Hey everyone, Jack Drees here! We have reviewed four Tom Cruise movies so far this month, now let’s make it five! Before we go any further, if you do want to check out my reviews for “Oblivion,” “All the Right Moves,” “Days of Thunder,” and “Top Gun,” you’ll notice that the titles are highlighted, meaning that you’ll find the links right there! These are all other movies that I have previously reviewed for the purpose of Tom Cruise Month, but we’re not focusing on those right now. Instead, we are going to focus on the year 2054, which looks mighty pleasant compared to 2020. It is time to talk about “Minority Report” as we begin our final installment of…
TOM CRUISE MONTH
“Minority Report” is directed by Steven Spielberg (Jurassic Park, Jaws) and stars Tom Cruise (Risky Business, Top Gun), Colin Farrell (Ballykissangel, American Outlaws), Samantha Morton (Band of Gold, Pandaemonium), and Max Von Sydow (Flash Gordon, The Seventh Seal). This film takes place during the year 2054 and is based on the material once created by author Philip K. Dick. In a future where Pre-Cogs can see upcoming murders and related criminal acts, a special police unit is supposed to stop murderers and arrest them before such crimes are committed. Interestingly, one of the police officers themselves is accused of a future murder.
Prior to making this review, I had not once seen “Minority Report.” And at this point, getting to witness something new, even if it is almost a couple full decades old, is kind of a treat. I bought the Blu-ray when I was in Santa Monica, California, and I figured this Tom Cruise Month theme would give me a solid excuse to pop in the disc. Unknowingly, I was aware of this movie’s existence. I mean, sure, I guess I knew the title and everything, but what I did not know was that this movie was the picture featuring Pre-Cogs. Like every other person under the age of thirty, I achieved a great deal of knowledge, or at least a conglomeration of useless factoids, over the Internet. If it were not for YouTuber Jeremy Jahns referencing one specific scene…
…I would probably not know squat about this movie, or at least acknowledge squat about this movie. So I will say, this movie must have stood the test of time in terms of being recognized in pop culture. Then again, it is a Steven Spielberg flick, and he has a fairly recognizable, prolific, diverse, and masterful library.
By the way, before we go any further, one of the biggest compliments I’ll give to this movie is that the framing is very well done. The scope of “Minority Report” pulls you right in. It does not disappoint. It takes this 2054 type of environment and makes you embrace it. Speaking of which, one of the best shots of this movie, is the first full-on glimpse we get of a Pre-Cog, which is shown in the GIF I would assume you have scrolled through fairly recently. It’s just so clear and crisp. I don’t know why, but the more I look at the shot of that Pre-Cog, the more I want to go into a pool. Although, maybe not until next year, knowing how things are right now. I will say, on that note, even though I really like the way this film looks, it’s not pretty all the way through, because I think the color scheme of many of the shots are a little too somber. Granted, “Minority Report” is not a comedy, it was never supposed to represent the best of times, even though we do get some classy looking cars in the future, but there are some times where this movie doesn’t come off as a soap opera from the script, but the color palette begs to differ. It almost reminds me of the “Point Break” remake from 2015, only this movie is twice as good as that film and in my personal opinion, technically qualifies as a “movie.”
Since this is a Tom Cruise movie, and given how this is the final entry to Tom Cruise Month, let’s talk about Tom Cruise himself. When it comes to Tom Cruise in this film, this is honestly one of his better performances. I think casting was a job well done with this film, not just with Cruise, but with names including Max Von Sydow and Samantha Morton. I bought into all their performances and it helped enhance the movie. I will say though, not that it matters entirely, Tom Cruise with a haircut like the one he has here is probably one of his inferior looks for one of his roles. But that’s just me. Also, if you know me, when it comes to Tom Cruise, I don’t always point out my love and respect for him through his ability to convey a character, even though he’s a respectable actor in that regard, but his motivation to perhaps nearly kill himself. Like some of his other movies, he does his own stunts here. Granted, I never really noticed anything as scary or heart-racing as say his plane hang from “Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation” as an example, but is nice to know that like some of his other projects, Cruise himself put an effort into the stuntwork.
One of the best parts of “Minority Report” is the concept. You have a special police force trying to stop murderers who are predicted by Pre-Cogs. I think the way that this movie went around executing the concept was worthy of a thumbs up. The movie kind of had me in the beginning alone. I will say when it comes to pacing it does slow down overtime, but the climax is fairly entertaining as well. It ups the pace of the movie when said climax begins, and it makes the viewing experience worthwhile.
Another point of the movie that stood out to me for a reason I truly should have grasped from the very beginning was the score. For the record, the score for “Minority Report” was conducted by John Williams, and I don’t know why for the life of me I didn’t conceptualize that from the beginning. I knew John Williams automatically went hand in hand with the “Star Wars” franchise but for some reason I completely forgot his attachment to Steven Spielberg, the two go together in the same way that Hans Zimmer and Christopher Nolan tend to go together. They have worked on so many films to the point where their coupling has become nothing short of iconic. When it John Williams, I will say, even though there are fractions of the score that I happened to like, it is one of inferior scores. This movie came out the same year as “Star Wars Episode II: Attack of the Clones,” another score that John Williams did. And even though I, along with many others, would point out that “Attack of the Clones” is a lackluster installment to the “Star Wars” franchise, there’s a solid chance I would agree with someone that “Episode II,” per usual had a kick-ass John Williams score. When it comes to his 2002 work, “Attack of the Clones” kicks “Minority Report’s” ass. Although, if you want me to go further, even though I barely remember, I do recall not hating Williams’ score to “Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets.” But I have to watch that movie again as it has been forever since I saw it. Sticking with “Minority Report’s” score, I will say I enjoyed it, but if I had to say one standout negative about it, I think it’s a little overbearing on drums. Just a little bit.
Little sidenote, this review is being written in 2020, the year that “Cops” was practically taken off the air for a list of reasons, so I will admit, I did get a slight chuckle seeing that apparently the TV show “Cops” was still relevant in 2054. Just thought I’d point that out.
In the end, “Minority Report” is a good movie, and a likable futuristic vision with a clever concept. However, when it comes to futuristic visions, specifically ones that come from the mind of Steven Spielberg, I much prefer his vision of 2045, which was represented through 2018’s “Ready Player One,” as opposed to his vision of 2054, represented here in “Minority Report.” Then again, “Ready Player One” is based on a book by Ernest Cline, and “Minority Report” is based on a short story from Philip K. Dick, so in reality, it’s not Spielberg’s vision. Nevertheless, I think when it comes to movies that are set in the future from Spielberg, I personally prefer “Ready Player One.” Although I will say, one thought that has been in my head for a little bit about this movie is the desire to check it out once more. Not just because I liked the movie the first time, which I did. But I feel like there are possibly one or two crucial points that I may have glossed over that are worth noticing in the future. If your movie can get me to have a urge to go back and see it one more time, no matter what the reason (unless maybe I want to torture myself), I’d say a job well done is in order. There are better Spielberg movies out there, I’d say there are better Tom Cruise movies out there. But this was worth my time, I didn’t really have any regrets. I’m going to give “Minority Report” a 7/10.
Thanks for reading this review! Thanks to all who showed any ounce of interest in Tom Cruise Month! I will point out that July is coming up, and while I have no real theme for the month, I will note that “Tenet” is scheduled to come out pretty soon, so maybe I’ll review some Christopher Nolan movies if I have the time. I will point out though, given how I have not really paid much attention to this year in film all that much, I do want to give this year’s movies a shot before it is too late. So there is a solid chance that a lot of July’s content is going to be of some 2020 movies that I missed. I’ve got a few on Blu-ray, I can probably check a few movies through streaming if I have the proper account setup. And even though I personally don’t have Apple TV+, there is a movie coming to that service that I might end up reviewing if possible, specifically “Greyhound” starring Tom Hanks. Because who doesn’t like Tom Hanks?! Be sure to follow Scene Before either through an email or WordPress account so you can stay tuned for more great content! Also, check out my Facebook page! Speaking of checking things out, if you want to see some more of my Tom Cruise reviews that are not exactly affiliated with Tom Cruise Month, the links are listed down below. These reviews by the way go all the way back to 2017, my second year of film reviewing on Scene Before. I want to know, did you see “Minority Report?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite John Williams score of all time? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
Before we begin this post, I just want to remind you all that next month is going to have a movie-based theme. I will not go into it, but for the sake of having content and not having to worry about talking about how crappy the world is, that’s what’s happening. Also, while I do share my thoughts on HBO Max right here, you can also check out my half-hour long video of my first day with the service. If you want to check it out, click down below and if you like the video, feel free to subscribe to my YouTube channel, which will have an all-new Blu-ray collection update coming this June!
PLEASE NOTE: If this is buggy, the video is currently being processed for copyright reasons.
Hey everyone, Jack Drees here! Here’s a post you don’t see often! Me talking about a streaming service! As you know, I have a large physical media collection, one in which I don’t plan on getting rid of ANYTIME soon. But today, we are going to be talking about the new streaming service HBO Max.
HBO Max is marketed as a platform “where HBO meets so much more.” Essentially, if you have HBO Now, it’s basically that, but with more shows and a purple background! Heck, it’s even the same price at $14.99/month! Although I did find a discount that let me get it for $11.99/month, so yay! Discounts! By the way, that discount is no longer available as it is a pre-order offer.
You get all sorts of old and new HBO content including movies and TV series. From everything to the fantastical, dark realms of “Game of Thrones” to a display of our reality within “Last Week Tonight with John Oliver.” There are also new original shows on the service as well that you cannot get anywhere else. One of the most notable titles is “Love Life,” starring Anna Kendrick, which dropped three episodes to the service on day one. It still has more episodes remaining, all of which are supposed to drop later on. Also joining the club with “Love Life” is “Craftopia,” a competition where 9 to 15 year old contestants get creative and try to take home the “Craftrophia.” You also have all new “Looney Tunes Cartoons,” a staple of the Warner library for years with brand new episodes. Plus “On the Record,” which centers around Drew Dixon, a former A&R executive. When it comes to originals and exclusives, the lineup does not intrigue me. But there is plenty more coming in the future including “The Flight Attendant” starring Kaley Cuoco, “Raised by Wolves,” exectuive produced by Ridley Scott, and there’s even continuations of past IPs such as an all new season of “Search Party,” which started as a TBS original, but will now be releasing new episodes via HBO Max.
I like the selection of outside content this service is starting out with. It’s got all twelve seasons of “The Big Bang Theory,” four seasons of “Impractical Jokers,” the Without Borders specials of “Conan,” and even though I haven’t sat through a whole episode yet, “Rick and Morty” is also on the service, and I have always been wanting to check that out. Plus, for those of you who smashed your television set once “Friends” was taken off of Netflix, you are in luck as HBO Max now has the entire series on their service. However, if you were going to watch the planned “Friends” reunion special, well that’s impossible at this point as production was halted due to COVID-19.
The service has individual libraries including Crunchyroll, Adult Swim, Cartoon Network, Turner Classic Movies, and DC. For those of you who are DC fans, a lot of the big players are there when it comes to movies including “Wonder Woman,” “Aquaman,” “Shazam,” “Supergirl,” “Joker,” and “Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice.” However, when it comes to missing titles, some big ones are unfortunately not on the service. Including “Man of Steel,” Christopher Nolan’s “Dark Knight” trilogy, and “Superman: The Movie.” Keep in mind that other services have these movies including Netflix and the separate DC Universe streaming service. Given how this new HBO Max service has shows including “Doom Patrol” on it, it would not surprise me if DC Universe fizzles out and HBO Max picks up a lot of the load that DC Universe left over. It’ll probably take shows like “Harley Quinn” or “Titans” and maybe implement them in the DC section. Given how HBO Max is trying to be a colossal service full of content, why not have these DC shows, which are likely being presented to a somewhat niche market be given to a wider audience? I would like to watch the new “Harley Quinn” show, but I don’t need another subscription to do it. As for other DC TV shows, HBO Max also has CW’s “Batwoman,” Cartoon Newtork’s “Teen Titans,” and HBO’s own “Watchmen.”
As for movies, HBO originals make a presence, including the recently released “Bad Education” starring Hugh Jackman and Allison Janney. But a lot of the movies present are either from Warnermedia in some capacity including all the “Harry Potter” films, minus the first “Fantastic Beasts” installment, the “Lord of the Rings” franchise, “The LEGO Movie,” “King Kong,” and “2001: A Space Odyssey.” Also included are a bunch of movies that you can find airing on the HBO airwaves regardless of who owns it including “Fast & Furious Presents: Hobbs and Shaw,” “John Wick: Chapter 3 – Parabellum,” “Die Hard,” “Alita: Battle Angel,” “American Pie,” “Madagascar,” and “Stuber.” So while this is basically a Warner Bros. streaming service, it is welcoming other distributors and outlets to join the party, which if you are going to have a variety of content like this, it kind of makes the $14.99/month price worthwhile. Disney+ is $6.99/month, which kind of makes sense as it only seems to be catering to particular demographics. If you are a fan of “Star Wars,” Marvel, Pixar, or if you have a kid, Disney+ is for you. But HBO is more on the side of Netflix where they have content for everybody, including some of the most adult media of all time. But if you want to put on say “Sesame Street” or “Adventure Time” or “Scooby-Doo” or “Happy Feet Two” for the kiddos, it’s good for that too.
Now for a few negatives, I will point out that a variety of platforms will be getting HBO Max including Chromecast, PS4, Xbox One, Apple TV, newer Samsung Smart TVs, as a YouTube TV addon, and so on. But of the range in platforms available for HBO Max viewing, two of them ARE NOT Amazon Fire and Roku. Keep in mind, the other HBO apps, specifically HBO Now and HBO Go are still availabe on these devices but HBO Max is not as there is currently no deal that will allow HBO Max onboard. I would also be willing to bet if there is ever a case where HBO Max does wind up on those platforms that it will go in HBO Now’s place given how the services are basically the same thing but one has more content. Also, I will point out that I get a lot of my media on my Sony Android 4K HDR television, which DOES get HBO Max, thankfully. But one of the things that I noticed that was missing at launch happened to be options for 4K. This sort of surprised me as a lot of the movies already on the service happen to be able on 4K elsewhere, including through physical media. Plus, while HBO does not necessarily have a 4K channel setup through regular television, they do have 4K content. A couple of seasons of “Game of Thrones” are available on 4K Blu-ray, and the same goes for “Westworld.” Going back to Disney+’s $6.99/month asking price, I will also point out that while the library is smaller and catering to a niche demographic, one of the pros of the service is that there’s plenty of 4K content available and there is no extra cost for it unlike services such as Netflix, in which you have to upgrade to their premium package if you have a lower tier. Maybe 4K will be a future implementation, but 4K TVs in general have been getting cheaper year after year so I figured HBO might want to start keeping up with these times a little bit. Again, as much as I think HBO Max will serve me well overtime, I see benefits to my physical media collection which I have spent years building. Yes, I can go watch “Wonder Woman” with the push of a button through HBO Max, but what if I want to watch it on 4K? Boom! I got the disc! That and I don’t need internet for it! Booyah! I will also point out, even though HBO Max has a variety of content that I am willing to watch, there’s a lot that I wish they had. Even though I already own it physically, I noticed that one of the key movies they were going to put on the service were those of the “Matrix” franchise. In fact, if you watch promos for HBO Max, you’d know that “The Matrix” was a core player in those promos. It’s kind of weird how it’s not on the service! The only “Matrix” property on HBO Max as of writing this is “Animatrix,” otherwise known as the one “Matrix” thing nobody talks about. It’s kind of bonkers!
Oh yeah, and I am looking forward to the Snyder Cut. If you asked me, I personally enjoyed the 2017 “Justice League” film more than most people and I will not deny that I had fun with it. But getting an alternate version of the film that may line up more with what the director could have originally put out does excite me. I wish it would also physically come out on Blu-ray and 4K as it would be nice to have on disc, but only time will tell.
I want to know, HBO Max just recently launched, but what are your thoughts on the service? Are you enjoying it so far? What have you watched on it? Why did you get HBO Max? To watch “Game of Thrones” again and be disappointed with the final season once more? To watch “Friends” in a time where you literally cannot hang out with friends? To watch real REAL CINEMA like “Casablanca” or “Citizen Kane?” Where does HBO Max rank for you in a world with seventy thousand streaming options available to buy? Let me know down below! Speaking of things down below, if you want to check out HBO Max for yourself and maybe sign up, go to the link below the paragraph!
Thanks for reading this post! Here’s a weird thing to talk about in a post about a brand new streaming service! Physical media! Coming soon, for my 400th post, I’m going to be providing an all new update on my Blu-ray collection, which will contain new movies, but the same movie reviewing moron talking about them all! I will be doing it in video form on my YouTube channel but I will also be talking about it on here and sharing the video for you all to watch. To check this out along with other great content, be sure to follow Scene Before either with an email or WordPress account so you can stay tuned for more great content! Also, maximize your time by liking my Facebook page, otherwise known as that thing you’ll be checking when you’re distracted from whatever you’re watching on HBO Max. Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
Hey everyone, Jack Drees here! Never thought you’d see this again, did you? Well, I originally marketed the Top Movies of the 2010s countdowns as an event, so you know what? If I really want to give this the event treatment it deserves, let’s keep it going! This time, we are going to be focusing on the twenty-five films that I watched either with full attention, anticipation, or curiosity, and was flat-out let down in some way. It’s time for the disappointing 25! Before we go any further, this countdown is subjective. All these entries are based on my own experiences and opinions, and are therefore no way supposed to represent the thoughts and opinions of other individuals. Keep in mind, just because I think a certain movie is disappointing, doesn’t mean you have to agree. This world would be boring if that were the case. Although… I’ll take less fighting in the comment sections any day. Also, even though I have had lots of time during this period of isolation to go back and watch more films, I have not seen every single film that has come out during the 2010s. It’s too big of a task to handle. So movies that I’ve heard from others that were disappointing like “Battle Los Angeles,” “Terminator: Dark Fate,” and “Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom” do not qualify to be on the list. I will also add, if a movie is to be included on here, I must have watched it from beginning to end. So, as much as I could count a movie like “Frozen,” that’s not happening.
Also, keep in mind this is a list of the most DISAPPOINTING movies and it is not to be confused with the WORST movies. The worst movies are just movies that I flat out don’t like. Disappointing movies on the other hand are the movies that I have expectations for in some way and end up being let down. In fact, some of these entries are movies that I like. They just have qualities attached that make them underwhelming, or in some cases, just a plain bad movie. So with that being said, if you had high expectations for this countdown, prepare to hopefully not be let down! These are my top 25 DISAPPOINTING movies of the 2010s!
#25: The Aeronauts (2019)
Starting off this list is “The Aeronauts,” otherwise known as what was supposed to be Amazon’s first attempt at an IMAX run. Unfortunately, that never happened, and it makes the movie slightly more unwatchable the more I think about it. This is a movie that I would probably watch again, but there are scenes in it that are slower than others. There’s the main plot of the movie that involves two people on a hot air balloon, and there’s a sideplot on land. And when the movie takes place on land, it’s almost worth tuning out. Did I mention this movie is based on true events and yet the main characters are fundamentally changed? I like what this movie did with the aspect ratio, because whenever this movie took place up in the air, the picture stretches to fit a traditional TV screen, whereas when the movie is anywhere else, it’s in a scope aspect ratio. It reminds me of the vibe the movie is going for whenever it wants to be adventurous or just drop back to reality. The cinematography is not bad either. A lot of the framing is lovely to look at. Another reason why this is not higher on the list is because this is one of the few movies that I’ve seen that I can consider the end credits to be the best part. Why is that? Because while the credits don’t really have any special background compared to… say… what a lot of animated films have presented over the past number of years, they have what could be one of the best original songs I have EVER heard in a movie, titled “Home to You” by Sigrid. Not only does it completely fit the vibe of “The Aeronauts,” it’s just a good song. Honestly, once this world goes back to normal, and I don’t mean the new normal, I mean normal period, it might be the first song I play as a sigh of relief. Because I know it’s easy to stay home, but after all I’ve done all this time, the song would be a great reminder of the journey I have been through and whatever positivity could lie ahead. I don’t like a lot of modern music, so it REALLY says something that I am giving a thumbs up for a song like this. But if you do want to watch the movie, it’s free on Prime Video, see what you think.
#24: Coco (2017)
For the record, I like this film, but the reason why I am putting it on the list is probably because of the expectations I’ve had for it. Ladies and gentlemen, I give you “Coco.” Even though I constantly make fun of Disney for their greed and desire to dominate the world, Pixar is probably one of the best studios working today, because they always manage to put out quality content that not only makes money, but is fantastically made. “Coco” is yet another example of why Pixar might have the best looking modern animations. It is also another effective story in the Pixar collection of films, even if it does remind me of a better of a better film, specifically “Kubo and the Two Strings.” But the reason why this film is on the list to begin with is a similar reason why I found “Manchester by the Sea” to admittedly be somewhat disappointing. By the way, that movie is not on the list. I’d probably put it as an honorable mention though. One of the core elements of “Coco” that I’ve heard from viewers prior to seeing it is that it is emotionally charged. I expected something maybe towards the end that could get me to almost shed a tear. I did not really get any of that from my experience. I will also say that maybe I am not part of the target audience that would usually feel that. In fact, many of the people I know who happen to be related or close to me are still alive. My core grandparents on both sides have not passed away, and I feel lucky to have them in my life. If somebody I know, whether it be a friend or family member passes away, maybe this movie will hit me more the second time I watch it. And no, none of this disappointment has to do with the extended “Frozen” short film they presented in theaters prior to “Coco” as I only watched this movie at home on a 4K disc.
#23: Seventh Son (2014)
Out of all the movies on this list, “Seventh Son” is one of the few that I’ve had little attachment to before seeing it. I was into the marketing, and the fact that it had gotten an IMAX run also pleased me. Little did I know how short of a run it would have in theaters. In fact, I was pretty lucky that I got to see it at all, because I found a screening of it when I was in Florida, and that’s how I managed to check out this flick. Unlike the other two movies that I mentioned previously, “Seventh Son” made it onto my worst 25 list for this series, meaning that it is not just disappointing, it’s beyond terrible! In fact, I’ll mention something I uttered in the worst list, I went to see this movie with somebody else, and while the screen did have my attention the whole time, the same cannot be said for my partner, who at this point, I might as well apologize for taking to the movie because they fell asleep! “Seventh Son?” More like “Seventh Snore!” “Seventh Son” is honestly one of the worst fantasy movies I have seen in my life, but part of me wonders if part of it has more to do with my experience of watching the movie because I will admit that the sound in my theater could have been better. Maybe if the theater provided a more quality experience, I could have at least felt like I was watching something worthwhile. Does this invalidate the #23 spot on the list? Frankly, no. Because the movie from what I recall felt generic. And speaking of recalling things, recalling everything about this movie is harder than Minesweeper! Remember that game?
#22: Jupiter Ascending (2015)
Fun fact about this next movie, in regards to release dates in the United States, this next film came out the same weekend as the one I just talked about. What is this next film? “Jupiter Ascending!” That’s what it is! “Jupiter Ascending” is quite honestly a film that I was desperately looking forward to. I was very disappointed that it was delayed from its original July 2014 release date into February 2015. The trailers looked great, the effects were eye candy, and it looked like it would make for a fun theatrical experience. It had good actors attached like Mila Kunis (Family Guy, Ted) along with the directors behind “The Matrix,” AKA the Wachowskis, but this film becomes more disposable the more I think about it. While it was, admittedly, an AMAZING theater experience, watching it on a standard TV does not really provide the same effect. Because while the film has an awesome musical score and great visuals, the story and dialogue are not the finest at times. I would definitely watch this film again for the action scenes, but definitely not for any of the writing. Channing Tatum didn’t even promote this movie when it was coming out. It’s that bad! As for Jupiter Jones, she does not really do much to resemble a proper protagonist other than simply be the center of the film just… because. For someone who is such a core character in the film, it feels weird that she is in distress as much as she is. Again, the visuals are breathtaking, and I would watch this movie as part of a tech demo, but I’d rather watch the “Matrix” sequels again than whatever this is.
“I love dogs, I’ve always loved dogs.” -Jupiter Jones
Shut up, Meg.
#21: Suicide Squad (2016)
Much like “Jupiter Ascending,” “Suicide Squad” was a fun time at the movies, but a lackluster experience watching it at home. I will say though, having already watched this film at home, the only time I watched it at home was at the beginning of 2017 and I popped in the extended cut of the film. I didn’t really feel much of a difference in terms of content, but in regards to the main movie, I became angrier than I thought I would about it. While Viola Davis is a solid actress, her character, specifically Amanda Waller, is one that I did not really enjoy watching. I didn’t really approve of all her actions in the film and she just left a bad taste in my mouth. Harley Quinn steals the show due to Margot Robbie’s performance, making her a solid character. But unfortunately, when it comes to the main heroes, Quinn is almost the only one who happens to shine. Deadshot’s okay, Katana’s alright, Killer Croc… looks pretty cool. But if I were to tell you who my favorite character in “Suicide Squad” happened to be, I’d go straight to Harley Quinn because she was pretty much the only one who had any charisma. I will say, when it comes to The Joker, he was not that bad. Of the Jokers I’ve seen on screen, he’s definitely inferior to others, but he’s also not a travesty by any means. Jared Leto played the part well and when it comes to this universe, I’d say his portrayal worked fine. Although I do think the movie maybe could have been better if they’ve utilized him more. This is also one of those movies, again like “Jupiter Ascending,” that had fantastic marketing leading up to it. The early trailer for “Suicide Squad” with Bohemian Rhapsody playing in the background was worthy of two thumbs up and raised the bar of excitement for me. “Suicide Squad” to me is the worst of the Detective Comics Extended Universe films. At least it’s uphill from there with films like “Wonder Woman” and “Shazam!.”
#20: Grown Ups (2010)
I don’t have a magical crystal ball, so I cannot go back in time and see exactly how many people were looking forward to “Grown Ups” when it was coming out. While I did not go see this movie in the theater, it was one I was curious about. But as I watched it, it didn’t stick with me. Now, from what I’ve heard, when it comes to Adam Sandler movies, “Grown Ups” is not as bad as “Jack and Jill,” which I have not seen. But this is one of those movies that the more I think about it, isn’t really as funny as I would want it to be. When you have renowned comedians like Adam Sandler and Kevin James in the mix, I probably would want a little more. And this comes from someone who likes Sandler’s earlier movies like “Happy Gilmore” and “Big Daddy.” This also comes from someone who really enjoys “King of Queens,” the nine-season sitcom starring Kevin James. RIP Jerry Stiller. Arthur Spooner for life. These two comedians have provided some thumbs up-worthy content for me over the years, and it’s disappointing to see these two, along with other cast members such as Salma Hayek, in something like this. I will also point out, even though the sequel is probably not remembered as the greatest of all time, I honestly think I enjoyed “Grown Ups 2” more than the original. Feels weird to say that, but it’s true. I did catch the movie on TV a few times and it did catch my attention, but it’s not one I’ll always remember for its quality. At this point, I only remember one or two scenes being remotely comical and well executed, and it was fun to see Cape Cod on screen. I say that mainly because I was at the waterpark where they shot part of the movie almost around the same time when filming took place.
#19: Under the Skin (2013)
Kind of like “Coco,” I do have some respect for this movie. It has a likable lead actress, some of the music suits it very well, and the vibe is seemingly perfect. So when it comes to “Under the Skin,” I have to ask… What exactly went wrong? That is a tough question to answer. Because for one thing, there are positive aspects about this movie. It just however wasn’t enough to keep me entertained. It is a seductive, hypnotizing film, and it honestly goes on to reveal the proper acting chops of Scarlett Johansson. Although the more I reflect on the film, the less I remember. I remember scenes in the car, I remember all the trippy s*it, but can I describe it all in detail? Absolutely not. This is probably one of those films that I probably need to watch again to fully appreciate, but with so many other movies out there, I am going to have to debate on whether or not such a notion is a proper idea. And if you think I am one of those people who cannot watch a film that is “too slow,” ask me what I think about “2001: A Space Odyssey” and I’ll tell you that it is arguably in my top 5 sci-fi films of all time. At times I was bored during “Under the Skin,” there just wasn’t enough for me. And that’s really disappointing. The film has an 85% on Rotten Tomatoes. It was nominated for a BAFTA! It was made by A24! It has the associations of what could mark the label of a solid movie. But it just wasn’t for me. But… Scarlett Johansson is dreamy, I’ll say that.
#18: New Year’s Eve (2011)
Before I saw this movie, I heard from others about how bad it was, but I went in with curiosity. I have not seen all of Garry Marshall’s holiday-themed movies, but they are not good, man. And “New Year’s Eve” is just a prime example of that! This movie takes a bunch of prominent actors who have perfected their craft and wastes all of them! Halle Berry is in this movie? You might as well be watching “Catwoman” at this point! Sofia Vergara showed up here? Just because she’s in an award-winning sitcom, doesn’t mean that will automatically make this movie good! Robert De Niro’s here?! Oh, the horror! There’s almost no redeemable, likable, or watchable scenes in this mess. Out of all the big holidays, New Year’s Eve is one of the few that I bend over for more than others. And honestly, this year, it’s gonna be pretty f*cking rad if you ask me, because I have never wanted to say goodbye to a year more. I’m just hoping we find a cure to COVID-19 by December, otherwise the ball drop would be just as boring as me dropping a ball from my hand to my bedroom floor. The problem with this movie is that there is no real center of the story to attach to. Yes, it’s called New Year’s Eve, and that’s what the movie is about, but it just doesn’t have one specific character that I can attach myself to more than any other. It’s kind of like “Dunkirk,” except that “Dunkirk” is a freaking awesome movie! “New Year’s Eve” is just a waste of time. And this comes from somebody who was really curious about this movie just from the title alone. I will also add, the scene where the ball actually drops is not even that great. Your movie is called New Year’s Eve, centers around the ball drop in Times Square, and you manage to f*ck that up out of everything! Unbelievable!
#17: Allegiant (2016)
If you ask me, I was never a huge fanatic when it comes to the young adult genre. If I had to pick what movies within the genre would have to be the best in regards to this previous decade, it would probably have to be “The Maze Runner,” although it doesn’t say much. One of the franchises that I thought had a lot of potential is “Divergent.” I went to see the first movie in the theater, enjoyed it. Saw the second one, liked that one even more. Then the dreaded third one, otherwise known as “Allegiant,” happened. Out of the three movies in this franchise, this one is easily the most forgettable. It had the worst box office total out of these movies, and it was also one that I will admit, was not the best in terms of marketing. When I saw marketing for the first movie in the franchise, “Divergent,” it felt badass, it felt raw in some ways. This however, just focused too much on the lovey dovey s*it. I didn’t really care about any of the characters, even though most of the actors give halfway serviceable performances. It’s not Oscar-worthy or anything, it just works. As for the visual effects, they feel like visual effects from 2007 that’s trying to gloss itself up for 2016 standards. It felt like everything was out of an overpolished Nintendo game! Even the people behind this movie must understand what exactly they’ve put out, because this movie we know today as “Allegiant” was once going to follow the footsteps of “Harry Potter” and “The Hunger Games” and get f*cking greddy by splitting the last film into two parts. For those of you who have read the “Divergent” books, which I have not done by the way if this adds anything to the table, “Allegiant” is the third and final installment to the franchise. Or, at least the original trilogy, because there is additional material afterwards. If you are wondering where that second part to “Allegiant” is, forget about it. It was supposed to go straight to TV, but it never got made! So this franchise remains unfinished! And don’t even get me started on how much they surprisingly succeeded on making Miles Teller the most annoying piece of s*it of all time. His character… Is something else. He’s honestly headache inducing, which is really sad as this movie truly does waste this actor who based on his performance in movies like “Whiplash,” has terrific chops. I may have alleged myself to the “Divergent” franchise at the beginning, but in the end, it crashed and burned. What else can I say?
#16: Sully (2016)
For the record, this is another movie that I honestly enjoyed. It is a film that I bought on Blu-ray and continue to own to this day, I just felt underwhelmed by it when I watched it. I’m talking about “Sully,” directed by Clint Eastwood, who honestly has not done his finest work in recent years, and this is just one example. There are essentials to a good flick here. Tom Hanks gives a solid performance, which should not be surprising at this point. Everything involving the plane crash had my attention. In fact, given how that is a major selling point of the movie, I applaud the crew for sticking the landing on that. No pun intended. Everything else in the movie is technically entertaining, but it doesn’t mean I was not almost bored with what was on screen. I think one of the main problems with this movie is that it starts with something that honestly feels kind of climactic, and as it goes, nothing really matches that or has that tremendous of an effect. A plane crash feels like something that would happen to symbolize an end of a movie rather than the beginning. But because everything else feels like it has the vibe of buildup when it is really what is supposed to come later, it just feels unfulfilling. I understood what was happening and the movie itself was competent, but it just did not give me an impact that felt happened to be gripping or enormous. The movie doesn’t crash land into disaster territory, it’s just not maybe as satisfying as I would have hoped.
#15: Flight (2012)
Speaking of movies with plane crashes that start out with perhaps the most climactic part of the movie, the next entry to the list is “Flight” starring Denzel Washington and directed by Robert Zemeckis. Honestly, even though I will forever credit Robert Zemeckis for directing the entire “Back to the Future” trilogy, I will also call him out because “Flight” might be his worst movie. And kind of like “Under the Skin,” this is a notion that I am disappointed to say, because this did get some awards buzz. And to be fair, the production value and acting is not that bad in this movie. I can see why Denzel Washington got an Oscar nomination. But this movie honestly bored me. I will admit, it has been years since I watched it. But all I remember is the plane crash and anything that happens after it is on a downward spiral in terms of pacing and enjoyability. I will say, I bought this movie on Blu-ray, and having paid $3.99 for it, I could have ended up with worse. At the same time, I expect more out of movie like this. Even though it did get a nomination for Best Original Screenplay at the Academy Awards, it did not have my attention. Although it has been years since I popped it in my player and last watched it. Maybe it’s better the second time, but I don’t know for sure.
#14: The Revenant (2015)
Leonardo DiCaprio won his first Oscar for this movie… Which, yeah, he was great, even though I really wanted Matt Damon to win for “The Martian.” Just being honest. With that said, “The Revenant” is not as great as some make it out to be. Yes, it won Best Picture-Drama at the Golden Globes. It was nominated for get this, TWELVE Academy Awards! It had a pretty good trailer leading up to it. I really did have interest in this movie to get me to go see it in the theater. In fact, when I saw it in the theater, it was worth the price of admission because of how well presented it was. The cinematography is outstanding, which should not be surprising as it is directed and shot by the same duo who worked on “Birdman” together. “The Revenant” has some of best individual frames of the decade. The bear attack in this film was… alright, I guess. It was probably not as hyped up as I have heard from other people. At a runtime of two hours and thirty-six minutes, I kind of wish much of that runtime gave me something a little more epic. This movie is surprisingly slow at times. At times it works, but some of the time it doesn’t. I will admit, the effort put into the movie through performances by Leonardo DiCaprio and Tom Hardy plus the directing from Alejandro G. Iñárritu makes up for its faults. However, when it comes to movies nominated for Best Picture at the 88th Academy Awards, I’d rather go back and watch “The Martian,” I’d rather go back and watch “Room!” Those movies are killer, by the way!
#13: The Hunger Games (2012)
I was 12 years old and in middle school when this movie came out, and everyone in my classes DID. NOT. STOP. TALKING. ABOUT THIS FRANCHISE. I read the first book for the franchise and put it down, and while I enjoyed this movie the first time, it just got worse the more I thought about it. I’m talking about “The Hunger Games.” Now, was I looking forward to watching the movie based on “The Hunger Games” when it was coming out? Most likely. Because it was the big phenomenon of 2012. Thankfully, my cousin gave me the book to read. I didn’t even make it halfway. That should have been a sign of what was to come during the movie, which I nevertheless looked forward to. I was a little nervous going into the movie the first time I watched it because I didn’t finish the book (this was a couple months after I started reading it) and I probably had some sort of unfulfilled commitment. While I did enjoy the movie the first time I saw it, I watched it a couple more times and it really does not hold up. The dramatic portions of the film don’t feel as high as I’d want them to be, I don’t like the color grading at times, and some of the cinematography is not that great. Jennifer Lawrence is a likable actress. In fact, she’s in this movie with Stanley Tucci and Elizabeth Banks, who are also respectable names in the industry, but this film is dramatically overhyped. There was even a point where I wrote an entry specifically for my 25 worst films of the decade, but I did not use it mainly because I feel that this film is more overhyped than it is incompetent. In fact, I’ve used part of what I’ve written for that entry at the beginning of this specific entry. Want to know what I ended with? Well, here ya go!
I own the movie on Blu-ray, but perhaps the only reason why I still own it to this day is because a lot of my friends who have connected with me throughout my life know what “The Hunger Games” is, and if the opportunity strikes to just sit down and watch a movie, chances are they might choose that. Although I am not completely sure because knowing our disposable society, “The Hunger Games” was likely just a fad for the time being. I am honestly not even a fan of the franchise, I do like the second film, but I still have yet to see the third and fourth, and the reason is because I refuse to pay for two parts. Thanks a lot, Lionsgate!
#12: Ant-Man and the Wasp (2018)
“Ant-Man” is currently in my top 5 MCU films. When they announced a sequel to “Ant-Man,” I was pretty excited because the first one was a total surprise. I didn’t really expect much from it, I thought it had one good trailer, but I was not sure if that was going to translate to a great movie. However, it was brilliantly written, nicely weaved in one specific outside Marvel character, and Paul Rudd plays a really good “Ant-Man.” Now let’s jump to 2018. The first trailer for “Ant-Man and the Wasp” drops… Ehhhh… Then “Avengers: Infinity War” comes out, it’s my favorite Marvel Cinematic Universe movie yet, and then all of sudden, I’m excited for “Ant-Man and the Wasp” again. Then I saw the movie… The movie is not bad by any means, in fact, when it comes to 2018’s comic book movies, I’d rather watch this again than “Venom.” But “Ant-Man and the Wasp” is a massive step down from not just the recently mentioned “Avengers: Infinity War,” but also, and perhaps more importantly, the first “Ant-Man” film. The first “Ant-Man” was an exciting heist adventure with compelling characters and Paul Rudd at the center of it all. Here, Evangeline Lilly, who I happen to like as an actress, becomes more of a prominent character as she becomes The Wasp. Their chemistry is fine, but while the film is trying its hardest to be lighthearted fun, the stakes almost don’t even feel like they are there. And while this could be somewhat intentional due to “Avengers: Infinity War” probably being the biggest film Marvel has done in terms of stakes up to this point, it feels like a sacrifice as the film is fun, but nearly uneventful. Oddly enough, this film has what could be the most useless end credits scene in the history of the MCU, where a human-sized ant is playing the drums because… Paul Rudd did it in the movie, so it needs payoff for some reason. However, I will admit, this movie also has what could arguably be the best end credit scene in the MCU, where it basically teases where the movie’s characters are going to be and what they’ll be doing in “Avengers: Endgame.” In fact, I put up a tweet regarding the end credit scene shortly after going to see “Ant-Man and the Wasp” in the theater.
I love how the MCU is such a unique movie property trying to tie in so many characters and stories in at once, but when the main story is not as good as what comes after it, it’s kind of a weakness.
#11: Moonlight (2016)
Coming in at #11 is a movie that is probably going to piss a lot of people off, partially because it was not only nominated for Best Picture at the Academy Awards, but it actually won it. Ladies and gentlemen, I give you “Moonlight.” The Best Picture? Of the Academy Awards? Are we sure it’s not “La La Land?” Now, I saw the movie after it won Best Picture, because it was still playing in theaters and I thought I’d give it a shot. While I did think the coming of age story was definitely watchable, I did not feel compelled the entire time. There’s one specific scene that I feel goes on for way too long, the movie starts out pretty solid, and while it continues to be pretty good, it’s on a downward slope in terms of quality. And I will admit, the movie is well made. The cinematography is beautiful. The color grading fits the tone quite well. The acting is top notch. Mahershala Ali earned his Oscar win for Best Supporting Actor. Also, it felt natural seeing Chiron’s character age, it did not feel like watching three different characters. Maybe I’m not in the right audience for this movie. I’m a straight white male. This movie deals with sexuality and identity, which are issues that I don’t struggle with. While can say I connected somewhat emotionally to the protagonist of the film, I cannot say I specifically embody the same traits as him. If you ask me, if the real Best Picture of 2016 was “La La Land” and that was not a mistake, I would approve, because I’d rather watch that movie again.
#10: Logan Lucky (2017)
Coming in at #10 is a film with a terrific cast, an acclaimed director, and a somewhat intriguing concept behind it. So, what went wrong? I don’t know! Nevertheless, “Logan Lucky” is probably one of the biggest drags of a film I have seen in recent memory. And it’s really sad to say that because this film has so many big names attached who are respectable in the industry, just from the cast alone! Channing Tatum! Adam Driver! Daniel Craig! Sebastian Stan! Seth MacFarlane for crying out loud! All these people are talented, but unfortunately, I could barely keep myself awake for whatever fresh hell this was. The funny thing about this movie, looking into the future, is that it is directed by Steven Soderbergh, who is known for films like “Ocean’s Eleven.” But what’s funny about that notion is that months later Soderbergh would come out with another movie by the name of “Unsane,” which by the way is free on Prime Video. Unlike “Logan Lucky,” which was beautifully photographed through a Red Epic Dragon camera, “Unsane” was shot primarily using an iPhone 7 Plus! Just goes to show that looks are not everything and without a good story, your movie is probably not going to be all that watchable. It was hard for me to connect with anybody, and it’s just as dull as watching paint dry. That’s even with the utterly wacky Daniel Craig performance somewhere in the mix! Kind of crazy if you ask me!
#9: Night at the Museum: Secret of the Tomb (2014)
One of my most nostalgic films is 2006’s “Night at the Museum,” it was one of the first films I have seen in the theater, and to this day, it is one of the more experiential films I have seen. As a comedy, it’s fun for all ages. It’s sequel, “Battle of the Smithsonian,” could arguably be better than the original due to Hank Azaria’s performance as Kahmunrah, and a good of number of the gags. I don’t know how many people would agree with me, but that’s just how I feel. “Night at the Museum: Secret of the Tomb” however is a film that quite honestly did not hit me the way I wanted it to. While I will say that the trailer for the film is not the finest in the world, I was still stoked because I love the property. Ben Stiller as Larry Daley is one of the better roles I’ve seen him in. The plot of “Secret of the Tomb” talks a good game, because it does that traditional sequel thing where you supposedly have to go bigger than the previous films. The first film took place entirely in New York. The second one expanded to Washington DC. As for this one, it’s out of the United States. Bigger doesn’t always mean better. And yes, much like the other two “Night at the Museum” films, this one has comedy that lands. There’s a great bit where the character Lancelot comes across a play of “Camelot” featuring Hugh Jackman and Alice Eve. Jedediah and Octavius spend some time on mini Pompeii before the volcano explodes. The movie does have some creative elements intact and some enjoyable aspects tied into it. But I’d rather go back and watch the first and second movies again. Oh, and Rebel Wilson is in this film too… Why is she here? Who invited her to this sham of a party?
#8: Transcendence (2014)
There are particular facts that you have to carry with you all your life. The only things that are certain happen to be death and taxes. In the event of a tornado, driving into a tornado is not the smartest idea to keep yourself safe. Also, “Transcendence” is f*cking boring! Johnny Depp is an enigma of an actor, because over the years, despite being credited with some solid performances, he’s had a good amount of bad days at the office. Maybe because he got too attached to Tim Burton for all I know. Out of all the bad days at the office, this is probably the one where the TPS reports make you want to break your computer. “Transcendence” is one of those movies that has a cool concept, but is executed in such a poor manner. The trailers leading up to “Transcendence” were attention-grabbing and seemed to promise something worth watching. While I did miss “Transcendence” in the theater, I bought the DVD and it’s safe to say that it is one of the least worthwhile purchases I’ve made in my life. I’ve popped the movie in once or twice and fell asleep. The time I did watch the film and I actually managed to make it through the whole thing, sleeping probably felt like the best option as this movie was a complete borefest and a trainwreck. I could barely tell you anything that happens in this movie past the second half. All I remember is that it takes place in a desert, things go crazy, and no semblance of quality exists. Plus, this movie is directed by Wally Pfister, the cinematographer of “The Dark Knight.” While this is his directorial debut, it is very disappointing to know that even after doing a few movies alongside Christopher Nolan, he cannot whip up a quality product himself. Nobody could save this movie! Not Johnny Depp! Not Rebecca Hall! Not Paul Bettany! Not Cillian Murphy! As for the screenplay written by Jack Paigen, it’s got the pacing of a turtle! Believe it or not, this is his first screenplay he’s officially credited for, so maybe I’m being a little harsh, but it’s not always the best indicator of fine art when you have this $100 million movie and both the screenwriter and director have never been credited for anything in this spectrum of their craft! GAH! …At least Pfister will forever have my respect for being the first cinematographer to shoot a major Hollywood movie with an IMAX camera, so there’s that.
#7: Pacific Rim: Uprising (2018)
“Pacific Rim” is a fun movie. It has the concept of “Power Rangers” and blends it excellently with the vibe of “Transformers.” I saw the film in IMAX, enjoyed it, and eventually got the 4K Blu-ray for Christmas, so I have fond memories of this film. Oh, wait did I say “Pacific Rim?” I’m sorry! That’s the good one! “Pacific Rim: Uprising” on the other hand is a total bitch of a movie! This is yet another movie that I was looking forward to simply from the concept, but what really got me onboard was the first trailer for it. Just like the first movie, it looked like it was trying to pack in as much fun as possible. And with a mega-star like John Boyega at the forefront, it must have been a recipe for excellence! Fun fact… This movie takes place ten years after the point where the original leaves off. Here’s another fun fact, it nearly feels as if it takes about ten years to get through this stinkin’ mess! Unlike the first “Pacific Rim” directed by Academy Award winner Guillermo del Toro, which had tons of soul put into it, this film was directed by Steven S. DeKnight, who has never directed a film prior to “Pacific Rim: Uprising.” He’s done TV shows like “Daredevil” and “Smallville,” but when it comes to films, this is his debut. “Pacific Rim: Uprising” honestly feels more like a movie that was a studio plot to start a franchise than anything else. Aside from that, Charlie Day’s character may be more annoying than Flo from Progressive trying to change every conversation at a party to be about insurance! “Pacific Rim: Uprising” reminds me a lot of “Independence Day: Resurgence,” which was a sequel that was perhaps more long-awaited, although maybe less wanted at the same time, but both movies make massive time jumps, yet cannot help but force reflections that tie into their original counterparts. Where did all my IQ points go? Guess a Kaiju destroyed all of them! That’s the only solution I can come up with at this point!
#6: Shrek Forever After (2010)
Coming in at #6, is the worst animated movie on this list, “Shrek Forever After!” Now “Shrek Forever After” is marketed as the fourth and final chapter in the “Shrek” franchise, that is unless you count the 2011 spinoff “Puss in Boots,” which is a pretty good movie. As for this one, it’s kind of like that TV show that your friend tells you to watch. It’s that show where your friend warns you, “The first couple seasons are good, but don’t watch the final one!” Although, “Shrek the Third” was not that well received either technically speaking, but I find that movie to be more watchable than this. It has been years since I watched “Shrek Forever After,” but I still remember being let down. When you market your movie as the final chapter, there has to be something that puts a bow on the franchise that makes the finale grand. This, honestly just didn’t work. And the ending, if you ask me, is rushed and barely even counts as climactic. The first couple of “Shrek” films had better endings than this travesty! Especially “Shrek 2,” which may have put have put out a cover song of Bonnie Tyler’s “Holding Out For A Hero” that might be twice as good as the original! The concept is interesting, seeing Shrek wanting to return to his roots at times was quite entertaining. But in a franchise full of happily ever afters, this movie is the one that brought me at the closest point to becoming an ogre than any other.
#5: The Favourite (2018)
Between massive awards potential, a stunning cast, and an acclaimed filmmaker, “The Favourite” may have had a formula for success. Guess what? It succeeded! …At failing to impress me. Given how this film was getting tons of awards buzz, I figured I’d give it a shot at the cinema. However, this movie tied me to a horse and dragged me across grass for a couple hours! It’s boring, it’s nearly feels pretentious, it’s horribly paced, and I couldn’t stop wondering when it would actually end. If you ask me, the performances are fine. Olivia Colman is alright, I wouldn’t say she was my pick to win an Oscar, in fact of the nominees listed for that specific ceremony, I probably would have picked Lady Gaga for “A Star is Born,” but that’s just me. Emma Stone and Rachel Weisz are also competent as their own characters. Technically speaking, “The Favourite” is a solid movie with detailed set design, gorgeous framing, well put-together costumes, and a somewhat neat score. Story-wise however, while I was compelled at times, it did not do much to leave me satisfied. As the movie went on, I began to tune out, just being honest. For a movie called “The Favourite,” it’s really ironic how this turned out to be one of my least favorite films of 2018. It nearly made it into my honorable mentions on my worst list for that year! This is also yet another example kind of like “Jupiter Ascending,” of how a movie can look visually appealing, but fail to deliver on the story. This movie nearly touches the two hour mark, but if you ask me, I think based on my experience, it felt like three hours! It’s a drag!
#4: Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 (2017)
Coming in at #4 is “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2!” The original “Guardians of the Galaxy” is a FUN movie. It has comedy! It has a killer soundtrack! It has a likable group of characters from Starlord to Gamora to Rocket! When it comes to 2014, it might as well have been the movie of the summer, as it became the year’s highest grossing superhero film, not to mention the year’s third highest grossing film period. Since this was a big box office hit, a sequel was perhaps inevitable. And when the first main trailer came out, I was hyped, because much like the first film, the comedy stood out. There was one joke that was shown at the end that introduces Mantis that made me switch between the mood of simply checking the movie out “because, why not,” to “absolutely needing to see it now.” Aside from “Wonder Woman,” “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2” was my most anticipated film of 2017. But when I saw it with 500 other people, I wondered if I was on drugs, or if everyone else was on drugs. I say so because the audience I was with pretty much laughed at every joke that came up, but I on the other hand remained silent for perhaps most of the film. And honestly, Baby Groot sucks. Even though inserting Baby Groot is technically appropriate for picking up where the Guardians left off, it almost feels something as simple as a ploy to get people to buy more toys. Now I understand that Marvel movies are expensive, it costs a lot to make them, but still! I didn’t find him cute, I didn’t find him that charming, maybe I’m just a horrible person! It feels like there are too many scenes in the film where the characters are doing something and Groot just is shoved in there because… Baby Groot’s gotta Baby Groot! I will admit, when I first saw this movie, it was at a sold out IMAX and I was in the front row, so I was not in the best mood. But if you must know, I did see it again on a separate occasion. I laughed more, but I also remembered how much I didn’t like Baby Groot, and how much of a step down this was compared to its original counterpart. Even though there is an argument to make that the original “Guardians of the Galaxy” is slightly overrated, it lives up to the hype. It’s hilarious, fun, and visually stunning. Sure, some of the fun is there in “Vol. 2,” but the comedy feels absent! The effects and shots in “Vol. 2” however are some of the finest I’ve witnessed in the MCU, so I’ll give credit where it’s due. I have respect for James Gunn, because he’s kind of a wacky director, and this does feel like a personal movie from his end, but in some ways, the movie failed to hit me. Sure, it had a great villain, which at some points, is rather odd to say in regards to the MCU, but it’s true! Still, if it were a Friday night and I had some friends around, I’d probably pop in the first film as opposed to its sequel.
#3: Avengers: Age of Ultron (2015)
Speaking of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, one of the most anticipated films of 2015 for me was “Avengers: Age of Ultron.” Now… Is it fun? Yes. Is it action-packed? Absolutely. …But it’s “The Avengers,” man! The freaking “Avengers” of all the heroes! Why is it that apparently “Guardians of the Galaxy” and “Captain America: The Winter Soldier” are some of the most solid films in phase 2 of the MCU and “Age of Ultron” is nearly the worst? Heck, even “Ant-Man,” which was the much smaller (in a literal sense) MCU installment to come out in 2015, is twice as good! I will say that this film is better than “Thor: The Dark World,” but when it comes to the MCU, that film is not hard to beat. This was a film that I felt an enormous need to see opening weekend. Every trailer captivated me and made me want to go see it. Joss Whedon, who did a solid job with the first “Avengers” film in 2012, is back in the chair again. The movie almost looked like it could be pretty dark as Robert Downey Jr.’s character of Tony Stark seemed to be going on a bit of a downward spiral from what I have seen in marketing. The trailers always caught my attention and promised something absolutely special. But instead, I got mediocrity shoved right in my face. Ultron is a slightly charismatic villain, but again, in Marvel’s first couple of phases, the villains did not always stand out. Also, you know how a lot of blockbusters are often defined as explosive popcorn movies? “Avengers: Age of Ultron” not only fits that bracket quite well, but to my surprise, it focuses way too much on being stylistic than effectively dramatic. It almost feels like Zack Snyder or Michael Bay could have directed this film at times. There are positives to it. It’s got funny at moments here and there. Some of the hero characters stand out, which they should. There’s a great gag involving mjolnir, AKA Thor’s hammer, and this also features one of the better Stan Lee cameos. Surprisingly, if you ask me what my thoughts are on the moments between Hulk and Black Widow, those did not annoy me as much as other people. In fact, “Age of Ultron” did little to annoy me, but I figured in a sequel as big and as highly anticipated as this, it could have lived up to a higher standard. I say this specifically not just regarding “Avengers,” but perhaps all Marvel movies, “Age of Ultron” has one of the weaker climaxes. While it is fun to look at, it doesn’t feel like there’s more to it than eye candy. This movie just feels like an excuse for Disney/Marvel to throw $365 million out the window. Which, in the end, probably wasn’t the worst idea as this movie joined the billion dollar club. Although I will admit, even though I think Joss Whedon, alongside everyone else involved, did a better job with the original “Avengers” movie, I do feel bad for some of the harsh feedback he got, because it’s a major factor that got the famous director to quit Twitter. Nevertheless, “Age of Ultron” is not only the worst “Avengers” movie, it is almost the worst movie of the MCU’s phase 2.
#2: Midsommar (2019)
These last two movies on the list are from 2019, which makes me even more satisfied that the year ended with a ton of solid movies from “Parasite” to “Ford v Ferrari” to “Knives Out” to “Uncut Gems.” In the middle of the year, specifically, July, my most anticipated film of the summer came out. While I did wait a month to see it and happened to be rather giddy when I finally got my chance, it was not even close to worthwhile! Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the runner-up of the disappointing list, “Midsommar!” This is a disappointment if there ever was one. “Hereditary” is probably one of the best directorial debuts in recent memory. Ari Aster made me believe that he had a very bright future ahead… Then we got “Midsommar.” Leading up to this film, “Midsommar” was described by Ari Aster himself to be “a ‘Wizard of Oz’ for perverts.” Having seen the film, it’s not that! “The Wizard of Oz” is a story that takes place in a magical and mystical land! It’s all happy and colorful! Here, it tries to be colorful, it tries to be quirky, but it is perhaps almost the most annoying movie I have ever seen. While the cinematography is beautiful and the directing job from Aster is worthy of a thumbs up, the movie itself pisses me off to no end. Even though Florence Pugh is a likable actress, I cannot say that her character is as likable or charming as her. She honestly probably gives what could be the weirdest and one of the most unreal cries I have heard in a movie. If anybody has seen the first few minutes of “Midsommar” and remembers the cry that Florence Pugh gives, do you cry like that? Do you know anyone who cries like that? I don’t, personally. It’s a thing that I’ve noticed from Ari Aster, because I remember there was a scene from “Midsommar” where I noticed some weird crying as well. If anybody really does cry like this, I want to know because I may be keeping my head in somebody’s ass here, but… I just don’t have much experience hearing cries like the ones from Ari Aster’s films. As if Florence Pugh didn’t play a fine character, the supporting characters are also nearly unwatchable. Most specifically, Florence Pugh’s so-called friends. There was almost nobody I really rooted for in the film. And while this film tries to be pretty scary, it fails. Again, it’s more annoying than anything else! Even the delightfully strange moments don’t make up for its faults! Maybe if I had less anticipation for this film, it would either not make the list or be somewhere on it that’s lower. But again, this was one of my most anticipated films in regards to the summer of 2019. What was the most anticipated? Not sure. Could have been this, maybe “Ready or Not.” Because that had a kick-ass trailer! To add more disappointment, this opened around the same time as “Spider-Man: Far from Home,” which even though Spidey is my favorite superhero, the trailers for “Far from Home” were pretty terrible. Between an underwhelming first trailer, and unexpectedly dropping massive spoilers for “Avengers: Endgame” in a later trailer, it left a bad taste in my mouth. “Midsommar” was a film that felt like a pretty unique experience. Plus, it’s from A24, which is a studio I often respect. They helped put out some of my favorite movies from the past decade including “Room,” “The Disaster Artist,” and “Eighth Grade.” “Midsommar” is in competition with “The Witch” to perhaps be my least favorite A24 film. It’s kind of sad if you ask me. Again, this film is not scary. And I know some people have probably pointed out how “gross” it is. I never really found it to be disgusting or gross. I just found it to be an annoyance.
But you know what the sad part is? It’s not the most disappointing film of the decade! Not even the most disappointing of 2019 as a matter of fact! This past year came so close to being a lackluster year for film.
Alright, we’ve made it! #1! What could it be? Well, here’s some things I’ll say! This movie, as mentioned, came out in 2019. It’s a movie that has been featured on Top 10 WORST Movies of 2019, and in regards to this series, I put it in THE WORST 25 countdown. What is it exactly? Well, it’s not “The Aeronauts.” That did not make it on my top 10 worst, and it’s already #25 here. It’s not “Midsommar,” I just talked about that. It’s not “IT: Chapter Two,” it’s not “Serenity,” it’s not “Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker,” it’s not “Dora and the Lost City of Gold,” and it’s DEFINITELY not “Cats” as I had no expectations going into it. My #1 most disappointing film of the 2010s is… FEATURED IN THE CLIP BELOW!
Oh my God. Zilla. I’ve said that before, but that saying has never made more sense than it does right now. Because my #1 most disappointing film of the 2010s is “Godzilla: King of the Monsters.” I am not the biggest “Godzilla” fanatic, but even I was uber-excited for this movie. At 2018’s San Diego Comic-Con, they dropped the first trailer for this film and it pumped me up like a balloon! Aside from having stunning visuals and some cool monster action, it had a BEAUTIFUL redo of “Clair de Lune” playing in the background. But little did I know at the time, that distracted me from the reality that this movie was visually beautiful, but as a story, it is a complete wreck! Nearly none of the original human characters make a return. Instead, we get new characters played by some well-known actors including Vera Farmiga, Kyle Chandler, Thomas Middleditch, and Charles Dance. All of these actors have experience and are culturally respected. Just because this movie has big names, does not mean it’ll be a big success. In fact, it’s a monster-sized failure! Even though it made about double it’s budget, it’s still a disappointment after raking in $386 million worldwide. The movie made less money than its predecessor from 2014, simply titled “Godzilla,” which took in $529 million worldwide against a slightly smaller budget than this dreaded sequel. Why did this movie fail? It’s hard to come up with one simple answer. It’s one of those movies, probably like “Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice” that did not sit well with critics, but for casual moviegoers and people who are simply fans of “Godzilla,” it was worth watching. After all, the audience score for “King of the Monsters” is 83%, nearly double of the critic score, which sits at 42%. Maybe the low critic score influenced the audience’s thinking patterns. But then again, “Aladdin” came out the week before, so maybe people were still into that.
When I come across a good number of positive thoughts for “Godzilla: King of the Monsters,” they sometimes have one thing in common. People sometimes point out that in terms of characters, this movie is lackluster, and despite that, they still give it a positive score. Some would say that monsters fighting each other is entertaining enough. With that being said, I will admit one of the slight positives of “Godzilla: King of the Monsters” is that the monster fighting is expanded in this movie, but it’s also a negative because even though it was minimal in 2014’s “Godzilla,” it nevertheless felt special. In “King of the Monsters,” some of the camerawork during the fights is nothing to write home about, although some scenes are better than others. As for characterization, this is just like the “Transformers” movies where even though there are alternate subjects in the title, the movie chooses to focus primarily on disposable and one-dimensional human characters. They’re poorly written, they’re poorly realized, even though the actors do what they can with them. Even though an actress like Millie Bobby Brown was somewhat wasted in this film, she gave it her all, which is probably a sign that she is going to have a bright future that involves a lot more than “Godzilla” and “Stranger Things.” I have come to a point in my movie watching journey where I require more than flat characters and all pretty visuals. This is “Jupiter Ascending” all over again!
Speaking of these pretty visuals, even getting to say that they are pretty in the first place is kind of sad. Because there is a sign that people put some effort into this movie. In fact, I imagine everyone across the board did all they can to make the finest movie possible, but for some reason, when it was trying to stick the landing, it plummeted as hard as s*it! This is one of the few movies that from a visual and audio perspective, made me nearly leave the theater with a headache. I like obnoxious films that are incredibly immersive, but there was so much going on at once! It felt like I was at a concert where three bands where competing to see which one can get the crowd roaring the loudest! This movie honestly feels like that “Family Guy” cutaway where The Emperor from “Star Wars” is speaking through the formula for great dialogue in the franchise. Specifically, he says “Something something something dark side. Something something something complete.” While “Godzilla” is not “Star Wars,” replace “dark side” with “monsters,” and “complete” with “fight in Boston,” you have “Godzilla: King of the Monsters.” Yes, it does have a standout story involving a major motivation from Vera Farmiga’s character, but again, all these characters feel incredibly disposable. I mean no harm, and people are allowed to like what they like, I don’t know how all the viewers who like “Godzilla: King of the Monsters” can get past the underwhelming characters who are played by big name actors, but have to deal with a s*itty ass script! It’s cheesy, boring, and forgettable! I can have fun with a big budget blockbuster, just not this one!
To add to the disappointment, this movie could have some unfortunate ramifications going forward. After all, “Godzilla: King of the Monsters” is the third installment to the current Warner Bros. Monsterverse, which currently features prime titans Godzilla and King Kong. In fact, both titans are supposed to duke it out against each other in a future film that is supposedly coming out this year. The more I hear about that film, or more specifically, what little I even hear about that film, the less I manage to look forward to it. But when it comes to what could happen to it regarding “Godzilla: King of the Monsters,” the poor box office total of that film could be a bad sign of what’s to come. Plus, it’s been a few years since people have seen “Kong: Skull Island,” which to be fair, was a success. “Godzilla vs. Kong” could although continue a trend of box office disappointment as it is part of a universe that might as well be shrinking in terms of relevance. One of the reasons why the Marvel Cinematic Universe is still working today is because they’re constantly cranking out films. It took a couple years between one “Iron Man” or “Avengers” film to get to the next one. Plus, in between those sorts of properties, we get other characters getting movies including Thor and Captain America. “Godzilla” took its time, and maybe was on less people’s minds. Plus, given the quality of “Godzilla: King of the Monsters,” it sort of hit me in a way that made me less excited for what’s to come. Going back to Marvel, “Avengers: Infinity War” made me excited for future movies including “Ant-Man and the Wasp” and the then untitled “Avengers: Endgame.” A bad movie can do more than just leave a bad taste in the mouth. It can leave an aftertaste that might stick for years. This aftertaste makes me look into the future and ultimately feel a tad pessimistic.
As for what that future looks like specifically, it looks like everyone might not be learning from their mistakes. After all, Eiza Gonzalez, who is set to star alongside Millie Bobby Brown as a couple human characters in “Godzilla vs. Kong,” was intereviewed in March while promoting the all-new Vin Diesel film, “Bloodshot.” She said the following during an interview for The Hollywood Reporter…
“Yeah, everything’s been done. These movies take a long time because there’s a lot of CGI in them. But, yeah, we’ve done everything, and they’re just going through and creating these incredible characters. I’m just really excited to see it because it’s these two worlds colliding. The fan base for “Godzilla vs. Kong” is incredible. When I say I’m in the movie, people are like, “Oh my God.” Seeing that fanaticism and seeing how excited they are to see this movie makes me really excited; I think they’re going to be really happy. [Director] Adam Wingard is so talented. Both stories are going parallel, as you’ll see, without giving anything away. It’s a large cast as well, and it was really fun to be part of it. There’s so much going on, but the heart of it is two young girls as well, which is such a positive message for society nowadays. It’s just incredible.” -Eiza Gonzalez
So unless these two young girls are Godzilla vs. Kong bitchin’ it out against each other, I would imagine it involves Millie Bobby Brown and perhaps a character played by Gonzalez herself. Since this movie chooses to focus on humans again, I really hope there is a sense of strong effort put into the script. Because the last one made me want to go out and topple some skyscrapers!
Also, as someone who lives near Boston, this movie is an insult.
Thanks for reading this countdown! Kind of like the previous lists I’ve done in the Top Movies of the 2010s series, this could easily change as it does span an entire decade as opposed to an entire year. In fact, now that I’m in isolation, I have all the time in the world to watch more movies from the 2010s, so who knows? All these picks may be outdated in a month or two. However, if you are interested in seeing more of Top Movies of the 2010s, feel free to check out my other lists titled THE BEST 25 and THE WORST 25. Now that content becoming harder to make in these times, I am thinking of doing more of these. Maybe I’ll also do more than top 25s. Maybe I’ll go short and do top 11s or top 15s, or if I really want to cover such a massive topic, I’ll go for top 50 or top 100. I’ll have to think of a topic that can truly fit a hundred films if that’s the case, but it’s still a thought that I have. If you want to see more great content from Scene Before, follow this blog via an email or WordPress account! Also, be sure to check out my Facebook page if you are interested, I post content updates, random thoughts, and if you don’t want to follow the actual Scene Before blog, I also automatically post new content from Scene Before onto the page if you would like to check it out. But it’s your world and I just live in it! I want to know, what are your most disappointing movies of the 2010s? Is there a title I missed? Or, what other countdowns would you like to see come to life in the Top Movies of the 2010s series? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
Hey everyone, Jack Drees here! We are more than a month into the year of 2020 and the film industry has already experienced its highest-grossing January movie to date, “Bad Boys For Life,” but like any other January, it has also been met with some stinkers like “Dolittle,” DO NOT WATCH THAT MOVIE… IT’S BLASPHEMOUS! Anyway, now that we have gotten as far as somewhat early February, I want to talk about what this year could mean for one of my personal favorite film-related brands, IMAX.
Now, there is no doubt that in recent years, IMAX’s competitors have made names for themselves. Regal’s RPX is still going strong, AMC is continuously rolling out their Dolby Theatres, and 4D venues still have a presence. But today, I wanted to talk about a few things that could make IMAX stand out from the competition, and ways they could potentially have a great year.
Let’s just get one thing out of the way, because to me, this is perhaps the most important standout notion to take in about IMAX’s lineup this year, from what I have heard, three feature-length wide release movies this year are being shot with IMAX’s film cameras. You know, the ones used for 30 minutes of “The Dark Knight.” I’ve talked about these cameras before, but if you don’t know, IMAX sometimes presents movies shot with specifically branded film cameras in a way that covers the whole screen. This has been done since 2008 in the realm of feature-length entertainment and has occasionally given the company a reason to keep using their film projectors. After all, everything is digital now, including IMAX’s newer projection systems, which I have noted as inferior to their original counterparts, especially when you consider that most of them were built specifically for use on smaller screens.
Now what’s so important about this? Well, for film purists like me, I take just about any opportunity I can get to achieving a “true IMAX experience.” When “Interstellar” and “Dunkirk” came out, I spent an hour flocking to Providence, RI just to go see those movies in the format in which they were perhaps meant to be seen. This year, I think there is going to be at least one opportunity for that, and I’ll get to that eventually, because we are going to be discussing these films in chronological order here.
Let’s talk about the movies that are being shot in IMAX 70mm!
NO TIME TO DIE (APRIL 8TH)
Now, I am not a major “Bond” fanatic like some, I’ve only seen a couple of the franchise’s films, but there is no doubt that I am looking forward to “No Time To Die.” It is Daniel Craig’s grand finale as James Bond, the cast also includes current notable names including Rami Malek (Bohemian Rhapsody, Night at the Museum) and Ana de Armas (Blade Runner 2049, Knives Out). In fact the first trailer is almost as good as a first trailer can be for a movie like this. It does not expose everything right off the bat, it’s got great music behind it, and it’s just action-packed. According to Wikipedia, it suggests select sequences are presented in IMAX. That can mean a lot of things, but it is safe to assume that at least one or two action sequences will bring IMAX filmmaking to the table. Which ones? I don’t know. For all I know it could be all of them. This is the first “Bond” film to be shot in IMAX, and if Daniel Craig is hanging up the suit, why not do so in the biggest way possible?
WONDER WOMAN 1984 (JUNE 5TH)
Three words. Welcome to 1984! At the near end of the spring season, comes the second “Wonder Woman” solo film in the DCEU, “Wonder Woman 1984.” “Wonder Woman 1984” takes place in a significantly different era and time frame compared to the franchise’s 2017 predecessor, simply titled “Wonder Woman,” which took place during World War I. The marketing so far has been good enough to make me hang a mini poster in my room so that might suggest something. Gal Gadot looks like she’ll kick ass once again, Patty Jenkins is directing once more, which totally pleases me because I thought the directing job she did with “Wonder Woman” brought one of the best visions to a comic book movie I have seen. As for how the film will be shot in IMAX, I imagine it will be a similar scenario like with “No Time to Die,” where most of the IMAX footage, depending on how many minutes total happened to be shot, will be presented during key action scenes. Much like “No Time to Die,” “Wonder Woman 1984’s” description on Wikipedia suggests “select sequences” will be shot using the format. Again, it does not go into much detail, nor does it need to partially considering how “Wonder Woman 1984” does not come out for another four months. Interestingly, of the three IMAX 70mm-shot films I’m talking about here, this is the only one that is supposed to be released in 3D. But I have noticed in recent years that IMAX venues, most notably the ones that I go to or happen to be close to, have toned down on the 3D craze. I almost even wonder if any IMAX theaters will be showing “Wonder Woman 1984” in 3D to begin with, but that is a mystery that shall be solved as we progress closer to the release date.
TENET (JULY 17TH)
This last film at one point WAS my most anticipated of 2020, specifically, “Tenet.” If you want to know my current most anticipated film it happens to be “Dune,” which comes out next December, also supposedly available in IMAX. However, at this point, “Tenet” is a close second. Why? Because it is directed by Christopher Nolan, who may just be my favorite filmmaker working today. And just like me, he sees the importance of the IMAX brand and why we should continue making and presenting movies on the clearest film formats possible. This movie, much like Nolan’s previous directorial effort, “Dunkirk,” is being entirely shot to be presented in 70mm, part of it being with IMAX footage. As for how much is being shot with what camera remains a mystery. I will say this though, as one of the first to see “Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker” in IMAX, I got to witness a six-minute prologue to the film and not only does it look great on the big screen where in this case, it is completely full, it also has the sound of what could only be described as a behemoth. Plus, story-wise, it is built for the theater environment. IMDb describes “Tenet” as “an action epic revolving around international espionage, time travel and evolution.” Having seen the trailer and hearing a bit about this film, it very much reminds me of Nolan’s own “Inception,” which too is action-based. And just like “Tenet,” “Inception” revolves around the concept of time, an often-repeated idea represented in Nolan’s films. “Tenet” has serious potential to possibly be this summer’s biggest critical hit. As for box office, that is going to depend on certain factors including whether Nolan’s name is enough to get people to flock to the theater. The film has a budget of $205 million. But this is being described as an event film, so who knows?
Of the three key films I mentioned, it is possible that “Tenet” might be the only film of said three to get an IMAX 70mm release. After all, Nolan’s films are often specifically crafted for the IMAX screen and he is often associated with the brand. Even though it would be AMAZING to see Cary Joji Fukunaga’s “No Time to Die” and Patty Jenkins’ “Wonder Woman 1984” be released in the format in which they were shot, the directors do not have the same name power that Nolan has and there are less reports about them that have caught my eye regarding them advocating for IMAX 70mm shows or other film presentations overall. Although, Patty Jenkins also directed 2017’s “Wonder Woman,” which did manage to get a 70mm release. The question of whether or not we see something like this with the 2020 sequel continues to remain. Until then, audiences can at least look forward to possibly viewing these movies in what can be described as IMAX 70mm’s digital equivalent, IMAX Laser.
As for other IMAX movies, “Detective Chinatown 3” was shot with ARRI Alexa IMAX Cameras, which were also used to film movies including “Avengers: Endgame.” Plus, “Top Gun: Maverick,” set to release this summer, has been shot using IMAX-certified Sony Venice cameras, which are capable of producing 6K images.
As for other, non-IMAX film camera-shot movies, Disney’s looking to dominate once again with titles like “Mulan,” Marvel’s “Black Widow,” Marvel’s “Eternals,” and “Artemis Fowl,” which is based on the hit book series of the same name. If “Artemis Fowl” is successful, it could be the next big fantasy franchise in film, maybe this generation’s “Harry Potter.” In addition, Disney now has their Fox slate, which means they’ll be inserting “The King’s Man” into IMAX theaters this September. Other potential event movies include Paramount’s recently mentioned “Top Gun: Maverick,” the upcoming second installment to its respective franchise. Also from Paramount, “F9,” the upcoming “Fast & Furious” installment set to return to the world of fast-paced car action this time featuring prank call meme John Cena (Playing with Fire, Blockers) as main character Dominic Toretto’s brother, and Warner Bros.’s “Godzilla vs. Kong,” where two iconic titans collide.
Now, something feels weird. We’re in a new decade, we’re seeing new movies, but NO “STAR WARS” FILMS. Every year since 2015 has brought movie audiences everywhere the introduction of a brand new “Star Wars” story, whether it is in “The Skywalker Saga” or a spinoff like “Rogue One” or “Solo.” Now that we are here in this extremely odd reality, I am willing to accept it, and I say that as a “Star Wars” fan. After all, one of the problems I have had with Disney’s ownership of “Star Wars” is that they essentially milked the franchise to the last drop. This resulted in seemingly rushed projects and ideas that I never specifically expected or wanted to see out of the franchise, most notably “Solo.” Will this hurt the IMAX brand? Well, having a “Star Wars” film during the year definitely helps any brand. But, given how DC has a couple films this year, given how Marvel has a couple films this year, the nerd demographic will probably still flock to multiple potentially popular titles.
In other news, IMAX has something significant coming in Australia. For those of you who don’t know, one of IMAX’s most historic venues lies in the city of Sydney. IMAX has numerous venues across the continent, including one in Melbourne which happens to be one of the company’s all-time largest screens (105 ft x 75 ft). However, Sydney’s IMAX shut down during the previous decade for some time, with news coming in about it being demolished. With that, came the loss of IMAX’s then largest screen (117.2 ft x 97 ft). Although, the Sydney IMAX was scheduled to reopen sometime in the future, with an even bigger screen that will still break the record as IMAX’s most massive venue. As revealed on imax.com.au, the new venue will feature IMAX’s laser projector, which is capable of digitally projecting images in 4K, plus their 12-channel sound system. While I am intrigued by the new setup, this does raise a question. Will the Sydney IMAX continue to play movies in IMAX 70mm? After all, they’ve had a film-based projector throughout the existence of the city’s original IMAX theater. There is not that much of a suggestion as to the new IMAX having a film projector. Still located in Sydney, as recently suggested, the new cinema will be a part of The Ribbon, an ongoing development project where the IMAX will connect to a W Hotel. Also around the area, there will be multiple retail and restaurant options.
IMAX has a somewhat big year ahead of them. Right now, “Birds of Prey” is reportedly going to end up having a disappointing opening weekend, but if it does not do as well as Warner Brothers would hope, there are opportunities for them, along with IMAX as a whole, to bounce back. Between the technology, the movie selection ahead, and more, the company will continue doing what they can to let viewers follow one of their company slogans, “think big.”
Thanks for reading this post! I just want to announce that my next review is going to be for the new DC film “Birds of Prey,” which coincidentally, I just saw in IMAX! Who knew? I’ll have my review of the comic book flick at some point, but as for when exactly it’ll be posted is a mystery, because as of now, most of my time and dedication to this blog is being centered towards THE 2ND ANNUAL JACKOFF AWARDS, my second time doing an award show, and my second time using a crappy title! If you want to complain about why your favorite movie did not win Best Picture, fine! Be that way! OR if you want one of these ten movies to win, click this link to enter the official voting form for this year’s Jackoff Best Pictures nominees. UNLESS OF COURSE, YOU ALREADY VOTED. But if you want your movie to win, make sure you vote by the end of Saturday February 15th, otherwise the voting closes and you will forever remain voiceless.
Tune into the 2nd Annual Jackoffs on Sunday February 16th only on Flicknerd.com!
If you want to see more content like this including reviews, countdowns, and more of my crazy opinions full of absolute entitlement, be sure to follow Scene Before either with an email or WordPress account (if you want the ability to like and comment)! Also, check out my Facebook page! Because if you don’t, Mark Zuckerberg will flip a table. I want to know, are you planning on seeing any films in IMAX this year? Have you seen any films in IMAX so far this year? I just saw “Birds of Prey” in the format, but I guarantee you that I have more IMAX experiences up ahead, especially with these IMAX-shot movies coming out. Let’s make it big this year, let’s do this! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
Hey everyone, Jack Drees here! Before we go any further, let me just say, I admittedly put this post out a little later than I once anticipated. I had my mind going around on three posts at once, part of me was begging to nap this week, some distractions have gotten in the way, and I also had this thing going on over on my Twitter where I’m giving shoutouts to women on International Women’s Day. With those things in mind, you might as well say that if this blog or my posts happened to be my kid(s), I might not be the best of fathers. I’ve been distracted, wanting to fall asleep, and just didn’t have enough of a focus on the things that matter. Speaking of parenting, let’s talk about Genevieve and Paul. Who are they? Well, they’re a couple who are currently expecting, but their journey to get there was like trying to find a way to defy gravity. Impossibly long and stressful. Ladies and gentlemen, this is all documented in “What The IVF?!”
“What the IVF?” focuses on the recently mentioned couple, Genevieve and Paul. The two are happy together and one day decide to have a baby. Turns out they realize, the process of having a baby isn’t all fun and games, and now they’ve got to deal with various problems. These problems range in areas including: Sex, math, exams, and those freakin’ needles! The first episode of the series up right now, it’s actually the video listed above, it’s a few minutes long, so if you need to waste some time and you feel like you should watch something, this is a good deal for you. And I said to the couple that I’d promote the material, and I’m not just saying this to be nice or push their buttons or receive a fat paycheck in the mail, in fact at this point they’d probably need it for baby food or something, I actually watched the first episode, and I thought it was very well done. If you look at this video, you’re in for a well edited treat. Be sure to catch up on the latest regarding Genevieve and Paul and to help you do that, I’ll post links to various “WTIVF?” social media pages, and if you check this stuff out, be sure to tell them that Jack Drees sent you over!
Getting back on track, it’s official that the Academy Awards are now over, so now I can look back and say to myself, “What happened to the politics?” If you think I’m asking that negatively, think again. Because I know one thing for sure, politics and the Academy Awards associate with each other quite well, and at times, it’s not exactly annoying, but they seemed to tone it down this year. When it comes to the politics, it was basically a sigh of relief. There were barely any comments regarding our current administration and when the comments were uttered, they were actually quite funny!
“That’s not the point. We don’t make films like ‘Call Me by Your Name’ for money. We make them to upset Mike Pence.” -Jimmy Kimmel
Then again, this isn’t the Golden Globes, where political and social issues, at least from my eyes and ears, seem to be more prominent and forced. At this Oscars, the insertion of all this commentary regarding politics and society didn’t feel that awkward because while they were there, there seemed to be more of a focus on awards and film.
Not every single person made it a big deal to wear black. People either did or they didn’t. The jokes weren’t as cringe-worthy. And let me just have you know, the stuff that’s being represented in terms of social issues happens to be stuff I personally support! Racial equality! Gender equality! I mean, Barbra Streisand and Natalie Portman didn’t get up on stage and come off as depression lords. Yes, time IS up, but there are more important issues than having male nominees and winners for Best Director. One of my favorite quotes regarding social issues comes from Kumail Nanjiani, who you may know as one of the writers and actors in last year’s “The Big Sick,” which is one of my favorite movies of 2017.
“Some of my favorite movies are movies by straight white dudes about straight white dudes. Now, straight white dudes can watch movies starring me, and you relate to that. It’s not that hard. I’ve done it my whole life.”
Well said, Kumail!
One of the other highlights of the night was something I didn’t actually expect. I came in for an award show, not a game show. Now when I say that, you may expect me to follow up with something negative, that is unless you realize my fanaticism for game shows. So as Jimmy Kimmel is finishing up his opening monologue, he reminds everyone that the Oscars is “a very long show.” Before those words are spoken, he states that the first Oscars show lasted for fifteen minutes from beginning to end, he adds in humor by saying “and people still complained.” So in order to spice things up, the show was going to give away a prize. So I start hearing “The Price is Right” music and suddenly, I see Helen Mirren standing right next to a new jet ski. The total value of the jet ski is $17,999, and whoever was to give the shortest speech, will go home with the prize. Kimmel adds, “Why waste precious time thanking your mother when you can give her the ride of her life on a new jet ski?” The man claimed that he was going to be timing everyone who wins an Academy Award with a stopwatch. Once they pick up their trophy, the clock begins ticking. Some of Kimmel’s conclusive words are “And in the unlikely event of a tie, I need to say the jet ski will be awarded to Christopher Plummer.”
By the way, Mark Bridges, the costume designer for “Phantom Thread,” was the winner of the jet ski. Also, for those of you who never heard of or seen “Phantom Thread,” the main character of Reynolds Woodcock, played by Daniel Day-Lewis, is a dressmaker. So of course, a movie about making clothes, won a category which involves making clothes.
Before I tuned into the Oscars, I made a hope/prediction post, which admittedly I rushed in some parts, but overall it was a somewhat effective list coming in over 4500 words. Although to be fair, it was crunch time, and I was just trying to get my major category predictions down. Much like in that post, I’m not gonna go through all the categories and stick to talking about anything from the categories that stand out to me. In my post I didn’t talk about anything such as Best Animated Short Film, Best Documentary, stuff like that. I’m just gonna talk about a category if I have some sort of interest related to them or if there’s something to me in it that stands out compared to other categories. To start this off, I’m going to dive into a category that I didn’t discuss on my prediction post. Specifically, Best Animated Short Film.
Here are the results for Best Animated Short Film!
Dear Basketball (WINNER!)
Regardless of familiarity, this category interested me because of its winner, “Dear Basketball.” For those of you who haven’t seen or heard of “Dear Basketball,” I don’t imagine many people will blame you, including Lakers fans. It has less than 2,000 ratings on IMDb, but it appears the Academy liked it. I have no problem with them liking it. I haven’t seen the short, so I can’t judge all that much. Although the real shocker for me here is who happens to be behind this “Academy Award winner.” OK, well, John Williams composed the music, which may have partially contributed to the overall verdict. The animation was a different style than what I usually see, and while I don’t think that in itself is award-worthy, maybe the idea of being different contributed to it. The creative developer, Brian Hunt made this his first project as a creative developer, but he also had experience in the industry prior to this. Although when it comes to the entire world of diverse, differently-minded, and film-focused people, the Academy decides to give an award to…
Yeah, Kobe Bryant. Kobe. Bryant. KOBE… BRRRRYANT. A former NBA Basketball player who has won the NBA Finals in the past, achieved an Oscar! I’m not saying that this is the end of the world, but seriously! If you told me a week ago, that Kobe Bryant, a guy who angrily swears at his own basketball team during practice, saying that his teammates are motherf*ckers who don’t do s*it for him, was going to win an Academy Award, I’d die laughing, get up, and tell you to get out of my sight because I’d think you’re incredibly dumb.
But he did.
Although one thing I really liked about this is how Mark Hamill was presenting the award. Because for one thing, he’s f*cking Mark Hamill. And another thing, the joke he made right before “Dear Basketball” was announced.
“Don’t say ‘La La Land.’ Don’t say La La Land.'”
Speaking of animations, let’s dive into Best Animated Feature Film.
The Boss Baby
“Coco” won. What a surprise.
“The Boss Baby” lost. Big fat shocker as well, not to mention a sign that Earth is still sane.
Enough said. Moving on.
Next up is Best Actor, and here are the results!
Gary Oldman (Darkest Hour) (WINNER!)
Daniel Day-Lewis (Phantom Thread)
Timothée Chalamet (Call Me by Your Name)
Denzel Washington (Roman J. Israel, Esq.)
Daniel Kaluuya (Get Out)
In total honesty, it would have been nice to see Daniel Day-Lewis win. Not just because he’s a terrific actor, but because this is his last performance. I have not seen “Phantom Thread,” much like how I haven’t seen any of the other films listed above, but seeing Day-Lewis winning would have been a treat. I have nothing against Gary Oldman. I don’t have anything against him winning, I think he’s a fine actor, and he definitely has potential to take on some more great roles in the future. I didn’t think about this while I was doing my hope and prediction post, but I did find this out going into the show. If Timothée Chalamet ended up winning Best Actor, he would have been the youngest person to win that award. For the record, Chalamet could have possibly been a 22 year-old Oscar winner, beating out then 29 year-old Adrien Brody (The Pianist) who won an Academy Award for this specific category for the 2002 movie season.
Once again, a category filled with movies that I just haven’t gotten around to watching! OK, well except one, which was “Three Billboards.” Having seen it, I approve of McDormand’s win. Very well deserved! Part of me thought at one point that Margot Robbie was gonna win for “I, Tonya” based on a clip I saw for it, but I guess not. Meryl Streep… I have nothing against her. I still have to see “The Post.” But I seriously wonder if this nomination happened just because she’s Meryl and the Academy has a fetish for nominating her. Part of me is also surprised the Academy didn’t go with Saoirse Ronan for “Lady Bird.” Although at the same time, it surprises me how many people saw the movie and didn’t like it. I didn’t see it, but I’m trying to.
One of the next categories we’re gonna get into is Best Adapted Screenplay.
Call Me by Your Name (WINNER!)
The Disaster Artist
I’ll state something similar to what I said in my prediction and hope post. “Mudbound,” to me, doesn’t qualify as a movie that associates with the Oscars. To me, the Oscars is about celebrating cinema. While there are a number of people who clearly worship this movie for various reasons, I refuse to call it a technical “Oscar film.” To my knowledge, this movie has released in a couple theaters if that. And while I do think a movie with even the smallest theatrical release can qualify to win an Oscar, it’s mainly known to me as a straight to streaming film. Now don’t get me wrong, if Amazon or someone like that distributed this film, I would have possibly supported “Mudbound” more. But instead, Netflix did. And since Netflix doesn’t give movie theaters a chance (do some research on “The Cloverfield Paradox”), I refuse to watch it, review it, and call it a movie that others seem to call it. So unless Netflix starts releasing films in theaters as a tradition and not a special occasion, I refuse to review any of their films or consider them for awards like Oscars, or if you want to be more accurate on my end, my top 10 BEST movies of the year lists. Now “Call Me by Your Name” won. I didn’t see it, therefore I was in a somewhat of a shock when its, well, name was called. I was glad it wasn’t “Mudbound,” but I didn’t really expect this film to win, and I was actually rooting for a couple of other films. One film I saw earlier this year because I couldn’t get to it last year was “Molly’s Game.” The film itself? Barely passable. The screenplay though? If this were a film class and I were teaching, I’d give it somewhere around the A range just for the diction choices and the snappy tone it provided at times. I was especially disappointed that they didn’t pick “The Disaster Artist” because humor-wise, it was the funniest movie of 2017, maybe aside from “The LEGO Batman Movie.” Not to mention the way it was written was partially realistic and another part felt like a homage. And while this is based on a true event, I totally appreciate the callbacks to some things that happened that can be associated with “The Room.” A lot of people are kind of disappointed that “Logan” didn’t win this award. I haven’t seen “Logan,” I’ve heard phenomenal things, but I haven’t seen it. Part of me wonders if this is just coming from people who either have a bias towards comic book movies or just go see comic book movies and ignores everything else, or if it’s a bunch of people who appreciate the screenplay for its differences compared to other comic book movies. It’s darker, grittier, contains more violence and foul language, and it just contains things that makes anyone who works at Disney hide in the corner. I’m not gonna focus on Best Original Screenplay, I don’t really have much to say about it. Like I mentioned earlier, I’m gonna just dive into categories which can feel more like an essay as opposed to a couple of forced complete sentences. Either that or if I feel if it has some sort of relevance to me, that will play into this sort of thing as well.
Next up is a category containing something I often think about, Best Original Score.
Alexandre Desplat (The Shape of Water) (WINNER!)
Hans Zimmer (Dunkirk)
John Williams (Star Wars: The Last Jedi)
Jonny Greenwood (Phantom Thread)
Carter Burwell (Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri)
Before we get into discussion concerning the winner, let’s talk about John Williams. John Williams, without a doubt, is a great composer, and there’s a reason why people love his work. Not only has he done some of the most iconic movie scores of all (Raiders of the Lost Ark, Harry Potter, Jurassic Park, Home Alone, Jaws), but he’s proven to be talented for many many years. Although him being nominated for his work on “The Last Jedi” is just… Bogus. I have seen every single “Star Wars” film scored by John Williams, including the latest one in the franchise, “The Last Jedi.” The movie’s mediocre overall, I admittedly overhyped it when I first saw it, it was a whole thing. When it comes to John Williams, I honestly don’t see how he could have been nominated for an Oscar other than the fact that he’s the one doing the score. You remember the score for “Rogue One?” That one was the only score for a theatrically released “Star Wars” film that isn’t from John Williams. That score, while not recognized all that much for awards, was not only a delight to hear, but a different take on what could qualify as “Star Wars” music. I’ve given some sort of praise to “The Last Jedi” for being different, but one aspect that didn’t feel different was the score. It felt like it just took themes from “The Force Awakens” and other “Star Wars” films and shoved them right into this one. I still remember the climactic scenes and I’m hearing the “March of the Resistance” song and it just felt underwhelming unlike the first couple of times. I like John Williams, I think he’s skilled, but what the hell? There are other scores that weren’t even nominated that could have qualified! “Blade Runner 2049!” “Wonder Woman!” And even though this film wasn’t really that good, I’d be fine with live-action “Ghost in the Shell” because at least various aspects of the movie, such as the music, made it sound like it was trying. “Revenge of the Sith’s” score was never nominated for any Oscars, but if you actually think “The Last Jedi” had a better score than “Revenge of the Sith,” I’m gonna force-choke you. Now onto something that matters.
I wanted “Dunkirk” to win Best Original Score. Although in the end, it turned out to be “The Shape of Water.” And funny enough, the composer for the score in “The Shape of Water,” Alexandre Desplat was originally going to compose the music for the recently mentioned “Rogue One” before that job ultimately went to Michael Giacchino! Desplat has also scored 2014’s “The Grand Budapest Hotel,” which I saw, enjoyed, but can’t say I liked as much other people. You know, kind of like its score. Seriously? It lost to “Interstellar?” You done goof, Academy. I’ll say this is one of those wins, much like a couple of others that really make me interested in checking out “The Shape of Water.” It would be interesting to hear what music related to a woman and fish who wanna f*ck sound like. I thought “Dunkirk” would win for its grand and fast-paced feel, but I guess not. But seriously though, no love for “Blade Runner 2049?”
Speaking of that, let’s talk about the nominees and winner for Best Visual Effects.
Blade Runner 2049 (WINNER!)
Star Wars: The Last Jedi
Kong: Skull Island
War for the Planet of the Apes
Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2
From what you can tell, I love “Blade Runner.” I love both the original film and its sequel. An enormous part of me is beyond glad that it won Best Visual Effects. I will say though, I imagine some people have these every once in awhile. They have certain categories in award shows where they don’t care who wins because they think all of them are deserving of the prize. This to me, was one of them. I will say, part of me is shocked that “War for the Planet of the Apes” didn’t win because a lot of people were impressed by that film visually. Interestingly, that was the only film of the five nominees I didn’t watch at the very least in portions. I’ve seen part of “Kong: Skull Island,” and every other film including “Guardians,” “Star Wars,” and “Blade Runner,” were ones I watched from beginning to end. Part of me even wonders how many people are thinking right now that “War for the Planet of the Apes” got snubbed. Nevertheless, I’m happy “Blade Runner 2049” won. If you have not seen “Blade Runner 2049,” you might occasionally drop your jaw at the city of Los Angeles, the fact that they did a clear recreation of Sean Young who played Rachael in the original film, and how much you’ll be immersed that a part of you might end up wanting to jump in this world. If “War for the Planet of the Apes” won, I think it would have been a very much deserved win, but I’m incredibly happy that “Blade Runner 2049” took the cake.
One category that got a number of people talking was Best Film Editing. This is partially because of not only who DID win. But also because of who DIDN’T win. Here are the five films to have been recognized for their achievement here.
The Shape of Water
Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri
So “Dunkirk” came out on top as you can clearly see, and as someone who has watched the movie, I can understand why it won. It was told in a non-linear fashion, which only made the film a tad more interesting than it already was. Although it’s a Christopher Nolan movie, so this puzzle-like editing isn’t exactly a shocker. One movie that people were surprised didn’t win however was “Baby Driver.” I feel like part of why this didn’t win is because the Academy usually goes after dramatic movies like “Dunkirk” instead of movies that some people would refer to as “less serious” and “fun” like “Baby Driver.” Not only that, but I’m willing to bet part of it has to do with the whole Kevin Spacey scandal that’s been brought to the world’s attention months ago. Granted, this isn’t Kevin Spacey’s nomination specifically, but still. Am I disappointed “Baby Driver” lost to “Dunkirk?” Not really, I think both films are well edited in their own little way. “Dunkirk’s” non-linear fashion makes the movie more of a challenge to watch and ultimately more fun. Although with “Baby Driver,” the editing in that movie has given us some of the best action sequences of the decade. In my review, I praised “Baby Driver” for its thrilling action sequences and how it made me want more of them once one ends. I can see why “Dunkirk” won, but some love for “Baby Driver” would have also been appreciated.
If you remember the nominees for Best Sound Editing and Best Sound Mixing, something in particular may have stood out to you.
They’re the same nominees.
Not only that…
THE SAME MOVIE TOOK BOTH AWARDS!
Blade Runner 2049
The Shape of Water
Star Wars: The Last Jedi
One thing I’d like to say about “The Last Jedi.” I actually beg to differ because I think it had 2017’s best LACK OF sound editing or sound mixing. Remember that scene where one ship goes into hyperspace and crashes through another ship in the process? HOLY. F*CKING. S*IT. As much as that movie could have been better, THAT. WAS. AMAZING. While I do think the general editing for “Baby Driver” was praise-worthy to the point where I can’t contain myself, the sound work is basically not a competition anymore when “Dunkirk” steps in the ring. The sound choices were authentic! The audibility was extreme! The immersion provided from all the noise was 100% pure! How can you go wrong with “Dunkirk” in these categories?! “Dunkirk” put me in a war zone, and if you tell me you missed out on seeing this movie in a theater, shame on you.
When it comes to Best Director, this was yet another one of those categories where I was left feeling a lack of a surprise.
Guillermo del Toro (The Shape of Water) (WINNER!)
Greta Gerwig (Lady Bird)
Jordan Peele (Get Out)
Christopher Nolan (Dunkirk)
Paul Thomas Anderson (Phantom Thread)
So… Del Toro won. Doesn’t shock me whatsoever. I don’t know what you may have thought as the one to come out on top, but this was rather predictable to me. And I feel like a big part of it has to do with his presence at other awards shows, how much del Toro’s name has been spoken recently, and also how many Best Director awards I’ve been aware of this film getting thus far. One that really stuck out to me was the Golden Globes, mainly because of Natalie Portman’s “all male nominees” comment, which honestly would have been better left unspoken due to its awkwardness. I wanted Nolan to win, partially because he’s my favorite director, and also because of the excellent job he did on “Dunkirk.” But yeah, you can’t have everything. Although, I will say, something in the same realm as Portman’s Golden Globes utterance occurred. Last year’s winner for Best Actress, Emma Stone (La La Land, Birdman), said this:
“It is the director whose indelible touch is reflected on every frame. It is the director who, shot by shot, scene by scene, day by day, works with every member of the crew to further the story. And it is the vision of the director that takes an ordinary movie and turns it into a work of art. These four men and Greta Gerwig created their own masterpieces this year.”
This was so much better than seeing Natalie Portman onstage and having myself hear what she said. Don’t get me wrong, Portman’s a fine actress. Although let’s take a look at the situation at hand with her. She was standing next to RON HOWARD, someone who has directed a number of films. Films that by the way, are still remembered to this day! Howard even recently directed a film in the “Star Wars” franchise! A franchise which Portman was once a major part of as an actress! The two are talking, they’re about to present the award, and at one point, I hear Portman say…
“And here are the all male nominees.”
Yes, it is true that female directors aren’t usually getting as much attention as males. It is also true, that more males are directing movies as opposed to females. But to literally shame a director just because they have a penis, is just unbelievably ridiculous. How do you think del Toro felt taking that award home? I imagine he felt happy because he won, but seriously, he won after being accused of simply being a man. Emma Stone on the other hand, didn’t exactly make an awkward joke and instead quickly stated some words before moving on. It’s actually kinda funny. It was presented in a setting and manner that didn’t have a forced vibe, and I don’t have any feelings of cringe to describe to you. This comment, while it does point out the lack of women in the director’s chair when it comes to filmmaking, doesn’t feel like something that a man should be ashamed of hearing. Because for one thing, it mentions a woman got nominated. Also because it’s still technically a comment of praise. Literally pointing out that nominees are male the way Natalie Portman did almost feels like a comment meant to point out disdain towards the potential winners. Just look at the difference between the tone, delivery, and choice of words between the two people. Just look and see what I mean!
Speaking of women making achievements, one of them was involved in Best Cinematography… Although to me, that’s not even CLOSE to the best part of this category. The best part, is who finally f*cking won, after FOURTEEN nominations.
Roger Deakins (Blade Runner 2049) (WINNER!)
Hoyte Van Hoytema (Dunkirk)
Rachel Morrison (Mudbound)
Bruno Delbonnel (Darkest Hour)
Dan Laustsen (The Shape of Water)
Best Cinematography. Sounds like a category that some people don’t care about. In reality, when it comes to filmmaking, I’m a writer. If there’s one thing I’m not, it’s a cinematographer. Although more than one name for me stood out on this list. You’ve got Hoyte Van Hoytema, who has to proven to be a great cinematographer with not just “Dunkirk” as a notable achievement, but also “Interstellar” and “Spectre.” I really admired “Dunkirk” when I saw it partially because of how well done the camerawork itself was presented from an immersion perspective, but also the fact that it was shot on mostly IMAX footage. If you didn’t go see this film in an IMAX theater, especially one with laser projection or 15/70mm projection, you may have just missed out on a one of a kind experience.
Another standout to me was “Mudbound,” and part of me thought the Academy was going to pick the cinematographer for that movie, Rachel Morrison. For the record, she was the first woman ever nominated for the award in all ninety of the Academy Awards shows. I’ll mention once again, I refuse to call “Mudbound” a movie. I have nothing against Rachel Morrison, I just have a problem with Netflix. I’d be rooting for Morrison more if she was given a movie that doesn’t associate with a company which will make me always say, as pervy as it may sound, “I’ll just take chill,” when asked the common meme-worthy question “Netflix and chill?.”
Then we have “Blade Runner 2049.” My runner-up for my favorite movies of 2017 list for a gigantic number of reasons. And speaking of gigantic numbers, let’s talk about the number 14. OK, in some realms it’s not really that huge, but you’ll see my point. Roger Deakins was the director of photography for “Blade Runner 2049.” And I imagine when some people heard his name, they got excited. Chances are, if these people have followed Deakins’ work, it might not be the first time they got excited about something like this. I can’t exactly relate, but having seen Deakins’ work in movies like “Skyfall,” “The Shawshank Redemption,” “Hail, Caesar!,” and “No Country For Old Men,” I agree with others when they say he’s one of the greats when it comes to cinematographers. Once again, the guy has been nominated for Best Cinematography by the Academy, FOURTEEN TIMES. Here is a list of all the times other than the one of focus when he’s been nominated. Note that the year listed is the year the film he shot came out and not the year he was nominated.
The Shawshank Redemption (1994)
O Brother, Where Art Thou? (2000)
The Man Who Wasn’t There (2001)
No Country For Old Men (2007)
The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford (2007)
The Reader (2008) (shared with Chris Menges)
True Grit (2010)
What happened to Deakins when he was nominated those thirteen times? Well, that can be explained in a video by TIFF Originals that starts off with the statement: “Roger Deakins is a loser.” The video is called “Roger Deakins’ 13 Oscar Losses.”
After watching this video if you have done so, you probably got a thought on your mind, and it may have been “Roger Deakins is a f*cking loser.” I’ll be fair and say some of the competition he had were deserving of their awards, take “Gravity” for example. Although this year with “Blade Runner 2049,” I only thought Roger was deserving of HIS Oscar. We get to the big moment. I see Sandra Bullock holding an envelope with “CINEMATOGRAPHY” labeled on it. She says some words before introducing the nominees, and when they are introduced. I just thought this was gonna be a year where the Academy doesn’t give him the award and just gives an award to Rachel Morrison just because she has a vagina. Again, I have nothing against Rachel Morrison. She actually did the cinematography for “Black Panther” which was such a treat. It came out really well! I imagine she’s a very nice lady, but I was rooting for Roger. I’ll admit, I’m not that religious. My main philosophy is to be a nice person, I am however not that religious. But as the nominees were introduced, I had my hands, containing all sorts of cells, interlinked. I WAS PRAYING. People were cheering for Morrison, and the others seemed to get some applause, but I heard more for Morrison than anyone else. So they’re introduced, and it’s time. Sandra Bullock still has the envelope in her hand, and she says this as she quickly opens it for the result:
“And the Oscar goes to, Roger A. Deakins (crowd erupts in a roar), “Blade Runner 2049.”
My reaction to that can be described in many ways. Part of me wished I had fireworks to set off after that win! Part of me wanted to go around the house doing cartwheels after the win! Part of me wanted to find some confetti to throw around after that win! My reaction, quite possibly woke up my mother and sister. I might as well have been a young teenage girl at her favorite boy band’s concert! I might as well have been at an event where I find out my kid in school won student of the year! I might as well have been a Chicago Cubs fan at the end of the 2016 World Series, where they finally had a victory after years and years trying to get it. People may say that Leonardo DiCaprio waited a bit to get his Oscar, which I’ll say, when he won it, I kind of wanted Matt Damon to take it, but that’s just me. Although for Leo, he won it on his FIFTH nomination. When you’re nominated THIRTEEN times, it’s almost like you’ll be that one person who gets a nomination, but that’s all. What if Meryl Streep never won a single Oscar? All of her wins, “Kramer vs. Kramer,” “Sophie’s Choice,” “The Iron Lady,” they never happened. Streep received her TWENTY-FIRST nomination for a role she did just last year in “The Post.” I can imagine the crowd roaring like a bunch of T-Rexes in an argument if that turned out to be her first win. Let’s take another example, because why the hell not? Imagine the New York Yankees. Some people don’t like the New York Yankees because they always win. But they’ve been in 40 World Series Championships. Imagine all their titles where they were victorious, all gone. The 40th appearance is the charm. That’s how I feel about Deakins here, the fourteenth time’s the charm. I can wholeheartedly approve of Deakins winning not just because it took forever and a half to happen, but just look at these shots and tell me they actually look terrible. I dare y’all!
Nice shot now isn’t it?
Take a gander at this beauty.
Look at this bad boy and tell me it sucks. I’ll wait.
Is it just me or does this define the meaning of life?
This shot screams something that in some worlds, would qualify as one word. Fan-freakin’-tastic.
LOOK AT THIS SHOT!
LOOK AT THIS F*CKING SHOT!
LOOK AT THIS MOTHERF*CKING SHOT! NO! SERIOUSLY! THIS IS THE DEFINITION OF PERFECTION! THIS IS A F*CKING MASTERPIECE! I’M GOING F*CKING INSANE!
My point is made. Roger Deakins’ victory, to me, may be one of the most deserved Academy Award wins in history. THANK GOSH! So many people can sleep now and have less dreams and concerning nightmares!
And now, as mentioned, we won’t get through every single topic listed for the Academy Awards today, but here’s one that people look back on years and years from now, Best Picture. Before we get into that, you may remember the whole “La La Land” and “Moonlight” mishap from last year? Warren Beatty and Faye Dunaway come up onstage to present the award, they state the nominees, they’re looking at the card, and somehow awkwardness ensues. Suddenly, Dunaway announces “La La Land” won Best Picture, but the two had the wrong card. Celebration ignites! Cheering be heard all over the Dolby Theatre, and a moment later, Jordan Horowitz, a producer behind “La La Land” is onstage and he states “Moonlight” won Best Picture. He even showed the card! Turns out Beatty and Dunaway were handed the wrong envelope. So… What happens now? What idea could be better than bringing Beatty and Dunaway back? Jimmy Kimmel had some fun before diving into the nominees. “We’re in the home stretch. Nothing could possibly go wrong from here. Here, on the 51st anniversary of Bonnie and Clyde, are Warren Beatty and Faye Dunaway.” They come out, Beatty says, “We’re glad to see you all again.” Dunaway adds, “As they say, presenting is lovelier the second time around.” The two continue speaking, eventually arriving at the point where they announce the nominees and the winner. By the way, they had the correct envelope this time. Here are the movies that have been nominated for Best Picture!
The Shape of Water (WINNER!)
Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri
Call Me by Your Name
In my prediction post leading up to the Oscars, I said this was gonna be a close race to the finish between “Lady Bird,” “Dunkirk,” “The Shape of Water,” and “Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri.” I will say however for “Lady Bird,” that kind of changed throughout the night because it was nominated for five awards during the show, but the four that were already presented were all losses on their end. For “Dunkirk,” I thought it had a solid chance. The Academy seemed to give a lot of praise towards this film and it already won a few Oscars throughout the night. For “Three Billboards,” I figured it could win solely because it won Best Motion Picture- Drama at the Golden Globes. It also made a sweep at the Screen Actors Guild Awards. And it was nominated for a ton of Oscars beforehand, and it ended up taking home two before getting as far as Best Picture. Although if there was one I “knew” was going to win, it was going to be a movie with thirteen nominations including Best Picture. It was going to be a movie that already took home a few awards. It was going to be a movie praised by many critics and average moviegoers alike. It was going to be… “The Shape of Water.”
…And it won.
I have nothing in particular against “The Shape of Water.” From what I’ve seen in promotional material, it’s very good from a visual perspective, but I haven’t watched the movie so I can’t really say much else. Funny enough, I take a film studies class in my school, and my teacher actually asked if anyone in our class has actually seen “The Shape of Water.” Once asked, the class pretty much unanimously declined to put our hands up. I wanted “Dunkirk” to win. But hey, it’s already got some well deserved awards, especially in the sound categories. Also, remember, Roger Deakins won. So I was beyond satisfied. Although if “Blade Runner 2049” were nominated for Best Picture, you’d know I’d choose it. Or “Colossal,” that was my #1 movie of last year. Although I can understand why it’s not exactly been nominated for anything. But seriously, check that movie out if you can! It’s on several streaming services as we speak! So congrats to “The Shape of Water” and its crew. That movie is actually going to be out on home video in a number of days, so maybe I’ll watch it very soon!
Guys, that’s all I have to say for the 90th Academy Awards! It was personally a great show on my end. All of the commentary for the most part, wasn’t all that awkward. I may be in the minority, but the monologue between Tiffany Haddish (Girls Trip, The Carmichael Show) and Maya Rudolph (Big Hero 6, Bridesmaids), despite how it’s on a topic regarding issues I can side with, just came off as something that would belong in a one of those “SNL” sketches that gets shoved in there when the writers have nothing else that they can come up with. It took a topic that I would, could, and should agree on, and it just sullies it. I imagine both Rudolph and Haddish are pleasant people, and I’M SORRY that Rudolph had to suffer through “The Emoji Movie,” but this just felt weird to watch. But other than that, it was one of the greatest nights ever. I’ve spent some time watching people react to their favorite team winning the Super Bowl on YouTube before, and when it comes to Best Cinematography, that’s legit how I felt. My team won the Oscars, which is MY Super Bowl. Congratulations to everyone who has been nominated and has won awards, I’m looking forward to seeing who will be in the 91st Academy Awards show, and finally. Finally. FINALLY! I can now call one of the world’s greatest cinematographers, Oscar-winning Roger Deakins. I’d like to thank the Academy for making that happen.
Thanks for reading this very long post! Pretty soon I’m gonna have my review for “Annihilation” up for you all to read, and if you are wondering, I don’t live in one of the countries where you have to use Netflix in order to watch it so if that were the case, I wouldn’t have seen the film. Also, stay tuned for my Tom Cruise “Mission: Impossible” review series which will have its first entry up this month. Stay tuned for more great content! I want to know, did you watch the Academy Awards? What are your thoughts? Did your picks win? Did they lose? Is there someone you really wanted to win or lose? Did you make any bets? Have you decided to check out any movies after watching the show? Let me know all of that info for an unofficial possible nomination for Best Comment. Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“Hey thank you, thank you. I better say something or else they’ll give me a jet ski and I don’t see myself on a jet ski somehow. I want to share this with my wife of 27 years, James, whatever. I want to share it with Andrew, Broderick, and Denis Villeneuve. Y’know I really love my job, I’ve been doing it for a long time as you can see. But y’know one of the reasons I really love it is the people I work with. Both in front of the camera and behind the camera. Some of my crew on “Blade Runner,” I’ve been working with for over thirty years. And others-others I met for the first time in Budapest. And this is for every one of them. Every one of them. In fact, I gotta say, it’s for us, because it was a team. It was really team- a team effort. Thank you. Thank you very much.” –Roger A. Deakins
Hey everyone, Jack Drees here! In 2014, one movie I kind of wanted to see was “The Maze Runner,” unfortunately, I never got around to watching it. Although a few months ago I was buying a number of Blu-rays at one of my personal favorite shops around the mall, AKA Newbury Comics, and I managed to come across “The Maze Runner” and “Maze Runner: The Scorch Trials. I still went on for months after buying them without watching either one of the films. That however, has changed. On January 26th, “Maze Runner: The Death Cure” will hit theaters. Appropriately, I felt I should review the first “Maze Runner” and the second “Maze Runner.” Since I’m a chronological type of person, we’re gonna kick this series off by talking about the first “Maze Runner.” Without further ado, let’s start the review.
“The Maze Runner” is directed by Wes Ball who has mainly done work in the film industry in the realms of art and visual effects. Aside from a few short films, this is pretty much the guy’s directorial debut. This movie stars Dylan O’Brien (Teen Wolf, The Internship), Kaya Scoldelario (Now Is Good, The Truth About Emanuel), and Will Poulter (We’re the Millers, Son of Rambow). “The Maze Runner” is about a youngish boy who is brought into this green, limited realm. He meets a group of men who tries to get him to adapt to the way things are. However, there is a way out (sort of). There is a maze separating this realm from the outside world. “Runners” are searching inside it every day, trying to find a way out. It’s at a point when this youngish boy learns about all of this, when he desires to join the runners.
This movie came out in 2014, it’s based on a book by James Dashner, and one thing I noticed about not only the 2010s decade, but perhaps slightly before this particular decade began, is how many popular young adult teen angst novels were being adapted into movies. Some examples include “Twilight,” “The Hunger Games,” “Harry Potter,” “Percy Jackson,” “The Chronicles of Narnia,” etc. I’ve seen a number of these, and no, “Twilight” wasn’t one of them. Thank goodness! While some of these young adult novels might fall under say the romance or fantasy genres, one concept that has applied a lot to recently popularized young adult books is the sci-fi dystopian element. This has been extremely evident with the worldwide phenomenon known as “The Hunger Games.”
I’ll be honest with you, I read the first “Hunger Games” book in the summer of 2012, and I don’t even recall making it a quarter of the way through the whole thing. I watched the movie, and while it wasn’t bad the first time watching it, the film got worse over more watches and the more I thought about it. The second film’s good, but I’ve yet to see “Mockingjay” parts 1 & 2, because as of now, I no desire to pay for two parts.
There’s a series that relates to this called “Divergent,” and I haven’t read the books for that. I enjoyed the first movie, I thought the second one was slightly better, but the third one sucked. As for the third movie, this is yet another case of splitting a book into two parts, and I’m wondering if that’s partially why the movie didn’t do well in terms of reactions and returns at the box office. Oh yeah, also don’t forget the rather dull story, annoying characters, and crappy CGI. One of the biggest problems I have with the movies however is that Tris keeps changing her hair. What’s up with that?!
People often consider “Divergent” a ripoff of “The Hunger Games,” but that’s simply not true. Both have corrupt governments and are futuristic, but just tinker around with them a little bit and you’ll see the differences underneath. “The Hunger Games” is an event that involves fighting to the death whereas “Divergent” is simply about a girl in a certain class that society doesn’t like. As for “The Maze Runner,” it’s got some similarities to both “The Hunger Games” and “Divergent.” However, as far as the book goes, “The Maze Runner” came out before “Divergent,” so you can technically say “Divergent” has similarities to “The Maze Runner” and “The Hunger Games.” All three books involve a post-apocalyptic world with a nasty regime, there’s a teen who has to fight against the overlords, and they’re all tested. The similarities are significant in all three films. However, I think out of “The Hunger Games,” “Divergent,” and “The Maze Runner,” I have to say I think “The Maze Runner” may be the best film of the three. This doesn’t say much about the book, but as a film, this one likely reigns supreme.
What I just said doesn’t mean “The Maze Runner” is a masterpiece, I just think it’s an enjoyable flick that could help you pass the time for a couple of hours. Since I have that out of the way, let’s get into some problems.
Pacing wise, this movie is mostly competent, you can follow everything quite well, and your eyes will be stuck to the screen for a long time. However, as the movie gets towards the end, I have to say that there’s a point, specifically when a screen comes on and everybody’s listening, that the pacing just goes off for a second. I don’t know how others feel about that but that’s how I feel. I will say though, without spoiling much of anything, the movie has to do something in particular, and that thing in particular is what caused the drag for me.
One little nitpick, and I don’t know if this was an idea that the book’s author had, or if it was a director, or an editor, or who it could have possibly been that had this vision, but there are these enemies that you see in the film. They’re called Grievers. As enemies, they are serviceable and I don’t really have much that’s significantly wrong with them, but thinking about them, they almost look like ripoffs of the Xenomorphs from the “Alien” franchise. I’m surprised I’ve even said that because believe it or not I haven’t watched one “Alien” movie.
Dylan O’Brien plays the main character of Thomas throughout “The Maze Runner,” and I’d say that the character was well written, and I’d say having gone through the movie, O’Brien’s a nice pick to play the character. Granted, I can tell they probably cast Dylan O’Brien mainly because girls have a crush on him since he’s on “Teen Wolf” and if you know what the show is, you’d understand my point. To my happiness, the script focused less on his physique and more on his hope to become a runner and leave the maze. That remains true for every single one of the movies characters, which is just rather refreshing. Speaking of refreshing, there’s not much romance in this film. There is friendship, there is interaction, but there’s never any romance. And in a world where that is prominent in both the “Hunger Games” and “Divergent” franchises, that is awesome.
I really like the scene in the film where we first meet Thomas and he forgets his real name. The way he finds out is kind of hilarious. Basically, we meet him, it’s daytime, we are introduced to the Gladers, and soon, night arrives, we see a bunch of boys around a campfire. Thomas is in a fight, and as he is fighting, he’s getting his butt kicked, and all of a sudden, he remembers his name is Thomas, announces it in front of all the boys, and everyone is just exclaiming to the tenth degree. Pure hilarity.
As for another standout character, we have the big bad bully, Gally, played by Will Poulter. While Thomas is just trying to save everyone, Gally would occasionally interfere, saying that Thomas needs to be punished. I must say, this is good choice from a casting perspective, and I’m not saying this is a negative despite coming off as repetitive, he kind of looks like bullies we’ve seen in the past in terms of what’s happened in TV and movies. Just compare him with characters such as Biff from “Back to the Future” or Buzz from “Home Alone” and you’ll see what I’m talking about.
In the end, I’d say “The Maze Runner” is a really enjoyable film for what it is. It has some of the teen angst cliches, but at the same time, is a little more lighthearted in ways making it feel like you can have fun watching the movie. I have nothing against dark and gritty films, but in reality, that’s how a majority of teen angst films seem to come off. If you have never seen “The Maze Runner,” I do recommend it. I don’t know what to say about the book, or how much you’ll like the movie if you’ve read the book. I just know they’re not exactly the same. I’m going to give “The Maze Runner” a 7/10. Thanks for reading this review! I’m going to have my review up for the second part of the “Maze Runner” trilogy next Thursday, January 25th, which is also the night of the early screenings of the final installment, “Maze Runner: The Death Cure.” So stay tuned for my review of “Maze Runner: The Scorch Trials,” along with more exciting content coming your way. I want to know, did you watch “The Maze Runner?” What are your thoughts? Did you read the book? Which is better? The book or the movie? Let me know your thoughts down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
Hey everyone, Jack Drees here! As it is the beginning of 2018, I feel it is appropriate to leave links to two posts down below for you to read in case you haven’t read them. My top 10 BEST movies of 2017, and my top 10 WORST movies of 2017. I’ve had fun making these lists, I’m sure you’ll have fun reading them, and I’m also interested in hearing what your best and worst films of the year are. So, read the posts, leave a like, comment, add Scene Before to your subscriptions through email or WordPress, and keep life going!
TOP 10 BEST MOVIES OF 2017: https://scenebefore.wordpress.com/2018/01/02/top-10-best-movies-of-2017-2/
TOP 10 WORST MOVIES OF 2017: https://scenebefore.wordpress.com/2018/01/02/top-10-worst-movies-of-2017/
Staying on topic, the end of the year and the start of a new one has a meaning when it comes to film. From one perspective it means January is here and a lot of crap is being put in theaters that people are gonna suffer through if all the award winning movies are high in ticket sales. Another perspective goes along the lines of what I just did with the posts above which I have links to, my top 10 best and worst movies of the year. Not only that, but we also have a bunch of award shows that are on the rise. January has the Golden Globes, the Screen Actors Guild Awards, the BAFTA awards, and the Critics’ Choice Awards. In February you got some stuff here and there, but when it comes to film, many people say the Academy Awards might be the only thing that matters (unless you’re that one guy who handed Warren Beatty the wrong card). When it comes to reflection, that’s not the limit to what’s been done this year so far. I’m pretty active on Twitter, and one account I occasionally surf is Collider. They posted a tweet which contained the five highest grossing films at the box office for 2017. This tweet had a link which lead to the highest grossing films of the year, looking over 2017’s box office winners and losers. Here’s the tweet:
1) 'The Last Jedi' 2) 'Beauty and the Beast' 3) 'Wonder Woman' 4) 'Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2' 5) 'Spider-Man: Homecoming'
This list reveals the top five for the specific category, and as I looked at the results, I’d say that it all makes a lick of sense. How do I feel about it? Honestly, not too good. Because a some time ago, I asked something about the future of movies, and so far nothing has been done about it. Although then again, it wasn’t that long ago that I asked. The question I asked was also the title of a post I did, the post is called “Where Are The Original Movies?” The answer, not here.
Of the top five films mentioned on this list, THREE are superhero films based on comic books, ONE is from a franchise that people recognize instantaneously once you put a picture of a lightsaber in front of them, and ONE is a live action remake that only adds a couple new things in of a Disney animation which is considered a classic by a lot of people. By the way, those aren’t the only two adaptations of the story! Oh yeah, did I mention FOUR of these have Disney at least partially associated with them? I will admit that I personally am at fault. I managed to see four of these films. These include “Star Wars: The Last Jedi,” “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2,” “Spider-Man: Homecoming,” and “Wonder Woman.” I review movies, and it feels like a job where I don’t get paid because I don’t monetize my site at the moment, and I actually legit wanted to see all of these films.
Out of the four I saw, I only found one to be great, in fact it made my top five of the year, specifically “Wonder Woman.” I gave it a 10/10 in my review and while it’s not technically flawless, given the villain side of the story, I thought it was an amazing ride with Gal Gadot proving to the world that she is this kick-ass superhero. Plus I felt for the most part this seemed like it was not a studio-type film unlike 2016’s “Batman v. Superman,” it was more like one person (Patty Jenkins) unleashing their vision and sharing it with everyone.
When it comes to “Spider-Man: Homecoming,” it tried to be a different “Spider-Man” movie, but in the end, the execution could have been better. The script had Spidey cracking jokes all over the place. And I think that’s fine, this is Tom Holland playing him, and he played the character in “Captain America: Civil War,” another movie where Spidey cracks jokes. Not to mention, BRILLIANT jokes. Unfortunately, the brilliance wasn’t repeated in “Homecoming.” In my review, I gave it a 7/10, but right now it’s borderline 6-7/10. Speaking of failed attempts at humor, let’s talk about “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2.”
When I saw the first trailer for “Guardians 2,” I was in instant hype mode. Granted, I don’t consider the first installment to be the best movie in the MCU, but I also think it is definitely one of the better ones. Not to mention, I consider it to be the most fun out of all the movies released in said cinematic universe. This second installment however wasn’t exactly terrible, but it should have been WAY better than it was. It shoves too much into one movie, kind of like “Age of Ultron,” and at the same time, it feels like it doesn’t feel it inserts too little. No pun intended, but BABY GROOT SUCKS! The humor seemed to land with just about the five-hundred other people watching the film alongside me, but I only laughed at various times. It just wasn’t that funny. The first one is lovable, quotable, and memorable. This one isn’t lovable, but you can say it’s quotable and memorable. I remember a turd joke. I remember a conversation about male genitalia. I will say that for the most part, “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2” at least tried to be one thing. I can’t exactly say the same for the conundrum that is “Star Wars: The Last Jedi.”
I love “Star Wars.” There are so many days where I think about “Star Wars” and how much it has brought a tremendous influence on our culture. When it comes to “The Last Jedi,” it’s a very weird installment when it comes to the “Star Wars” saga, and I don’t mean that in a good way. I say that because you can look at a movie like “Colossal,” think of it as weird, and praise it for being weird. The way I’m using “weird” when it comes to this movie is not a good kind. I mean that as in, this movie is “not ‘Star Wars.'” I do appreciate it for not ripping off “The Empire Strikes Back,” but the way they’re taking a lot of the stuff shown in the movie made the whole experience more of a wreck the more I think about it. Also, I’m glad Porgs aren’t in the film for that long, but seriously, they can go to hell.
For the record, the results I talked about are domestic. These results make me wonder what the rest of the decade will look like for box office returns. In the 2010s decade, there have been a small number of original films making the top five for box office returns. These include “The Secret Life of Pets,” “Inside Out,” and “Frozen.” I will give credit to “Inside Out” because I do feel it deserved every penny it made. I watched that and it was extremely emotional. I did watch “The Secret Life of Pets” in the theater, and while it was a technically passable animation, it wasn’t exactly something I would ever want to watch again or show to a kid. I also watched a portion of “Frozen,” and it made me want to die. Beautiful animation, but what else does it have going for it?! The further we go in terms of cinematic history, the more I’ll probably miss 2009 because in that year, “Avatar” came out, and it shut the door on other movies at the box office. And while I do consider that movie to be overrated, and already somewhat dated, I do have to give credit because at the very least, it’s a property that nobody’s heard of. People have picked up on how much it can be compared to movies like “Pocahontas,” but still. Although I wonder how many people confused it for “Avatar: The Last Airbender.” Sure, it’s from a well known director, but it’s still better than paying money to see “The Hunger Games.” Why did it make so much money? IT’S F*CKING POPULAR! But wait, there are other films on this list too. Just for the sake of letting out information, let’s add on the other top films at the 2017 box office. Just to tell you which ones are actually original ideas, I have those in bold.
7. Thor: Ragnarok
8. Despicable Me 3
9. Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle
10. Justice League
12. The Fate of the Furious
15. The LEGO Batman Movie
16. Get Out
17. The Boss Baby
18. Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales
19. Kong: Skull Island
20. Cars 3
As you can see, only TWO original films are in the top 20 for the 2017 box office numbers. Just a fun fact, I saw neither one of those, and I’m deeply disappointed in myself. I never got around to watching “Coco” because I don’t know anyone who would want to watch animations, but I heard so many great things about it. As for “Get Out,” I was in a similar situation, I don’t know many people who would want to watch a horror film. I almost picked it up on Blu-ray based on thoughts I had in the past, but I never got to it. Although for those who actually did manage to go see those films, I have tremendous respect for you. Admittedly, I saw five of these fifteen films from beginning to end. I saw another one, “Kong: Skull Island” for the first ten minutes, but my 4K Blu-ray player was having problems therefore not allowing me to watch the rest of the picture. Of the five I saw, I loved two of them. This seriously does beg a question I asked in the past. Why do people watch these movies?
If you want my theory, it’s because everyone is familiar with a particular property. This is why “Star Wars” has owned the box office for the past three years. Main saga installments such as “The Force Awakens” and “The Last Jedi” broke box office records because a large number of people wanted to see these films since it’s part of a well known franchise that a lot of people admire. They didn’t really know what the verdict was from critics who saw the film early, in fact many people, including myself, bought tickets as early as about two or so months prior to release. People went to see “Thor: Ragnarok” because it’s Marvel, the same can be said for “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2.” Also, you can consider how both of those movies received positive ratings from critics. People saw “Logan” because the Wolverine’s in it. People saw “Justice League” because it’s DC, although in reality you can say that’s why some folks skipped this movie. You can also say because it has Batman, Wonder Woman, The Flash, Cyborg, Aquaman, those people. People saw “The Fate of the Furious” because it’s “Fast and Furious.” Not to mention, it’s not that complicated of a movie, it’s not one of those films where you have to sit down and think. You just eat popcorn and let time go by. People saw “The LEGO Batman Movie” because it’s animated so it’s good for the kids, it has Batman, and “The LEGO Movie” was not only popular, but well received. People saw “Cars 3” because it’s animated, it’s from Pixar, there are a couple of installments leading up to it, and there’s a good chance your kid dragged you to it. You see my point?
I also have to say that studios are partially responsible for this craze. When studios like Disney put out another “Star Wars” movie or another Marvel movie, do you think they’re doing it because they want to put out a quality movie that will be talked about generations to come? It’s possible, however it’s also possible that they’re thinking with their wallet, or in this case their Scrooge McDuck money vault. Yes, I’m still talking about “The Force Awakens” today, and I think it’s an amazing movie. One of my biggest problems with it is that they played it safe, but it’s a very minor issue. There’s a good chance I’ll probably still be talking about “The Last Jedi” too, but I might not be talking about it saying that it’s a great movie. The name “Star Wars” will put almost anyone in the theater. If “The Phantom Menace” didn’t prove that already, these past few years certainly have. Disney also released “Beauty and the Beast,” which I heard is visually dazzling, but ultimately just the same story as the animated version, just told in live action, with a couple songs added in, and changing someone’s traits to make them homosexual. I’m not saying live action remakes from Disney are terrible, after all I really enjoyed “The Jungle Book.” I will blurt that I actually might not have the right to say what I’m saying because I didn’t see any version of “Beauty and the Beast.” This is the problem. Hollywood is just redoing old ideas and passing them off as new. It works for “Super Mario Bros,” not for Disney movies.
As for 2018, originality isn’t looking too great for Disney either. Let’s see what movies they have lined up:
A Wrinkle in Time (based on a book by Madeleine L’Engle)
Solo: A Star Wars Story (Star Wars)
Avengers: Infinity War (Marvel)
Black Panther (Marvel)
Ant-Man and the Wasp (Marvel)
Incredibles 2 (Pixar sequel)
The Nutcracker and the Four Realms (Based on a story and ballet)
Ralph Breaks the Internet: Wreck-It Ralph 2 (Disney animation sequel)
Mary Poppins Returns (Title pretty much says it all)
It’s not just Disney to blame here. Let’s talk about some other unoriginal films coming out in 2018!
X-Men: Dark Phoenix
Ready Player One
Pacific Rim: Uprising
Fifty Shades Freed
Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse
Bumblebee: The Movie
Fantastic Beasts and the Crimes of Grindenwald
The New Mutants
Sicario 2: Soldado
Johnny English 3
Goosebumps: Horror Land
Super Troopers 2
The Equalizer 2
Mission: Impossible 6
Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom
Maze Runner: The Death Cure
Insidious: The Last Key
The Purge: The Island
Hotel Transylvania 3: Summer Vacation
Teen Titans Go! to the Movies
God’s Not Dead: A Light in Darkness
You get the point by now…
I get that filmmaking is technically a business, and people use it to make money, but they have to realize what they’re doing to people who watch the films. They could walk in, walk out, and say that they had an experience. It could be good, it could be bad. The real question is: How many experiences like the ones I just described will have a good chunk of people who felt like they experienced something new? Granted, storytelling has been around for a long time. The oldest written story passed down to us, The “Epic of Gilgamesh,” was introduced to the world around 2100 BC. We’ve been telling stories for as long as time can stand. It’s quite possible that original stories are going the way of the woolly mammoth. In fact a lot of original stuff we’re actually getting now borrows elements from other pieces of work. At this point, I don’t really care if we get a new franchise or a new movie from something we haven’t technically watched in the past, but I want to see more of that and less sequels each and every day. I may be a picky eater, I always have been since I was a kid, but my tastes in film go like this: As long as the film’s good in any way possible, it’s cool. Do I like unoriginal work? Yes, as long as it’s good. I’m not saying every original film is good either. Heck, 2017 gave a ton of original crap! Films like “Gifted,” “Downsizing,” and “The Space Between Us.”
I’m also not saying every unoriginal film did well at the box office in 2017. Films like “Blade Runner 2049,” “xXx: Return of Xander Cage,” “Ghost in the Shell,” “Underworld: Blood Wars,” “Resident Evil: The Final Chapter,” “A Bad Moms Christmas,” “The Mummy,” and “The LEGO Ninjago Movie” didn’t appear to be as successful as other films during the year. By the way, for those of you who skipped out on “Blade Runner 2049,” you missed a work of art.
What I want studios and filmmakers to learn is this: It’s OK to take risks, it’s OK to be different, that’s what storytelling is about. Showing a unique vision to the world, not grabbing everyone’s wallet and swallowing it because of something they already know getting a new installment. How do you think Quentin Tarantino is popular today? How do you think he got popular in the first place? Is he doing the same thing as everyone else? Is he recycling old ideas? Sure, he definitely has influence from others, but his ideas are usually original so people usually view his movies as refreshing. Christopher Nolan has borrowed ideas from others, including his own brother, but at least he has done some stuff of his own like “Inception.” Not to mention, he stays away from traditional Hollywood conventions, even in unoriginal content like “The Dark Knight.” Another director I have my eyes on now is Nacho Vigolando. He wrote and directed “Colossal,” one of my top films of 2017.
The concept of “Colossal” itself, takes a number of elements from other movies, but in end, it’s truly its own thing. A girl named Gloria (Anne Hathaway) is kicked out of her apartment by her boyfriend who goes by the name Tim (Dan Stevens). Gloria moves back to her hometown where she reunites with a childhood friend, Oscar (Jason Sudeikis). As the movie progresses, we are shown that a monster recently attacked Seoul, South Korea. The thing that everyone has yet to realize, Gloria is responsible for the monstrous actions. You can do so many things with this, and what they did with it was just imaginative. It tries to be a lot of things at once, and believe it or not, it actually works! Films like this are something that I could imagine inspiring a generation of filmmakers. The problem is that it’s not all that popular, it’s an independent film, and was never really marketed all that well. In fact, I never really anticipated “Colossal” to be the absolute masterpiece that it is. People never really talked about it much before or even during the release. The same can’t really be said for a chunk of unoriginal content.
One of the movies I’m really looking forward to in 2018 is “Incredibles 2.” Not much has been shown for it yet, but regardless, I want to see it. Why? Because the original film is my favorite animation ever made! This just really makes me wonder, how rare is it for someone to actually go on for a long time, hyping for something totally original? Hype is something that people usually have for unoriginal content for no other reason other than because what they’re hyping for IS that unoriginal content. I’ve hyped for original content, but the more I look around, that’s not the case with everyone else. Look at all the hype “Avengers: Infinity War” is getting right now! This based on comic book story has been built up for quite some time through the release of a ton of films, and now that it’s almost here, there’s an enormous craze regarding it.
I’m not saying all unoriginal ideas are bad, I think I’ve made that clear already. In fact, I want to say one of them could be a future masterpiece. This year I was one of those people who actually got off their ass, went to the theater, and saw “Blade Runner 2049.” Just about everyone who saw the film would agree with me when I say it’s good. I’d bet not everyone would say they enjoyed it as much as I did. There will inevitably be those people who were bored out of their minds due to the movie’s slow pace, but in the end, this movie is just a testament to cinema. From a technical perspective, I was blown away. Roger Deakins’s cinematography was some of the best I’ve seen all year. The visual effects were eye candy that you’d want in your mouth instantly. Watching every single frame pass by was like looking at neon Heaven. Story-wise, I was also impressed, especially for a sequel like this. It develops all of its characters perfectly, continues in a future that probably will not happen entirely, but based on the world of “Blade Runner,” it does seem like something that would make sense from a certain angle. I’ll remind you that the original film came out in 1982 and took place in 2019, this sequel released thirty five years after, 2017, and took place in 2049. Sadly, not many people saw this when you compare the results this movie got against others. Although you might as well consider that not many people left their houses to go and see the first “Blade Runner” either. One of the biggest things I appreciated out of this sequel is how it didn’t set the stage for endless sequels or a cinematic universe. It felt like a movie, not a neverending TV series.
As interesting as cinematic universes are, they are becoming more and more common and the concept is just becoming rather boring. I will say, I have an idea for a cinematic universe, I think it could work, but as far as standalone franchises, I’m only incorporating two of them. It’s simple and effective. Standalone sequels have a beginning, middle, and end. They can give a sense of satisfaction. I’m not saying cinematic universe movies don’t have a beginning, middle, and end, but meshed in there is setup. Sometimes it works, sometimes it just comes off like a kid trying to get attention. Despite how much “Avengers: Infinity War” may sound like a finale for the MCU, trust me when I say it’s not. For one thing, there’s going to be a fourth “Avengers” film the following year, and Marvel still has more plans for films afterwards. They have another “Spider-Man” movie and another “Guardians of the Galaxy” movie! According to James Gunn, writer and director of the first two “Guardians of the Galaxy” films, not to mention the possible writer and director of the upcoming third installment, he says that “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3” will expand the cosmic universe. Honestly, I don’t know how to feel. At least “Two and a Half Men” had a conclusion! It took about twelve or so years to get to it, but it happened! Although you know what could happen once this cinematic universe ends? One word. Reboot. And you know what? It’ll probably make some f*cking money!
You know what else could be true? I don’t know, we’re probably just reaching the bottom of the barrel and running out of ideas. Although I can’t say that’s true because I have an idea for an original film. I won’t say what it is, but if any major Hollywood studio wants in on it, I’d be happy to send it to them. I don’t have the script finished yet, but I can definitely work on it if you want to see this idea realized in the future.
I’m not against unoriginal content, but from my personal viewpoint on society, these results make it seem like that’s all anyone watches now. Is it a popular thing? Someone watched it. Is it based on something that happened before? Someone watched it. I just want to see a future where at least some original content gets to shine as much as unoriginal content. Well, as long as said original content is good. I want to say to both studios and audiences, take some steps off the beaten path. I did that when I saw “Colossal,” I was originally planning to see “Kong: Skull Island,” but “Colossal” was the movie I ultimately had time for, and it was f*cking worth the ride.
Thanks for reading this post! As far as upcoming reviews go, I do plan on seeing this film called “The Commuter,” there’s a chance you may have heard of it on TV. It stars Liam Neeson as a person on a train who’s caught in a criminal conspiracy. The director who’s doing this film directed “The Shallows,” which was pretty great, but it’s January, so anything could happen.
Also I want to inform you that pretty soon I’ll be starting a new mini-series of reviews, specifically for the “Maze Runner” movies. I’m gonna watch “The Maze Runner” and “Maze Runner: The Scorch Trails,” and I’ll review the first film one week, and follow up with a review for the second film the week afterwards. This is all being done in preparation for “Maze Runner: The Death Cure,” which comes out January 26th. Stay tuned for those reviews and more great content! I want to know, which movies did you see in 2017? Did you see any that made the top results at the box office? Do you think we need more original content? Would you watch more original content? Leave your comments below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!