Mad Max

Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga (2024): Anya Taylor-Joy is Fast and Furious in This Mad Max Prequel

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga” is directed by George Miller (Happy Feet, Babe: Pig in the City) and stars Anya Taylor-Joy (The Super Mario Bros. Movie, The New Mutants), Chris Hemsworth (Thor, Rush), Tom Burke (Mank, The Souvenir), and Alyla Browne (Sting, Three Thousand Years of Longing) in a prequel film that follows its titular character’s origins throughout various stages of her life, before she meets Mad Max.

“Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga” is one of those films that had my interest ever since it was first announced. And as much as I know people love Charlize Theron’s take on the character back in “Mad Max: Fury Road,” I was very much excited to see what Anya Taylor-Joy could do with the role. She is one of the hottest names in Hollywood right now, racking up several projects that have given her a diverse resume. Everything from Jane Austen adaptations like “Emma.,” to visionary horror titles like “Last Night in Soho,” to a video game adaptation that has become one of the decade’s most mainstream titles, “The Super Mario Bros. Movie.” I am proud to say that when it comes to Anya Taylor-Joy’s take on the Furiosa character, I was not disappointed. Like all of her other roles, she plays the part well. Despite this movie having a female protagonist, this movie feels pretty masculine. And I mean that in a positive way. As I watched this movie, I was on a bit of a high, and Anya Taylor-Joy is the drug that fueled it.

In fact, all the actors in this film are great. None of them feel out of place. Not only does Taylor-Joy provide a superstar outing as Furiosa, but her younger variant, played by Alyla Browne, also shines bright. Lachy Hulme does a good job as Immortan Joe, who we previously saw played by Hugh Keays-Byrne in “Fury Road,” rest in peace. In fact, that’s not his only role in the film, because he is credited with playing Rizzdale Pell, a gang member serving under this film’s most enjoyable character to watch, Chris Hemsworth’s Dementus.

They say a movie is only as its good as its villain, so I am happy to report that Dementus will end up being one of my favorite on-screen villains I have seen this year. While Chris Hemsworth is playing a different character entirely, it is safe to say that he is putting the “mad” in “Mad Max.” He’s over the top, bombastic, and kind of wonderfully demented. Sometimes he is so rage-filled it is kind of artistic. There is something beautiful about it. Also, I love how he has a line twisting a classic phrase where he utters, “Lady and gentlemans.” Chef’s kiss.

And much like Hemsworth’s Thor sometimes, I can say Dementus’ beard game in this movie is strong. Just look it it. I have grown out my facial hair quite a bit from time to time, but I cannot say I have ever grown a beard like the one Dementus has. Adding to the beautiful rage of this character, Hemsworth himself has something to say to back that up. Speaking with Variety, Hemsworth goes on about his experience in the makeup chair…

“Twas justifiably irritated by the end of it. That really helped my performance-there was a nice amount of pent-up rage simmering under the surface.”

Take this as a lesson kids. If you work hard enough, and learn some patience by sitting in a chair, you too can entertain tons of people by becoming a bit of a maniac. Inspiring stuff.

That said, looking back at “Furiosa,” this movie ends on a bit of an interesting note. I do not want to spoil everything that happens in this film, but if you are a novice to this franchise, I will remind you once again this is a prequel to “Mad Max: Fury Road.” A film that, and I apologize to the thousands of cinephiles I am inevitably going to irritate, I find to be a tad overhyped.

Now to find that flame shield…

Nevertheless, I recognize that a lot of work went into “Mad Max: Fury Road,” not to mention a lot of money. Based on research via IMDb, the total budget of the film comes out to $150 million. Despite being older and less expensive, it still looks better than some of the more recent Marvel projects for example, including Hemsworth’s own “Thor: Love and Thunder.” Just so we have the statistics in place, I will remind you that “Furiosa” cost more than “Fury Road,” specifically $168 million. For the record, Wikipedia says “Fury Road” cost anywhere between $154.6–185.2 million, but if I had to compare “Fury Road” and “Furiosa” side by side, I would say that “Fury Road,” depending on what the actual budget is, feels like the slightly bigger bang for the studio’s buck. It is also a slightly better movie as a matter of fact. Story-wise, both of these movies do not have the most Shakespearean of plots or happenings. They are pretty simple when it comes to their concepts. And honestly, in the case of “Furiosa,” I sometimes wish I were more interested in some of the goings on that we witnessed on screen. “Furiosa” has a runtime of 148 minutes, and I truly felt that runtime. I have no problems with movies going on for that long. In fact on paper, one of the pros of having such a long runtime for a movie like this is that we get to see some pretty cool extended action sequences. There are some action scenes that go on for quite a bit and had me glued to the screen. But substance-wise, “Furiosa” feels kind of thin. Does this movie try to deliver a fun story? I guess. But other than seeing Furiosa grow up, I did not feel as engaged with this film as I wanted to. That said, one thing I was engaged by was seeing Furiosa’s exposure to certain torturous acts, and how much said acts shaped the perspective of the character throughout the film.

But this film ends on an interesting, yet rather fitting note. I do not think this is a spoiler. If you think otherwise, you do you. But the end credits for “Furiosa” start with a few minutes of clips essentially detailing “Mad Max: Fury Road.” After all, again, this film leads into that one. Though it got me thinking… Upon leaving the movie, I did not say I wanted to go back and watch “Furiosa” a second time. If anything, the credits made me think I should potentially revisit “Fury Road” instead. While “Furiosa” is well done in its own right, it made me wish I were watching something better. I have seen “Fury Road” twice, and even though I think it is not the masterpiece some call it, I recognize there is plenty to like about it. And I think there is more to like about “Fury Road,” than “Furiosa.” Sure, “Furiosa” could stand as its own movie, but at the end of the day, it doubles as the world’s most robust, compelling advertisement for “Mad Max: Fury Road.”

Much like “Fury Road,” “Furiosa” tends to use star power to sell itself between the casting of Anya Taylor-Joy and Chris Hemsworth. However, from an effects perspective, the money is definitely there, but it does not mean the quality is there. What makes the look of “Fury Road” so appealing at times is despite knowing it is a movie, it tends to look as raw and lifelike as it could in such an environment on display. In “Furiosa,” there are a fair share of effects that look like they could belong in a blockbuster movie, but they feel like they belong more in a demo for the sake of showing off a new piece of tech. There is a lot less verisimilitude with these effects this time around. While “Furiosa” does not have the worst special effects I have seen, they are a significant step down compared to its predecessor.

And that’s the thing about this movie. It reminds me a lot of “Fury Road,” but it does not do anything as exciting as it. Plus between some long buildup, some forgettable characters, and scenes that probably did not need to go on as long as they did, I do not think “Furiosa” is worth watching a second time. How does it compare to the other “Mad Max” installments? I will be real, I have not seen any of the other ones. I want to, I just have not had the time. I could tell George Miller made the movie the way he intended. I just wish it were better.

In the end, “Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga” has plenty of positives. But there is not a lot in this movie, maybe other than Hemsworth as the villain, that truly stands out. Do not get me wrong. Anya Taylor-Joy does a good job as the title character. The film, despite some overpolishing, is easy on the eyes. The color palette of the film is appealing. I say this film looks like an over the top tech demo, and I meant such a thought as a bit of a dig. But it does not mean the film all looks bad. Also, if the Oscars were tomorrow, “Furiosa” would definitely be nominated for Best Makeup and Hairstyling. But when all is said and done, I would rather watch “Mad Max: Fury Road” one more time as opposed to watching “Furiosa” again. I am going to give “Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga” a 6/10.

“Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga” is now playing in theatres and is available to rent or buy on VOD.

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “Thelma,” the new movie starring June Squibb as an elderly woman who tries to get her money back from scammers. Also coming soon, I will share my thoughts on “Daddio,” “A Quiet Place: Day One,” and “Maxxxine.” If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga?” What did you think about it? Or, which Furiosa-centric story do you think is superior? “Fury Road” or “Furiosa?” Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

The Secret To 3D Movies You May Have Never Known (Post-Conversion)

Posted on by Jack Drees

375px-Glasses_for_RealD_Cinema-fs_PNr°0272

Hey everyone, Jack Drees here! I have a serious question. Is 3D still relevant? Don’t get me wrong, at times it can add a bit to several movie experiences. I remember going to see all three “Hobbit” films in IMAX 3D, all of them were epic and thrilling. Although nowadays 3D has become at times this thing you have to accept when going to see a film at the theater.

3D in a way is like prescription pills. There are a number of cases where you never really asked to take them for your personal amusement, but since you want to get on with your life, you just move along. When I go to the movies, I don’t traditionally care what show I get, but if I were making every executive decision, I’d probably choose to see a film in 2D. If the movie’s in IMAX and 3D’s the only option, chances are I’d go for that. Although when it comes to 3D, it’s something I never wanted, but it has always been around. It was very popular at the at the end of the 2000s leading into 2010. That’s because James Cameron’s “Avatar” was released all over and praised for the theatrical experience when watched in 3D. However since then, audiences have been thinking to themselves that 3D movies are becoming more and more bland. While there are those people who think 3D is awesome and think it’s one of the greatest things in cinematic history, 3D has increasingly resembled a fad as opposed to a game-changer.

One question some of you may have until looking at this post is this: How does the 3D come to be? It varies from movie to movie, but in most circumstances nowadays it’s fake. How is this? Unlike a number of films shot on cameras and rigs meant for 3D, most movies are currently shot on 2D cameras. It doesn’t even matter if the movie’s shot on film or digital, it’s just shot in 2D. Nowadays it is very rare to find a film coming out which is shot in actual 3D. This current year is 2018, let’s take a look at the list of movies that have been revealed to have been shot in actual 3D.

  • Mission: Impossible: Fallout
  • 2.0

There you go! That’s the whole list! Note that there are no animated films since those are made on computers.  Now let’s take a look at the rest of the 3D films labeled to have 2018 releases. Note once again that there are no animated movies.

  • Maze Runner: The Death Cure
  • Black Panther
  • A Wrinkle in Time
  • Pacific Rim: Uprising
  • Tomb Raider
  • Ready Player One
  • Rampage
  • Avengers: Infinity War
  • Solo: A Star Wars Story
  • Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom
  • Ant-Man and the Wasp
  • Alita: Battle Angel
  • Alpha

There are more films coming out in 2018 to be released in 3D. However, I can’t confirm or deny whether they’re real or fake. These results just goes to show when you look at the movies playing and you notice that there’s something playing in 3D, chances are that movie isn’t actually 3D.

Post-converted 3D is something that’s not really talked about when it comes to older movies nowadays such as those that were in 3D during the fifties, but it got some severe attention in 2010. In 1981, a movie known as “Clash of the Titans” was released to the public. The movie provided a fun family adventure for an hour and fifty-eight minutes and received a number of positive verdicts. Since studios love remaking everything, it’s no surprise that “Clash of the Titans” was one of those movies that got the remake treatment. And according to many people, it’s a f*ck-up on S*itshow Valley. Release the Kraken? More like Release the Crapen! Aside from the eye-covering CGI, the one-dimensional characters, and how people see it in comparison to the original film and mythology, this film was despised by critics and audiences for its use of 3D. Perhaps even more hilarious is a marketing tagline used by this movie. The tagline being, “Titans Will Clash.” No. F*cking. S*it. It’s like if “The Emoji Movie” had a tagline that said “This movie will suck, and you’ll hate your life while watching it.” THANKS, CAPTAIN OBVIOUS!

As for the movie’s use of 3D, the film was originally shot on 2D film cameras, and the director of the film, Louis Leterrier, went to the studio early on asking about a 3D conversion. However, this process was new and expensive. When “Avatar” was released, Leterrier was pressured to do a 3D post-conversion. He gave into it after seeing what he thought was a rather convincing View-D conversion process. The man even stated that it was essential for audiences to view the movie in 3D as an enhancement as opposed to a gimmick regarding the overall experience. Let me just tell you right now, the audience didn’t view it as an enhancement, they didn’t even view it as a gimmick, they viewed it… as crap. Three years after the film’s release to the public, Leterrier came out and said this about the 3D:

“It was famously rushed and famously horrible. It was absolutely horrible, the 3D. Nothing was working, it was just a gimmick to steal money from the audience. I’m a good boy and I rolled with the punches and everything, but it’s not my movie.”

And this just goes to show that studios can sometimes get in the way of movies. This isn’t the first time this has happened. Just look at films such as “Spider-Man 3,” “Risky Business,” and “Blade Runner.” Studios might force directors to do something concerning their movie that they ultimately don’t want to do. In this case, the studio wanted a 3D conversion. Had the movie just been in 2D, everyone would have probably been a little more happy. They’d still get a bad movie, but they’d have one less terrible aspect related to it. In fact, part of me thinks that Warner Brothers would end up making just a tad more money. After all, so many people were complaining about the 3D, so some folks would avoid 3D showings like the plague.

This isn’t to say that all post-converted 3D sucks. Some of the most highly appreciated 3D experiences are post-converted. After all, it is the norm now, so there has to be a gem somewhere. I went to see “Jurassic World” and the 3D was probably one of the best parts of the IMAX experience I was given. It was dinosaur-sized fun! “Mad Max: Fury Road” was also an experience worth the extra number of bucks, seeing all of the practicality and CGI come together at times really made you feel like your face was on fire or cars were running you over. One of the best experiences of all, is “Gravity.” I saw “Gravity” the weekend it came out in IMAX 3D, and it was f*cking worth it. The movie itself doesn’t have much replay value, but between the sound editing, sound mixing, score, cinematography, CGI, everything came together, and there were certain scenes where I truly felt like I was in space. Even better, trying my absolute hardest to survive in space. Just goes to show, even fake stuff can be real!

If anything, the improvement of post-production 3D is most likely due to commitment, and advances in technology. When it comes to “Gravity,” CG Effects Supervisor Alexis Wajsbrot has this to say:

“It was rendered in stereo, then we post-converted the faces with a very accurate track. It was a very precise rendition. That’s why the stereo works so well because it was thought about a long time before the movie was made.”

As suggested, the way “Gravity” was rendered gave it a 3D effect. The rest was work. Stereoscopic 3D is a very useful process if you’re shooting in 2D instead of 3D, if you’re maybe trying to save some cash and back pain, or if you are just looking for a way to cash in on a film even though you’re doing it in an effective manner. It won’t be real 3D, but it may give your brain the thought that you’re actually looking at 3D. While I do prefer authenticity, technology and commitment can help in making a proper product.

…Although in reality I prefer seeing movies in 2D.

Thanks for reading this post! I actually believe it or not had trouble doing this post, because I was working on another post I thought of last week, it was stuck in my head like how much I love pizza, the brand of the TV in my room, and the fact that with TurboTax, at least your taxes are free. Seriously though, thanks for reading! Tomorrow a new trailer for “Solo: A Star Wars Story” is arriving and we also got some trailers coming out tonight during the Super Bowl, trailers like “Mission: Impossible: Fallout,” “Skyscraper,” and “Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom.” I might review one of those trailers, and as far as newer movies go, I can confirm that at some point soon I’m going to see “The 15:17 To Paris.” That movie’s coming out February 9th, so I’ll be seeing that not long from now. Also, if you want more exciting content to take a gander at, I’ll have links down below to my “Maze Runner” reviews. Please check those out, I enjoyed a couple of those movies, and I have my thoughts summed up, whether they are positive or negative. Stay tuned for more great content! In 2D. I want to know, what is the best experience you had watching a movie in 3D? Yes, I’ll even count IMAX documentaries or something along those lines. Doesn’t even matter if the 3D’s real or not. Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

“THE MAZE RUNNER” REVIEW: https://scenebefore.wordpress.com/2018/01/18/the-maze-runner-2014-the-continuation-of-teen-angst-starring-dylan-obrien/

“MAZE RUNNER: THE SCORCH TRIALS” REVIEW: https://scenebefore.wordpress.com/2018/01/25/maze-runner-the-scorch-trials-the-continuation-of-teen-angst-starring-dylan-obrien-part-2-to-be-concluded-in-almost-2-5-years-also-this-is-wckd-boring/

“MAZE RUNNER: THE DEATH CURE” REVIEW: https://scenebefore.wordpress.com/2018/01/28/maze-runner-the-death-cure-2018-the-continuation-of-teen-angst-starring-dylan-obrien-part-3-to-be-rebooted-once-hollywood-runs-out-of-young-adult-dystopian-books-to-base-movies-on-still-bett/

Top 10 UNPOPULAR Movie Opinions

Posted on by Jack Drees

Hey everyone, Jack Drees here! There’s a saying that not everyone is the same. We are all different in our own little ways. This case is shown in our individual thoughts. In fact, in some instances, there are times when people wholeheartedly have different thoughts than others, or someone may call another’s opinion invalid for one reason or another. After reading this list, chances are you might just do the same with me. Today I’m going to be counting down my top 10 unpopular opinions in the realm of movies. With this list, I’m not trying to encourage others to change their minds about something. If they do, great! Although if they don’t, it’s understandable. So if you think that you should embrace something I say here simply because I embrace it, I wouldn’t recommend that. I’d recommend you embrace whatever fits with you, while I embrace whatever fits with me. So without further ado, let’s begin counting down my top 10 unpopular movie opinions.

10: Animal House is OVERRATED!

Before we get into this entry on the list, let me remind you, I’ve only seen this movie once, it was New Years Eve, and I recall there was also a transition to New Year’s Day while watching this. So ultimately, I could have been more awake. Nevertheless, when I was watching “Animal House,” I found it for the most part, boring. It’s not a terrible movie, there are worse comedies out there, but I don’t remember much about it today. I don’t remember anybody’s name, whats it’s about, how it ended. I don’t remember. There are some parts I remember, mainly the “I’m a zit” scene. For what I recall, I don’t think I laughed as much as other people while watching “Animal House.” Maybe it’s better the second time around, but only time will tell. This movie was directed by John Landis, who also directed “The Blues Brothers,” which is an awesome movie. If it were movie night and I had to pick between “Animal House and “Blues Brothers,” it’s “Blues Brothers” all day everyday baby! Although ultimately, if there’s a movie that I would personally watch that involves a fraternity, I personally prefer “Revenge of the Nerds.”

9: The Dark Knight is SLIGHTLY OVERRATED!

I love Christopher Nolan, I’ve said it time and time again. Some of you might be tired of me shoving that opinion down your throat. There are some of his movies that in recent times I’ve gone back and watched again. I have done that with “The Dark Knight,” but I really don’t think it’s as good as everybody says. Don’t get me wrong, it has a lot of redeeming qualities. The screenplay is really good, Hans Zimmer has created an excellent score, this was the first major Hollywood release to have footage not only presented, but shot in IMAX, and Heath Ledger’s interpretation of The Joker was phenomenal! This is certainly a film that has proven that comic book movies don’t always have to be childish, but even with that, I can’t give it the same praise that everyone else gives it. I’ve watched films from Nolan that I personally thought were better than “The Dark Knight,” such as “Inception,” “Interstellar,” and his most recent release, “Dunkirk.” “The Dark Knight” is a good movie, but it’s not a fantastic movie. Even my dad agrees with me. I mean, seriously?! #4 on IMDb?! Seriously?! This film is better than every installment of “Lord of the Rings?!” This film is better than “The Matrix?!” This film is better than “The Empire Strikes Back?!” Come on, guys! Christopher Nolan is certainly a director with tons of talent, but really? This is low on the list however because I personally predict that “The Dark Knight” might somehow become better with age therefore making this entry to the list having no matter whatsoever.

8: Paul Blart Mall Cop 2 is FUNNY AND ENTERTAINING!

Kevin James is a mystery to me. I like him in “King of Queens,” however his movies don’t usually live up to that show (mainly Grown Ups). However of the movies featuring James which I enjoy, a couple of those happen to be the two “Paul Blart: Mall Cop” films. Now, I said two. I like the first one better, but I’ll go as far as to say the second one, as much as you might want me to turn in my movie buff card for saying this, is watchable. Now, it’s not perfect. It’s stuff we’ve seen before, not to mention it borrows a lot of what we’ve seen in the first movie, in fact there’s more stuff in this movie that may as well come off as cringeworthy when compared to the original. I know from a critical perspective, this isn’t a good movie, it’s a slapstick comedy starring a fat guy on a segway, that TOTALLY sounds like an Oscar winner! And you know what? This movie was nominated for six Razzies! Worst Director, Worst Screenplay, Worst Screen Combo, Worst Remake, Rip-Off or Sequel, Worst Actor, and Worst Picture! Based on all of the negativity that is being displayed toward this film, it’s kind of surprising that it actually won a positive award. What did it win? It won a Young Entertainer Award in the category of Best Leading Young Actress- Feature Film due to Raini Rodriguez’s performance as Paul Blart’s daughter, Maya. I can understand how some people dislike this film. Sometimes it’s awkward, but it really could have been worse. There are moments in the film where I did laugh, and I wouldn’t mind watching it again. Now some of you may be wondering why I put this one on the list instead of the first one even though I like the first one better. Based on experience, I’ve seen more positive verdicts given to the original “Paul Blart,” and quite honestly, me putting the original “Paul Blart” on this list feels biased because I live right near the shopping centers where the original movie was shot. I think the first movie does get a lot more hate than it deserves, but I know people who watched it and ended up liking it. Although there is a saying that comedy is subjective and if fat guys on segways isn’t your thing, that’s understandable.

7: Revenge of the Sith is AMAZING!

mv5bntc4mtc3ntq5of5bml5banbnxkftztcwotg0nji4na-_v1_sy1000_sx750_al_

I love “Star Wars,” these movies have such an impact on our culture nowadays, and it’s easy to see why. In fact, now that Disney owns Lucasfilm and is making several new installments to the franchise, people are going as crazy for it as they were back when it started. So, what is my unpopular opinion about it? Well, it’s concerning the fact that “Revenge of the Sith” might be one of my favorite movies in the saga. For those of you who think I’m fanboying, I’ll have you know I don’t like “The Phantom Menace”  nor do I like “Attack of the Clones.” Now this is a lower entry considering the fact that when it comes to the “Star Wars” prequels, people might refer to “Revenge of the Sith” as “the good one.” In fact if you look at IMDb, “Revenge of the Sith” has a higher rating than both of the other movies in the prequel trilogy. A lot of people do like “Revenge of the Sith,” however, I LOVE IT. There are so many elements of this movie I appreciate. The score, the sound, the lightsaber duels, just about everything in the movie is awesome! The movie’s not perfect, Hayden Christensen isn’t really the best actor. That has also been proven in “Attack of the Clones.” However, to say this is bad like the other two movies in the prequel trilogy isn’t right. In fact, they toned down on Jar Jar, they only included him walking in the film! They don’t have him talking this time around! Woohoo! Part of me can imagine that as George Lucas was working on the prequel trilogy, this was the story he couldn’t wait to do. Who doesn’t love Darth Vader? Anakin as a character in this movie is totally conflicted, everything is crumbling for him and this starts out at a point in this movie. Palpatine is killer in this movie and the fight between him and a bunch of Jedi was short but sweet, not to mention accompanied by great music. His lines have become meme-worthy over the years and I can imagine Ian McDiarmid had fun at times on set. Ewan McGregor is terrific as Obi-Wan and it was really engaging to see him alongside Hayden Christensen’s Anakin both as a friend and as an enemy. John Williams crafted his best score of the prequel of the trilogy and that is saying something because “The Phantom Menace” has Duel of the Fates in there. Every single fight, whether it be a space battle, a lightsaber duel, or a massive land brawl, was awesome. Speaking of which, the opening shot for the first space battle is cinematic bliss. Also, the final lightsaber duels featuring a fight between Obi-Wan and Anakin and another fight between Yoda and Palpatine were engaging and thrilling. The Obi-Wan vs. Anakin duel is my favorite duel in the saga, it’s two former friends going up against each other and while fans may know the results to come of this battle, the characters don’t and despite it going on for awhile, it was never boring. You can say duels like the ones between Luke and Vader are awesome because of the situation at hand and the fact that you might not know what’s coming, but the duel between Obi and Ani impressed me from a musical perspective, a technical perspective, and it shows how far these two characters have come since they first met. Is it highly choreographed? Sure, but it doesn’t mean said choreography wasn’t impressive! Everything looked stylish, it had a video game feel to it which I kind of admired. The CGI actually still holds up today, and is much improved since the start of the prequels. If you ever feel like watching “Revenge of the Sith,” (Transition to Palpatine’s voice) do it.

6: The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug is THE BEST MOVIE IN THE LORD OF THE RINGS SAGA!

mv5bmzu0ndy0ndeznv5bml5banbnxkftztgwotixndu1mde-_v1_sy1000_cr006751000_al_

There was a time when I had a huge fanaticism for “Lord of the Rings.” To this day I never read the books, but I’ve watched all the movies. I like all of the movies in the saga, including “The Hobbit” trilogy, but my favorite of all of them might surprise you. That my friends, is “The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug.” Fun fact about “Lord of the Rings,” prior to going into the movie in the saga which came out before this, AKA “The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey,” I had no clue this was even connected to “Lord of the Rings.” Part of this is due to how I never even watched “Lord of the Rings” in the first place. It took a long while for me to actually find out there’s a connection between these movies. The movie I watched after is “The Desolation of Smaug.” Before I watched that, I thought “An Unexpected Journey,” wasn’t bad, but it really could have used some improvement. The 3D was awesome though! “The Desolation of Smaug” was a whole different ballgame however. I walked out of the theater thinking “The Desolation of Smaug” was a huge improvement over “An Unexpected Journey.” It became my favorite movie of 2013 and stands today as one of my favorite movies of all time. In fact there’s a good chance I might say it’s better than any of the “Star Wars” films. The movie as whole was awesome, the action was immersive and entertaining, the music is epic, I mean it’s “Lord of the Rings,” so why wouldn’t it be? Benedict Cumberbatch as Smaug the Dragon is probably my favorite villain in movie history. He’s so menacing, so massive, and his voice is amazing! The entire confrontation with Smaug sent literal chills down my spine. Imagine if in “The Empire Strikes Back” the entire confrontation between Luke and Vader actually had Luke as a very tiny guy and instead of going up against a guy his size, he’s going up against a freaking enormous giant! Also, imagine instead of having a fight, the small guy is getting chased the entire time! This goes on until the end of the movie and I was engaged the entire way through. This movie also introduced Evangeline Lilly’s character of Tauriel, who undoubtedly kicked some ass in the movie! Another really entertaining part of the movie is the barrel scene, which is basically this fight that is going on through a river, there’s dwarves, there’s orcs, there’s elves, it’s just glorious to look at. The music in that scene is something I’ve listened to time and time again. If I had any problems with the movie, it would be one thing and it’s how some of the effects actually somehow look better in the trailer as opposed to the movie. I’m not saying the visual effects in the movie were bad, I’m just saying that they didn’t look as good as what I saw in the trailer. While “An Unexpected Journey” may have been the first “Lord of the Rings” film I’ve seen, “The Desolation of Smaug” began my love for the franchise (movie-wise) and this still stands today as my favorite “Lord of the Rings” movie.

5: Avatar is OVERRATED!

Ah, 2009, the decade is coming to an end, everyone’s 2010 fever is rising, and at the end of the year, we’ve gotten, based on advertising, possibly the biggest movie of the decade. James Cameron, the director of the first two films in the “Terminator” franchise, is back in the director’s chair. The CGI looks very impressive, this movie’s being built up like hell, everybody’s super stoked to see James Cameron’s first film since “Titanic.” A film named “Avatar.” I saw this movie in the theater, and while I was somewhat impressed with what I saw, I really couldn’t say it was super duper. The CGI, as mentioned, is objectively amazing. Everything looks like you’re on a realistic theme park ride, but as a story, not only has it been done before, but upon rewatch, the story isn’t really something this movie has me coming back for. Not to mention, when this movie was released in theaters, it basically brought a huge rise in digital projection. While digital projection may be easier to use than film projection. Film projection from experience usually provides better images. A good number of digital projectors might give off an image at a resolution slightly higher than HD. Some theaters operate in 4K, but it’s still not as clear as film projection. I went to see the movie in 2D, and I imagine the 3D was awesome, but this is probably part of what brought the rise of 3D shows becoming a normality. And while certain movies are thrilling in 3D, there are those movies that really didn’t need conversion in the first place. I mean, it probably could have been worse. At least the cameras used to shoot the film were actually 3D cameras and the movie wasn’t just post-converted. I haven’t seen the film I’m going to be talking about here, but here’s a fun fact for you. You may be aware of a Disney film which came out in 1995 called “Pocahontas.” I’m going to provide a link down below to something I want you to see. “Avatar” is basically just another version of “Pocahontas!” By the way, on IMDb, “Avatar” has a higher combined rating.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/04/avatar-pocahontas-in-spac_n_410538.html

4: Tim Burton’s Charlie and the Chocolate Factory is a CHOCOLATE-COVERED DELIGHT!

mv5bnjcxmjg1njg2nf5bml5banbnxkftztcwmjq4nzmzmw-_v1_

Remakes and reboots are usually frowned upon by moviegoers, but it doesn’t mean good ones don’t exist. To me, one of the good ones happens to be “Charlie and the Chocolate Factory.” Some of you probably have your pitchforks ready and that’s understandable, but please hear me out. For those of you who don’t know, Rohld Dahl created a book called “Charlie and the Chocolate Factory” back in 1964, it has grown in popularity ever since and it is often read by children. Then in 1971, “Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory” came out, starring Gene Wilder, I think that’s a great movie. It’s not exactly faithful to the source material in every single way, but in ways it isn’t faithful, it still works. Ever since it came out, it has remained as one of the most popular musical films and family films to date. Then in 2005, “Charlie and the Chocolate Factory” came out. What do I like about “Charlie and the Chocolate Factory?” It gives a twist on a tale we already know and manages to be a darker interpretation which I can appreciate. Not to mention it relies on the source material in ways “Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory” didn’t. I don’t mind the Oompa-Loompas in “Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory,” in fact their songs are catchy, but the Oompa-Loompas in “Charlie and the Chocolate Factory” sing songs that resemble songs written in the book. Instead of being labeled a bad egg, Veruca Salt is labeled a bad nut. In fact, the scene in the nut room is awesome! There are more similarities, but I don’t want to go on a tangent, in fact the movie isn’t a complete copy of the book. Much like the 1971 movie, the 2005 movie has a different ending than the book. Honestly, the 1971 movie had the better ending. Wonka was kind of a jerk as “Charlie and the Chocolate Factory” came to a close, this changes as the movie goes on, but still. Speaking of Wonka, Johnny Depp’s performance could have been better, and as of right now I probably mean WAY BETTER. Also, I gotta say, Mike Teevee in “Charlie” was a great character. That’s not to say 1971 Mike Teevee was bad, but I also admire 2005 Mike Teevee. His introduction is AWESOME. We see him playing a video game in front of his TV, there’s a bunch of press around him, his parents are there. He’s kind of mopey and just trying to concentrate on his game. The thing I find funny about Teevee is that he hates chocolate. I think the writer nailed Teevee’s personality perfectly! Also, I love Danny Elfman’s score. It’s so dark, it’s so intriguing, and it’s just wicked investing! Is “Charlie and the Chocolate Factory” perfect? Not really. Is it watchable? AB-SO-F*CKING-LUTELY!

3: Mad Max: Fury Road is OVERRATED!

I love it when movies can literally immerse you. I felt this way during certain movies. Some examples include “Interstellar,” “Dunkirk,” “Hardcore Henry,” “Oz the Great and Powerful,” and “Doctor Strange.” Another movie that belongs in that category to me is “Mad Max: Fury Road.” Although just because it’s immersive, it doesn’t mean I enjoyed it as much as I wanted to. For the record, I saw this in 3D in the theater, so it would have been surprising for the experience to let me down. What I got out of the experience was pure awesomeness, but I really wanted a better movie. After watching “Fury Road” I said to myself multiple times that I think it’s a great film from a technical perspective, but I wanted more from a story perspective. This film was filled with practical effects and it’s just an explosive chase from beginning to end. I still can’t get that one guy with the guitar out of my head. This movie actually broke a common rule used in cinema, that being the rule of thirds, which basically has a subject of focus on a left or right side of a camera frame. In this movie, a lot of the footage has its subjects centered. This can be an advantage if you’re a viewer because this means you won’t really have to tilt your head as much while you’re watching the movie. I couldn’t really get into too many of the characters, I was mainly into a lot of the other crazy stuff. Also, I recall my experience and there were times in the theater that I couldn’t make out some of the dialogue. Maybe if I watch the movie at home that’ll change, but it’s something that happened to me. Another thing I’ll mention is that I haven’t seen another “Mad Max” movie aside from “Fury Road.” Maybe there’s a chance this opinion will change once I witness another one of those movies.

2: Spider-Man 3 is ENJOYABLE!

Spider-Man, without a doubt, is one of my all time favorite superheroes. I grew up with Spidey, I watch Spidey, I love Spidey and in the realm of movies, there are a number of things when it comes to Spider-Man that I can agree with when it comes to the opinions of others, the majority’s thoughts on “Spider-Man 3” however is something I can’t agree with. Now, let me just say, “Spider-Man 3” in my opinion is not the best of all the “Spider-Man” movies, that medal actually belongs to “Spider-Man 2.” When it comes to “Spider-Man 3,” it’s a movie that a lot of people consider to be the worst “Spider-Man” movie ever made, and one of the worst comic book movies ever made. I personally disagree on both of those statements. Some of you may be thinking right now “Oh you’re just a Sam Raimi fanboy!” No I’m not, if I were a Sam Raimi fanboy, I would say his movies are perfect. I didn’t say “Spider-Man 3” is perfect! In fact, let’s point out some flaws I have with it right now. This movie interjects a similarity to “Batman & Robin,” which is adding in too many villains. They weren’t all terrible, but there was one that was literally shoehorned in there, AKA Venom. Flint Marko’s transformation to sandman was kind of idiotic because he landed in a pit of sand, which, yeah, things happen, but the problem I have with that is that a bunch of scientists are operating a machine above the sand. It’s turned on, and before it starts its procedure, one scientist picked up “a change in the silicon mass” in the pit, not exactly suggesting the scientist knows there’s a person in there specifically, and another scientist goes off on that statement saying “It’s probably a bird, it’ll fly away when we fire it up.” Based on the change given, is that really believable? There is NO spider-sense tingling sounds in this movie! Just a personal preference. Also, one complaint you’ll agree on is that the jazz club scene is rather cringeworthy. Now I don’t hate it as much as other people, I just think it’s a weak scene. But it could honestly be worse. It does illustrate the personality of certain characters and it plays into Peter’s development as a character. I’d rather watch that scene than “Suicide Squad” again! There are a lot of things I like about this movie I haven’t mentioned. I like the action scenes, the music, J Jonah Jamesson, the rivalry between Peter and Harry, this movie has plenty of positives that part of me imagines has once been overshadowed by the movie’s negatives for some people. I’ll even go as far as to say this movie is better than “Spider-Man: Homecoming!” I’m not joking!

1: Baby Groot SUCKS!

Ah, “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2.” This movie had me going into it with high expectations and it ultimately disappointed me. The movie wasn’t bad, it just disappointed me. I did think there were some redeeming qualities shown throughout such as the visuals, some of the fight scenes, and the character of Ego. However, this movie wasn’t perfect, and part of it has to do with F*CKING BABY GROOT! I hated this thing! Groot from the first “Guardians” was a cool character. Somewhat one-dimensional, but his charm ultimately was revealed to me. Baby Groot however is not only one-dimensional, he’s just taking this picture which is meant to be a superhero flick and turning it into a f*cking toy commercial! When I first saw him at the beginning of the flick, it set the tone for the whole movie, I couldn’t even tolerate what I was watching. The movie had an opportunity to show us an opening action sequence, but we cut away from that just to focus on this twig! I know that Baby Groot is considered cute by many people, but based on how much he stole from the entire movie as a movie, he got on my nerves. This is part of why I don’t own a Baby Groot toy unlike a lot of other people. What if R2-D2 was just made to serve no purpose in all of his movies other than to sell toys? You can argue he’s that way in “Rogue One,” but what if he was that way in the original “Star Wars?” I expected Baby Groot to leave some sort of impact on the movie, but not this kind of impact! I already thought “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2” was overrated but the fact that this character is being put on such a pedestal right now is astounding to me! Sure, some people think he’s cute and I imagine kids like him, but there’s so many things I found annoying about him. In a way, he’s almost like Toad from “Super Mario Bros.,” puny and annoying. Not to mention, after seeing Baby Groot, it kind of makes me worried about the future of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Will we ever see a great MCU movie ever again? I already said I wasn’t a massive fan of “Spider-Man: Homecoming,” which was somewhat enjoyable, but it wasn’t what I wanted it to be. “Thor: Ragnarok” looks visually pleasing, but I’m not sure how I feel about it from a story perspective. I imagine the fight between Thor and Hulk will be cool, but this ultimately, judging from the trailers, might be filled with certain things I’ve already seen. Not to mention the vibe doesn’t feel like it fits “Thor.” “Black Panther” honestly looks intolerable. I’ve only seen the trailer a couple times but it really didn’t impress me. I hope “Avengers: Infinity War” is good otherwise this franchise might fall. Is “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2” a bad movie? No. Is it overrated? Sure. Although before I think to myself that the movie’s overrated, I might think to myself about the horror I had to suffer through while glancing at Baby Groot. I’m sorry if you like him, and clearly a large portion of the world does, but in my world he’s as annoying as Spirit Airlines.

Thanks for reading this countdown, I hope you aren’t planning to kill me or my family after I made this list, but I’m sorry if this list has various things you don’t agree with. Do you have any unpopular opinions in the realm of movies? What are they? Do you agree with any of my picks? Do you think my mind should be adjusted? Do you think you can convince me to change my mind about one of these picks? Leave a comment below and maybe I’ll respond! Also, stay tuned because tomorrow I’ll have my last review in my series of Tom Cruise films, and that review will be for “The Firm!” Stay tuned for that review and more great content! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!