#Movie

Will STAR WARS: THE RISE OF SKYWALKER Be Shown On IMAX 70mm Film?

Posted on by Jack Drees

mv5bnda5ywu1mditowzlos00ytljlthhytytmzm4mgi2njhlmdywxkeyxkfqcgdeqxvynjg2njqwmdq40._v1_sy1000_sx675_al_

Hey everyone, Jack Drees here! Last year, I created a post asking the following question. Will “First Man” be shown on IMAX 70mm film? The answer, no. This year, there is another movie that I have followed for some time that is making me ask the same question. Specifically, “Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker.” Why? Because despite a majority of this decade’s “Star Wars” films getting 70mm IMAX releases, there are reasons to believe that “The Rise of Skywalker,” the final film in The Skywalker Saga, will miss the mark.

When J.J. Abrams’ “Star Wars: The Force Awakens” came out in December 2015, that released in a number of IMAX 70mm locations, along with standard 35mm and 70mm theaters. It also was projected on IMAX’s then new laser technology in other locations. While that’s not film based, it is a digital response to IMAX’s film projection. When it comes to being projected in IMAX 70mm, the following locations took action.

US/CANADA

Alabama
McWane Center IMAX Dome Theatre – Birmingham
IMAX, U.S. Space & Rocket Center – Huntsville

California
Hackworth IMAX Dome, The Tech Museum – San Jose

Canada
Kramer IMAX, Saskatchewan Science Centre – Regina

Florida
Museum of Discovery & Science AutoNation IMAX – Ft. Lauderdale
IMAX Dome, Museum of Science & Industry – Tampa

Indiana
IMAX, Indiana State Museum – Indianapolis

Iowa
Blank IMAX Dome, Science Center of Iowa – Des Moines

Missouri
Branson’s IMAX, Entertainment Complex – Branson
St. Louis Science Center OMNIMAX Theatre – St. Louis

Pennsylvania
Tuttleman IMAX, The Franklin Institute– Philadelphia

Washington, DC
Lockheed Martin IMAX, National Air & Space Museum

Texas
Omni, Fort Worth Museum of Science & History – Fort Worth

INTERNATIONAL
LG IMAX, Darling Harbour – Sydney, Australia
The Science Museum – London, England

That’s 15 locations. That is less than the number of seasons of “The Simpsons,” “Family Guy,” “NCIS,” “America’s Funniest Home Videos,” “Jimmy Kimmel Live!,” “Real Time with Bill Maher,” “Judge Judy,” “Dr. Phil,” “South Park,” “The Bachelor,” and the combined seasons for “Star Trek: The Original Series,” “Star Trek: The Next Generation,” and “Star Trek: Deep Space Nine.”

“Rogue One: A Star Wars Story” also came out in certain IMAX 70mm locations, but the difference between that and “The Force Awakens,” aside from being a spinoff, is that the film was not shot specifically for 70mm IMAX projection. “The Force Awakens” was shot using IMAX branded cameras, and when a number of films were shot using that, IMAX presented the movie having those scenes fill the entire screen. This is true for many of their digital-based locations, as well as those running film. In fact, the film was shot completely in digital using an ARRI Alexa 65. Nevertheless, it still managed to hit 13 IMAX 70mm screens.

Alabama
IMAX, US Space & Rocket Center
IMAX Dome, McWane Center

California
AMC Universal CityWalk Stadium 19 & IMAX – Universal City
Esquire IMAX – Sacramento
Hackworth IMAX Dome, The Tech Museum

Canada
Kramer IMAX, Saskatchewan Science Centre

Florida
IMAX Dome, Museum of Science & Industry

Iowa
Blank IMAX Dome, Science Center Iowa

Indiana
IMAX, Indiana Stare Museum

Minnesota
IMAX Theatre, Minnesota Zoo

Missouri
OMNIMAX, St. Louis Science Center

Pennsylvania
Tuttleman IMAX, The Franklin Institute

Texas
Omni Theatre Fort Worth Museum of Science & History

Granted, this was a starting list. I say so because “Rogue One” was shown in more IMAX 70mm theaters after its initial release, including one in Connecticut’s Maritime Aquarium, which is one of the closest venues of its kind to where I live. When it comes to this specific theater, they managed to do the same for “The Force Awakens.”

Then came “Star Wars: The Last Jedi,” directed by Rian Johsnon. Much like its chronological predecessor, “The Force Awakens,” this was partially shot using IMAX cameras. I will say though, personally, I missed out on the IMAX experience for this film when it came out. But based on research, I did not miss much. Why? Multiple sources suggest that the film never had any scenes projected from top to bottom on IMAX 70mm screens. The entire movie was projected in an aspect ratio of 2.39:1, which is conventional in the movie industry. The original IMAX-specific aspect ratio is 1.43:1. “The Force Awakens” had 5 minutes of IMAX footage intact. All five minutes was blown up to fill the brand’s screens. But for those who went to see “The Last Jedi” in IMAX, they may have gotten crystal clear images, but black bars up the wazoo. Turns out, as a matter of fact, IMAX was the only film format in which this movie happened to be presented. No standard 35mm or standard 70mm was available. And if viewers did manage to check out these types of IMAX screenings, chances are they flocked to one of these places.

US/CANADA

Alabama
IMAX Dome, McWane Center – Birmingham
IMAX, U.S. Space & Rocket Center – Huntsville

California
Hackworth IMAX Dome, The Tech Museum – San Jose

Canada
Kramer IMAX, Saskatchewan Science Centre – Regina

Connecticut
IMAX, The Maritime Aquarium – Norwalk

Indiana
IMAX, Indiana State Museum – Indianapolis

Iowa
Blank IMAX Dome, Science Center of Iowa – Des Moines

Missouri
OMNIMAX, St. Louis Science Center – St. Louis

North Carolina
The Charlotte Observer IMAX Dome, Discovery Place – Charlotte

Pennsylvania
Tuttleman IMAX, The Franklin Institute– Philadelphia

Texas
Omnitheatre, Fort Worth Museum of Science & History – Fort Worth

UK
London Science Museum – London

That’s 11 locations. That is less than the number of seasons of “The Big Bang Theory,” “Supernatural,” “It’s Always Sunny In Philadelphia,” “Criminal Minds,” “America’s Got Talent,” “Ridiculousness,” “Bones,” “Grey’s Anatomy,” “Face Off,” “The Bachelorette,” “SpongeBob SquarePants,” “Dallas,” “Two and a Half Men,” and “Love Connection.”

As for “Solo: A Star Wars Story,” which released almost half a year after “The Last Jedi,” that was not filmed with any IMAX technology. It still released in the IMAX format however, going through a traditional DMR (Digital Media Remastering) process. Here are the theaters that presented “Solo: A Star Wars Story” in IMAX 70mm.

There aren’t any, the film was entirely released in digital formats.

That’s 0 locations. That is less than the number of seasons of “Freaks and Geeks,” “Firefly,” “Clone High,” “Swamp Thing,” “Whiskey Cavalier,” “The Michael J. Fox Show,” “Bam’s Bad Ass Game Show,” “Son of Zorn,” “Bordertown,” “Inhumans,” “Selfie,” “Heroes: Reborn,” “Ghosted,” “America’s Next Best Weatherman,” and “State of Georgia.” FYI, ALL OF THESE got cancelled after one season.

To be honest though, I can’t complain too much because the entire movie was shot digitally on ARRI Alexa cameras.

And when it comes to a good portion of the locations that have played a few of these recent “Star Wars” movies in 70mm, not only are they few and far between, but many of them rarely play Hollywood features. Many of these theaters simply show IMAX-distributed documentaries that are either new or cater to a theme that would associate with a venue. Not to mention, a glaring fraction of these are domes, and while I will say I rarely go to domed IMAX theaters, one thing to point out about them is the 180° style of the screen. With a number of cinema screens, it is sometimes easy to notice a slight curve they can provide, and traditional IMAX screens are no exception. Forget about a curve with an IMAX Dome, it’s practically a boulder sliced in half. Not only do they rarely show Hollywood features, but they also can have a quirky looking image when there are black bars involved. Granted, I have yet to see something like this for myself in person, but from what I’ve seen online, it’s almost weird looking. I almost wonder if it would turn off a good portion of general audience members.

History aside, let’s move onto the present and the future. Despite IMDb’s current claims that this film will be shot with IMAX cameras, no word of mouth from Disney, J.J. Abrams, Kathleen Kennedy, etc., has said anything related to such a claim (except this one, based on brief research). After all, I don’t know for sure, it could have been inserted long before, or maybe just as soon as the film happened to be starting production. However, IMDb is also claiming that the movie will be presented in multiple film formats. These include 35mm, 70mm, and IMAX 70mm. By the way, they are also suggesting these were also formats used for shooting.

“Shot on 35mm, 70mm, and 70mm IMAX, this is the third Star Wars film to be shot in the IMAX format, the first film in the franchise to be shot on 70mm film, and the first Star Wars film since Star Wars: Episode VI – Return of the Jedi (1983) to be shot entirely on celluloid.”

OK, I can buy this movie entirely being shot on film. After all, one of the things that J.J. Abrams wanted out of “Episode VII” was the nostalgia factor, which was partially brought to the table through filming the movie in celluloid, an action that the prequels neglected for the most part. But to be fair, “new technology” sometimes has a ring to it.

As for what technology was used specifically, I think we still need updated information on it. Because when it comes to technical specifications, that is still a mystery kept by those who made this film. Yes, there are articles suggesting a mixture of 35mm and 70mm cinematography in the movie, but many of them are from the end of 2016, a month before “Rogue One” came out. However, perhaps the most credible information I came across was this occasionally updated article as seen on fromthegrapevine.com. For those who are lazy, there is a suggestion via an image that this next “Star Wars” film will be shot in 70mm.

Granted, I highly doubt that this movie will be mostly shot in digital. The past two films in the trilogy have been shot using film for a good portion of the runtime, therefore to maintain a similar feel, Abrams must have said film was the way to go.

And with this information in mind, I will point out that IMAX has a vast history of showcasing movies that were not shot through their technology on their true projection format. The thing is however, that time happened back when the DMR process was starting to get into full swing. With IMAX’s jump into digital projection in 2008, it wasn’t too long before IMAX started getting picky with what films would be shown in their original format. “Rogue One” was a rare exception back when it came out in 2016.

In fact, let’s look at IMAX in 2018 and what they have done with this technology. Unfortunately, IMAX missed the opportunity to put “First Man,” their only new release that year shot with IMAX 70mm tech, in theaters catering to that format. They were shown in IMAX Laser theaters, which is a nice consolation, but having been in both venues for different movies, it’s not the same. The only “new” 70mm experience that came out was a limited 50th anniversary engagement of Stanley Kubrick’s “2001: A Space Odyssey.” Aside from that, there was a 10th anniversary limited engagement of Christopher Nolan’s “The Dark Knight” which played around the same time period. There was another movie released in IMAX shot with their technology (Avengers: Infinity War), but that film was shot completely in digital. This allowed a complete fill of the screen in many, smaller, digital venues, but not for the venues IMAX was originally known for.

If you think I am pulling these facts out of my butt, let me just point out to you, I am not. There is a Wikipedia page that lists every single IMAX film that has gone through a DMR process. Yes, Wikipedia is not the most scholarly source of all time, but over the years, this has been pretty reliable for this subject matter.

List of IMAX DMR Films

In fact, if you scour the list, go to the section labeled “2019,” and scroll down to “Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker.” you’ll notice it does not suggest there will be any IMAX 70mm screenings, nor does it say anything about the cinematic equipment. Granted, a lot of the information related to this does not exactly need to be displayed now, the movie does not even release until December. Even with that in mind however, it is slightly concerning. I can live with a lack of IMAX 70mm screenings if it wasn’t shot in that exact format, but if it was, I feel like we are gonna be in a “First Man” situation all over again. Although that movie flopped as far as I am aware so, who knows? It might have been for the best. I enjoyed the movie, in fact it was one of my favorites of the year, but regardless, it didn’t have proper financial legs.

It is perhaps slightly inevitable that “Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker” will be a financial success. I say SLIGHTLY inevitable, because while a number of recent Disney “Star Wars” flicks made over $1 billion at the box office, the most recent one, “Solo: A Star Wars Story” did not meet the financial standards of films that came prior to it, including the spinoff “Rogue One.” At the same time, it has things going for it. For one thing, it’s the conclusive chapter to The Skywalker Saga, it involves characters we have known for the past two films and even further into the past, Lando is back, and Palpatine seems to be making an appearance as well. It has the potential to win audiences and a portion of the fanbase overall. Well, that depends on how divided said fanbase is by the time this movie comes out, because it’s pretty ugly right now. And even though that ugliness is a thing, there are enough fans in the “Star Wars” community that could potentially show up for a new flick in the franchise.

If you ask me, I think Disney, Lucasfilm, Bob Iger, IMAX, among others would not have minded the idea of releasing the film in IMAX 70mm. Sure, “Solo” didn’t do as well as they would have hoped, but based on how that is a film that not many audiences asked for in the first place, added onto the prior success of films that came before it, they wouldn’t mind releasing the film in an IMAX 70mm format. They’re making more money with the Skywalker films compared to the spinoffs, and let’s face it, audiences care about Rey, they care about Kylo, they care about Chewie, they care about Lando, they care about BB-8. The praise is there, the studio just has to make a decision. Another factor to consider is the transition to go back to how Disney originally released these types of films. Specifically, by doing so in December. This is a good strategy because people are home for the holidays, kids are on break, and with a bunch of Oscar-bait films competing against each other, this blockbuster has a significant chance of standing out.

Do I want to see a reality where we get the opportunity to go check out “The Rise of Skywalker” in IMAX 70mm? I would, but I know it’s not certain. Given my clustered knowledge of how this movie is being shot, I don’t know if it is being shot in the IMAX format, but even if it isn’t, I would be willing to show up for an IMAX 70mm presentation simply because it is the clearest picture in existence. And… Disney, if you are planning on releasing this in IMAX 70mm… PLEASE… Consider releasing it at the Providence Place IMAX. It’s one of the closest true IMAX venues to my house, and one of the best theaters I have ever been to. I will flock there immediately if you release your film there in this specified format.

Am I being an obsessive nerd about this? Probably. Do I care? Hell no! In fact, with all statistics being considered, it makes me worried for the future of how IMAX movies are presented. Yes, we are likely getting Christopher Nolan’s “Tenet” in IMAX 70mm next year, but are we simply doing so because it’s a Christopher Nolan film? Is it because of the director’s power in the industry? He’s my favorite director working today, but it’s still a question I can’t help but ask! “Star Wars” is a big franchise. And this latest film is seemingly shot in a big resolution. So why not let us as an audience look at the big picture?

YUP. PUN ABSOLUTELY INTENDED.

“Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker” hits theaters December 20th, 2019. I am looking forward (although I am also slightly apprehensive) to seeing how this sequel trilogy will conclude. I do have faith in J.J. Abrams, especially after the excellent job he did with “The Force Awakens.” It also seems inevitable that I am going to see the movie on opening night, even if I get access to a press screening before the movie hits theaters everywhere. As for IMAX, I don’t care what you do with this movie. If it is shot in your format, release it in 70mm. But based on the popularity of this franchise, consider that sort of release even if this movie was shot in a smaller format. What will happen? I don’t know, only time will tell! Thanks for reading this post! I just want to remind everyone that next week starts the second half of 2019, so I will be creating a mega-post containing a halftime report and a glimpse into the future of Scene Before. Be sure to look forward to that! Also, stay tuned for my second trailer of “Project 2020.” If you have seen one of my posts back in April, you know what I am talking about. Be sure to follow Scene Before either with an email or WordPress account so you can stay tuned for more great content! I want to know, do you have any thoughts on this “Rise of Skywalker” in IMAX 70mm matter? Or am I just batcrap crazy? Also, are you looking forward to “The Rise of Skywalker?” Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

The Secret Life of Pets 2 (2019): The Secret’s Out: This Movie’s As Lifeless As A Pet Rock

Posted on by Jack Drees

“The Secret Life of Pets 2” is directed by Chris Renaud, who directed the previous installment to this specific franchise. He also has a voice role as multiple characters. Renaud is directing alongside Jonathan del Val, whose work has mainly been in the animation department for other Illumination titles such as “The Grinch” and “The Lorax,” which makes this his directorial debut. This film stars Patton Oswalt (King of Queens, Ratatouille) as the character of Max, a dog who has many pet pals in his vicinity around the city of New York. What’s interesting about that is the first movie had Max be voiced by Louis C.K., but based on eventually surfaced controversy, C.K. was replaced by Oswalt. Alongside Oswalt, we have Eric Stonestreet (Modern Family, Identity Thief), Kevin Hart (Ride Along, Central Intelligence), Jenny Slate (Obvious Child, The LEGO Batman Movie), Tiffany Haddish (Night School, Uncle Drew), Lake Bell (BoJack Horseman, Childrens Hospital), Nick Kroll (Operation Finale, Sing), Hannibal Buress (The Eric Andre Show, Neighbors), Bobby Moynihan (Saturday Night Live, Me, Myself, & I), and Harrison Ford (Star Wars, Raiders of the Lost Ark).

“The Secret Life of Pets 2” follows the story of the recently mentioned Max as he adapts to having a human child by his side, only to eventually become protective of said child, not to mention, his own self. Meanwhile we get side stories involving the bunny Snowball as a superhero and the dog Gidget guarding a toy as she tries to learn the traditions of being a cat.

I saw the original “Secret Life of Pets” back when it came out, and it was also one of my first reviews I have ever done (view my continuously developing content here). When I did that review, I managed to view the movie as decent, and I managed to address a complaint that I imagine a decent number of people had while watching the film. Specifically, the notion that “The Secret Life of Pets” is too similar to “Toy Story.” Yes, there are similarities, but “The Secret Life of Pets” is fine enough to stand on its own if you ask me.

Oh, by the way! Check out my review for “Toy Story 4!”

That first movie managed to make $800 million more than its original budget of $75 million. Regardless of the movie’s quality, that is something both Universal and Illumination should celebrate. So naturally, a sequel seemed to be inevitable.

Well, here we are. And honestly, while I imagine some people like Chris Renaud may be doing this as a passion project, this almost feels like one of those movies that only exists just to make money. I could just say that just from viewing the movie on paper, but I viewed it on a screen. Guess what? I still feel that way! “The Secret Life of Pets 2” is the worst animation of the year so far! If I had to be honest, this just makes me feel bad for Illumination. I know the studio is pretty popular right now, especially with the following of “Despicable Me,” a trilogy I still have yet to see from start to finish. I saw part of the second film, and that is it. No, I have not seen “Minions.” But even though I enjoyed “Sing” and sort of enjoyed “The Secret Life of Pets,” I have yet to see that one film which defines the studio. To add onto this, I watched last year’s “The Grinch” and it was freaking awful. My gosh golly! That movie was a mean one for sure! Sadly, I think this movie’s worse. Because for starters, much like “The Grinch,” there is some occasional nice looking animation in this, but I think “The Grinch” slightly edges out its competitor because “The Grinch” was colorful and zazzy. There was nothing in this film that had a real wow factor. In fact, most of the film is cringe if you ask me!

Seriously! The writing is terrible! The plot is nearly convoluted! Not to mention, the movie almost has this rushed feeling to it. And if you look at the runtime, this statement would not surprise you. I say that because the runtime is 1 hour and 26 minutes. Coincidentally, that is also the runtime of what may be the worst animated film of all time, “The Emoji Movie,” another rushed disaster that might as well exist because, well, the thing it is about is trendy! “The Secret Life of Pets” was a success, why not make another one? We’ll make it the s*ittiest waste of time and money imaginable, and everyone will go see it. The script will be so lazy that it will eventually spend lots of time in one of the crew members’ junk drawers! Granted, “The Secret Life of Pets 2,” admittedly, is much better than “The Emoji Movie,” so this does not say much.

I felt like I already gave a teaser to how chaotic this movie is in terms of building blocks, because it didn’t feel like a movie. Instead, it felt more like a bad situation comedy episode with pets as the main cast. There are multiple plot lines for individual characters, which is fine for a number of films, but the execution was poor in this one. There are cheap jokes that don’t land, and there are anger-inducing moments that make playing a game of pinball where the flipper buttons shock you with each press look fun!

As for Max himself, there is one question I want to ask to the general audience going to this film. Do you care about the replacement voice actor? I could tell the voice difference betweent Oswalt and C.K., but I understand why the replacement happened so it’s not like I entirely give damn. Oswalt did a fine job with the voice, but as an avid moviegoer, I am gonna inevitably notice things, and Oswalt’s voice is not the same as C.K.’s. If you ask me, I would have probably done an audition process to see if someone could be a good match to Louis C.K.’s voice for the movie. Then again, I imagine some people don’t want to think about that guy so that could backfire. In terms of characterization, I understand the purpose of his character throughout the film and how he was written, but Max’s main problem in the movie in terms of how it was executed, nearly made me roll my eyes. Did I feel bad for him at times? Sure. But I still hated myself throughout the experience.

But as he tries to cope with this we get to meet the absolute best character in the movie, Rooster. For one thing, he’s voiced by Harrison Ford, who definitely brings a likable screen presence into a lot of projects, perhaps even if he sleepwalks. He has a couple of funny moments during the film, sadly I saw the characters’s main highlights prior to going into the auditorium. I guess this is what you get for watching promotional material and talk shows. Although unfortunately, because this movie quite literally cannot get any shorter, the amount of screentime Rooster manages to have is slightly underwhelming. I could tell that Harrison Ford was likely trying, but I would almost bet that this was a paycheck movie as far as Ford was concerned. As soon as I saw what I then gathered would be Ford’s final scene in the film, I almost wanted to turn off my brain. And I don’t mean turn off my brain and shove popcorn in my month as I stare at the screen. I mean lose all processes of thinking, knowing, and realizing. Because while I’m not psychic, I imagined that whatever would come next in the film, would be nowhere near as fun or entertaining as the scenes with Ford’s character. And of course, this super genius of film is right once again! Boom! Although I will say one thing about Harrison Ford’s character that is kind of interesting, I guess Han Solo got to play Chewbacca for once!

*Cricket noises*

Chewbacca derives from a Russian word for dog.

There is a lot of crap that happens in this movie to the point where I don’t even have the time to hit all of it (and some hinges into spoiler territory). Some of it includes a scene where Chloe (Lake Bell) is slowly taking in the effects of cat nip as if it was some sort of illegal drug, which might qualify to be one of the most unintentionally disturbing scenes in animation history. The ending is kind of absurd that it almost feels like it is too much for a cartoon, but there is one thing I have yet to cover regarding this film that I absolutely hate as a viewer.

They say a story is only as good as its villain. If that’s the case, THEN THIS STORY IS BULLCRAP! “The Secret Life of Pets 2” has a villain that even makes a good portion of the underwhelming MCU villains come off as menacing and watchable. Specifically, a character by the name of Sergei. The lackluster Sergei is partially responsible for running a circus. His latest addition to the crew is a wild tiger named Hu. Maybe I could appreciate the villain if he wasn’t so over-embellished, but crew went ahead and uttered “F*ck that! Quality? Who cares about quality? Let’s make him talk deep, with a unique yet cliche voice, give him the most boring lines imaginable, give him less personality than a bowling pin, and possibly make him more evil than he should be!” It would be fine if Sergei were some alien from another world or if he… I dunno, just didn’t happen to be human, but behind his black clothing and sidekick wolves, he is very likely just a regular guy. I imagine he would do other things in life aside from his dayjob at the circus. Once he gets home, I imagine he turns on the TV, watches the news, heats up a microwavable pizza, drinks a glass water, takes a shower, lives a normal life. I don’t mind ordinary people becoming extremely villainous for one reason or another, but in this case, it just didn’t work. If this is supposed to be propaganda against the circus or keeping wild animals where they don’t belong, maybe I could appreciate the movie for the direction it decided to take. But I’m sorry, it is overshadowed by cringe, insanity, stupidity, and a villain who makes this movie even more of a waste of my time than I ever imagined it would be. Remember the movie “Up” where the main villain is basically an elderly man who just loved to explore and hunt? He was not a maniac for the sake of being a maniac! Much like this film’s villain, he’s got a pack of animal sidekicks, but they have more dimension than chasing after potential victims. Then again, that’s because in this movie, the wolves are loyal to their one-dimensional owner whereas in “Up” the owner of the mob of dogs managed to have a personality. Man, this movie sucks!

In the end, “The Secret Life of Pets 2” is more intolerable than a bite from a vicious dog. I cannot even believe I am still talking about this movie! But in all seriousness, this movie could have been a lesson to children to make them realize they may have to face their fears, but sadly, I’m a teenager, and now I have self-diagnosed disease of TheSecretLifeofPets2phobia. Maybe it could be a lesson for adults and parents to not to make their children too soft, but even with a lesson like that intact, I learned a different lesson from “The Secret Life of Pets 2.” That lesson by the way is that I don’t ever want to watch this film again! This movie is a bad boy! Bad boy! Or… girl??? Is it a boy or girl? I dunno, who cares? The jokes don’t the work, the screenplay doesn’t work, and everything feels as rushed as math homework done by a student who answered each problem with the phrase “I dunno.” The first movie was OK, and now I am starting to wonder if someone put heavy drugs in my body because maybe if I watch that original film now it could suck. You know, kind of like this movie did. I’m going to give “The Secret Life of Pets 2” a 2/10. Thanks for reading this review! I just want to remind everyone that next week I am going to releasing a giant post related to my Scene Before experience so far this year, which will also include a preview for what I’ll be doing for the rest of the year. Stay tuned for that! Be sure to follow Scene Before either with a WordPress account or email so you can stay tuned for more great content! I want to know, did you see “The Secret Life of Pets 2?” What did you think about it? Or, what is the worst animated movie of the year for you? I did not see “Wonder Park,” but if I did see it, I imagine that would be in the conversation for sure. Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Toy Story 4 (2019): Wait… This Got Made? Thanks, Pixar!

Posted on by Jack Drees

mv5bmtyzmdm4nzkxov5bml5banbnxkftztgwnzm1mzg2nzm40._v1_sy1000_cr006741000_al_

“Toy Story 4” is directed by Josh Cooley (Inside Out, Up) and stars Tom Hanks (Cast Away, Sully), Tim Allen (Last Man Standing, Home Improvement), Annie Potts (Ghostbusters, Pretty In Pink), Tony Hale (Arrested Development, Chuck), Keegan Michael-Key (Keanu, Tomorrowland), Jordan Peele (Get Out, Us), Madeleine McGraw (Ant-Man and the Wasp, Cars 3), Christina Hendricks (Mad Men, The Neon Demon), Keanu Reeves (The Matrix, John Wick), Ally Maki (Wrecked, Cloak & Dagger), Jay Hernandez (Suicide Squad, Bad Moms), Lori Alan (Family Guy, SpongeBob SquarePants), and Joan Cusack (Say Anything, Saturday Night Live). This is the fourth installment to the “Toy Story” franchise, not to mention what I once considered to be one of the most unnecessary films of all time. While I never explicitly made a full length post about it, I was extremely skeptical about how would turn out. Nevertheless, the film takes place some time after the toys’ transition from Andy to Bonnie, as seen in “Toy Story 3.” The film also explores Bonnie’s personal life as she makes a transition of her own. Simultaneously, we get to know a new “toy” by the name of Forky. Bonnie and her family also go on a road trip together, allowing for more adventures to ensue.

I’m not even joking when I say this, out of all the sequels, reboots, or remakes coming out these days, I DID NOT think “Toy Story 4” was going to be one of them. “Toy Story 3” was one of the most satisfying, lovable, and emotionally charging movies I have ever seen. It is by far one of Pixar’s best examples of quality work, and possibly worthy of having the best ending to any of their movies. Although then again, it’s tough to decide between that and “Wall-E.” It is also one of my favorite movies of 2010, alongside “Scott Pilgrim vs. the World” and “Inception.” In fact, the trilogy itself is nearly perfect. “Toy Story” revolutionized animated technology and was able to prove that computer animation was the future. “Toy Story 2” was a worthy follow-up that was hilarious, and expands the lore of its main character. “Toy Story 3…” is the bomb. That’s all I have to say. And despite hearing some comments from stars like Tom Hanks suggesting how emotional the movie is, I was still a tad skeptical about what we were going to get. This movie, on paper, felt like an obvious cash grab by Disney. Specifically, one that purely exists for financial gain, and for no reason that could associate with compelling audiences. But more and more word of mouth happened be positive upon this film’s arrival. I became more excited. I don’t know how, but apparently I wanted to see this movie. So I went to a local AMC, bought tickets for a Dolby Cinema screening, and I went in, with a thinking cap on, but still hyped.

How was “Toy Story 4?” Tell ya what, it’s almost my favorite movie of the year. In fact, it might be my #2. The animated genre in general almost does not get better than this. The animation is almost lifelike in some scenes. In fact, there is a cat in this movie, even though my head knew this film was animated, it looked like something I would probably notice in real life. The amount of detail done by the artists behind this film is astounding. As for the film, the story was surprisingly well done! If you think the words “Toy Story 4” would have sounded like nothing else but a cash grab back in the day, imagine a movie where a spork happens to have a conscience. Imaginative? Maybe. Would it sell toys. Probably. But what’s the story? This movie took that plot and executed it better than one would execute a deep dish pizza in Chicago!

Seriously guys, Forky is a surprisingly good character. I love how they take the purpose of a toy and apply it to something that is an eating utensil! Its connection with Bonnie is sweet, and kind of made me feel bad for the character. You remember “Blade Runner 2049?” There tons of reasons why I love that movie, but one of them is Ana De Armas’ character, Joi. She is not a human, while she does take the design of a human technically, she’s actually a hologram. When you can convince me that your movie’s main character is in love with something he might as well have purchased, to the point that gets me as a viewer to crush on them, you know your movie might be doing something right. Forky is a gem if I have ever seen one, and he also might be the greatest throwaway character in movie history!

By the way, one of the film’s main plot points involves a connection between Woody and Forky. While their connection was not displayed for the entire film, I was pleased with what was presented in front of me. In fact, if I had to compare the relationship between this duo, it would perhaps be Pixar’s response to the relationship between George and Lennie in “Of Mice and Men.” You have Woody, who is practically trying to be this father figure to Forky, teaching him all the traditions of being a toy. As for Forky, while not exactly simple minded, he is terrified and has a completely different purpose than being played with.

And I will say, one thing that the other movies had that this one didn’t have, was much of Woody and Buzz together. I will point out, I am not as nostalgic towards “Toy Story” as other people. For me, my most nostalgic franchise from Pixar is likely to be “The Incredibles.” I imagine some people may consider this a hindrance on the film’s part, but if you ask me, I don’t care. While Woody and Buzz can definitely go together like bread and butter, I didn’t care that they weren’t together much because I was already enjoying the storyline involving Woody and Forky. Plus, Buzz has a storyline of his own that I happened to enjoy.

In fact, the only real problem that I have with this movie happens to be the humor. And when I say problem, I don’t mean catastrophe, I mean something that at times just didn’t work. I will say, this movie is funny, but not as funny as I was expecting. There were a number of chuckleworthy moments, but there are few moments that I’d consider kneeslappers. I won’t specify, but I’m almost surprised that I’m even saying this, because I know some people are pointing out that this is the funniest “Toy Story” film yet.

If you ask me, that’s not the case. While this may not be my definite answer, since it has been awhile since I have seen every installment of the franchise, “Toy Story 2” is probably the funniest. What other movie can you get a line like this?

Thank you, Pixar!

As for everything else, this movie doesn’t just rock, it rocks the world. From the United States, to the United Kingdom, to the United Arab Emirates, to the United Nations, to United Airlines, to the United–wait wait, let’s just go with Canada just for shiggles. Wait… Canada… that reminds me.

Let’s talk about Keanu f*cking Reeves! Keanu Reeves… Oh my gosh, his role in this movie just proves that he is getting so much better as an actor. I don’t know if he is accepting any script that comes his way nowadays, or if he is getting more fun material to work on. Wait… He did “Replicas.” I take that back. Keanu Reeves plays a toy that is supposed to be a Canadian stuntman. He’s energetic, charming, and he even has a surprising amount of layers to him. And I can imagine other actors playing him and doing a good job with the voicework, but the fact that Keanu Reeves managed to not only take on the role, but light my eyes up by doing it, just puts a cherry on top of the sundae! And while I will say Reeves is more entertaining in “John Wick: Chapter 3,” I’d currently say this may be his best movie of the year. AND THAT SAYS SOMETHING.

Speaking of characters, Bo Peep is back! And I will point out something, you know how I appreciate “Toy Story 2” because it goes into the lore of its main character? Well “Toy Story 4” happens to dive into lore involving the connection of Woody and Bo. I will also say, upon seeing Bo in the middle of this film, I could not help but feel slightly shocked on how she would display herself. And when it comes to her character, it’s almost like this movie is trying to present a feminist message. This is your reminder that I am a straight white male, and as a straight white male, I don’t mind these sorts of messages as long as they feel like they fit or have a purpose. And guess what? It works! I’m not confirming this movie has a feminist message, and I won’t go into why, but if that’s what the movie was going for, I think they did a pretty good job with it. If not a feminist message, it is at the least, a message about growing up and becoming an adult. One or the other.

And what this movie didn’t do for laughs, is honestly forgiven when you consider how close I got to releasing man tears. You know how “Toy Story 3” had a whole climax of emotion? “Toy Story 4” kicks off with that, and there are more instances throughout displaying a similar vibe. I don’t think it was as sad as “Toy Story 3” as a movie, but there are more scenes where I felt like a girl. Nevertheless, this movie does a fine job of balancing character development, emotion, and storylines to the point where I’d call it one of the best animated films I have seen in recent memory. In fact, the ending… HOLY S*IT. Another thing that “Toy Story 3” did better, but this came SO CLOSE to being the best ending in the franchise.

Let me also just remind you, this film is directed by Josh Cooley, and this just so happens to be his feature-length debut. Much like other films from this decade such as “Deadpool” and “Lady Bird,” “Toy Story 4” in regards to its director, Josh Cooley, is definitely going to be one hell of a debut to put on his resume. I cannot wait to see Cooley’s next full length feature, and if it’s from Pixar, I’m there. If it’s live-action, I’m there. If it has a budget of $50 max, I don’t care, Josh Cooley did one hell of a job with this movie that I just want to see more from him. By the way, I think credit should also go to the writers, everyone behind the story, maybe even, as much flak as I might get for saying this, John Lasseter (based on recent events). For all I know, he could have conceived the best ideas in this movie. I don’t know, I wasn’t there. The screenplay for this movie is one of the best of the year, even with the hit or miss humor. Go see this movie now! That’s all I can say!

In the end, “Toy Story 4” is in the conversation of being the worst “Toy Story” movie. But that is not saying much, because ALL OF THEM are great. Don’t just take it from me, because the lowest rating one of these movies possess from Rotten Tomatoes is in the nineties. Half of the movies in the franchise have a 100% verdict on that site! “Toy Story,” honestly, might be the most solid franchise ever. When was the last time a franchise with four films in it was this good? “Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull” came out, some say it nuked the franchise. “Star Wars” had its first prequel, and as time went on it didn’t turn out too well. “Alien: Resurrection” is considered by many fans to be one most inferior installments in the entire franchise. “Mission: Impossible” had less than satisfying films before its fourth one came out. Some would say “Jaws: The Revenge” killed shark movies. Others would say “Sharknado” BRUTALLY MURDERED shark movies. It’s really hard to think of another franchise like “Toy Story.” This just makes “Toy Story 4” a pure cinematic achievement. It’s proof that sometimes, even when the idea of having a sequel that could feel like a cash grab, maybe a sequel that could be a bit scary to create, it’s all worth it in the end. It’s nearly tearjerking, it’s fun, it’s adventurous, the characters, new and old, have earned my seal of approval. But if the humor were just a little bit better, this could have been a perfect movie. But don’t think that last comment is meant to bog this movie down, because it is funny, but it was not as funny as I would have wanted it to be. That’s just me, plus comedy is one of the most subjective things on the face of the Earth, chances are everyone reading this will love the comedy and that’s great. I would love to buy “Toy Story 4” when they release a 4K for it, I think it is up there as one of my favorites of the year, and I am going to give it a 9/10.

I will also point out a few things for those who are curious. There is no short film before this movie, and I would recommend staying for the credits. If you want me to be specific, there are five end credit scenes, and they do something pretty cool with the Pixar logo at the end. Thanks for reading this review! Next week I am going to see the upcoming comedy “Stuber” starring Kumail Nanjiani and Dave Bautista. I got passes to an upcoming screening, so look forward to that review very soon. I also want to let everyone know that pretty soon I am going to be releasing a reflection of my first half of 2019 as well as a less than concrete (but also somewhat official) schedule for the second half of the year. It’s going to announce movies I’m potentially going to review, some new, some old, cons I am planning on going to, and a special event that I am going to be releasing at the beginning of 2020. This post will be up very soon, look forward to it! Be sure to follow Scene Before either with an email or WordPress account so you can stay tuned for more great content! I want to know, did you see “Toy Story 4?” I’m willing to bet a lot of you did by now, because it is one of the biggest selling movies in the animation genre. Nevertheless, if you saw the movie, what did you think about it? Or, what is the most solid franchise to you? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Replicas (2018): Keanu Reeves’ Latest Glitch In the Matrix

Posted on by Jack Drees

mv5bzgqxytzlyzqtnjk3ns00mjvhltkxztytmdk2odlkmgjkyzbhxkeyxkfqcgdeqxvymtk5mze1mty40._v1_sy1000_sx675_al_

“Replicas” is directed by Jeffery Nachmanoff (Legends, Traitor) and stars Keanu Reeves (The Matrix, Point Break), Alice Eve (Star Trek: Into Darkness, Iron Fist), Thomas Middleditch (Silicon Valley, Captain Underpants: The First Epic Movie), and John Ortiz (Kong: Skull Island, Silver Linings Playbook). This film is about a man who works for a scientific organization and despite some downs here and there, his life is good. That is until he gets into a traffic accident alongside his family. He’s the only one in the car to survive. From this moment, his primary focus is on resurrecting said family through means of science.

Keanu Reeves is one of the best actors working today. He is one of those actors who has allowed me to change my perception towards them in regards to range and talent. I am not saying I hated Keanu Reeves back in the day or anything, but having seen him in “The Matrix,” it was almost hard for me to think of Keanu as anyone else but Neo for a period of time. An occasionally emotionless being who might as well be the heroic equivalent of an Amazon Echo.

USER: Alexa, try to make the first jump.

ALEXA: Whoa.

Then I saw him in “John Wick,” and holy hell that was sick! And at this point, in 2019, I feel like not just myself, but the world, is having Keanu fever. Keanu… Reever? Keanu Feever? Whatever. The point is, Keanu Reeves is arguably more popular and hip than he’s ever been. If you told me back in the day that Keanu Reeves could make another popular trilogy after “The Matrix,” I’d laugh in your face, call you a dirty rotten liar, and steal your most valuable possessions at night.

But today, we are not talking about “John Wick,” partially because I just saw the third movie and reviewed it about a month ago, and the fact that I purchased a Blu-ray from Best Buy of a movie that I for one am well aware, did not get good reviews. But for the sake of reviewing more relevant movies (as in, ones that recently came out) on this blog, I figured I’d buy it and watch it. And unfortunately, it is just about as bad as I heard. Like, what the f*ck?! Why did Keanu Reeves do this? Did he lose a bet or something? Granted, all of the actors in this movie, at least from my perspective, did well with what lackluster material was provided. But this movie felt like it should have gone straight to Syfy or something. I have a feeling that the studio behind “Replicas,” probably would have wanted to put this out on DVD or something, maybe sell the rights to Netflix. But they had Keanu Reeves, who as suggested, is probably a bigger phenomenon right now than the “Baby Shark” song. Maybe Alice Eve had something to do with it, but yeeeaah… Keanu Reeves is the bomb right now.

And sadly, the movie WASTES him! When he’s at work, he’s this serious guy who is insanely focused and has a bond with Thomas Middleditch. In fact, this is shown during one of the first scenes where Keanu is testing out a robot. And when it comes to this robot, he kind of represents the upright position of a homo-sapien, which isn’t a bad design. Granted, some of it looks cliche, maybe a little boring, but it’s at most, serviceable. Although at the same time, maybe even that is a little too generous! Partially because I then saw this robot move, it did not look real! I did not buy it! When it’s trying to gain control, it felt like the movie was losing frames. Movies are traditionally shot in 24 frames per second, when this robot moved, it felt like 12. What is this? Is this a movie? Or is it an online video game on a slightly tolerable PC?

You know what? It’s neither! You know what it is? S*IT!

In fact, that’s not all! Keanu has to figure out a way to revive his family, without getting into certain major consequences. This leads to an enormously off-putting scene where we have to watch him impersonate his family and make up lies. He tells the school his children go to that the kids are now being home-schooled, he’s texting with his daughters’ friends, some of these things just feel like they could work on an “SNL” sketch if the vibe was appropriate, but in a movie that I guess I’m supposed to take somewhat seriously, it just didn’t work for me. I could tell that Keanu really loves his family in this film, but holy crap, some of the things he does is just out of left field.

In fact, as a story, the concept could have potential, but at times it felt awkward, maddening, and sadly, BOOORING. I’d rather watch a YouTube video of some guy in a hotel counting all of the bedbugs in all of the guestrooms! You’ve got uninteresting characters, barely passable pacing, moments that make me as a viewer angry, and a cliche corporate guy who loves money.

It’s really sad how generic some of things in this movie happen to be. Sure, the story is kind of an interesting concept, but you’ve got a standard looking robot that does not come off as great, you’ve got the definition of a “suburban family,” and a lot of the dialogue feels bland and wooden. The testing in this movie kind of reminded me of “Fant4stic” from 2015, BUT WORSE! Granted, I wouldn’t say “Fant4stic” is AS bad as other people say, in my opinion, but knowing some things about this movie and that movie, that is a good comparison. You’ve got your randomly placed together characters, cliche writing, and a couple moments that made me as an audience member feel dumber.

In fact, there is a point where this movie’s “main plot” if you can call it that, gets into full swing, and I think the only interesting thing that happened is when Keanu is with his kids. It’s a warm morning and the kids at one point want one particular breakfast portion and once they’re finished with that, they want another decent breakfast portion. That’s kind of fun and quirky, give me more of that! But no, this movie wants to be boring, and as I write this review, I’m almost having trouble figuring out what to say. Out of all the characters in this movie, barely any of them have a personality. As for those who do have a personality, they are either less than fascinating or ordinary. I think a ragdoll from “Garry’s Mod,” simply lying on the ground on a map could potentially be more compelling of a character than some of these people!

Does the movie know what it wants it be? Probably so. It probably wanted to be this compelling sci-fi flick that could show the power of family and connections. That’s probably what I wanted it to be. But it was nothing except garbage to me, just the honest truth! When the climax arrived, I practically checked out. I didn’t care what would happen to anyone! Everyone could die and I wouldn’t care! The world could mutate or something and everybody would turn into banana splits! I wouldn’t give a damn! For all I know we get a plot twist that the big corporate dude from the beginning of the movie was Jesus Christ in disguise! Why should I even pay attention?! It doesn’t matter! Just let the movie end!

In the end, “Replicas,” which came out in theaters, feels like a carbon copy of a flick that went straight to Syfy. Keanu Reeves, seriously! Are you poor? If you are, I apologize, I’ll send you a Nintendo Switch to keep you entertained, I’ll bring some food, and I’ll organize a GoFundMe page! But why did anyone agree to do this movie? All the actors must have been “Alright, *double clap* paycheck time.” Because this movie is not just the epitome of bad sci-fi, but also a January movie. It bombed at the box office, and it did so for good reason! If you want a good Keanu Reeves movie from this year, go see “John Wick: Chapter 3 – Parabellum.” I’m just glad I could actually say that since I waited until June to check this film out. But no matter what month you check “Replicas” out, you will wish you could die. Given how I would be fine going through the rest of my life not watching this movie again, and finding perhaps one or two minor positives overall, I am gonna give “Replicas” a 1/10. Thanks for reading this review! I just want to let everyone know that this upcoming weekend is the opening for “Toy Story 4.” I don’t know if I’ll be catching it this weekend, but it is on my to do list for sure. “Toy Story” is one of the best animated franchises out there, and even though I have been petrified for a long time on the thought of “Toy Story 4,” I kind of want to see it the more I hear about it. I don’t have my tickets yet, but I want to get them as soon as possible, so we’ll see what happens. Be sure to follow Scene Before either with an email or WordPress account so you can stay tuned for more great content! I want to know, did you see “Replicas?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your least favorite Keanu Reeves film? I have not seen em’ all, so I cannot really say “Johnny Mnemonic.” This one is certainly a contender for me. My gosh, my brain cells are literally exiting my body! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Men In Black: International (2019): Thor and Valkyrie Play with Toys

Posted on by Jack Drees

mv5bzgmwnwiwnzytntq3ys00njrhltgxztatnzzjodljm2m4nmvmxkeyxkfqcgdeqxvynjg2njqwmdq40._v1_sy1000_cr006651000_al_

“Men In Black: International” is directed by F. Gary Gray (The Fate of the Furious, Friday) and stars Chris Hemsworth (Thor, Rush), Tessa Thompson (Thor: Ragnarok, Creed), Rebecca Ferguson (Mission: Impossible: Rogue Nation, The Girl On the Train), Kumail Nanjiani (The Big Sick, Silicon Valley), Rafe Spall (The Big Short, Life of Pi), Les Twins, Emma Thompson (Saving Mr. Banks, Love Actually), Liam Neeson (Non-Stop, Cold Pursuit), and Tim Blaney (Muppets Tonight, Guild Wars 2). This film is a spinoff that takes place in the popular “Men In Black” franchise, which would traditionally star Will Smith and Tommy Lee Jones, but this time, as you can assume by the recently mentioned word “spinoff,” the story is diverging away from its usual storytelling methods. Although Frank the Pug is back, which is awesome. This spinoff revolves around agents H and M (coincidence?) as they save the planet from alien-related attacks.

Going into this movie, I had my expectations set somewhere around the middle. I enjoy the “Men In Black” movies. I own the first one on DVD, and I have seen the second and third films as well. When it comes to the second film, I thought it was decent. Just another case of the sequel not surpassing the original, but still a good time. Surprisingly, probably not just for me, but this might surprise a lot of you, of Will Smith’s trilogy, my favorite of them all is “Men In Black 3.” There was one point where I would watch Starz all the time, and throughout the year of 2013, “Men In Black 3” was probably the thing I rewatched the most on that channel. I admired the film for its use of time travel, some of the dialogue, and the surprisingly emotional ending. When I first heard they were doing a “Men In Black” spinoff, I didn’t particularly know what to think. I also remember there once being an idea for a crossover between “21 Jump Street” and “Men In Black.” I have not seen “21 Jump Street,” so I can’t fully give my thoughts on how much sense this idea would make. However, despite my slight apprehensions, which I still had after witnessing the first trailer for “Men In Black: International,” I still went in with some hopes that this movie would be worthy of the franchise name. I will say though, the final trailer, is actually a pretty good piece of marketing. It got me a bit more interested in the movie than I was before.

So, how was the movie? It’s the best “Men In Black” spinoff ever!

It’s also the only one.

Seriously though, how was the movie? It was pretty good. If you ask me, I think “Men In Black: International” has all the ingredients for a cliche, but effective, summer blockbuster. Cool action, witty dialogue, charming characters, neat effects (for the most part), and some nifty concepts here and there. It’s good enough for you to go with a few friends and forget about reality for a couple hours, and then, I dunno, maybe catch on cable one day. And I say that with all seriousness, because it is probably the most “fun” I’ve had in a theater this year. It’s not the best movie of 2019. In fact, there are other “fun” movies that I saw that I would technically consider better than this, but if you if you ask me which movie made me grin like an idiot for most of the runtime in 2019, “Men In Black: International” is certainly a contender.

The “Men In Black” franchise has always seemed to have mastered the art of comedy, and “Men In Black: International” is no exception to this rule. Unfortunately, while Frank the Pug does make a brief appearance in this film, he’s not a critical character. But we do manage to get an equally as awesome comic relief character by the name of Pawny, played by the likable and talented Kumail Nanjiani. His backstory, which is explained during the film, made me care for him, and he had a number of gutbusting lines here and there. Speaking of gutbusters, Pawny’s charisma does suggest that all the other characters are less funny or less interesting, because Chris Hemsworth is the bomb.

My respect for Chris Hemsworth has grown so much over the past few years, even though I hated “Ghostbusters,” even though “Thor: Ragnarok” was not what I wanted it to be, I still had respect for Chris Hemsworth because in general, he makes the idea of being charming the exact opposite of a chore. And when it comes to “Men In Black: International,” I think Hemsworth was one word: charismatic. He had fantastic lines, he truly feels like an expert in his field, maybe a bit of a goofy smart-ass who simultaneously takes his job seriously, and a guy who I would not mind having lunch with. Also, I mentioned the excellence of this film’s comedic elements, and I will certainly link an inside joke involving Hemsworth’s character. If you have ever heard of Marvel or Thor, there is a shot that will have you dying. Prepare for it if you ever see this movie.

Speaking of Hemsworth, I’d say he also had great chemistry with the film’s other lead, Tessa Thompson, but then again, that should not be too surprising since they have worked together before in multiple Marvel films, most notably “Thor: Ragnarok.” In fact, if I had to be honest, I think the duo’s chemistry here in “Men In Black: International” is better than it was in “Thor: Ragnarok,” because I feel the actors’ personalities meshed together when it comes to collective line delivery and interactions. I was able to buy into their partnership, and they worked together quite well.

I also really liked the big gun the marketing revealed at one point. If you remember the final trailer where our main characters test a gun in a desert, that makes for a couple highlights in the film. The gun does not get heavy usage, but it is probably the most admirable weapon in the film, which is saying a lot.

However, like most movies, “Men In Black: International” comes with its imperfections. Like a number of films I have seen recently, this movie suffers from some minor pacing issues, which almost made me lose interest in the story. Also, compared to a couple other “Men In Black” films, this installment feels a tad disposable. I’d watch it again, but I would not call it the holy grail of summer blockbusters. And as mentioned earlier in the post, a lot of the effects worked, but it doesn’t mean all of them did. When the movie started, I got a glimpse at a creature who was in front of young Agent M. It looked like something out of a B-rate “Avatar” film or perhaps live-action “Sonic the Hedgehog,” although, probably much more competent than that. It didn’t look revolting, but absolutely artificial. There was also almost no real threat. While various baddies appear throughout the film, it’s almost impossible to pinpoint the most threatening of them all, at least for a period of time, and it almost took me out of the movie. Another aspect I didn’t like is the Lexus product placement, but at the same time, compared to “Hitman: Agent 47” and that film’s relationship with Audi, I can tolerate Lexus in this film by MILES. Pun most certainly intended. Then again, this film had a decent amount of positives to which point, the negatives almost don’t even matter. I had enough fun with “Men In Black: International” that I felt in the zone. Do I want to see another story with Chris Hemsworth or Tessa Thompson? That’s still up for debate from my perspective, but I still managed to enjoy what I saw.

In the end, “Men In Black: International” had me smiling, laughing, and immersed. If there is one aspect of movies that I personally felt has improved since I first started Scene Before in 2016, it is comedy, and movies like “Men In Black: International” support that sentiment. Chris Hemsworth and Tessa Thompson make a good team, I enjoyed the humor, and it made me, surprisingly, appreciate a “Men In Black” story that didn’t have Will Smith in it. Although technically speaking, he does appear at one point, I won’t say how. Also, part of me may be wondering however if my positive, “smile on my face” thoughts related to this film, may be due to the collective atmosphere in the theater. Because just about everyone was laughing from one point to the next and the cinema was nearly full. Then again, I saw “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2” in a full cinema where everyone was laughing and I hated that piece of crap. Part of me wonders if my thoughts as of now, are simply fueled by what the collective vibe must have been. Maybe if I watch the film again, said thoughts could end up changing. But I don’t care, because I’m going to give “Men In Black: International” a 7/10. Thanks for reading this review! I just want to let everyone know that I just recently reached my 300 post mark on Scene Before, so if you want to check it out, click this link! The post involves me going over my complete Blu-ray collection, which features a video I uploaded to YouTube, partially because WordPress would not let me upload it directly. Be sure to follow Scene Before either with an email or WordPress account so you can stay tuned for more great content! I want to know, did you see “Men In Black: International?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite “Men In Black” movie? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Rocketman (2019): Elton John: The Musical

Posted on by Jack Drees

mv5bmty0mzuwodc4n15bml5banbnxkftztgwmjmymjy0nzm40._v1_sy1000_cr006751000_al_

“Rocketman” is directed by Dexter Fletcher (Eddie the Eagle, Bohemian Rhapsody) and stars Taron Egerton (Kingsman: The Secret Service, Sing), Jamie Bell (Fantastic Four, Jumper), Richard Madden (Game of Thrones, Bodyguard), and Bryce Dallas Howard (Spider-Man 3, Jurassic World). This film is based on a portion of the life of music icon Elton John. It goes over his origins as an artist, as a person, and as someone who eventually must overcome various personal weaknesses or quirks.

I don’t know much about Elton John as an artist, and he’s not the first musician I go to when I need some music to soothe the mood. It’s not to say I hate him, but unlike other artists including AC/DC or Metallica, I just don’t think to myself, “Oh yeah, Elton John! I’ll leave myself on this station for him!” However, going into this movie, I did have some expectations. One of them, specifically the least important expectation, is that it would be better than “Godzilla: King of the Monsters.” Why? Because “Rocketman” came out the same weekend as that movie, I already saw “King of the Monsters,” and now I unfortunately can’t unsee it. As for other expectations, I did think that “Rocketman” would be rather fun and maybe not as much a downer type of film compared to other music-related biopics. For one thing as an example, unlike the main character of last year’s “Bohemian Rhapsody,” Freddie Mercury, Elton John is still alive. It’s not like we’re going to see a movie and feel like it is asking the audience, “Oh, remember him?” I’m not saying I’m bored of the whole “memory” thing, if you remember the movie “Ray,” I thought that was one of the best movies of the 2000’s and it showcased some serious downs of Ray Charles’ life. Even with that being said, I was still expecting this movie to go in a slightly different direction. “Rocketman” from the trailers looked vibrant, immersive, while at the same time, a true escape from reality. After all, one of the movie’s taglines is “Based on a true fantasy.” And I certainly did get a true escape from reality, almost a little too much. “Rocketman” is based on true events, and I know a lot of movies don’t have every detail of accuracy when it comes to basing them on reality. But “Rocketman” went into a direction that I for one did not see coming. The Wikipedia page for “Rocketman” describes the flick as a “biographical musical film.” I was expecting “biographical,” but not “musical.” In fact, this movie’s early attempts at being a musical kind of felt forced. It did become slightly more acceptable and a tad less cringeworthy as time passed, but due to my limited research on the film prior to seeing it, not to mention having certain expectations, this kind of came off as a surprise.

To put this in a short amount of words, if you went into “Rocketman” thinking you’re going to get a glimpse of what happened during Elton John’s life, I must point out that you are in fact going to get that. But it is all surrounded by tons of musical numbers, some of which kind of felt admittedly cringeworthy at first. It almost made me think I accidentally bought tickets for a Disney flick or something! Although that would be kind of amazing because this is rated R. And as the movie went on, the numbers actually almost became the biggest highlight. After all, while I am not a musical guy, one thing I can appreciate about certain musicals is the spectacle, which at times, this movie truly does have. It pulls you into the lively, flashy concerts, and takes an idea that I usually think would not fit in a biopic, but somehow the crew would manage to make it all work.

Also, Taron Egerton as Elton John? Hell yeah. I bought it completely. Definitely one of the best performances of the year so far. But it’s not even summer yet so I cannot confirm or speculate how many awards he’s going to win. And I have a feeling that part of why Egerton may have encapsulated the essential elements of Elton John is because the two have previously interacted with each other. If you remember 2017’s “Kingsman: The Golden Circle,” which to me was a fun, but slightly disposable action flick, Taron Egerton plays the main character. During that film, Elton John made an appearance as himself.

Don’t go breakin’ my heart? More like, “Go breakin’ some bones!”

Does Egerton have a shot at an Oscar from here? I dunno, we’ve still got time to wonder. But much like Bradley Cooper in “A Star Is Born” from 2018, one of the biggest praises I can give to Taron Egerton is that he does his own singing. I never saw Taron Egerton as a singer, and the fact that he even made the effort to sing on his own is magnificent. Big thumbs up from me!

I also admire the direction that this film tends to go, because the way it starts off, it’s almost glamorous, almost as if I went to see a movie that takes place in a cinematic universe where all the contestants from “RuPaul’s Drag Race” team up to fight crime. Then without going into spoilers, it turns out to be… well, not that. I mentioned that this movie isn’t really the most “downer-like” of biopics, but some serious stuff manages to happen in one overarching part of the story, not to mention other parts of the film. I’m not saying the film is having trouble knowing what it wants to be, in fact, I think the tone in its entirety works for a movie like “Rocketman.” It’s big, it’s exciting, but also at the same time, slightly grounded in some sort of reality here and there. I guess I am not that surprised to see an Elton John film. A lot of famous people will get their own movie if their story can be told while being interesting and profitable. But what I am somewhat surprised by is the fashion in which we managed to get a movie like this. Because for those of you who don’t know, Elton John himself has an executive producer credit for this film. While he didn’t direct or write the film himself, this almost must have been a glimpse back, not just for the audience, but for Elton John more than anyone else. I have seen some of the film’s marketing, but I can’t say I knew everything about it going in, so let me just say, consider my last statement and see how this movie is presented. Trust me.

And I do mean this, “Rocketman” has the flair of Elton John himself, whilst presenting some peaks and valleys from his youth. He had trouble living with his parents, not to mention getting care from both of his parents, especially his father, who is nothing short of a jerkface with an extreme lack of tact.

One last thing, I also really like some of the scenes where Elton John has to present himself and his musical talent to executives. I thought those were some of the better parts of the movie and there’s one scene where an executive just keeps criticizing every music-related choice Elton John is making. It’s kind chuckle-worthy, maybe even funnier than that.

In the end, “Rocketman” is not the best movie of the year, but it probably qualifies as the most interesting. It’s quirky, it has spectacular direction, and a stellar performance by Taron Egerton. It’s no wonder that Egerton likely had John’s blessing, and if they make another movie together, whether it is another “Kingsman” or something completely different, sign me up! I will say however, to me, this is probably going to be a movie that does not have much replay value. A lot of the movie’s standout scenes, at least to me, may make for good YouTube clips, but unless I needed something to watch on a big 4K TV, I probably wouldn’t go straight back to watching “Rocketman” this instant. It’s kind of a one-off, but it’s a good one-off. I’m going to give “Rocketman” a 7/10.

But before we go any further, I do have to bring one thing up, I went to see this movie with my mother and sister, and as far as I know, this is probably the most anticipated my mother in particular has ever been for a film. And she had a ball watching it. In fact, she brought up something I would have never expected to have ever heard from her. She mentioned the movie “brought her back to her childhood.” I don’t talk about my family life much on here, but this came off as a shock to me because my mother, at least when I’m in the room, NEVER gets nostalgic over anything. And out of all the nostalgia bombs arriving in theaters today, there are few, if any, that ever brought my mother back to her youth. I think only exception in my entire life when it comes to this sort of thing would have be 2015’s  “Pixels” because it inspired my mother to play an 80’s playlist. I’m just glad that in this postmodern era of media, it’s not just people like myself who obsess over “Star Wars” or “The Incredibles” can return to the days of being a kid. Even my own mom, who to my knowledge, never tends to go back in time, just experienced time travel.

Thanks for reading this review! I just want to let everyone know that I scored a couple of passes to go see “Men In Black: International” next week, which is the first spinoff in the popular “Men In Black” film franchise starring Chris Hemsworth and Tessa Thompson, who coincidentally, worked closely together in “Thor: Ragnarok.” I also want to remind you all that if you have not checked it out already, I recently released my 300th post on Scene Before, which is a glance at my Blu-ray collection. It features a YouTube video going over every single solitary copy I own including special editions like 4K, 3D, Steelbook, etc. To view the post, click the link right here! Be sure to follow Scene Before either with an email or WordPress account so you can stay tuned for more great content! I want to know, did you see “Rocketman?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite song by Elton John? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

300TH POST SPECIAL! June 2019 Blu-ray Collection Update!

Posted on by Jack Drees

IMG_20190601_000539_738

Hey everyone, Jack Drees here! Well, whaddya know? It’s post 300! If you remember around the time of my 200th post, I did an analysis of my Blu-ray collection. Now we have reached a total of 300 and with that in mind, we have an update to go through. Last Spring we have gone through my ENTIRE Blu-ray collection only to realize… They’re a hell of a drug for me. We live in an era where “Netflix and Chill” seems to be the cool and hip thing to say, but the reality is, I just like the feeling of having something and knowing that a studio or service is not going to take away my right of viewing it after awhile. We live in one hell of a time where everything is at our fingertips, but I’m old fashioned. I’m 19 years old, and I already feel like that old man complaining to my grandchildren about the ways things used to be and that sort of thing.

“Back in my day, we went to this thing called a store, where we bought cases, that you had to pick up with your own hands. And it was like a Tamagotchi, you had to take care of it. You had to store it on shelf space, and when you wanted to watch it, you had to physically maneuver yourself to a media player. And hopefully, the disc wasn’t scratched! Swell times!”

No, seriously, even though I know there is a market for physical media out there, this is the way I feel right now. But who cares? Because it is time to dive into the collection.

Before getting into the collection however, I would like to point out something. This is for my Blu-ray collection ONLY, so while I do own a number of DVDs, they will not count. Blu-ray is my main physical medium, which is part of why I continue to collect it to this day. And yes, this will include 4K discs, because those are technically under the Blu-ray label.

Also, instead of what I did last time, which is simply listing everything I’ve collected, I am making the choice to record a video showing off the collection in detail. I feel like it would provide a more immersive experience instead of me just telling you what I have. Anyway, hope you enjoy the video!

I just want to say, I tried uploading this video directly to this WordPress page, but unfortunately it wouldn’t go through. However, if you want to see more from my YouTube channel (which does not really have much to do with movies), click the link below and subscribe!

YOUTUBE

20190603_000104

Thanks for checking this out, and I will remind everyone that coming soon I have my review for “Godzilla: King of the Monsters” which… Oooh boy. That’s gonna be a fun review. Just you wait. Be sure to follow Scene Before either with an email or WordPress account so you can stay tuned for more great content! I want to know, do you still buy Blu-rays? Samsung just recently stopped making Blu-ray players, which according to a lot of people, seems to signify *the end of physical media*. I think it has *at least* ways to go, but if that end comes soon, I am gonna be a mess. But hey! This may be worth something one day, so who knows? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

The Kid Who Would Be King (2019): Knights of the Kiddie Table

Posted on by Jack Drees

mv5bmjmzotuwnzgyov5bml5banbnxkftztgwnjk3mtqwnzm40._v1_sy1000_cr006761000_al_

“The Kid Who Would Be King” is directed by Joe Cornish (Attack the Block, The Adam & Joe Show) and stars… some kids you may have never heard of. Patrick Stewart’s here though. Anyway, in all seriousness, this movie stars Louis Ashborne Serkis (Alice Through the Looking Glass, Mowgli: Legend of the Jungle), Rebecca Ferguson (Mission: Impossible: Rogue Nation, The Girl on the Train), Tom Taylor (The Dark Tower, Legends), and as mentioned, Patrick Stewart (Star Trek: The Next Generation, American Dad!). This film revolves around a young boy named Alex, who eventually finds Excalibur, the sword of King Arthur. Alex eventually comes to a realization that he must use this sword to stop the enchantress Morgana from destroying the world.

I didn’t see “The Kid Who Would Be King” when it came out in theaters. Partially because on its opening weekend, I wanted to go see “Serenity” instead, which was kind of a mistake. I remember seeing the trailer not too long before the film came out and it looked like a fun adventure film for a family demographic. I can dig a solid adventure flick. But unfortunately, due to life, college, and other movies getting in the way, I missed out on this film during it’s theatrical run. And apparently a lot of other people did too. This movie is a box office bomb and made over $30 million, which is fine for an R-rated, small-budget horror film. But having seen “The Kid Who Would Be King,” there are a few effects-heavy sequences that give that traditional fantasy film vibe. According to IMDb, the film’s production budget is estimated to be $60 million. I just bought this movie on 4K recently and I decided to watch it on Thursday night. As I was watching the movie, I didn’t know how to feel. In fact, now that the movie is no longer playing on my screen, there is a massive part of me that still doesn’t know how to feel. But for the sake of not spoiling anything, I cannot go into everything that happened.

This movie is not exactly what I would call a guilty pleasure. Who knows? Maybe it will become one overtime depending on how much attention it picks up in terms of our cultural trends. Maybe the “The Simpsons” could make an episode based on it that would make people go back and watch the movie. I don’t know, I can’t tell the future. But this movie has a collection of decent sequences and scenes, some interesting characters, and cool ideas (some of which MIGHT be better remaining on paper), but it occasionally gets bogged down by one or two heavy plot points. In fact, without spoiling anything, there’s something that really ticked me off about the mother, and it honestly made her one of my most hated characters, probably in movie history. Don’t get me wrong, she’s cast pretty well, and she definitely fits the role’s requirements, but the way she’s written was pretty anger-inducing. Part of me wonders if that’s the intention, but regardless of whether this intentional or not, I still got a bit irritated, which is not good. Without giving away my final verdict just yet, but there were a couple of fluctuations of said verdict. It’s kind of like ordering the same meal at a fast food restaurant repeatedly. Chances are you are not going to be completely satisfied as you may have been at a certain time because it doesn’t always come out the same way.

But one of the biggest perks I can give towards this film may as well go towards the acting, because if one were to pitch to me an idea of a movie with a ton of kids in the cast, I’d probably hesitate on getting it greenlit because there’s that stereotype of child actors being difficult to work with. So I not only have to give props to the kid cast but also the work that director Joe Cornish had to take on. There were barely any moments that any of these child actors felt out of characters except for one. There is one kid who goes by the name of Lance (Tom Taylor) who starts out the movie as a bully, then he befriends the main character, which felt a tad rushed for him, but that’s not why he felt out of character for me. That befriending moment was sort of convenient but it was not my main problem. My main problem kind of occurs during the midway point of the movie.

One of my minor problems in this movie as well has to do with chemistry. The chemistry manages to improve by a tad as soon as the movie comes to a close. But the main problem with the chemistry between our four leads manages to carry through from the first act and extends for a good portion of the movie. The characters almost feel like they’re randomly placed together. Granted, one advantage is that the four leads originally were in duos, and these duos cross over. So these characters, as duos, have chemistry, which to me, works. And this was all previously established before the movie’s main course began.

Another minor problem of mine is that this reminded me a lot of another movie that was trying to go for a similar demographic last year, specifically “A Wrinkle In Time.” I say so because you see the main character at his school, trying to prevent something happening because to him, it’s what he thinks is right. And much like that movie, we eventually meet a weird being that can’t fit into normal, 21st century society. I will say however, unlike the mediocre combination of the odd trio in “A Wrinkle In Time,” this film did a better job with its solo being.

That weird being by the way is Merlin himself, who goes by two identities. Although, without diving into much detail, Merlin may have disguised himself well from the outside, but his fake name, which is exposed during the movie was ridiculous. Why? Because it sounds almost exactly the same as his original name. It would be like if I were trying make a fake ID or something and change my name to have my last name come before my first name! I might as well settle for some fake mustache I can buy at Walmart or something. I mean, I don’t know about Medieval Times as much as other people. However, I would probably assume that Merlin wasn’t the first definition people thought of that would relate to the word “idiot.” Then again, that is his only trace of idiocy throughout the entire film, so he could definitely be worse as a character. Plus another odd thing about this Merlin is that while he is often stereotyped as an old man (which is where Patrick Stewart comes in), he is represented as a young man who looks like he often jams out to rock music (which is where Angus Imrie comes in). The reason? He mentions he can age backwards. I have a question. Can he turn into a baby? I honestly don’t want to see him turn into a baby, but that is a question I continue to have.

As for how this movie concludes, I will admit that this film feels like it goes on for a bit too long. It could have ended at a certain point, but it almost feels like because this movie “needed some big climax,” it just had to continue. Granted, the climax was pretty cool at times, but it almost feels forced or tacked on. And it does partially involve a couple major plot points exposed throughout the film, but I didn’t care about some of those plot points so why should I fully care that we’re getting a flashy climax? In fact, without it, the movie probably could have made its budget back. They would have spent less on it and theaters could have added more showtimes. Although at the same time the movie could end up feeling rushed, so who knows?

In the end, I almost feel confused on my ultimate thoughts towards “The Kid Who Would Be King.” It’s not horrible, yet I am pointing out a lot of flaws. It’s not great, but I am willing to say there are many positives brought to the table. There were even a couple of shots I really liked in this movie. There’s a landscape shot that shows our main characters walking through a field, it’s eye candy on my 4K TV if you ask me. There are a few creative ideas brought to the table, especially with a movie like this that kind of has a predictable formula. But there are some parts of the movie that truly got me angry. Even with that, it’s met with fun action, a likable duo between the main character of Alex and Bedders. Although if I were to have kids one day and sit them down for a family movie night, this would not be my first choice. I’m going to give “The Kid Who Would Be King” a 6/10. Honestly, this movie could also be a 5/10, but I’m not going to give it that. Because this film still manages to be fun while making me slightly irritated. That’s just me. Thanks for reading this review! Pretty soon I’m going to have my thoughts on “Godzilla: King of the Monsters.” Be sure to look forward to that review very soon. But I will point out something to you all. You may or may not know this, this is my 299th standing post. My next entry to Scene Before is going to be a special 300th post giving you guys an update on my Blu-ray collection! I’ll posting that as soon as possible so look forward to it! Be sure to follow Scene Before with an email or WordPress account so you can stay tuned for more great content! I want to know, did you see “The Kid Who Would Be King?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite movie involving Medieval Times? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

What We Know So Far About Christopher Nolan’s TENET (2020)

Posted on by Jack Drees

mv5bmdbjntyymzetndzkny00njg2ltgwogetyzi4mtezzgi1ote5xkeyxkfqcgdeqxvyodu5oti5oty40._v1_sy1000_sx675_al_

Hey everyone, Jack Drees here! As you may know, I am massive fan of Christopher Nolan (The Dark Knight, Memento). I have seen almost every single one of his films. And if you have been following the news this year, you’d know that Nolan is coming out with a new movie called “Tenet.” Prior to the reveal of the title, this was first leaked as an “event” film. I had no idea what this would entail, and I figured by event, it would be a follow-up to one of Nolan’s recent films such as “Inception” or “Interstellar.” Because let’s face it, whether you like those films or not, they felt like events. And what would be more “event-like” than a follow-up to a Nolan film that received overwhelmingly positive reception and good box office returns? Especially “Inception,” because that movie came out in 2010. What if we got a sequel in 2020? It would be marketed as “the one movie we get every ten years.” And if that’s successful, we’d get another “Inception” in 2030. But that’s not the case, and I’m also not disappointed because originality is ALWAYS something I’m asking for in Hollywood, so I’m proud to see Christopher Nolan deliver it. Without further ado, let’s dive into some things that could easily be gathered about Christopher Nolan’s upcoming movie, “Tenet.”

THE FILM WILL BE IN THE ACTION GENRE
We now know that Nolan’s new movie is an original project. The film is being described as a “massive, innovative, action blockbuster.” Recent news has pointed out a more detailed description of what this film would entail, specifically that it is “an action epic evolving from the world of international espionage.” I personally consider action to be one of my favorite genres, in fact, action is also a genre that Nolan has nailed thus far. After all, he helmed the entire “Dark Knight” trilogy and “Inception.” Both movies have bits and pieces of memorable action scenes and I have a feeling that Nolan can use his prior knowledge and put it into this movie.

THE CAST
John David Washington (BlacKkKlansman, Ballers)
Robert Pattinson (Twilight, Good Time)
Elizabeth Debicki (Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2, The Cloverfield Paradox)
Aaron Taylor-Johnson (Godzilla, Kick-Ass)
Kenneth Branagh (Dunkirk, Much Ado About Nothing)
Clémence Poésy (Last Love, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1)
Dimple Kapadia (Bobby, Luck by Chance)
Michael Caine (Batman Begins, Interstellar)

Let me just say, of course Michael Caine was gonna be in this. I mean, he’s Michael Caine. Christopher Nolan literally goes to bed every night in a room containing at least three posters. There’s one in the middle that says “MICHAEL CAINE IS GOD,” and it is accompanied left and right by posters for “Dirty Rotten Scoundrels” and “The Cider House Rules.” This is a long way of saying, Christopher Nolan clearly loves Michael Caine and they are working together again. Can’t wait to see what Caine can bring to the table. As for some of these actors including John David Washington and Aaron Taylor-Johnson, I am well aware of their names and have liked them as performers in what they’ve done. I just saw Washington in “BlacKkKlansman” this January and his performance was good enough to get a nomination from me in the Jackoff Awards. As for Taylor-Johnson, I remember reviewing Amazon’s “The Wall” months after it came out and calling it a pile of crap, but I also gave praise to his particular performance. A win’s a win, even when it’s a loss. Yes, Robert Pattinson from “Twilight” is being cast here but for one thing, I have not seen much of his work. In fact, I’ve heard he’s been pretty solid in some indie flicks. And for another thing, if he’s not only being cast as Batman, but also in a Nolan film, I have a feeling his name could grow on me. Only time will tell. But Nolan is not a stranger to odd casting choices, because if you all remember “Dunkirk,” he somehow managed to cast One Direction member Harry Styles, and he turned out to be solid! I’ll wait for the movie, but for the most part, the cast looks promising.

THE FILM IS BEING SHOT WITH IMAX AND 65MM CAMERAS
For those of you who follow Nolan, you’d probably know that he has, no pun intended, experience with IMAX. “The Dark Knight” was the first feature film to be shot in IMAX. Since then, he has used the same technology in “The Dark Knight Rises,” “Interstellar,” and “Dunkirk.” All of those films are shot using advanced IMAX cameras that use horizontal 65mm film. It should therefore come as no surprise that he is bringing the technology up to the plate once again for “Tenet.” Plus, the movie will bring back Hoyte Van Hoytema to man the shots, who also was involved with the cinematography for “Interstellar” and “Dunkirk.” I remember one of the first announced details was that this film was going to be shot in IMAX, and when I hear that about a film, I am automatically intrigued. Also, according to IMDb, the film is also being shot with a Panavision 65 HR Camera, which uses standard, old school 65mm technology. I am pretty interested to see what Nolan would do with the IMAX technology in a film involving espionage. This would definitely provide a big scope for the action scenes when viewed in IMAX theaters and maybe provide a few jaw-dropping shots. I remember “Mission: Impossible: Ghost Protocol” being shot with IMAX cameras, but unfortunately, I never went to an IMAX to watch the movie. I really don’t know how this movie will play out, but part of me hopes to walk out saying “this is a “Mission: Impossible” film that only Nolan could create.” Then again, based on other details I’m hearing about this movie, this might be a bigger idea than “missions, should people choose to accept them.” Speaking of old school technology…

THE FILM WILL BE PRESENTED IN 35MM, 70MM, AND IMAX 70MM
This may have already been implied, but in case it didn’t, “Tenet” is going to be screened not just in today’s traditional digital formats found in multiplexes everywhere, but also in a select number of auditoriums featuring film stock projection. Christopher Nolan’s most recent films have marketed themselves as being “experiences” and part of said experiences involve presentations in analog formats, which honestly, I prefer over digital projection. Seeing “2001: A Space Odyssey” in 70mm last year (twice) was game-changingly epic. It’s partially due to the experience of going into an arthouse-style theater while also having projection that provides greater material than my local chain locations. And since “Tenet” is seemingly being shot entirely using 65mm technology, the film will fit very well when projected on film. Granted, I imagine it will look great almost matter where it’s shown, but there are places where I can probably tell you to see it as opposed to others. Since it is being shown in IMAX 70mm, I can guarantee that the film will have select sequences where the aspect ratio changes to fill the entire screen from top to bottom.

And for those of you who don’t know, this is why I went to a theater over an hour away from my house to see “Interstellar” and “Dunkirk” and people close to me probably think I’m insane.

But it was SOOOOO worth it.

HANS ZIMMER IS NOT INVOLVED
Unfortunately, for all of the Christopher Nolan fans who liked movies such as “Inception” or “Interstellar” partially because of Hans Zimmer’s scores (I’m one of those fans as well), I’ve got some news for you. He’s not gonna be around for “Tenet.” In fact, the reason for this is due to Zimmer currently being busy with another acclaimed director who I happen to like, Denis Villeneuve (Blade Runner 2049, Arrival) as he is scoring the upcoming movie “Dune.” As for other movies next year he is focusing on, he is involved with “Wonder Woman 1984,” which I’m currently anticipating. He’s also doing “Top Gun: Maverick,” which only makes me more intrigued for how that movie is going to play out. And he’s also scoring “The Spongebob Movie: It’s a Wonderful Sponge,” which was once scheduled to compete with “Tenet” on its opening weekend, but the movies are now a further distance away from each other on the current release schedule.

LUDWIG GÖRANSSON IS COMPOSING
As for who will be composing the music in “Tenet,” that position will held by Ludwig Göransson. I have slightly mixed thoughts on how this is going to pan out, but I like to remain optimistic. For one thing, Nolan and Zimmer go together like bread and butter. Plus, Ludwig Göransson is also responsible for scoring “Venom,” and the score was not really the highlight of that film. Then again, what was the highlight of that film in the first place? The score felt manufactured, generic, and kinda dull. You know, like the movie “Venom” itself. Although at the same time, he scored another comic book movie, which like “Venom,” I don’t think I enjoyed as much as other people, and by other people I don’t just mean general audiences, I’m also referring to The Academy. Y’know, the gods of the movie industry? That movie by the way, is “Black Panther,” and while I think that movie is tremendously overrated (but still a solid flick) it had one of the better scores I’ve heard from a movie in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. It’s not my all time fave, but if I were to do a countdown on my favorite MCU scores, “Black Panther” would probably be high on the list. I am quite curious if Goransson will deliver an epic score to remember forever or if there will be some sort of disconnect between him and Nolan that will make me wish Zimmer would’ve been involved. Göransson’s music has been used in recent television programs including TBS’s “Angie Tribeca” and Fox’s “New Girl.” He’s also recently scored movies like “Creed II” and the 2018 remake for “Death Wish.”

PALINDROMES MAY BE AN IMPORTANT FEATURE IN THE SCRIPT
Now if you thought that Christopher Nolan is going to change his ways and simplify his movies, think again. Because from what I’m gathering so far, this movie sounds like it is going to be heavy. For one thing, look closely at the word “Tenet,” and you’d know that it is a palindrome. One of my favorite sci-fi movies of the decade, “Arrival,” directed by the recently mentioned Denis Villeneuve made palindromes play a bit into that movie, and if this movie manages to do the same, I would not be surprised, and I have faith that the palindrome insertion could be more than just a cheap gimmick.

Screenshot (5)

Also, last week, I shared a post on Facebook from a page with the handle @ChristopherNolan.info on what I thought was an official poster for “Tenet” but it turns out that’s more than likely not the case. However, one detail that stood to me regarding what I’ve shared is the number inside the image, 2701072, which like the word tenet, is a palindrome. People have pointed out in the comments that if you rearrange the numbers in that image, you can get the release date for this movie, July 17th, 2020. I also did some research regarding that number and this is not the first time that the account did a post with that number in it. On January 28th, the same Facebook page made a post that was literally just this exact number. Unless they had insider information about this movie and Nolan’s life/career, it’s almost as if they predicted that the title will be a palindrome or the movie would heavily involve palindromes. However, this Facebook page was not the first social media account to post something like this, because data suggests another Christopher Nolan-related account on Twitter by the name of @nolantalkcom did so on January 27th. Based on this information, and based on differences in followers, this is probably a bit of a stretch. I’m willing to bet the operator of that Twitter also operates the Facebook page. If you want to check this out for yourself, click the links below!

@ChristopherNolan.info

@nolantalkcom

THE FILM MAY HEAVILY INVOLVE TIME
Speaking of expected traditions from Christopher Nolan, it would not be surprising if he made time a major element in this film. Heck, one of the posters features numbers from one to twelve with arrows sticking toward multiple twelves. It’s a like an ongoing watch or something! I don’t know how time will play into this film, but it is an action film involving espionage, so maybe there will be some sort of race against the clock. Maybe there’s a bomb that has to be diffused. But knowing Nolan, it may as well be something completely unthinkable.

In a way, this poster almost reminds of “Interstellar” because if you remember the Endurance from that film, you may notice that the ship resembles a clock. “Interstellar” is easily one of my favorite sci-fi flicks of the decade, so I cannot wait to see what happens with “Tenet” and if it could possibly be compared with “Interstellar.”

There are a few other things I could talk about related to “Tenet,” but I already have gone way past scratching the surface when it comes to this movie. I even have a growing theory of this movie being part of a universe that Christopher Nolan previously established, specifically “Inception,” which I think could be a plot twist in this movie based on certain factors. As much as I would like to get into that, it would involve heavily digressing from the main topic, so I might make a separate post for that one day. But only time will tell, so who knows? I’m really looking forward to “Tenet,” and as of right now it is probably my most anticipated film of 2020. Anything Marvel announces next year? Forget it! There is a reason why Christopher Nolan is my favorite director of all time!

So I gotta ask all of you, how are you currently feeling about “Tenet” as we build up to its release? Are you excited? Worried? Could you avoid caring about the movie whatsoever? Do you think Christopher Nolan is a hack who deserves to die? Let me know your thoughts down below!

Thanks for reading this post! This Saturday I’m going to see “Godzilla: King of the Monsters.” It’s a film a part of me is REALLY looking forward to from an entertainment perspective, but from a critical perspective, I’m simultaneously nervous. I kinda don’t know how to feel going into the movie, so we’ll just see what happens. But I am going to see it in IMAX, which I think is the best way to see big scale movies like this, so I am still pretty excited. Be sure to follow Scene Before either with an email or WordPress account so you can stay tuned for more great content! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Booksmart (2019): Olivia Wilde Rocks Our World

Posted on by Jack Drees

mv5bmjezmjcxnja2nl5bml5banbnxkftztgwmjaxmdm2nzm40._v1_sy1000_cr006741000_al_

“Booksmart” is directed by Olivia Wilde (Tron: Legacy, The Incredible Burt Wonderstone) and stars Kaitlyn Dever (Last Man Standing, Justified) and Beanie Feldstein (Lady Bird, Neighbors 2: Sorority Rising) as two academic besties who feel the need to let themselves have some fun, which is something that according to them, they have failed to do throughout their four years of high school. And as the movie suggests, the two carry the urge to have such fun in just a day away from their graduation.

I saw a trailer for “Booksmart” back in March. And when I saw it, I got a mixed first impression, because I didn’t become attached to the main duo in the two provided minutes. But the concept became increasingly interesting as the trailer came to a close, and it did have one or two funny lines in it. So yeah, I was kinda onboard. Then as the movie’s release date got closer and closer, I noticed all sorts of press screenings and overwhelmingly positive reactions that the idea of wanting to see this movie only became more front and center. In fact, going into “Booksmart,” it felt like I was going to see “Blockers” mixed with a buddy cop film. Granted, everyone seems to be comparing this movie to Judd Apatow’s “Superbad,” but I haven’t seen “Superbad.” I want to see it, but I just haven’t got around to it. Maybe when I pick up the Blu-ray I’ll give it a go. This doesn’t mean I wasn’t still slightly concerned, because the marketing also gave me an impression that this would be like a propaganda piece because you had all of these female leaders in one clip of the movie. I don’t really have a problem with that, but it also gave me the impression that this movie was just gonna go ahead and say “F*CK MEN!” the entire time. Luckily, that’s not the case. In fact, there’s a joke towards the end of the film about the typical “straight white male” that I thought was utterly hilarious. You’ll know it when you see it. And for those of you who are new around here, this is coming from a straight white male.

I mentioned the hype for this movie, and while I know that the comedy genre tends to put out more disposable movies compared to genres like period pieces and screw it, I’ll be biased, science fiction. There is one thing that got me intrigued, and that is the high Rotten Tomatoes score. From a critical perspective, I recall seeing it at 100% at one point. Right now, it’s at 98%. Then I saw a couple of people in the industry such as Ryan Reynolds reacting to the movie on social media with immensely positive thoughts.

As for my overall impression of the movie itself, it was pretty well done. In fact, from a filmmaking perspective, this is better than I ever could have anticipated. I seriously mean that because there’s this one clip with a long take that as far as straight-up comedies go, can probably qualify as a cinematic achievement. But speaking of comedy, not all the jokes land. There’s a lot that do, but it’s not perfect.

In fact, at the beginning, there’s one joke that not only manages to get a head-raising laugh from me, but I thought it was also an effective way to establish one particular character’s personality. If only more jokes were that funny in the movie. In fact, when it comes to personalities, the main duo has great chemistry together.

Yeah, I could totally buy Kaitlyn Dever and Beanie Feldstein’s friendship, I can buy that the two are academics that put work before partying. Even when there are instances when they shy away from that connected academic/professional personality, their chemistry still manages to work for the way this movie tends to flow. These two are brainiacs who wouldn’t mind having fun, and manage to have each other’s back. In fact, when it comes to how their relationship plays out, it kind of hit me to the core. There are some ways that I’d say that this movie reminded me of a movie that I did not even think I would compare this to, specifically “Lady Bird.” I won’t give much away for either of these movies, and if you ask me from a critical perspective, I’d say this movie is nowhere near as excellent as “Lady Bird,” but it did remind me of that film.

Why was this movie off and on in terms of humor? Well, there are various moments and utterances of dialogue that had me cracking up, but one example of when the movie would slide down a hill is from a recurring gag. There’s this one character played by Carrie Fisher’s daughter, Billie Lourd (American Horror Story, Scream Queens) who was kind of funny when the movie first started out, but she had this one thing that kept happening in the movie that was part of what made her funny, but the more it happens, the more it feels like I’m being beaten over the head. The ongoing gag did not insult my intelligence, which if anything, since this film is called “BOOKSMART,” I think it would be the most ironic thing in the entire history of the universe if that actually happened, but it was just a slight hindrance to my experience. Lourd played her character with excellence, but the script didn’t always make her presence worthwhile.

But in all honesty, when I first saw the currently incessant TV spots, I was given the impression that while this was definitely going to have elements of a coming of age story, I thought it was going to be a lot goofier than it actually turned out. This felt a lot like “Tag,” where there’s tons of humor intact, but it’s all surrounded by one emotional punch. Maybe it partially has to do with timing because I graduated from high school from last year, and in a way, despite not having that many friends I hang out with, I can kind of relate to the relationship of the two main characters. I’m not saying I’m entirely like them, because I definitely worked hard in high school, but I feel like there are certain points that I felt the need to rebel. Because let’s face it, high school sometimes felt robotic. It felt like what was being taught to me at times was being taught through an assembly line-like process. And when I left high school, I honestly couldn’t be happier. Yes, I’ll miss my friends that I made along the way who I may only talk to through social media in the future. But I won’t miss the times when I went through various obstacles of feeling like I didn’t fit in. I won’t miss the subjects I regretted learning about. I also won’t miss what was quite honestly, a beyond underwhelming senior year. Sure, it had its moments, but as I was becoming an adult, there were times when I felt like I was occasionally getting my own kiddie table. Unlike the main characters of Amy and Molly, I didn’t go to any single party that my classmates flocked to (and yet I somehow won Best Dancer). I don’t regret my choices, but the fact that I’m being treated like an adult in college only makes me appreciate that concept much more.

And speaking of college, I can honestly say that this movie may become increasingly relevant giving what’s happening in the news. Because there’s a segment of the movie where one of the main characters is talking to people who may present themselves as idiots, but somehow managed to get into places like Harvard, Yale, and Stanford. This movie premiered at South by Southwest this year, which happened in March, but if this movie had more time to shoot and release perhaps during the holiday season, they could have probably added something to the script about the college admissions scandal that’s been going on. Maybe we’ll save it for a sequel. I would not mind seeing one.

In the end, “Booksmart,” might not be getting an A from me, but it should not frown upon its final, respectable results. I will say that when it comes to the ending of the film, that is one of my core problems that is probably going to stick with me for some time. If it was slightly rewritten, I would have appreciated it more. Because this movie towards the end was going in one direction and I admired it for going in such a direction. However, the last bits of dialogue change that. If you ask me, the exchange was kind of corny and almost left a bad taste in my mouth. It was somewhat out of left field and unexpected. If the movie ended JUST before that, I think the ending would have been solid, and one of the better ones I’ve seen this year. But no! Let’s throw a curveball in there! Wow. Back to back sentences with baseball terms, isn’t that a hoot? Although to be serious, “Booksmart” is funny, charming, and definitely gets me interested for whatever else Olivia Wilde has up her sleeves in terms of her directing career. I’m going to give “Booksmart” a 7/10. Thanks for reading this review! I just want to remind everyone if you noticed anything different about my blog, you might notice my domain. While I’m still calling this blog Scene Before, if you ever want to tell your friends about it, tell them to go to http://www.flicknerd.com. Why flicknerd.com? Because nerds rule and flicks are sick, that’s why! As for new content, I am steadily approaching post #300. For that post, I will be providing an update on my Blu-ray collection! Be sure to follow Scene Before with an email or WordPress account so you can stay tuned for more great content! I want to know, did you see “Booksmart?” What did you think about it? Or, since “Aladdin” just came out and I’m willing to bet most of my viewers saw that this weekend as opposed to “Booksmart,” is Will Smith a good genie? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!