#Movie

Blockers (2018): When Parents Don’t Want Their Kids Gettin’ Cocky

Posted on by Jack Drees

Alright fellow moron followers, it’s that time! We’re gonna talk about sex! And to do that, we’re not just gonna go over my thoughts for the movie “Blockers,” we’re gonna be doing a usual promo. Sex may be fun, hot, and climactic. You know, unless you’re Genevieve and Paul. If you’re Genevieve and Paul, sex is not all fun and games! It’s work! Hard work! No! They’re not f*cking porn stars! They’re in a YouTube series where they’re trying to conceive! Watch them… in “What the IVF?!”

“What the IVF?” is an all new series on YouTube that goes over one couple’s long journey to conception. Watch Genevieve and Paul as they deal with various struggles and small victories! As time passes, they realize, them becoming parents will only become a reality if they push themselves to the limit instead of just having sex and having a natural procreation method. Not to mention, getting injected with tons of needles. You can find the latest videos from Genevieve and Paul on the “WTIVF?” YouTube channel. Also be sure to hit the notification bell and subscribe for all new content! Their latest entry to the series involves a fertility appointment, and things just don’t go according to plan. If YouTube doesn’t satisfy you, check out all the other “WTIVF?” social media profiles and the series’s own website. All links are down below, tell em Jack Drees sent ya, and now let’s continue getting sexy!

WTIVF? WEBSITE: http://www.whattheivf.com/

WTIVF? YOUTUBE: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCILXSidkzWgwrQ5Oa1py78w/featured?disable_polymer=1

WTIVF? TWITTER: https://twitter.com/WTivF

WTIVF? INSTAGRAM: https://www.instagram.com/wtivf/

WTIVF? FACEBOOK: https://www.facebook.com/What-The-IVF-288868031634125/

mv5bmje0odiznjkzml5bml5banbnxkftztgwodq3mzu4ndm-_v1_sy1000_sx632_al_

“Blockers,” or C*ckblockers, as the promotional material implies, is directed by Kay Cannon and stars John Cena (Trainwreck, The Wall), Leslie Mann (Knocked Up, This Is 40), and Ike Barinholtz (Suicide Squad, Neighbors) as three parents who get together who try to stop their daughters from losing their virginities on prom night. Basically if you watch the movie, take the concept for “American Pie,” add in some elements of modern-day s*it in there, change the gender of the teens in a pact to get laid, and make the parents bigger parts of the story, and you get “Blockers.”

This movie is the directorial debut of Kay Cannon, who is mainly known as a writer and producer when it comes to her work in Hollywood. Cannon has written all three “Pitch Perfect” films, and produced the two sequels. I only saw the first one, I thought it was one of the worst comedies I’ve ever seen, even though a number of people seem to like it, but it certainly kept me from seeing the next two movies. Cannon also wrote several episodes of “New Girl,” which honestly, I need to still watch! They have reruns now, so I have a good opportunity on my hands. As I went into “Blockers,” I didn’t expect much, and my low expectations had partially to do with Kay Cannon, who I imagine, is a rather nice woman, but as far as I’m concerned, I didn’t like her s*itty movie from about six years ago. But hey, if were sitting in a chair in a coffee shop, having a coffee with her, I wouldn’t feel like I was tied to that chair. How someone is as a writer and someone is as a person are two completely different ideas! And luckily, in terms of how this movie was not only from the perspective of director Kay Cannon, but also the perspective of writers Brian and Jim Kehoe, it was so much better than it deserved to be! Seriously, from some of the advertising, I was somewhat convinced that this movie would be mediocre at best, but I walked out thinking to myself that I watched a movie where “American Pie” and “Revenge of the Nerds” had a lovechild! Is this movie a masterpiece? Heck no! But not only did I have a fun time, part of me feels that this movie goes over some very important themes. But before we get into why I’m craving this movie like ice cream, let’s dive into negatives.

First off, this movie has a ton of points where I nitpicked the hell out of it. I won’t go into extreme detail because it seems rather spoilery, but he biggest standout to me is when Ike Barinholtz’s character said he’s never watched anyone have sex before. My first thought after hearing that line was, “You’re a grown man who has impregnated someone, and raised a kid.” There’s not one point in your life where you rented something from the adult video store? I don’t know, That’s how he comes off to me. The more I thought about it, maybe he was just referring to in-person sex, but it doesn’t change how that original thought popped into my mind. Another thing I sort of didn’t like, is one joke that kind of makes fun of “Fast & Furious” and Vin Diesel. While it was somewhat executed well, audiences have seen a joke similar joke to that almost three years ago now in “Vacation.” Granted, that movie from what I heard was trash, but having promotional material, I imagine some people might watch this movie, witness this joke play out, and view it as perhaps less funny than if it was had “Vacation” never happened. I remember witnessing other various nitpicks, but I’ll be real with you, I can’t exactly recall them off the top of my head. It just goes to show how many positives there are in this movie compared to negatives.

Let’s talk about the three parents in this movie. You have the recently mentioned Ike Barinholtz who plays Hunter, whose daughter goes by the name of Sam, played by Gideon Adlon (The Real O’Neals, Z Nation). Hunter used to be married, but after reveals of him cheating on his wife, divorce happened. Barinholtz did a great job playing a very hyperactive, overenthusiastic, and somewhat aware dad. And by somewhat aware, I mean in terms of how teens communicate. This is something that the movie dives deep into. When the other two parents were trying to decipher whatever it was the teens were trying to say based on what was being typed out and shown on an accidentally left open laptop, Hunter was basically helping the two parents out with knowledge. To add some hilarity to the mix, Hunter treated the text reading like a puzzle, and some lines given in context to that were nothing short of lovable. I was totally able to buy him as a single parent and his connection with his daughter, especially towards the end of the film, was believable and charming.

Speaking of divorced parents, you’ve also got Leslie Mann’s character of Lisa. She is portrayed as this somewhat kick-ass, caring, and memory-sharing mother. She gave birth to a daughter named Julie played by Kathryn Newton (Paranormal Activity, Lady Bird), and their chemistry was totally believable. Mann’s character definitely delivers a fine performance of a parent who is somewhat concerned about the future of her child, and when it comes to overall concern, Lisa shines more than any other character.

Now we have an interesting character, and when I say that, I mean in terms of who plays him, not so much of how he’s laid out in terms of overall characterization. We’re about to talk about a little someone in this movie.

AND HIS NAME IS JOHN CENA!

How is John Cena in this movie? I’ll be completely honest with you, I don’t know. I couldn’t see him. He wasn’t anywhere in sight.

OK, I saw him.

John Cena plays the character of Mitchell, and he’s basically this overprotective father. His daughter goes by the name of Kayla, who in the movie is played by Geraldine Viswanathan. Out of each chemistry between each main parent to their daughter, this one was believable as well, but if I had to choose the one that is the least believable, I’d pick this one for now. Here’s why. I’ve done some research regarding this movie. John Cena is white, and he was born in West Newbury, Massachusetts. You’ve got Mitchell’s wife, Marcie, played by Sarayu Blue. She was born in Madison, Wisconsin, and she kind of looks like her family has an Indian origin. As for their daughter, the girl who plays her is from Australia. She might look like a mixed race child, but something feels off. Again, I’ll mention, most of my problems in this movie are nitpicks. John Cena though gives a great interpretation of a father and in some ways, reminds me of my own father a little bit.

Moving away from mature people, let’s move onto the movie’s three main teenagers. As you can see in the image above, they’re standing along with three guys, all of which you can probably guess are their prom dates. The three girls, Kayla, Julie, and Sam, have great chemistry and I buy them as best friends and dates to their boys. I’ll also have you keep in mind that part of that great chemistry may have resulted from the very thing that happened at the beginning of the movie. The film starts off with a montage in 2005, when the girls meet in kindergarten, otherwise known one of those times when you realize your life is about to go through a downward spiral of crap. The montage itself was sweet, effective, and illustrates the point that these girls are best friends maybe without having to make you question it. Their setup to actually plan on simultaneously declare their quest for virginity loss, might be a tad bit rushed, but you could also make the argument that they’re teenagers and teenagers often rush into things and I can totally get that. Maybe, and I’m not being sexist here, I would have believed this if the girls were actually boys. Because in real life, people usually think of boys talking more about sex and losing their virginity than girls do. In fact, this movie an interesting topic that I often think about in relation to that, which we’ll get to in a bit. But in all seriousness, girls, after seeing this movie, I want to know, would you say that from experience or personal thought that girls talk about sex and stuff like that as much as guys? Maybe in a positive light? I seriously want to know because this movie is honestly just making me think and I kind of want some experience or two cents from someone who would apply in the realm I’m referring to.

By the way, the girls’ dates were all pretty cool to watch here, but my favorite teenage boy in the movie has to be Kayla’s date, Connor. He’s played by Miles Robbins (The X-Files, Mozart in the Jungle) who not only does a great job with the character, but I also have to give kudos to the writers. The movie sets up Connor as someone who Kayla likes, but not as someone Kayla’s father likes. Granted, in some ways, it almost makes her father look like a dick, but it didn’t really take too much away from the movie. Listen to me, imagine if I were taking some girl to prom, I pop into her house, and the girl’s father looks at me and I have the hairstyle Connor has, there’s gonna be some s*it going down soon. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with it, but I’m not Kayla’s father.

Now let’s dive into this movie a little bit deeper and talk about how it tackles some issues regarding teens, parents, those kinds of people. You have many movies out there that might as well be quests to losing one’s virginity. Movies like “Porky’s,” “American Pie,” and f*ck, I’ll say it, “The 40-Year-Old Virgin.” Out of these movies, I’ve only seen “Porky’s” and “American Pie.” From what I’ve seen, I wouldn’t say they’re terrific. “Porky’s” almost seems like a good background movie in some cases, and “American Pie” was enjoyable, but I didn’t really connect to any specific character. Maybe it takes a couple watches, but I will admit, I didn’t enjoy that movie as much as I thought I would. Also, when it comes to these “virginity loss quest” movies, they’re usually from a male perspective. I will bring up that “Blockers” has all male writers, but the director for this movie was a female. To me, this brought an interesting balance in terms of what both genders thought of teenagers and sex.

When it comes to the parents, they’re obviously worried. John Cena comes off as very overprotective, not just because her daughter’s virginity is going to be taken, but perhaps even because it’s going to be taken by a guy whose hair probably doesn’t even belong in this world. Hey! I never said that! I’m not John Cena! Connor seems like a nice guy who knows that he wants his first time to be special, but hey, parents will be parents.

Leslie Mann is going through a bunch of worries when it comes to her daughter. She’s going to college soon and the mother is concerned of losing the kid she raised forever and ever. She wants her daughter to go to a local college and stay near her mother, but this girl wants to go to UCLA, and that’s just an upset to her. Oh yeah, and her daughter’s on a virginity loss quest, don’t forget about that! By the way, her daughter is technically the one to jumpstart this whole quest!

Ike Barinholtz, as mentioned, doesn’t even live with his daughter. Like Leslie Mann’s character, he’s divorced, but he lives alone without a child. And when it comes to his daughter, not only is he concerned about her being in this sex pact. He’s worried about her sexuality. Sam, the daughter of Ike Barinholtz, is gay. She’s going out with a boy. We actually see her worried about this and have a desire towards a certain girl later, but Ike’s character doesn’t have that knowledge.

This movie as a whole dives really deep into a ton of the main characters and unleashes little figments of their personality. It’s a sex comedy that doesn’t feel like a comedy where sex is bound to happen and it’s really all you think about. It’s almost more like “Revenge of the Nerds” in some ways because that’s a sex comedy, but it also dives deep into the characters and their own little individualistic traits to get you to care about them. There’s not many people who feel like they are just written on a page or cookie-cutter. This feels like a vision. Sure, it has that typical studio comedy feel, and it is complete with tons of Apple product placement, but the characters in this movie all have a chance to shine.

I will also admit, I was watching this film alongside my mother, and I was wondering how awkward it would be for the two of us. For one thing, I was not expecting much out of this movie, but also another thing is that I’m eighteen years old. I gotta say this movie came out at what might be a proper time for me. Relying on numbers from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the average age for one to lose their virginity according to them is 17.1 (both males and females). Sex is something my mother and I don’t talk about, and why would we talk about it? What… benefit… is there to life… of having a sex-related conversation between a parent and a child? It’s gonna do nothing except make one of us want to exit the room! My mother actually reads this blog, and I’m trying to get inside her mind. What if there’s one day she finds out about me having sex? Sure, maybe when I’m an adult maybe that’s natural. OK, well, I’m technically an adult at this point, but certain members of society would probably still refer to me as a child or teenager. I’m willing to bet a number of adults know that teens, especially ones in my gender, think about sex all the time, but they always see us doing it as dangerous or horrifying. As a teen, I get why, but I feel like that no matter what gender the characters are, whether it’s the kids I’m talking about or the parents, this movie does a fantastic job of not only highlighting the thoughts of the young and the old when it comes to teen sex, but it also seems to add a nice touch by not choosing a side in this debate and calling one right or wrong. This feels like a film, not propaganda. I don’t know if it will open much discussion between kids/teens and parents about sexual activity, but maybe it will develop some along those lines with maybe close friends.

In the end, I honestly couldn’t have gotten more of a surprise from “Blockers” than I already have. “Blockers” feels like one of those movies that we as a society didn’t really deserve, but someone was nice enough to let us have it. I’d love to thank Kay Cannon for directing the hell out of this, and I’m sorry that I called your other movie a piece of crap. I’m gonna give “Blockers” a 7/10. Thanks for reading this review! Next week I have a week off from school, giving me more opportunities to go to the theater and see something. Maybe I’ll go see “Rampage,” “Pacific Rim: Uprising,” “A Quiet Place,” “Isle of Dogs,” we’ll have to find out! Also, be sure to stay tuned for my review for “Mission: Impossible II” which will be up by the end of the month! Stay tuned for more great content! I want to know, what did you think of “Blockers” if you saw it? Or, what is your favorite sex comedy? Me personally, I gotta go with “Risky Business.” It feels natural, the characters are great, and the music is awesome! Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Ready Player One (2018): Pop Culture’s Ultimate Birthchild

Posted on by Jack Drees

*SPONSORSHIP ALERT* (although nobody’s payin’ me)

Before we dive into my review for one of my most anticipated movies of 2018, let me just have you know that this review is being called “Pop Culture’s Ultimate Birthchild.” If you watch “Ready Player One” and/or read the book, you’d know precisely what I’m talking about. And speaking of birthchildren, there’s one couple out there in California who are currently expecting a birthchild. The couple contains souls by the names of Genevieve and Paul, and they are going to giving birth to a child sometime in the future. You can find out the true story of this babymaking journey in “What the IVF?!”

“What the IVF?” documents the seemingly endless but also effort-filled journey of having a child. What’s so hard about it? Watching over them? Finding a babysitter? Trying to get them to fall asleep? No, you fools! The hard part is making them! Watch as Genevieve and Paul do something that will change humanity. By, you know, trying to increase its overall population by 1. But the process of doing that isn’t easy! The couple suffer through troublesome situations in regards to sex, math, testing, costs, and because they TOTALLY asked for them, infinite needles! If you want to watch the fifth episode to this series, it’s listed up above. This time, Genevieve and Paul’s marriage might be going down the toilet! Not to mention, nothing seems all that pleasant at this point. Watch the episode, comment, subscribe, hit the notification bell, share with your friends, enemies, frenemies, whoever they may be. Also check out the “WTIVF” website, and their other forms of presence on social media, all of which is listed down below! Oh yeah, and tell them Jack Drees sent ya! I’m sure they’ll appreciate it!

WTIVF? WEBSITE: http://www.whattheivf.com/

WTIVF? YOUTUBE: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCILXSidkzWgwrQ5Oa1py78w/featured?disable_polymer=1

WTIVF? TWITTER: https://twitter.com/WTivF

WTIVF? INSTAGRAM: https://www.instagram.com/wtivf/

WTIVF? FACEBOOK: https://www.facebook.com/What-The-IVF-288868031634125/

mv5bodcxnji4mzy2mf5bml5banbnxkftztgwmte0nzuzndm-_v1_sy1000_cr006741000_al_

“Ready Player One” is directed by Steven Spielberg (Jurassic Park, Lincoln) and stars Tye Sheridan (X-Men Apocalypse, Mud), Olivia Cooke (Ouija, Me and Earl and the Dying Girl), Ben Mendelsohn (Rogue One: A Star Wars Story, The Dark Knight Rises) and is based on the pop culture extravaganza of a book written by Ernest Cline, who by the way, is one of the film’s screenwriters alongside Zak Penn (The Avengers, The Incredible Hulk).

Much like the book, this movie centers around the character of Wade Owen Watts, a teenage boy who is currently living in the 2040s. Oh yeah, and just like every other movie that takes place in the future that seems to have something depressing, Earth is dying, who’d a thunk it? Nowadays he basically spends his time on the virtual reality headset universe known as the OASIS (Ontologically Anthropocentric Sensory Immersive Simulation), where you can literally live your reality meeting other avatars who go by nicknames. For example, Wade’s avatar name in the game is known as Parzival. Another example would be for a different character in the movie, Samantha, which is the name she goes by in real life, but in the OASIS, she’s known as Art3mis. There’s not just that, you can do just about anything you can think of! You want to drive a DeLorean? You’ve got yourself a DeLorean! You want an Iron Giant to hang out with? Of course you do, and you’ve got one! You want to ride the bike from “Akira?” Bingo! This is basically a future, where there’s nowhere left to go. And I’ve seen a lot of media will give this dystopian landscape where everything looks all depressing, but one thing I’ve never noticed is a hint of pop culture in there. And I feel this movie, the more I think about it, is kind of relevant. Not just for the environmental message that you’d find in films like “Wall-E” or “Interstellar,” but the fact that maybe we’re running out of ideas in terms of what could be the next big franchise or the next big movie or the next big TV show. The movie doesn’t really dive into that, but this is an unoriginal movie which centers around unoriginality and it’s all the better for it!

This was one of my most anticipated movies of the year. Most of the promotional material had me nerdgasming! The visuals looked astounding! The music, like, oh my gosh! The teaser trailer for “Ready Player One” which was revealed at San Diego Comic-Con, went on to become one of my favorite trailers of 2017, and the movie had a couple more trailers that went on to become instant favorites of mine for this current year. I went to see the movie in 70mm film! A lot of people see “Avengers: Infinity War” as their most anticipated movie of the year, and I totally get why, but when it comes to both movies, I can’t help but hype both up like the Soup Nazi when his place was in business on “Seinfeld.” I even did something that I never do before going to see a movie. I actually read the book. Let me just pull up a quote that I left in my review for “The Firm.”

“…movies are more fun! Sorry, books!”

Part of my reading of the book has to do with a challenge I gave to some friends, but still.

After reading the book and seeing the promotional material of the movie, I felt like this was a fictionalized “King of the Nerds.” If you have seen “King of the Nerds,” you’d probably know it as a part competition and part nerd culture extravaganza. This show is actually quite possibly my favorite of all time, making me even gladder to have read the book to capture the feeling of the show inside me once more after it was canceled by TBS in 2015. And speaking of “King of the Nerds,” “Revenge of the Nerds,” the movie which the show is sort of based on, is referenced in the book. In fact, there’s one part where the main character of Wade Watts goes searching for something important to the plot, and he tries going into a recreation of the house that the nerds rent and fix in the movie! If you know me in real life, if something receives a comparison to “King of the Nerds,” you know that I am jumping up and down.

Unfortunately, there’s no “Revenge of the Nerds” references in the movie. However, when you take the rest of the movie for what it is, you might as well refer to it by one word: Amazing. Am I fanboying? Sort of. I’m only fanboying because this film met, and in ways, exceeded my expectations. I am not one of those people who says this:

“This is a great book! Terrific! Unbelievable! If you change an ounce of this book, I will find you studio freaks at your filthy houses and slaughter every last one of you!”

Yes, there are changes from the book, and personally, I can understand the changes, and based on what we’ve gotten out of this movie, I don’t care! This movie itself, was probably one of the most thrilling experiences I’ve had in a theater. If the 70mm show wasn’t enough to please, some of the scenes which have now become new personal faves of mine certainly were!

Steven Spielberg directed this film, and when I first heard about him taking on this project, I was like, “cool.” As I read the book though, I thought to myself, there is NO OTHER MAN ON THIS EARTH that should direct this movie! Well, it was mainly because Spielberg was referenced in the book and it was done in a form of appreciation. Now that I’ve seen the film from start to finish, I can’t say anything else except, THERE’S STILL NO F*CKING WAY ANOTHER PERSON COULD HAVE DIRECTED THIS FILM! Steven Spielberg’s hayday was blockbusters galore, not to mention he’s a master of putting you into the action. Just watch “Saving Private Ryan” or “Jurassic Park!” The film’s opening contains this big and important race, and I guarantee you that at some point, you’ll feel like you’re in it.

Speaking of action, “Ready Player One” also contains one of the best mega-battles I’ve seen in a movie, and one of the best chases I’ve seen in a movie. There’s this big climactic battle that decides the future of both sides, and as I watched, I felt like I was back the early 2000s, going to the theater, and watching “Lord of the Rings.” I ate it up and I wanted more! Now I know that I talked about the race during the film’s starting point, and it’s sort of chase-like, but we cut to the real chase towards the end of the film. Literally. This final chase, may be one of the very best I’ve ever seen in a movie. The climactic chase of the movie almost feels like a mix of “Inception” and “The Lego Movie.” In other words, it was a mix of a heartfelt moment and the dropping of my jaw. I don’t even want to go into it, because I want you as a viewer to be surprised.

Now I mention that this movie, like the book, is really freaking good! But if there’s one thing that the book does better, it’s character development. I’m not saying that the characters in this movie sucked, in fact I really liked all of them. But in comparison to the book, the book did it better.

Let’s talk about the main character of Wade Watts, otherwise known as Parzival. In some ways, much like the book, I resemble this character. We both want to do something that will prevent our governments from harming us personally, we’re both uber nerds, and we both know a lot about a variety of popular culture. Although then again, that’s what pretty much a majority of the movie’s characters know about. In the book, Watts was actually fat in real life. I can kind of understand why they would cast a guy like Tye Sheridan for the role of Watts even though he’s not fat, but they could have paid homage to the book and done that. If they did cast someone fat, it would have increased the chance of seeing a key character moment from the book. I’m not saying I’m unsatisfied with what we got, but still, the book did it better.

Although one thing that may rival the book entirely in my opinion was the depiction of Samantha, or Art3mis. When I read the book, I always thought of the interactions in the OASIS between Parzival and Art3mis as cutesy, and as something that just developed over time. The movie feels faster, and it almost makes Samantha’s avatar look like someone a boy would usually be attracted to. Well, to me anyway, looks are subjective. Sure, in the book I can kind of buy Parzival’s infatuation towards Art3mis, but it didn’t have a raw feeling, like this movie did, and I personally thought it worked. Cooke as an actress pretty much nailed what this character needed, and I admired her performance.

Now let’s get into one of my favorite parts of the movie, and that is the character of Nolan Sorrento played by Ben Mendelsohn. Having seen him play Krennic in “Rogue One: A Star Wars Story,” it should be proof at this point that Mendelsohn can play one awesome villain! Here, he does that too! He’s basically this corporate baddie that oversees all the operations of IOI (Innovative Online Industries) and he wants to change the OASIS to make it more like what can be translated as something like Net Neutrality or EA shoving micro-transactions down your throat. As if his representation of evil was good enough, his character has one of the major highlights of the movie for me. There’s a point where he’s talking with Wade and he’s trying to act consumer-friendly, attractive, and telling Wade what he would probably want to hear, and someone is on the other end, speaking into his ear without Wade’s knowledge. Trust me, it’s kind of funny.

Now let’s state another highlight performance of the movie, and that is the character of James Halliday, played by Mark Rylance. This is Rylance’s third performance with Steven Speilberg, and he was cast perfectly in regards to this character. Halliday was charming, somewhat funny, and a mix between Willy Wonka and Steve Jobs. You’ve got the one side that seems to scream charisma and wonder and you have another that represents brains and sometimes over-stressed. I will say though, I was doing research on this movie, and while I think Rylance’s performance is terrific, there is someone I would have loved to see bring their skills to the table.

Rylance’s character is once again, comparable to Willy Wonka, and thus it kind of makes sense where Steven Spielberg’s mind would be going at one point. One idea he had for the character of Halliday before Rylance ultimately took over is to get Gene Wilder back on screen. According to the movie’s trivia page on IMDb, “Wilder respectfully declined.” Mark Rylance was cast in 2016 some time before Gene Wilder’s death. But what if Wilder were in the movie? I imagine the movie would make a hell lot more money than it already did, it would have a stronger opening weekend, and based on recent events, it might actually bring something emotional to the movie. Although then again, I wonder if they still would have been filming the scenes for Halliday at the time of Wilder’s death, so it probably wouldn’t have even mattered. Nevertheless, Wilder as Halliday would have been PERFECT, A+, 10/10 casting. However, Rylance, based on his portrayal, is just as solid.

Moving onto one thing that I heard a number of people complain about, let’s talk about references. People were nervous about this movie because they figured the only thing that it stands for is to make references down your throat. Personally, I did not have that complaint going in. I thought the movie was gonna have a fine number of references that didn’t feel bloated. Besides, references are awesome! As far as this movie goes none of the references forced (for what I remember), they were charming, and they were even sometimes hysterical! One of the biggest standouts is a moment where the main characters are going into the world of a classic movie. No, seriously, they go in, and several events from that movie play out in this one! I didn’t have too too many people in my theater, so I can’t say much noise was made, but I heard there were some presentations that people attended where audience members collectively gasped. The most references come in during the commencement of the movie and the climax, and while the middle definitely has some, it seems to come off as more story-oriented. And that’s not to say that the beginning and end aren’t story oriented. I’d say the references used at the start and finish were properly utilized while still maintaining an interesting story, thus making the movie better. You know, unlike “The Emoji Movie,” which story-wise and reference wise, is nothing but trash buried beneath the ground after being lit on fire. That movie was nothing but a complete waste of the talent from minds like Patrick Stewart, Anna Faris, and TJ Miller.

Fortunately, TJ Miller’s talent is not wasted here! If you don’t already know, TJ Miller plays the character of I-R0k, and let’s just get serious for a moment. TJ Miller’s voice, IS ASTOUNDING. If Morgan Freeman is the king of narrating serious pieces of work, then TJ Miller is the king of narrating anything that sounds hilarious. Just watch “Silicon Valley,” “Deadpool,” heck, I’ll say “Transformers: Age of Extinction.” HELL! I’d say even watch “The Emoji Movie!” Even though the movie sucks, you still get to hear the killer voice of TJ f*cking Miller. TJ Miller was TOP-NOTCH CASTING for I-R0k, and after seeing Miller play him, I probably can’t imagine anyone else taking on the role! If the remake and reboot craze continues and “Ready Player One” is the next in line, I quadruple dog dare those behind the project to find a better I-R0k.

In the end, “Ready Player One,” was a f*cking blast! I had very high expectations for the movie, and I certainly was not let down. This is also personally, almost a #1 favorite of mine for Steven Spielberg. I saw this movie on a Tuesday night, and this review was finished on a Friday. On this day, I’m still thinking to myself, “I want to see this again.” Have I seen it again? No I have not, but I’d literally cut through traffic and smash cars to pieces just to go to the theater for a second time and catch the experience once more. So with that being said, “Ready Player One” is yet another win for Spielberg and I’m going to give it a 10/10!

Thanks for reading this review! Fun fact about my experience watching this in the theater, I mentioned I went to see this in 70mm, and it actually was in this quaint theater near Boston, and they played a trailer for “2001: A Space Odyssey” since the theater was bringing it back in the 70mm format for its 50th anniversary. Just… One of the best things I’ve witnessed in my entire life. I might do something soon for “2001” if possible, maybe a movie review, maybe dissect it, or something else along those lines. As far as other content goes, I have a few ideas lined up. Maybe I’ll go see “Blockers,” “A Quiet Place,” “Pacific Rim: Uprising,” or maybe I’ll wind up seeing “Ready Player One” again. Who knows? Stay tuned for more great content! I want to know, did you see “Ready Player One?” What did you think about it? Did you read the book? What did you think about that? I personally love it, and comparing both the movie and the book side by side, they both make themselves great in their own ways. Also, if you were going to make a book or movie full of references, what would the references be and how would the movie play out? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Mission: Impossible (1996): This Movie Review Will Self-Destruct In Five Seconds

Posted on by Jack Drees

Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to read through the first of the “Mission: Impossible” reviews from Scene Before. More are on the way, such as “Mission: Impossible 2,” a movie whose review shall be published a month after this one. As always, should you or any of your Force be caught or killed, the Movie Reviewing Moron will disavow any of your actions. This message will self-destruct in five seconds.

mv5bmtc3nji2mju0nl5bml5banbnxkftztgwndk3odyxmte-_v1_sy1000_cr006751000_al_

“Mission: Impossible” is directed by Brian De Palma (The Untouchables, Dressed to Kill) and stars Tom Cruise (Top Gun, Risky Business) as an American agent who goes by the name Ethan Hunt. In this movie which is inspired by the television series of the same name, Hunt must find out who framed him for murder of the entire Impossible Missions Force.

This is the first movie of the ongoing Tom Cruise “Mission: Impossible” series, and I imagine there’s a good number of people out there like myself who has seen this movie or another movie in the series and couldn’t compare it to the original TV series. As far as which incarnation is better, I can’t say, but I can say that this movie is super thrilling! Let’s dive into it a bit deeper.

The movie starts off with the crew on a mission. One character, Jack, played by Emilio Estevez (Young Guns, Repo Man), is watching the surveillance, doing his job, and we see one guy in a white tank top being interrogated. The guy asking all the questions is Tom Cruise who eventually reveals his true self, Ethan Hunt by taking his snobby, Spanish-looking Agent Smith mask off. We see Tom Cruise going over to Claire, played by Emmanuelle Béart (Nelly & Monsieur Arnaud, 8 Women), injecting a needle, then we hear Claire, all bloodied up, asking Ethan, “Did we get it?” Ethan responds, “We got it.” Great exchange, great timing, and a great transition to the title sequence featuring the endlessly famous “Mission: Impossible” theme song. Just… perfect. That’s all I gotta say. The intro doesn’t really show all too much except for major characters, but the transition from the intro to the main events of the movie probably couldn’t have been done better.

The “Mission: Impossible” theme used for this movie by the way, was composed by none other than Danny Elfman, and if you have known me, I love Danny Elfman. I will say that sometimes his scores are somewhat underwhelming and don’t deliver the goods that they should (Avengers: Age of Ultron, Justice League), but when his scores are well done from my personal view, they stand out like Marilyn Monroe in a beauty pageant. Elfman from my personal view did a fine job on the movie’s score and this is definitely one of his better ones. Although one interesting thing about it is that it wasn’t supposed to be his.

Alan Silvestri, another terrific composer who has new work coming out in films such as “Ready Player One,” “Avengers: Infinity War,” and “The Women of Marwen,” was originally supposed to do the score, but his was ultimately rejected. That’s not to say that Danny Elfman made a bad score, I think it is very well done. But I listened to Alan Silvestri’s “Mission: Impossible” theme, and I think it is an interesting rival to Elfman’s. For how this movie turned out, I gotta say that Elfman’s is a bit more appropriate for something like this, but Silvestri’s is just killer. The reason why Elfman’s theme works for this movie is because the movie had an intro that made it feel like we were watching TV, and his song was short and effective. Silvestri’s felt really grand and epic at times, especially with the drums. I’ve been looking around online and I don’t think there’s been a single announcement as to who will officially score “Mission: Impossible: Fallout.” Silvestri’s got some stuff up his sleeve as we speak, but I would love to see him come back and score this upcoming movie with the use of his own theme that would have been inserted back in 1996 if no conflict got in the way. By the way, be sure to let me know which of the two “Mission: Impossible” themes you prefer: Elfman’s or Silvestri’s.

Funny thing about these themes is, I gave a compliment to the Elfman one for feeling like a TV show and that is something I usually DON’T want in my movies. The rest of the movie feels like a film, but with this TV-like theme, I can’t help but praise it.

Now I talked a little bit about Tom Cruise here, but I can’t really say I’ve dived into too much depth about him. Tom Cruise’s character of Ethan Hunt has defined the movie and Cruise probably had no idea how much this character would make a newfound path in his acting career. Cruise delivers a fine performance as Hunt in this movie. It’s believable, you feel his pain, you buy him as this agent and his performance maintains a fine line between fun and serious which totally worked for the movie. A couple of other standout characters include Luther, played by Ving Rhames (Pulp Fiction, ER) and Jim Phelps, played by Jon Voight.

Fun fact about Jon Voight by the way, he would have never been in this movie if it weren’t for one thing. Believe it or not, Voight wasn’t the goto as for who would be cast as this character. If you watch the original show and its revival (where he appears as only original cast member to return), you’d know that the character of Phelps is played by none other than Peter Graves and there was a point where he found out about some actions that his character did in the movie. Once he found out about them, he didn’t want to be a part of the project.

Now let’s get to the best part of the movie, and it is probably the part that you all know about if you’ve seen the film, or maybe even if you haven’t seen it, and it’s the wire sequence. Like, holy crap! This is my second time watching this movie, and my jaw literally dropped! Tom’s performance in here is pristine! He’s silent, he’s mentally terrified, but also somewhat determined. The suspense levels during this scene just happens to be unbelievable! It has the environment, if you can call it that, of a library, but it also has the feel of a boxing match! I talked about the music in this movie and how well done it was, but there’s barely any music during this sequence and the movie as a whole is all the better for it! Just… wow! My favorite Tom Cruise movie is “Risky Business,” but if you ask me which scene from a Tom Cruise movie might be the best, this one, I cannot guarantee is my favorite, but it’s certainly a contender, I need to probably make a conclusive list before I decide whether or not it is my favorite.

Also, it’s not just Tom Cruise who has the spotlight here in this scene, some of it is given to a minor character by the name of William Donloe, played by Rolf Saxon (Saving Private Ryan, Woman in Gold). In this scene, he headed to the secure area where Cruise is downloading files, but the fact that he pretty much had a bad meal allows Cruise, conveniently, to carry on the mission with slightly less worries.

In the end, “Mission: Impossible” the second time around actually turned out to be better than the first time. I didn’t hate it the first time, but I’m just saying. “Mission: Impossible” is certainly a fun movie, but at the same time, somewhat dramatic. The tone works overall. On one hand you have a story where the main character has to deal with his crew dying, and on the other hand, you have a story where that same character fights someone on a train with a wind machine going at 140 miles per hour so his face gets distorted, a speed so fast that Tom Cruise himself approved of it because wind at that speed could possibly knock him off the train. The more I find out about this movie and the more I think about it, the more interesting it gets. I’m gonna give “Mission: Impossible” an 8/10. This in my mind, is currently a low 8 on a scale of 1-10, but this could increase overtime. It would probably be a 7 though if less passion were injected and less standout moments and characters were inserted into the final product. I’m honestly willing to bet that next time I’ll watch it, I’ll like it even more. And speaking of products…

*SPONSORSHIP ALERT* (although I’m not getting paid)

Call kids what you may. You can call them what I just said, or you can call them children, offspring, products of two parents, etcetera. You might as well say these products are newly realized each and every day. And one day, the realization will arrive to a male and a female. For example, a gal named Genevieve, and a guy named Paul, will achieve that realization in a number of months. But before that, they had to suffer through the seemingly neverending process, which might as well now be a neverending story, of something that their child will ultimately thank them for. Making them. This is all explained… in “What the IVF?!”

“What the IVF?” is a relatively new series and channel on YouTube, where Genevieve and Paul document their time trying to have a baby. To them, the journey is hard, but they “keep effing trying” as they face tiny victories, but also enormous losses. Get ready for the drama between the two as they encounter problematic situations in sex, testing, wasting money on everything that’s needed for impregnation, and needles so sharp they might as well kill you! Their latest episode listed above is the fourth episode in the series and it is a deep dive on trying to conceive! You see the couple going to Dollar Tree and buying pregnancy tests, Genevieve utilizing an app that might as well be a diary she never wanted, and a shoutout to the drink Surge! By the way, this is a late announcement, but if you haven’t heard, they actually brought the drink back! Just a fun fact because I’m not sure if everyone is aware! To catch up on the latest episodes regarding Genevieve and Paul’s adventure to conception, click the link below to their YouTube channel, be sure to subscribe, like, click the bell, whatever it takes to make them happy without buying something for their baby. Also, be sure to check out their Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and their website! All the links are down below, and if check all of this stuff out, be sure to let them know that Jack Drees sent you over!

WTIVF? WEBSITE: http://www.whattheivf.com/

WTIVF? YOUTUBE: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCILXSidkzWgwrQ5Oa1py78w/featured?disable_polymer=1

WTIVF? TWITTER: https://twitter.com/WTivF

WTIVF? INSTAGRAM: https://www.instagram.com/wtivf/

WTIVF? FACEBOOK: https://www.facebook.com/What-The-IVF-288868031634125/

Thanks for reading this review! April is on the way! “Ready Player One” is out! I’m probably gonna catch it in 70mm! Quite a time to be alive! Not only that, but April will also be the month where I continue this series of reviews and focus on “Mission: Impossible II!” Stay tuned for that, and also I want to let everyone know that I made a part 2 to a post I made back in November which got a decent amount of hits, “What the Heck Is Up with Justice League?” In this new post, I talk about the movie’s box office total, how it is shockingly low for the kind of movie it is, and I even give a sense of wonder as to where the Detective Comics Extended Universe could be going from here. The link to that is down below, be sure to check it out, and be sure to follow me here on WordPress so you can stay tuned for more great content! I want to know, did you see the 1996 “Mission: Impossible?” Let me know your thoughts if you did! Do you think the movies or the TV shows are superior? I actually kinda really want to know since I never watched the show on TV. Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

WHAT THE HECK IS UP WITH JUSTICE LEAGUE (2017)? *PART 2*: https://scenebefore.wordpress.com/2018/03/24/what-the-heck-is-up-with-justice-league-2017-part-2/

Tomb Raider (2018): A Step In the Right Direction For Video Game Movies

Posted on by Jack Drees

mv5boty4ndcyzgqtymvlny00odgwltljytmtyzq2ote3ndhjodmwxkeyxkfqcgdeqxvynzyzodm3mzg-_v1_sy1000_cr006741000_al_

“Tomb Raider” is directed by Roar Uthaug and stars Alicia Vikander as Lara Croft. If you are not familiar with “Tomb Raider,” it’s a video game franchise that started back in 1996 and is still making games today. You play as Lara Croft throughout an action-adventure and puzzler. This is also not the first “Tomb Raider” movie. There have been two before this one starring Angelina Jolie, but that series didn’t last. This movie is more similar to the 2013 “Tomb Raider” game as opposed to the oldest ones. The plot is that Lara is the daughter of an adventurer, and unfortunately, this adventurer has disappeared. Now, Lara must push her own limits once she finds herself on the island where the adventurer, otherwise known as her father, disappeared.

I’ll remind all of you reading right now that this is a video game movie. In Layman’s terms, a movie you should usually avoid. People for years and years have been making several video game movies, and while I can’t really say I’ve seen all of them, heck, I can only say I’ve seen a few, I can say that one of them turned out to be my least favorite film of all time. That “film” by the way, is the 1993 “Super Mario Bros.” movie. When it comes to video game based films, the “Tomb Raider” franchise is no stranger to this. It already had a couple of movies out, but now it has been redone with a different actress playing the main character. I’ve actually seen bits and pieces of “Lara Croft: Tomb Raider” in various YouTube videos and on TV. From what I’ve seen, I know it’s objectively dumb. But if you have the right mindset, it might come off as pure fun. That movie and its sequel seem to have some similarities to the older “Tomb Raider” games, but this “Tomb Raider” film seems to relate more to 2013’s “Tomb Raider” and is a little more serious. This movie feels more like “Wonder Woman” as opposed to say… I dunno, “xXx.” Does the seriousness work in this movie? I gotta say it does. And speaking of things working, I gotta say this movie as a whole works. I didn’t expect this movie to be as good as it was AT ALL. The teaser poster released months back looked terrible, the first trailer looked like s*it, and I was kind of skeptical about the girl who played Lara Croft. I mean, my fondness for her grew over time as I found out she plays Ava in “Ex Machina,” but leading up to this film’s release, I was skeptical of the turnout. But you know what? The quest is complete! We have an above average video game movie! Out of all the video game movies I’ve seen, this is the first I’m giving an above average score to. No you fools, I’m not counting “Tron” or “Wreck-It Ralph,” those were original!

Let’s talk about Alicia Vikander in this movie. I’ll mention once again that this movie is more like the 2013 “Tomb Raider” so with this character, you don’t really see her slinging guns at giant robots or running on walls while on wires, you just see her on an adventure. While I can’t fully compare this film and “Lara Croft: Tomb Raider” side by side, Vikander’s character is a bit more heroic and warrior-like as opposed to Angelina Jolie’s character who might as well be a rock and roll superstar badass chick who makes you accept the fact that she can do literally anything. Here in this movie, you are given moments where you can emotionally attach yourself to Lara. You see her struggles, you feel her pain, and you root for her in just about any circumstance. Also, based on what I recently said, I will bring up that I’m NOT saying I DON’T think this movie’s Lara is a badass, but I’m also saying she’s a different type of badass. I’m not giving what exactly can be called a negative connotation to either character, but Vikander’s the type of badass that is relatable whereas Jolie’s the type of badass you can’t help but wonder what the hell is going to happen.

Another standout character to me in this film is played by Walter Goggins (The Shield, Justified) he goes by the name Mathias Vogel and if you played the 2013 video game you might be familiar with him. There was a moment I was watching the movie and I was reminded of something. You know how every once in a while I do a countdown on a certain topic? One of the ones I’ve planned to do for a long time is my most hated characters in movies. If I actually get around to doing that, Vogel might be a possibility. I can’t say he’ll make it for sure, but based on his attitude and some the s*it he does in this movie, major points goes to him on that, making him climb up the charts.

Now once again, this is a video game movie, meaning it has problems. And let’s face it, this movie’s boring. I don’t mean that from beginning to end, but there are various points where the movie felt like just dragged. I didn’t give a crap about what was going on, part of me didn’t even know what was going on, and I kind of didn’t want to know what was going on. Gosh, it’s “Star Wars: The Last Jedi” all over again!

Also speaking of video games, depending on what you play, you might think of those at times being these epic adventures where you can basically accomplish anything, even if it’s just by the smallest of seconds. This movie’s kind of like that too. You almost have to suspend your disbelief and just let certain things go at times. If you don’t play a lot of video games, you probably don’t know what I’m talking about. Just imagine someone trying to get from one side to the other and there’s no bridge or walkway. So you have to go back, and run as fast you can to the edge of the side you’re on, with the slightest amount of hope that you’ll make it to the other side. It looks like you’re gonna fail, you’re going to fall down a neverending abyss, but with your own two hands, you make contact with the edge of the other side, and you’re struggling to actually “make it over.” It’s just a climb away. With all your might, you climb! It takes ten seconds of your strength and willpower, but you have achieved the right to fight! This movie is like that sometimes. I was able to let it slide because for one thing, it’s based on a video game and video games are like that. But also because there’s a certain limit in my head where I can’t suspend my disbelief any longer, and the movie fails to reach that. So yeah, this movie is based on a video game, and it can technically be called a movie. Awesome! F*cking finally! The umpteenth time’s the charm, but it happened!

In the end, I’d watch “Tomb Raider” again. Some part of my brain would want to give it a 10/10 just because of what it stands for in the video game movie genre. Not only that, but it also exceeded my expectations. Although I’ve got to be real with you, if I give this movie a 10/10 my pants would be on fire. I’m a critic, not a charity operator. Having watched this, I was engaged, I was intrigued, I was connected to the characters, I thought the people behind this film did a good job at adapting the source material to the screen, and I also thought Vikander did an alright job as Croft to my utmost surprise. So with that being said, I’m going to give “Tomb Raider” a 6/10.

One last thing before we close this out, long before this movie released. There was actually speculation all over the place that the role of Lara Croft would end up going to a different actress than Vikander, specifically Daisy Ridley, AKA the “Star Wars” franchise’s Rey. When I heard about this news, I was in instant approval mode. In fact it’s not just me, other people, including “The Force Awakens” co-star John Boyega thought Daisy Ridley would have made a great Lara Croft.

According to an article from The Hollywood Reporter, it turns out that John Boyega has played the 2013 “Tomb Raider” reboot, happened to be aware of the project, and texted Daisy Ridley saying that she could have a real shot at playing Lara if they decide to base the upcoming “Tomb Raider” film on the 2013 remake game.

Daisy Ridley also admitted that at the time she had been in talks to play the character. Although there was no confirmation. There were some loose ends that needed tying up involving the film. The script still needed to be finished for example. When I found out Daisy Ridley wasn’t going to be the next Lara Croft, I was a bit disappointed. Seeing her killer performance in “The Force Awakens” made me think NOBODY ELSE could be Lara Croft. Having seen this movie, not to mention a couple of “Star Wars” flicks with Ridley as the lead role, I guess I can say to myself that I may have just been complaining a tad more than necessary. After all, if Ridley gotten the role, I could have either overhyped the movie just because she’s in it, or have been disappointed just because I mainly see her as Rey. I like Alicia Vikander as an actress, and I ended up highly appreciating her in “Ex Machina,” but if I were on “Who Wants to be a Millionaire?” and you asked me who Vikander was in 2016, I probably would have just been stumped or in need of a lifeline. This movie ultimately continues to make me envision a bright future for Vikander, and I hope she gets some more good roles.

Thanks for reading this review! This week I’ll have a review up for “Mission: Impossible” and hopefully I’ll be able to see “Ready Player One” in a few days. If I do see “Ready Player One” in a few days,  I hope it’s great, and maybe I’ll prove to my pals who apparently think this movie’s going to be s*it dead wrong on the nose. Then again, they didn’t read the book. Stay tuned for that review, my “Mission: Impossible” review, and whatever other content this movie reviewing moron can give you. I want to know, did you see “Tomb Raider?” What did you think about it? Did you see the Angelina Jolie “Tomb Raider” films? Did you play any of the games? Leave your comments down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

What the Heck is Up With Justice League (2017)? *PART 2*

Posted on by Jack Drees

mv5bywvhzjzkytitogiwys00nmrklwjlyjctmwm0zjfmmdu4zjezxkeyxkfqcgdeqxvymtmxodk2otu-_v1_sy1000_sx675_al_

Hey everyone, Jack Drees here! Last November, I asked a question to the world. What the heck is up with “Justice League?” I made a post with that title where I talk about various incidents that have been going on involving the crew of the then upcoming “Justice League” movie. To view this post, click the link below!

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

Although before we go any further with our current post I just want to get something out. Why are you here today on the Internet? I figured it was because you wanted to waste some time and avoid cleaning your room. Come on now! Your mother’s about to walk in and she’s gonna freak out! Well, allow me to once again introduce, Genevieve and Paul. Check out some earlier posts for less recent introductions. They are on the Internet for multiple reasons, but one of them is to tell the story leading up to their conception. The explanation of the conception journey is gone over in a little thing I like to call “What The IVF?.”

“WTIVF?” is a new series on YouTube where Genevieve and Paul go through the struggle of having a kid. The struggle being, well, making a kid. Each episode features a new adventure between the two where they encounter unfortunate realities in sex, testing, math, examinations, costs, and needle injections that end up hurting harder than a simple step on a LEGO brick! The video you see up above is the third episode in the series. The past two have been sexy, but now things are getting awkward! Paul is on a mission for science, but he has no idea what he’s in for! If you enjoy this video, be sure to like it, share it, subscribe to the “WTIVF?” channel, hit the notification bell, leave a comment, all that jazz! I’ll post links down below to their social media profiles including their YouTube, so check em out and tell them that Jack Drees sent ya over!

WTIVF? WEBSITE: http://www.whattheivf.com/

WTIVF? YOUTUBE: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCILXSidkzWgwrQ5Oa1py78w/featured?disable_polymer=1

WTIVF? TWITTER: https://twitter.com/WTivF

WTIVF? INSTAGRAM: https://www.instagram.com/wtivf/

WTIVF? FACEBOOK: https://www.facebook.com/What-The-IVF-288868031634125/

Judging by the title of this post, you might be thinking, “What crazy hijinks is being cooked up this time?” Well, I can tell you. This post may be asking what the heck is up with “Justice League,” but it is also going to be asking what the heck is up with the Detective Comics Extended Universe? As you may know, “Justice League” is the fifth movie in the DCEU. It takes all your favorite DC superheroes and places em all together in one movie. Together, they join forces and try to take down the evil Steppenwolf. I reviewed “Justice League” almost a week after it came out and if some of you read it, some of you may call that the real part 2 to this series, but that’s not the main focus of the post. My very own thoughts were more important. Whatever the heck is going on does get a load of attention, but my main intention was to review the movie. Here however, we need to about the utter s*it that’s being happening lately.

As mentioned in my review, “Justice League” made a combined domestic and international total of $278.8 million on its opening weekend. While that is certainly a lot of money for a film in general, it’s kind of underwhelming if your film is called “Justice League.” This whole topic gets crazier when you realize that “Thor: Ragnarok,” which was out two weeks prior to “Justice League,” made so much more on its opening weekend worldwide (approx. $427 million). “Thor: Ragnarok” is an action-comedy that has less superheroes and less money put into it. Having seen both movies, I will even say that PERSONALLY, “Justice League” is the better movie. And I might be a bit generous when I say that because I now own the 4K and I rewatched it. Some of the effects look like they were from a college student’s film. I had believe it or not, a better time watching “Justice League” than I did watching “Thor: Ragnarok,” but it doesn’t mean I can’t point out its flaws.

I will also have you know that I paid more money to see “Justice League” in the theater than I did when I went to see “Thor: Ragnarok,” and I brought more people with me to see it. I went with a companion to see “Thor: Ragnarok” on opening weekend, and they ended up going another time in the future with their family. I didn’t, but adding that in, I guess some logical sense can be made behind “Thor: Ragnarok’s” overall total. Not to mention, they didn’t go see “Justice League.” Although I will say that I went with one more person to see “Justice League” than I did for “Thor: Ragnarok” and to my knowledge, neither of them have seen “Thor: Ragnarok.”

With that being said, that basically covers the extremely early events of “Justice League” and “Thor: Ragnarok,” and now, both theatrical runs have lead up to this point. I now have a 4K Ultra HD Best Buy exclusive steelbook for “Justice League” and I don’t have one copy of “Thor: Ragnarok.” One week after the “Justice League” movie came out on 4K and other home video formats such as Blu-ray and DVD, I found out some news that Marvel may be popping drinks over, and news that’s leaving DC rolling their eyes. “Thor: Ragnarok” made a total of $853,968,214 right now. “Justice League” just finished its theatrical run, and its total came out to $657,924,295. Keep in mind, that recently mentioned number, is objectively, a lot of money. Although judging the two movies and what they contain, the idea of a “Justice League” movie making as much as money as it did against a punier movie such as “Thor: Ragnarok” is what’s called a surprise and a f*cking half!

My personal opinion on both films aside, “Justice League,” according to many people, was not as good as it could, would, and should have been. When you take the movie and put it in that sort of viewpoint, it can be said that “Justice League’s” total against “Thor: Ragnarok” is valid, but part of me wonders what this means overall for the DCEU. Let’s take a look at the worldwide totals for every movie, including “Justice League,” released in the DCEU thus far.

MAN OF STEEL: $668,045,518
BATMAN V. SUPERMAN: DAWN OF JUSTICE: $873,634,919
SUICIDE SQUAD: $746,846,894
WONDER WOMAN: $821,847,012
JUSTICE LEAGUE: $657,924,295

This does beg a question, where does the DCEU go from here?

The DCEU is obviously going to have to make some choices from here on out. After all, with all the popularity Marvel is getting at this point, it’s getting harder and harder each and every day to compete with them.

One thing I’ve heard as a suggestion is the possibility to reboot. I do think this is a good idea, but also a bad one. Let’s start with the positives.

If you reboot, you have an opportunity to reorganize and readjust your vision to only make POSITIVE products. Let’s face it, there are numerous souls who weren’t satisfied with various DC films. The lack of satisfaction towards those films could have lead to the downfall of “Justice League.” Also, I usually try to promote movies and support them for being different, but one thing that’s an odd choice for DC, is that barely any of the heroes who happen to be in the Justice League thus far, had their own movie released prior to “Justice League.” Superman had one, Batman had one, Wonder Woman also had one, but not The Flash, Aquaman, or Cyborg. Sure, you can also make the point that not every Marvel superhero in the Marvel Cinematic Universe had their own film released before “The Avengers.” Although judging by the time, did you really think putting out a Hawkeye film before “The Avengers” would have gotten everyone flocking to the theater? Everyone would probably go see it now, including me even though I think Hawkeye’s as useless as a rock paper scissors match to determine what time it is. I will say however in DC’s defense when it comes to making money, forming the Justice League and actually putting out that movie prior to releasing standalone films might be an interesting strategy to get people who liked seeing certain heroes in “Justice League” in their own films. That way, instead of going to see “Justice League” only once after maybe ignoring some prior installments, they have some awareness of a character existing in the universe and their existence intrigues them enough to go see their standalone film. Maybe, just maybe, to fully determine the idea of this reboot thingy, we should wait and see what “Aquaman” makes at the box office. Besides, it’s not like Marvel didn’t do something like this before. They briefly introduced Black Panther and Spider-Man in “Captain America: Civil War” and the two went onto getting successful standalone movies down the road. Plus, another thing that keeps coming to my attention is that DC is constantly announcing project after project, but these projects never seem to go anywhere. Marvel seems to maintain a steady pace and seems to focus on the present. They sprinkle in some ideas about what can be done in the future, but they don’t seem to have the clutter that DC has. This is the great thing about Marvel president Kevin Feige. The DCEU always seems to be scrambling and doesn’t really know where to go next, but Marvel always has a path. Now let’s talk about something I usually consider a positive, but point out its flaws.

My usual philosophy when it comes to movie-making is that someone’s vision should be fulfilled, and when it comes to that, I’m mainly talking about the vision of the director. When it comes to Marvel, you can see that the directors of those films unleash what they view as figments of their own imagination, and they ultimately have a vision of where their movie should start and where their movie should finish. But the thing about the Marvel Cinematic Universe is that the visions of the director, doesn’t play as big of a part in the series as much as producer Kevin Feige’s. If you look at all the Marvel movies, they all don’t feel like they’re in their own little area. While they technically are, they all have a tone, story, and feel that reminds you they’re in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. DC’s movies, when it comes to directing, come off as a bunch of people who try to make their own food, they bring it to a big banquet and see who takes it or considers it the best food of all. If you compare the styles of Zack Snyder and Patty Jenkins, you might notice that their movies are written a bit differently, tonally speaking they’re not exactly similar, and they seem like a movie only they or a few other people would make for themselves. I’m not against them having their own thing for now, but if this universe gets to a point where a major storyline plays in future films, it’s gonna have to get more collaborative.

Now let’s talk about one big con when it comes to rebooting. Who are gonna play the roles of the heroes? Well, if they’re gonna do an all new universe with the same exact heroes that have been introduced thus far, I do think they should recast Christian Bale as Batman, but separate it from the “Dark Knight” trilogy universe. Although since that’s probably unlikely to happen, I’ll be a bit more realistic.

BATMAN: Jake Gyllenhaal (Nightcrawler, Stronger)
SUPERMAN: Wes Bentley (Interstellar, The Hunger Games)
WONDER WOMAN: Deepika Padukone (xXx: Return of Xander Cage, Chennai Express)
THE FLASH: Timothée Chalamet (Interstellar, Call Me by Your Name)
AQUAMAN: Whatever bloody person has long blonde hair or can put on a blonde wig, this one’s really freakin’ hard. Or if someone can find Patrick Swayze’s ghost that would work too.
CYBORG: Dexter Darden (The Maze Runner, Joyful Noise)

While you can reboot, recast, and therefore start something new and fresh, it’s going to affect the current universe’s positives. Not only do we have a surprisingly great Batman (Ben Affleck), one that’s actually beloved by moviegoers and comic book fans, but we also have a fantastic Wonder Woman. Some people may beg to differ, but I personally thought Gal Gadot as Wonder Woman is what made “Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice” worth watching. Not Batman, not Superman, but once I walked out of the theater, I thought Wonder Woman was the s*it. And no, not because she was sexy. Although that’s bonus points. To prove to you how much I truly loved Wonder Woman in that movie, I went to Rhode Island Comic Con in 2016 and she was there. I stood in a line for five hours JUST to meet her and get an autograph. It was a fast paced line, but I did get to talk to her. She was pregnant at the time so I took a moment to congratulate her, and she thanked me. Not only did I love Wonder Woman as a character in this universe, but people, mainly girls, were hyping up the standalone “Wonder Woman” film like crazy. I was too, many people were skeptical of how it would turn out, but I knew this was going to be something special just based on how the character was portrayed in “Batman v. Superman.” And judging by many people’s opinions, it was. I might even think that the standalone “Wonder Woman” film, might even be better to me on a personal level than a gigantic number of the MCU films. If you reboot, you’ll lose a short-lived legacy of Gal Gadot inspiring girls all over and if the Wonder Woman who replaces Gadot doesn’t live up to her, some folks are going to be disappointed. It’s not to say that rebooting can’t work. Batman’s been rebooted multiple times and people had not much of a problem behind it for the most part and Spider-Man’s recently been rebooted for the MCU and people seem to like that. Although if this reboots, it needs to follow a collaborative path or something. Don’t copy Marvel beat for beat, otherwise you’re just an imitator. Develop your own path, and have people follow it. Hire qualified directors and writers, perhaps ones with lots of experience, and despite having a path to follow, allow directors and writers to add their own flare to the table. Have a collaborative effort while still promoting imagination.

I honestly don’t want the DCEU to end and reboot. But based on all the announcements that’s been going on lately and the total confusion-fest that some call news, it looks like it’s either heading that way, there’s gonna be another DC movie universe going on at the same time, or something else that I don’t even know at this point due to an increasing headache I’m getting from looking at all of this! At this point! I should change the name of this post to “WHAT THE FLYING F*CK IS UP WITH JUSTICE LEAGUE (2017)?!” When it comes to news, this is the Trump administration of movie news. A lot comes out and it’s sometimes just bonkers. I’m a DCEU defender, I know it’s not been great thus far, but I do see potential if the right people are hired to do each job, a more collaborative effort is put into each product, and while I don’t want each movie to be the same, I want the movies to feel like they know they’re in the proper series. I don’t want a reboot, some others seem to feel the opposite way of me, but this is where I stand. Although before we put this post to rest, I’ll say something that can get some people talking. “Black Panther” has been out for weeks now, but I’ll say, the movie’s been out for a month, and it already passed above the $1 billion mark. Its current worldwide total is at $1,211,644,236. Years ago, if some Gandalf-like wizard came out of a portal and told you that “Black Panther” will be out for a matter of days, and it will make more money than a very recent “Justice League” movie, you’d laugh your ass off. Am I right?!

So I want to know, why do you think “Justice League” made as much money as it did? What do you think the future for the DCEU will be? There are future movies coming out such as “Aquaman,” “Shazam,” “Flashpoint,” and “Wonder Woman 2.” The fate of these films may be uncertain and the fate of the DCEU may depend on the reception and box office returns of these installments, so let’s hope the results are positive! Thanks for reading this post! Pretty soon I’ll have my review of “Tomb Raider” starring Alicia Vikander. I went to see the movie hours ago, and I have quite a bit of things to say about it. Also, I can assure that by the end of the month I will have my review up for “Mission: Impossible” starring Tom Cruise to kick off my “Mission: Impossible” review series. Stay tuned for more great content! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Avengers: Infinity War (2018) Official Trailer 2: Do We Seriously Need This? I Was Already Satisfied!

Posted on by Jack Drees

mv5bmjmxnjy2mdu1ov5bml5banbnxkftztgwnzy1mtuwntm-_v1_sy1000_cr006741000_al_

Hey everyone, Jack Drees here! I can’t believe I’m saying this. But this is my first trailer review of 2018. The last trailer review I did believe it or not, was for the same movie whose trailer I’m reviewing right now, otherwise known as “Avengers: Infinity War.” A lot of news has come in about it recently. Tickets have gone on sale! We have a new poster to gloss over! You know, just after we got another recent set of posters to gloss over! By the way, Spider-Man’s poster SUCKS. This new poster we got, the one you’re seeing up above, is actually really freaking badass. It’s got a f*ckton of characters, it’s indeed got some colors, and it just sets the tone for super duper destruction. You know s*it’s about to go down, and go down HARD when Iron Man is doing his version of Jesus symbolism. What is he Superman now? A lot of people call it cluttered, I don’t really mind it all that much, but that’s just me.

Before we dive into the trailer I do have to ask a question. What is the best ending to a movie you have ever seen? What is an ending to a movie that you personally think about when you think about satisfaction? You don’t need to see anything else, you don’t need to find out anything else, everything that’s been seen thus far is all that matters. I had a similar feeling inside me once I saw the first “Infinity War” trailer. I didn’t want another trailer. But apparently we got one. Am I mad? No. Am I disappointed? No. Do I think it is necessary? Not really. I was stoked to watch it when I had the chance, but in all seriousness, I didn’t think we needed something like this. Not to mention, the first “Infinity War” trailer, looked like A+ material. It restored my faith for the MCU, which has always been known as the current comic book movie group whose movies are the very definition of epic. I was highly underwhelmed with “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2” when it released in 2017. In fact I rewatched the movie in school this year for a class and I hated the movie even more. “Spider-Man: Homecoming” wasn’t as good as I wanted it to be. It was a HUGE downfall after seeing Spidey in “Captain America: Civil War.” “Thor: Ragnarok” was better than both of those films, but to me, it felt like it tried too hard with the jokes. Also, to say that it’s a DIFFERENT type of Marvel movie like everyone else is, yeah, that’s f*cking bulls*it. It has humor, a Stan Lee cameo, end credit sequences, multiple heroes in there, there’s action, all that jazz. HOW IS THAT DIFFERENT? Also, I like “Immigrant Song,” but why did it have to play twice? You can argue it’s a different “Thor” movie, but even so, that’s one thing I didn’t like about it. I know a lot of people hate the first “Thor,” but I thought it was the best phase 1 MCU film! It actually, at times, felt similar to the second “Thor” film, you know, the one that should have never happened ever. I want it to rot in a dark world where it shall never escape. This year’s “Black Panther” was better than all of the three films of focus, but I found it to be somewhat overhyped. I saw it twice already, but I found it to be overhyped.

The first trailer given to us towards the end of the fall, made me think “Avengers: Infinity War,” could possibly, be the best movie in the MCU. Because I think I just saw one of the best trailers in the MCU. I’m not saying that this new end of winter trailer changed my thought process completely, but I considered it a step down from the first trailer. I will admit, I enjoyed parts of the trailer, but I can’t really call it the greatest thing on the face of the Earth. Now let’s dive into it!

Screenshot (267)

So the trailer starts off and we get this opening shot where the camera is starting off in a near-upside down position. The shot I’m seeing here believe it or not, reminds me of one shot I saw in “Black Panther.” One thing I couldn’t help but think of as well is, you know how all the phones that are out now? If you flip the screen left or right, the image will change position? It’s kind of like that. Someone who might as well been on a helicopter took a picture of New York City, this is their homescreen, and it somehow the homescreen can now move when the phone is rotated.

Then we move onto a montage of shots where we hear Gamora and Tony speaking about the film’s main villain. His motivation is to wipe out half of the universe. When I watched this for the first time, I thought to myself, wait a sec, not all of it? OK, that’s unique. This conversation sounds rather compelling if you ask me. This is especially true when Tony wants to hear the guy’s name again. Gamora reminds him the name is Thanos.

Screenshot (268)

Speaking of which, we get this shot of Gamora as she mentions Thanos’ name. I love this shot because looking it at closely enough, it almost seems to foreshadow the ultimate strength of Thanos himself. I can already tell that Thanos is about to kick some ass in this movie, maybe kill some Avengers in this movie, and possibly depending on what happens in “Avengers 4,” kill more in that movie. This purple glow you’re seeing all over the place, that’s saying something. Sure, there seems to be a portal in front of Gamora, but I honestly feel this is definitely foreshadowing.

On that topic, we also get the first reveal shot in this trailer of Thanos, which if you’re unfamiliar with Marvel…

Screenshot (271)

He has Doctorates in asskicking and being an ungrateful f*cking son of a bitch. If he’s your doctor and he’s got a needle, he’s not gonna give you a shot, which by itself, is painful. Chances are he’d shove that needle down your throat.

One relationship that has been revealed to us throughout the Marvel Cinematic Universe is the mentor-mentee relationship between Tony Stark and Peter Parker. So I see these two shots and they occur one after the other. You’ve got the shot of Spider-Man flying around, then you see Iron Man flying after some ship-like thing in the air. Maybe Spidey’s up there and Iron Man is trying to rescue him. That could totally just be there to get people to think that and this assumption actually is way off, and it could be, because look at the slight differences in the skies. I’m not saying that’s happening, but this does lead me to thinking that.

We also hear Stark say “We’ve got one advantage. He’s comin’ to us. We have what Thanos wants… so that’s what we use.” What does Thanos want? If you have not been following the overall storyline of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, you’d probably be unaware that Thanos wants the Infinity Stones. Hence why this movie’s called “Infinity War.” So we see one that has not exactly been revealed in any promotional material yet, and it is in the possession of Doctor Strange, and another one which we have seen, is in the possession of Vision. Basically, anytime while I’m at the theater to see this film, I can imagine at least one audience member gasping or getting chills when they see an Infinity Stone.

Next up we have some shots of Wakanda, which moviegoing audiences have been introduced to in “Black Panther.” Appropriately, we get a glance of “Black Panther.” He looks super noble, welcoming, and charming. A bunch of the “Avengers,” including the gorgeous Scarlett Johanson as Black Widow can be seen in one shot. And speaking of Black Widow, she has blonde hair for a reason I still don’t quite get, but maybe there will be a reason in the film. I’m not saying a hairstyle can’t be changed on a character, but it’s throwing me off. You know how in the “Divergent” movies, Shailene Woodley’s character of Tris would always have different hair in each installment? It just felt odd! You also have Steve Rogers shaking T’Challa’s hand, very wonderful to see. And I must say once again, Wakanda looks nice. Although I wouldn’t say it’s as nice as possible. Maybe a little color grading will change it all, but that’s just a nitpick.

Screenshot (283)

Then we get… THIS SHOT. This is something a good number of people have been waiting for. Stark and Star Lord are standing next to each other! I also love the way Tony is standing. In this frame you can see he has eyes kinda closed, but even when they’re open, you can look at the way he’s standing and find it to be chuckle-worthy. You can also see at this point, Star Lord IS Star Lord.

“Let’s talk about this plan of yours. I think it’s good, except, it sucks. So let ME do the plan and that way it might be really good.”

It almost reminds me of another role Chris Pratt did. You know how in “The LEGO Movie” he plays the main character of Emmett and he meets Wyldstyle? They’re in the old west and at one point, they’re talking about the main villain and the current state of what’s going on. So they’re talking to each other and Emmett says this:

“Great. I think I got it. But just in case… tell me the whole thing again, I wasn’t listening.”

Part of me was nervous about the “Guardians of the Galaxy” crew being in this movie because I thought with their humor combined with the tone of the main “Avengers” crew, I thought it would result in clashing tones. This clip gives me hope.

Screenshot (284)

So everyone seems to be getting ready for a big battle, they’re still on Wakanda, and this is probably gonna be some brutal s*it. You can also hear Thanos speaking over with the music, it just sounds awesome! Also, this is something that I’ve been waiting to see for a good bit of time in a Marvel movie. Despair. While I don’t think it’ll be as dark as the source material based on what I’ve heard, I’m quite excited to see a possibility that maybe Thanos could end up winning the battle. His destiny could be fulfilled. As you can see in the shot above, we have Thor, and from what I can tell, he’s still got no hammer, but lightning is a true force of his. Also, another thing he’s missing is an eye. If you’ve seen “Thor: Ragnarok,” you’d know the story. That however is more visible in this shot, the one where Thor is basically Thanos’ puppet.

Screenshot (285)

I mean… Holy s*it.

But before that shot occurred, we got to see what I consider to be one of the most defining moments of the entire trailer. We see Thanos’s hand, and you can also see a much smaller green hand. And based off of what I can tell, that is Gamora’s hand. Specifically, a young Gamora’s hand. The two are walking, and this must serve some purpose to the story. I can basically bet a million dollars that this is a flashback to Gamora’s youth. You know I’m right. Throughout, Thanos says this:

“When I’m done, half of humanity will still exist.”

This is once again restating the plan I mentioned at the beginning of this post. As I heard this, one thought went into my mind. What if Thanos knows the Infinity Stones aren’t powerful enough to kill all of humanity, and now he needs to find another way to kill the rest? Maybe in “Avengers 4?”

Screenshot (288)

The fighting continues, and we get to see perhaps an updated and more quality version of the big battle towards the end of “Star Wars Episode I.” Also, there’s gonna be big explosions everywhere, so I imagine if Michael Bay sees this trailer, he probably has his IMAX tickets already.

Screenshot (289)

Then we have one the most chilling shots of the trailer, Doctor Strange who looks like he’s getting the worst acupuncture session of all time. I’m almost convinced this is part of a dream sequence, and if it is, I’ll be somewhat disappointed, but this just shows how much our heroes are going to suffer in this event they call a movie.

I gotta talk about this moment too. The one where Thanos, from what I’m gathering, is saying to Iron Man, “I hope they remember you.” If this is not exactly a trailer trick and the line is actually being used where I think it is going to be used, specifically, in Iron Man’s last moments (I’ll get to this in a second), that is the perfect line that could be used for this!

Next up, is a moment of the trailer that so many people are talking about, and it associates with why Captain America is a great hero. You have Thanos here, looking like he’s ready to do some collateral damage to Cap, and all of a sudden, Cap’s itty bitty teeny tiny hands are grabbing onto Thanos’ mega Five Finger Death Punch fist. Thanos looks confused, and the shot where this is visible on the top left has actually been compared by some to a recently popularized meme. Specifically, Patrick Star’s “evil face.” And you can tell in the shot after, the one on the top right, CAP IS GIVING IT HIS *ALL*. I can’t wait to see how this plays out.

After the logo that seems to be taking as much time as it can to let everyone know what this movie is going to be called, we get one comedic moment. Or… at least that’s what people are saying. Because honestly, if this were comedy, it might as well be the cheapest form possible. I’m not gonna be too too hard on it, but it just feels out of place at least in this trailer, and it might be one of the weakest moments of comedy in the MCU. Essentially Spidey and Strange are introducing each other to one another. Spidey gives his real name of Peter and Strange is using his hero name, to which Peter says…

“Oh, so we’re using our made up names, then I am Spider-Man.”

Then we get a shot of Spidey swinging around through all sorts of destruction, everything looks like it has been f*cked over, and the trailer ends.

I’m not gonna say we NEEDED this trailer, but it also doesn’t mean it is bad. I think this is going to be a great film, but I was already all set after trailer 1. This just riddled my brain just a little bit. It gave me some things to be excited for, although part of me wonders how the comedy will play out. Now let’s talk about something we’ll all inevitably face in life.

That thing called death.

Seriously. SOMEONE HAS TO DIE IN THIS MOVIE. And I will probably give some major points if a death occurs to more than just a single character. If Hawkeye dies, I won’t f*cking give a damn. Hawkeye has done nothing for the MCU. Why should I care if he dies? The death has to pertain to someone I’d care about. Someone other people will care about. ALSO, IF THERE’S A FAKE DEATH IN THIS MOVIE I WILL SHOOT MYSELF IN THE FOOT! You know what Marvel? Pepper doesn’t die in “Iron Man 3?” Fine. Nick Fury doesn’t die in “Captain America: The Winter Soldier?” Alright, but it’s almost borderline stupid. As for the people whose death could affect the story, let me go down the list.

First and foremost is Iron Man. If Iron Man dies, this could be a perfect setup for a new story for Spider-Man, because obviously, Spider-Man is Iron Man’s mentee. This can lead to struggles in “Avengers 4” and the sequel to “Spider-Man: Homecoming.” Not only that, but it can also lead to struggles among the Avengers themselves. Tony is basically the spark to ignite the Avengers (unless you count Nick Fury). He’s the hero that defines the MCU Avengers. The rest of them have to cope with his death and fight in his honor.

Another death that could truly affect the story is if Gamora dies. Now Gamora’s a newer character but her death could be the point of the script where Thanos goes from being an evildoer to a jackass. Thanos raised Gamora, and based on what we’ve seen in the MCU’s material, they clearly have different views on society. Sure, Nebula’s death could do the same thing since Gamora was her sister but I feel that the death of Gamora could leave me mourning a lot more due to a larger attachment to Gamora. And… maybe… Because she’s a good-lookin… green chick… I dunno. Oh, and speaking of that! That can definitely affect Star Lord! The two are romantically linked and if Gamora dies, Star Lord is gonna freak out. Maybe he’ll endlessly shoot up Thanos in rage! Also if EITHER of the sisters die, it’ll obviously affect the other because, well, they’re sisters. Although I don’t think this death might end up happening for multiple reasons. First, “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3” is scheduled for a 2020 release. Second, Gamora is part of perhaps the most family-friendly part of the MCU. Third, she’s not exactly a main Avenger, and if it were to happen that people were to die, I think it wouldn’t really affect the Guardians as much. But you never know, anything can happen.

Other deaths can affect the story, and other deaths can definitely tug the audience’s emotional strings. But these are the two (or three if you count Nebula) that’ll probably have the most dramatic effect on the story and the MCU going forward.

Also, one question I didn’t ask after the first trailer. WHERE THE HELL ARE ANT-MAN AND HAWKEYE? IMDb suggests both characters will be in the movie, but we’ve seen nothing from them in the previews. One thing I’ve been gathering from a number of people, is that it’s possible that their lack of appearance has to do with something secret. Maybe having to do with “Ant-Man and the Wasp” coming out this July. I mean, if Hawkeye doesn’t show up, I don’t freaking care, he’s useless as hell anyway. Nothing against Jeremy Renner, he’s a good actor, but his character’s useless. Or… What if Ant-Man is hidden somewhere in this movie? Maybe in a good amount of frames in the trailer? But since he’s so small, it’s incredibly hard to see him! Or maybe, they’re in the credits.

Overall, I’m pretty stoked for “Avengers: Infinity War,” I already got my tickets, I’m going opening Thursday night at my local IMAX theater with laser projection. I’m gonna be seeing the movie in 3D, it’s gonna probably be one of the wildest experiences I’ll ever have at the movies. I’m undoubtedly excited that I know even if the movie sucks, I’ll have an awesome experience. I already enthusiastically tweeted about it!

Thanks for reading this post! “Avengers: Infinity War” has opening night showings on April 26th and will be everywhere on April 27th. I honestly don’t think I’m AS hyped as I was once before. In fact, after watching a recent “Ready Player One” trailer, I’m a little more hyped for that, but this movie looks like GOLD. My review for the film will be out at the end of next month and I’ll also soon have one for Tom Cruise’s “Mission: Impossible” to kick off my series of “Mission: Impossible” reviews. Stay tuned for more great content! I want to know. Did you see this new “Infinity War” trailer? What are your thoughts? Do you think anyone will die in this upcoming film? If so, who? Will Disney actually allow the darkest possible film to happen? Let me know down below and if you haven’t already, get your tickets! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Black Panther (2018): Is the Revolution Worth the Hype?

Posted on by Jack Drees

mv5botc2nty0ndu2ov5bml5banbnxkftztgwmtiwndc1mji-_v1_sy1000_cr006741000_al_

“Black Panther” is directed by Ryan Coogler (Creed, Fruitvale Station) and stars Chadwick Boseman (42, Get on Up), Michael B. Jordan (Creed, Fantastic Four), Lupita Nyong’o (12 Years a Slave, Star Wars: The Force Awakens), Danai Guira (All Eyez on Me, The Walking Dead), Martin Freeman (The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey, Sherlock), Angela Basset (Olympus Has Fallen, Contact), Forest Whitaker (Rogue One: A Star Wars Story, Arrival), and Andy Serkis (Rise of the Planet of the Apes, Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers).

This is the, I can’t believe I’m saying this, EIGHTEENTH, installment in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, and the whole story hasn’t even been going for ten years yet! Nevertheless, in this next chapter, it’s main focus is directed towards the title character of Black Panther, or T’Challa. Wakanda, an African nation with isolation and advanced technology, needs a new king. Why? Well, T’Challa’s dad died. His father was a former king and now T’Challa is next in line for the throne.

Going into this film for the first time, I was terrified of what I’d end up thinking of it. I remember watching trailers for this film, and I watched the first trailer that came out and thought to myself, “What in the world did I just watch?” The music felt WAY off, the tone felt like something in between a slapstick comedy and a fantasy for all ages, and it didn’t feel like something I’d get invested in. The second trailer was an improvement over the first one, and it made the movie look more watchable. I will say though from both trailers, the movie looked like it was well directed and had some good action. However, I was still scared. Heck, even the teaser poster (the first image in this review) was giving me some weird thoughts! It felt stale and almost as if you could confuse the background as if it were Asgard in “Thor.”

Let’s also just get something out of the way… (sigh) I’m white.

Let me just say that none of my comments regarding this movie or review have to do with race. I don’t judge people by the color of their skin (unless someone is miscast in something and part of it has to do with skin tone and it doesn’t flow with material that came before something related to it was made or some other reason like that). I imagine A LOT of people were excited for this movie for reasons having to do with a lack of white people, and I get that. Let me just say, if this movie had all white people in it, I’d probably give it a lower verdict than I would in this current review. Why? Read the extended parentheses statement above. A LOT of people are giving this movie some of the most positive reviews I’ve seen for a film recently, and it has become one of the best reviewed superhero movies of all time. What are my personal thoughts on the movie itself? It’s good, but it’s overhyped.

Before you call me a racist for not giving the movie a 10/10, let me state once again, IT’S GOOD. If that’s not positive enough, I’m sorry, that’s my personal opinion. You can have your personal opinion, we’re still friends. I’ll actually state if you want to know who the real racists are, I will provide a link down below to a tragic story about this movie and what happened before it released. Either take a break from this review and click the link, continue on and come back once you’re finished with the review, or if you hate reading, don’t click it at all. Also, if you hate reading, what are you doing here? YOU’RE LITERALLY READING THIS! Go do something else! You know, unless this is your punishment and you hate reading!

TRAGIC AND RACIST “BLACK PANTHER” STORY: https://www.colorlines.com/articles/white-supremacist-groups-plan-tank-black-panther-rotten-tomatoes-score-fails

Also, regarding that article, no matter what your views are, why would you rate a movie before you see it? Did I give “The Emoji Movie” a 1/10 on this blog or IMDb without even taking a look at it for myself? Nope! I went to the theater, paid $5.99 at the ticket line, which is ultimately money I was robbed of, and then I destroyed every last trace of life it had!

I will say though, “Black Panther” might actually be better than I thought it would have turned out. I thought it was just gonna be a middle of the road movie, but it turns out, it’s just slightly above that range. Now, I gotta become Mr. Movie Reviewing Moron, and tell you some things I found wrong with the movie. Wait a minute, I’m missing something. I’ll be right back.

*MAKES TRIP TO MEN’S WEARHOUSE, BUYS EXPENSIVE CLOTHING, RETURNS HOME, REMOVES GREY RALPH LAUREN SWEATSHIRT, BLACK “YOU’RE NOT GROOT” (FEATURING WHITE TEXT) T-SHIRT, BLACK (WITH WHITE STRIPES) ADIDAS SWEATPANTS, BLACK SKECHERS AIR-COOLED CLASSIC FIT MEMORY FOAM SHOES, AND ’47 GREY AND WHITE BOSTON RED SOX SOCKS, SOME HINTS OF BLACK ARE FEATURED TOO, INCLUDING THE COLOR OF THE RED SOX LOGO. PUTS ON WHITE DRESS SHIRT, BLACK SUIT, BLACK TIE, MATCHING DRESS PANTS, BLACK SOCKS, AND BLACK LEATHER SHOES, I DON’T EVEN CARE ABOUT THE BRAND NAMES FOR THOSE FOUR RECENTLY MENTIONED PRODUCTS, USE YOUR IMAGINATION. USE OF IMAGINATION IS SOMETHING I’M TRYING TO PROMOTE, SO UTILIZE IT!*

Alright, I’m back. Let’s get cracking.

This movie ended up being two hours and fourteen minutes long. Honestly, it felt a tad longer. It wasn’t like watching “Downsizing” which came out last December, but it still felt long. Some of the stuff that goes down in this movie, most notably the climax, takes forever and a half to conclude. I get that the movie needs a grand and epic feel during the climax, but it can have the same feel without being too long. Just saying.

While I will admit that the climax felt long, I will also mention that at various points of the first half, the movie itself felt a bit draggy. It’s not like I was watching “The Last Jedi” during its first half, but it still felt like it could have been improved.

This next part is part positive and part negative. This movie barely has any humor in it, which completely worked for what I was watching. TAKE NOTES, “THOR: RAGNAROK!” However, I won’t ignore how cheap the humor in the film happened to be. There were parts where I chuckled, but that’s probably how most of the humor went down for me. It wasn’t like “Doctor Strange” or “Ant-Man” where it felt like I was gonna die from laughter, it felt more like a disposable comedy starring you people know, people you liked in other movies, let’s blurt out such names like Will Ferrell and Ed Helms, and they’re there for the paycheck, much like every other actor in the picture. And it’s not just them. The whole movie is just gonna come off as a cash-grab. Maybe the writer(s) happen(s) to be trying their absolute hardest, maybe the director, and while the studio doesn’t think it’s a total masterpiece, they think it’s “good enough.” How good enough is good enough? Good enough to make money. Some people will think it’s funny, some will be in the middle, and others might just roll their eyes the entire time.

This film for the most part is very well written. I don’t have many complaints but when it comes to a couple scenes that tried to come off as emotional, I don’t really think I felt anything. Maybe I felt a tad of something in one moment, but for the most part I really didn’t feel much of anything aside from things such as my popcorn bag, my clothes, and my reclined seat.

My next complaint is somewhat personal, and it has to do with the film and how it’s color graded. There are a lot of scenes shot well, directed well, and a number of them also look great in terms of their wide range of color, but I will admit, there are some that look rather cheap just because, personally, the grass looks kind of pale. The grass is green, but not the green I want it to be. Maybe I’m imagining things, maybe I’ll change my mind, but this is how I feel for now.

You know one place grass can be found? The forest! And happily, not on Forest Whitaker, because that would be beyond terrifying! Forest Whitaker is in this film, he plays Zuri, and I’ve seen him play a number of characters prior to watching this. Those characters can be found in movies such as “Arrival,” “Taken 3,” and sadly, “Battlefield Earth.” Another film you can find Whitaker in is “Rogue One: A Star Wars Story,” which is a great movie in my book. Although the thing is, Forest Whitaker is in this movie, and in it, he just comes off as another version of Saw Gerrera, which is the name of the character he played in “Rogue One.” Not exactly in terms of what he does, but watching the movie, I couldn’t help but pick up on certain mannerisms and how the character behaves and compare it to Saw. It’s almost like the movie’s director, Ryan Coogler, saw “Rogue One,” loved it, and said, “Your character in ‘Rogue One,’ he’s awesome, best part of the movie, so do me a favor, and play the same character but with different clothes and keep your tentacle porn business out of any scenarios.”

This film also contains what may qualify as the most forced kiss in cinematic history.

 

Enough said.

 

I could get into some writing problems, but they’re mainly just diction complaints that will end up coming off as nitpicky at best. I already got personal with the colors, but I feel this will come off as a bit more personal than that, and I say that because I have perhaps a greater knowledge when it comes to writing than I do color grading despite color grading various videos.

Now let’s move away from the negativity and talk about some of the stuff I really appreciated during the film. First off, the visuals. Pretty much every single Marvel movie I see has competent visual effects. Some more than others, but it’s very hard to say that a Marvel movie hasn’t given me some sort of impression from a visual perspective. I will say from a visual standpoint, at times it very much reminded me of last year’s “Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets.” And no, this movie did not remind me of “The Fifth Element” all that much.

Some of these visual effects are part of what made for some of the best shots in the entire film. A select number of shots pertaining to what I’m talking about came from the trailer, but even some of those I have just recently discovered stood out to me. With that being said, the cinematography in this film actually was really impressive overall. It might actually add up to be some of the better cinematography I’ve seen in a Marvel Cinematic Universe film. There’s actually this one shot where a character is walking forward and the camera is slowly rotating 180° from an upside down point of view to a normal point of view. It’s one of the best shots of the entire movie.

Speaking of cinematography, some of the action was also very well shot. There were actually some parts that feel like they came out of a Marvel movie from the Russo Brothers, such as “The Winter Soldier.” The action was also very well directed and well choreographed. I was able to believe it for what it was, although there’s one part of the highly promoted car chase, or as I like to call it, an excuse to get people to watch a Lexus commercial, that felt kind of jarring. I remember the Lexus going at a blazing speed at one point, and I don’t know if it actually was going at said speed, but it almost felt like it was a computer-enhanced effect. It probably wasn’t, but that’s just “what it felt like.” The whole thing kind of threw me off.

There’s one more mega-plus this movie has, what was it again?

Oh yeah right, Bilbo and Gollum reunite.

Speaking of characters, let’s talk about T’Challa, AKA Black Panther. This is not the first movie in the MCU featuring Black Panther, that happened to be “Captain America: Civil War.” In that movie, I thought the character was cool, but not completely memorable. Although the first action scene with him was a total blast. Here, he’s cool and memorable. To be fair however, the movie literally has his name as the title, so it’s kind of hard to get him out of your head. His rise to becoming king invested me, and I will also say that you probably don’t have to watch “Civil War” to understand some of the stuff that’s going on in this film. I say that partially because the movie actually cuts back to “Civil War” during some key moments that way you don’t have to. I was able to root for the character, I truly cared for him, and I was able to buy Chadwick Boseman as this hero.

I buy Chadwick Boseman as the hero, so it’s super duper that I also buy Michael B. Jordan as the villain. Michael B. Jordan plays the character Erik Killmonger (as if you didn’t need a bigger hint as to whom this movie’s villain is, just read the last name) and with him, we’re getting yet another rare case of a great Marvel villain. I’ve had my history of viewing Marvel Cinematic Universe villains to be underwhelming (Red Skull from “Captain America: The First Avenger”), cliche (Ronan from “Guardians of the Galaxy”) unmemorable (Wait, What Was His Name? from “Doctor Strange”), or just plain stupid (Malekith AKA Mr. Dumbasadoornail from “Thor: The Dark World”). Erik is yet another surprising addition to a recently formed chain of fantastic Marvel villains. This is due to his motivation, his mannerisms, and how whatever he does is essential to the plot. As a viewer, it is clear that you’re supposed to hate the villain as a character, and that’s exactly what I did given Erik’s actions.

A lot of characters in this movie, you know, ones that happen to be Wakandans, they’re all super fierce and warrior-like, they reminded me a lot of “Wonder Woman’s” Amazons. They often appear organized, they’re somewhat rowdy, and often shout “Wakanda forever.” The actors who played them all did a very good job, from major roles to extra roles, and I’d trust these folks to help everyone survive, I don’t know, say a zombie apocalypse.

Also, let me just say, at one point during the movie’s first act, one character gives the finger, I’m calling it right now, it’s not gonna take too long for that to become at the least, a somewhat popular meme. It might take some time, but I’m willing to bet some people might make a GIF out of it or just spread the GIF somewhere. If not, they might just use a random screenshot. And maybe I’ll use it one day, if it’s not popular enough, maybe I’ll change its popularity.

One thing I’m still debating however, is whether Black Panther himself was more of an action delight in “Captain America: Civil War” or this movie. On the way home from the theater, I was asking that question to myself. It’s been over a year since I actually watched “Civil War,” but I still remember the chase scene where we first see Black Panther in his suit. It was well shot, fast-paced, very well done. The action scenes in this movie can also qualify to be up around that caliber, but there’s a part of me that doesn’t think I’d usually go and point out a scene from this movie to show off the awesomeness of Black Panther in action as opposed to the chase with him in “Civil War.” Although as I say for a lot of things on here, only time will tell.

In the end, I was actually somewhat pleasantly surprised by “Black Panther.” Sure, it’s overhyped, but ultimately enjoyable. I must say, as a Marvel Cinematic Universe film, it’s not the best, I’ll be completely honest with you and say I’d rather watch “Iron Man 2” than this, which a number of people don’t seem to like. Ah well, opinions are opinions. I can see why people are hyping up the movie in ways, but what matters is the execution, and in some senses of the word, it partially felt off. However, I’d probably watch “Black Panther” again and I’m gonna give it a 7/10. Also, remember, IT’S GOOD. I LIKED IT. YOU CAN STOP TELLING ME TO GO SCREW MYSELF. I’m actually going to see this movie again a number of hours after this is posted, so my opinion could change, but I figured why not get this review up while I can. Plus, a majority of movies I’ve seen have been reviewed after just a single viewing, so it might as well be fair to give that sort of treatment to this one.

Thanks for reading this review, on February 23rd, a couple of movies are coming out and I really want to see both of them. The first one is “Game Night,” which is a comedy where a game night turns into a murder mystery. The second one is “Annihilation,” Alex Garland’s second film he ever directed, which I’m hyping up like crazy because he directed “Ex Machina” and that movie is not exactly perfect, but just… beautifully made. So yeah, I can’t wait to see how this new film turns out. Stay tuned for more reviews and other great content! I want to know, did you see “Black Panther?” What are your thoughts? Leave your comment below! The next Marvel movie’s “Infinity War!” Woohoo! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

WAKANDA FOREVER!

The 15:17 to Paris (2018): Don’t Always Be Yourself

Posted on by Jack Drees

mv5bmty0njuznjywov5bml5banbnxkftztgwmzy1mdm0ndm-_v1_sy1000_cr006741000_al_

“The 15:17 to Paris,” unfortunately, is directed by Clint Eastwood (American Sniper, A Fistful of Dollars) (sigh). This movie stars Alek Skarlatos, Anthony Sadler, and Spencer Stone as themselves. The film is based on a book known as “The 15:17 to Paris: The True Story of a Terrorist, a Train, and Three American Soldiers,” which is based on a true story of three Americans who grew up together and find themselves discovering a terrorist plot while they’re aboard a train in France.

Now you may be wondering why you just read the word “sigh” in this post. Clint Eastwood is a beloved figure in Hollywood. I can’t say I’ve seen much of his work, but the man has proven himself to be talented as a director, as an actor, and as a producer. And in “The 15:17 to Paris,” the man comes off more like some American-loving guy than a filmmaker. I’m not trying to say that I hate America, I’m not trying to say that Eastwood can’t love America, but I’m saying that this film about three Americans who obviously were courageous, needs improvement.

This film is an hour and thirty-four minutes long, which is actually just a couple minutes shorter than “Sully,” another film directed by Clint Eastwood which is based on a true story. “Sully,” much like this movie, wasn’t as good as it would have, could have, and should have been. Although it was barely passable unlike this one. What worked in “Sully” is that the film is centered around the event people now refer to as the Miracle on the Hudson and the entire film focused on it in some way. The main event that really should be the nucleus of the movie this review is directed toward, which is the train fight, doesn’t feel like a major part of the picture. One of the other differences between this and “Sully” is that “Sully” has actors playing the lead roles and this movie doesn’t. I will be fair in saying that the three guys also written a book on this information, which eventually lead to this movie. The book even has mostly five-star ratings on Amazon. Although they had no involvement in the screenplay. Maybe if they wrote the screenplay and gave their own insight, maybe the movie will be better. Although that’s hard to say too because these guys are not professional screenwriters. This movie honestly becomes more and more of an enigma the more I think about it.

As mentioned, “Sully” mainly focused on an event that the lead character had major involvement in. This movie doesn’t. Not only that, but I didn’t even care about most of what happened in this film at all. The film starts off telling about how long the three major characters have been friends. They were troublemakers, they went to a Christian school, they didn’t have girlfriends, they enjoyed taking out some guns and playing War. That was somewhat intriguing. Then they all get older, the movie’s starting to lose some steam, but it’s still competent, and then we get to Europe and I ask myself, “What is happening?” This movie made me ask the same question I asked myself as I was forced to read “Pride and Prejudice” in school! Nothing happened! I will give the movie credit, at least it was technically more entertaining to me than “Pride and Prejudice,” but keep in mind, I’m not some girl who lived in 19th century Britain. Although this is a film DIRECTED BY CLINT EASTWOOD! I expect greatness from a movie like this! Once again, competently shot and entertaining in ways, BUT NOTHING EVEN HAPPENED!

I will also be fair and mention the hour and a half runtime again. Even if Clint Eastwood didn’t direct “The 15:17 to Paris” and it instead happened to be directed by Michael Bay, I’d probably have somewhat similar thoughts on both final products. Also, for the record, Eastwood didn’t do the screenplay. I’d have similar thoughts on both products because they’d still be barely long enough to qualify as a feature length film. Down below I have a description regarding feature length films taken from Wikipedia.

“According to the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, the American Film Institute, and the British Film Institute, a feature film runs for at least 40 minutes, while the Screen Actors Guild states that it is 80 minutes or longer.

The majority of feature films are between 70 and 210 minutes long.”

I have never really watched too many films that are forty minutes long, but this a film that could easily be a lot shorter, although in the end, a number of viewers who went to see this film would probably skip on it because it’s too short to be a “movie.” Heck, I think a large number of theaters wouldn’t even accept the film if it were forty minutes! Although it has Clint Eastwood’s name on it so…

In my reviews it’s traditional that I provide a section I where I go into the major characters and some characters that perhaps stood out to me, but I’m not gonna do that here. Instead, I’m gonna introduce each character, and I’ll provide some actors that could potentially play the role these folks have played themselves.

Here are the three heroes from this movie. The first one we’re going to “talk about” is Alek Skarlatos (left). This guy could have been played by a number of people in my book. The first person that comes to mind is Matt Damon. They look somewhat similar physically, granted Damon’s twenty-two years older than Skarlatos, but I think a role like this can be pulled off. Another person I bet could pull this role off is Alden Enrenheich, and if this name doesn’t sound familiar to you, let me have you know he’s been in films such as “Beautiful Creatures,” “Blue Jasmine,” and “Hail, Caesar!.” He’s also going to be playing Han Solo in “Solo: A Star Wars Story,” which at this point is more like “A Star Wars Product” given material I’ve seen thus far. Another possible candidate to me is gonna be somewhat surprising and that is New England Patriots’ tight end Rob Gronkowski. I know, weird, right? I will say though that he, just like some other notable sports stars such as Dave Bautista (Blade Runner 2049, Guardians of the Galaxy), Dwayne Johnson (Central Intelligence, Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle), and John Cena (Daddy’s Home 2, Trainwreck) had some acting gigs and it’s now a regular thing for them. Although I wonder if this kind of thing would have worked out because this movie went into production over the summer and certain announcements concerning it came in around preseason time. Also since I just mentioned John Cena, he probably would have done fine as this character given his physique.

Onto the guy in the middle, Anthony Sadler, his character is a–wait a minute, I don’t want to lose my sense of focus… The guy could have been played by Chadwick Boseman, who is playing Black Panther in, well, “Black Panther.” Sadler could have been played by Winston Duke, who will be playing M’Baku, another character in “Black Panther.” He could have also been played by John Boyega, who you may know as Finn in the “Star Wars” sequel trilogy. Yes, he’s British and this is an American character, but if you have seen John Boyega, he can do one hell of an American accent. Maybe Eastwood could have gotten J. Lee, who you may know for playing John LaMarr in Seth MacFarlane’s “The Orville.” Maybe Lakeith Stanfield would be a good pick. He was in movies such as “Selma” and “Get Out.” I can’t say I’ve seen much of his work, but he has proper looks for the role.

Moving onto Spencer Stone, he is the guy on the right of the photo which is located a couple paragraphs above where you are now. I’m not saying that this guy should play Spencer, but given one thing that happens in this movie, I wouldn’t mind seeing Russel Crowe taking on the role. I say this because there’s a meme-worthy “Gladiator” reference in this film. Remember how I said Rob Gronkowski would be a good pick for Skarlatos? If he had a buzz haircut, then he would probably be suitable for this role as well. Channing Tatum might be a good pick if he ever does a buzz to his hair too. Perhaps if Andrew Garfield did some shaving too his placement in this role could have been rather effective.

This movie is not exactly the end of the world, but it is lacking professionalism. Yes, you have a very experienced director helming it all, but you have a multiple actors who are playing themselves. Sure, this movie has its fair share of big names such as Judy Greer and Jenna Fischer, but this also has a screenwriter that hasn’t really done much of anything. Sure, experience doesn’t always equal skill, although it doesn’t change the fact that the level of skill put into this film wasn’t completely visible. Maybe the main trio wanted to play themselves for authenticity, but you have to consider, how skilled are they? They weren’t terrible in this movie, but their acting ability happened to be at a low level of some sort.

Some of you might be thinking, “Hey! Jackass! You’re forgetting about such instances like when Kumail Nanjiani played himself in ‘The Big Sick!'”

I didn’t. You’re missing the point.

You see, Kumail’s a f*cking actor.

In the end, this movie happened to be underwhelming as s*iiiiiit. If this movie lacked a tad more professionalism than what was already there, I might be a little more understanding and give a higher verdict, but this movie just got worse the more I thought about it. It’s difficult to care about the heroes, the filler is all over the place, and pretty much the only positives include the well directed action and the proper cinematography. Clint Eastwood, I’m sorry, I didn’t feel lucky, and this movie is a punk. A punk which stole my friend’s hard earned money! I’m going to give “The 15:17 to Paris” a 3/10. This is a hard movie to rate. I didn’t really know what to expect before going in since I haven’t really seen much in terms of marketing compared to some other films I know, but a movie with Clint Eastwood’s name attached to it should have been miles better than how this turned out to be. And sadly, this MIGHT POSSIBLY be the best movie, at least the best one that a number of people actually give a s*it about, to come out this weekend! What else is coming out this weekend you ask? The climactic (in more ways than you’d imagine) “Fifty Shades Freed,” and from Sony Pictures Animation, the absolute gods that brought you “The Emoji Movie,” live-action “Peter Rabbit!” Thanks for reading this review! Pretty soon “Black Panther” will be out in theaters, and given my ambitions, I have plans to see that as soon as possible. I’m also working on another post which will be out soon, which includes my personal thoughts on the upcoming “Super Mario Bros.” film. Stay tuned for more great content! I want to know, did you see “The 15:17 to Paris?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your least favorite Clint Eastwood film? He can do anything in it. He could act, he could direct, anything. Leave your comments below and maybe they might have more quality than “The 15:17 to Paris!” Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

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

Posted on by Jack Drees

375px-Glasses_for_RealD_Cinema-fs_PNr°0272

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

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

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

  • Mission: Impossible: Fallout
  • 2.0

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Maze Runner: The Death Cure (2018): The Continuation of Teen Angst, Starring Dylan O’Brien- PART 3, To Be Rebooted Once Hollywood Runs Out of Young Adult Dystopian Books To Base Movies On, Still Better Than Twilight

Posted on by Jack Drees

Before we begin my review for “Maze Runner: The Death Cure,” I wanted to give a shoutout to someone I know. This person I’m talking about just created an account here on WordPress. She’s a good companion of mine, who goes by the name of Millie. This companion just initiated an all new blog by the name of “Movie Reviews and More!”. The overall intention of “Movie Reviews and More” is to provide movie reviews, rumors related to the entertainment industry, and just talk about movies regardless of whether or not they’ve been released. Millie began her blogging journey days prior to the publication of this post you’re reading as of this moment. If you could do her a favor by checking out her blog and following her, that would be much appreciated. Now that we have that out of the way, let’s start my review!

MOVIE REVIEWS AND MORE!: https://moviereviewsandmore780585661.wordpress.com/

“Maze Runner: The Death Cure” is directed by Wes Ball, the director of the previous two “Maze Runner” movies, and stars Dylan O’Brien (American Assassin, Teen Wolf), Ki Hong Lee (The Nine Lives of Chloe King, Wish Upon), Kaya Scodelario (Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales, The Truth About Emanuel), Thomas Brodie-Sangster (Love Actually, Nanny McPhee), Dexter Darden (Geography Club, Joyful Noise), Giancarlo Esposito (Breaking Bad, Once Upon a Time), and Rosa Salazar (Insurgent, Parenthood). This film is being advertised as the final “Maze Runner” installment, and in this one, Thomas goes on a mission to find a cure for a disease that’s spreading all over civilization.

It hasn’t been until recently that I watched the prior two “Maze Runner” installments. After watching both from beginning to end, I have to say I enjoyed the first one, but the second one felt like Melatonin in the form of moving images, which is another way of saying the second movie made me almost fall asleep at times. Going into the third film, I didn’t have truly high expectations. The movie had a low score on Rotten Tomatoes, not to mention a January release date. Let’s face it. Movies+January=Begging for mercy. It’s simple math! It’s still January as I’m writing this and I’ll have you know that this is the first 2018 release I’m focusing on. There’s a saying known as “worst for first,” although I can tell you right now that’s not true because last year I saw “The Emoji Movie” and that was the twentieth movie I’ve seen released that year. Depending on what happens in 2018, I don’t think that’s going to be the case here either, because “Maze Runner: The Death Cure” surprised me in terms of its positivity. As I walked into the theater to watch this movie, not to mention, prior to even going there, I had one thought to myself. I thought, “Please be better than the second movie!” Not only did I get a film that’s better than the second movie, to me it has around the same praise I have for the first movie. If you read my review for the first movie, you’d already know that I’m not saying this movie’s perfect. We’ll get to that, but let’s go on by stating some positives.

This movie was directed by Wes Ball, and as mentioned, he directed both the first and second installments to this series. The fact that he’s come back to direct this third movie is just unbelievable, and I mean that in a good way. Although then again you have Michael Bay coming back to direct every single “Transformers” film and look how those have turned out. I say this is positively unbelievable because you have several films out now based on young adult adaptations. These young adult adaptations have come from books that have gotten multiple installments. The “Maze Runner” franchise is one example of that. Let’s compare this statistic with other similar films. As for “Twilight,” every single movie in the franchise has a different director making the picture. Well, that is if “Breaking Dawn” wasn’t split into two parts so in that case, the same guy directed both of those movies. “The Hunger Games” started off with direction from Gary Ross, and every film after that was directed by Francis Lawrence. “Divergent” was directed by Neil Burger, but that didn’t last because the next two films in the franchise were to be directed by Robert Schwentke. “Fifty Shades of Grey,” YES, THIS COUNTS, because it’s based on “Twilight” fanfiction, even though its target demographic is middle-aged women, was directed by Sam Taylor-Johnson. Then once that movie came out, it had two more scheduled to be released. “Fifty Shades Darker,” the sequel to “Fifty Shades of Grey,” was directed by James Foley, who also directed “Fifty Shades Freed,” which will, unfortunately, be out soon. It just goes to show that with these young adult adaptations and the sole young adult adaptation wannabe, nobody can commit to these movies. With the existence of “Maze Runner” and Wes Ball, we have an exception on our hands. Not only did he direct these movies just for the sake of having a job, he actually tried on all three. He failed on the second one despite looking nice at times, but he tried on all of them. Ball now has a trilogy to look back on as an accomplishment. As for this film, Ball once again delivers by executing solid performances out of the actors along with neat location choices. According to IMDb, the movie was done in South Africa, and it fit the post-apocalyptic vibe quite well. A lot of the cinematography done by Gyula Pados, who also did the cinematography for the previous “Maze Runner” installment, was very proper and it I could easily tell what was going on. So for overall direction, this movie’s solid.

Moving onto the actors, let’s talk about Dylan O’Brien. After seeing Dylan O’Brien in this movie and hearing a little more about him, I have massive respect for him. While all of the actors here commit to their roles, I have to say that O’Brien did an exceptional job committing to the one for which he was responsible. In 2016, it was reported that O’Brien was injured on set while filming “The Death Cure,” suspending production indefinitely. Turns out the injury came from a car making contact with him. Production resumed about a year after the injury happened. The fact is, they got it done. O’Brien survived, everyone’s fine, and the movie was made. Having said that, I want to write my own movies, I might even want to direct them, and I’ve had an idea for one for some time and I’ve often thought to myself for this one I’m thinking of in particular, Dylan O’Brien would be the lead role. Now that I’ve seen O’Brien and what he’s done as far as this movie goes, I want to work with him even more. O’Brien plays the character of Thomas once again, and he’s definitely got some charisma here, much like some other characters.

Another notably fine character is Newt, played by Thomas Brodie-Sangster. I thought Brodie-Sangster’s performance was solid and the way his character was written, along with Dylan O’Brien’s, brought out some great chemistry between the two. I’d probably have to watch the other two movies again, but I don’t think I felt as much of a connection to him as I did here. Maybe it’s because this is the last installment, maybe it’s because I watched this in a theater, not to mention an IMAX theater, I don’t know, but the point is, I like Newt here.

Another character worth talking about is Kaya Scodelario’s character of Teresa. In this movie, we first see her on the side of WCKD, which if can’t tell by what that acronym sounds like, is this franchise’s evil organization. I’m not gonna go into supreme detail about Teresa, but just about every single action from this character was something I was able to believe.

This movie, to me, was full of surprises, and I think I made that somewhat clear. Another surprise that caught my attention was that I actually cared about Rosa Salazar’s character of Brenda. She was introduced in “The Scorch Trials” as a character I didn’t really have much of a connection towards and since the movie itself was a near-snoozefest, that pretty much explains my thoughts towards her character. Brenda actually had a standout scene to me at one point during this movie. She’s driving a bus, and she has to escape, and the way she attempts to escape is pretty awesome. Actually, you know what, I take that back. It was aMAZEing.

As mentioned, this movie isn’t flawless, and as a movie reviewing moron, I gotta be fair here. Going into this film, I will have you know that I was actually at a restaurant beforehand having breakfast. My sister, who wasn’t going to see the movie, was receiving explanation from my father as to what the movie we were going to see was like. He described it as a combination of “The Hunger Games” and “Resident Evil,” at least that’s what my mind suggests. As for that second insertion, I’m not talking about the video games, he’s never played those. He’s talking about the movie adaptations. I haven’t seen one of those films, but I heard they’re abysmal, but having heard various things about them, I think I can make that connection now. The “Resident Evil” movies have a number of moments where you basically have to suspend your disbelief like crazy. This movie has that too, you just wonder how some of the stuff in this film actually happens. It’s not “Batman & Robin” bad, but it’s still a thing that occurs. One more issue I had was the first part of the film. I honestly thought it was a tad draggy but it quickly recovered as the movie went on.

If this movie, at least in my book, could trim up those issues, it might just be the best “Maze Runner” movie yet. Not only that, but it might make this the most solid based on dystopian young adult adaptation movie series I’ve seen to date. In my rankings, it’s tied with “Divergent,” but “The Maze Runner” is actually better because it could actually finish its own story. Based on what I’m saying about “The Scorch Trials,” that’s not really saying all that much. Others would disagree with me, and I’m not lying. Germain Lussier from io9 Reviews made an article titled “The Death Cure Doesn’t Give The Maze Runner the Ending It Deserves.” Not only that, but David Sims from The Atlantic calls this movie a “grim, half-hearted farewell.” I never read the “Maze Runner” books, so maybe my opinion is little different than others. Although Sims never says whether or not he’s read the books so that fact stands here. Nevertheless, maybe I’d like this movie a little less if I have actually read the books, but only time will tell. I might not ever read the books. This isn’t my first time saying this, but movies are more fun! By the way, sorry, books.

In the end, I was rather satisfied with “Maze Runner: The Death Cure.” Wes Ball once again proves to be an effective director who I personally think should get more work in the realm of action movies. Dylan O’Brien nails yet another performance as the lead character of Thomas. I thought a lot of the characters were great. The sound editing was a joy. The set pieces were amazing as well. Also, one of the best parts about all of this, we have a solid January movie! Whether or not this third installment is better than the second one requires no contest. As for being better than the first one, that’s a hard judgment to make, it could be slightly better, slightly worse, or equal. With that being said, I’m going to give “Maze Runner: The Death Cure” a 7/10. One last thing I’m wondering about this movie is this. Why do so many franchises like this have a fetish for needles? Just put this side by side with “The Hunger Games,” “The Giver,” and “Divergent” to see what I mean! Oh yeah, and even more hilarious, “The Hunger Games” has a character called Nessie Needle! Thanks for reading this review, be sure to check out my friend’s blog, and also be sure to check out my past “Maze Runner” reviews. I have reviews for “The Maze Runner” and “Maze Runner: The Scorch Trials,” so take a look at those if you’re interested. Also, as for upcoming content, I’m not sure what I’ll see next. Maybe “The Commuter” or “12 Strong” will be my next review. We’ll find out when time allows it. Stay tuned for more great content! I want to know, did you see “Maze Runner: The Death Cure?” What are your thoughts? What is your favorite “Maze Runner” installment in the movie trilogy? What is your favorite “Maze Runner” book? How would you rank either saga? Do you think either the books or movies are better? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

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

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