“The First Slam Dunk” is directed by Takehiko Inoue and stars Shugo Nakamura, Jun Kasama, Shin’ichirō Kamio, Subaru Kimura, and Kenta Miyake in a film about Ryota Miyagi, an athlete who tries to achieve the status of basketball star, as he is inspired by the dreams of his late brother. The film is also based on the manga series “Slam Dunk,” written by this film’s director himself.
I used to play sports as a kid. In fact, one of the conveniences of living near an elementary school is having easy access to a basketball court, so I shot a lot of hoops for fun when I had free time. I am not as much of an athlete now, but it does not mean I do not look back at my youth with some fond memories over at the court for instance. But as I have transitioned over the years from athlete to cinephile, I have come across and appreciated numerous sports-related films. A couple of my favorites include “Moneyball,” “Happy Gilmore,” “Ford v Ferrari,” and even though I have not watched it in a long time, the sports film I always think about as the quintessential watch is “The Sandlot.” On the surface, it is a fun little baseball movie. But over the years I continue to appreciate how it handles its characters, coming of age nature, and rivalry between the team and The Beast. Whereas a film like “Rookie of the Year,” another solid movie about baseball, showcases how the game becomes more important with time, “The Sandlot” showcases how a bunch of friends can continue to have fun over a simple game. There are adventures to be had and consequences to avoid, sure, but the stakes over who wins a game of baseball in the film never feel that high, even when it is team vs. team. “The First Slam Dunk” shows the importance of a basketball game, but it does it in a way that I feel is incredibly unique.
And that is part of why I think “The First Slam Dunk” is up there with “The Sandlot” as one of the best sports films. Ever. I say this as someone who has never read the source material or seen any of the televised content. This film not only serves a potential gateway to explore the franchise even more down the road, but it also happens to be one of the best movies I have seen this year. In my limited experience of watching anime, this is an enormous standout. When it comes to anime, as much as I liked “Suzume,” which I saw earlier this year, I think “The First Slam Dunk” might be better.
Let’s go back to the importance of the game, the reason why that importance is handled so well is because whereas some other stories build up to a climax where the team has to play their hearts out at the “big game,” this movie mostly sets itself around the big game and gets you to care about the characters along the way. This is like if they made a story set at the Daytona 500 for example, showed you random bits and pieces of some people’s lives in between, and used those moments to fuel your desire to see someone win as a result. I, as much I cannot stand American football, watch the Super Bowl every year. Sometimes I might get invested in a team based on certain factors. Maybe there is an underdog story. But I can only imagine what it is like for someone who follows the NFL so religiously to see two teams who bust their butts, or a favorite team of theirs, in such a daunting environment where the stakes hit a high. They have to be stoked out of their mind. But that sometimes could take months. “The First Slam Dunk” got me behind not only the team, but its individuals, in just a short amount of time.
The way this film is told reminds me of “Slumdog Millionaire.” If you watch that film and witness Jamal on “Who Wants to Be a Millionaire,” you see him answer each question as it is presented to him, but you also see his thinking process. You see how he answers the questions. You get flashbacks into his life, his memories, his experiences. And as the movie went along, I rooted for him. This movie, despite being rated R, is nowhere near as disturbing as that film, but it is just as effective in its storytelling. As someone who watches lots of game shows, I am happy when anyone does well under hot lights. But that movie gives a ton of visual context to root for someone completely fictional. In same way, when we see moments of Ryoto’s life for example, they get me to care about him more as a player in the big game. Despite watching a number of professional basketball games, I will probably never know the pressure of physically playing in the NBA Finals, but this movie took me to a game perhaps about as dramatic and climactic as one of those. I honestly do not remember the last time watching a sports-related climax and being as on the edge of my seat as I was here. By the end, I cared about the team, its players, and the appreciation is only heightened by the movie’s effective use of flashbacks.
Technically speaking, this film is a goldmine. The music is great, the sound effects are realistically top notch. Going back to the notion that I have played a lot of hoops in my youth, the sound effects, most especially those set around an outdoor court, took me back to my childhood. The shots are spectacularly laid out and executed. A lot of the movement in the film felt fluid and dynamic. It matches the movie’s quick pace at times. There is a visceral feel to “The First Slam Dunk” that put me into the film and never allowed me to leave.
The animation, as it should in 2023, looks fantastic. Never once does it feel completely lifelike, but that does not mean it is not immersive. The big game segments often feel a bit faster, more active. Everything else feels more down to earth. This is a story that probably could be told in live-action, but it has maximized its potential with animation. The angles, the stylization, the neat little tricks in between, all come off as things that are best seen in an animated form. Honestly, if this story were done in live-action, it would not be the same. It would be inferior. And if you need a further example, specifically towards general audiences living in the United States, why animation is not just for kids, show them this movie. This film is not over the top in sex, violence, or gore, but it is simply mature. And that is what makes it great. As for other minor details, the way this film shows the players’ sweat is a nice touch.
Despite its animated flair, the film is a grounded story that can only be described as captivating. The drama does not only extend to the game, as again, the flashbacks do a good job at fleshing out characters. But it does not mean the movie lacks lighter moments. There is a gag I liked in particular about one player bickering about how they are never receiving the ball on the court. The screenplay in the movie’s more present moments is already exciting enough, but it is enhanced with excellent backstory given in every little crevice. “The First Slam Dunk” is not playing in too many places at the moment, but whenever it hits DVD or streaming, you owe it to yourself to check the movie out as soon as you can.
In the end, “The First Slam Dunk” is… I’ll say it, a slam dunk. There are maybe one or two sports films that have been as well-crafted and executed as this one. I cared about the characters, I cared about the team, the animation is exciting and gorgeous to witness in action, and I love the way this story was told. “The First Slam Dunk” is my first exposure to the “Slam Dunk” IP and I think it is a mighty fine introduction. I cannot wait to watch this film a second time just to digest the full story, all the beautiful shots, and see the exciting big game play out one more time. If there are any flaws with this film, they would be hard to come by. It has been a few weeks since I have seen the film, so if there are any flaws I probably would have forgotten them by now. Not that I had any to begin with. “Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse” has some competition for this year’s best animated picture, because I have to say “The First Slam Dunk,” from what I can tell you based on my initial watch, has to be a 10/10.
“The First Slam Dunk” is now playing in a few theaters. If you live near one, see the film while you can. Because it has yet to hit VOD, physical media, or streaming.
Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for one of the biggest movies of the year, “Barbie.” So you guys can finally stop wondering why the Movie Reviewing Moron has not reviewed the hot topic of the summer. You’re welcome. Also, I have reviews coming for “Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Mutant Mayhem,” “Talk to Me,” and “Blue Beetle.” If you want to see this and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “The First Slam Dunk?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite movie about sports? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“Elemental” is directed by Peter Sohn (The Good Dinosaur, Ratatoullie) and stars Leah Lewis (Nancy Drew, The Half of It), Mamoudou Athie (Underwater, Jurassic World: Dominion), Ronnie del Carmen (Inside Out, Soul), Shila Omni (The Illegal, Tehran), Wendi McLendon-Covey (The Goldbergs, Rules of Engagement), and Catherine O’Hara (Schitt’s Creek, Second City Television). This film is set in a world where elements, such as water or fire, are living, breathing creatures. They all live their own lives and often follow one rule. Specifically, they cannot mix with other elements. When the fiery Ember and watery Wade meet each other, they become friendly, but as others discover their connection, they fear the consequences.
“Elemental” ended up being one of my most anticipated movies of 2023. Compared to some of the other animated titles like “The Super Mario Bros. Movie” or “Ruby Gillman, Teenage Kraken,” “Elemental” had an unfair advantage. Specifically, its attachment to Pixar. Of the animation studios working today in Hollywood, Pixar is by far my favorite of the bunch. Because they have continuously pumped out quality movie after quality movie. Even some of their lesser fare like “Cars 3” and “Onward” has been enjoyable if you ask me. Though if you also ask me, I think their latest movies have not been the best efforts they have given. I have often considered Pixar to be the gold standard of modern animation with films like “Toy Story,” “The Incredibles,” and “Wall-E” for instance. But ever since the beginning of the pandemic, I have seen a streak of Pixar titles that do not live up to their predecessors. Although I thought “Turning Red” was incredible and was robbed of a wider theatrical release. Perhaps the greatest example of this is “Luca.” I thought the protagonist was shallow, the stakes and characters were not as up to par as I would have expected, and by the time we got to the end, the movie lacked a climactic feel. I saw “Lightyear” twice. But I will admit that I have no plans to watch it again in the future despite the positive times I had with it.
But “Elemental” looked like it could turn things around. At least from the teaser. I thought it looked promising, and the thought of Pixar doing a love story of sorts intrigued me. Sure, Pixar has had romantic connections in the past, but none of them appeared to drive the film as much as this one. If anything, the marketing promised something with a “Romeo & Juliet” vibe. The structure is totally different, but much like “Romeo & Juliet,” the film suggests that the two love interests cannot interact for the good of everyone, including themselves.
Sadly, it did not turn things around. And it is not like “bad” Pixar in the sense that the movie was good but not great. It is worse. For the first time in my life, I can say that I have seen a Pixar film I disliked. For the record, I do not have every Pixar feature under my belt. I still need to see “Brave,” “Monsters University,” and “The Good Dinosaur.” Other than that, I have seen everything. Of everything I have seen, this is the worst of the bunch, and distinctly so.
Though before I get to the bad, I will talk about the good. Leah Lewis and Mamoudou Athie click as Ember and Wade. The two are well cast and play off each other fantastically. As far as other voices go, I also liked Ember’s parents, Bernie (Ronnie del Carmen) and Cinder (Shila Omni). I bought into these two as a long-married couple who have been through a lot with each other and everything around them. Their voices were excellent for their parts. For the most part, the voicework, like many Pixar projects, is pretty good. The animation is also pretty stellar. Not only is it colorful and vibrant, but there is a scene towards the end of the film, where I thought I was looking at real interior. The frame cut to this concrete area and my eyes lit up. I could not believe what I was seeing. Going back to Pixar being the gold standard, one reason for that is because they always tend to make their films look incredible. Good animation is essentially a requirement in 2023, but one way Pixar separates themselves from the competition is that they will have at least one increment of the movie that looks lifelike despite being made on a computer. And this is not an exaggeration. While “Toy Story 4” is my least favorite of the franchise, one thing I still think about is how realistic a particular cat looks in it. My mind is still blown by it.
Though if I have to be real, this film bored me. Pacing-wise, this might be the weakest of the Pixar films yet. If I were watching this as a child, there is a good chance that I would be bored. One of the compliments I give to Pixar films like “Inside Out” is how much more adults might end up liking it than their children, but I say that while acknowledging that the movie would also appeal to children. Then again, I remember being a child and it was a rarity for me to think a movie could be “bad.” But if I were a child watching this movie, I would probably pick “The Incredibles” or “Up” before watching this one again. There are more fantastical elements about those titles that would appeal to me at the time, and honestly, still appeal to me today. I like the idea of this film, as it is inspired by Peter Sohn’s parents and their story of being immigrants in the United States, but it did not translate well to a movie. Maybe if it were translated into another movie, I would feel different. But this is what we have, and unfortunately, it kind of blows.
For the most part, Pixar films have decent humor. I still think one of the greatest visual gags in not just Pixar’s history, but in all of cinema, is the scene in “Toy Story 2” where Al exposes he needs “to go all the way to work on a Saturday.” He drives from his apartment building to his place of work located, of all places, across the street. America. Scenes like this highlight why it pains me to say the worst thing about “Elemental” is the humor. Not only does just about every joke and gag in the film fail to land, but they feel interchangeable. Every joke in the film is a play on words or actions regarding the element at hand. This would have been fine if I were laughing, but again, I was not.
Perhaps the worst example of the bad humor in this film comes from the supporting character of Clod, a teenage tree. This character has a crush on Ember, somewhere between casual and to the point of desperation. That would be fine, but every line and visual gag of out of this character regarding that made me cringe. I could tell the movie was trying to be funny, it was trying to be clever. But in doing so, it kind of resorted to basic puns the whole way. For the record, I do plays on words and puns all the time. Though I recognize to some capacity, they are on the lower end of the humor scale. They do not take much time or effort to craft. And they can land phenomenally, but there are plenty that if you mention them, you should be… PUNished.
I have no idea if this is inside joke or not, but there is a scene in “Elemental” where it honestly comes off as a parody for the entire Pixar brand. There is a game the water characters tend to play, specifically “the crying game.” Okay…? First off, regarding the inside joke thing, I would not be surprised if this is written in response to Pixar’s history of making viewers cry during certain movies. Movies like “Toy Story 3,” “Inside Out,” and “Coco” just to name a few. Second, I know this is not a real world, but even if it is not, what a ridiculous game! I mean, if these people played it on occasion maybe I would not be CRYING about it, oh boy, here we go with the wordplay… Why would you want to play a game where you cry all the time? It is actually kind of cringeworthy to be honest. Yeah, maybe there is a water joke attached to this, but I did not find the scenes in which these games were attached to amusing or entertaining whatsoever.
In the end, “Elemental” is Pixar’s worst film yet. This is an easy call to make because, again, it is the first one I saw that I walked out of saying I did not have a good time. I have a long history with Pixar. “Cars” was my first movie in the theater. For years, “The Incredibles” stood as my favorite animated title. I love Pixar. But their last few films, minus “Turning Red,” have not met that standard I am used to the studio achieving, and “Elemental” is just the latest film to avoid the prestige many other Pixar titles have acquired. If you want to go see a killer animated title in theaters right now, just stick to “Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse.” You will thank me later. I am going to give “Elemental” a 4/10.
“Elemental” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.
Thanks for reading this review! I have more reviews coming soon including “Ruby Gillman, Teenage Kraken,” “Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny,” “Joy Ride,” “Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One,” and “Oppenheimer.” If you want to see this and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Elemental?” What did you think about it? Or, what is a film that destroyed your positive track record with either a studio or a filmmaker? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“Cocaine Bear” is directed by Elizabeth Banks (Pitch Perfect 2, Charlie’s Angels) and stars Keri Russell (Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker, Mission: Impossible III), O’Shea Jackson Jr. (Long Shot, Straight Outta Compton), Christian Convery (Sweet Tooth, Playing with Fire), Alden Ehrenreich (Solo: A Star Wars Story, Hail, Caesar!), Brooklynn Prince (The Florida Project, Home Before Dark), Isiah Whitlock Jr. (The Good Cop, The Wire), Margo Martindale (August: Osage County, The Americans), and Ray Liotta (Goodfellas, Field of Dreams). In this film, people of various identities must survive against a bear jacked up on cocaine.
If I had the authority to make a textbook definition for the utterance “truth is stranger than fiction,” I would just insert “Cocaine Bear” and move on. “Cocaine Bear” sounds like a campy creature feature from the title alone. And in some ways it is. Although despite being a horror comedy that should not be taken too seriously, it must be noted that “Cocaine Bear” is based on true events.
You heard me right. A bear did cocaine. And they made a movie, specifically one that takes tons of liberties, about it. Best idea ever.
I have been excited for this movie ever since they announced the project in the middle of 2021. While I did not know how the actual movie would turn out, I even put it in my top 10 most anticipated movies of 2023 because I could not stop thinking about it on a frequent basis. What also helped it is the excellently produced trailer that perfectly showcased the over the top comedic nature this film was aiming for. Also, it was directed by Elizabeth Banks, one of my favorite actresses and possibly the best game show host on television right now. Although it must be noted that her directing career has not intrigued me as much. I did not enjoy the first “Pitch Perfect,” therefore I never got around to watching the second after all these years. Her next feature, 2019’s “Charlie’s Angels” had some okay action here and there, but it was lacking in flair. It felt rather pedestrian and suffered from an average marketing campaign.
But “Cocaine Bear” looked like a completely different ballgame. It looked funny, occasionally scary, and seemed to have just the right amount of dumb to avoid feeling overwhelming.
Now that I finally got to see this movie, sorry, no, once in a lifetime cinematic event… What did I think of it?
It was okay.
This is the kind of movie that would go over really well at a pitch meeting. In fact, part of what made me go see “Cocaine Bear” is the idea behind it. Who does not want to see a bear go haywire after ingesting an illegal drug? It is the same way I felt about “Moonfall” before that movie came out. I did not know if it would be good or bad, but that idea is anything but ugly. It would be cool to see what would happen if that became a feature. While “Cocaine Bear” is better than “Moonfall,” this does not suggest I was not a tad a underwhelmed with this creature feature that honestly does the bare minimum to be watchable.
Unlike Elizabeth Banks’s past features, she did not write “Cocaine Bear.” That honor belongs to Jimmy Warden, who only has one previous screenplay credit. He was one of the writers behind “The Babysitter: Killer Queen,” a straight to Netflix film. This makes “Cocaine Bear” Warden’s first theatrical written effort. While I found “Cocaine Bear” to have its comedic moments, it could have been funnier. Most of the funnier moments in the movie are already in the trailer. When I come out of a good comedy, I usually end up quoting one or two lines from it either with a friend, family member, or in cases like this one where I go to the movies alone, amongst myself. I am having a difficult time remembering any specific line from this movie that I did not already see in the marketing that stood out. Except for the one that specifies the gender of the bear, which honestly would have been funnier if I did not already know what it was thanks to social media.
I do not hate any of the characters in the film, but this is not a film that I would sit down and watch again because the characters stand out. That said, I think the two young kids, Henry and Dee Dee, played by Christian Convery and Brooklynn Prince play well off each other. They are two of the more admirable cogs that mesh this movie together. I bought into their chemistry, I liked the reason behind why they were going into the forest. I mean, almost every kid would dare to skip school every once in a while. I also like how this movie was set in the 1980s, which is when the story that inspired this movie took place, because if it were set today, Keri Russell’s character, who has to search for these two, would just call Dee Dee’s cell phone if she can be trusted with one. This makes it a bit harder for the Keri Russell to track the two down since they cannot simply be geolocated. The other thing I liked about the two kids is the way they were used for comedic purposes. Not just in terms of their dialogue, but their actions. This movie is not afraid to push the boundaries. Without giving too much away, there is a moment where the kids dare each other to try cocaine. I will let you see the rest for yourselves.
I should also note that this is one of the last projects to ever feature Ray Liotta, who recently passed away. He does a a good job with the material given to him as this kingpin who is after the cocaine that ends up lost in the woods. Liotta’s character is one of the standout personalities on screen and had much of my attention throughout the runtime. Knowing that this film is one of Liotta’s last is unfortunate, but it if there is any bright side, “Cocaine Bear” is a halfway decent film, and he is also likable in it. That said, the situation is still sad. Ray Liotta will be missed. May he rest in peace.
From start to finish, the bear has a commanding presence. Every scene featuring the bear is a hoot. The chase sequences, the kills, the rampages, the blood, all of it! Even the one scene where a bunch of people watching it snort cocaine is a thing of beauty. Seeing the bear do its thing in that moment is one of the more laughable scenes in the film. The movie is called “Cocaine Bear,” and it certainly lives up to its name.
I think the biggest problem with “Cocaine Bear” is that the film’s cast probably would have been better have they shaved one or two names off. I understand that the movie needs enough people to tell a story. And the plots and subplots for the most part do their job. But at times, it feels a little overwhelming when the movie is about the tales of a coke-fueled furry creature. I have no real digs to give other than the fact that the movie feels a tad overstuffed in its 95 minute runtime. Would I recommend “Cocaine Bear?” Well, I think some of you might find it to be an inevitable watch the moment you see the title. As bad as I think “Sharknado” is, a reason why that movie appears watchable at first is because of the title. They say not to judge a book by its cover, but with a title like “COCAINE BEAR,” it is undoubtedly going to get attention. But in regards to it being a movie, I think there are better options out there. Then again, this film manages to be… somewhat bearable.
In the end, “Cocaine Bear” is neither bad or good. It is not that powerful of a drug. It finds itself somewhere in the middle. I love Elizabeth Banks in a lot of projects like “The LEGO Movie,” “Slither,” “Zack and Miri,” “Brightburn,” “The Hunger Games,” and I even thought she was great in the “Power Rangers” movie. That said, if she continues to direct movies, I hope we get something better out of her than this. She is not a terrible director. But not only does the writing fail to supplement her efforts, but I do not know if she has a flair to her work yet that would make her stand out. She is not a bad. She gets the job done. I just hope whatever she does next is a step up from this. The acting is okay, the bear is admirable, and the movie might be good to watch at least one time to see what all the hoopla is about. But it is not the next Best Picture by any means. I am going to give “Cocaine Bear” a 6/10.
“Cocaine Bear” is now available on DVD, Blu-ray, VOD, and Peacock.
Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for the brand new movie “Air.” I just saw the film days ago and I cannot wait to share my thoughts on it with you all. Also, I will soon be reviewing “How to Blow Up a Pipeline,” which is available in select theaters now. Additionally, I will be talking about the 1993 “Super Mario Bros.” movie. I want to talk about it sooner than later, but I just have not found the perfect time to sit down and write about it. However, that review should be on its way when the time is right. If you want to see this and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Cocaine Bear?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite movie based on a true story? Or, what is a movie that you like that is based on a story so strange that it just so happens to be true? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“Black Panther: Wakanda Forever” is directed by Ryan Coogler, who also directed the previous “Black Panther” installment. This film stars Letitia Wright (Sing 2, Black Mirror), Lupita Nyong’o (Star Wars: The Force Awakens, 12 Years a Slave), Danai Gurira (Treme, The Walking Dead), Winston Duke (Us, Person of Interest), Florence Kasumba (Wonder Woman, The Lion King) Dominique Thorne (If Beale Street Could Talk, Judas and the Black Messiah), Michaela Coel (I May Destroy You, Chewing Gum), Tenoch Huerta (Mozart in the Jungle, Narcos: Mexico), Martin Freeman (The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey, Sherlock), Julia Louis-Dreyfus (Seinfeld, Onward), and Angela Basset (Akeelah and the Bee, Soul). This film is the sequel to “Black Panther” and follows Wakanda as its people attempt to defend their home from the king of Talokan, Namor.
I have always wondered what a “Black Panther” sequel could look like, especially given how successful the first film was. If you are Disney and/or Marvel Studios, there is no way you would just sit pretty after earning a billion dollars at the box office. Sure, you might pop a few bottles. But once you are done drinkin’, you must soon be back to grindin’. Although my wonder supposedly peaked towards the end of 2020. For one thing, the predecessor’s lead, Chadwick Boseman, passed away. This brought a gigantic question. What is going to happen to T’Challa?
On December 10, 2020, the world got its answer. During a Walt Disney Company Investor Day event, Marvel Studios president Kevin Feige announced that the character of T’Challa would not be recast and the sequel would explore other characters in Wakanda. While I am under the philosophy that actors can be replaced to a degree, I understand the tough decision that had to be made here. Boseman’s character was more than a guy who looked cool on screen, he was a symbol for the black community.
While there have been other black protagonists and superheroes on-screen, very few had the impact that Boseman’s T’Challa/Black Panther did over recent years. If you ask me, I liked the first “Black Panther,” but I did not love it. That said, I recognize there are plenty of people who do and I nevertheless celebrate how the film remains a symbol for a specific audience. I still remember where I was when Chadwick Boseman died, sitting in my room, browsing on my phone. While this may not be my first idea for a “Black Panther” installment, I like that the film went for an angle where art somewhat imitates life.
This movie dives into how the Wakandans live after the death of T’Challa. The execution of this is brilliantly realized and delivers certain segments of the movie that I consider to be phase 4 highlights. If I were to judge this movie simply as a tribute to Chadwick Boseman, I would give it two thumbs up. Unfortunately, there is also the rest of the movie. Some of which is solid, some of which is not.
“Black Panther: Wakanda Forever” is by no means a bad movie, but I think it comes down to the classic saying in regard to sequels. It goes bigger, but it does not make it better. It goes to new places, introduces new characters, but the execution is not as stellar as it could be. The first movie succeeded partially because of how it handled the character of T’Challa as a protagonist. As mentioned, he is not here for obvious reasons. Sadly, while the tribute to Chadwick Boseman delivered the feels, something was missing because T’Challa’s character was not replaced with another actor. What may have been missing is an escape. Because the first film at its core, even in its more dramatic moments, is fun. Kind of like the recent “Thor: Love and Thunder,” there are clashing tones that do not mix together all the time. This tries to be a traditional MCU movie with some of the flair of the original “Black Panther,” but falters because it unsuccessfully mixes this with a grieving process for T’Challa, and the actor who played him. This is not to say all of it did not work. Some happier moments worked. Some sadder moments worked. But I did not feel as happy or sad as this movie maybe wanted me to feel by the end of it.
It is time to talk about the villain, which in regards to MCU movies, are often considered a weakness. Thankfully, for the case of “Wakanda Forever,” Namor is serviceable. Although not perfect. While Namor had his moments, I think if you were to compare “Black Panther” and “Wakanda Forever” side by side, the first film clearly has the superior villain with Killmonger. His fleshing out was better, Michael B. Jordan gives a compelling performance, and I had a bit of an emotional attachment to him by the end of the film. Namor is threatening and there are some highlights with him on screen, but his motivation did not feel as prominent as it could have been. The best thing about Namor is how our heroes deal with him. There is a particular scene past the halfway mark into the film where from the heroes’ perspective, I got a sense of what they must have been thinking, what they were feeling. While 2018’s “Black Panther” did a good job at handling both the perspectives from the protagonist and antagonist, I think the former’s perspective was done better here than the latter’s.
A lot of Marvel movies, including good ones, often fail to deliver on the villain. I was not a huge fan of Ronan in “Guardians of the Galaxy,” but the movie nevertheless worked for me. But almost every time the film slips on the villain, I am still onboard when it comes to understanding and rooting for the hero. I feel like I am given enough justification to continue liking them, to keep cheering them on. “Black Panther: Wakanda Forever,” while its villain is not a dumpster fire, is no exception to this rule. That said, when I say that I am siding with the protagonist in this case, the movie comes to a decision as to who “the protagonist” is, but much of it does not resemble a centered story. There are so many things going on in this movie that until the end, it almost feels like there is no main character. There is ultimately a main character, but at times, it feels like there is not. The movie feels overstuffed, which I hate to say, because I liked some of the concepts in it.
For me, the highlight of “Black Panther: Wakanda Forever” is Angela Basset. I liked Angela Basset in the original “Black Panther,” but her portrayal of Ramonda in this sequel is an improvement over the original in every way. Part of it is because the script gives the character a reason to perhaps have a more prominent presence on screen, and when it comes to the Wakandan society grieving over the loss of their king, I often connected with her based on her position in said society, in addition to knowing that her child is gone. Going back to what I said about art imitating life, Basset’s performance, alongside others in this film, came off as more than the characters going through their own reality. At times, Basset seemed to channel herself in regard to her connection to Chadwick Boseman. I bought into Basset’s performance, and as sad as Boseman’s death is, it may have enhanced Basset’s ability to deliver an excellent screen presence, one that could potentially be a talking point this awards season.
This movie is 161 minutes. Just over two and a half hours. At moments, I felt the runtime. Some of the exposition, specifically in regards to Namor, went on for way too long and I almost tuned out. In addition to being a “Black Panther” film, “Wakanda Forever” also somewhat doubles as an ad for Disney+ with the addition of Riri Williams, also known as Ironheart. Other than that, another notable flaw, and maybe this is just the case of my theater, maybe not, the sound mix was not perfect. There were select lines of dialogue that were hard to make out. It is not “Tenet” bad, but as far as the MCU goes, this is probably the first time I can recall having a problem like this during one of the movies in this series. Then again, I just turned 23 a little more than a week ago, therefore this is a possibly a sign that my hearing could be slightly deteriorating. Do not grow up, it is a trap.
If I had to compare “Black Panther: Wakanda Forever” to anything else right now, it would have to be, of all things, the television series “Impractical Jokers.” …Hear me out.
“Black Panther: Wakanda Forever,” much like the most recent iteration of “Impractical Jokers,” loses one of its core cast members, tries to reinvent itself while also keeping certain elements audiences are familiar with, and fails to recapture some of the magic of what made its previous material great, but through a situation that it cannot fault itself for. “Black Panther: Wakanda Forever” is a film that I would have been terrified to be a part of if I were a higher-up at Marvel. I know “Black Panther” is a popular IP and there is no question as to whether or not a sequel should be made. But my question from the beginning was how the heck the story could go on without the title character.
If you look back at films like “Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness,” you would notice in the posters and marketing that the subtitle is a tad bigger than the title itself. The same is true for “Black Panther: Wakanda Forever.” One could argue this is coincidental, but I would contend there is a reason why “Black Panther” is tiny and “Wakanda Forever” is enormous. This film, while it is ultimately a “Black Panther” story, is ultimately about the Wakanda community. How they come together. How they deal with grief. How they engage in politics. There is no way this film would not have had “Black Panther” in its title. Because if it did not, it would probably lose money. Although at the end of the day, this is part of what I mean when I say the film is overstuffed. Again, there is almost barely a center character. If anything, Wakanda itself is debatably the central character.
Now that I have seen all of phase 4, one of the commonalities during some of phase 4’s stories is the concept of grief. If you ask me, despite being an example of art imitating life, I think “WandaVision” and weirdly enough, “Spider-Man: No Way Home” had better execution when it comes to grief. Maybe it is because of my connection to one specific character either during the story itself or in previous installments and how they end up dealing with it. “Black Panther: Wakanda Forever” dealing with grief was perhaps unavoidable because of a real life event. There are moments, especially towards the film’s end, where grief comes into play that continue to stick with me. But part of what made “WandaVision” and “Spider-Man: No Way Home” more fulfilling is that I knew who to root for. Wanda and Peter Parker. Of course, “Wakanda Forever,” a movie where, again, Wakanda itself may as well be considered the central character, presents a scenario where an entire society is mourning. But because the movie had an overabundance of characters and things going on at times, it becomes less powerful for me.
Although if there is one thing “Wakanda Forever” does well despite its flaws, it would be consistency. “Thor: Love and Thunder,” the previous MCU film, was like a seesaw in terms of tone. At certain points, it is as goofy as can be. At others, it is wildly dramatic. There is almost no in between. “Black Panther: Wakanda Forever,” again, like “Thor: Love and Thunder,” clashes in terms of tone, but it is probably the most somber MCU film to date while also having pinches of much needed fun in between. Much like many other Marvel movies, there are moments of levity, but the film itself is a consistent downer. From scene one, the movie does everything it can to remind its audience that not everything is happy go lucky in Wakanda. Much like “Wakanda Forever,” “Love and Thunder” made grief a paramount topic. The film however goes too extreme on both ends to the point where it fizzles the goldilocks zone. While “Black Panther: Wakanda Forever” is more depressing than the average MCU film, including other movies that have their downer moments like “Eternals” or “Avengers: Infinity War,” it is at least both steadily, not to mention believably, sad.
Although because this movie is sad, does not mean there are no ounces of joy to be had. In addition to the recently mentioned levity, which is noticeably not as prominent as say “Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings,” I liked the chemistry between Shuri and Okoye. The action, during this film’s collection of sequences, is well-done and kept my attention throughout. There is even a segment where someone catapults into the air via fish. I do not remember if it was a dolphin or a whale. I would have to watch the movie again, but that caught me off guard. This has to be arguably the craziest cool sight I have witnessed in a comic book movie since that one scene in “Aquaman” where an octopus plays the drums.
With all this sadness though, some of you might ask, can you bring your family and children to this movie? After all, Marvel movies, in addition to being box office hits, are also traditionally fine options for large groups like families. Even for children despite the usual PG-13 rating. To answer the question, I would say yes. This may not be as fun as “Guardians of the Galaxy” or “Spider-Man: No Way Home.” Although there is nothing absolutely offensive, nothing overly gory, and despite the film’s serious nature, there is nothing in it that I would think would instantly turn off younger viewers or the parents trying to entertain said younger viewers.
Before we move on, without giving a ton of detail, there is a fantastic joke in the movie about MIT. You will know it when you hear it. It got a good laugh out of me, and I think many people reading this will react similarly.
In the end, “Black Panther: Wakanda Forever,” while still a decent movie, is a step down from the original. It is the neither the best or worst film of phase 4. It is somewhere close to the middle. The film is ambitious, but cannot quite fill the massive void that Chadwick Boseman left. I admire that “Wakanda Forever” took the risk of killing off one of its core characters and making that a backbone as to where things go in the film. Unfortunately, it led to a movie of both hits and misses. Is the film worth watching? The answer would be yes. It has its flaws, but in a thumbs up/thumbs down world, “Black Panther: Wakanda Forever” is a thumbs up, not to mention a 7/10.
Well, that is the end of phase 4! If I have to be honest, while this is not my favorite phase in the MCU, I will give it credit. Unlike phases 1, 2, and 3, every movie that came out in phase 4, had some semblance of decency at minimum. In phase 1, I was not a fan of “Captain America: The First Avenger.” In phase 2, I did not like “Thor: The Dark World.” In phase 3, I disliked “Captain Marvel.” Phase 4’s movies, from “Black Widow” to “Black Panther: Wakanda Forever,” were all entertaining, fun, and worth watching. They all had flaws, but they were also worth watching. I have no idea what phase 5 is going to be like, but I hope that like phase 4, the movies continue to be solid.
“Black Panther: Wakanda Forever” is now playing in theatres everywhere including premium formats like IMAX and Dolby Cinema. Tickets are available now.
Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for the brand new Searchlight Pictures film “The Banshees of Inisherin.” I just watched the film this weekend, and while I look forward to reviewing just about every movie I see, I mean it with this one. I cannot wait to review “The Banshees of Inisherin,” I hope to drop it soon.
If you want to see more of my thoughts on phase 4 of the MCU, check out my reviews for “Black Widow,” “Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings,” “Eternals,” “Spider-Man: No Way Home,” “Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness,” and “Thor: Love and Thunder.” If you want to see this and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Black Panther: Wakanda Forever?” What did you think about it? Or, what are your thoughts on Marvel’s phase 4? What is your favorite movie or television show from the timeline? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“DC League of Super-Pets” is directed by Jared Stern and Sam Levine, and stars Dwayne Johnson (Doom, Skyscraper), Kevin Hart (Ride Along, Night School), Kate McKinnon (Yesterday, Saturday Night Live), John Krasinski (A Quiet Place, The Office), Vanessa Bayer (Saturday Night Live, Office Christmas Party), Natasha Lyonne (Orange is the New Black, Big Mouth), Diego Luna (Rogue One: A Star Wars Story, Narcos: Mexico), Marc Maron (Maron, GLOW), Keanu Reeves (The Matrix, John Wick), Ben Schwartz (Parks and Recreation, Sonic the Hedgehog), and Thomas Middleditch (Godzilla: King of the Monsters, Silicon Valley). This film follows Krypto the Super-Dog, as he must figure out how to rescue his owner, Superman.
I love comic book movies. And I know I am not alone. If the box office for most of the films within this classification have shown anything, it is that films of this type are hotter than they have ever been. Marvel Studios is on fire right now with the release of “Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings” in addition to the massively successful “Spider-Man: No Way Home,” both of which ended up in my top 10 best of last year. DC is also doing well for themselves. I enjoyed “The Batman” despite some pacing issues I had with the film, and I thought last year’s “The Suicide Squad” might just be the best movie to ever have the DC logo attached. And in the midst of all of these movies that I either looked forward to or saw and really enjoyed, I never thought “DC League of Super-Pets” would live up to the quality standards that we have seen in other comic book-based works. If anything, I thought it would probably be on the same level as “Morbius,” only slightly more comedic and family-friendly.
I will be real. I cannot remember the last time I asked for a movie about Superman’s dog, but here we are. Why did I see it? Because I have reviews to get done and AMC A-List is a dynamite investment. I love not paying for movies that I feel the need to see to stay in the loop. Although at the same time, if you have names as big as Kevin Hart or Keanu Reeves, that should bring something promising to the table. And this brings me to my first positive, which I will dive more into later, Keanu Reeves was the highlight of the film.
What did I think of “DC League of “Super-Pets?” It’s predictable, mediocre, and I do not think the comedy landed that much. I have heard some differing opinions, but if you ask me, even some of the more clever jokes in this movie did not garner much of a reaction out of me. Some of the comedy attempts either felt tired, forced, or obvious. There is a “Paw Patrol”-related joke that probably would have been funnier if I did not make a “Paw Patrol” comparison before the film came out. Speaking of “Paw Patrol,” one thing about that show is that it is specifically made for kids. That’s the vibes I got from “DC League of Super-Pets’s” marketing campaign. All kiddy, no maturity. Turns out there is some adult humor in this film, but even that did not land. I can only hear the censor bar so many times before the gag becomes tiresome. This is honestly unfortunate considering the film is written by Jared Stern and John Whittington, who previously wrote another animated DC flick, “The LEGO Batman Movie.” Regardless of its comic-based origins and spinoff placement, it is one of the funniest animation scripts done in recent years. That movie had five writers! I hope for the sake of Stern and Whittington that they came up with at least one of the clever jokes that script contained, because “DC League of Super-Pets” feels like a far cry to the 2017 “LEGO Batman” spinoff.
The story of “DC League of Super-Pets” does not reinvent the wheel. I never asked for this movie to begin with, and therefore I never asked it to reinvent the wheel, therefore I did not know what to expect. But the movie itself sort of reminded me of a longer episode of a Saturday morning cartoon, but not necessarily a great one. I also think the script of “DC League of Super-Pets” is probably going to land better with those who are dog or cat people. People who have pets and consider them part of their family. I live in a space where there are pets, but they are not necessarily my pets, so this script did not connect with me maybe in the way the writers hoped it would.
I want to talk about the biggest problem in this movie, and this is the problem that the movie has built up ever since its first teaser. Going back to the big names. Having big names like Dwayne Johnson in your movie always builds intrigue and promise. It’s like when a printer gets endorsed by Shaquille O’Neal, or Mark Cuban becomes a quasi-mascot of a new, innovative product, or when Howie Mandel fist bumps everything in your store for some reason. When this film’s first teaser released, the primary focus was on the stacked cast this movie managed to acquire from Dwayne Johnson to Kevin Hart to Kate McKinnon to John Krasinski and so on. I want to talk about those first two names. Dwayne Johnson is arguably the biggest movie star in the world, and Kevin Hart, in addition to being a relevant comedian, has worked with The Rock in the past on “Central Intelligence” and the “Jumanji” movies. This is their third property together, and I do not mind actors or crew joining forces more than once. Ryan Gosling and Emma Stone have worked together numerous times in “Crazy Stupid Love,” “Gangster Squad,” and “La La Land.” Their chemistry is undeniable.
I have no idea if this is coincidental or not, but the Gosling/Stone pairing is a match every time. The difference between Ryan Gosling and Emma Stone compared to Johnson and Hart is the ability of the former pair to show range. Ryan Gosling can be the sexy boy toy, he can sing, he can be stoic. Emma Stone can be a quirky young woman, she can be an aspiring actress, she can be someone from a couple centuries ago. The two are “actors,” not stars. Johnson and Hart, despite having personality, are not the greatest thespians, and it shows in “DC League of Super-Pets.” When I look at Krypto, I see The Rock. When I look at Ace, I see Kevin Hart. In my imagination, they are just playing versions of themselves in animated dog form. This is why part of me is often worried when I think about the upcoming “Super Mario Bros.” movie because like “DC League of Super-Pets,” I am just worried that Chris Pratt is going to do another version of Emmet from “The LEGO Movie” or something. Chris Pratt, like The Rock, while he is definitely a better actor, is not the greatest of the performers working today. Pratt’s voice is recognizable, and that is part of why it felt weird hearing said voice in Pixar’s “Onward.” I am not saying live-action movie stars should not voice animated characters. Some have as much talent as those who primarily do voice-acting. But these roles show Johnson and Hart’s lack of range as actors. Dwayne Johnson and Kevin Hart always do the same schtick or some variation of it in their movies. Sometimes it works, sometimes it does not. Not having a live-action environment hinders that and makes this film the weakest of their collaborations. And the fact that I am looking at these dogs’ faces and seeing nothing but Johnson and Hart makes their performances creepier than they should be.
I said I will get back to Keanu Reeves. A promise is a promise. Reeves is easily this film’s best part. Not just because of his voice, but the character he plays, that being Batman. Much like “The LEGO Batman Movie,” this interpretation of Batman or Bruce Wayne is on the more parodic side, and rightfully so. I said earlier that I was slightly concerned that Jared Stern and John Whittington possibly never came up with any solid jokes in “The LEGO Batman Movie.” Although after reminiscing on Batman in this film, part of me has second thoughts. I was not a huge fan of the film’s comedy, but the parts where I was almost rolling on the floor were the scenes where Batman shows up. His screen time in this film is minimal. Think of it as a funny Stan Lee cameo where he plays himself except it happens ten times. Despite this movie’s lighthearted tone, it also pokes fun at the darkness of the Caped Crusader. Everything from his lone wolf mentality to his lack of parents. It’s hilarious, and I might every once in a while look on YouTube for the scenes in this movie containing Batman just to get a laugh.
In the end, “DC League of Super-Pets” is, to my surprise, not the worst comic book movie of the year. Again, “Morbius” exists. You’re welcome, Warner Brothers! You are going to have to settle for the dishonorable mention. Some of the voice acting is hit or miss. When I watch an animated movie, part of me wants to forget that I am watching something that has The Rock in it. I think as far as voice performances go, Johnson’s performance in “Moana,” while not my favorite in history, is slightly better than the one he gives to Krypto. But I also do not know if I can blame it on his ability, because his voice is recognizable. When it comes to Kevin Hart playing a house pet, I’d rather listen to his performance as Snowball the terrier in “The Secret Life of Pets.” I often watch films for an escape. If I want an escape with The Rock and Kevin Hart, I would rather watch “Central Intelligence.” This is not a film that is going to stand the test of time. As far as DC goes, it is surprisingly better than “Wonder Woman 1984,” but unlike “DC League of Super-Pets,” I had higher expectations for that film. I am going to give “DC League of Super-Pets” a 5/10.
“DC League of Super-Pets” is now playing in theatres everywhere. Tickets are available now.
Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for the film “Vengeance,” directed by B.J. Novak. Also be on the lookout for my review for “Bullet Train,” the new action flick starring Brad Pitt as he and assassins crowd up a speeding train in Japan. If you want to see this and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “DC League of Super-Pets?” What did you think about it? Or, what is a movie with a stacked cast that disappointed you? For me, that big disappointment was 2017’s “The Circle,” starring Emma Watson, Tom Hanks, Patton Oswalt, John Boyega, among others. Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
Hey everyone, Jack Drees here! Compared to say 2017, when I did not have as much access to a cinema in my freetime, I am not doing as many of these “non-review” posts nowadays. Sure, I’ve done stuff like the 4th Annual Jackoff Awards, but Scene Before has primarily been review-centric as of late. Ladies and gentlemen, it is time for a nearly impromptu piece based on my recent experience at the movies. I just saw “Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness,” and I have done so in a cinema I should probably refer to as “the multiplex of madness.”
I love the movies. The cinema experience made me want to make movies of my own one day, and I am taking whatever steps I can to achieve that dream. In fact, one thing I often look forward to when I am at the movies is when I sit down, I’m on time. Maybe I finish up watching some of the advertising from a source like Front & Center or Noovie or something. After all the ads, we start the preshow, and we see some trailers. In fact, in today’s Internet culture where everything is at your fingertips, we live in a time where sometimes I watch a trailer online, and get excited to potentially see it on the big screen.
My cinema of choice is AMC Theatres, which I went to last Thursday, specifically their Assembly Row 12 location in Somerville, Massachusetts, to go see “Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness.” I shelled out some extra money for the IMAX 3D experience. Not for me, my ticket was free (Thanks, A-List!), but my dad’s ended up costing $21.69. This is a premium experience that offers the biggest screen in the venue, arguably the loudest sound in the venue, and of course, 3D, which is not as much of a craze as it was a few years ago.
So, the trailers start… We get a ton of titles. These are not in any specific order by the way, “Nope,” “The Bob’s Burgers Movie,” “Lightyear,” “Bullet Train,” “Jurassic World: Dominion,” “Thor: Love and Thunder,” an extended look at “Top Gun: Maverick,” and the teaser for “Avatar: The Way of Water.” That’s right! THE “AVATAR” SEQUELS DO EXIST! That’s eight movies. And I’ll remind you… Not all of them are going to be in IMAX. “Bob’s Burgers” has no evident deal with the IMAX brand at this point to release the film in said format.
It takes a lot for me to lose my patience. Part of me snapped once I realized how long I’ve sitting in my seat just watching ADVERTISEMENTS, not even including all the Noovie stuff! I didn’t snap, because I was frankly excited to finally get to the film. Plus, the last trailer was for “Avatar: The Way of Water,” which I was happy to see. “Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness” is two hours and six minutes long. The preshow, which included the trailers, the AMC advertising, the IMAX countdown, was probably around half an hour. I’d say so because when I checked my phone at the end of the movie (including credits), whose preshow started at 9:30, it was 12:07, so those ads must have run for around half an hour.
I will also add this… Something happened that night that I have never witnessed before. The trailer for “Bullet Train…” PLAYED TWICE IN THE SAME REEL. It’s a great trailer, but what happened?
This is getting ridiculous. We’re here to watch THE MOVIE.
I mentioned that AMC Theatres is my movie theater of choice, but that’s mainly because it is the biggest bang for my buck. Why? Because I have A-List, which allows me to see three free movies a week in any format. I have gone to experiences where they played six, seven, and eight trailers, and not once have they been as long or tedious as what I just went through.
Sometimes having a lot of trailers is not the worst thing in the world. It gives more time for you to show up to your movie if you are late, if you want to go out and quickly grab food, go to the bathroom, and come back, you can do that and not miss much depending on where and when you see the movie. But when I’m paying a premium price, probably the most I have paid for an individual movie ticket in my life, I am not paying for the trailers! In fact, you could make an argument that for the price I paid, I should be paying for NO TRAILERS! Have you seen streaming models lately? Look at Hulu! You can pay $5.99 per month and get ads, or you can pay $11.99 per month and get no ads. It’s a premium price for a premium experience. I am paying monthly for YouTube Premium right now so I am not getting ads on the site! I never thought I’d say this! And even if it were not a premium price like $21, 9 trailers, including an extended preview and one that plays a second time, is obscene, especially when you consider how much of your time that it takes up. In fact, I would argue that there are theatres that try to take advantage of fewer trailers, but justify the price for it.
Some of you may remember the ArcLight chain, which primarily had cinemas around southern California. They opened a theater in Boston shortly before all their locations closed. A standard 2D show at the ArcLight in Boston right near the TD Garden was $15. Not the lowest price, but when you consider what you are getting, including a maximum of three trailers, a selling point of the ArcLight, it makes the price reasonable.
I get it. Movie trailers are supposed to sell movies. In addition to popcorn, movie theatres are in the business of selling movies, so I get why trailers exist. They are a decent business model for the venue and the studio. I am not saying that movie theatres need to get rid of trailers, but they need to make me feel like I paid to watch a MOVIE, not a barrage of marketing.
If anything, I think six trailers or more is where you start to push things, because trailers are often 2 to 3 minutes each unless it is a teaser. This gives an approximate 10 to 20 minute preshow, and that may or may not include whatever else the theatre tries to sell you. I am not telling theatres to get rid of their ads that partner with Coca-Cola, because if they did, I think that would lessen the chance of Coca-Cola being sold at that theater in the future. But if they made the trailers a reasonable length that did not make me feel like I watched a quarter of the film already, then I would feel like my purchase was justified. We live in a culture where we could look up any trailer we want on YouTube. I do not need AMC reciprocating my search history.
And you know what? It looks like studios are starting to catch on, at least to an extent. Because last week, CinemaCon was held in Las Vegas. During the Paramount presentation where they showed the entirety of “Top Gun: Maverick” to the audience, the domestic distribution chief, Chris Aronson got onstage and suggested that movie theaters should play fewer trailers before the film starts, as stated in this article from Box Office Pro.
“We’re not completely back yet and now is not the time for complacency, It’s not the time for ‘If we just have movies, everything is going to be okay,’ exhibition has to ensure that every facet of the guest experience is the absolute best that it can be. And [studios] have to ensure that we’re delivering content that moviegoers want to see in your theaters. We must work together in every way possible, the way partnerships are supposed to work—sharing data, not selling it—to help us market our movies to your patrons. Playing the right number of trailers and not numbing the audience to the point that the recall rate drops to nil. Ensuring that the price-value ratio is fair and proper. We need to look at our business from different perspectives and experiment in finding ways to increase attendance and revenue.” -Chris Aronson
When a higher-up from a major studio is chiming in on an issue like this suggesting that LESS marketing, potentially from their own movies, needs to be played, that is a sign that the cinemas need to fix this.
But at the same time, Paramount is also the studio behind “Top Gun: Maverick,” and they literally played a 5 or so minute preview of the film on top of all the other trailers I witnessed that same night!
I was talking to someone recently as part of a school project and they said during an interview that one thing they miss because of the pandemic is the movies. Should they ever go back, I can only imagine how’d they react to sit through as many trailers as I did. Not missing it so much now, right?
I’m writing this post as an American, likely for an American audience. Here’s an analogy my American friends can understand. Movie preshows are like baseball games. You can watch a number of innings, experience a thrilling game, perhaps feel satisfied in the end. Trailers, like baseball, can be fun. But if trailers go on for too long, they become the most insufferable, brain-melting, tiring thing on the face of the planet!
So AMC, Regal, Cinemark, Showcase, all the other venues that are probably playing trailer upon trailer right now, please take into consideration that the audience wants to watch the movie they paid to see. And if you are concerned that they are not going to know about “The Bob’s Burgers Movie” of all things, then that’s why standees and posters exist to be displayed around the theater! I should not be watching eight or nine trailers when you need extra time to play the IMAX countdown and a pointless, counterproductive ad where Nicole Kidman reminds everyone that heartbreak feels good in AMC Theatres. No, seriously. That ad makes no sense. Why is an ad reminding you to go to AMC Theatres attached to the end of the preshow when I already entered the theatre?
As they say in the song “Take Me Out to the Ballgame,” “if they don’t win, it’s a shame.” Nobody wins with eight or nine trailers. They’re cluttered, long, and for all I know, the audience probably won’t remember all of them. I remember every one I saw because I was angered by all this in the end, but all it did is lessen my chances of returning to AMC. They’re lucky I am not cancelling my A-List because I go to watch and review movies. But if I were not doing Scene Before, I would probably cancel my A-List, maybe choose another theater to commit to. Movie theatres, this is simply put, a shame. Therefore I beg, stop self-indulging, stop overselling, and start playing what I came to see!
I want to ask everyone a couple questions. First off, do you like movie trailers? Second, do you think the movies are playing enough trailers? Too little? If you had to put a number on it, how many trailers would you PREFER to see before a movie? Do you even watch trailers at the theater? Also, how long would you say is the longest preshow you witnessed before going to see a movie? Let me know down below!
Thanks for reading this post! If you are new around here, feel free to check out some of my reviews for movies like “Sonic the Hedgehog 2,” “CODA,” and “Morbius.” I have more reviews coming soon. And speaking of Nicole Kidman, I will be reviewing “The Northman” this week! Be sure to check that out when it drops! Evidently, given all that I have talked about, expect a review of “Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness” sometime in the near future. If you want to see more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
Hey everyone, Jack Drees here! Some of you may have finished reading my top 10 BEST movies of 2021, feel free to check that out if you have not already, but I am now here to present the exact opposite! The top 10 WORST movies of 2021! 2021 was admittedly a better year for movies than 2020 was. I mean, more movies actually came out, so… But it doesn’t mean there wasn’t crap! Now, I will say I have not seen all the crap that has come out this year. If you have seen a certain movie this year that is not on the list, who knows? Maybe it’s so bad I forgot about it. Or maybe I just didn’t see it. I didn’t see either of the sequels that came out this year to “The Boss Baby” or “Peter Rabbit,” so I sat pretty when it came to those. Granted I have not seen the originals either. With that being said, these are my ten picks, they’re all subjective. There is not really much of a grand scale as to how these movies made the list. They’re just on the list because I did not like them. Well, mostly… Maybe you did like these movies. More power to you if that’s the case. Also, I should state this, the films have to be theatrically released and this does include any day and date film like those released simultaneously on HBO Max for instance. Those do count. If they’re exclusively on streaming, I’m not including it. That’s technically television. Before I dive into my top 10, I am going to list three dishonorable mentions.
Dishonorable mention: The King’s Man
Kicking off the dishonorable mentions we have “The King’s Man!” This is a really disappointing movie to see on this list because I love the “Kingsman” franchise. I enjoyed both “The Secret Service” and “The Golden Circle,” so to see this prequel here kind of hurts. I mean, there are a couple fun action sequences, but it isn’t enough to make a good movie. I’ve only seen this a couple weeks ago and I have already forgotten a good number of the characters. Not the best of signs. Rhys Ifans was GREAT as Rasputin though, I’ll give the movie that.
Dishonorable mention: Reminiscence
The next dishonorable mention is “Reminiscence.” I feel like part of the reason why this movie saw an actual release date, aside from the cast involved, is because the director, Lisa Joy is married to Jonathan Nolan, who probably has, or perhaps at this point, had, alongside his brother Christopher Nolan, a great relationship with Warner Brothers. The concept of this film is intriguing, but this ended up being an amazing original concept that became one of my most easily forgotten films of the year.
Dishonorable mention: Space Jam: A New Legacy
Last, and certainly least for the dishonorable mentions, is “Space Jam: A New Legacy.” Why did we need this movie? The first one completely and totally sucked on every level! The one pro I will give this film is that some of the visual effects do look dazzling and Don Cheadle’s portrayal of Al-G Rhythm was honestly quite entertaining, but that’s were the positives end. As for the rest of the film, it’s basically a combination of cheap jokes, forced nostalgia, while also being a giant commercial for the Warner Brothers brand. If you want a Warner Brothers commercial that’s ten times better than this, go watch “The LEGO Movie,” skip “Space Jam: A New Legacy.”
Now let’s start off the list! Things could be a lot worse for these films, they could have come out in 2020. These are my top 10 WORST movies of 2021.
#10. Snake Eyes: G.I. Joe Origins
#10 is “Snake Eyes!” I have admittedly never watched anything related to the “G.I. Joe” franchise, but I thought I’d give this film a shot. Turns out, this film gave me a shot. …In between the eyes. You know people go to film school to learn how to make movies? Well, if it were opposite day and they had a class that taught people how not to make an action movie, this would be a proper example. Shaky cam came, shaky cam saw, but I thought filmmakers came to realize that it wouldn’t conquer. Apparently shaky cam is still a thing in the realm of “Snake Eyes.” Not only is there a ton of it during the action sequences, but even when someone is just walking in a room! There’s a scene where Samara Weaving’s character is just walking, she’s all business, and the camera’s basically simulating an earthquake! I wasn’t looking for anything on the level of “The Shawshank Redemption,” I just wanted to have fun seeing people kick ass. When I couldn’t even get that, that’s a problem.
#9. Malignant
Coming in at #9 is “Malignant.” As I’ve said on this blog before, horror movies are not my goto genre. But I did have some desire to check out “Malignant.” It looked rather compelling through whatever marketing I saw. Turns out it was the exact opposite! If anything it looks like a modern horror film that tries to take itself a bit seriously, but it ends up going full camp at certain points with dialogue that you could have gotten away with only if it were uttered in the 1980s. If I knew that’s what they were going for, okay. But it just didn’t work. The film is directed by James Wan, who has been known amongst modern horror fans for films like “The Conjuring.” That’s a film I’d rather watch on a Friday night over this piece of crap! At times, the film feels like it takes itself seriously, then the next moment it feels like I’m watching a Lifetime original with a monster in it. I’m excited to see what James Wan does with the next “Aquaman” movie, but this original was a bit of a misstep for him.
#8. The Hitman’s Wife’s Bodyguard
Ryan Reynolds is just the best! “Free Guy” is one of my favorite movies of the year! I’ve seen it twice! Wait, this is the worst list? Sorry, wrong script. Ryan Reynolds? What are you doing, man? “The Hitman’s Wife’s Bodyguard” was a complete waste of time! I remember watching the original film, “The Hitman’s Bodyguard,” a few months after it came out and I had fun with it. It was not my favorite action film of the year, I thought “John Wick: Chapter 2” was better for instance, but I enjoyed myself. And that film made a lot of money, and like all pleasantly fine things that make money, of course they make a sequel. Just wish they made one that felt like it had more time and passion into it. This film has an ADHD-esque story and nearly unmemorable action. The only action scene I clearly recall is one towards the beginning when Ryan Reynolds is trying to relax and next thing we know he ends up on a bike with Salma Hayek. I’ll give credit to the performers. Despite the lazy writing, they played their characters to perfection, even if they felt like they were somewhat playing themselves. But seriously, if you want a good Ryan Reynolds flick to watch, check out “Free Guy.” Skip “The Hitman’s Wife’s Bodyguard” if you can.
#7. Dear Evan Hansen
I’ve never been a Broadway guy, but I had some interest in “Dear Evan Hansen” before it came out because the trailers looked good. Then I saw the movie and realized, what a waste of time. I don’t care that they got a guy in his 20s to play the lead role of a teenager, that’s been done before, but what I do care about is that they get a guy, regardless of age, who looks LIKE a teenager. I went through this entire film looking at the lead actor, Ben Platt, and thinking I was looking at Jerry Seinfeld. All he needed was a puffy shirt and he’d be a perfect ripoff. “But I don’t wanna read the emails!” With that aside, unlike some other musicals that came out this year, like “In the Heights,” which I wasn’t a HUGE fan of, and “West Side Story,” which I was a huge fan of, the numbers in this film were mostly unmemorable and for what I noticed, they did not even have that grand scale that I’m used to seeing in musicals. It felt very small, and it was not presented in a positive way. Now the message of the film could be interesting, but I spent much of the film rooting against the main hero because of how said message is utilized. I don’t know, I just did not always relate to him. And I will admit that like him, I’m somewhat awkward in social situations, but the execution here left me uneasy. If you want a decent musical to watch this year, go watch “West Side Story.”
#6. F9: The Fast Saga
Do me a favor, please. Starting from one, count to nine. I’m sure in that one attempt of summing up numbers, it will contain more logic and sanity than even a fraction of a second in “F9: The Fast Saga!” “F9: The Fast Saga” was a humungous disappointment. Not only is it another letdown in this ongoing franchise, which for me personally has only happened with “2 Fast 2 Furious” and “Tokyo Drift,” but this letdown hurts because of how much anticipation I had behind it. Have any of you ever seen that Lifetime original film “Grumpy Cat’s Worst Christmas Ever?” Yeah, I wish I could forget it too. Much like that straight of TV piece of crap, “F9” spends more time than it needs to making fun of itself and trying to make the collective Internet roll on the floor! Hey, look! We’re invincible! Just another Tuesday for Dom Toretto and the family! LET’S GO TO SPACE BITCHES! Oh my god! Watching the space scene was honestly embarrassing. Space is special. You guys just ruined it for me. I no longer want to be an astronaut because of this movie. Well, that, and maybe rich people. 2021 is such a weird year. The first half is spent seeing the Fast family go to space and now all these rich people get to send their buddies up to space. I like the “Fast & Furious” franchise. In fact, I wanted to see this movie to a certain degree that I bought tickets for it in advance IN 2020! Of course, when the film rescheduled about a year later, I had to refund those tickets, but goddamnit, if I did not get to see this film opening night, I would have felt like an idiot. Well, this idiot suffered through an IMAX experience through Hell.
#5. Tom & Jerry
Some people hate cats. Some people hate mice. Some people hate… People. If you hate all these concepts, then I should warn you that “Tom & Jerry” will make you hate them even more! “Tom & Jerry” was never something I watched as a kid. The only reason why I went to see this movie is because I had a friend, who told me I’d “like” the movie, and he wanted me to go. Boy was he wrong. And I expected that going in, because the trailer did not look promising. This looked like a lot of those other cartoons that kind of got that live-actionish treatment like “Alvin and the Chipmunks” and “The Smurfs.” And just like the latter, this whole thing’s set in New York where the focus is not on Tom & Jerry, the two characters whose names are in the freaking title. No! It’s instead about some scumbag named Kayla who thinks it’s okay to lie her way to getting a job at a hotel! What a great lesson for children! I did not know what to expect going into this film. I just wanted some okay action sequences. There may have been one or two moments that stood out, but it is surrounded by a lifeless plot, overacted performances, and some of the most cringeworthy scenes I have ever watched in a movie. Some people may defend this film saying it could entertain children. But I look at this film and I would not want my kid watching it. Kayla is a fraud who cheats her way to the top. “Die Hard” is a better movie for children to watch because that film at least enforces the notion that terrorists are bad! “Tom & Jerry” is the perfect family film if you really, truly, hate your family.
#4. Zola
We live in an era where they’ll truly make a movie about anything. They’ve done LEGO, Emojis, Trolls. It feels like they’ve done it all. But wait! There’s tweetstorms! Not many people have done that! And after seeing “Zola,” I really hope that this is a trend that is either improved or kept to a minimum. I’ll give this film credit. The reason why it is not in a more negative spot is because there are a number of scenes that do look dazzling. There’s one moment in the first two minutes that really stands out. But it is also surrounded by all this footage that looks like it is something out of a poorly done YouTube vlog. A24 is one of my favorite studios, but evidence suggests that they have also done some of my least favorite films of the last decade like “Midsommar” and “The Witch.” “Zola” has officially joined those ranks. In my life, I often keep my ringer off on my cell phone because I’m often busy and I don’t want to get distracted. Depending on the situation, I’m one of those people who gets easily distracted. I think after hearing the Twitter notification sound every minute in this film, I think I want to keep that ringer off for the rest of my life. And I don’t know about you, Riley Keough’s performance in this film was occasionally nauseating to watch. She could be a decent actress, but the way she handled her character here, whether it was through her or the director’s eyes, felt almost offensive and obnoxious. To top it off, the movie seemed to have a number of attempts at humor, but I didn’t really find the film all that funny. Simply put, if there were a way to block movies in the same manner you can block accounts on social media, I would do it with this one.
#3. Red Notice
Dwayne Johnson, Ryan Reynolds, and Gal Gadot. Put these three good-looking actors together, and it sounds like a recipe for pure entertainment. Right? WRONG! If you said, yes, I’m willing to bet you have never watched “Red Notice,” and frankly I think you shouldn’t. I mean, come on! This movie has three of the biggest movie stars working today and it wastes all of them! I mean, they do their best with the material that’s given to them, but “Red Notice” is one of the most disposable and forgettable action films of all time. The only real compliment I can give to the movie is that some of the locations are kinda pretty and Gal Gadot has some really sexy outfits. This film is the definition of style over substance. Overall the story is predictable, the script is all over the place, the attempts at humor did not land no matter how many times the writers tried, and at the end of the day, the people behind this film basically relied on name recognition to get people to watch it. That’s really disappointing. I can name a few movies I’ve seen with a phenomenal cast, but they barely do anything to make that cast pop! Movies like “The Circle,” “Aloha,” and “Lucy.” Yeah! Tom Hanks, Bradley Cooper, and Scarlett Johansson respectively can sell me at the door, but once I’m locked behind that door, all I see are empty promises. And may I add, this is the second film on this list starring Ryan Reynolds. What’s happening with you?! I liked you in “Free Guy!” Why are you resorting to this crap?!
#2. Cinderella
My next film on this list is “Cinderella.” My god, “Cinderella” was just awful. I knew it was gonna be bad from the beginning with the opening number. I think first impressions matter in film, and when the first number of a musical fails to impress me, that’s not really the sign of a memorable musical. “Cinderella” is directed by Kay Cannon, who wrote the “Pitch Perfect” films. I have not seen the sequels, but I cannot say the first is among my favorite comedies, although she has been attached to a few things I enjoy. Including the entertaining Fox show, “New Girl.” This film is a modern take on “Cinderella,” it kind of reminded me of the 1990s “Romeo + Juliet” film starring Leonardo DiCaprio, which, you may punch me in the face for this, I wasn’t a huge fan of that film either. I say that because while these films are not the same, “Cinderella” takes a lot of elements that make the character iconic and remembered through the years and sprinkles them into a story with modernizations. Apparently there’s a drag feel to this film, there’s all these inside jokes to modern society, and it could add up to something unique, but it didn’t stick the landing. I like the idea of Cinderella having to live in a modern society where women are perhaps more independent, they can do more for themselves. And there’s even a whole thing about Cinderella being a dressmaker and if she marries someone in particular, that technically means she can forget about becoming a businesswoman, someone who can take her dressmaking and turn it into an opportunity to make some money. I like these ideas, they sound good in a pitch meeting. But they just didn’t translate well with what we got. Also, James Corden… My lord. Who’s your agent? You’re in this too?! I mean… This is a step up from “Superintelligence.”
I just want to note something about “Cinderella.” I did not review this film. In fact, this is one of the few films that I saw in 2021 that I had no intention of reviewing because it was so late in the year when I watched it and it’s been out for months, but I did tweet my thoughts on the film because it stood out to me in such a negative way that I had to express my opinion. I could not let it sit in my head. After a few tweets, where I even mention the director Kay Cannon’s name, I did not tag her by the way, I just mentioned her, including her past film, not to mention her directorial debut, “Blockers,” which I ADORED. So much so it was one of my favorite comedies of the past few years. She responded with the following:
“Sorry you didn’t like it. It’s a PG fairytale jukebox musical made for kids/families to enjoy. And millions upon millions of them did along with a bestselling soundtrack. Maybe rewatch Blockers to ease you from the torture you endured?”
I mean, I’m a bit shocked she even chimed in because I figured she could look at these tweets, notice some idiot on the Internet, and move on. But I’m not here to judge anyone. In addition, I responded back saying…
“I have respect for you, Kay. Glad to hear the movie’s successful. Glad other people can enjoy something. That’s the subjectivity of film. Looking forward to whatever you’re doing next.”
First off, she’s right. “Cinderella” is not for me. I cannot think of myself belonging in a single demographic that I could fall under for the movie. Musicals are not always my thing. I was never attached to any of the other “Cinderella” stories like the ones that Disney did over the years, and of all the late-night hosts currently on network TV, I think James Corden is the one I’m least likely to watch. I was admittedly rather excited for “Cinderella” purely because of the filmmaker behind it. I mean, for me she’s had ups and downs, but she was hot off of “Blockers” and it made me more excited for her next project, whatever it was. I mean, it’s like getting excited for the next Quentin Tarantino film or the next Christopher Nolan film or the next Ari Aster film or the next Wes Anderson film. Sometimes I have to separate the content from the creator. The creator, I love her. I think Kay Cannon is talented and someone I want to keep an eye on in regard to upcoming projects. But I’ll also remember her as the woman who directed “Cinderella.” I did not choose this life. It chose me. Actually… I did choose to watch the movie, so maybe I did choose this life. Whatever.
#1. Music
The last couple years of doing these countdowns were interesting, yet sad, because the same director made the #1 film two years in a row. This year, that is thankfully not the case, but apparently this film is a feature-length debut. In a lot of cases, I could be disappointed in a feature-length debut, but nevertheless hopeful that the director behind that feature will go on to do great things. As for this feature, I think the director needs to keep her dayjob. My god, this movie was off the charts horrible! My #1 worst movie of 2021 is… “Music.” I mean, come on! What else could it be? I almost skipped this film this year because it barely had a theatrical release, but the film was nominated at 78th Golden Globes and had people talking, so by the end of the year, I had to dive into some untreaded waters. Having watched it, I can assume that I could write an entire double-spaced, Times Roman Numeral 12 point font essay on why this movie is not only bad enough as a project to begin with, but why it simply should have never been made. I watched this film for free on Prime Video, and even then, I felt robbed. “Music” is directed by Sia, an artist I have never really cared to follow, but after seeing this film, I don’t really care if she’s good at her dayjob, I don’t know if I want to support her. Some people in the film industry often object to the idea of doing a worst movies of the year list, and I can see why they would do that. Not everyone wants their movie bashed, or to see other movies get bashed. I get that. I can see why people advise others not to yuck on something people spent hours making. “Music,” however, is a movie I cannot use as a defense in this case. Not just because it is a bad movie that failed to entertain me. You want a bad movie that failed to entertain me? Look at “Life of the Party!” That film came out in 2018 and was my #1 worst movie then! I could at least see why people would enjoy that. It was never cruel or offensive, it was just a poorly made film that failed to appeal to me on any level. “Music” on the other hand is a completely DANGEROUS and ALARMING project.
The film centers around a girl who has to take care of her sister, who is on the autism spectrum, and given this sister’s abnormal behavior, it makes this situation all the more challenging. Maddie Ziegler plays the title character and yes, I have been around autistic people. I’m autistic myself, and yes, there are a few of us that do not often communicate with easy to understand words or sentences. That is a fact, I’m putting it out there. But the point is that when it comes to Maddie Ziegler as this character, she almost feels like she’s going over the top at certain points. She’s almost like a cartoon character. At times, her performance either felt cringe-inducing or even downright uncomfortable. And I don’t mean that last part in a compelling way. Apparently Sia and Maddie Ziegler have been good pals for years, so Sia felt it was natural to include Ziegler as the title character in this film. For the record, Ziegler does not have autism herself. And I think this movie would heavily enhanced if they stuck to getting someone on the spectrum to play the lead role. After all, they have experience, and it can help the film in terms of its overall credibility, which it evidently lacks. Apparently Sia TRIED doing this movie with someone on the spectrum, if that actually happened because it was also stated she wrote the character of Music with Maddie Ziegler in mind, but said actor was uncomfortable. So, instead of accommodating her, which some decent people would try to do, in fact they’ve done it with me throughout my life in school to a degree, they let her go. For all I know, maybe she or someone she knew genuinely had resistance to doing the role, but it does not change the fact that a good director would take into account someone’s disabilities and work around them. Or, if you let this person on the spectrum go, at least try finding another one! You know, there’s more than one autistic actor out there! And to be honest… I don’t think “Music” is a film where you get your best friend to tag along, just because… It’s weird. And it almost lacks decency. And apparently Ziegler herself had second thoughts about this role while filming as well! They should have just thrown in the towel to be honest! And also, this film is supposedly meant to show off that people on the autism spectrum are “different” but worthy of existing in this world just like everyone else. Honestly it didn’t feel that way. The only people I could see this movie relating to are the caregivers of those on the spectrum, but even then it’s dangerous, because said caregivers will get the wrong idea based on some of the things that happen in this film. I’m not saying make the character speak in complete sentences or anything, but the way they handled the character of Music as is felt nothing short of infuriating and borderline ableist. Although speaking of caregivers, Kate Hudson, who plays Music’s caregiver, did give an okay performance, but it’s not enough to make a good movie. There’s also flashy sequences in this film that I would imagine a good number of people on the autism spectrum would not be able to watch in the first place. Great job connecting with your subject matter! Apparently Sia did three years of research on autism while making this film… She honestly needs at least three more. There’s a scene in this film where one of the major characters restrains “Music” suggesting that he is “crushing her with his love.” You realize that this is an action, depending on how you go about it, that kills or traumatizes a lot of people? Yes, this is something that has been done to those on the autism spectrum, but this is being PROMOTED in the film despite a history of this very action endangering those on the receiving end, sometimes KILLING them. This is the kind of thing that is saved for last resort situations, and they treat it like it’s something done on every other Tuesday. There is an argument to make that no film in history NEEDS to be made. Well, I think I found one that really shouldn’t have. Someone in the future could watch this film, see that scene, and think it is a fine way to calm someone down on the spectrum, when in reality, it is likely only hurting them. Now can it be used to keep someone from harming another person? Perhaps. But the scenes in which the restraining happens do not occur as a result from that. They occur because Music is freaked out over multiple scenarios! I mean, yes, Music is flailing her arms, but she’s not doing anything to potentially warrant any real medical treatment for someone else or herself. I mean if she hits herself enough times, maybe, but she did not! She isn’t holding a gun, she isn’t carrying a knife, she isn’t raising her fists, she’s just going through a situation that is beyond her control. And apparently that warrants a restraint…
And going back to what I said about “Cinderella” and Kay Cannon responding to me on Twitter defending her film. She at least did so with some decency. She could have thought I was a freak. After all, it’s the Internet. It’s her right. But she AND I calmly handled this matter. There was no Twitter feud between us. Just a couple people with differing perspectives. Sia on the other hand got into Twitter feuds with people regarding this film before it came out, including autistic people, because THAT’S a GREAT way to promote your film. After all of this, she sent out tweets with promises that scenes with restraints would be removed and there would be a warning at the beginning of the film that restraining people with autism is something that won’t be encouraged. Granted, this info was sent about a week before the film came out and kind of felt half-baked, but nevertheless… A promise is a promise. BUT WHO AM I KIDDING?! The restraint scenes are still there and having watched the movie on Prime Video, and double checking before we move any further, THERE IS NO WARNING.
YOU. GODDAMN. CHEAP. MORONIC LIAR!
Sia, I have never meant these two words more, f*ck you. Now you can make an argument that removing those scenes would lessen the story of the movie and diminish an arc Kate Hudson’s character has, but this goes to show that what they really should have done with the movie, is cancelled it. Because yes, I watched the film. But now I never have any intentions of buying Sia’s albums, buying separate songs on iTunes, or buying any of her merch. Short term, maybe the movie makes money. Long term, I cannot support Sia on any of her future projects.
If you look at other movies on this list like “Red Notice” or “The Hitman’s Wife’s Bodyguard,” those movies are on this list almost solely because they failed to entertain me or provide me with a good time, which at the end of the day, a movie is supposed to do. Not only did “Music” provide me with a terrible time, it felt near, if not offensive, and gave me the idea that a movie could potentially harm someone or give someone the wrong idea about a serious subject matter. The only reason why I would support a future product from Sia is if I were tied to a chair and about to die, or I were forced to review it. I salute the hard work people put into movies, even if they’re bad. Sia may have spent years making the movie, in fact this was shot in 2017, but she spent years making a potentially harmful story that could send the wrong message. For all those reasons, “Music” is easily my #1 worst film of 2021.
Thanks for reading this countdown! I also want to thank everyone for making the trek with me through 2021 in film and here’s to 2022! Let’s hope we have a year of great movies, fun experiences, and hopefully less delays. Come on, “Top Gun: Maverick,” I’ve been waiting forever to see you! I’m looking forward to a lot of movies coming out this year including “Doctor Strange and the Multiverse of Madness,” “The Batman,” Steven Spielberg’s “The Fabelmans,” and Damien Chazelle’s “Babylon.” A lot of potential movie magic is going to be cast over audiences this year, let’s hope it’s all properly executed! Until then, thanks for going through another year of movies with me! Also, if you want some positivity instead of this, be sure to check out my picks for the Top 10 BEST Movies of 2021. I do these two lists every year, and I am looking forward to doing them again for 2022. If you want to go through this year of movies and want to make a commitment to take that journey along with me on Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, what are your least favorite movies of 2021? Leave your picks down below! Let out the stress, let out the anger. I hope you’ll find it therapeutic. Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“Red Notice” is directed by Rawson Marshall Thurber (Skyscraper, Central Intelligence) and stars Dwayne Johnson (Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle, ), Ryan Reynolds (Deadpool, Free Guy), and Gal Gadot (Wonder Woman, Criminal), Ritu Arya (Doctors, The Umbrella Academy), Chris Diamantopoulos (Up All Night, The Wonderful World of Mickey Mouse), and this film centers around two agents who are assigned to track down the world’s most wanted art thief.
Netflix is the epitome of watching a movie or TV show from home today. You can go to your microwave, whip up some popcorn, turn on your smart television, open the app, and let those images fly. Granted there are other options like Hulu or Prime or HBO, but only one has earned the identity of being the place where can watch your stuff and “chill.” Although in recent years, Netflix has taken the movie theater business rather seriously. They’ve released great, emotional titles like “Roma” and “Marriage Story,” and they’ve racked up some Oscars here and there. They even released my favorite film of 2020, “Over the Moon,” which I’m sure is an opinion that others don’t typically share, but knowing myself, I really could have used that film at a certain time in my life, hence why I loved it so much. Netflix’s bread and butter is obviously streaming, but they’ll occasionally try their hardest on a movie when the moment allows. Extreme emphasis on when the moment allows. Because not all of their stuff is theatrical, and a straight to streaming movie is today’s equivalent of a straight to cable movie. Everything looks a bit less polished and they don’t always showcase high quality. But for “Red Notice,” this is an interesting case. This was released theatrically, so it has that going for it. But also, the film had not just one, but three of the highest paid actors working today.
You have Deadpool and Blue Shirt Guy himself, Ryan Reynolds. One of the sexy Canadian Ryans out there. Yes we Canada! I know, he’s not in “Toy Story,” just go with it!
You also have Dwayne Johnson, who if you ask me, is probably today’s biggest stereotype when it comes to being a movie star. He’s not the ultimate chameleon, but he has his fans and knows his audience.
Lastly, there’s Gal Gadot, who I have fallen in love with for awhile given her portrayal as Wonder Woman. I think when she first started in that role, granted that was not her first gig, I think her line delivery could have been improved, but I saw potential in her, and she has been growing since then. And one of the first positives I can give to this film in terms of Gal Gadot being in it is that this is one of the better performances I’ve seen from her. The reason is because the way her character is written and directed unleashes the thought I have held for her for a long time. Gadot is probably one of the most beautiful women acting right now. Whether it is of highest intentions or not, which it probably is, she spends much of the movie coming off as almost semi-seductive in every scene. She has a couple lines in this film that feel like they come out of an action-packed porno.
I will also give the movie another thing. When it comes to the costumes, again as an example, I’ll mention Gal Gadot’s red outfit that is almost intentionally meant to put her perverted enemies at bay, they’re very well done. Ryan Reynolds and Dwayne Johnson look like they’re going to be the highlights of spy prom. I think many of the costumes in “Red Notice” are dazzling to say the least. I will also say that some of the sets are well put together and they occasionally make me want to travel the world. But I also want to note that nearly every positive I have given so far is either something based on looks, or how attractive the cast is. As the old saying goes, looks aren’t everything. How is the actual movie in terms of substance?
It’s pure crap. Honestly, this looks like a cheap “Fast & Furious” ripoff that is not quite bad enough to be in the Walmart $5 bin, but that kind of makes it worse because looks can be incredibly deceiving. It has the looks of a modern blockbuster, but it has a script that was created by a 12 year old! This film cost $200 million to make. I bet the three leads received an enormous portion of that pile of cash. I mean, what does Ryan Reynolds need all that money for? Is he gonna try to buy Canada or something?!
This is one of those scripts that if you are specifically writing it with the actors who ended up in this movie in mind, it would sound great in a pitch, but from my perspective, it’s also kind of a long shot considering some of these actors having busy schedules. Given the final results, I think these actors should have stayed busy.
Look, I love Ryan Reynolds as much as the next guy. I think he is one of the most hilarious dudes, and possibly my favorite movie star on the market today, but I have to admit, I don’t think I laughed once when this character was on screen. Part of his role in this film is the typical Ryan Reynolds schtick where he’s almost got traits of a lovable idiot but in actuality he’s not that much of a dumbass, but every line out of his mouth is ridiculously flat and I don’t even know if he was just off while filming or if Rawson Marshall Thurber is not as good at directing as I would like him to be. I liked “Central Intelligence.” I just wish “Red Notice” was as entertaining as that. This film is edited and written as an action-packed thrill ride. Why doesn’t the acting match the feel of a thrill instead of coming off as slightly robotic?
In fact when I watch this movie and I look at Dwayne Johnson and Ryan Reynolds, the first thing I’m reminded of is “Hobbs & Shaw.” Only it’s ten times worse… Because between the characters of Hobbs and Shaw, you had chemistry. One of the best things about the film “Hobbs & Shaw” for me was the chemistry between Dwayne Johnson and Jason Statham. They hated each other, and they took every other moment to acknowledge their displeasure. Sometimes it was really funny. Whenever I look at, again, Dwayne Johnson, shows you the kinds of roles he’s taken in recent years, alongside Ryan Reynolds, I feel like I’m watching a watered down version of that pair. Even though the “Fast & Furious” franchise has never made a single masterpiece, the one thing it often gets right is the chemistry between certain characters, Hobbs and Shaw being one notable example.
Also, this film has one of the lamest and most forced examples of Coca-Cola product placement in recent memory. It felt like something out of an “SNL” sketch that made fun of an action movie as opposed to an actual action movie.
In the end, when it comes to “Red Notice,” there is not much to say except that it is one of the most forgettable landfills of a film I have watched in some time. Again, the stars look cool, the sets look cool, but I feel like more time was spent on developing the style of the movie to the point where Rawson Marshall Thurber and others involved literally forgot substance. I thought it would be tough for Dwayne Johnson to release a film that is worse than “Jungle Cruise” this year. Well, here we are. I also thought it was gonna be tough for Ryan Reynolds to crap out something worse than “The Hitman’s Wife’s Bodyguard” this year. Mission accomplished, I guess! Gal Gadot looks stunning in a red dress. Okay. Let’s make a good script with that concept in it! How bout that? I’m going to give “Red Notice” a 2/10.
“Red Notice” is now available on Netflix for all subscribers. The film also released in theaters, but it has been a month since it came out, so I would not count on going to the theater to see this film at this point.
Thanks for reading this review! If you enjoyed this review, I just want to let you know that I have more coming. I have reviews coming for “Ron’s Gone Wrong,” “King Richard,” “Tick, Tick…BOOM!,” “Encanto,” “Sing 2,” “Ghostbusters: Afterlife,” and “West Side Story.” I’m also going to be seeing “Spider-Man: No Way Home” soon, so I will have a review for that as well.
Also, tomorrow, I will be sharing my thoughts on “The Matrix Reloaded” as part of the ongoing review series “The Matrix Reviewed!” Stay tuned!
If you want to see this and more on Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Red Notice?” What did you think about it? Or, what is the most disappointing movie you’ve seen with a great cast? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“Jungle Cruise” is directed by Jaume Collet-Serra (Unknown, The Shallows) and stars Dwayne Johnson (The Fate of the Furious, Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle), Emily Blunt (Mary Poppins Returns, A Quiet Place), Jack Whitehall (The Nutcracker and the Four Realms, Mother’s Day), Edgar Ramírez (Gold, Point Break), with Jesse Plemons (Game Night, Judas and the Black Messiah), and Paul Giamatti (12 Years a Slave, Sideways). This film is based on the Disney theme park ride of the same name and is set during World War I. Throughout the film we see the mysterious ship captain Frank Wolff, who gives cheap tours through the Amazon River, join forces with Lily Houghton as they search for a tree that contains magical healing powers. While their intentions are to use it for good, Germany has other plans to utilize the power of the tree in order to win the war.
I saw “Jungle Cruise” on opening Thursday in the theater and safe to say, I had moderate expectations going in. I was not expecting Shakespeare, in fact most movies starring The Rock, regardless of his acting talent, are not usually taken as seriously as others. The trailers looked okay, they seemed to have promised a generic adventure that is somewhat family friendly despite being PG-13. In fact, the more I think about it, it kind of looked like a better version of “Dolittle,” as the plot of that film also involved finding a specific tree for healing purposes. There were plenty of people at my screening. It was not a sold out show, but it was good to see families returning to the theater. I went by myself, because I’m awesome, I’m important, and goddamnit, I’m the absolute best! But is “Jungle Cruise” worth the trip? In addition, is it worth $30 on Disney+?
“Jungle Cruise” certainly ain’t no “Indiana Jones.” Or “Pirates of the Caribbean” if you want to get into other theme park ride-based films. Well, the first one to be specific. If anything, “Jungle Cruise” is more in line with the fifth “Pirates of the Caribbean.” It’s a fun film to watch once and then forget about. I will admit, I had quite a few problems with this film as I sat down trying to take it all in. This is one of those rare times where I watch a film and think that Dwayne Johnson is not exactly likable. I mean, sure, I can probably find one or two other films where that is the case. “Tooth Fairy” is another one that comes to mind. But if I have learned one thing in recent years, it’s that regardless of his acting ability, Dwayne Johnson is one of the most charismatic movie stars out there today. He’s up there with Tom Hanks and Ryan Reynolds. Two actors who I think are more talented than The Rock, but there is no denying that they have delivered dumptrucks of likability over the years just from their personalities and how they present themselves on screen.
I’m not saying The Rock is a dick in this film or anything. I just find the way they wrote his character to be somewhat of a letdown. You know, one of the best things about movies like “The Empire Strikes Back,” “Memento,” and “Parasite,” without getting into detail, are the twists and turns these movies take along the way. “Jungle Cruise” is no stranger to this idea, but there was one subversion of my expectations that happened in the first twenty minutes of the film regarding The Rock’s character that made him go from a badass hunk of a man to… Somebody. I dunno. The point is, right off the bat, the character did not leave me with the best first impression. In fact, one of first scenes in the movie with this character, Frank Wolff, is him giving a tour through the Amazon River. The tour itself is notably cheap and lacks an oomph factor. That was the intention on the script’s part, therefore I am not calling this a critique. But the thing is, the whole scene is just The Rock trying to give a boring tour while delivering so many dad jokes. And that’s a thing throughout the movie. Dad jokes! Dad jokes everywhere! Who wrote this movie? 7 year olds? I have never ridden the ride this movie bases itself upon, but apparently, according to what I’ve heard about the Jungle Cruise ride itself, there’s a tour guide on the ride, and that tour guide will spew out dad jokes here and there. While I appreciate the nods to the source material, I’ll be blunt and say this doesn’t rock.
Goddamnit.
I will say that one of my regrets, despite seeing this in the theater, part of me wishes I saw it in 3D or some large premium format. I ended up seeing the film in regular 2D as that was the most convenient timeslot. But if you want a visual feast, this may be worth the trip. The same cannot be said for the story though, at least from my perspective. Because while it is unpredictable at times, it is surface level and the unpredictability is not precisely impressive.
Although I will say that one of my highlights of the film would be some of the supporting cast. Jesse Plemons has been great in everything I’ve seen him in so far, so naturally he is also great in “Jungle Cruise.” Here he plays Prince Joachim, an over the top German aristocrat who stands in the way of the heroes. Plemons does not even feel like himself in this movie. He feels like he’s playing someone from another world at times. Granted, it is a Disney film, where a little over the top sprinkles are encouraged. I will also note Jack Whitehall as Lily’s brother, MacGregor, who comes along for the cruise. Whitehall comes off as a likable coward who almost tries to be the voice of reason but does so almost poorly. I think he is easily one of the better parts of the film the more I think about it.
Disney has tried time and time again to recreate the success of “Pirates of the Caribbean.” Whether “Jungle Cruise” gets a sequel or not is still somewhat questionable on the surface because of the pandemic. The movie did not do too great thus far theatrically or on Disney+. But when it comes to movies based on Disney’s theme park rides, this feels more focused on gimmicks and immersion compared to story. The story is okay, but it is most certainly not great. If you have a family and are looking for an excuse to leave the house, I’d say see this in the most immersive format you can afford. It may be fun for a couple of hours, but I cannot guarantee you will remember it much after.
In the end, “Jungle Cruise” is mediocrely paced, more focused on style over substance, and MY GOD the dad jokes never end! That’s a weird complaint coming from me, because if you know my family, specifically my father’s side, we get together a lot and we are no strangers to puns. In fact, for those of you who do not know, my last name is Drees, and on my father’s side of the family, we call puns and other related jokes “Drees humor” just because of how commonplace it has become when we are around each other. Either way, they did not work in “Jungle Cruise.” I think Dwayne Johnson and Emily Blunt are a fair pair. Although I wish the script served the actors better, especially Johnson. The film does look nice, but looks are not everything. I want a good story too, but “Jungle Cruise” failed in that regard. I’m going to give “Jungle Cruise” a 5/10.
“Jungle Cruise” is now playing in theaters and it is also available through Disney+ with Premier Access for $29.99 on top of a subscription.
Thanks for reading this review! If you enjoyed this review for a film based on a Disney theme park ride, why not read five more?! Be sure to check out my reviews for all five “Pirates of the Caribbean” films including “The Curse of the Black Pearl,” “Dead Man’s Chest,” “At World’s End,” “On Stranger Tides,” and “Dead Men Tell No Tales.” I reviewed all of these films as part of recognizing Scene Before’s 5th anniversary in an exclusive series titled “Pirates of the Caribbean: The Chest of Reviews!”
Continuing down the road of Scene Before’s 5th anniversary, this Monday I will be unveiling my thoughts on the 1984 sex comedy “Revenge of the Nerds” as a starting point of the upcoming review series, “Revenge of the Nerds: Nerds in Review.” As I’ve said previously, my in-depth thoughts on this film, not to mention franchise, feels like it is long overdue.
Speaking of things we’ve all been waiting for, this weekend we are finally getting to watch “The Suicide Squad!” I have IMAX tickets for Saturday, I cannot wait to share my thoughts with you. James Gunn, I have faith in you, do not let me down. If you want to see all this and more on Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Jungle Cruise?” What did you think about it? Or, did you ever go on the Jungle Cruise ride? What was that like? Leave your thoughts and opinions down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
Hey everyone, Jack Drees here! Welcome to the second entry of the Scene Before exclusive review series, “Pirates of the Caribbean: The Chest of Reviews!” Today, we will be diving into the second film in the franchise, “Dead Man’s Chest.” If you read my review for “The Curse of the Black Pearl,” you’d know that I had a lot of fun with that film. It’s a solid mix of old fashioned Disney vibes mixed in with some darker and more mature elements to create something special. Can this sequel capture the same feeling that I got from the original? Here’s my review!
“Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest” is directed by Gore Verbinski, who also directed the first “Pirates of the Caribbean” film. This sequel once again stars Johnny Depp (Sleepy Hollow, Ed Wood) as Jack Sparrow alongside Orlando Bloom (The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, Ned Kelly), Keira Knightley (Star Wars Episode I – The Phantom Menace, Bend it Like Beckham), Stellan Skarsgård (Good Will Hunting, King Arthur), Bill Nighy (Shaun of the Dead, The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy), Jack Davenport (This Life, Coupling), Kevin McNally (Doctor Who, Conspiracy), and Jonathan Pryce (Brazil, Glengarry Glen Ross). This film once again follows Jack Sparrow as he embarks on a quest to find the heart of Davy Jones to avoid enslaving himself to his service. Meanwhile, others are after the heart as well, but for their own reasons.
I really enjoyed the first “Pirates of the Caribbean” film. It’s pretty to look at, it’s fun to watch, it is overall simply crafted with a sense of sheer magnificence. Gore Verbinski did a good job at not just making a great film that I will likely watch again in the future, but also finding a fine line between genius and stupid. In my review for “The Curse of the Black Pearl,” I pointed out that if anything, the film is essentially a modern day version of “The Princess Bride” because it is a great watch for both kids and adults, it’s got terrific sword fights, and both films seem to place themselves in a position where they can be goofy while also realizing it can be smart. When it comes to Johnny Depp as Jack Sparrow, I will stand by him being perfectly cast, and his presence in this sequel certainly proves my point. Jack Sparrow feels like a role that only someone like Johnny Depp can play. I cannot imagine anyone else taking on this role after watching these two films.
Unfortunately, this sequel is not as good as the original, as the old saying goes. However, it is not a bad movie. The second half is what kept my attention. This is not to say that the first half was bad, but compared to the second, it is kind of forgettable. On top of that, the one specific part that I remember most from the first half is perhaps the film’s biggest deterrent. In the current post-modern era, there is a tendency from studios, distributors, and producers to constantly create content that lacks originality. Sometimes it’s a good thing, sometimes it’s a bad thing. In case of these first two “Pirates of the Caribbean” movies, I’d say it’s a good thing, but it does not mean it is perfect.
As you may or may not know, this property started out as a theme park ride. A lot of movies these days tend to have a theme park-like experience. The Marvel movies are varying visual feasts for the eyes and ears. The “Fast & Furious” movies are ridiculous in concept and crazy in execution because of their messing with physics and what could be done with supercharged cars. In fact, “F9” honestly took that theme park-esque experience a little too far for me to continually suspend my disbelief. Honestly, I do not know where the next “Pirates of the Caribbean” movies are going to go, but part of me worries that they’re going to go down the same path that “Fast & Furious” followed since the fourth movie. Now to be clear, I am not saying that every “Fast & Furious” has sucked since the fourth one. The only installment I hated since the fourth one is “F9.” But the reason why I hated “F9” is because each film manages to surpass the last in some degree of absurdity that it is too much for my brain to handle. There’s one or two scenes in “Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest” where Jack Sparrow arguably should have been seriously injured or dead, but he isn’t! He walks off every other incident as if nothing happened! I am keeping an open mind at this point given how this is a fantasy film, but this is nevertheless something that does irk me internally. The first “Pirates of the Caribbean” film, even though it was a bit ridiculous, it still felt like there were rules. In “Dead Man’s Chest,” there is less verisimilitude and a greater sense of absurdity.
This complaint does not take anything away from the fun that I had.
Throughout, the film has a lot of the strengths that the first one has. Some great lead characters. No seriously, I love Johnny Depp and Orlando Bloom when they’re put together. I think they would make a great pair for a buddy cop movie one day. The visuals are breathtaking and hold up fifteen years later. In fact, I am not totally surprised considering how this film happened to win the Best Visual Effects Oscar for the year it came out. The entire encounter with the kraken is worth the watch alone. Keira Knightley is back as Elizabeth Swann and I really liked seeing her here too. There’s this funny scene towards the end of the film where Sparrow is supposedly flirting with her and her reactions to this are one of the better parts of the movie.
As for new characters, this movie adds Naomie Harris as Tia Dalma, and I think she was a perfect addition to this movie. She has this fantastical presence to her that could only work in a movie like this. I’m not gonna lie, by the end of the movie, I almost had a crush on the character. Naomie Harris shines as this mysterious being who used to be a sea goddess, Calypso specifically, and her voice is perfect for someone who helps someone else who happens to be trying to fulfill their destiny. I like this character and of the many supporting characters this franchise has introduced so far, this one was perfectly cast.
Without spoiling anything, I also really like the way they end the film. It is exciting, thrilling, and gets me stoked to see the third movie the more I think about it. I feel like Gore Verbinski is really passionate about everything that he has put to screen in these first two films and he has a serious idea on the direction to take the third film. They got a couple of the writers who worked on the first film to come back as well. Something tells me they all work very well together and love what they do. I am very excited to see where they go from here.
In the end, “Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest” is worth a watch, but compared to “The Curse of the Black Pearl,” it is not exactly as Shakespearean. “The Curse of the Black Pearl,” despite being in the fantasy genre like “Dead Man’s Chest,” seemed to acknowledge that there were some rules that had to be followed. Maybe if I were a young kid watching this I’d let the absurdity of the film fly over my head, but at this point, it didn’t, and it is a reason why the movie lost some points. Nevertheless this is a serviceable sequel with a kick-ass second half. I cannot wait for the third movie, part of me thinks that it will be better than this one. I’m going to give “Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest” a 6/10.
“Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest” is available wherever you buy movies including DVD and Blu-ray, and you can also watch the film on Disney+.
Thanks for reading this review! Next week we dive into the deep waters of world’s end! My review for “Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End” will be available on Thursday, July 15th! Stay tuned!
This weekend I have a couple new posts coming your way including a brand new installment to the CINEOLOGY podcast, where I am once again joined by my good friend Millie as we talk movies. Also, I will have a review up for one of the biggest movies of the summer, “Black Widow!” The film drops in theaters and on Disney+ this weekend, I’ve already got my tickets, and I cannot wait to share my thoughts on this movie that we REALLY should have gotten three or four years ago! I cannot wait to see this! I love Marvel! I love Scarlett Johansson! I love the fact that we are getting big movies again! The experience will hopefully be worth the wait! If you want to see this and more on Scene Before follow either with an email or WordPress account or check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite Johnny Depp film? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
Scene Before 