How To Train Your Dragon: The Hidden World (2019): The Dragon Capper

mv5bmjiwmdiwnjayof5bml5banbnxkftztgwnde1mdc2ntm40._v1_sy1000_cr006311000_al_

“How to Train Your Dragon: The Hidden World” is marketed as the third and final chapter of the “How to Train Your Dragon” franchise. This film is directed by Dean DeBlois, a co-director behind the first film in the franchise who eventually went on to direct its follow-ups by himself. The film stars Jay Baruchel (Undeclared, Knocked Up), America Ferrera (Superstore, Ugly Betty), F. Murray Abraham (The Grand Budapest Hotel, Homeland), Cate Blanchett (Thor: Ragnarok, Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring), and Craig Ferguson (The Late Late Show with Craig Ferguson, Hot in Cleveland). This film continues with the characters audiences have come to know in recent years. As the movie begins, it is revealed that Toothless, Hiccup’s loyal dragon, is not the only one of his kind. After all, there is one other female dragon who meets up with Toothless and the two form a relationship with each other. Meanwhile, there is an antagonist by the name of Grimmel who is trying to find “The Hidden World.” Our heroes must find the same place as their island, Berk, is becoming overpopulated.

I cannot believe I am saying this. It took me over two full weeks to actually sit down and review this movie! I will admit that I managed to go out and see it on its opening weekend, where I went by myself in a crowded theater full of families and children. OK, you know what? It doesn’t mean I can’t be part of the target audience, because this animated franchise has not only proven to be watchable for older audiences, but its first installment came out when I was ten years old. And while my childhood may not have been devoted to this franchise as much as other animated franchises like “Shrek” or “Kung Fu Panda” or “Madagascar,” this was something I’d watch from time to time. Because it is a good movie. When it comes to the second installment, that is the one out of these three films that I remember the least. But I will point out that I have only seen that movie one time. Over these past couple of weeks, the same could be said for “How to Train Your Dragon: The Hidden World,” and I would not mind seeing it again. If you saw my last review, specifically for “Fighting With My Family,” I called it the first lovable movie experience of the year. I might as well have been exaggerating, because “The Hidden World” FLOORED me. And I think a tremendous amount of kudos goes to the brilliant screenplay and direction done by Dean DeBlois. As I was watching this film, I could tell that there was no interference from DreamWorks, everything flowed as it was meant to, there were no efforts to rely on silly gags to make kids happy and adults cringe. This felt like a perfect ending to a solid trilogy. In fact, given how much that I wanted to watch this movie after seeing it once in the theater, I think it might be my favorite installment in the “How to Train Your Dragon” franchise.

This movie focuses heavily on the endlessly developed relationships throughout the franchise. Hiccup and his dad. Hiccup and Toothless. Hiccup and Astrid. OK, let’s stop before I get the hiccups… Nevertheless, this movie’s entire progression focuses on the connection between all of its layered and lovable characters. You have Hiccup who is the charismatic young man who loves his dragon. You have Toothless who is loyal to Hiccup as a practical pet. You have Astrid who is actually a pretty admirable love interest for Hiccup as well. In fact, this movie plays a bit on that love story because there’s constant jokes about the couple getting married. Speaking of love…

It is constantly seen in the film’s marketing that Toothless meets another dragon of his kind and the two manage to fall in love. This actually manages to deliver a couple of the film’s highlights. Aside from the relationship itself, there is a scene that shows Toothless trying to impress this dragon by writing in the sand and dancing, which is more like frolicking from my point of view. Regardless of what it was, I thought it was very heartfelt, and the opposite of cringeworthy. Although part of me imagines it is because I have grown up with this franchise. The first film released when I was ten, the second released when I was fourteen, and now we are here with the third releasing when I am nineteen. And I’ll be perfectly honest, this movie came out at the absolute perfect time for me.

For those of you who know me, there are no conspiracy theories behind the fact that I am currently in my first year of college. I still live at home, but I am out of the house for an extended periods of time. There is a moment of the movie that defines the meaning behind this entire movie, which is shown towards the end. Now let me tell you about my history at the movies. I have seen several films at the theater. I have been a movie-goer since 2006. I will go to see certain films multiple times. But when was the last time I ended up crying during a movie? There’s not one I can easily remember… But damn you, Dragon move. You had me in mantears. When your movie can get a grown man who likes big action, obnoxious rock music, and buffalo chicken that gives you the sweet taste of victory to release tears in a public auditorium. You have done your job. That is just a part of the absolutely phenomenal ending to cap off this trilogy. Let me just say something. “Toy Story 3” made me feel certain emotions towards the end. I was actually crying when I saw this. And the thing that made me really glad about this ending is that the crew behind this film was not lying, they actually set out to make a trilogy capper. I enjoy the “How to Train Your Dragon” movies, but it is made by a group of people catering to a certain market: Kids. As much as some kids would probably want to see another “How to Train Your Dragon” movie, I don’t see a purpose for another one. The crew behind this movie set out to conclude a story that has sort of defined a generation. It has also defined a decade for animation. Think about it, what other animated movie franchises got trilogies this decade? Well there’s “Cars,” which some would argue doesn’t even deserve to exist (haven’t seen the third one so I can’t say much about the trilogy as a a whole). “Despicable Me,” which a lot of people like, but I personally think minions are annoying. “Toy Story” got a trilogy, but that is soon becoming a quadrilogy so that ship has sailed. Plus, “Toy Story 3” came out very early in the decade so it is almost even questionable if that movie is relevant enough to make the trilogy define said decade. The only real debatable solid animated trilogy I can come up with is probably “Kung Fu Panda.” The first movie came out in 2008, it was fun. 2011 gave us the first sequel, a lot of people enjoyed that. And the same can be said for “Kung Fu Panda 3” in 2016. I admittedly have to give the one up to “Kung Fu Panda” over “How to Train Your Dragon,” but both franchises have created visionary works of art that are likely to stand the test of time.

My only real problems with the movie might be the cliche villain who just wanted to do villain things and one other notion that some people may agree upon.

SPOILER ALERT: “How to Train Your Dragon: The Hidden World DOES NOT show you how to train your f*cking dragon. Hypocrites.

In the end, “How to Train Your Dragon: The Hidden World” is f*cking satisfying. It is a film that shows the inconsistency of connection between a parent and child as they age. It shows what people will do for friends, family, and loved ones. And that animation… Quite beautiful if you ask me! Also, THAT F*CKING ENDING. I have seen a lot of great endings this decade. “Interstellar,” “Rogue One,” “Colossal,” “Blade Runner 2049,” “Inception,” “Avengers: Infinity War,” “Kubo and the Two Strings,” “Grand Piano,” “Toy Story 3” as I recently mentioned. This movie’s ending is an a guaranteed position to compete with these endings for best ending of the 2010s cause holy crap! I will say, if you watched “How to Train Your Dragon” as a kid and are starting to think you are getting too old for animation, give this movie a chance, it is absolutely worth it. If you are an adult who wants a babysitter to take the kids to see this movie that way you can have a night out, I wouldn’t say no, but don’t shy away from this film entirely. It will make you feel something, I guarantee it. And I am definitely feeling something right now, because I am going to give “How to Train Your Dragon: The Hidden World” a 10/10! This is the first 10/10 of the year, and damn this movie deserves it! To me, this is the perfect way to describe what it is like to lose someone you love. It is an absolute A+. Thanks for reading this review! Guess what guys? The latest controversy in the comic book movie world has arrived! For those of you who don’t understand, here’s Layman’s terms. “Captain Marvel” is out in theaters! No, not “Shazam,” the other one. Can’t wait for “Shazam” by the way. I will actually be away in California because it is Spring Break so I’m not sure exactly how my schedule will pan out. However should I get a chance to watch the film in the state, I will most certainly take it. There are certain movies that I define as “work” for Scene Before, and blockbuster comic book movies are part of said category. I just gotta do what I gotta do. Be sure to follow Scene Before either with a WordPress account or email so you can stay tuned for more great content! I want to know, did you see “How to Train Your Dragon: The Hidden World?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite “How to Train Your Dragon” movie? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Fighting with My Family (2019): 2019’s First Truly Lovable Movie Experience

mv5bmjq3mtk4nzc1m15bml5banbnxkftztgwmtewmdu5njm40._v1_sy1000_cr006751000_al_

“Fighting with My Family” is directed by Stephen Merchant (Hello Ladies, Logan) and stars Florence Pugh (Lady MacBeth, The Commuter), Leda Headey (Game of Thrones, 300), Nick Frost (Paul, Into the Badlands), Jack Lowden (Mary Queen of Scots, Dunkirk), Vince Vaughn (Wedding Crashers, The Internship), and Dwayne Johnson (Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle, Rampage). This film is based on the true story of a family who live and breathe wrestling like it is an alternative to oxygen. Two kids who are very passionate about the sport get a chance to try out for the WWE, and this is based on truth so I wouldn’t call this a spoiler, but it is also essentially the origin story of Paige, who becomes the famous wrestler fans have come to know in recent years.

Right off the bat, I will just tell you all something. Wrestling is not my jam. If you know me in real life, this wouldn’t surprise you, sports in general are not usually my goto activity. I say that regardless of whether I am watching a sport or playing a sport. In fact, the reason why I went to see this movie has nothing to do with wrestling. Aside from getting passes to a free screening, I was excited for this movie because it was being helmed by the likable and talented Stephen Merchant. He has this flow when it comes to comedy that ultimately just works. I have seen a lot of his interviews on talk shows or other scenarios over the years and the guy is just freaking funny! Maybe his British accent has something to do with it, but still. Plus, he was the voice of Wheatley in “Portal 2,” which might just be my favorite video game of all time. Granted he was in “Tooth Fairy,” which if you think about it, it’s sad that I still remember that movie, but the guy is talented. And let me just say, he does a hell of a job with this movie! Merchant actually wrote and directed the film, but to add onto what I just said, he actually has a role in it too. Granted, the role isn’t enormous, he plays some random dude named Hugh, but it works. In fact, that is an understatement, because Hugh might just be the best part of the movie!

Screenshot (417)

Part of me is wondering if Merchant (left) wanted to do this role simply because out of everything he’s written, he thought it was the most humorous part, but nevertheless. Hugh is comedy gold. And when it comes to a lot of comedy that I am exposed to, most of what I consider to be “good” comedy is actually through written lines. Physical comedy usually takes a backseat for me nowadays. Not everyone can be “The Three Stooges.” When it comes to Hugh, it’s all non-verbal comedy. And f*cking brilliant non-verbal comedy when all is said and done! Also, one of the standout traits that I personally gathered from Hugh is not only that he acts funny, but he also looks funny. I’ve seen images of Stephen Merchant (in fact I just provided one), and the way he transforms himself into this character just takes him from a lanky British dude to a guy whose house your kid might not bother visiting on Halloween night. And this was actually a surprise to me because I saw marketing for the film and I see Stephen Merchant in it for a brief second, but it almost looks like he’s doing OK comedy. This was better than I anticipated!

One of the best parts of “Fighting with My Family” is that you don’t have to like wrestling to watch it. Because ultimately it is not about wrestling, it’s about family, it’s about striving to accomplish your goals, and the complication of social interaction. There was a part of the film where I compared it to a reality competition, especially when you consider there’s a scene where chicks hate each other over word choice. In fact, this comes partially as a surprise considering how the opening titles state that this is from WWE Studios. When was the last time I saw that for a motion picture release like this? Admittedly, there are times when this kind of feels as if it commercializes WWE, especially considering the cameos from professional wrestlers that are present in this film including John Cena, the Big Show, and Sheamus. Plus there is one scene where the brother is saying that he is imagining 20,000 people cheering him on as he stands in an empty stadium that has graphics moving around. It’s almost like “The LEGO Movie,” which may technically be commercial but it tries to sneak things in along the way.

Now as far as Paige goes, I do like her portrayal in this film. I like how they made Paige out to be a shy, timid, and goth looking girl in front of these stereotypical chicks who show off their bodies the whole time. It sort of reminds me of that Planet Fitness commercial where the girls keep talking about how “hot” everything is and there’s also another girl who finds the whole situation awkward. Another thing I like about her character, without diving too deep into spoilers, is the message that people can sometimes pressure you into being somebody just for shiggles or for the sake of fitting in. Maybe you ultimately don’t want to be that person, but the way things go in life, you are automatically triggered into thinking you need to change your ways. I thought that was very well done.

Also, I will say, I saw this going in, but I went to see this film with my mother, and she was somewhat looking forward to seeing Dwayne Johnson appear on screen. Without spoiling anything, he’s only in a couple of scenes. He’s not the star of this film. But for the scenes he’s in, it makes me wonder how he is in real life. I’ve always pictured The Rock to be a nice guy, and this movie makes a convincing case that maybe he is supportive of his fans. This is a guy who gets in a car accident with someone who happens to be a fan, keeps his cool, and shakes it all off like it is no big deal. By the way, that’s a true story, there is a link below the paragraph for further proof.

ARTICLE

Before I give the final verdict, I’ll talk for a sec about Paige’s brother, Zak. One of the complaints that my mother gave toward the film is Zak’s appearance, saying he didn’t look like a wrestler. Having seen him in the movie, I would agree. If this were fiction, there’s a high chance that I’d automatically be on her side, but this is based on true events, so I decided to close my mouth on that subject for a period of time. With that in mind, I decided to do some brief research on Zak, and I found a couple of images where his body looks similar to his actor counterpart. The body thing is something I can actually avoid calling a mistake, but what is a mistake is Zak’s characterization. While his motivations seemed to be clear, I kind of pictured a guy who would get mad for no reason. Granted, the reasoning for his anger seemed understandable, but there are not many characters I would prefer to remember just for mainly being angry.

In the end, “Fighting with My Family” was actually pretty fun. It’s intense, humorous, and kind of heartwarming. Again, I am not a fan of wrestling, and I don’t follow organizations like the WWE, but I enjoyed this movie. “Fighting with My Family” shows what happens when you pit people against each other in a heated, dramatic competition, and also what happens when you aspire to be the very best you can be. I’m going to give “Fighting with My Family” a 7/10. Thanks for reading this review! I’ve got some more content coming soon, including another review which will be in the works soon, specifically for the new DreamWorks animation, “How to Train Your Dragon: The Hidden World.” Also, I just watched the Academy Awards this previous Sunday, so stay tuned for future content related to that. Some of you might wonder why I didn’t do a prediction post this year like I’ve done in the past couple of years, and the reason is simple. Life is short, and college cares more about me killing my brain cells with endless work as opposed to balancing my life with brief periods of relaxation. I would have loved to have done a prediction post, in fact, I would have loved to have posted this review earlier, but the fact is, my brain was fried. There were points where I almost couldn’t help but crawl into the fetal position. So that’s the story of my life for the last few days, how about you tell me yours? Be sure to follow Scene Before either with an email or WordPress account so you can stay tuned for more great content! I want to know, did you see “Fighting with My Family?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite movie where a celebrity plays him or herself? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Green Book (2018): Deserving of Green Marks

mv5bmjmynzexnzq5ov5bml5banbnxkftztgwnjm2mjixnjm@._v1_sy1000_cr006311000_al_

“Green Book” is directed by Peter Farrelly (There’s Something About Mary, Hall Pass) and stars Viggo Mortensen (Captain Fantastic, Lord of the Rings) and Mahershala Ali (House of Cards, Moonlight) as an Italian guy who is down on his luck and a black guy who seems to have ten times the luck the Italian guy has. These two eventually meet each other, get to know each other, drive around the country together while simultaneously making stops for the black guy’s trio tour. Throughout we see the bits and pieces of 1960s racism, a bond between two men which at the time, seemed unlikely, and the development of our main characters to adapt into alternate versions of themselves by teaching each other hallmark traits associating with one person or the other.

This movie is based on the true story of Tony Vallelonga and Don Shirley, who surprisingly I don’t know much about. To be completely clear, I am not surprised I don’t know about Don Shirley, I am not that much of a loyal follower when it comes to the music industry. However, it has recently come to my attention that Vallelonga has done acting jobs over a few points of his life. He appeared in eleven episodes of “The Sopranos,” and by an enormous coincidence, he played a character in “Goodfellas.” I say enormous coincidence because I recently purchased the 4K edition of the film. Not that it matters entirely, just saying. Nevertheless, despite my lack of knowledge towards these two individuals, I gotta say this movie was really quite enjoyable. In fact, a part of me shouldn’t be surprised that is the case. After all, I just watched the Golden Globes and this movie was nominated for five awards, taking home three, including Best Musical or Comedy.

I saw “Green Book” last Friday, and to be honest, I probably would have still watched this movie at some point, regardless of whether or not it actually took home Best Picture. I’ve pondered over seeing it for months, but now is the time when I finally get around to it. One of my highest expectations was towards the performances by our two leads, Viggo Mortensen and Mahershala Ali. Those two performances did not disappoint. One thing that almost sounds crazy at first is the thought of them having decent chemistry because one person (Mortensen) is rather dynamic and the other person (Ali) is almost robotic. My first sight of Ali in this film made me think of him as a robotic religious figure.

One of the best parts of the movie to me is something that I perhaps started thinking about a little more as I age. A question that sometimes comes up in my mind is: How many people have to follow their own market? As my brain has developed over the years, I realize I am coming across more and more stereotypes as days go by. In this film, one of the scenes where the duo are in the car together shows them listening to music and one of the songs is done by an artist who according to Mortensen is “Ali’s people.” It almost makes me think about my own life. I am going to name a number of movies I still have not seen and chances are that I am going to make you mad once I tell you what those said movies are.

  • Rocky
  • A Fistful of Dollars
  • The Godfather
  • Goodfellas
  • The Wolf of Wall Street
  • Forrest Gump
  • The Green Mile
  • Gremlins
  • 12 Angry Men
  • A Clockwork Orange
  • The Departed
  • Get Out
  • Airplane

You guys mad? I could go on, but I’ll spare you all from getting any angrier.

The point is, with that scene in mind, I was reminded that you don’t HAVE to like something just because society tells you to. Just because I’m a straight white male, doesn’t mean I have to love Nickelback. Just because I live in the United States, where Donald Trump is currently president, it does not mean I have to like Donald Trump. Just because I don’t like Donald Trump, it does not mean I have to like Hillary Clinton even though that is apparently how some members of society like to put things into perspective.

Also, this movie is surprisingly funny. Sure, there is a comedy aspect to this film from the way it is marketed. But I didn’t think it would be as funny as it was. Granted, it’s not roll on the floor laughing funny like “Anchorman” or “Game Night” or “The Hangover.” However, when considering the number of lines that gave me a happy go lucky feeling, it sort of felt surprising. I mean, when I found out this was directed by one of the guys who did “There’s Something About Mary” it kind of makes sense. Nevertheless, this movie, while it was definitely intended to be comedic, was surprisingly, well, comedic. It’s especially surprising when you consider the storyline, the vibe, and the time period which this movie takes place. I figured some serious s*it would be going down at a certain point. And it does, but it does not take away the fact that this movie delivered comedy effectively while simultaneously being kind of a shocker.

But really, at its heart, what “Green Book” truly is from my point of view, is a feel good story. It almost feels like that end of the day story you’d hear on CBS Evening News. With the formation of a friendship that seemed rather unlikely at the time, and some laughable moments, it is easy to call this film something that associates with feeling fulfilled. I talk a lot about comic book movies and how I sometimes wish the script sometimes has more dark moments as opposed to moments that come off as safe or kid-friendly. But in a movie about two different races interacting with each other, trying to change who they are, or in some cases, the other person, I wouldn’t settle for anything else but a feel good story. More specifically, in this particular case I wouldn’t settle for anything else.

Also, without spoiling anything, there is this one moment in the film involving a green rock. It’s actually surprisingly funny and also kind of clever. I won’t go into detail, I’ll just say, see the movie for yourself to find out what I’m talking about.

In the end, “Green Book” is a well done, well put together, and overall interesting flick. It blends comedy and drama with excellence, the chemistry between the two leads almost couldn’t be any better, and the story was very fascinating to observe. I also must point out, there are a couple scenes involving Kentucky Fried Chicken in this film, and while the movie didn’t exactly make me hungry for KFC, it did however make me think that this is actually pretty effective product placement. It doesn’t feel over the top, and it’s actually kind of hilarious. This movie is based on a true story, but the product placement feels incredibly well done to the point where I didn’t even care whether or not the KFC bit actually happened in real life. As someone who had to suffer through “Uncle Drew” months back, I truly appreciate this. I’m going to give “Green Book” an 8/10. Thanks for reading this review! I just want everyone to know that I am going to see a movie this weekend, but I’m not going to reveal what it is, because I would prefer to reveal it in a surprise post which will be up by the end of the week. Speaking of posts, I will have everyone know that I decided on the EARLIEST POSSIBLE DATE for the announcements of my personal nominations of my first annual Jackoff Awards ceremony. That earliest date is going to be Sunday, January 27th. If something happens before then, I’ll probably postpone the announcements to maybe a day or two after, perhaps even into the month of February depending on how things work out. Nevertheless, look forward to that and more great content coming soon! If you want to see such great content, be sure to follow Scene Before either with a WordPress account or email! I want to know, did you see “Green Book?” What did you think about it? Or, what is a movie you enjoy involving long car trips? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

IMAX, We Need To Talk About First Man.

mv5bywfhzgvjmtatzdcwmc00yty3ltljywutnzriodzlowfknjezxkeyxkfqcgdeqxvymjmxote0oda-_v1_sy1000_cr006311000_al_

Hey everyone, Jack Drees here! As you may know if you’ve followed my blog for some time, I am an IMAX enthusiast. I imagine there are many others out there like me, despite how much more often I post things about IMAX. I’ve seen numerous films in IMAX throughout my life, including a good number just this year alone. Some examples of films I saw in IMAX this year include “Maze Runner: The Death Cure,” “Avengers: Infinity War,” “Solo: A Star Wars Story,” “Mamma Mia!: Here We Go Again,” “Mission: Impossible: Fallout,” “2001: A Space Odyssey,” “Bohemian Rhapsody,” and “Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse.” I am granted with the privilege of having a few IMAX theaters close to where I live. By the way, the closest one has laser projection, and subwoofers underneath the seats.

I love IMAX, but it doesn’t mean I don’t have my gripes with the brand. In 2008, they started rolling out their digital projection system, which not only was used on significantly smaller screens, but occasionally was brought in as a replacement to some of the projectors used by older theaters. This brought a reduction in quality, and when it comes to movies shot with IMAX cameras, those older theaters that once used film projection, where the frame covered the screen top to bottom, now supplies a much smaller image. Granted, one minor fix to this is the introduction to another digital projection system which IMAX agreed to unveil alongside Kodak, AKA their recently mentioned laser projection system.

One movie I saw this year on said projection system is “First Man.” As a movie, while there are flaws, I will point out that it is in fact one of my favorite films of the year from a technical perspective. In fact, when it comes to the immersion, that is a part where I had really high expectations. I was not let down. One part where I was let down however is something I found out before going into the film.

“First Man” was partially shot on IMAX film, which some say theoretically provides the highest resolution on any format that can be used on a camera. Granted, the IMAX footage only lasted for about five minutes, but the five minutes were absolutely worth seeing. When IMAX started, all they used was film projection. After all, they started in the 20th century, and digital projection wasn’t big until the end of said century or the beginning of the next.

When I saw “First Man” in IMAX laser, it was undoubtedly one of the best movie experiences I had all year. The superb sound design was music to my ears, the score put me in space, providing me with a feeling that I was on a shuttle wearing headphones, and as mentioned, there was a full frame IMAX sequence that made me feel like I was watching “The Wizard of Oz.” As AMAZING as my experience was, there is one other theater I would have gone to in order to watch the movie.

I live an hour from Providence, Rhode Island. In that city contains what perhaps might be my all time favorite movie theater, Providence Place Cinemas 16 and IMAX. And I specifically mean the IMAX part when I say that because it is one of the few theaters near me with a 70mm IMAX projector, IMAX’s original projection system. I’m not saying that “First Man” wasn’t playing there, it just wasn’t playing there the way I would have preferred to see it.

In fact, it’s not just Providence that wasn’t showing the movie in IMAX 70mm, it was literally every other theater with the proper projection capabilities. From museums, to multiplexes, and other standalone venues. Let’s compare this to some other movies that came out in IMAX 70mm. “Dunkirk,” which came out in 2017, had 37 IMAX 70mm locations. All of this decade’s “Star Wars” films had some sort of IMAX 70mm run, with the one exception being “Solo.” In fact, to really hit my point out of the park, if you look up the Wikipedia page List of films released in IMAX you’ll notice that from 2002 to 2017, there has been at least one new release to be shown in the IMAX 70mm format. Note, I said new release, “2001: A Space Odyssey” does not qualify. In fact, speaking of old releases, while the title won’t show up for 2018, “The Dark Knight” had its tenth anniversary this year and in honor of that, at the same time as “2001,” it was shown in IMAX 70mm in 5 theaters.

Don’t me get me wrong, if I had a time machine, I would certainly consider the option of going back and seeing both movies in the IMAX 70mm format. But if you ask me, I am honestly disappointed that IMAX missed an opportunity to play the best version of a movie possible. In fact, now that this year had not even a single new release in IMAX 70mm, it only makes me wonder what will happen in years to come.

According to Wikipedia, in 2019, there are currently no films slated to release in IMAX 70mm. If I had to guess, there’s a possibility that “Star Wars Episode IX” will get some sort of release, even without the use of IMAX filmography equipment. After all, “Rogue One” released in 2016 in the IMAX 70mm format even though no IMAX equipment was used to record the movie. The next movie coming out to be shot with IMAX 70mm cameras is not set to release until 2020, and that is “Wonder Woman 1984.” Unless IMAX is planning a special engagement which I don’t know about, part of me doubts that we’ll ever see that movie the way it was meant to be seen. Let’s also bring up a giant influence on the conservative effort of IMAX film, Christopher Nolan.

Christopher Nolan is my favorite director of all time. He has a great track record when it comes to his features, from “Memento,” “The Prestige,” “Interstellar,” and most recently, “Dunkirk.” Nolan is also known for shooting the first Hollywood feature on IMAX film, specifically “The Dark Knight.” Speaking of which, all of his films from “The Dark Knight” and on are all shot partially using IMAX technology (except Inception). While there are some films which Nolan has been affiliated with where an IMAX film release never happened, he did happen to get all of his directorial features since “The Dark Knight” in the IMAX film format, regardless of whether they were shot with IMAX cameras or not. And speaking of shooting with IMAX, “Inception” released in 2010, a couple years after “The Dark Knight”came out, and “Inception” was not shot in IMAX.

I love both IMAX 70mm and Christopher Nolan, but the one problem that comes to my mind is that the two go together like bread and butter. Don’t get me wrong, bread and butter is tasty. However, if Nolan is the only director getting the IMAX 70mm treatment (with few exceptions), I almost don’t see a point for putting these films in IMAX 70mm other than to please him. I as an audience member, constantly seek alternative and interesting ways to go see movies. If “First Man” came out in IMAX 70mm, I probably would have gone to see it more than once. Because while I did see it at a theater 10 minutes from my house, I would want to take someone to see it an hour away, where information that wouldn’t be seen on a less detailed screen actually would be seen. But no, “First Man” is directed by Damien Chazelle, director of f*cking “Whiplash” and “La La Land.” Neither of those titles can compete with “The Dark Knight” apparently.

Let me also bring up “2001: A Space Odyssey.” As some of you may know, “2001” is directed by Stanley Kubrick, who passed away in 1999. For those of you who don’t know, “2001” came out in 1968, therefore it just turned 50 years old, which eventually lead to many screenings back in select theaters in 70mm and 4K. I also mentioned it was put in IMAX for the first time this year. The film also went through a restoration process to match what it would be like to watch the movie back when it came out. Guess who did the restoration process? CHRISTOPHER F*CKING NOLAN!

I may only be nineteen years old at this point but I want to work in the film industry. Part of me wants to get my hands on an IMAX camera and use it in a future movie. To know however that my film will not be seen the way I want to see it, is honestly disappointing. Did Damien Chazelle have plans to release “First Man” in IMAX 70mm? To be honest, I’m not sure. But if he did have plans and IMAX rejected them, they’ve done goof.

I know that film is kinda dying. Sure, with the occasion of special engagements, film has a slight glimmer of life left in it. And I may be biased, but I certainly hope it NEVER dies. But as someone who rarely gets to see a movie in IMAX 70mm nowadays, the times when a movie comes out on such a special format is one that I cannot help but praise. If “Dunkirk” is the last movie I will ever get to see in IMAX 70mm, well, I am not going to be happy but at least it was a good movie. The point is, I want more occasions of not just movies being shot with IMAX cameras, but also occasions of IMAX movies being seen the way they have been intended.

So IMAX, I love you, but you missed an opportunity and deserve to be reminded of what you are. Please fix your ways in the future, but I will still go to see movies in your theaters.

Thanks for reading this post! First off, for those of you who celebrate Christmas, I want to wish you all a Merry Christmas and a happy new year! Speaking of the new year, one of the early days of next year I will be counting down my top 10 BEST movies of 2018 and also my top 10 WORST movies of 2018. I don’t know what day my lists will be up, probably the 1st and 2nd, maybe the 2nd and 3rd, maybe I’ll put them up on the same day, we’ll find out. I’ll probably get a couple more flicks in by the end of the year, and if I do, great! Be sure to follow Scene Before either with a WordPress account or email so you can stay tuned for more great content! I want to know, did you see “First Man” in IMAX? What did you think? Did you see the movie in some other way? If you did, let me know! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Welcome To Marwen (2018): Back to the Future Part IV: A Robert Zemeckis Film

MV5BMjIxMjUwMjItMGIxYS00NTlmLTgxZTQtMzg2Yjc1ZWQ3YTYxXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyMjM4NTM5NDY@._V1_SY1000_CR006311000_AL_

“Welcome To Marwen” is directed by Robert Zemeckis (Back to the Future, Forrest Gump) and stars Steve Carell (The Office, The 40-Year-Old Virgin), Eiza González (True Love, Baby Driver), Leslie Mann (Blockers, Knocked Up), Merritt Wever (Signs, Nurse Jackie), Janelle Monáe (Hidden Figures, Moonlight), Gwendoline Christie (Star Wars: The Force Awakens, Game of Thrones), Leslie Zemeckis (The Polar Express, Beowulf), and Neil Jackson (Quantum of Solace, Abesentia). This film is about an assault victim who likes cross-dressing. The victim’s specific name is Mark Hogancamp, and after the attack, it has been revealed that his memory is not in good shape. In order to restore his memory, Hogancamp decides to build a World War II village in his yard.

I saw the trailer for “Welcome to Marwen” a while back, and even if I didn’t see the trailer, I probably would have been excited for the film no matter what. Why? Well, Robert Zemeckis is directing the film. I loved his work in numerous films including “Back to the Future,” “Who Framed Roger Rabbit?,” “The Walk,” I just think the dude has serious visionary talent when it comes to crafting a film. “Welcome to Marwen,” on paper, is no exception to this notion. The film manages to focus on the real life events of Mark Hogancamp while simultaneously giving a nearly animated look at his dolls. So in a way, you can also call this the live action version of “Toy Story.”

If you want my short thoughts on the film right away, I’ll be honest, I really f*cking enjoyed it. In fact, I have to say it’s one of the year’s best films, but to be completely honest it is not for everyone. When I say that, I don’t mean that in a way that is sort of related to the movie showing mature content or giving viewers scares or anything, but there is something in this movie that I noticed, but when I went on social media, it kind of got an uplift in terms of how it was addressed.

Without spoiling anything, Steve Carell’s character has a certain “attachment” if you will to his dolls. I have a feeling some will consider it cute, some will consider it creepy. I am on the side that finds this to be cute. But if you really want to know if I have problems with the film itself, I only really have one thing that I think I can address, and it’s kind of in the nitpick territory.

“Welcome to Marwen” is based on a true story, and I haven’t looked much into said story or watched the documentary from which this movie adapts, so I don’t know how much is altered. Although there is one story that applies to the dolls, I won’t go into detail about it, it could be possible that Hogancamp came up with bits and pieces of the story at the very least, and it involves time travel. The dolls are supposed to go into the future by 15 lightyears. The fact is, I have to be Mr. Movie Reviewing Moron and point out that lightyears are a unit of distance and not time. A lightyear is nearly six trillion miles. If this were fiction, I’d probably be a bit more harsh when it comes to this film, especially if it were a movie specifically revolving around time travel, but I still couldn’t help but point this out.

The reason why I love “Welcome to Marwen” so much not only has to do with visuals, characterization, directing, anything like that, but it also has to do with the fact that this is a story about storytelling. A good portion of the movie focuses on the CGI world of dolls. It partially helps us in understanding who exactly our main character is, not to mention, who he wants to be. Not only was the world immersive, engaging, and charming, the doll characters are also a delight. They have this vibe to them that makes you want to hang out with them, or at least one that makes you think they can protect you. And in total honesty, the last time I saw some sort of concept similar to the style executed in “Welcome to Marwen” is probably… …well, I don’t know. If they ever make a live action “Toy Story,” I’d remind Disney and Pixar “Welcome to Marwen” beat them to it.

Speaking of this world, this is also responsible for many of my personal surprises in the movie. This is technically a vision where dolls can talk, but I didn’t expect the badassery out of some of the action scenes which were given to me here! In fact, there are times, when this movie, despite being PG-13 and not R, goes for dark violence. There is a scene in the movie where a doll splits in half! There is also a scene where a doll falls into a fence, and the top of the fence is going through its body like a sword!

Before we discuss Steve Carell’s character of Mark Hogancamp, I would just like to say that this year has been interesting for a couple cast members of “The Office.” You have two transitions from a couple of actors who were once comedy-oriented and now they’re trying to get more serious. You have John Krasinski who did “A Quiet Place” and you also have Steve Carell who was in “Beautiful Boy,” “Vice,” and this movie. Also, when it comes to Carell I gotta say, the dude can act. I was able to buy this character and see him for the way he was. He manages to deliver certain mannerisms that made me feel for his character. If I were to make a comparison, if you have ever seen “Anchorman” and you wanted a more serious version of his character in that, with perhaps ten times the depth provided to his character in that movie, this is the flick for you.

The other real highlight in this movie for me in terms of characters is the one played by Leslie Mann, specifically Nicol. Yes, there is no “e” in her name. Mann’s character in this film is someone who not only has a story of her own, but manages to play quite a bit into the story of Hogancamp as well. There is a scene in this film that was extremely well acted by both Carell and Mann, and no matter what you think of it in terms of realism, I thought it was very well done.

When it comes to all of the dolls Hogancamp owns, each one manages to have its own story, which I really liked. They are not just pieces of plastic that Hogancamp plays with. In fact, his own doll even helps explain the story of him getting beat up for cross-dressing. If you had to ask me personally, I have no interest in cross-dressing, but for those of you who do, that’s your thing and I don’t care, I’m not gonna straight up attack you over it. The film does a great job at making you side with someone because they were attacked for something they wore. If they wore a t-shirt that said “EVERYONE DESERVES TO DIE,” that’s a different scenario, but nevertheless, this film succeeds.

I also will say one thing about this movie, it’s directed by Robert Zemeckis, director of “Back to the Future.” The thing about “Welcome to Marwen” that I want to talk about has to do with my recent nitpick. One of the gadgets that plays into the story of the dolls in the movie is a time machine, and it nearly resembles a Delorean. So if you guys want to see Robert Zemeckis direct another “Back to the Future” movie, this is the closest you’re going to get.

In the end, I LOVED “Welcome to Marwen!” Is this a movie for everyone? From the way it is marketed, almost. It’s not for kids, there’s some serious s*it that goes down in the movie. But I wouldn’t say that I’d recommend this movie for every single audience. But for ME, and ME PERSONALLY, I ate this movie up. It sort of blends “Toy Story,” “The Secret Life of Walter Mitty,” and “Back to the Future.” This film might be an Oscar contender, but I don’t think it’s gonna make much money though. Aside how this film is seemingly going to be divisive in terms of criticism, it is competing against “Aquaman,” “Bumblebee,” “Mary Poppins Returns,” and “Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse,” but if you want to support an artistic vision, this is for you. I have no idea how long this is going to last, and I’m sorry for saying this based on how many reviews are trashing on this movie, I’m going to give “Welcome to Marwen” a 10/10! This is probably one of those scenarios where my unbelievably crazy opinion is going to stand out from a lot of other people. So you know what? In celebration of absurdity, let’s talk about some other unique film opinions I have.

  • ANIMAL HOUSE WAS BORING!
  • MAD MAX: FURY ROAD IS NOT AS GOOD AS EVERYONE SAID!
  • I ENJOYED PAUL BLART 1 & 2!
  • GROWN UPS 2 IS NOT JUST BETTER THAN THE ORIGINAL, IT’S ACTUALLY A GOOD FILM!
  • I LIKED CARS 2!
  • REVENGE OF THE SITH IS THE BEST STAR WARS MOVIE!
  • I LIKED A COUPLE OF LIVE-ACTION TRANSFORMERS FLICKS (1 & 3)!
  • I LOVE TIM BURTON’S CHARLIE & THE CHOCOLATE FACTORY!
  • FANT4STIC WAS BAD, BUT NOT AS BAD AS EVERYONE MAKES IT OUT TO BE!
  • GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY VOL. 2 IS NOT GOOD!
  • THOR: RAGNAROK IS OVERRATED!
  • THE HOBBIT MOVIES HAVE A PURPOSE IN SOCIETY!
  • OZ THE GREAT AND POWERFUL MIGHT MATCH THE ORIGINAL WIZARD OF OZ IN TERMS OF QUALITY!
  • I LIKED VALERIAN AND THE CITY OF A THOUSAND PLANETS!
  • I HATED WE BOUGHT A ZOO!
  • PITCH PERFECT IS ONE OF THE WORST COMEDIES I’VE EVER SEEN!
  • DISNEY NEEDS TO STOP THE TREND OF THEIR LIVE ACTION REMAKES DESPITE HOW BEAUTIFUL THEY SOMETIMES MANAGE TO APPEAR!
  • BLACK PANTHER IS OVERRATED!
  • IRON MAN 3 IS MY FAVORITE IRON MAN MOVIE!
  • SPIDER-MAN 3 WAS AWESOME!

So there you go. In the comments section, I want to know a few things. Did you enjoy “Welcome to Marwen?” Not everyone has seen it yet, but still. Also, what are some controversial or odd opinions you have about movies? Your full honesty is absolutely appreciated. Thanks for reading this review! This weekend is a pretty big one for movies, and maybe I’ll catch one of the films that come out on Christmas weekend. The one I want to see, aside from ones that could have potential at winning an Oscar, is “Aquaman.” After all, if I do so, it’ll mean I’ll have given my thoughts on every major comic book movie this year. Be sure to follow Scene Before either with an email or WordPress account so you can stay tuned for more great content! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

The Grinch (2018): Two Sizes Too Small In Quality

mv5byme5yjg0mzktyzgzmi00ytfilwjjytity2m5mmi1odi4mdy3xkeyxkfqcgdeqxvymtmxodk2otu-_v1_sy1000_cr006311000_al_

“The Grinch” is directed by Yarrow Cheney (The Secret Life of Pets) and Scott Mosier (Clerks). This movie stars Benedict Cumberbatch (Star Trek: Into Darkness, Sherlock) as the title character who hates Christmas and everything associated with the holiday. There have been multiple on-screen adaptations of Dr. Seuss’ children’s book, and now Illumination (Despicable Me, Sing) has attempted to create their own version of the famous story.

One strange thing about my life is how I have no memory of seeing the Jim Carrey adaptation of “How the Grinch Stole Christmas!”, despite how it released a year after I was born. However, I do recall watching the rather well known animated edition which took the drawing style of Seuss himself. That version was short, sweet, and very much got the point across. The Grinch is a dick and shall never be tolerated. In this new, slightly more lighthearted adaptation of the popular children’s story, The Grinch is a bit more relatable than his 1966 on-screen counterpart voiced by Boris Karloff. And to be honest, when it comes to tone, that’s where this movie sometimes fails. I know it’s a kids movie and kids movies are supposed to be less frightening than some made for adults, but I really wanted a darker tone here. I will say though, some of the music in this film, created by Danny Elfman (Spider-Man, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory) actually matches that dark tone I want from a movie like this.

However, with 2018’s “The Grinch,” we get less of an emphasis of The Grinch as a monster and make him more like Squidward Tentacles from “Spongebob Squarepants.” He despises life, he lives without wanting company, and much like Squidward, hates Christmas. There’s some parts of this new Grinch that totally work. For example, Benedict Cumberbatch seems to make the Grinch his own character. If anybody can pull off The Grinch from a voice perspective, it might as well be Cumberbatch. After all, he did give one of my all time favorite voiceover performances as Smaug in “The Hobbit.” Cumberbatch comes off as depressed yet sinister, which I can tell is what the crew behind “The Grinch” was going for. Although despite mastering this Grinch, I gotta say that it didn’t equate to a quality movie. I know the formula for family movies nowadays is to inject as many silly gags as possible while still maintaining a lesson for children, and the movie does succeed at both things. However when it comes to the silly gags, some of these just felt off-putting, awkward, or just forgettable. I remember explicitly putting my hand on my head in disdain during certain parts of the film. I don’t recall which parts, but that brings two negatives to the table. Maybe a positive because now I don’t have to recall what moments made me dissatisfied. There’s this one moment during the first half of the film where The Grinch is in preparation mode, his dog notices him, and we get a shot with The Grinch’s butt going directly in our face. Keep in mind, I saw “The Grinch” in IMAX. The screen was eight stories high. So I got to see eight stories of The Grinch’s ass right in my face (including black bars, which reduces the size a ton in all technicality)! At least it wasn’t in 3D, that would be worse!

One side of the story that I honestly cannot stand involves a family in Whoville. This family has a heavy involvement with the film’s plot and even triggers in a couple of other Whos. The main thing I want to bring up is the relationship between a mother (Donna Who) and a daughter (Cindy-Loo Who). Both actresses behind these roles (Rashida Jones and Cameron Seely) did a fine job with their performances. My problem doesn’t involve their acting abilities. The big problem however is their chemistry. I know this is a kids movie. I know kids are a target audience. But keep in mind, adults are watching these films too. Who do you think happens to be taking the kids to these movies? As a technical adult at 19 years of age, I honestly felt like some of my intelligence was insulted. I can suspend my disbelief during movies. I enjoy the “Fast & Furious” franchise, and there’s a lot of other animations that wouldn’t work in the real world which I happen to admire. There are some things however, regardless of whether they are written to be animated or put into live-action, in this very movie, that I thought were an insult as soon as I saw them. The chemistry between the mother and daughter is one of those things. The mother came off as this individual who seems to know she has a daughter, but it’s like she’s viewing her as someone she doesn’t even need to protect. Keep in mind, based on her IMDb profile, I can definitely tell Cameron Seely, the voice of Cindy-Loo, is younger than me. Wouldn’t the mother be a little more worried about some of the things she does? That’s not the only suspension of disbelief I couldn’t achieve, I also couldn’t buy into the fact that one character in particular, without giving a name away, was able to find The Grinch’s house without really knowing a thing about him or where he lives. And if you think about it, it’s somewhat easy to find, but still, my complaint stands. Maybe I missed something earlier on in the movie, but when you’re in an auditorium with somebody who literally had their tablet on for pretty much the entire first half of the film, you can get distracted at times. And yes, I said TABLET. NOT A PHONE! A TABLET! And even worse, there was lots of time wasted when the kid using the device and not even doing a thing on it! It was just on the home screen! If it were being used as a closed captioning device then that’s a different story (not sure how the technology works entirely).

Let’s also talk about Kenan Thompson (Snakes On a Plane, Saturday Night Live) in this film.

What the f*ck?

His character might be the biggest stereotype for a black person I’ve seen in a film since Patty from the “Ghostbusters” remake. My f*cking gosh, I HATED this guy! One of the worst casting decisions I’ve seen in my entire life. Kenan Thompson is not a bad actor, I’ve seen him do some fine roles on “SNL.” He’s especially fantastic as Steve Harvey on all of the show’s “Family Feud” parodies. But I feel like the biggest problem with this role is that I could especially tell that Kenan Thompson’s voice is involved. Thompson has such a recognizable voice in my mind that out of every voice given in the movie, his was the most obvious. I knew Benedict Cumberbatch was playing The Grinch before going to see the movie, but had I not seen any stories or marketing related to this film, I could potentially think to myself, “Wait, that was Benedict Cumberbatch?” Kenan Thompson to my knowledge cannot alter his voice enough to make me think he’s playing someone other than himself. Part of me is willing to bet the people casting everyone into the movie wanted to cast Kenan Thompson just to say they’ve put a black guy in the film. And that is sad, because while it does bring diversity to the table, his performance just blows! The narrator for this film is black as well (Pharrell Williams). As a narrator, I felt like his voice didn’t work entirely, but it could have been worse. You know, it could have been Kenan Thompson. I’m guessing Morgan Freeman wasn’t available to narrate this bitch?

I’ll give some credit to the movie though on a few positives before I give my final verdict. This film is very well animated. It comes off as polished and some of the images from the film are some of the better ones I’ve witnessed from Illumination. Some of the voice acting worked, except for of course, Kenan Thompson. And this movie is short enough to avoid inducing a feeling of a snail’s pace. After all, it is only an hour and a half, which can be a good thing because of what I just mentioned, but to me it also makes this movie feel like even more of a cash grab than it already is. I don’t feel like I’m going to remember this “Grinch” adaptation all that much, and maybe it will be played a lot around Christmastime in years to come. Heck, “Christmas with the Kranks” is going to be on FX during the 24th of this month and the reviews of that movie certainly weren’t praising it. Anything’s possible.

In the end, “The Grinch” is certainly a mean one, and it made me feel like a Scrooge. If this movie does one thing well, it’s making The Grinch’s character relatable. Sure, he hates his life sometimes even though life for him is the complete opposite of pain and suffering. Yes, he might be out of shape. But thanks to this movie, it made me hate Christmas a little bit more than I once did! Because now we have another bad Christmas movie! Kids who watch “The Grinch” might enjoy it, but the film might end up making them dumber without said kids even realizing such a thing. Aside from some neat animation and decent voicework, there’s nothing that stands out or appears to be excellent regarding “The Grinch.” Parents, if your kids drag you this movie, do them a favor and put coal in their stocking on Christmas morning. Please? Also, tell them Santa isn’t real. I’m going to give “The Grinch” a 3/10. Thanks for reading this review! Tomorrow night I’m going to see “Second Act,” which comes out on December 21st, a little over a month from the time I’m finishing this post. I got passes for an early screening of the film, so therefore I’m gonna see “Second Act” a month early. My review will most likely be up sometime around December. Also, while I don’t really know my plans for the rest of the week or this upcoming weekend, I do have aspirations to see the new Julius Avery film “Overlord.” I heard “Overlord” flopped this weekend, so this might affect me even being able seeing it in the theater, but if it’s still there this next weekend, I should hopefully have an opportunity to check it out. Plus, I’m too behind on “Harry Potter” to see the new “Fantastic Beasts” movie. Be sure to follow me on Scene Before either with a WordPress account or an email so you can stay tuned for more great content! I want to know, did you see “The Grinch?” What did you think about it? Or, which on-screen adaptation of “How the Grinch Stole Christmas!” is your personal favorite? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Marrowbone (2018): Crossing the Line Into An Unmemorable Horrorland

mv5bmza5ndm1mjmznl5bml5banbnxkftztgwnduymta4ndm-_v1_sy1000_cr006651000_al_

“Marrowbone” is directed by Sergio G. Sánchez and stars George MacKay, Anya Taylor-Joy, Charlie Heaton, Mia Goth, and Matthew Stagg in a movie that starts as every happy-go-lucky story does, with the mother dying immediately. This mother’s death now leaves four children varying in age to take care of themselves. At the same time, this death has to remain in secret. If the secret gets out to the town lawyer, Tom Porter (Kyle Soller), it’ll be revealed that the new caretaker, Jack, the oldest of the children, has nobody in his home that is over the age of 21. This gives the alert that Jack, is illegally taking care of his younger siblings. That’s not all, because throughout the movie, they have to deal with a monster inside the house.

I bought this movie for $15 during my time at New York Comic Con, so why not watch it? Going into the flick, I was somewhat intrigued as to what I was about to see. I am not a complete and total stranger to the studio behind this movie, Magnolia Pictures, although in this case the studio label is Magnet. They made a movie that came out earlier in the decade, “Grand Piano,” starring Elijah Wood (Lord of the Rings, Happy Feet) and John Cusack (Better Off Dead, Say Anything), which I wholeheartedly admired. Naturally, while I wasn’t expecting to compare this movie to “Grand Piano” (different genres, different crew, etc), I did have some faith in Magnolia because their name is not as prominent as Disney or Sony, which for the most part, seems to be all about the money as opposed to quality. They operate on the more independent side of the spectrum, much like another prominent studio, which I honestly probably like a lot better than Magnolia, A24.

Another thing to consider is how good 2018’s movies have been so far, specifically in the horror genre. “A Quiet Place” came out in April and it was one of the most innovative horror flicks I’ve seen. What John Krasinski was able to do not only with as someone who had little materials to work with, but also as a first-time director is astounding to me. My favorite horror film of the year however, has to be, coincidentally, an A24 film. To be specific, “Hereditary.” Toni Collette better be nominated for an Academy Award, the cinematography was stylistically successful, and it is a truly wild ride.

“Marrowbone” is not as good as those two films.

Before the crew sends their pitchforks flying in the air, all the way to my house, let me just state, it’s good.

One of “Marrowbone’s” biggest strengths comes from the cast. The chemistry between all of the children is extremely believable, there’s even some chemistry between one couple I was able to buy into, and as far as everyone’s general acting ability goes, a job well done is in order.

Another aspect I totally found myself getting into was the score. It’s been days since I watched the film from start to finish, but it somewhat reminded me at times of what Howard Shore did for “Lord of the Rings.” Since I seem to be spitballing Shore’s name right now, I’ll also give a shoutout to Fernando Velázquez for creating the excellent score for this very film. The score also manages to accommodate the stellar cinematography, most notably the land shots. Will this receive any Best Cinematography awards during the upcoming season? Hard to tell, this movie didn’t make much money during its limited release and it is not even out on digital yet.

When it comes to the main characters, the oldest of the siblings goes by the name of Jack. He is the one responsible for hiding the family secret throughout the whole runtime. While there are moments in the movie where I do side with him, while there are moments where I do root for him, there’s also this thought that I’m currently having in my mind that is trying to get me to gather all of my other thoughts about him. Jack is a likable, although slightly unmemorable character. Then again, it’s not as easy for him to stand out when you have a young kid in the mix who occasionally serves as comic relief.

By the way, that young kid’s name is Sam and he is played by Matthew Stagg. Out of everyone in the film, I gotta say that he delivers the best performance. No, he is not the next Jacob Tremblay, he is not the next great child actor to be remembered for eternity (might need to see more work before my ultimate verdict on that though). I also got to give credit to the writing for the movie because some of the character’s most notable lines are pretty much what the audience might as well be thinking. He is curious, he is suggestive, and he is charming. Having seen Matthew Stagg perform as this character, I can’t imagine anyone else playing him.

Also, I can’t go without mentioning that this is a horror movie and there are supposed to be some scares in this thing. The scares are there, but I feel like maybe they could have been taken up a slight notch. I wasn’t really genuinely terrified by what I’ve witnessed. However I must say I will say that the monster this movie seems to heavily revolve around is very well done special effects-wise. Nice work! The scares are not horrible, but they are also not as memorable or outstanding as I’d hope they’d be.

In the end, I don’t really have much else to say about “Marrowbone” because everything else I really do have to say is in spoiler territory, and if I actually had the ability to remember more of the movie, I would be talking about it more. Again, it’s not a terrible movie. It could be some decent background noise on Halloween, but there’s not really much more credit I can give to it other than that. Well, maybe except the production value, that is excellent. Also, I must say, another factor that makes me think this is worth a second viewing is that there is a 4K Blu-ray for this. By the way, I used that for my review. So I guess that copy is a hearty $15 well spent. Perhaps this movie would also get the same verdict I gave to live-action “Ghost in the Shell” last year. It’s not a fantastic movie, but if you want a movie that can show off a new giant TV, this wouldn’t be a bad pick. Especially when you consider there’s a 4K edition of it available. Maybe part of my lack of remembrance towards “Marrowbone” has to do with my review coming days after seeing the movie, as opposed many of my other reviews which traditionally are posted in much less time compared to when I finished the movie. So in that case, maybe some human error applies to this. I’m going to give “Marrowbone” a 6/10. I have a strong feeling this grade could go up in the future during a potential rewatch, but for now, this verdict stands. But still, going back to the beginning, 2018 has been one of the best years for movies I’ve ever seen. By far the best year for movies since I started Scene Before. The good movies this year have certainly outweighed the bad. There were a number of all timers like “Avengers: Infinity War” and “Won’t You Be My Neighbor?.” Even some of the stinkers this year couldn’t rival some of my worst movies of the past couple of years. Maybe “The Hurricane Heist” sucked, but it was certainly better than “The Space Between Us.” Melissa McCarthy’s “Life of the Party” took every ounce of life I had and set it on fire, but it was not as bad as that 2016 “Ghostbusters” movie she starred in. “Marrowbone” is a slightly forgettable movie, but it still gets a 6 from me. Well done.

rhodeisland_comiccon_november2018_eventimage_600x280-copy-24e2513026

Thanks for reading this review! I just want to say to everyone reading this that I wish you all a Happy Halloween and good luck avoiding teepees, eggs, and most importantly, police officers telling your kids they are too old to trick or treat. Speaking of treats, this weekend I’ll be my making 4th annual trip to Rhode Island Comic Con, and I’ll be documenting all of the craziness that is bound to go down. I should also have you all know that it is my birthday weekend, so hopefully, I can beg somebody to give a free autograph or photo. Cons are not cheap! Also, there’s a movie theater not far from me in the area, so if I have the time, maybe I’ll catch something there. I’m well aware that this weekend is the release of “Bohemian Rhapsody,” one of my most anticipated movies of the fall. And no, I’m not reviewing “The Nutcracker and the Four Realms” (depending on how many requests I end up getting)! Maybe if I want to torture myself I will do such a thing, but for now, I’m staying away! Be sure to follow Scene Before with a WordPress account or email so you can stay tuned for more great content! I want to know, did you see “Marrowbone?” What did you think about it? Or, since it is Halloween, what is your favorite horror movie? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

First Man (2018): One Giant Spacegasm

mv5bywfhzgvjmtatzdcwmc00yty3ltljywutnzriodzlowfknjezxkeyxkfqcgdeqxvymjmxote0oda-_v1_sy1000_cr006311000_al_

“First Man” is directed by Damien Chazelle (Whiplash, La La Land) and stars Ryan Gosling (Blade Runner 2049, The Notebook) as Neil Armstrong. This movie takes place during the events of Apollo 11, the most famous of the Apollo missions. Many people going to see this movie probably know the story, Neil Armstrong and some other astronauts attempt to land on the moon, but this movie explains a little bit more than that. It goes into the personal and family life of Neil Armstrong, and shows off all the preparation that went into executing such a daring mission.

I don’t know if many people reading this remember, or even knew when this movie was first announced, but my first time hearing about it was around January 2017 if I recall correctly. As if the concept alone of the moon landing was interesting enough, it was to be helmed by one of my favorite directors working today, Damien Chazelle.

Damien Chazelle is known for his work on “Whiplash,” but in my eyes, his popularity skyrocketed during the release of “La La Land.” That movie is a 2016 musical which went on to win 7 Golden Globes, which also happened to be the total number of awards the movie happened to be nominated for. Speaking of awards, the movie went on to receive 13 Oscar nominations, 6 wins, which doesn’t happen to include the rare instance of the kinda sorta maybe victory of Best Picture. So kids, if you are reading this and think that your dream will never come true, if you think you’ll never be able to colonize Mars one day, just remember this. Two films were labeled Best Picture at the 89th Academy Awards!

When it comes to “First Man,” this is actually a really interesting movie though because out of all the feature-length films Damien Chazelle has done as a director, this is actually the first one he doesn’t have a screenplay credit for. Granted, this movie was actually written by Josh Singer, who also wrote the screenplay for 2015’s “Spotlight,” which won Best Picture at the Academy Awards. Even so, the fact that this was not written by Chazelle himself made me slightly worried. I was beginning to wonder if I didn’t like this movie, it might partially lead to me thinking Chazelle is another Brad Bird. He’s a fantastic director, but only fantastic when it comes to directing his own material. Having seen this movie, that worry is meaningless, because I’ll be honest with you, this is one of the best movies I’ve seen all year. In fact, when putting Chazelle into the conversation, it’s my second favorite film of his directly behind “Whiplash.”

Just about everything in “First Man” worked. The acting, the directing, the score, the entertainment value, the sound work, the effects, everything just felt as if it was created by a god. I went to see “First Man” in IMAX, which I will get to, but I must say, regardless of whether or not you went to see “First Man” in IMAX, I must tell you, this is one of those films that you have to get off your ass and see in the theater. This joins some recent films like “Dunkirk,” “Blade Runner 2049,” “Avengers: Infinity War,” “Ready Player One,” and “A Quiet Place” on the list of films to watch on the big screen. What the crew did for this movie in terms of cinematography is genius.

In all honesty, part of me wonders how many people will notice or care to notice, some of the images in the movie, are incredibly fuzzy or grainy and it just feels like they were gathering dust before processing. Let me just have you know that this movie was shot on 16mm film. Most of the scenes early on in the films, that take place on Earth, looked somewhat old-timey. And I honestly thought that fit, because believe it or not, I don’t know how much you guys know about Neil Armstrong’s life, but when this movie started it was basically a soap opera. For some people, I imagine that will take them out of the movie, but to me, it fit because for one thing, you can’t alter history. It partially comes into play when developing Armstrong as a character. Also, it showcases the excellent acting ability of Ryan Gosling.

Ryan Gosling is the star of the movie and he seems to have a decent range as an actor. You can put him in a movie as a sex doll that girls will dream about. You can put him in a movie where he happens to be somewhat passionate and upbeat. And you can put him in a movie where maybe he happens to be intentionally robotic. To call Ryan Gosling my favorite actor of all time is a stretch, but he is a true force in the industry. And when it comes to his portrayal of Neil Armstrong, overall it is really good, but I have a couple minor complaints. For one thing, Neil in this movie is incredibly stoic at times. If he was as stoic in this movie as he was in real life, then whatever, then my complaint will be taken off. That’s not to say he doesn’t show any emotion at all. He’s actually seen in the beginning of the film shedding tears. It’s a great performance, but part of me wonders how much Neil Armstrong would say it’s “him” had he been alive to see this picture come to life. Ah well, where’s Buzz Aldrin when you need him? Another minor complaint I have is a bit nitpicky, but Neil Armstrong was born and raised American, and yet they cast the very idea of the “Sexy Canadian Boy” Halloween costume. Again, nitpicky. It does not however change the fact that the interpretation of Armstrong is still a top-notch performance. Plus, it’s still a pasty white dude, so it’s not like they’re trying to make Neil Armstrong a woman or black and erase history by doing so.

Speaking of minor casting issues, I also should point out that Claire Foy (Unsane, The Crown), who plays Neil’s wife, Janet, is British. Let me just point out that much like Neil Armstrong, Janet was born and raised American. It’s still a great performance and BY FAR the best one in the entire film. I really hope Foy receives a Best Actress nomination. Several scenes from her add tons of emotional weight to the film and I can imagine in a way, back in the 1960s, her character would not only encapsulate the thoughts of just herself, but those people who are out of Neil’s family who have to watch the crew go to the moon. Granted, it’s a lot worse for her, because she can lose her husband, but still.

All my complaints in this movie are legit complaints for sure, but in reality, they are easily forgivable because they fall under the classification of “minor” or “nitpicky.” One small complaint I have is something that occurs towards the end of the film that I wonder if it actually happened. Without going into spoilers, when Neil Armstrong gets to the moon, he has an object with him that happens to be very significant. As far as I’m aware, there is no concrete evidence to this happening. If it did happen, cool. But if it didn’t, maybe it added some emotion, but there would also be that part of me who thinks that shouldn’t even be in the movie.

Speaking of objects on the moon, let’s get controversial! One report that has been going around about “First Man” is that there is no scene showing the American flag being planted on the moon. As someone who witnessed this movie, let me confirm to you all, THIS IS TRUE. Many conservatives for what I know are upset about this and they’re hoping this movie fails. Based on the box office for the opening weekend, it lost big time to “A Star Is Born” and “Venom,” which retained its first place spot for the second week in a row. By the way, f*ck “Venom.” I will say though, this is kind of a spoiler, but it’s not really going to affect your viewing experience, at least I don’t think. If it’s any consolation, the American flag is shown on the moon during the film. I can understand why people would be upset about this, but honestly I don’t really care. I live in America, and this is an American achievement, but at the end of the day, “First Man” is supposed to be a film, not a propaganda piece. Also, if you like your flags so much, let me just remind you that the astronauts have American flags on their spacesuits, and there’s actually a scene where an American flag is being raised. Also, I’ll be honest, I’m glad that someone like Damien Chazelle directed this movie as opposed to someone like Michael Bay. I say that because there would be an American flag overload to the point where the planting scene would involve Neil Armstrong breaking the laws of physics, jumping into space bumping into one planet into the next like a pinball. Once that’s all done, he flies back to the moon striking the surface with the flag like Link did to Ganon in “The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker.” Also for fun, we cut to explosions happening in Russia therefore symbolizing their loss in the space race. There are reasons why I wouldn’t mind seeing the flag planted in the film, but the direction Damien Chazelle took with the movie worked very well and made me not care about seeing the planting of the American flag. The emotional journey mattered more in the end to me than seeing a country’s representation, even if I do happen to be a part of that country. Plus, you also have to consider international audiences. How will they respond to this? I don’t know. There’s always room for experimentation. Even so, I guess it is not wrong to assume that international audiences will be able to recognize the accomplishment that the US made with the moon landing, but at the same time, since it is not their accomplishment, they’d probably find the scene less relatable. I really think I should do a separate post someday on why it might be a good idea to have the planting of the American flag shown in the movie and why it might not be a good idea. Now let’s move onto…

Screenshot (362)

SPACE.

Before we actually dive into my thoughts on the space scenes, I gotta say that I saw this movie with my mother and sister. I can understand why some people would have certain complaints but one that really stuck out to me is that my mother said the movie spends too much time in space. I find this amusing because “First Man,” after all, is a space movie. I’m not saying it’s invalid, each to their own, but I thought the space time was fine. And trust me, it does spend a bit of time. Aside from focusing on Apollo 11, the movie spends some time focusing on Gemini 8. I’m willing to bet this is where my mother complained. Although I appreciated that the movie decided to include that, because this establishes not only the dangers for anyone who has to go to space, but as far as Neil Armstrong goes, he had to experience said dangers before moving onto another dangerous mission that is amazingly daring, to the point where he might never see his wife and kids again. One thing I also admire about this scene is the music, which is very reminiscent of “2001: A Space Odyssey” when they play “The Blue Danube.” ALSO, THE SOUND WORK IS TOP-NOTCH! If this movie doesn’t win best director at the Academy Awards, it better get something in the sound categories because it is something worth hearing. While the movie is great overall when it comes to sound, in fact some of it reminded me of “Gravity,” one of the best scenes when it comes to sound comes after the lunar lander touches down on the moon.

In terms of sound, cinematography, and theatricality, the walking onto the moon is definitely one of the best scenes I’ve witnessed all year in a movie. And you even get an added bonus if you see this movie in IMAX. As you can see, the crew is getting ready, opening their hatch, as they are about to see the moon outside their craft. So you get to see the camera coming out, and BOOM! Silence. Scientifically accurate for sure, but that’s not the point. The effect that lack of sound has on the scene literally dropped my jaw. And as if that’s jaw dropping enough, the lunar sequences for this movie were shot on IMAX film. So once the camera comes out of the craft, we go from the aspect ratio we’ve been seeing for the entire movie so far to full fledged, screen-covering glory. WALL TO WALL. FLOOR TO CEILING. Looking at Neil Armstrong up close makes you feel like you are an ant compared to him. The screen dominated me in that moment. The way everything plays out in that from acting, directing, and camerawork just felt like I was in a museum looking at paintings instead of a movie. And another reason why I love this IMAX transition goes back to how this movie was shot on 16mm film. Everything looks fuzzy, it was somewhat of a more unsettling time back then. This takes all depression out of the equation and we have gone from a sad movie that felt like a soap opera, to the end of an epic. It’s one of the best movie transitions I’ve seen in recent memory, and some of the all time best use of an IMAX camera that I am aware of.

I will say that a number of movies shot with an IMAX camera happen to be ones I enjoy. Take the “Transformers” movies out of the equation however. On the subject of cinematography, something happens in this movie that made me realize how awesome this movie truly was. When it comes to filmmaking, one term I’ve always hated was “shaky cam.” But there are several scenes in this movie that actually use shaky cam, and it almost made me change my mind on it entirely! Shaky cam is probably a reason why some critics aren’t massive fans of certain action movies. Aside from hiding poor stuntwork, one reason why I imagine some people use shaky cam in their movies may be to heighten tension. I can’t really recall many moments where shaky cam increased tension for me. Here in “First Man,” there’s moments where shaky cam happens to be prominent and believe it or not, I am not bashing on it. A good movie can do things that people have seen before which have been done with care and everything works. A great movie can take something that might not be your thing and change your perspective on it. While I do enjoy space movies VERY MUCH, I don’t traditionally find myself bowing down to the gods of shaky cam. Shaky cam is a reason why I find shows like “Modern Family” somewhat off-putting. I honestly don’t know if I am overrecating, I wonder how other people would react to something like this, but this is just how I felt from my experience.

In the end, I wouldn’t call “First Man” an A+, but it sure comes close. This is by far one of my favorite movies of the year, and when it comes 2018’s new releases, “First Man” is up there with “Ready Player One” as one of my favorite theater experiences. It has the potential to shoot itself up to an A+ depending on replay value or depending on how I view this movie outside the theater, but in reality, from a critical point of view, while it has some minor things to complain about, there are really no glaring errors (then again, I don’t work for NASA, so science isn’t my biggest strong suit). What Damien Chazelle did with this movie is truly something to appreciate. The cast, while not technically completely matching with their counterparts were believable and added to the movie’s overall grit. The score is appropriate for the film and perhaps something maybe I’ll listen to for motivation. While there were not really any shots to pick out to say that they were really innovative for the most part, the cinematography in “First Man” is certainly something I hope not to forget sometime in the future. Also, if you can, please, go see “First Man” in IMAX. You’ll thank me later. I’m going to give “First Man” a 9/10.

Thanks for reading this review! For those of you who read my work often, you may be aware that I’ve gone to New York Comic Con. I went almost a couple of weeks ago, and don’t worry, a post on that is coming. I just need to put it together. I’m actually going to be in a hotel room in Connecticut this weekend because I’m going to see the Impractical Jokers live, so when I have some free time, or if I choose to be a madman and stay up all night (which would be appropriate because I’m in a casino), maybe I’ll work on this post then. As far as movie reviews go, I will say that my next pick is currently undecided, maybe I’ll go see “Bad Times at the El Royale,” “Goosebumps 2: Haunted Halloween,” maybe “Night School.” A good comedy is soothing every once in a while. Seriously though, I’m almost considering going to see “First Man” again sometime soon. It’s that good. Be sure to follow me on Scene Before either with an email or WordPress account so you can stay tuned for more great content! I want to know, did you see “First Man?” What did you think about it? Or, you know what? F*ck it. Was the moon landing faked? Please comment below, I would like your honest answers, I won’t judge (maybe). Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Apollo 13 (1995): Houston, We Have a Movie Review

Hey everyone, Jack Drees here! Apologies for the slight delay on this review. My goal of this space movie review series is to do one new post in the series every Thursday. Although work (and fun) have gotten in the way, so you’re getting this on a Friday and for that, I apologize. Right now, “First Man” is in theaters everywhere, and I do have plans to review it (as long as I can get my “A Star Is Born” review up first). For those of you who are curious to know what “First Man” is about, it revolves around the moon landing and how Neil Armstrong and his family cope with the enormous difficulties of the Apollo 11 mission. Funny enough, that is not the only movie involving the moon landing I’ll be talking about this year. Another one goes by the name “Apollo 13.” Without further ado, let’s dive into the review!

mv5bztzlmtliodktzmq3mc00ytizlthknjutmdyzngexntqxzmu3xkeyxkfqcgdeqxvynjuxmjc1otm-_v1_sy1000_cr007491000_al_

“Apollo 13” is directed by Ron Howard and stars Tom Hanks (Big, Forrest Gump), Bill Paxton (Weird Science, Aliens), and Kevin Bacon (Footloose, Friday the 13th) as the trio of astronauts who go on a mission associated with the movie’s title. This is the seventh manned mission of Apollo and the third which involves an attempt to land on the moon. Based on true events, the three astronauts are onboard a ship which eventually faces damage, thus making the journey back home more difficult. It is up to NASA to help strategize a plan to get the trio back to Earth.

When it comes to the Apollo missions, the one that we mainly still talk about to this day is Apollo 11, which is getting covered in the upcoming movie, “First Man.” However another mission that got covered a while back, specifically 1995, in movie form was Apollo 13. As far as this movie goes for me. I first watched it in 2014 in a science class during eighth grade. I enjoyed the movie and thought it was a very compelling mission. I appreciated the space scenes, the music, and the launch sequence. Having watched it now, I’d probably say I MIGHT like it less than I did back then, but I still enjoyed it. In fact, now that I’m older, I feel like I paid a bit more attention to the dialogue, which probably felt a tad more compelling than it did when I was 14 years old.

When it comes to the music, this honestly feels like some of the most patriotic music I’ve ever heard in a movie. The main theme almost reminds me of a theme that used to be on CBS Evening News until getting rid of it in 2016. And I’ll be honest, that’s probably where this movie excels more than anywhere else. The music basically does the talking. It reminds you to pay attention. It sometimes give you a feeling that you need to silence yourself. At times it is almost eerie. When I watched this movie, one piece that can be heard almost reminded me of some of the last music you hear before the credits in “The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug.” Looking at this movie now, I can totally see why they decided to put this music in, and it does symbolize how this mission is not just for the world to see, but just like the groundbreaking Apollo 11, it was for the United States to see.

Let’s talk about some of the performances in this film. I mean, you do have star power from folks like Tom Hanks, Bill Paxton, and Kevin Bacon, but in reality their individual performances do not really make the film what it is. As a matter of fact, it’s their chemistry. It’s how they get along as a team and how they cooperate with each other in space. These three look like they get along with each other, they look like buds, and they also look like they are actually trying to help each other in a time of need. But I’ll be honest, the performance I’ll probably forever credit is Ed Harris (The Abyss, Jacknife) as Gene Kranz.

Gene Kranz is a guy who I occasionally still hear about today. He was part of the documentary “Mission Control: The Unsung Heroes of Apollo,” which I have reviewed on here. I have a friend who works for NASA who has met this fine gentleman. And I will say that my friend has also brought up his name every once in a while. When it comes to his portrayal in “Apollo 13,” my gosh. I f*cking loved it. Ed Harris literally knocked it out of the park when it comes to not only talking, but believe it or not, remaining silent. One thing I often think about when it comes to talented actors who go on to get nominated for Oscars is how they have that one moment where they just talk. The talking seems to stick out to a point where it stays in your head. It’s very compelling. But as I’ve learned from another movie this year, “Won’t You Be My Neighbor?,” silence is a great gift. There is a moment in this movie, specifically towards the end, where we see Ed Harris say no words. If you have not seen this movie and decide to check it out one day, be sure to look out for that. By the way, Ed Harris was nominated an Academy Award for this performance and lost to Kevin SPACEYYYYOW! Gross! Get that away! Get out! Get out!

Speaking of mission control, the set for mission control was very well done. It felt rugged, the colors seem to be accurate, and the computers just scream like they are from the time frame which this movie takes place. Also, as far as your NASA employees go, they seem to fit the time frame as well. Nerdy, white males who could have potentially gotten kick me signs on their backs or atomic wedgies when they were in school. And to add a little extra nerdiness to the mix, I even noticed pocket protectors. As I was watching the movie I was just saying to myself that everyone resembled Lewis or Gilbert from “Revenge of the Nerds.” And now that I think about it, maybe George McFly from “Back to the Future.” Costume design and casting was very well done here.

One thing I do find interesting about this movie though is the PG rating. If this movie came out today it would probably be PG-13. I find it really interesting to see that a movie  with as much smoking and language as it has actually managed to get a PG rating. Then again, according to Wikipedia, smoking wasn’t really as big of a problem until 2007. It almost reminds me of “Back to the Future” which got a PG even though it has multiple utterances of the word s*it and some other vulgar language that parents wouldn’t want their kids to hear. I’ll say though for “Back to the Future,” PG-13 was a new concept back when it came out. When “Apollo 13” arrived it actually was a thing for a decade.

One of my favorite scenes of the movie, despite how Apollo 13 was a mission where the astronauts attempted to go to the moon and never made it, involves being on the moon. We cut to a scene where Tom Hanks’s character, Jim Lovell, is actually getting off a craft and envisioning himself walking on the moon. It’s almost sad looking at that. In a lot of movies, I imagine some people saying that they care about historical accuracy, and I’m with those people. Here though, I don’t want to know if Jim Lovell actually envisioned that. If that vision was fabricated, I don’t give a flying f*ck. That actually enhances the movie in so many ways. And in a way, it almost shows how dreams can slip away from you. Many boys dream of being an astronaut. Sorry, kid, lower your expectations.

Also, one more thing.

SPACE.

That’s a tradition in this series, so I might as well keep it going!

In the end, I don’t really have much to say about “Apollo 13,” but what I do have to say is that it is a watchable, enjoyable space flick based on a great story. “Apollo 13” is directed by Ron Howard, who also directed “Solo: A Star Wars Story,” which I suffered through this year. To those who must know, this movie truly showcases the talent of Ron Howard. Leave “Solo” in the dust! Overall, I think “Apollo 13” is a good movie, and I would say while it is the worst of the films I tackled in this review series, it is certainly worth watching. I’m going to give “Apollo 13” a 7/10. Thanks for reading this review! I hope you enjoyed this space movie review series, apologies for the delay once again. But at least I was able to get this out. Stay tuned for my review of “First Man.” I don’t think that’ll be up right away, but given how I am seemingly seeing it on Sunday, I’ll have my thoughts on it probably sometime next week. Be sure to follow me on Scene Before either through an email or WordPress account that way you can stay tuned for more great content! I want to know, did you see “Apollo 13?” What did you think about it? Or, what is a dream you had as a kid that never became a reality? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

The House with a Clock in Its Walls (2018): I Believe in Magic 8-Balls

mv5bmtk1mzm1odewov5bml5banbnxkftztgwmte0ota4ntm-_v1_sy1000_cr006311000_al_

“The House with a Clock in Its Walls” is directed Eli Roth (Death Wish, Cabin Fever) and stars Jack Black (Kung Fu Panda, Goosebumps), Cate Blanchett (Thor: Ragnarok, How to Train Your Dragon 2), and Owen Vaccaro (Daddy’s Home, Mother’s Day) as a young orphan named Lewis meets up with his charismatic uncle Jonathan. This uncle happens to be a warlock who lives with an elderly witch by the name of Florence Zimmerman. Together, they are all living in the same house that is said to be haunted. Throughout the movie, Jonathan is trying to get rid of a clock through magic in order to preserve the world.

“The House with a Clock in Its Walls” is one of those films I just didn’t know much about before going to see it. I remember seeing one trailer for it in the movie theater. And in all honesty, the first time I even heard about this was when the film was doing advance screenings. Then again, I live 30 minutes from Boston and Eli Roth, the director behind this film, actually was born around the area. So I don’t know what other areas happened to be doing regarding this film, but I remember getting some alerts for screenings going back as far late August. Although I must say, the screenings were far ahead of when I was alerted of them. The screenings actually happened to be on the week when the movie actually released. Guess Universal didn’t have too much faith in this film. Most of the marketing I saw came towards the time before the movie went into theaters.

I have to say though, despite some apprehension with the marketing, “The House with a Clock in Its Walls” is a fun time! I’d say it’s a decent flick for kids and adults alike. It doesn’t treat people like idiots (for the most part, because it is apparent these days that you can’t have a kids movie without poop jokes). The biggest praises I can give to this movie is the lovable chemistry between the characters. Some highlights include Jack Black and Cate Blanchett, who play off each other calling each other rude names. The gag increasingly dies down as the movie goes on, which is kind of unfortunate considering once I first witnessed this, it was one of the best parts of the movie.

As far as the kid goes in this movie, his name is Owen Vaccaro. I wouldn’t go ahead and call Vaccaro the next great child actor, who is gonna go onto win Oscars one day. I mean, he could, but his name probably wouldn’t be as prominent. It’s not like I’m witnessing another Jacob Tremblay (Room, Wonder) or Macaulay Culkin (Home Alone, My Girl). However, Vaccaro’s performance serves both the character and the movie very well. His character, known by the name of Lewis Barnavalt, is pretty much a wiz. He reminds me of a more humanized version of Mindy Kaling’s character from “A Wrinkle in Time.” I’m not saying he often quotes other people, particularly those who happen to be famous and have perhaps above average intelligence, but he does seem to have some abnormalities to him. He often looks in a dictionary, and I mean that in a way that technically qualifies as a hobby. In fact, what makes this kid weird, is kind of what this movie tries to teach people. It’s similar to other lessons that may have been provided in children’s films before, but it doesn’t mean the film fails on trying to emphasize such a lesson.

While the kid may be weird, the character played by Jack Black is just plain crazy. He almost reminds me of a mad scientist in some ways because he doesn’t seem to believe in the concept of sleep. So in a way, I guess you can say I can relate to this character. The character’s name is Jonathan Barnavalt and he is a warlock. Jack Black is probably my favorite character in the movie, and perhaps the one that kids might want to emulate the most. For one thing, his house has one rule (don’t open a particular cabinet), but other than that, there are literally no rules. He’s enthusiastic, hyperactive, and it adds up to make him rather charming.

As for Cate Blanchett, her character goes by the name of Florence Zimmerman. Out of everyone in the movie, she wasn’t my favorite character. She was pretty close, but Jack Black takes the cake. But the thing is, I literally had no idea I was even witnessing Cate Blanchett in this movie. So out of everyone in the movie, I’d say this character was the most well performed. Maybe it’s because I didn’t really know Cate Blanchett was going to be in this film and I knew Jack Black was. Plus the film reminded me of “Goosebumps,” which also had Jack Black as a character with some similarities to his character in this movie. I’ve seen Cate Blanchett in some films before like “Lord of the Rings,” “Thor: Ragnarok,” and “How to Train Your Dragon 2.” I’m somewhat surprised that I wasn’t really able to discern Cate Blanchett because to me she seems to have one of those voices you can easily pick out. But you also have to consider how Cate Blanchett looks in this movie compared to how she does off screen. Even so, I feel like Cate Blanchett embodied this character well and it just goes to show one actor can truly slip over your head sometimes. I am not saying Cate Blanchett’s performance is gonna get her an Oscar nomination, maybe at best she’ll be recognized for a Saturn Award, but I’m not sure.

But in all reality, what makes this film so interesting to me is the vibe and the spirit of the film itself. This film is in the fantasy genre, and it’s particularly aimed at families. I will have you know that when I was actually at the theater to watch this movie, I was the only customer in attendance. “The House with a Clock in Its Walls” manages to balance humor, story, and character development very effectively. In fact, in some ways, I guess you can also say this is a horror movie as well. One reviewer on YouTube by the name of Chris Stuckmann actually went to see this movie, and somebody told him that children walked out of the theater early because they were scared. When I saw his review, it reminded me of how I studied something scary from a childhood show I watched. I’m not sure what it was, but it was probably from a show on PBS or something. I could understand why some children would walk out. Comparing this film to “Goosebumps” once more, there are some light scares that almost seem like scares that fall into the “playing safe” category, but then there’s one scene that stood out to me as I watched it and almost reminded me of what I “must” have witnessed as a kid. If you like horror, I wouldn’t say to go out of your way and watch this movie. This isn’t like you’re watching “A Quiet Place” or something. But if you want to have fun and escape reality, “The House with a Clock in Its Walls” is for you.

In the end, “The House with a Clock in Its Walls” is a fine fantasy film that probably won’t be remembered throughout time, but it is certainly good for a watch. It’s intriguing, occasionally suspenseful, funny, and perhaps the most effective commercial for the Magic 8-Ball that I’ve seen since maybe “Angels in the Outfield.” Would I buy the movie on Blu-ray? Probably not. If it were used and available for a decent price maybe I’d put my hands on it. However I am proud to say that my recent viewing of this film was not a waste of time. I’m gonna give “The House with a Clock in Its Walls” a 7/10. Thanks for reading this review. Be sure to stay tuned for my review of “Apollo 13,” which will be up on October 11th (hopefully). This will be my last space movie review before I make the trek to see “First Man,” so be sure to check that out. Also, be sure to check out my eventual reviews for “Venom” and “A Star Is Born.” One more thing, I just got back from New York Comic Con, and I’ve got a bit to talk about regarding that, so look forward to my review on that sometime soon! Be sure to follow Scene Before with a WordPress account or email so you can stay tuned for more great content! I want to know, did you see “The House with a Clock in Its Walls?” What did you think about it? Or, given how this film is directed by Eli Roth, what is your favorite film Eli Roth was involved in? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!