Jumanji: The Next Level (2019): The Kinda Sorta Freaky Friday Holiday Special

mv5botvjmmfimdutowq4my00yzhmlwe3mzetodm1ndfjmwewztrkxkeyxkfqcgdeqxvymtkxnjuynq4040._v1_sy1000_cr006741000_al_

“Jumanji: The Next Level” is directed by Jake Kasdan, who also directed this film’s predecessor, “Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle.” This film stars Dwayne Johnson (Rampage, San Andreas), Kevin Hart (Ride Along, The Wedding Ringer), Jack Black (Kung Fu Panda, Goosebumps), and Karen Gillan (Guardians of the Galaxy, Doctor Who). This film is the sequel to the recently mentioned “Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle,” and it continues following the characters we got to know from the last film, a group of young adults who get sucked into a video game and become the the avatars they chose. And in this followup, the main young adult, specifically Spencer, returns home from studying in New York around Christmastime. He eventually goes into his basement and decides to play the “Jumanji” video game once more. This leaves Spencer’s friends bewildered of where he’s gone and leads to their eventual return to the virtual world.

I have been on this blog since 2016, and I have reviewed a good number of movies every year since then, but one of them was not “Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle.” For one thing, I had little time on my hands for it, there were other movies I was more focused on such as “The Disaster Artist,” I was trying to get started on 2018 in film, I had my end of year countdowns (by the way, stay tuned for my BEST & WORST movies lists of 2019 once the New Year arrives), and I will also add that I saw the trailer for “Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle” and before that, I heard about the movie’s plot. I wasn’t particular fond with it. I grew up admiring the “Jumanji” film from the 1990s, the one with the horrific board game that brought havoc upon humanity, I loved that movie from a story and spectacle perspective. The ending still gives me chills just thinking about it. When it comes to “Welcome to the Jungle,” the 2017 reboot, I was scared for how it would turn out because it felt like there was going to be significantly less at stake compared to its 1990s counterpart. After all, the movie took place inside a video game as opposed to the real world, where ACTUAL things happen. But to my surprise, I had a rather fun time with “Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle.” The main cast has terrific chemistry, a lot of jokes inside the video game worked, Jack Black’s performance is up there with some of the finest I’ve seen in a popcorn movie, and here’s a shocker, it felt like there were stakes! Surprisingly, anything that took place in the real world was boring compared to the video game. Granted, when the movie kicks itself into gear and I start seeing lots of Sony product placement everywhere, I cannot help but get irritated.

Speaking of surprises, I honestly think “Jumanji: The Next Level” may be better than its predecessor. I think it has better writing, the ideas are just about as clever as they were in 2017, it’s crowd-pleasing, and I will say that a couple new characters bring a bit to the table as well. Most notably, Danny DeVito (Batman Returns, The Lorax).

In this movie, Danny DeVito plays Spencer’s grandfather, Eddie, and I don’t know how many of you saw the trailers, but without giving much detail, he ends up getting sucked into the “Jumanji” video game, so he manages to become an avatar. To be as blind as possible, the avatar he happens to portray is why I found it hilarious when he asks “Are we in Florida?” Yes, the trailer reveals who he becomes, but I went into this movie fairly blind so I am just trying to go off of my experience.

Now I mentioned that in the last “Jumanji” movie, “Welcome to the Jungle,” I never really liked anything that happened in the real world, and I say this because anything that was spoken or acted out in the real world was never funny, somewhat generic, and it did not have much glamour to it if you wil. All I saw were four stereotypical teens not knowing they were going to escape their boring everyday lives and that’s about it. Granted, I grew to like them, but still. But what made the real world events interesting was catching up with our past characters, because they were reuniting, and even though I have known them for less than a week, I feel like I have grown up with them. After all, they were in high school in the first film, and now they are following their own paths in life. I have a feeling I will have some sort of reunion with somebody down the road that I have known from high school in the future, after all, the holidays are here, making this a good time for it. Plus, I’ll mention once again, speaking of reality, Danny DeVito’s real life character is honestly a highlight of the movie for me. I am honestly surprised at how much I enjoyed watching him, especially when he has a little reunion of his own. This movie goes into a little sideplot (if you can call it that), about a restaurant that he and someone else operated together. This is just a fraction of the interactions DeVito has with the character of Milo, who is wonderfully played by Danny Glover. Both of them have great chemistry and I honestly would not mind a spinoff mini-series on Crackle or something just listening to them have conversations.

But let’s be serious, real life is overrated, and sometimes it’s a video game, it’s just a fact. I do like how the video game manages to go in different directions with its characters and storyline, this time there is a new plot where the characters are after a different object. It’s sort of got similar beats to the previous installment, but it has enough to not feel like a ripoff. As for the villain, Jurgen the Brutal, I thought he was just going to be this cliche bad guy who wants to do bad guy things upon one or two early impressions of him, but even though he may resemble someone with cliches, the way the movie goes about executing his character, specifically towards the end, is a thing of beauty. There is an ongoing scene where our characters are interacting with him and his cronies, it’s not only intense, but also pretty funny. That’s the thing that I will say is amazing about this movie. I know it’s got comedic talent, but to have TWO “Jumanji” movies that aren’t exactly the within the realm of “Jumanji” I have come to know and have BOTH be funny and charming is one of the best surprises I have gotten during my recent moviewatching experiences.

But even though I will point out that this film is better than the original, it doesn’t mean it’s flawless. As much as I really like the climax, it does get a little off the rails towards the end. Granted, there is a bit of that off the rails factor that I like, but there’s also a tad that I found to be too insane. It is a video game though, which often distorts itself from reality so maybe I’ll retract this error eventually. I think some of the pacing could have been fixed, and once again, this is not that big of an issue, but there are some scenes that take place in the real world that feel like they are just inserted at a random point and it almost doesn’t flow. This movie is not that much longer than its predecessor, and even though I found certain portions dull, the pacing is a bit better in that film. The last film felt shorter than what it actually was, but this one just felt a tad longer. There’s also one scene with ostriches that is most certainly trying to get a laugh out of people, but feels like something out of a a horror movie where every character does not know the first thing about common sense. I get it, jokes bring smiles to people’s faces, but so do characters with brains. Nevertheless, “Jumanji: The Next Level” is funny and I would not mind watching it again on a rainy day at home.

In the end, “Jumanji: The Next Level” is exactly as the title suggests, “The Next Level.” The last movie was good, this one is a step up. I think I’ll end up having a little more replay value with this one, but we’ll have to see. The characters, both real and fake, are all a joy to watch. The movie itself is pretty mindless, but also works because it is so mindless. In fact, portions of its creativity perhaps comes from mindlessness. I know “The Rock” is not a GREAT actor, just a muscular man who has a somewhat engaging screen presence, but if I had to compare the performance he gave in “Jumanji: The Next Level” to pretty much anything else he’s done, this may be the best he’s been in terms of solid acting ability. I mean, when you are playing someone that is literally portraying somebody else in avatar form, it requires a little bit of extra effort to maybe be convincing. For that, props to Dwayne Johnson. I’m going to give “Jumanji: The Next Level” a 7/10.

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is most likely going to be for “Uncut Gems,” which I saw before reviewing this movie, but I wanted to get this “Jumanji” review out first because it felt like a higher priority. Also stay tuned in about a week and a half, where I will have my review for the biggest movie event of the season, “Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker.” Be sure to follow Scene Before either with an email or WordPress account for greater access and posts brought directly to your personal feed! Please leave a like on this post, and if you like liking, like… a lot, check out my Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Jumanji: The Next Level?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite video game of all time? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood (2019): Why the World Needs Tom Hanks

mv5bytc1owfmzdytndkzmy00zjm2ltkxzditm2e3ztg3nte1zwe2xkeyxkfqcgdeqxvymtkxnjuynq4040._v1_sy1000_cr006741000_al_

“A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood” is directed by Marielle Heller (The Diary of a Teenage Girl, Can You Ever Forgive Me?) and stars Tom Hanks (Cast Away, Forrest Gump), Matthew Rhys (The Americans, The Post), Susan Kelechi Watson (This Is Us, The Blacklist), and Chris Cooper (American Beauty, Adaptation). This film is based on the on the article “Can You Say… Hero?” by Tom Junod, which was published in Esquire magazine. It focuses on the character of Lloyd Vogel, who is in a bit of rut when it comes to the current state of his job. Prior to this, he attended his sister’s wedding and got into a fistfight with his father. Now, he has to interview Fred Rogers on a segment his organization is doing on heroes, which is pretty much where the movie’s main subjects lie.

I think Fred Rogers may be one of the greatest people to ever walk this Earth, and this is coming from somebody who has never had him in my childhood, with one exception. That exception by the way is my grandmother constantly singing the opening theme to “Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood” when I was in her presence. It’s a delightful little song, no matter what age you are, no matter what mood you’re in. In fact, one of the best parts about this movie is how they implement the show “Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood” into it. Let me just be clear, for those of you who know nothing about this movie, and have not seen any marketing. This movie is not about Fred Rogers’ life. It goes over what could have been a nifty little portion of his life, but this is not a textbook of all the things Fred Rogers did from birth to death. Fred Rogers is practically a main character in this film, but it does not mean the film is about HIM per se. If you ask me, it is more about Lloyd Vogel, the reporter who has to interview Fred Rogers. And I honestly do feel the need to say that, because I feel like a good number of people, I don’t know how many for sure, but still, a decent amount of people are going to go into this movie, thinking of it purely as a Mr. Rogers story, which it kind of is, but not really.

But going back to what this film contains in regards to “Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood,” what this movie was able to do by using the show in one way or another was incredible. The movie kinda sorta plays out as if it were an episode of “Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood.” In fact, the first scene of the film has Tom Hanks doing the iconic intro to the show. A lot of you likely know what I’m talking about. Rogers, or this case, Hanks, walks through the door, starts singing, changes his sweater, adjusts his shoes, he does the whole nine yards. I was in a rather full cinema, and it honestly felt like we were watching an episode of the classic children’s show. And it honestly shows with Tom Hanks performance.

I think Hanks here gives one of the best performances of the year. He’s probably not going to end up being top dog for me, Joaquin Phoenix is a tough competitor. However, Hanks as Mr. Rogers was everything I wanted. In fact, I think this was perhaps the easiest casting decision anyone could make for a role like this, because in Hollywood right now, Tom Hanks is often seen as that “nice guy.” You talk to anyone in Hollywood, they’ll often refer to Tom Hanks as a pure gentleman, therefore it’s almost hard to avoid thinking of Tom Hanks as this generation’s stereotype that could easily match with Mr. Rogers. Is he as nice? It’s hard to tell. He does not have a children’s TV show that airs on a network every day, but how often do you look at the news and read the headline “Tom Hanks Is a Dick Who Shatters Glass In Your Eyes, Says Everyone”? I think a lot of what made Hanks’ performance stellar is not just how he goes about with certain mannerisms to turn himself into his character, but I think directing was a key component here as well. After all, if you watch the movie, you’d notice Tom Hanks taking advantage of time in front of him, and wasting some of it by either being quiet or pausing. For all I know, maybe Hanks cautiously studied Rogers prior to taking on his role, maybe he has a solid memory when it comes to Rogers himself, but long story short, Hanks aced his role and I’m going to give one of the best compliments I can give an actor, I cannot see anybody else playing this role at this point.

Screenshot (11)

Again, I’ll mention, despite how this movie is called “A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood,” it does not entirely have to do with Mr. Rogers. And I do not think that is the worst thing in the world. I say that because what the film manages to do with the character of Lloyd Vogel was just as worthy of my attention as were the scenes exclusively involving Mr. Rogers. I really enjoyed his arch in this film, which really fits in with the idea of a story about maybe what a child could have been going through at a particular point in their life. The whole idea of Mr. Rogers himself is to provide a space through the television to inform and educate young children, spread kindness, and let the children viewing the program know they’re special. The movie dives into the emotions, internal thoughts, and personal life of Vogel. He never seems like the happiest person in the room, and if you watch him in this movie, it shows. And the way this film goes about telling the story of Vogel, it really goes to show the impact Rogers himself had on the generations he had to serve through television. Speaking of Vogel and Rogers, I really like the chemistry between the duo. There are a couple scenes that still stand out to me, specifically where Rogers is talking to Vogel through one of his puppets and Vogel is clearly irritated by the current scenario. I imagine if they didn’t have the right actors for this scene, the movie, I don’t know for sure, but this is my personal assumption, would have ended up being awkward as HELL. But somehow their chemistry easily clicked and the scenes between them were worth my time.

I also will say, sticking with the notion that this movie is sort of played out like a Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood episode, there are a couple little neat transitions in the film that pay homage to the low-budget yet somewhat colorful props and set design of the series. I can’t say this film brought me back to my childhood, in fact I was born in the very late nineties, I did not grow up with “Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood” being a part of my life. If I could describe this film in one of many ways, one thing I should say is sort of similar to what I just said. This movie may not have made me travel back to a time of pure nostalgia, but it reminded me of something that may have been missing from my life, sort of similar to how I felt leaving “Won’t You Be My Neighbor?,” the documentary on Fred Rogers which just released last year. When I did my review for that film, I explained that my childhood, even though I think there are a lot of things that I wouldn’t change about it, may have been missing a program like “Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood” being a part of it all. A program that is not too obnoxious, not too flashy, not too dumbed-down, but a series that manages to educate people about life, serious topics, and important lessons at a level that a young kid can comprehend. In fact, this movie even touches upon something that I kind of was surprised to hear, not to mention, appreciative because I heard it. I am not sure how often Fred Rogers said this in real life, but based on Tom Hanks’ portrayal, he did not view himself as perfect. Because when I think of Mister Rogers, I think of a guy who is calm, collected, understanding, and courteous to those around him. He loves people, especially children. Even if they are being rotten, he still has respect for them for being, well… them. I wish I could do that. But even he, like some of the kids who looked up to him in the past, has to deal with his own pain, his own troubles, and maybe it’s not always easy for him. The scene where the character of Fred Rogers manages to reveal such a thing, humanized him. I say humanized, because I almost would not be surprised if there were perhaps some unexposed religious text that maybe we will never see for the rest of time, and the text suggests Fred Rogers is perhaps the second coming of someone like Jesus. It felt nice to see that even the most heroic of people may need help at times.

However, “A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood” is not entirely beautiful. It’s a good movie, but not entirely beautiful. I had high hopes for this film, and I wonder if I set them too high, kind of like I did with a film like “Avengers: Endgame.” There was no way it was going to be THAT good. It was very enjoyable, similar to “Endgame,” but much like “Endgame,” it has problems. I will say the film ends brilliantly, but the last minute, I won’t get into specifics, but there’s this final moment that feels sort of tacked on and unnecessary, if I were the editor, I would have removed it from the final cut. But that’s just me. I also think this film wouldn’t be one that I’d be watching again anytime soon, as much as I enjoyed it. I think the film is a fun time, but it’s also one that I don’t see any reason to go back to. It’s a good time at the theater. Will I buy the Blu-ray? Maybe. Will watch the Blu-ray anytime soon? Probably not. I have priorities. When I left “Won’t You Be My Neighbor?” in 2018 it felt like a life-changing experience. This on the other hand, felt simply like a fine movie. I’m not complaining, but “life-changing” is definitely higher on the scale than “fine.”

In the end, “A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood” is a delightful and charming little film that reminds me the power of being kind. I think it is a proper film for just about any audience member. I think it is also a really good family film. I should also point out, it’s PG. If you want to see Tom Hanks act his heart out, delivering a solid performance as a pure heroic icon, this movie is for you. Is it the best movie of the year? Not really. But it is also a fine time at the movies as far as I’m concerned. The chemistry between the two leads is fantastic and even if the movie almost kinda sorta feels like two in one (one about Fred Rogers and another about Lloyd Vogel), it still manages to impress me. I’m going to give “A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood,” a 7/10.

Thanks for reading this review! I just want you all to know that next week I’m going to be seeing a couple movies including “Jumanji: The Next Level,” which I will be going to see on Monday. But, on Sunday, I’m going to be going to see a film that has been apparently getting a lot of hype recently, “Uncut Gems.” This is an advance screening at Boston’s new Arclight theater, which I might do a post on eventually reviewing it (depending on how much time I have on my hands). The reason why I am going is because there are going to be several people involved with the film who are going to be present at the screening. Specifically, the directors, the composer, former Boston Celtics player Kevin Garnett, and the film’s star, Adam Sandler. I cannot wait for this screening, I hope the movie is as good as people are saying it is, and I hope this is yet another example of A24 delivering an excellent product. Be sure to follow Scene Before if you want to see more posts like this one! How? Use an email, or WordPress account for greater access! Do you like Facebook? Yeah? Well then, check out the Scene Before Facebook page and give it a like! I want to know, did you see “A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood?” What did you think about it? Or, and I’m not sure how many people saw “Won’t You Be My Neighbor?” or how many people saw that and the movie I am currently reviewing, but if you did see both movies, which was better? Do you prefer “Won’t You Be My Neighbor?” or “A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood?” Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Zombieland: Double Tap (2019): A Presidential Zombie Flick

mv5byjcwnjzhngytognlny00ngi3ltlmodmtmgzlmja3yja0njg0xkeyxkfqcgdeqxvymdm2ndm2mq4040._v1_sy1000_sx675_al_

“Zombieland: Double Tap” is directed by Ruben Fleischer, who also directed the original “Zombieland” back in 2009. The film stars Woody Harrelson (Solo: A Star Wars Story, The Edge of Seventeen), Jesse Eisenberg (The Social Network, Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice), Abigail Breslin (Little Miss Sunshine, Scream Queens), Emma Stone (Easy A, The Amazing Spider-Man), Rosario Dawson (Sin City, Men In Black II), Zoey Deutch (The Year of Spectacular Men, Dirty Grandpa), and Luke Wilson (Concussion, Enlightened). This film takes place, appropriately, ten years after the original “Zombieland.” Columbus, Tallahassee, Wichita, and Little Rock are back and they have survived in an America that has basically become zombified. We see them in the White House, continuously living with their current reality as an imaginary dysfunctional family. Meanwhile, Little Rock flees away with a guy which prompts the remainder of the White Household, plus a new teammate, to go find her. Oh yeah, and let’s not forget, there’s zombies.

I first saw “Zombieland” back in 2016, which happens to be 7 years after it came out. While it was not the best comedy of its particular year, I found it to be rather funny. Granted, it also tries emphasize various horror elements, but the more I think about it, it almost feels like a pure comedy. That’s not to say that “Zombieland” is a bad horror movie, but it just feels like it was meant to be funny more than it is meant to be scary. This is why when I saw the marketing a couple times, I was a tad turned off, because it didn’t seem that funny.

Although at the same time, one thing I didn’t consider is a common complaint among various moviegoers. You know how there are a lot of comedies out there that show all the funny parts in the trailer? This movie, at least from my experience, saved a great portion of the funniest parts for the final product. By the way, if you have NOT seen the recent red band trailer for “Zombieland: Double Tap.” DON’T. There’s a moment that is not in the main film, but instead, during the credits. I didn’t watch this red band marketing piece until after watching the movie, but I saw something in there that I would have preferred the marketing team to leave out because I would rather have it be a surprise. Granted, it involves something I knew about going in, but it involves a specific moment that should have been unmentioned for a greater effect.

This is also a warning to all of you who are going to see “Zombieland: Double Tap,” stay for the entirety of the credits. You will not regret your decision.

One of the best parts of the film is perhaps the characters. I say that because they all have lovable chemistry. I mean, it shouldn’t be too surprising. The main cast consists of great actors, all of whom were at least nominated for an Academy Award. Granted, “Zombieland: Double Tap” is not the type of movie that would be going for any acting awards, but it is hard to deny when it comes to being together as a team, the characters tend to shine. You’ve got Tallahassee who is the same quirky, gun-loving redneck we have seen from the first film. There’s Columbus who will stop at nothing to follow his own rules. Little Rock shows up and while she does not have as much screentime as the others, her story in the film is rather interesting. Wichita’s here too, and there’s a subplot in this film involving her and Columbus, it gets nuts. Also, I don’t know how anyone else feels, but to me it feels kind of weird to see Emma Stone in this movie. I say that because I thought based on her last few choices of work, it seems she has increasingly made a transition to Oscar bait material or smaller budget films. Guess she just wanted a change of pace, and there’s nothing wrong with that. Based on how much I enjoyed this film, I should rephrase myself… There’s ABSOLUTELY NOTHING wrong with that.

Much like the first film, I must warn everyone, this is a horror comedy. Although I feel just like the first one, this is more funny than scary. I will also state, personally, this isn’t really a bad thing. Because of level of humor in “Zombieland: Double Tap” is freaking unbelievable. I was with a relatively active crowd, and there’s a good mix of chuckle-worthy, burst out laughing, and kneeslapping moments. There’s even a couple of moments where the crowd managed to applaud.

Sticking with the theme of things that worried me slightly when I was going into this film, let’s talk about Zoey Deutch’s character, Madison. We first see Madison in a surprise moment for Columbus. Specifically, he’s in an abandoned mall and he’s trying to defend himself. From this moment, I’ve gotten the impression that she is a talkative teenager in an adult’s body. I thought as soon as I saw her, she was going to be the reason for me wanting to slap someone in the face as a way of taking out anger towards this movie. I WAS DEAD WRONG. She’s also associated with the dumb blonde stereotype, which gave for PLENTY of laughs. Speaking of funny scenes with her, she is involved with perhaps the most hysterical sex scene I have witnessed in recent memory. I will not go into detail about it, but look forward to it.

The film is incredibly well paced, finely written, and while I’m not sure if this film will get many nominations for cinematography, there is one kick-ass action scene that is all done in one take. The set used for it is incredibly vibrant, which only adds to the overall sense of satisfaction I achieved from watching the particular clip. This movie happens to be shot by Chung-hoon Chung, who also shot 2017’s “IT.” To me, “IT” has good cinematography. After seeing “Zombieland: Double Tap,” there’s a good chance “IT” might as well eat its own heart out. Or in this case, its brains out.

If I had any flaws with “Zombieland: Double Tap,” there are a couple lines that don’t exactly land, and there is a line that happens to be a callback that feels kind of awkward as one particular character responds to said callback. Also, there are certain portions that do become slightly predictable. But even with that, it pretty much fails to detract from the overall fun to be had watching this movie. And again, this is mostly a comedy. I don’t consider it a “flaw” per se that this feels more comedic than horrifying, but if you are going in expecting pure scares or dark vibes, look elsewhere. Then again, I guess I couldn’t go wrong with a fun zombie movie every now and then. Nothing wrong with that in my book.

In the end, “Zombieland: Double Tap” is a sequel worthy of the “Zombieland” name. It may be as good as the original, if not better. It’s fun, crazy, and hilarious. Halloween is coming so there’s a lot of horror material right now in theaters, so if you want your horror fix while also slapping your knees, “Zombieland: Double Tap” is worth seeing. In fact, if you just saw “Joker” and need something light to watch, I would probably recommend this movie even more because you have a transition from something incredibly disturbing and depressing to something absolutely bonkers and energizing. It would probably be a pretty good double feature if you ask me. I’m not sure on my final rating yet, but I enjoyed “Zombieland: Double Tap” just about as much as its predecessor, so I’m going to give it a rather high 7/10. Thanks for reading this review! I just want to let everyone know that next Wednesday, I have an advance pass to the upcoming film “Countdown.” This film is about a nurse who downloads an app that predicts when people would die, only to find out she has three days left before she bites the dust. This sounds like a neat concept, so I am absolutely curious as to how it will be executed. Be sure to follow Scene Before either with an email if you want notifications about the blog in your inbox, or with a WordPress account to like, comment, and get notifications in your WordPress feed. Stay tuned for more great content, and check out my Facebook page! I want to know, as of this review, there have been a number of advance screenings that have taken place. So, did you see “Zombieland: Double Tap?” What did you think about it? Are you looking forward to it? How does it compare to the original for you? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Spider-Man Is BACK IN THE MCU!

mv5bmjbkzdrjogmtzda3zi00ndewlwi2zjgtzta5mdqxzmvlywu5xkeyxkfqcgdeqxvynjczote0mzm40._v1_sx1777_cr001777731_al_

Hey everyone, Jack Drees here! So next week, I’ve been thinking about seeing “Joker,” the latest of the neverending trend that we like to call “comic book movies.” And I’ll tell you, the movie looks pretty freakin–WAIT A MINUTE! HOLD THE PHONE! SPIDER-MAN JUST RETURNED TO THE MARVEL CINEMATIC UNIVERSE!

This information, to me, came completely out of the blue. I was just enjoying my Friday off from school, summing up my thoughts on the latest movie I’ve gone out to see, when all of a sudden, I’m on social media, and a Variety article comes up with a headline that at this point looks too good to be true. Once I saw the headline “Spider-Man Will Stay in the Marvel Cinematic Universe,” there was only one thing to do.

DO SOME CARTWHEELS AND ALERT THE FREAKING MASSES!

I try to maintain a level of professionalism on this website. There are definitely signs that may suggest otherwise, but that’s because I want my blog to be fun, not boring, not unoriginal. I want everything to stand out. So with that in mind, THIS IS ONE OF THE BEST THINGS I’VE HEARD IN MY LIFE! HELL TO THE FREAKING YEAH! BOOM!

Now, let me just say, Spider-Man is my favorite superhero of all time, and if you have not been following my favorite superhero of all time in the news recently, you’d know that Disney and Sony had a little scrap. For some years now, Sony had the ability to spend money on a new Spider-Man movie, but Marvel Studios (owned by Disney) helps out in making those movies come to life and in return, their side gets a portion of the money, all of the merchandising rights, and a couple of chances to show Spider-Man off in other movies they happen to be making. Sony also gets the chances to retain rights to solo Spider-Man filmmaking as they have already come out with films like “Venom” and “Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse.” But this was recently interrupted because Disney asked Sony for greater permission on the content, but Sony said no.

The original deal had Sony making 95% of the box office totals on films that would eventually be known as “Spider-Man: Homecoming” and “Spider-Man: Far From Home.” This means for those movies, Disney would gain 5% of the box office. After the exciting news of “Spider-Man: Far From Home” becoming Sony’s highest grossing movie ever, it was a great sign that the deal seemed to have worked out. Both Disney and Sony are making money on Marvel Studios films, Disney is getting merch money, and Sony gets to make money on their own “Spider-Man” films outside the MCU. But Disney asked for Sony to co-finance and split profits on upcoming “Spider-Man” films. Sony wasn’t satisfied with Disney’s new proposal, so they were no longer involved with the MCU. But, a “Spider-Man 3” was still planned. So they were going to make the movie on their own, without Marvel Studios president Kevin Feige’s involvement, which seemed kind of difficult because if you ask me, Spider-Man currently represents an enormous part of the MCU’s current storyline. With several main characters we currently know having disappeared, Spider-Man may be the next crucial main character for Marvel’s phase 4 and on. He was taken under the wing of Tony Stark, he tried to make him proud from time to time, and now he is trying let Stark’s legacy live on. This separation would have been bad because Sony probably couldn’t use any of Marvel Studios’ other properties or characters if they needed to, and future Marvel Studios films would probably have to come up with some lame or cheesy excuse as to why Spider-Man is not with the Avengers.

Related image

Did he have too much homework?

Is he busy with The Daily Bugle?

Did he not feel so good? I mean, come on!

Nevertheless, as of Friday, Sony and Disney have reunited with new terms that may seem to work out for both of them. And that was one thing that I personally was worried about, because as much as I want Spider-Man in the MCU, I understand why Sony left, and I would have rather had Sony leave the way they did as opposed to having them go along with the 50/50 terms because that means they lose control, or at least partial control of their biggest property, and let’s face it, if this were a game of Film Studio Monopoly, Disney would be winning. They own Boardwalk (most of Marvel), they own Park Place (Lucasfilm), there are hotels on both properties, and you might as well say that they own Pennsylvania, North Carolina and Pacific Avenues, all of which represents the remains of 21st Century Fox, and they are starting to build on those properties as we speak. If Sony were playing this game, they’d be better off landing on the go to jail spot over and over again. I’m not saying they are in danger of going out of business, but still. Luckily, things are being kept in check, because while the deal is no longer a 95/5% difference between sides, it is now 75/25%, with Sony gaining most of the profits. And while this may seem like a significant increase right now for Disney, it may be worth it in the end. Because Sony is still putting some of their eggs into the basket of their own Spidey content, including “Venom 2” which is currently in development.

Despite how much I may point out how Disney is making “too much money,” there’s not much wrong here with Disney wanting more money for these “Spider-Man” films. They’ve done their part when it comes to inserting soul into the character. But I think this deal should probably not go much higher, because Sony is the one distributing the film, and they are the ones paying for it to be made. I personally think 25% is the highest that I would be OK with Disney earning for these movies. Because if they are allowed to earn anything greater, then they might as well be snatching “Spider-Man” from Sony. Yes, Disney technically owns Marvel, but Sony is also in a position where Spider-Man movies are “their thing” and will probably end up being their greatest asset for the time being. It would be like Universal giving up “Fast & Furious” or Paramount giving up “Mission: Impossible” or STX Entertainment giving up “Bad Moms.”

I should also point out that in addition to this whole reunion, the spreading of joy and good news across the movie fandom, Sony put out a post recently of a little announcement that I think you all might enjoy.

One word. Hype.

I honestly almost couldn’t be happier because while Disney is still increasing their control on Spidey, it’s not like they’re hogging the entire plate. Sony gets to keep the rights, and Marvel Studios gets to keep Spider-Man in the MCU. And even if it is just for one more movie, it would help me as an audience member in getting some closure after the AMAZING mid-credits scene of “Spider-Man: Far From Home.” What mood am I in right now? Well, look down below!

I feel like dancin’ like I just don’t care! Booyah!

Thanks for reading this post! I just want to remind everyone that “Joker” comes out next weekend. Now, I want to go see it next weekend. I have time to go see it next weekend. But chances are, I’m not going to. I will say though, I do have tickets booked for the second weekend! I’m going to see “Joker” on Friday, October 11th in 70mm! Hopefully I can get a review up by the end of Columbus Day if I go see it then for the first time, or Indigenous Peoples’ Day depending on your preference, I cannot wait to check it out! As for this next weekend, I am not sure what’s going on. Maybe I’ll watch “The Fanatic,” the new John Travolta movie that just came out, because I kind of want to talk about it. It just seems like it would make for good material, so we’ll see what happens. Be sure to follow Scene Before with a WordPress account if you want to see new posts in your WordPress feed, or if you just want to subscribe with an email, you will be notified of new posts immediately through email. Stay tuned for more great content, and check out my Facebook page! I want to know, what are your thoughts on the latest news regarding Sony, Disney, Marvel, and Spider-Man? Are you happy to see him back in the MCU? Do you think a better deal could have been made? Or are you disappointed? Did you want to see what Sony could have done with Spider-Man without Marvel Studios? Leave your thoughts and opinions down below and I’m not sure about you guys, but bring on “Spider-Man 3!” I want it now! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

“This is terrific, Peter Parker’s story took a dramatic turn in ‘Far From Home’ and I could not be happier we will all be working together as we see where his journey goes.” -Amy Pascal (Producer, SPIDER-MAN: HOMECOMING and SPIDER-MAN: FAR FROM HOME)

Black and Blue (2019): The Adventure of the Body Cam

mv5bmmzhzmq1yjytmmzkzc00ztixltg5ytctmdczzgjmztllyjbkxkeyxkfqcgdeqxvymtkxnjuynq4040._v1_sy1000_cr006741000_al_

“Black and Blue” is directed by Deon Taylor (Meet the Blacks, Supremacy) and stars Naomie Harris (Skyfall, Moonlight), Tyrese Gibson (Transformers, 2 Fast 2 Furious), Mike Colter (The Good Wife, Luke Cage), Frank Grillo (The Purge: Anarchy, Captain America: The Winter Soldier), Reid Scott (My Boys, Veep), and Beau Knapp (Death Wish, The Nice Guys). This film involves a rookie cop working for the police department in New Orleans. She is on a mission where she is forced to do nothing, only to lead to a moment where some real chaos goes down. This “chaos” by the way, is the killing of a drug dealer, who died as a result of the actions executed by cops. Naomie Harris’ character, Alicia West, sees this and now she is on the run, defending her life.

The film experience I had for “Black and Blue” in particular was very interesting, because unlike a good portion of the films I watch when they first come out, I have not witnessed a single piece of marketing for this one. I will admit, I knew a bit about the plot going into it, but as I was reserving my spot in the theater, this was literally the earliest I have known about this movie.

I just want to remind everyone that this movie is not even out until the final weekend of October. I saw this at an early screening where there seemed to be a good amount of people who scored advance passes. So I’m gonna be pretty vague here with this review. When I saw this movie, I was with a pretty active audience. They would gasp, talk to the screen, and burst out into applause at times as if this were an “Avengers” movie. As for me, I was pretty quiet. There were a few moments where I would react to things, but those reactions were nowhere near as obnoxious or as likely to shake the entire room. Then again, I don’t usually watch movies about cops, maybe it’s because the director, writer, and producers weren’t trying to target me specifically. I don’t know. The point is, this movie is not as good as the rowdy crowd at my theater would have made it seem. In a way, this almost reminded me of “Captain Marvel,” which I had the privilege of seeing this year at Hollywood’s TCL Chinese Theatre. It’s a movie that when audiences applauded or reacted to something, I honestly either remained in silence or questioned why this was happening in the first place. There were even a select couple of moments where I had my hands on my face. I did the same thing I when I saw “Venom” last year. If you saw that review, you could tell that this isn’t pretty. But staying on the topic of “Captain Marvel…”

Remember when Captain Marvel takes down Yon-Rong with a laser beam in one hit after he’s maniacally rambling? OK, this sort of thing worked in “Raiders of the Lost Ark!” Here it’s just cheap!

Now I am not going to deny that there are a fair share of “edge of your seat” moments that the movie has to offer, but the fact is that when it comes to characters, not everyone stands out. As I left the film, there are a fair share of characters who I felt their motivations or feelings could have been expressed better and overall the film convoluted itself based on how many characters it tries to handle at a time.

In fact, I’m not gonna get into the ending, but let’s just say that it goes on for a time that is longer than I would have anticipated, and it kind of overstays its welcome. There are a couple of things that I would trim out, clean up, some edits that I might end up fixing and speaking of editing, there are a couple moments in this film, albeit in the category of nitpicky, but it does show a select amount of shots where the cinematography almost looks like something out of a student film. There are a couple of shots I think could have been adjusted, but they have little to no real effect on the movie as a whole. I will admit, I am surprised to dive a little deep into the cinematography of this movie, but speaking of surprises…

Screenshot (28)

Let’s talk about Tyrese Gibson. Looking back, I didn’t think about this that much, but Tyrese Gibson does a really good job in this movie. Gibson plays a character by the name of Milo “Mouse” Jackson, who operates a convenience store. Throughout the film, we come to realize that he is the only one who can help Alicia in her current situation. I might need to watch the movie again to know for sure, but compared to some other movies I have seen him in, he seems a lot more calm and collected here. I almost couldn’t even tell Tyrese played the character he was supposed to portray, which may be one of the best compliments I can give to an actor.

As for the main character, I was rooting for her. There was a point, especially during the beginning, where she kind of came off as the only interesting character in the entire movie. Granted, I would rather watch a movie where I care significantly more about the main characters as supposed to supporting characters, but it does not change the fact that when it comes to supporting characters, they’re either bland or unmemorable. I didn’t flat out hate any of them, but the main characters made me feel like I drank 10 cups of coffee whereas the supporting characters made me feel like someone dropped an entire container of Melatonin pills into my body like Tic-Tacs.

When it comes to other things about the movie worth pointing out, part of why I don’t particularly think this movie is going to be all that memorable as time goes on is because of the pacing. The movie tends to maintain a fast pace throughout and sticks with it. But at times, it goes a little haywire. It feels like the movie eventually goes on a sugar rush and gets a little too bombastic with some absurd happenings. There are a couple of moments where I questioned the logic of the movie, and again I’ll bring up the obnoxious crowd I was with. Take out the lively atmosphere, this would probably be a slightly lackluster movie experience.

To quote YouTube user Jacksfilms…

“Wait why are we clapping? Stop clapping!”

In the end, “Black and Blue” was not even close to insufferable. But it also wasn’t even close to a masterpiece. It’s just… Something. …That exists. The experience was undeniably wild, which may be why I wasn’t exactly bored during the movie. I was silent, and at times, annoyed by certain people who happened to be talking, but it was still like a big movie theater party. I’m wondering how this film will do when it releases at the end of October. It’ll definitely get some people in the theater, but so far, most of the reviews I have seen, specifically from outlets like Variety and The Hollywood Reporter, have not been great. Unfortunately, this review belongs in that category. Based on how much I think I’ll forget this movie compared some other films that came out this year, I’m going to give “Black and Blue” a 5/10. Thanks for reading this review! Next week is the release of “Joker,” which could possibly be THE BEST comic book movie of the year. I’m planning on seeing it opening weekend, I’m probably not gonna go opening Thursday night, because I might make it a priority to see this film with my dad, because I think he may enjoy it. I’ll have to see if he’s busy, but nevertheless, I am here, I am ready, I am game for “Joker.” Bring it on! If you want to see that review and other great content, be sure follow Scene Before! Also, if you are on Facebook, check out my Facebook page, it helps me out a ton! I want to know, did you see “Black and Blue?” What did you think about it? I’m willing to bet at the time of this review, a majority of you didn’t, so let me ask another question. What is your favorite movie featuring Tyrese Gibson? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Brightburn (2019): Superman: The Quest for Rest In Peace

mv5bmjc0yzm2zjitnze3os00ntrhltkyntutmjy5y2y5ntu3owi0xkeyxkfqcgdeqxvynju2nti4mje40._v1_sy1000_cr006741000_al_

“Brightburn” is directed by David Yarovesky (Guardians of the Galaxy, The Hive) and stars Jackson A. Dunn (Shameless, Legendary Dudas), Elizabeth Banks (The LEGO Movie, The Hunger Games), David Denman (The Office, Traffic Light), Matt Jones (Mom, Breaking Bad), and Meredith Hagner (Men at Work, Search Party). This film revolves around a family and its child, Brandon Breyer. Brandon is growing up fast, and at times seems to be a relatively normal child. But we soon discover that he has powers, he sometimes behaves poorly, and he has various elements of a psychopath. Basically, take Superman, but make him malevolent, wicked, and some sort of equivalent to a devil worshiper.

I originally saw the first trailer for “Brightburn” last year, and I was somewhat excited for this film upon seeing that trailer. It looked beautiful, bold, and a tad scary too. In a way, this film is a mix of horror and a traditional comic book style story. The movie is not based on any preexisting property by name, even though it does contain similarities to “Superman.” To add even more comic book and superhero elements into the mix, let me just point out that James Gunn, director of the two recent “Guardians of the Galaxy” films, has a producer credit on this movie. This film is also kind of a family project, because the two writers are related to Gunn. You’ve got Mark Gunn, a cousin of James. And Brian Gunn, who happens to one of James’ brothers. It’s clear that this movie was partially done with combined passion, and it’s nice to see a family come together to entertain audiences. Granted, I don’t like everything they’ve done. I think “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2” may be one of the most overrated movies of the past few years. And both Brian and Mark wrote “Journey 2: The Mysterious Island,” which may be my least favorite movie with The Rock in it.

But with all of the creative forces combining together for “Brightburn,” how did they all add up? O-K? I guess? This was not my most anticipated film of 2019, but it was up there in terms of films I was looking forward to. In fact, of all the films that came out during its particular opening weekend, it was probably the one I wanted to see the most. Granted, I ended up seeing “Booksmart,” which ended up being good. I still have no interest in seeing “Aladdin,” but I finally got around to seeing “Brightburn” only to have numerous less than positive things to say about it. I mean, it’s not all bad. But it seriously could have been a lot better.

As a concept, it is certainly intriguing, and there are a lot of ideas that go into the concept that are executed fairly well. That being said however, this almost seems like a pitch movie.

“It’s gonna be Superman, but evil! Comic book movies are the thing right now! Let’s see what we can do with one of the most iconic comic stories of all time, but with a sinister twist! It’s gonna be great!”

This movie ultimately reminds me of a movie like “Lucy.” Remember “Lucy” from 2014? If you haven’t seen “Lucy,” Scarlett Johansson plays this girl who gets drugged by some less than friendly people, all the while discovering how to use more than 10% of her brain. It seems like a good movie to write with a couple of people around you, discussing ideas of how to use one’s brain at a greater level than what mankind is traditionally capable of. But it doesn’t mean anything for the movie in terms of how watchable or compelling it will turn out in the end, it’s just a collection of seemingly rad ideas.

If there were an evil Superman per se, this movie would be a good example of how such a character would work. In fact, I literally do mean evil Superman because the movie starts off with a crash on a farm, and the crash involves a baby boy. This baby grows up, we see him seemingly hitting puberty, and he becomes a stalker, an aggressive talker, and a violent maniac.

I also gotta give props to everybody acting in this movie, and this even includes our lead kid actor, Jackson A. Dunn. He owns the part as Brandon. He’s almost a perfect embodiment for a child of his age in terms of how he presents himself (despite being more aggressive than the average person). When he would cover up truths or lie, I felt like that would usually be how a kid of his age would do such a thing. And he, thankfully, did not overplay his character in any scenes involving dark violence, gore, etc. I guess in that sense, I might as well give props to the director for properly handling this film’s scenes.

But sticking to acting, the two standout performances in the movie have to be from the parents played by Elizabeth Banks and David Denman. The best part about their characters to me really sticks out like a sore thumb during the halfway point, specifically how they view the main situation of the whole movie. And it just goes to show how far Elizabeth Banks’ character would go to unconditionally love her kid. Granted, there are slight hints of wanting what’s best for him. But at the same time, she comes off as one of those mothers who will put her kid before anyone else regardless of how they behave or what they tend to do in their daily life. This sort of reminds me of those situations where a parent will endlessly defend their child or deny any of their faults. Her character’s thoughts and actions are completely different compared to those of David Denman’s character, who thinks the kid is up to no good, he’s violent, and he’s showing no signs of being a sane person.

My last compliment I can really give to this movie is that it does look really nice. The cinematography kind of made me feel like taking several deep breaths of fresh air. Granted, I did watch the movie through a 4K Blu-ray, but still. I also dig the farm location, I think overall, it suits the movie very well.

In the end, “Brightburn” is a movie with an interesting twist on a well-known concept, but I don’t know if I’d ever watch it again. Comic book movies are currently more popular than they’ve ever been. This is not based on a comic book, but if you told me it was, I wouldn’t be surprised. One trend I’m seeing now is the rise of comic book villain stories on film. We just saw it in “Venom” last year, which sucked hard. And we’re seeing it again this October with “Joker.” Thankfully, this is not anywhere near as unwatchable as “Venom.” But this movie doesn’t add anything big or bold to the type of genre with which it is trying to associate. “Brightburn” is a tad scary, it is somewhat entertaining, it is well-acted, but it doesn’t have an enormous “oomph” factor to it. I’m going to give “Brightburn” a 6/10. Thanks for reading this review! This weekend is the release of Brad Pitt’s “Ad Astra,” which I hear is getting great reviews so far, and I cannot wait to check it out whenever I can! I’m hoping to go see it Friday, because I do have Fridays off from school, so it would be good timing on my part. Plus, I am busy Sunday evening, so I can’t go see it then. Also, while not completely official, I wanted to touch upon another recent trend in the movie world, specifically “alternate programming at the movies.” If you have been following the news lately, sporting events and TV shows are making their way to cinema screens, and I want to talk about that! Be sure to follow Scene Before if you want hear me talk about this, or other movie-related topics! Also, check out my Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Brightburn?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite “Superman” movie? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Spider-Man Out of the Marvel Cinematic Universe?!

mv5bzwuwzthkzjitmzlloc00mguxlwfiztgtntu5m2ywztezzgnkxkeyxkfqcgdeqxvynji0otq4mje40._v1_sx1777_cr001777744_al_

Sony? Disney? I don’t feel so good.

Hey everyone, Jack Drees here! This past Tuesday has been one of the most peculiar days of my life. I scraped my knee pretty bad and I broke my bed. But that might not even be the biggest piece of news that I have to share with you all, because this past Tuesday I have heard that Spider-Man, my favorite superhero of all time, is leaving the hands of Disney! Now when I say that, I mean whatever hands of Disney it has, because if you are not familiar with what’s going on, a few years back, Sony (who owns rights to make Spider-Man movies) negotiated a deal with Disney to put Spider-Man in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. At the same time, Sony would still be allowed to produce and distribute their own “Spider-Man” films with the same iteration of the character in the MCU. So far, they have come out with “Spider-Man: Homecoming” and “Spider-Man: Far From Home,” both of which were critically and financially successful.

This deal was working very well for both sides. Disney would get some of the money made for the Sony-owned “Spider-Man” films, specifically 5%. Spider-Man would also be included in various Disney projects including “Captain America: Civil War,” “Avengers: Infinity War,” and “Avengers: Endgame.” Much like the recently mentioned “Spider-Man” movies, those Disney projects also received positive reviews and each one went on to gross over $1 billion, with two of them reaching past $2 billion. Disney and Marvel also had 100% of the merchandising rights to the character. This means, Sony is making money through making “Spider-Man” movies, along with titles such as “Venom” and “Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse” and Disney is getting some or all of the money depending on the occasion from live-action movies with Tom Holland as the webhead. Plus, Disney is getting money from toys, clothes, etc.

In fact, Sony just hit a nifty little achievement from receiving their all-time highest grossing film, “Spider-Man: Far From Home,” which grossed $1.109 billion, beating out 2012’s “Skyfall.” Sony’s making money! Disney’s making money! Everyone’s making money! And since it makes the world go round, it should not be surprising that money is the reason why Sony and Disney are separating! Sony has decided to back Spidey out of the hands of producer Kevin Feige and Marvel Studios! Why? Disney’s side wanted a raise!

Now let me just say, if they went to Sony and asked them for 10% of the money earned on the next “Spider-Man” film, maybe 20% or 25%. That would be a different story. But Disney, otherwise known as the box office kings of 2019, said “MORE! We want more!” And wanting more is not a bad thing. But ten times more? This is easily comparable to Spongebob asking Mr. Krabs for a raise because he has recently shown to be doing such quality work for him. Of course, being the krabby snob he is, he’d probably say no. But if Krabs were a gentleman, he would definitely raise Spongebob’s pay just a little bit. I’m fine with Disney getting a little more because financially speaking, this situation has been working out for both sides to the point where they can both give themselves a pat on the back. But the fact that Disney literally wants half of the box office intake for the next “Spider-Man” film reveals their true colors to me. Let’s face it, all movies, in some way, are made for the purpose of profit, but Disney is a different animal when it comes to this. They recently remade one of their most popular films, “The Lion King,” an animated classic which I happen to adore. But the new one is exactly the same as the original! It has little to no differences, and whatever differences do exist don’t seem to stand out. And let me just remind you, it has the same formula as “Hamlet” and “Kimba the White Lion.” Let me just remind you all, it is now in the top 10 films in terms of box office of all time. That happened. Granted, I also feel bad for Disney because as much as I *HATE* them for buying Fox, they have to deal with a slew of several finished films that will barely see the light of day. Plus, they laid off tons of employees and shut down Fox 2000. Although at the same time, they made “Avengers: Endgame,” which is now the Mount Everest of box office champions so there is a hint of achievement in sprinkled somewhere.

Is Disney doing this because of the recent failures of Fox? I have no idea, but based on their recent achievements, I don’t know if it is necessary. I understand the desire to go bigger, be bolder, but with Disney, they already have such a stronghold on the film industry to the point where I feel the need to remind them that they need to calm down. This is one reason why I get Sony backed out of the deal. “Spider-Man” is their highest-grossing property. And for Disney to come in and ask, “Hey, you know that ‘Spidey’ thing, can we take half the money?” It is the literal definition of unexpected and it makes them look like a giant s*ithead of a jerk. As a kid, one important lesson some people are taught is that “sharing is caring.” Both companies have hands in about a half of the deal. Why does one want the high ground?

Wait…

Image result for i have the high ground gif

This is Disney right now. I don’t know if they intentionally want to dismantle or destroy Sony, but the only way that I could see a deal like this working is if not only both companies earn 50/50 on box office, but they put 50/50 into the budget. But as far as I know, Sony is the one spending money on the film to begin with. I don’t want to point any fingers, but if I had to make an assumption, I am pretty sure this one could be on the money.

Now some of you might be thinking of past experience when it comes to Spidey and how Sony would usually tend to screw it up at a certain point. Let me just say first off, I LIKE “Spider-Man 3.” Sorry, it’s true. As for “The Amazing Spider-Man 2” however, that is a different story. But if this is a matter of Disney wanting more money, I would say that this is a sacrifice worth taking. Disney has enough. They have merchandising rights to the character, they have two to three Marvel films every year now. They have the profitable live-action remakes. They have “Star Wars.” They have the entirety of some people’s childhoods. AND… they have most of Fox. They are literally the Veruca Salt of entertainment. Granted, I imagine everyone at Disney is MUCH more well behaved (for the most part, I don’t have enough insider information). But this is honestly a reminder to Disney to sometimes be thankful for what you have, otherwise there will be consequences.

And let’s address another big issue, getting Spidey out of the MCU’s relevance. One of the biggest problems for this dealbreaker when it comes to both Sony and Disney is trying to get Spider-Man to not interact or have connections with the Avengers anymore. This begs a question. Is he still going to be part of the team but without mention towards said connection? Will either side try to find a way to get rid of his “Avenger” status? A few movies ago, he was just declared an Avenger. From “Avengers: Infinity War” to “Spider-Man: Far From Home,” there was an important story in Peter Parker’s arch to allow him to emphasize his importance as an Avenger. Granted, that arch has come a long way since “Infinity War,” but at least from my view, there is still more to be explored regarding Parker and this story of his.

Oh, let’s not forget this…

*IF YOU HAVE NOT SEEN “SPIDER-MAN: FAR FROM HOME,” THIS IS AN END CREDIT SCENE FROM THE FILM, DO NOT WATCH IF YOU DON’T WANT SPOILERS*

Yeah… I want answers. Now.

So in all honesty, this breakup may end up being good for nobody. Granted, Sony agreeing to Disney’s terms would be be bad too, but this reminds me of divorce. You know how they say divorce is hardest on the children? This is hard on all fans of “Spider-Man” who happen to be enjoy both his solo films and MCU crossovers. It’s hard for Disney because they lost an interesting character, and as for Sony, we’ll just have to wait and see what kind of movie they end up making in order to determine how hard this is for them. The MCU will very likely survive without Spider-Man. After all, they have a bunch of other characters they can work with, and since Disney owns Fox, this now gives them the opportunity to insert “Fantastic Four” and “X-Men” into the mix. This leave may hurt them a little bit, because in a future project they’ll probably have to come up with some sort of excuse as to why Parker would be out of the realm. And for all I know, we may never see another Tom Holland “Spider-Man” story again, which would be disappointing, because, again, I want answers. Maybe Sony will do another reboot where Uncle Ben dies, which, I’ll say, I don’t mind seeing again. I get why people wouldn’t want to see it again, but seeing it can highlight the pain Parker goes through and it could emphasize the drive the character will have down the road.

Do I want Spider-Man in the MCU? Sure, he’s a cool character and I like Tom Holland’s portrayal. I think it is very well done, and when it comes to how the character is written in films like “Avengers: Infinity War,” he had my seal of approval. But I understand why Sony did what they did. I personally think “Homecoming” could have been slightly better when comparing it to other “Spider-Man” films, but I ended up loving “Far From Home” even more than “Endgame.” I have very mixed thoughts, but this is a tough time in the trendy comic book movie genre.

AND JUST BECAUSE SONY AND DISNEY ARE NOT GIVING YOU WHAT YOU WANT, DOES NOT MEAN YOU CAN RAID THE STUDIOS! IF THERE IS GOING TO BE A BIG RAID AGAINST EITHER STUDIO, MY FAITH IN THE HUMAN RACE IS GOING TO GO DOWN THE CRAPPER! DON’T. EVEN. THINK. ABOUT IT. CAPICHE?!

I’m just about done. I have nothing else to say except… Disney, stop your plan for world domination. This is the same corporation that gobbled up Fox for Pete’s sake! Give Sony a reason to be with you, or move on. Thanks for reading this post! I just want to remind everyone that I just recently saw “Ready or Not” which just opened in theaters a few days ago. This is the first full weekend the movie will be shown and I imagine a lot of its money will be earned over the course of said period of time. If you want to check out my review for that film, click the red box below and see what I have to say! Be sure to follow Scene Before either with an email or WordPress account so you can stay tuned for more great content! And if you want, check out my Facebook page! Go to my Facebook page for the latest info from the Movie Reviewing Moron cluttered inside a space full of “friends.” I want to know, what are your thoughts on this whole “Spider-Man” fiasco? Do you want him in the MCU? Do you want Sony to keep making movies with him outside the MCU? Do you think there should be some sort of reboot? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Once Upon a Time in Hollywood (2019): There Lived an Actor and His Stunt Double

“Once Upon a Time in Hollywood” is directed by Quentin Tarantino (Pulp Fiction, Django Unchained) and stars Leonardo DiCaprio (Inception, Titanic), Brad Pitt (World War Z, Allied), Margot Robbie (Suicide Squad, The Wolf of Wall Street), Emile Hirsch (Into the Wild, Speed Racer), Margaret Qualley (The Leftovers, Death Note), Timothy Olyphant (Santa Clarita Diet, Live Free or Die Hard), Austin Butler (Switched at Birth, Arrow), Dakota Fanning (Coraline, The Twilight Saga: New Moon), Bruce Dern (The Hateful Eight, The ‘Burbs), and Al Pacino (Scent of a Woman, Heat). This film takes place in Hollywood around the time of the Manson murders during 1969. The story focuses on the dynamic duo of the characters played by Leonardo DiCaprio (Rick Dalton) and Brad Pitt (Cliff Booth). Dalton is an actor and Booth is Dalton’s stunt double. Together, they have a hunger for fame and fortune as the Golden Age of Hollywood comes to a close.

If you have been following this blog in recent weeks, you may have gotten the implication that I have just recently introduced myself to the masterful works of Quentin Tarantino, a director known for his quirky style, gritty scripts, and his enthusiasm to deliver a rather nostalgic vibe to his films. And this film is no exception. It is shot using 35mm film, it takes place in 1969, and it is designed to be presented as a love letter to ancient Hollywood. It has callbacks to real life Hollywood figures including Roman Polanski, Bruce Lee, James Stacy, and Sharon Tate. There are tons of throwback cars that can be seen that truly highlight the automobile culture of California that seems to continue to exist today. It kind of reminded me of “Amercian Graffiti” a little bit.

My excitement for this film was through the roof as soon as the tickets went on sale. I called my dad, he and I agreed to go on opening Thursday, I picked to go to the 7:30 show at the Somerville Theatre, which if you are not from Massachusetts, it is a 100 year old theatre that has a few screens, but one of them is in a grand auditorium that shows a lot of event-type films. I was there last year for the 70mm film festival, more specifically, for when they showed John Carpenter’s “The Thing.” It was my second time watching the film, and the atmosphere was turned up to an 11 when it came to how lively the crowd happened to be. I thought we were going to get a few people to show up for this film, because let’s face it, “The Lion King” is out right now, everyone’s going to see that, and unlike “The Thing,” “Once Upon a Time in Hollywood” was playing for more than one night. Plus, it didn’t have reserved or reclined seating. People seem to flock to those two things nowadays.

And I’ll let you in on a little something about “Once Upon a Time in Hollywood.” It’s the single best movie experience I had this year. Yes, better than “Endgame.” The atmosphere was almost dead during “Endgame,” there are several moments in this movie where people would shout, yell, laugh, applaud, it felt like I went to the world premiere of a “Star Wars” film. It was the very definition of exhilerating! The theater might have been sold out, if not super close to being sold out. I got to chat to a guy in the row in front of me about Tarantino films, there was a lovely lady I got to talk to about his work and other people’s films. This was clearly going to be an experience to remember. OK… maybe this has to do with the atmosphere of the film. But how was the movie you ask? F*cking nuts! It’s a special kind of awesome! I mean, could you expect anything less from Tarantino? This is the fourth movie I have seen from him, and this is probably my 2nd favorite. This film is full of excellent scenes with great characters, lines of dialogue that made me laugh and cheer, and fantastic setpieces.

For those of you who don’t know, part of the production of this movie involved transforming Hollywood as if it were presented in the 1960s, and I think the movie did a really good job with it. All of the neon lights shining everywhere and the plethora of signs set the mood, I dug the driving scenes that really had that flair of fun attached to it, and I felt immersed into the world that happened to be presented almost to the point that I imagined myself as a part of it, and I think from watching “Pulp Fiction” and this film, that is something that I think Tarantino can do very well. And this may be a big reason why I enjoyed this film so much. No matter what movie I have seen from Tarantino so far, the appropriate vibe is automatically set. But I feel that Tarantino, from what I have seen so far, has done a better job with his films when they are slightly more grounded in reality. Even though I saw “The Hateful Eight” and there can be a definite argument that that film grounds itself in reality a little bit, it doesn’t really have characters that I can latch onto. The characters in “Once Upon a Time in Hollywood” feel raw, they feel like people I would probably run into at one point in my life. Maybe I’m biased since this takes place in Hollywood and I am an aspiring filmmaker and I can picture myself working with people who are similar in some ways to these characters, but my case still stands. “The Hateful Eight” has characters that at times are interesting, but for one reason or another, I just can’t relate to all of them.

And this is why I really enjoyed the main characters of the film, Rick Dalton and Cliff Booth. The two legitimately feel like a best friend pair, and seeing a number of scenes with the two together happened to be entertaining. Whether they were working or hanging out, they just made the movie worth watching. If I had to be honest, when it comes to acting, it’s almost difficult declaring whether DiCaprio or Pitt had the better performance because for one thing they’re both great actors. Not to mention, when you put the two together, they have the perfect recipe for a friendship. Plus, it kind of makes sense since in the movie Booth has to emulate Dalton in productions together, so in a way they have to act like they’re the same person. I’m not saying they are in real life. Both have their individual characteristics and storylines and they hypnotized me. I’ll also point out that the proper execution and quirkiness of said storylines are part of why I would want to go see this in the theater a second time.

And you want to know the best part about this movie? I can’t speak for everybody, but pretty much the entire theater, and this is a lot of people, happened to be dying laughing. This is why I enjoy going to movies with crowds, not to mention in cities (which I did technically for this film) because recent experiences have shown that my urban movie experiences (mainly during early access screenings) have usually gotten better reactions than ones I’d traditionally experience elsewhere. It felt like I was part of the worldwide Tarantino cult, they just accepted me after introducing me to their rituals, and we all came together for an experience of a lifetime.

As for myself, I am kind of in an unfortunate position because I have been exposed to tons of content, and as much as I enjoy watching certain comedies, I often feel like I have “seen it all” or seen enough to know what to expect. Here, I was laughing through a number of scenes, I was appreciating a lot of the dialogue that has been uttered, and it never felt like the movie lost its groove. It was one interesting moment after another. And this all builds up to the big. F*cking. Climax of a lifetime! It is quite literally a Tarantinogasm of super f*cked-up awesomeness on a stick! Is it the best climax or ending in movie history? No, it’s not, but it is by far one of the wildest. I cannot recall the last time, or at least the last recent time, that I laughed as hard as I did during this climax with all the s*it that was going down. I cannot go into it, but the climax alone is worth the price of admission, everything else feels like an appetizer. I, like pretty much everyone else in the world, saw “Avengers: Endgame” this year, and I thought the climax to that, especially as a geek, was fantastic. This ending, to me, wasn’t fantastic. It was bloody phenomenal!

And by the way, speaking of movies I saw this year, one of my other highlights happens to be “John Wick: Chapter 3.” That franchise, as you may know, has a lot of emphasis put on dogs, and the most recent installment manages to continue highlighting their importance to everything that’s going on. In my review for that film, I said it had my favorite dog-related scene of the year. That thought has since changed because “Once Upon a Time in Hollywood” has a scene that I really cannot go into involving a dog. If you have seen the movie, you may know what I am talking about. It’s almost out of left field in the best possible way. Talking about it feels like a sin because it’s something I really want to do, but it feels wrong because, well in this case, spoilers could flood out of my mouth.

Just… See this movie, my gosh it’s f*cking ride.

I will say though…

The film is not perfect.

Yes, I have raved about this movie to death. Both in person and on here, but there is one single, solitary flaw that I have with the film.

And to my disappointment, it kind of involves Margot Robbie’s character of Sharon Tate, because despite how she may have cool scenes, and how she has a relation to one of the film’s characters who is mentioned by name, she almost had no real part in this movie, or at least one that contributes to the bigger picture of what is happening. And I will admit, it was sad to see her in this film after realizing she is watching the last film she will be alive to see herself in. But even with that, her character could have had more depth to her. She didn’t feel lifeless, Robbie portrayed the character very well, and she was charming. Kind of like how in “Suicide Squad,” the movie itself wasn’t the greatest, but Robbie did an excellent job portraying Harley Quinn. I’d probably have to watch the movie again to decide whether or not this storyline was necessary because there is a part of me that does think it is compelling and is a part of this old Hollywood love letter, but also begs to question how needed it really is.

Nevertheless, the movie is still an excitement bomb. It is still one of my favorite movies of the year, and I would INSTANTLY go back to the theater and watch this film again because I saw this film with my dad, we couldn’t stop talking about it on the way home, and he made an interesting comment. He was laughing so hard that he must have missed something. When your film is good enough to possibly allow that to happen, a repeat viewing is inevitable. Will I go back and see the film one more time? Hopefully, but only time will tell. And if I do, I will be really damn excited.

In the end, the hype is real for “Once Upon a Time in Hollywood.” Tarantino once again presents himself as the cinematic mastermind he has always been made out to be. The film utilizes a lot of practical effects to turn Hollywood back fifty years, to say the acting is solid is an understatement, and there are several scenes I will be looking forward to viewing once I see this movie again, because it is absolutely phenomenal. And again, the Sharon Tate thing, I liked certain scenes she was in, but her character almost felt tacked on. I could grow in appreciation for her. After all she’s played by Margot Robbie, who is one of the most beautiful women working in film right now, so who knows? This is not to say she can’t act, because again, she was charming. And there are several films that I have seen this year that are funny. A couple of examples include “Long Shot” and “Fighting with My Family.” But when it comes to comedic timing and writing, this film is most likely going to be the absolute best we are going to get this year in terms of comedy. Between the awesome and brilliantly written final act, the investing opening scenes where we get to know our lovely main duo, and a gag involving dog food, there is so much to enjoy in this one film. I cannot wait to talk more about this film with other people and I cannot wait for this film to come out on Blu-ray. I’m going to give “Once Upon a Time in Hollywood” a very high 9/10. I have a feeling, and it’s just a feeling for now, depending on replay value and how I feel about certain aspects of this film over time, this could increase to a 10. I’m not sure, but this was one of the best looking films of the year, one of the most well shot movies of the year, one of the most interestingly written scripts of the year despite my flak given to Sharon Tate, and one of the most compelling ensembles of the year. But seriously, Tarantino, you are a god and we do not deserve you. Thank you for this orgasmic movie! And if it means anything, I’m pretty sure this has to be the best “9” movie of the decade so far. So a score change may be possible, who knows?

Thanks for reading this review! I just want to let everyone know that next weekend is the release of the “Fast & Furious” spinoff, “Hobbs and Shaw.” I probably won’t see the film right away because I’m going out of state for a night, but I will likely make a commitment to get my ass in the theater at some point. It is a movie that I am looking forward to simply because it looks absurd for all the right reasons, so once I can see it, I will take that opportunity. Be sure to follow Scene Before either with an email or WordPress account so you can stay tuned for more great content! Do you have a Facebook? Check out my Facebook page! You can get all the latest info from your favorite movie reviewing moron regarding upcoming content, new posts, and more! I want to know, did you see “Once Upon a Time in Hollywood?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite Quentin Tarantino movie? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Marvel Cinematic Universe PHASE 4 Plans Announced

mv5bngi1othjyjytyjk2zi00nzcwlwfknmitndk0ywq2otu5ogrmxkeyxkfqcgdeqxvyndqxnjcxnq4040._v1_sx1777_cr001777747_al_

Hey everyone! Jack Drees here! You thought we were in the endgame? Think again, because, to my lack of surprise, as well as others perhaps, the Marvel Cinematic Universe is not going anywhere, and as part of this year’s San Diego Comic-Con, Kevin Feige and crew have officially announced their gameplan going forward in regards to movies and television. While I could not make it to San Diego this year (just like every other year), I had the pleasure of receiving a number of these announcements through social media, which is something Captain Marvel should have brushed up on by now.

This first announcement, doesn’t relate to what some would call “phase 4,” but it happens around that certain timeline and takes place in the same universe, so why not leave it in? Anyway, as you may or may not know, Marvel is finishing up their series “Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D..” It’s a series that I tried watching when it first started, but for one reason or another, I just couldn’t latch onto it. It just didn’t work for me. The show will begin its seventh season during the 2019-20 television season, and will air for 13 episodes. However, if you are caught up with the series, you’d know that season 6 is still in progress, so the show still has time left before ABC dusts it away from its current lineup.

Speaking of television, Marvel in general is seemingly changing the norm of how they release their television programming. Before now, they would release various MCU-related content on ABC such as the recently mentioned “Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.,” “Agent Carter,” and the short-lived “Inhumans.” Netflix also had a fair share of content, all of which was recently cancelled such as “Iron Fist,” “Jessica Jones,” “Luke Cage,” and to what I believe is to a lot of people’s surprise, “Daredevil.” These platforms, for all I know, could lose the ability to air new Marvel content for awhile whereas the TV channel Freeform, and streaming services Hulu and the yet to be released Disney+ are going to be the big three for some time. Speaking of Disney+, Marvel announced a plethora of shows to be exclusively released on the upcoming service.

For the record, Disney+ is expected to be released during the fall. So just a reminder, none of these shows will be available on day one.

The first show to premiere on Disney+ is going to be “The Falcon and the Winter Soldier.” As you can tell by the title, the series revolves around the known characters played by actors Anthony Mackie and Sebastian Stan. It is expected to start filming October 2019 and premiere in August 2020. While there are not many details about the series just yet, Mackie and Stan have previously wanted to do their own spinoff film at some point, particularly in the style of a buddy cop story. So who knows? Maybe this series could have some sort of comedic buddy vibe. But only time will tell.

Moving onto 2021 programming, up next we have “WandaVision,” which is short for the characters Wanda Maximoff and Vision meshed together. This series is going to star actors Elizabeth Olsen and Paul Bettany as the characters we have previously come to know throughout the Infinity Saga. Although I must point out. This takes place after “Avengers: Endgame,” and Vision died in “Infinity War” only to never come back to life. So my question is… How will they allow him to return? Let me guess, time travel. Because now if the Marvel universe has a problem. Boop! You got a time machine! Want to save Nick Fury from losing an eye? Boom! You got a a time machine! Want to stop Tony Stark’s home from being destroyed like it was in “Iron Man 3?” Boom! You got a time machine! Want to give Captain America the most advanced pop culture lessons of his life? Boom! You got a time machine! Granted, there’s probably more to it, but a time travel element would not be surprising. The show will hit Disney+ in Spring 2021.

Also coming in Spring 2021 is a “Loki” series. Without going into much detail, because this does involve a spoiler for “Avengers: Endgame,” which as of writing this, is still in theaters, it will involve a Loki of the past. That’s all I’ll say. The series will of course star Tom Hiddleston. I don’t know if I am going to watch any of these series, but I think out of all the series on this list, I feel like this is the one I’d be least likely to watch. It almost seems like an idea from a think tank meeting (even though a number of these shows feel the same way). “Remember that mysterious guy from ‘Thor’ who keeps dying and coming back to life? Nobody knows if he’s good or evil? Let’s not deal with any new characters, let’s use this guy some more! Yay!” The way I wrote that sounds generous, but when I imagine it, it sounds like a business meeting all involving out of shape guys in suits smoking cigars.

OK… I take my last statement back, this is a series I’d probably watch. Granted, I don’t want to pay for Disney+, I don’t see any reason to. Plus, as someone who wants to avoid witnessing Disney’s plan for world domination put into action, I want to spend as little money towards them as possible. Although I kinda do want to go to Disneyland to see Galaxy’s Edge the more I think about it. Nevertheless, the next series is “What If…?” For those of you who don’t know, “What If…?” is a franchise that creates and realizes perhaps unlikely or alternate scenarios related to Marvel characters. Some examples from comics include: “What if the Fantastic Four all had the same power?,” “What if Captain America had been elected president?,” and “What if Jane Foster had found the hammer of Thor?.” While I’m not getting Disney+, if they are ever to release any of these shows on DVD or Blu-ray I am very likely to pick up “What If…?” simply for the concept. The stories presented in the show will not affect the MCU’s timeline, but merely exist just to answer questions through the power of imagination. It is simply something that just provides a unique take of some sort.

Hawkeye in the MCU is an “interesting” character to say the least, because just about every time he appeared in an MCU movie when he first started, I did not care about him as much as the other characters. Then I saw “Endgame” and thought he was one of the best characters of the whole thing. Coincidentally, of the upcoming shows on Disney+, “Hawkeye” is one of them. Also, according to what I have gathered, this series will introduce Kate Bishop, who in the comics is the first woman to earn the Hawkeye title. She’s also a member of the Young Avengers. Here, this show will seemingly spend some time on allowing Jeremy Renner’s Hawkeye to pass the torch to this younger character. The question is… Will I care about her? Or will she just be another boring bow and arrow fetishist?

That’s it for TV shows. I’ll probably watch NONE of them. Mainly because I feel that the way that everyone is trying to push streaming service upon streaming service towards the consumers is going to eventually make streaming as a whole a significantly worse deal than cable. My family and I have not cut the cord, and honestly, I’m happy. Especially considering how I still have my game shows (streaming IS NOT a good alternative if you are a game show fan for the most part), plus it’s nice to watch a new episode of a show and have it feel like an event, whereas an episode or two of a show, or a whole season, drops on Amazon or Hulu and it’s almost like you unintentionally DVRed something. Plus, I enjoy my livetweeting. It makes me feel like I am part of a community. Another reason why I’ll probably miss out on all these shows is because I REVIEW MOVIES DAMMIT! Movies are a top priority of mine and because I watch and review them excessively, I barely have time for TV. And speaking of movies, let’s reveal what Marvel has planned for that realm of entertainment in phase 4.

First up for movies is a project that I think a good number of people know has been in full swing, “Black Widow.” The plot and details are mostly unknown at this time, but Scarlett Johansson, the woman that I have a crush on who says she should be allowed to play trees, well then, if that’s the case… Vin Diesel? Watch out, you might be fired soon! She is returning as the title character who we have seen in several parts of the MCU such as the “Iron Man,” “Avengers,” and “Captain America” franchises. From speculation, I would imagine this would take place long before the main events of the MCU, kind of like in “Captain Marvel.” I am also willing to bet this will be a grittier film in the franchise (even though they aren’t going for an R rating), while also trying to be fun. After all, Black Widow isn’t really a superhero, kind of like Iron Man, she just plays with toys. And based on what we have seen from her character in comics and movies, this is very likely to be a spy flick. If you ask me, this is not my most anticipated spy-related film of next year, I’d reserve that spot to “Tenet,” directed by Christopher Nolan, but I’ve been eager to see a “Black Widow” solo film for quite some time, so I’m excited!

Plus, ScarJo is a dream girl. Just saying. The film will be released on May 1st, 2020.

Up next is a newcomer to the MCU, specifically, “Eternals.” Some big name actors in the film include Salma Hayek (Grown Ups, Desparado), Kumail Nanjiani (Stuber, Silicon Valley), Angelina Jolie (Kung Fu Panda, Mr. and Mrs. Smith), Richard Madden (Rocketman, Game of Thrones), among others. It is going to be about a bunch of eternally living beings who have spent infinite portions of their lives fighting a force of evil referred to as The Deviants. One character, Makkari, played by Lauren Ridloff is going to be the MCU’s first deaf hero. The film will be released on November 6th, 2020.

The third movie is one that I personally think will be a mega hit at the box office. It’s not to say the others won’t be, but if “Black Panther” from phase 3 has proven anything, it’s that if you put a “visually different” person at the forefront of a superhero project, people will see it. That’s because this movie we’re talking about is “Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings.” I don’t know if the final product will have a title this long, but only time will tell. Then again, it’s not as much of a mouthful as say “Percy Jackson and the Olympians: The Lightning Thief.” The main reason why I’d say this film has a bonkers chance of success is because Shang-Chi is Chinese, and in this film, he is going to be played by Chinese Canadian actor Simu Liu. Not to mention, based on comic-related images I have seen, this movie could be a visual treat. Another thing to consider is the Chinese movie market. If this movie is as visually impressive as I think it will be, not to mention as honorable to the Chinese culture as I think some would want it to be, I think a lot of people will go see this in the theater. China, at least to my knowledge, seems to go to a lot of spectacle type films. Some historical examples that come to mind include “Transformers; Age of Extinction,” which to be fair, was partially shot in China, and “Warcraft.” While “Transformers” is popular in the United States, “Warcraft’s” domestic returns led to its underwhelming final box office total despite making more than twice its budget. But it couldn’t reach the total $450 million needed to completely break even. But if anything has been proven, Marvel is an automatic success in the United States. In the US and Canada, “Black Panther,” a culturally significant film for the African community, managed to make over $700 million, which for those countries specifically, is actually more than “Infinity War.” But with the massive potential for winning over China and perhaps other somewhat related Asian communities, plus Marvel’s domestic success, it has a chance of being possibly a bigger success than “Black Panther.” The movie is scheduled for a February 12th, 2021 release.

Another film I saw coming was “Doctor Strange 2,” and we got it! But it technically has a more specific title, “Doctor Strange and the Multiverse of Madness.” Based on what I’ve heard, Scott Derrickson could be coming back to direct this sequel. It is also suggested that Benedict Cumberbatch and Benedict Wong, or in this case, just for fun, I’ll call them Team Benedict, will be returning to reprise their roles. One thing that I found interesting though is that Wanda Maximoff will be in the be in the movie as well, and it will be tied directly to the Disney+ series “WandaVision.”

OK… You gotta be kidding me. I know people give flak to DC for how they do their movies, but at least you don’t have to watch a freaking TV show to perhaps understand or comprehend what is happening in one of the DCEU’s films! Guess I’ll just read the Wikipedia entries for the WandaVision episodes, because I ain’t paying for Disney+. But one thing that does intrigue me, is the notion that this is going to be a more horror-esque movie compared to a lot of the other MCU installments. So who knows? Maybe this could have a wacky funhouse vibe, or maybe be the MCU’s version of “The New Mutants.” Although now that I think about it, “The New Mutants” could possibly end up being another version of this movie depending on how many more times it gets pushed back. Man, that movie premiere is gonna be one big realistic version of a FaceApp demo. This is definitely a movie I would want to see on an IMAX screen, maybe in 3D. Because I saw the original “Doctor Strange” in IMAX 3D, which made for one of the best visual trips of 2016. This film is expected to drop into theaters May 7th, 2021.

But my one request for this movie. JUST GIVE A MORE MEMORABLE VILLAIN. Then again, it’s Marvel, it’s not their strong suit.

When 2015 first started, the YouTube channel RedLetterMedia made a video where they jokingly predicted that we’d eventually get a fourth “Thor” movie called “Thor 4: More Thor.” Believe it or not, “Brooklyn Nine-Nine” used that title in their show. Unfortunately, we’re not getting “Thor 4: More Thor.” But we are getting a fourth “Thor” movie titled “Thor: Love and Thunder.” I have mixed thoughts on this movie, because I REALLY enjoy 2011’s “Thor,” probably more than I should. I know some people don’t like it, but I enjoyed Thor’s character arch and Loki was a solid villain. Granted, the followup in 2013, “Thor: The Dark World,” is in the conversation to be my least favorite Marvel Cinematic Universe movie. And even though “Thor: Ragnarok” was… “better,” it’s not what I wanted. I thought it was too comedic, and some of the jokes didn’t land. While it is visually stunning, somewhat appealing from a story perspective, the tone just didn’t work. Basically, Asgard is in a state beyond repair in this film. It could have been dark, gritty, maybe a little funny, but not like it was “Deadpool” for kids. I don’t think Taika Waititi is a bad director, in fact, I thought he would be a better suit for something like “Guardians of the Galaxy,” but he did a “Thor” film instead. It just didn’t stick the landing for me. I’m hoping “Thor: Love and Lightning” will be better, but from what I can imagine, it could be tonally similar to the previous “Thor” installment, which if that’s the case, I’m just hoping that the story actually fits the tone.

One thing that could be interesting is that Jane Foster, played by Natalie Portman, is making a comeback. And similar to a comics storyline, Foster is going to be taking on the mantle of Thor. And based on visuals presented from San Diego Comic-Con, it looks like her character will be holding Mjölnir at some point during the film. As long as Kat Dennings doesn’t show up to play her character from “2 Broke Girls” everything should be rather fine and dandy. The film is predicted to be out November 5th, 2021, so I demand there should be at least one reference to “V For Vendetta,” ESPECIALLY since Natalie Portman is returning!

Now let me just say, I have no idea when these next films are going to be released, part of me is willing to bet that one or two of them, are not even in phase 4, but Marvel Studios chairman Kevin Feige has confirmed that these movies are in development, therefore we are going to cover them. So let’s continue!

Remember the 1998 film “Blade?” Guess what? Marvel is getting to do another project with the character. I personally can’t say I have seen “Blade,” but part of me is willing to imagine that this will be a somewhat different take on the character because the original trilogy was rated R, whereas all the MCU films so far have gotten a PG-13. If you ask me, I would not mind seeing an R version of the character in the MCU, kind of like with Black Widow, but you cannot have everything. One thing that does intrigue me though is that Mahershala Ali (Moonlight, Green Book) is attached to playing the lead role. He’s a fantastic actor who has a ton of range, and he actually pitched this sort of idea to Marvel Studios through a call. Coincidentally, Ali has been attached to a couple of alternate recent comic book-based products including Sony’s “Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse,” and Netflix’s own MCU show, “Luke Cage.”

There’s not much to say on this next film, but I KNEW this was gonna be made at some point, perhaps soon. Why? Because again, it made SO MUCH money. I guess this is what happens when Disney remakes “The Lion King” for a new generation. Wait… I’m talking about “Black Panther 2.” There’s not much to say about this movie yet, but Ryan Coogler suggested that he’d write and direct this film, which does intrigue me because I thought he did a rather decent job with the first one despite its flaws. So… what Disney movie are they gonna retread next? Are they gonna do “Dumbo” because Black Panther is learning to fly for some reason? Are they gonna do a film in the style of “Wreck-It Ralph” where it is revealed that Wakanda is in an arcade cabinet? Are they gonna do one like “Frozen” where Shuri or Okoye just breaks out into an annoying catchy tune? By the way, screw “Frozen,” that movie can rot in hell!

Up next is a film that was supposed to come out in 2020, but based on recent controversy, that’s not happening anymore. Specifically, “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3.” This is a film that I am honestly curious to see, because while I imagine this could potentially be a capper for a trilogy, director James Gunn has previously exposed that this installment is not meant to be a powerhouse of emotion. It is still going to be fun and lively. But if you have been following the news in terms of film recently, you’d know that Gunn was fired by Disney/Marvel over the resurfacing of less than family friendly tweets. Tweets that even he admits, he’s not proud of. If you ask me, I believe James Gunn is a competent director, who may have deserved the criticism that he received, but I’m not sure if Disney should have gone as far as firing him, especially when you consider how much he has changed over the years in terms of his outlook. Nevertheless, I am quite curious to see how this upcoming “Guardians” film turns out, and I do have a shortlist of soundtrack ideas, but I think I should save that for another time. The movie is not expected to begin filming until 2020, but that’s because James Gunn is currently doing a DC movie, specifically “The Suicide Squad.”

Here’s another no-brainer, “Captain Marvel 2.” When your film has the sixth biggest opening of all time, you know you have to make a followup. I’ll be honest, the first “Captain Marvel” did not work for me. I thought the chemistry between Fury and Danvers was kind of hit and miss. The scene where “Just a Girl” plays honestly, while I guess it was trying to be empowering, felt really off for an action scene that was most likely trying to be kick-ass. The final fight, which I imagine was trying to be funny, just ended up being questionable to me. And don’t even get me started on Goose the Cat! But, we are getting another movie, and I’m honestly hoping it is better than this one, but only time will tell. I like Brie Larson as an actress, but when she plays Captain Marvel, she honestly sounds like she’s only been in straight to DVD content. Come on, Brie! You won an Oscar for “Room!” Show me the magic! She did alright in “Endgame,” but she was not in the movie that much so there is that to consider. Then again, I’m a straight white male. So is my opinion even valid to begin with?

Another film on the list of “in development” is a third “Spider-Man” movie. By the way, by the time you finish reading this post, five more “Spider-Man” movies will be released, because they keep cranking them out! I finally saw “Spider-Man: Far From Home” the other day, and honestly, after seeing that film, I’d say a third one HAS to be made. And without going into detail, Kevin Feige suggested that the mid-credits scene from that film implies the third film will involve “a Peter Parker story that has never been done before on film.” And it does not surprise me that this is happening. I believe Sony is already satisfied with making their own “Spider-Man” movies in their universe and still enjoys the success they can get from spinning their webs in the MCU. Nevertheless, can’t wait. But if I had any requests, make sure the word “home” is in the title. That way I don’t have to end up confusing “Spider-Man” trilogies and can refer to this as the “Home” trilogy. Seriously! Even if it simply means that there is a minute of the two of the film where we find Peter Parker watching a Mets game, and for that reason it is called “Home Run,” it would still work because the other two movies have the word “home” in their titles too!

The next two films are a couple of projects that I think a lot of people have been asking for. Why? Because Disney just acquired 21st Century Fox recently, meaning they have retained the rights to a couple of big name franchises. One example is “X-Men.” I have no idea how the film will present itself. If anything, it is definitely going to be a complete reboot, staying away from the timeline Fox originally showcased to audiences since the early 2000s. After all, while I didn’t go see “Dark Phoenix,” probably just like everyone else in the world, maybe that movie tarnished the franchise enough to say, “Screw it, it’s over.” But some movie franchises or IPs are like Jenga, you can end the game by collapsing the tower, but you can always start a new one by rebuilding it. Maybe “X-Men” has a place in the MCU. And honestly, if a couple of the phase 1 heroes are going away, I think this is the perfect time to add in new heroes, because if they were still there, I’d honestly worry about clutter in the MCU. Granted, even with them showing up now, that is still a worry. But I also have a slight intrigue as to what this mega franchise can bring to the cinematic universe.

Speaking of Fox, one other franchise they once had, not to mention wasted, is “Fantastic Four.” Since Marvel has the rights to them, they can now possibly… NOT screw it up this time… Hopefully? I imagine it’ll be good, but I’m keeping experience in my back pocket. It’s in different hands, but for all I know, despite its popularity in the comic book world, maybe “Fantastic Four” is simply cursed as a movie franchise. But I am curious about this film and how it’ll turn out, and perhaps a little more excited about this than “X-Men.” Will Dr. Doom be the main villain again? Will the movie have the four in the middle of its title? Or… How about this? How about we get Chris Evans to play Johnny Storm again? Do it just to get some other character in the movie for a second. Maybe the group will be going around New York City grabbing lunch or something and they run into Peter Parker walking with Ned, which leads to Peter pointing at Johnny saying, “Hey! You look like someone I know!” I highly doubt that will happen, but it certainly would make for a proper more realistic “What If…?” scenario. Plus, with Stan Lee gone we’re gonna need new cameo ideas.

That’ll probably do it for all of the MCU-related announcements for phase 4, and again, a lot of these films and TV shows are in development. So who knows? One could get pushed back, maybe one gets cancelled. Perhaps it ends up being a part of an eventual phase 5. Nevertheless, I’m excited for a large number of these projects, and hopefully they will all end up being good! Also, James Gunn, I know it is a little late, but welcome back. I want to know, is there something I’m missing from this list? I think I’ve covered all the ground, after all I have 4,000 words inserted into this thing! Or, what is something that you want to see from the MCU as a TV series, as a movie, as a concept? It doesn’t even have to be for phase 4 if you want it someplace else. Let me know down below! Thanks for reading this post! Pretty soon I am going to be reviewing Quentin Tarantino’s “Once Upon a Time in Hollywood,” which is out this upcoming weekend. I’m going to one of my local theaters for their first screening of the film in 35mm, can’t wait! Also, speaking of Tarantino, be sure to stay tuned for my final installment in my Quentin Tarantino review series, “The Hateful Eight.” Be sure to follow Scene Before either with an email or WordPress account so you can stay tuned for more great content! Also, if you could do me a favor, like this post, share it around with those you know, it really helps me out. And speaking of that, like my Facebook Page! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Spider-Man: Far From Home (2019): The Truth Is… I Am Spider-Man

mv5bzjbhywnimdqtyjrmyy00nzezltg1mdytyzg3yzrkzmrkyjy3xkeyxkfqcgdeqxvynjg2njqwmdq40._v1_sy1000_cr006741000_al_

Well, I waited over two weeks, I finally get to say it. “Spider-Man: Far From Home” is directed by Jon Watts (Cop Car, The Onion News Network), who also was the director and one of the writers behind the preceding film in this franchise, “Spider-Man: Homecoming.” This film stars Tom Holland (The Lost City of Z, In the Heart of the Sea), Samuel L. Jackson (Pulp Fiction, Snakes on a Plane), Zendaya (The Greatest Showman, Shake It Up), Cobie Smulders (How I Met Your Mother, Safe Haven), Jon Favreau (The Jungle Book, Chef), Jacob Batalon (Blood Fest, Every Day), Martin Starr (Silicon Valley, Knocked Up), J.B. Smoove (Uncle Drew, Hall Pass) with Marisa Tomei (My Cousin Vinny, Chaplin) and Jake Gyllenhaal (Nightcrawler, Stronger). This is the 23rd film in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, the second Spider-Man film in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, and the eighth big screen “Spider-Man” film of the 21st century. So much for originality! Yay! This film continues the adventures of Tom Holland’s Peter Parker in a post universe-wide snappening setting. As everyone adapts to a world that has changed forever, Peter Parker and his classmates are going on a field trip to Europe, only to run into chaos through unexpected encounters including Mysterio, and Nick Fury himself.

When it comes to Spider-Man, he is by far my favorite superhero of all time. Spider-Man is the perfect embodiment of your average teenager trying to live a normal life, but various struggles and obstacles beyond their control manage to get in their way. As for Tom Holland’s Spider-Man, my love for him is unbelievable. While I wasn’t the biggest fan of “Homecoming,” I really enjoyed him in other films including “Captain America: Civil War” and “Avengers: Infinity War.” If I had to a superhero to relate to more than any other, Spider-Man is definitely number one. This is a reason why I really enjoyed a movie like Sam Raimi’s “Spider-Man 2,” because it emphasizes the internal conflict of what Peter wants vs. what he needs. That film by the way, is my favorite comic book flick of all time. And in some ways, “Spider-Man: Far From Home” sort of takes me back to the time frame of Sam Raimi’s films.

Mary Jane has a screen presence in this film that I personally did not expect.

This movie has the result of Sandman getting a makeover due to incoming tides.

Not to mention, the film is freaking awesome!

In fact, you know how “Avengers: Endgame” perhaps stands as the most anticipated film? Like, ever? As the release for “Endgame” got closer and closer, my hype levels increased. Can’t say that for “Spider-Man: Far From Home.” I saw the first trailer, thought it sucked, and while going into the film, I appreciated this film’s efforts to try reminding everyone of the effects of “Endgame,” I was still somewhat nervous. Then I came out of the film, got home, and made the following tweet.

For all I know, this could be due to just seeing the film, my opinion could change, but I felt a bigger impact through the smaller and slightly more individualistic story of “Spider-Man: Far From Home” than I did for perhaps what has been marketed as the biggest geekfest in history. But much like that giant nerdgasm-inducing experience, “Spider-Man: Far From Home” is not perfect.

Much like “Avengers: Endgame,” “Spider-Man: Far From Home” suffers from minor pacing issues, but similar to “Endgame,” “Far From Home” has pacing issues which I can live with simply because of everything else that is happening. And this is not an issue in every sense of the word, but this movie has a lot of moments in its script that are incredibly convenient to what is happening on screen. But at the same time, I feel like that is one of the big improvements I can give to “Far From Home” when comparing it to “Homecoming.” Why? One of my biggest issues with “Homecoming” had to do with the script in a crapton of ways, one of which included the unbelievable amount of comedy inserted. And honestly, there was not a lot that landed. When it comes to Spidey’s quips and one-liners in “Homecoming,” they don’t feel as hysterical as they could be. I could tell that Tom Holland was trying his hardest with the material that may have sounded great on paper, but for one reason or another, the jokes just didn’t stick the landing for me. Here however, there seems to be a lot less comedy, and the bits of comedy they have in this film, when present, completely works. Because let’s face it, this movie is the first installment in the MCU that has to reflect on the past couple of “Avengers” flicks, which honestly would present the need for a slightly more serious script. Plus, Sony’s distributing this film instead of Disney. When the mouse is away, the spiders will play!

Also, while I keep talking about “Spider-Man: Homecoming” as if it happens to be the last “Spider-Man” film to be released, keep in mind that we just got “Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse,” which many consider to be the best “Spider-Man” film to date. While I don’t know whether or not I enjoyed this film or “Spider-Verse” more, I can confirm that when I saw “Spider-Verse,” it was perhaps the biggest acid trip of a superhero film I have ever watched. Guess what? I might need to rethink that statement, and I won’t go into why, BUT LET ME HAVE YOU KNOW THAT “SPIDER-MAN: FAR FROM HOME” IS ONE HELL OF A DRUG! If you drop acid before this movie, I wish you luck on getting out of the movie theater when the film ends because there are a couple of head-spinning moments that kind of left me speechless.

And you know something? Another shocker for this film to me is MJ, because when I saw her in “Homecoming,” I did not like her, I thought she some clowny individual who barely had a personality. This time there is depth to her, and even though I was nervous back in 2016 when they announced who was playing MJ, specifically Zendaya, she pulled it off in this movie! Mainly because she had a take on it that made the character her own. After all, her name isn’t really Mary Jane, it’s actually Michelle. If she was a redhead, I’d want the character a certain way. But I appreciate Zendaya’s take not only because her character was well written, not just because she did her part with excellence, but because it did not feel like the type of MJ I thought she would be, which would be a black person trying to playing the typical white Mary Jane, almost as if it were a s*itty impression. Zendaya has her individual flair which brought some pizzazz to the final product. Rock on! Granted, seeing her in the beginning of the film was a little sloppy, in fact, that’s not the only issue I have with the start of the film (there are a couple minor moments leaning towards cringe), but as it went on, I began to admire her.

And the surprises don’t even end there, because this time around I actually liked Ned! If you don’t remember my “Homecoming” review, this is what I said about Ned.

“One character in this movie goes by the name of Ned Leeds, he was played by Jacob Batalon, and there was a point in this movie where I wanted some sort of technology that existed which could allow me to jump into a movie’s universe. I could go into this one, find Ned, and give him the finger!”

You know what? Forget about that statement, f*ck it! Because in this movie, Ned is the opposite of annoying. In fact, he’s pretty charming at certain times. There’s this portion of the film dedicated to this relationship he has with this one girl, which honestly, had its ups and downs, but there are moments when I can approve of it.

Also, if anything, it reminded me of the Schmoopie relationship from “Seinfeld.”

And while I won’t dive too deep into this, another problem I had with “Homecoming” that somehow gets fixed here is my displeasure with the AI from that film. Remember Karen? I do. And I don’t like her. While she could have been charming in that film, she had a few quirks that did not sit well with me. Karen does not make a return here and I won’t go into detail, but there’s an AI here that is honestly charming, and even sets up an entertaining and thrilling sequence on a bus.

Moving onto our main character, Peter Parker is back and now the important question is this: What would be a bigger feat for him than going to space? Europe? That’s nothing! Any idiot can fly a plane to Europe! But nevertheless, Parker is vacationing in Europe, and now he has to deal with a side mission, which takes away from whatever relaxation he can get. This is why I really enjoy the character of Spider-Man, because other heroes, specifcally in the MCU, always seem to be built with this sort of drive to save the world. Granted, with an interpretation such as Tony Stark, maybe he’d get a little drained from it and prefer to lay low for awhile like he did in “Iron Man 3,” but there are not many moments where I have seen an MCU hero flat out refuse to do hero work. When the Avengers got together, just about everyone showed up. Thor always seemed to have a knack for defending Asgard with a hammer by his side. Captain America would always be willing to sacrifice himself for the greater good. But Spider-Man… Needs his alone time. While in some instances, I imagine this would make a hero look like a dick or a coward, it works for Peter Parker because he’s just a normal, likable, not to mention, relatable kid. He just wants a normal life despite various perks of being a superhero. In fact, Peter’s story and actions in this film kind of remind me of what is like to be me when I was younger. I had my crushes, perhaps constantly imagined plans to get together with said crushes, and if you know me, they did not work out, and I’m fine with that. By the way ladies, I’m single! Plus, Peter in this film has to deal with following in the footsteps of those above him, which is something that I did think about out sometimes when I was younger. Granted, probably not a lot, but the thought definitely did come up in my head once or twice.

I also really liked Mysterio in this film, they managed to go in a direction with the character that I for one personally did not expect, and as for Jake Gyllenhaal, he was basically perfect casting for this role. I remember back in the day I wanted him to be the next Batman if Affleck were to leave. Granted, he’s not, but still. But even though I never imagined Jake Gyllenhaal as Mysterio, I cannot help but dig him. He did a really good job, and I love his costume! It’s amazing!

Now despite what the box office can make me think, there are still people out there who have yet to see “Avengers: Endgame.” But in “Endgame,” there is a lot that happens that leads to this film’s events. In fact, the beginning of this film is a tribute to a couple of major characters who have encountered a common barrier in “Endgame.” And this movie, while I won’t go into context, shows off perhaps the most heart-wrenching footage of the snappening I’ll ever see in my life. If you thought that collection of deaths on Wakanda was disturbing, I’ll remind you, the effects to me were personally diminished (although still slightly powerful) because going into “Infinity War,” I kinda knew we were going to see people die. Granted, I didn’t know who, how, or when, but I knew something was coming. What made it really disturbing is that it was just a bunch of innocent people going through their everyday lives. Granted, that was sort of already shown during “Infinity War’s” end credits, but this movie did it better because for all I know it was shot on somebody’s phone or some other everyday camera. It almost reminds me of the found footage movie “Cloverfield” the more I think about it, because in a way, I felt immersed into such a disturbing situation, not to mention from a rather shaky first person perspective.

In the end, “Spider-Man: Far From Home” can be summed up in one word. Fun. It has a vibe that is almost reminiscent of Sam Raimi’s “Spider-Man” films while also managing to be a product of its own. The movie, in more ways than one, made me feel young again. I talked to death about the relatable teen year experiences this film provided, but I grew up watching Sam Raimi’s “Spider-Man” films and in some ways, this film managed to take me back to when I was somewhere between 6 to 14 years old. “Spider-Man 2” still stands as my favorite comic book movie ever, but I cannot deny that this is definitely another solid second “Spider-Man” movie. As I was writing this review, I’ve been having a constant debate in my head on whether or not this is better than “Spider-Verse,” and this debate is far from over. I’m willing to bet that this won’t end for awhile. I’d probably have to rewatch both films to know for sure. But if I had to make my thoughts on this film as finalized as possible, I’d say that unlike “Spider-Verse,” I felt that “Spider-Man: Far From Home,” while just as entertaining, if not more, had a greater quantity of issues that stood out to me. So with that being said, “Spider-Man: Far From Home,” despite “Endgame” being a more conclusive chapter to the entire three phase saga of the MCU, is a damn fine way for Marvel to cap off their third phase. I’m going to give “Spider-Man: Far From Home” a high 8/10. I love the constant joke about how we are getting too many “Spider-Man” movies or movies that have Spidey in them. Well, if we’re getting films that are this good, why should they stop making them? I’ll wait for the next “The Amazing Spider-Man 2” and then we’ll revisit this topic later. And I also will say, I almost forgot to consider this about “Spider-Verse,” it basically was a game-changer for the comic book genre in cinema. The animation style was unlike anything I have seen on the big screen up until that point. How many live-action “Spider-Man” films do we have right now? I don’t care about real numbers at this point. Let’s just go with umpteen because it sounds kind of fun. Thanks for reading this review! I just want to let everyone know that next Monday, July 22nd, will be the release date for my final Quentin Tarantino review series installment, specifically, “The Hateful Eight.” I’ll be reviewing this film just in time for Tarantino’s new film coming out next week, “Once Upon a Time in Hollywood.” Stay tuned!

Also, if you love “Spider-Man” like I do, or if you simply want to know more of my thoughts on the “Spider-Man” movies, I posted a review for every big screen “Spider-Man” film since the original Sam Raimi flick from 2002. If you want to check these out, click the links down below! Be sure to follow Scene Before through a WordPress account or email so you can stay tuned for more great content! Also, I have a Facebook page, if you could do me a favor and give it a like or follow it would be very much appreciated! I want to know, did you see “Spider-Man: Far From Home?” What did you think about it? Or, as painful of a reminder as it may be, this is the first MCU film without a Stan Lee cameo. RIP, by the way. So with that being said, what is your personal favorite Stan Lee cameo? If you ask me, I’d go with the one where he tries to get into Reed and Susan’s wedding in “Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer,” Tony Stank from “Captain America: Civil War,” the bus driving scene from “Avengers: Infinity War,” or even though it’s not Marvel, “Teen Titans Go! To the Movies,” which basically takes the Stan Lee cameo and manages fetishize it to the core. Nevertheless, let me know your pick, that way your name will make a random appearance as a cameo in this post! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Spider-Man (2002)

Spider-Man 2 (2004)

Spider-Man 3 (2007)

The Amazing Spider-Man (2012)

The Amazing Spider-Man 2 (2014)

Spider-Man: Homecoming (2017)

Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse (2018)