Sony

Blade Runner 2049 (2017): Is the 35 Years Worth the Wait?

Posted on by Jack Drees

mv5bmjm3njcxndm4ml5bml5banbnxkftztgwmji4ndizmzi-_v1_sy1000_cr006481000_al_

“Blade Runner 2049” is directed by Denis Villeneuve (Prisoners, Arrival), stars Ryan Gosling (La La Land, Crazy Stupid Love) and Harrison Ford (Star Wars, Raiders of the Lost Ark), and is the sequel to 1982’s “Blade Runner” which was directed by Ridley Scott (Gladiator, The Martian), a movie considered by many people to be one of the greatest sci-fi films, if not one of the greatest films, ever made. “Blade Runner 2049” takes place in the year of 2049 in the US state of California, the plot is that there’s a young blade runner (Ryan Gosling) who discovers a long-kept secret which leads him into tracking down former blade runner Rick Deckard (Harrison Ford), who’s been out of sight for three decades.

When it comes to the original “Blade Runner,” it’s a movie I haven’t actually watched until fairly recently. For the record, when I say that, I’ll have you know I didn’t even watch the original version of the film, which by the way the version I watched which isn’t original, is the one I viewed five times at this point. I say that because if you know this movie’s history, you’d be aware of how it has received endless cuts. In 1982, they started out with a movie that not many people saw but was on the rise to prove its influence to film. I mean, seriously! If you look at films and material which came out after it, you’ll understand what I’m talking about. Just check out “Ghost in the Shell,” “The Matrix,” the “Star Wars” prequels, “The Fifth Element,” all of these just look at them and don’t tell me you don’t see a bit of “Blade Runner” in them. The redo of the TV series “Battlestar Galactica,” according to the producers, cited “Blade Runner” was a major source of influence to the series. It has also been parodied in material such as the British science fiction TV show “Red Dwarf.” Based on what I have told you, it’s not surprising that people revere this movie. Overtime it has gained a cult following, and has been considered one of the greatest science fiction films, not to mention one of the greatest films in general, ever made. It was nominated for two Oscars (Best Effects, Visual Effects, Best Art Decoration-Set Decoration), it was also nominated for a Golden Globe (Best Original Score-Motion Picture), which I wholeheartedly approve of because the score is probably one of my favorites in movie history. BAFTA also praised the score by nominating it, which was one of the eight nominations the movie received in that particular show. By the way, it won three. It currently has a spot on the IMDb top 250, it’s on AFI’s 10 Top 10 as the #6 science fiction film, and IGN put it as the #1 spot in its “Top 25 Sci-Fi Films of All Time.” I watched the film multiple times now, specifically “The Final Cut,” and it gets better with multiple watches. So, how is “Blade Runner 2049?” Holy crap, this movie was an experience. I went to see this movie in IMAX, and I don’t regret it, because this is one of those films that MUST be seen in a theater! You know how I kept talking about “Dunkirk” and what an amazing experience that was? This was just as great! And with that I’m gonna give you guys a little sidenote…

I don’t use Netflix, in fact, I’d go as far as to say that Netflix is slightly overrated. I may be biased because they killed Blockbuster Video, a significant memory from my childhood, but I’m gonna let you know a little information about them that you may or may not be aware of at the moment. Netflix may be known for its selection of movies and TV programs to watch which are available at your fingertips, but they’ve also done original content. They’ve done TV shows such as “House of Cards,” “Orange is the New Black,” and “Stranger Things,” all of which received positive reviews and a following by many people. That’s not to say all Netflix shows were considered watchable, there are disliked ones such as “Iron Fist” despite it having a following. They’ve also done movies such as “Gerald’s Game,” “The Ridiculous Six,” and “Beasts of No Nation.” What I’m going to say next is rather unnecessary for their TV shows, but can fit for their movies. When it comes to Netflix movies, they go straight to the streaming service. There’s no theatrical release for it, it just hops straight on over to the service, so people might get a theatrical experience depending on their setup, but chances are someone might end up watching the movie on their laptop without headphones, or heck, even their phone! Critically acclaimed director Christopher Nolan agrees with me when say that this is bullcrap, because Netflix is missing out on a opportunity for their movies to be shown in theaters, where audiences pay money to go see it in an immersive setting. Want to know something else? There’s an event called Cinemacon, which is a convention dedicated to film, it shows off what upcoming movies have in store, it also does screenings for flicks, stars show up, and it also has has a focus on cinemas themselves and technologies related to them. When “Blade Runner 2049” footage was being presented to attendees at the show, Sony chairman Tom Rothman said this…

“Netflix, my ass.”

Well said, Tom. For the record, Netflix has never presented at Cinemacon, so that shows what they stand for in the realm of cinema. At least Amazon releases content in theaters!

If this movie were released on Netflix, I would have been outraged, partially because I don’t use the service, but having seen this movie, this movie looked and sounded SPECTACULAR! Yeah, that was a long point, but I felt it had to be made. This movie was directed by Denis Villenevue, who also directed “Arrival,” one of my favorite movies from last year. I think he’s a great director, and his vision for this movie was brilliant. Every single frame had something worth appreciating. I can only imagine the detail that went into storyboarding this thing! Although, I can’t exactly say that he’s only in this fest of praise, because I gotta give kudos to Roger Deakins, the cinematographer of the film. For the record, this isn’t the first time Deakins and Villenevue worked together. They’ve also collaborated in “Sicario” and “Prisoners.” I haven’t seen those films, but I will say that Deakins is a fine cinematographer, just watch “No Country for Old Men” to see what I mean.

The original “Blade Runner” came out in 1982, and when it comes to movies with great lighting, as of right now, it’s probably the first movie that comes to my mind. The lighting in “Blade Runner 2049” personally isn’t as great as the original, but that doesn’t mean the lighting’s bad. However, from an overall perspective, much like its three decade old predecessor, “Blade Runner 2049” has terrific effects. Every single effect in the movie felt realistic. Sure, there are moments of the movie containing visuals that probably would be impractical (the giant sex doll with blue hair for example), but in all reality, even those felt like they actually existed for the universe this movie was presenting.

Speaking of things that aren’t as good as the original, I gotta say the music isn’t as great. Once again, this doesn’t mean the music was bad, the music was almost as brilliant as the 1982 film. But the thing about the 1982 film, is that it was unique. The music by the way in that film was done by Vangelis, who also did the score for “Chariots of Fire.” Also, Vangelis did not return for this movie, and yes, he’s still alive. The guy doing the score this time around is one of my favorite composers. I’ve brought him up in a number of posts this year, Hans Zimmer. Like the original score, it’s techno, and at times you do hear booms, which is pretty much the first thing you hear in the original movie when the titles show up. By the way, those booms sound amazing in IMAX. Also, this score at times felt a little more traditional than the original “Blade Runner.” The “Blade Runner” score is something you’d rarely hear, and while this newer film does have qualities of the older score, the new doesn’t have the absolute uniqueness of the old. I say that because I remember the original having moments that almost sounded like chimes, it was different. You could also hear vocalizing in the score, and I mentioned how much of an influence this had on “Ghost in the Shell” and I wouldn’t be surprised if the original movie’s score was partially influential. The vocalizing, the more I think about it, reminds me of “Ghost of the Shell’s” intro music. “Blade Runner 2049” was just released, so only time will tell how much the music, plus the rest of the movie will influence future products. Nevertheless, “Blade Runner 2049” had a GREAT score and I’d love to listen to it again and again.

Let’s talk about one of the leads in the film, specifically Ryan Gosling. This fellow has proven to be an excellent actor. By the way, there’s a couple scenes in this movie where Ryan Gosling is in front of a piano, and that’s not the only film where Gosling is in front of a piano, just watch “La La Land” to see what I mean. Gosling plays K and he’s basically this movie’s young Blade Runner. He’s given a mission at the beginning of the film, and seeing his character progress throughout the picture was entertaining and very moving. At times, Gosling’s acting chops were unleashed to full potential, which happened to be prominent during the movie’s emotional scenes which I won’t get into to avoid spoiler territory. K also had some qualities which were noticeable that could be compared to Harrison Ford’s character of Rick Deckard, who we’ll get to momentarily. K starts off in the movie as being directed by Lieutenant Joshi, a character played by Robin Wright, who in terms of looks and attitude, almost reminds me of your typical Charlize Theron role such as the ones she’s done in “A Million Ways to Die in the West” and “Hancock.” Anyway, seeing Gosling focus on his objectives was fascinating and despite this movie, like the original, appearing to be a slow burr, my eyes were never taken off the screen. Yes, this applies to more than Ryan Gosling in all technicality, but I’m just making a point. There’s also a spouse Ryan Gosling has, by that I mean a futuristic spouse, and by THAT I mean a spouse that is basically holographic, oh yeah, and she can change form. I can’t even get into the mission Ryan Gosling does in the film because I have a feeling this is something the trailers are hiding. I’ve seen all the main trailers, but it’s been awhile since I’ve seen one in particular, and I’m not sure if the hidden details are there, but for the sake of keeping some information a secret to possibly have some folks savor the movie’s flavor, I’m going to ignore uttering these details.

Now let’s talk about Harrison Ford. If you remember the original “Blade Runner,” Harrison Ford played Rick Deckard, the main character of the film. He was hunting down replicants just because he had a job to do. Speaking of the original film, we do get some callbacks. As mentioned recently, the music can qualify as a callback, but we do get some audio from the first film. During the film I heard Harrison Ford’s voice as it was in 1982, and I remember hearing Sean Young’s voice too. The origami unicorn makes a return here, which has brought up an interesting theory of whether Deckard’s actually a human or a replicant. By the way, I’d say he’s human. Also, I may have said that Ryan Gosling did a great job, but in all reality, Harrison Ford probably did better. By the way, out of all the performances I’ve seen Ford do, this might be his best one. Also, Deckard’s introduction is definitely one of the best scenes in the entire flick. You may have gotten a glimpse at it in the trailers, but there is more to it then what was there. I won’t go into detail though.

As much as I praise this movie, it’s not perfect. For example, some characters didn’t stand out as much as others, and speaking of characters, there’s one character who goes by the name of Mariette. She’s not unlikable, but she didn’t really add much of anything to the movie in terms of story except for maybe one part where she and K’s holographic wife are shown to have no clothes on. Also, this isn’t really a complaint but it’s mainly something I noticed, Jared Leto is barely in this movie. In fact I think he may have spent less time here than “Suicide Squad,” although I liked Leto better here than “Suicide Squad.” I may be nitpicking, and from experience, this is probably one of those movies I have to watch more than once to fully appreciate, so maybe I’m just imagining things. Other than what I mentioned, this movie’s pretty much a masterpiece, which is saying something considering what many people say about 1982’s “Blade Runner.”

Now I just mentioned this could take multiple watches to fully appreciate. And I’ll have you know I watched the original “Blade Runner” four times from start to finish since early September. I also saw it not long ago and I fell asleep to it, but to be fair, it was late. This is one of those movies, like the original “Blade Runner” that I’m probably gonna watch over and over.

In the end, “Blade Runner 2049” is a movie that defines how sequels should be made. This to me is 2017’s “Tron: Legacy,” by that I mean you’ve got this film which came out a long time ago, in fact the original “Blade Runner” actually came out the same year as the original “Tron.” The film now has a sequel, years in the making, and people enjoy it. Granted “Blade Runner 2049” has gotten more positive reception, but it doesn’t mean people didn’t appreciate “Tron: Legacy.” I love the film from a technical perspective, this movie and “Dunkirk,” so far, have been my two favorite cinematic experiences of 2017. Hans Zimmer created a great score, the screenplay hit every necessary emotion, the direction and cinematography are stellar, I’m glad to see Harrison Ford return as Rick, Ryan Gosling was great as well. Overall, this movie did what it needed to do. I’m gonna give “Blade Runner 2049” a 9/10. If you saw “Blade Runner” thinking that this movie could never be recreated, chances are you’ve just been proven wrong. This is a sequel worth remembering, and as far as sequels go, this is probably the best one I’ve seen so far this year. I can’t wait to buy this movie when it comes to home video, I want to see it again, possibly pick up on some details I missed, we’ll see what happens. Thanks for reading this review! As far as upcoming reviews go, I hope to see “Stronger” starring Jake Gyllenhaal, which is about a guy who manages to survive the Boston Marathon bombing, and I also am planning on reviewing “Thor” and “Thor: The Dark World” in preparation for “Thor: Ragnarok.” Stay tuned for those reviews, and more reviews! Also, if you’re into “Blade Runner,” you might be interested in checking out my post dedicated to things “Blade Runner” got right about the future. Here’s a question, which “Blade Runner” was better? The first one or the second one? Also, one more question, what is a movie that gets better the more you watch it? Let me know down below in the comments! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

WHAT “BLADE RUNNER” GOT RIGHT ABOUT THE FUTURE: https://scenebefore.wordpress.com/2017/10/06/what-blade-runner-got-right-about-the-future/

Underworld: Blood Wars (2016): More Like Bore Wars *SPOILERS*

Posted on by Jack Drees

Before we dive into this review for the crime against movies known as “Underworld: Blood Wars,” I’d like to take a second to promote something to you all. Keep in mind, when I say promote, I don’t mean that as in I’m advertising something for money. I just discovered something the other day that I think will totally interest a number of people reading this post and I want to share it with you all. So it’s free advertising! I want introduce you all to an app called Stardust.

Stardust is a free app you can download on your mobile device. It’s basically Snapchat for movies and TV. Now I find it amazing that I like this because I don’t like Snapchat. How does it work? You can search for any movie or TV episode and record a short length video featuring your reaction and/or thoughts to the movie or TV episode. For example, if you go see the latest movie in the Marvel Cinematic Universe or if there’s a movie you like or dislike that you really want to talk about, you can record a video summing up your thoughts. Or if there’s a TV show you’re watching and you want to talk about a specific episode, you can bring that up as well. I know this for a fact when it comes to movies, I’m not sure what the case is when it comes to TV, considering I’ve only talked about movies on Stardust thus far, you don’t even have to see the movie you’re watching. You can give your thoughts about any of this stuff at any given time even without knowledge of said stuff. Just don’t do it when you’re naked, that’s what intimate video chat is for. Plus, it’s kinda weird. You can also find other people who use the app and follow them for updates on their movie and TV thoughts. If you want to find me on the app, my handle is JackDrees, go check it out! Now with that out of the way, let’s start the review.

mv5bmjqymdk5oteznv5bml5banbnxkftztgwmjmwndu0mdi-_v1_sy1000_cr006741000_al_

“Underworld: Blood Wars” is the fifth installment in the “Underworld” franchise. It began back in 2003 and now it has lead up to its most recent installment which has come out in theaters January of 2017 (even though you can also call this a 2016 movie). This film is directed by Anna Foerster, who has directed episodes of TV shows like “Outlander” and “Criminal Minds.” This film stars Kate Beckinsale (The Disappointments Room, The Aviator), Theo James (Divergent, Golden Boy), Tobias Menzies (Casino Royale, Outlander) and involves the main character of Selene as she tries to end a war between the Lycans and the Vampires.

When it comes to the “Underworld” franchise, I can imagine that some people see this as a series that shouldn’t be taken too seriously, and I can kind of understand why, but that doesn’t mean all of its movies are good. I enjoyed the first two movies, but the other sequels leading up to “Blood Wars” were just awful. “Rise of the Lycans” probably has the one of the most poorly presented sex scenes in cinematic history, and “Awakening” is just plain forgettable. Not only that, but even the good movies aren’t even that great. I’ve gone back to watch the first movie more than once, but other than that, I had no desire to watch the other ones again. OK, to be fair, I actually watched 3 & 4 for the first time recently, but I haven’t really gone back to watch 2. Despite my hate for 3 & 4, I wouldn’t say they belong in the garbage bin. Granted, 4 comes close, but it’s not quite there. This movie however, might just have a place in said bin. If you think about it, this news isn’t really all that surprising. This movie released theatrically in the month of January and it’s the fifth installment in the franchise which is coming out five years after the previous installment, which by “Underworld” standards is unusual because these movies typically come out three years apart from each other. For the record, this isn’t the only fifth installment in a franchise to come out this year that I disliked, “Transformers” is another example.

Before we dive into anything else, I just want to bring up how forgettable and boring this movie truly is! I barely remember anything in the movie plot-wise (if there is one). In fact I think “Transformers 5” had more of a plot than “Underworld 5.” All I can recall is that there was this huge quest for blood, mindless action, weird editing techniques, characters I didn’t give a s*it about, and just random nonsense! I’ve sat through a couple boring movies this year: “Logan Lucky,” “Ghost in the Shell,” but here’s the thing about those movies, they qualify as movies! “Logan Lucky” has good cinematography and acting, “Ghost in the Shell” has stellar action and great visual effects that makes you almost feel like you’re watching “The Fifth Element” or “Blade Runner.” This movie has like a couple coolish moments having to do with action but that’s about it for the positives! Let me just put it this way, “Rise of the Lycans,” is not good, but, at least there I cared for the characters. I cared for nobody here. I mean, I knew who some of the people were, it would be somewhat shocking if I didn’t know who Selene was considering I watched four other movies leading up to this one with her in it. Speaking of which, let’s talk about her.

Kate Beckinsale plays Selene once again and she’s pretty much the same character you can truly expect to see here if you’ve watched previous “Underworld” installments. However, unlike other movies I’ve seen her in where her character is rather kick-ass at times, you don’t really get any moments here that stand out in terms of kickassery. I can still remember the first movie when there was a scene where Selene had to shoot around a floor that stood out. I still remember a scene from the end of the first movie, the one where she slowly bites that one dude. Granted there were still moments of action out of “Underworld: Blood Wars” that I still remember, both for good and bad reasons. But there’s not really many moments where people shine here. It’s kind of like “Revenge of the Nerds II: Nerds in Paradise,” which now that I think about it, another thing these two films have in common is the boredom factor. Although I’ll say, “Revenge of the Nerds II” didn’t have as many boring moments which means this movie is more like “The Girl on the Train.”

As far as the other characters go, I’m not even gonna list them, because who gives a f*ck about the other characters?! The other characters certainly move the story along, but they were unmemorable despite seeing some of these folks before such as Theo James’s character of David, but these characters have no outstanding qualities about them.

The action in this movie, as mentioned, was both good and bad. There was a scene in a cage that was rather interesting to watch, although from an editing perspective, maybe slightly flawed by the looks of it. I own the Blu-Ray so I could probably look back and see if I’m just imagining things. The opening action sequence had potential to be somewhat cool but the editing in that scene at times was just somewhat jarring! The ending action sequence was rather cool, but chances are I won’t remember it that well. The sound editing was pretty good, but I can’t really think of anything else that was really that slick. Oh yeah, and SPOILER ALERT ahead, once the final action sequence ends, the movie doesn’t have much time left until it ends, and it’s actually open ended. I checked the movie’s IMDb page and Len Wiseman, a producer behind the “Underworld” movies, says that there will be a sixth film in the franchise! If this were another franchise, it’s possible that I might be rather excited, but based on how these movies progressively get worse, I can’t say the same about this! It’ll also star Kate Beckinsale one last time, and I hope it’s one last time because these movies need to die. As much as I enjoyed the first two “Underworld” installments, it’s objective that the franchise doesn’t really qualify as quality filmmaking.

In the end, “Underworld: Blood Wars” is a film you guys just really shouldn’t see. Go watch the first movie again, not only is it better, but you’re more likely to get it for a cheaper price! This franchise was dying when I watched the third and fourth installments, and after seeing this fifth installment, its death has now arrived. I’m gonna give “Underworld: Blood Wars” a 2/10. Seriously though, if a sixth “Underworld” movie is being made, my biggest request is that there’s effort put into it. There can still be mindless action, there can still be a dark color palette, just make a good movie, that’s the main thing I’m asking for! Not to mention, this news came in VERY RECENTLY and I almost left this information out, apparently “Underworld” is getting a TV series. If this is true, put effort into that too! Thanks for reading this review. Pretty soon I’ll have my review for “Kingsman: The Golden Circle,” and now that I reviewed a number of Tom Cruise films which he made in the past, I want to follow up on that by seeing “American Made” this upcoming weekend. Stay tuned for more reviews, and I’ll ask you all, what is your favorite “Underworld” movie? You can still say it’s this one. You can even bash me and roast me and tell me why I’m wrong, I don’t care! I just want to know your thoughts! Anyway, comment below, and I do read them by the way. Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Marvel Cinematic Universe Will Continue For Decades, Not Surprising, Although Slightly Concerning

Posted on by Jack Drees

Hey everyone, Jack Drees here! I have to say right now, this week may be the craziest I’ve ever witnessed when it comes to comic book movie news. Nothing new is coming out this weekend, however when it comes to news, it’s absolutely insane. I’m actually gonna cover multiple segments here, however only one portion here matters more than others. I love the Marvel Cinematic Universe. It’s an idea, when introduced at the time, seemed original by the standards of film. It has now inspired other cinematic universes such as the “Dark Universe” from Universal, the DCEU (Detective Comics Extended Universe), and the Monsterverse Warner is focusing on at the moment. “Thor: Ragnarok,” which will be released in November, is going to be the seventeenth movie in the universe. That’s not the only future movie planned, there’s gonna be a couple of “Avengers” sequels coming up, “Ant-Man” is getting another standalone film, Captain Marvel is gonna have a movie, “Spider-Man: Homecoming” is gonna have a sequel, and “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3” will be happening. Speaking of “Guardians of the Galaxy,” let’s talk about that.

If you don’t know me personally, I enjoyed the first “Guardians of the Galaxy” movie. The vibe worked perfectly, the comedy landed for the most part, and it took characters that not many people, including some people who read comic books out of enthusiasm, didn’t know much about. Not many folks, until 2014, heard about Starlord, not many people knew about Gamora, they weren’t aware of Groot, they didn’t ever think about Drax, nobody traditionally thought of Rocket as a badass raccoon. What Marvel was able to do with these characters kind of amazes me. As far as their movies go, this might be their most family friendly one yet.

As much as I enjoyed the first “Guardians,” the sequel was big letdown for me. It may have been due to my hype for the film, but then again, I anticipated “Wonder Woman” and “Dunkirk” to death and look how those movies turned out. It’s by no means a bad movie, nor is it the worst in the MCU, but it is not a great movie either, it’s just passable. The humor didn’t land as much, although some worked, like the Taserface gag and the Mary Poppins joke. Some of the characters were not as cool as they were in the first movie, although the movie did get a better villain and they did improve the character of Drax in some ways.

*UNPOPULAR OPINION WARNING, FLAME SHIELD READY*

Baby Groot is by far one of the single most annoying characters I’ve seen in anything! I get he’s small, and supposed to be cute, but this film literally tries to force it down your throat! It almost reminds me of the stupid kid the lead characters have from the piece of crap they call “Sharknado!” It’s like watching YouTube, you’re watching cat videos, and the person taking the video is constantly saying look at this cat playing the piano! YOU MADE YOUR F*CKING POINT! YOU SAID IT ONCE! YOU ALREADY TOLD ME! I ALREADY KNOW! It’s like if BB-8 from “Star Wars Episode VII” was constantly shoved into random scenes just because he’s cute. And granted, the cuteness factor was there, and a lot of people see him as a cute droid, but he’s there when the plot needs him, he’s not randomly in shots just shoving jelly beans down his gullet. Wait a minute that makes no sense, droids can’t eat or drink. Also now that I think about it, trees don’t eat jelly beans either. Whatever, you probably get my point! I’m sorry if you hate me, but this is how I feel.

If you are a mega fan of the “Guardians of the Galaxy” movies, both 1 & 2, and you don’t know the main man to thank, I’ll have you know the man you probably should be thanking is James Gunn, he directed and wrote the first and second films which are out right now, and he’s also working on the third one. The man definitely knows how to direct and write these movies based on how the actors deliver their lines and how well the humor plays out. Recently, he did a stream on Facebook Live, and something… …interesting came up. When he was on the livestream, a bunch of users asked some questions, and one user asked if Richard Rider/Nova would ever be put in the MCU films. At one point when answering the question, Gunn uttered this: “One of the things I’m doing with creating “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3,” it will take place after the next two “Avengers” movies and it will help to set up the next 10, 20 years of Marvel movies. It’s going to really expand the cosmic universe.”

That’s right, you’re probably getting at least a decade’s worth of Marvel Cinematic Universe films. How do I feel about this? While I love Marvel and I’m excited to what they have in store, I’m simultaneously worried. The Marvel Cinematic Universe began back in 2008 with “Iron Man,” since then it has expanded with many films loved by audiences everywhere. Some people still say they prefer superhero films outside the MCU such as the older “Spider-Man” films, Nolan’s “Batman” trilogy, Donner’s “Superman,” or movies in the “X-Men” franchise. We’ve had film franchises go on longer than the MCU, such as the “Bourne” series, “James Bond,” “Fast & Furious,” and “Star Wars.” Although I’m noticing that compared to these franchises, the MCU is producing movies more rapidly and when it is compared to a franchise like “Bourne,” you can tell that “Bourne” might have an intended stopping point. The MCU is basically the cinematic universe version of “The Neverending Story.” Me personally, if I had a cinematic universe, and I actually do have one in mind if I ever have the opportunity to make films in Hollywood, I would end it at a point. I’d give it a sense of finality, but I only wonder if the folks behind the MCU will ever feel the same way.

While I am concerned about the franchise going on forever and ever, allow me to address some positives. Starting off the positives, this isn’t Michael Bay’s “Transformers” nor is it “Sharknado.” Also, Marvel has clearly shown how it can make stellar movies that people want to see. A lot of their flicks have been well received by both average moviegoers and critics. When it comes to comic book fans, they do a fine job appreciating that particular audience for the most part. Some notable mistakes they made over the years has usually been with the villains. With the exception of villains like Ego from “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2” or the Vulture from “Spider-Man: Homecoming,” the MCU hasn’t really featured terrific villains in their films. This is why I love “Captain America: Civil War” so much, it didn’t have a villain, it had sides, neither good or evil. Another notable flaw many people have with the MCU is in “Doctor Strange.” You may remember the Ancient One in that movie, she was played by Tilda Swinton because it’s an example of whitewashing. While the MCU may not be perfect, it certainly has a lot of likability to it. Despite saying that, I wonder how much it has left.

The MCU has been around for nine years and people still enjoy it, but what if it goes on forever and ever to a point where people begin to become tired of it? If you ask me, I’m not exactly tired of it, but I am starting to think the series might go on longer than it should. Keep in mind, Marvel is owned by Disney, the Bill Gates of movie studios. Disney basically owns us now since they have Marvel, Lucasfilm, Pixar, and their own animations along with those animations that are being remade into live-action form. The top 5 films of 2016 in terms of box office performance are all Disney films. “Captain America: Civil War,” “Rogue One: A Star Wars Story,” “Finding Dory,” “Zootopia,” and “The Jungle Book.” Right now, three of this year’s films owned by Disney are in the top 10 in terms of box office performance. Those films are “Beauty and the Beast,” “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2,” and “Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales.” I’m not counting “Spider-Man: Homecoming” here because despite how it is in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, Sony distributed the movie. Disney has also had successes with 2015 films like “Star Wars Episode VII: The Force Awakens,” “Avengers: Age of Ultron,” and “Inside Out.” If you look at what Disney is doing, you may see that they’re making buttloads of money. They now own all of these things we, as viewers, know about. Although I want to make a comparison to this and a popular video game franchise you guys may know about.

Have you guys ever played the “Call of Duty” games? I don’t play as much as other people do, but I know people who play the games. If you know a bit about them, you may know that they do this thing where they release a new game every year. We’re getting Marvel movies, quicker than we’re getting “Call of Duty” games. Keep in mind, many people say that some of the older games like “Modern Warfare” and “Modern Warfare 2” rock whereas newer games like “Advanced Warfare” and “Infinite Warfare” suck. If there’s one thing I noticed, personally, it’s that I thought Marvel movies got better as they went on. the oldest Marvel Cinematic Universe movie I currently have a 10/10 for is “Iron Man 3” which was released on May 3, 2013. Then there was “Captain America: The Winter Soldier,” “Ant-Man,” and “Captain America: Civil War,” which is currently my favorite movie in the MCU. Also, you have to keep in mind, I don’t witness many people talking about the first “Call of Duty,” the second “Call of Duty,” anything along those lines. While it seems that a lot of the Marvel Cinematic Universe films are widely talked about today, I could tell you that when “The Avengers” came out, this is when a majority of people flocked to the theater to see these movies. Also keep in mind, this came out in 2012, the same year that “The Amazing Spider-Man” and “The Dark Knight Rises” came out. Both “The Amazing Spider-Man” and “The Dark Knight Rises” were successful at the box office, in fact in some cases, “The Dark Knight Rises” may have gotten more positive reception than “The Avengers,” the case isn’t really the same for “The Amazing Spider-Man.” Spider-Man and Batman are both argued among nerds all over the world between which is the better hero, they both get their own movie in the same year, and they are beat by “The Avengers.” Although when you think about it, it makes sense, you get more superheroes, some you may know, some you may not know, and the idea of “The Avengers,” unlike “Batman” and “Spider-Man,” hasn’t really been done much on screen. Although the “Fantastic Four” movies have more than one superhero and look how those movies turned out. However when you look back before and realize what “Spider-Man” did in terms of box office performance in 2002, such as being the only film to make $100 million in its opening weekend at the time, and how “The Dark Knight” not only won the box office in 2008, but avoided a comic book movie from having the slightest bit of childishness, this is kind of interesting to think about. The Marvel Cinematic Universe did have some successes before “The Avengers” like with the first two “Iron Man” films, and while 2011 brought “Thor” and “Captain America: The First Avenger,” they didn’t quite reach the top 10, making them get a lower score in the box office than “The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Part 1…” (sigh). Right now, if you can’t tell already, the box office isn’t a problem for the MCU, and I don’t think it will be in the future. However, I wonder about their movies in terms of quality.

There’s a saying that all good things come to an end. We all know we are going to die one day. OK, I’m not saying all people are good, just look at Adolf Hitler! You know movie franchises that have technically come to conclusions in the past? Just look at “Back to the Future,” “Jaws,” or “Revenge of the Nerds.” The people behind these movies knew when to stop, “Back to the Future” stopped at three movies suggesting that the characters’ futures are what they make them, and all three franchises according to popular opinion have never made a movie better than their first installment. You know what’s still going today? “Transformers,” “Sharknado,” “Diary of a Wimpy Kid,” and “Fifty Shades.” Traditionally, these movies are not well received, however they are popular over a certain demographic. “Transformers” continues to make lots of money even though people are literally paying to see the same thing every time, “Sharknado” is on TV, but people watch it because it’s “so bad it’s good,” which I thought at first with the original, but upon rewatch it became worse, and the later installments are just plain awful, “Diary of a Wimpy Kid” is popular among families and kids, including some who know about the books, and while it was fun to watch as a kid, it became worse the more I thought about it. Not to mention their newest installment, if you haven’t heard about it, may be one of the most forced sequels in movie history, and for “Fifty Shades,” while it may be popular among women and those who have read the books, it wasn’t well received because of its characters, along with the fact that it is technically “porn” and yet the movie fails to deliver on that for a lot of people. Also ladies, for those of you crushing on Jamie Dornan, who plays Christian Grey in the series, the actor says he didn’t want himself nude in the movie. If you’re gonna make a movie for women, that’s technically a porno, KNOW YOUR TARGET AUDIENCE! If you ask me, I haven’t seen any of the “Fifty Shades” movies, nor have I read the books, so I can’t really say my true thoughts about it, but I honestly don’t want to see or read it unless I have a girlfriend who wants to watch it and she feels like watching it with me, if it means I get to go to a free screening, or if someone is paying me to watch the movie. With Marvel, I can enjoy myself throughout the process of watching one of their movies, but how much longer will it take for me to not enjoy myself?

So far, two movies in the Marvel Cinematic Universe have been released this year, “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2” and “Spider-Man: Homecoming.” While I enjoyed parts of both movies, I thought both needed improvement. I said what I needed to about “Guardians 2,” but I didn’t really say much about “Spider-Man: Homecoming.” I thought they aced Peter Parker and Spider-Man for the most part, it could have been funnier, they had Iron Man in the movie but they played their cards right and kept the movie from turning into “Iron Man 4,” the AI annoyed me, and the villain was cool. I gave the movie a 7/10 in my review, and I said it would probably drop to a 6. For the record, I gave “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2” a 6/10, which I also gave to “Avengers: Age of Ultron,” which was fun at times, but ultimately a disappointment. The only film I gave a lower score to in the MCU was for “Captain America: The First Avenger,” which was a 5/10. Based on this you can tell that Marvel is capable of making good movies, but every year since 2013, I’ve seen one Marvel film that is worthy of a 10/10 for me. In my top 10 MCU films, I have only one movie that is a 7/10 in my book, all the others are 8/10 at minimum. If “Thor: Ragnarok” isn’t a 10/10, then the streak I’m talking about is officially over. If you ask me, I’m somewhat excited as a Marvel movie lover for “Thor: Ragnarok,” but at the same time, worried. It looks like it could be a good movie, but the marketing makes it look like “Guardians of the Galaxy.” Now, I like “Guardians of the Galaxy,” but for a movie like this, I want a darker tone. You have Planet Hulk in this movie, it looks like there’s gonna be a lot of destruction on Asgard, and yet in the trailer they’re playing “Immigrant” by Led Zeppelin. Good song, but it makes me worried here. You can still have humor in the movie, you can still have flashy effects, and granted the effects look stunning in the trailers, but I want a darker vibe than what I’m getting when this movie comes out. Now, I’ll say if “Thor: Ragnarok” is a 9/10 or 8/10, that’d still be cool. Although if it’s a 7/10 or lower, I’d start to worry.

Also, you have to consider the fact that these movies are based on comic books, so they might be taking material from the comic books, and turning that into movie material. That’s fine, but part of me wonders, will we ever run out of good material to copy? I don’t read comic books all that much, but this is something I wonder similarly as a movie watcher. I wonder if we will stop seeing original material and start always seeing unoriginal material. Although comic books have been going on for years and we are still getting lots of new stuff, but they always do unoriginal stuff. They do stuff based on other sources, they do a new series or a spinoff with certain characters, or they might do gender or race swaps. If we want to keep these movies going, we either need to introduce new characters that haven’t been written in comic form or we need to get people writing new comic book material. This has been done before though, you guys know Harley Quinn? Her first appearance was actually in “Batman: The Animated Series.”

And if you think that comic book movies are stopping anytime soon, you’re completely under a rock. People continue to watch those movies, people keep making them, and they’re even making movies on villains, kind of like they did with “Suicide Squad.” That’s not all, Sony is coming out with a “Venom” movie in 2018 with Tom Hardy as the lead actor, and there’s also gonna be a “Joker” movie that I hear is gonna be in a different universe than the DCEU. In fact tonight, just when I thought I covered everything in this post, I took a break, thought I’d add some finishing touches a little later, ONLY TO FIND OUT MATT REEVES’S “BATMAN” MOVIE ISN’T GOING TO BE PART OF THE DCEU EITHER! What is happening? It’s becoming like “Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs,” only instead of running out of food on an Island in the Atlantic, we’re running out of new and fresh movies quite possibly throughout the world, and instead of just having sardines to eliminate our hunger, we just have comic book films to fulfill our movie watching desires!

I love movies. I love comic book movies. I love Marvel Studios. Although at the same time, I’m concerned about its future. Maybe they’ll continue on creating original content and keep rocking it not only at the box office, not only on home video, but also in the minds of the viewers. As much as Marvel Studios makes good movies, there may be a day where it goes the way of McDonald’s, by that I mean there will be a MCU movie on every corner, and it may just be processed as opposed to crafted. Guys, I don’t think “Thor: Ragnarok” will be great, admittedly I’m excited for “Avengers: Infinity War” and “Ant-Man and the Wasp.” If “Thor: Ragnarok” is good, there’s less of a chance I have of going into these MCU films in the future with a bit of skepticism. So I want to know, what are your thoughts on this? Also, what is a movie you want to see from Marvel Studios, but hasn’t happened yet?

Also I want to break a little announcement to you all, while I still plan to do reviews of new movies, I also want to tackle some older ones too. If you recall me doing my “Spider-Man” review series along with my Christopher Nolan review series, I’d like to let you know I’m doing another one. If you think about big action stars, I’d traditionally think about Liam Neeson (Taken, Non-Stop), Jason Statham (The Transporter, Death Race), Keanu Reeves (John Wick, The Matrix), and Vin Diesel (xXx, The Fast and the Furious). Another one I think of is someone who I’m starting a series on, that my friends is Tom Cruise. Over the years, Cruise has proven himself to be a very talented actor in many ways, and I’m gonna talk about three movies he stars in. I’m gonna be starting off with “The Last Samurai.” At some point I will include a review for “Risky Business,” I’m not sure where I’ll put it, either as my second or third review, but that will be an intention in the future. I will also be reviewing another movie Cruise is in, but I’m not sure what it is yet, you’ll find out when the review comes around! Stay tuned for those reviews, and Marvel Studios, if you are planning on continuing the universe for another 10 or 20 years, focus on the movies first, and focus on the money later. Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

The Emoji Movie (2017): A Literal Pile of Sir Patrick Stewart (WARNING: STRONG LANGUAGE)

Posted on by Jack Drees

20170802_133606_HDR

Before we begin this review of the piece of crap they call “The Emoji Movie” I would like to remind everyone that I’m not doing this for clicks, as you can see above, I have proof I saw this. I’m doing this review for a couple of reasons. 1: To give you a movie review. 2: I’ve gotten requests to do this. I would like to say to those people, thanks for the request and I’m happy to deliver on it, but at the same time, f*ck you. But seriously, who doesn’t love hearing a guy complain about a s*itty movie? If you have children, let them read at their own risk, and enjoy my review!

mv5bmtkzmzm3otm2ml5bml5banbnxkftztgwmdm0ndu3mji-_v1_sy1000_cr006741000_al_

“The Emoji Movie,” AKA an animated s*itshow, is directed by Tony Leondis, who you may know for directing “Igor,” an animation from 2008, and it stars TJ Miller (Silicon Valley, Deadpool), James Corden (The Late Late Show with James Corden, Gavin and Stacey), Anna Faris (Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs, Mom), Maya Rudolph (Bridesmaids, Grown Ups), Steven Wright (Mad About You, Son of the Mask), Jennifer Coolidge (Legally Blonde, 2 Broke Girls), and Patrick Stewart (Star Trek: The Next Generation, X-Men). This movie revolves around the Meh Emoji, played by TJ Miller, and if you know the Emojis and are familiar with them, you’d know they represent symbols and they can’t really change, so naturally in this movie about Emojis which actually live inside a person’s phone, each Emoji is only capable of making one expression. However, TJ Miller’s Meh is a bit more expressive, making him unique from other Emojis. However Meh isn’t intending on having that unique quality about him last so he sets out on a quest in order to make him a normal Emoji.

I bet you’re asking, “Jack! What the f*ck are you doing?! This movie has no potential! Why are you seeing this?!” My answer to you is, I don’t know. Going in, I expected this movie to make me want to kill myself. On opening night, “The Emoji Movie” was leaked to have gotten a 0% on Rotten Tomatoes. Granted the rating has gone up since I found out about that, but it’s worth pointing out. If I weren’t doing this blog, I’d probably ignore this movie, but the thing is, quite a few people have requested that I’d do this. I made a Twitter poll not long ago and when the results came in, it turned out more people wanted me to review “The Emoji Movie” than not review it. So ultimately, I wanted to see how deplorable this movie actually was. And trust me fellas, this movie was crap! This is probably the worst animation I’ve ever seen. This movie copypastes elements from other animations which have been released over the years but has none of the charm, heart, humor, or likability needed to make a good product. This movie makes “Ice Age: Collision Course” look like “How to Train Your Dragon.” This movie makes “Transformers: The Last Knight” look like “Pacific Rim.” This movie makes “Terminator: Salvation” look like “TRON.” This movie makes “Battlefield Earth” look like “Interstellar.” This movie makes “Fant4stic” look like “Spider-Man 2.” “The Emoji Movie” is so bad that it doesn’t come as much of a shock when you think about it, it’s a movie about Emojis! A concept which on paper, sounds dumb as s*it and is also dumb as s*it in reality. When I talked about the first teaser trailer for this atrocity, I knew something bad was going to happen, and damn I turned out to be right!

Let’s talk about TJ Miller’s character of Meh in depth. If you ask me, I like TJ Miller, I enjoy him in “Silicon Valley,” I appreciated his character in “Deadpool,” and I also like his voice. Even if he’s doing crap, he still does a fine job. For example, he was in “Transformers: Age of Extinction,” which in my book is mediocre at best. He played a character named Lucas Flannery and at one point while watching that character, he might as well come off as some sex pervert or something. Granted he’s not on screen as long as other characters, but this is something many people saw in that character. If you watch him in the beginning of the film, you’d probably have a good guess as to what I’m talking about. TJ Miller wasn’t terrible casting-wise for Meh, which utterly surprised me, he also isn’t TERRIBLE as a character, but the thing that this movie was trying to do with a lot of the characters, this one included, was make them funny, although the movie failed to deliever on that. Although I will say, one thing that’s kind of funny about TJ Miller being cast in this movie, is that in “Deadpool,” another movie he’s in, he has to explain to the main character of Wade Wilson, what the poop Emoji is.

WADE WILSON (Ryan Reynolds): (Looking at a text from Ajax) What is that?

WEASEL (TJ Miller): That’s the s*it Emoji. You know the turd with the smiley face and eyes. I thought it was chocolate yogurt for so long.

Along Meh’s journey over the course of the runtime, we meet a couple supporting characters. Hi-Five (James Corden) and Jailbreak (Anna Faris). This is part of where the elements from other animations come into play. Hi-Five is basically the comic relief of the film, it’s almost like your typical “scene stealer” you’ve seen in movies like “Up” (Dug), “The Secret Life of Pets” (Snowball), or “Frozen” (Olaf). I’m fine with this movie having a character like that, but the big problem I have with the character has to do with the most basic quality a comic relief character needs, which is humor! I don’t recall any funny moments from the character, same for the movie itself. I wanted this character to literally DIE. There was one moment where there was some sort of giggle coming out of my mouth, but I need more than a giggle! In fact there were actually kids in this theater with me, they almost didn’t utter a sound. I actually was in the second upper row in the theater, there was barely anyone in my row, but one row above me, there was a family. I don’t know what their final thoughts are on this movie, but I remember one part of the movie scaring a kid, and I recall that more than making them laugh. By the way, the character who caused the kid to get terrified was Smiler, played by Maya Rudolph, we’ll get to her in a bit, but let’s talk about Jailbreak for now. Jailbreak wasn’t the worst character on screen, although there were some things I didn’t like about her for sure. One thing that was noticeable was how much she was like Wyldstyle (Yes, that’s how her name is spelled) from “The LEGO Movie.” The only difference between her and Wyldstyle is that Jailbreak doesn’t have a boyfriend when we first meet her, and she’s basically displayed as some sort of feminist. I don’t have too big of a problem with that, but still. Not only do we get a rather cliche character, but as she develops during the film, she just becomes more and more cringeworthy! Oh yeah, speaking of cliche characters from animations, TJ Miller’s Meh, who we recently talked about, actually is kind of stock too! In a way, he’s almost like Emmett from “The LEGO Movie” and Ralph from “Wreck-It Ralph!” I imagine some of the people imagined this is part of went on behind the scenes. Some dumbasses watched some animations and said “Oh yeah, that was the s*it!,” and thought “Let’s try to recreate those, but with Emojis!” So they went to Sony Pictures Animation and suggested this s*itshow of an idea to them and Sony Pictures Animation told them, “Welcome aboard! Time to capitalize on the name “Emoji!” Who cares if it’s s*it? We decided that “The Angry Birds Movie” was a good idea so let’s become known as the phone movie gods!” My response to that is, thanks Sony Animation! Thanks for being a bunch of f*cking twerps that don’t understand the concepts of art and storytelling (flips two birds)!

On a different subject, let’s talk about Maya Rudolph’s character of Smiler, she was the film’s main antagonist. I find this character to be one of the most annoying villains I’ve seen in my life. And by annoying, she didn’t exactly annoy any of the movie’s characters, she annoyed me. I HATED her voice. She’s basically what would happen if Joy from “Inside Out” went insane. I despised this character! As a villain, her motivation was clear, but as a character, her personality didn’t make me smile, IT MADE ME RAGE! Speaking of things that made me rage, we get ANOTHER similarity to “The LEGO Movie” when it comes to the villain! She has these minions that are supposed to look menacing, you know how in “The LEGO Movie” they have these characters referred to as Micromanagers? They’re all black and red and they essentially, well, micromanage stuff. Guess what’s in this piece of crap?! MORE BLACK AND RED MINIONS! They look different and they don’t exactly do the same thing the Micromanagers do, but it just comes off as unoriginal especially when you keep a lot of the other elements from this film in mind. What are the names of the minions? I don’t know and I don’t give a f*ck!

One of my absolute biggest disappointments concerning “The Emoji Movie” is Sir Patrick Stewart. Now keep in mind, when say Patrick Stewart is a disappointment, I didn’t hate him in this movie, it’s just that I wanted to see more of him. He plays the Poop Emoji, and I think it’s a superb casting choice, by far the best one in the movie. Who doesn’t want to see a British piece of s*it walking around with a remarkably soothing voice? I will say, regardless of what you think of Patrick Stewart in this film, there’s one interview where Stewart is talking about the movie, it’s on “Conan.” The interview was meant to promote “Logan,” but Patrick Stewart and Conan O’Brien talked about “The Emoji Movie” at one point. I don’t know, I just love it. The video’s down below if you want to watch it.

Although one of the biggest flaws when it comes to this character, is something concerning him and his son, Poop Jr., or PJ. There’s this one scene from the trailer containing a poop joke, you know what I’m talking about if you’ve seen it. Before that even happens, Patrick Stewart comes out of a stall with his son, who is established to be ten years old. I’d be OK with this if the son was like, I don’t know, three and he wasn’t toilet trained, or if he was puking at one point or had diarrhea or something, but the problem here is, he’s toilet trained, shouldn’t he be in his own stall? Does he or his father have some sort of fetish with watching people eliminate waste? OK, no, that’s probably not the case, this is a kids movie, but still. In fact, during the same scene, TJ Miller’s Meh is in the bathroom too, he’s actually in there with his mother and father. One thing I want to know, is this a unisex public restroom? Because if it isn’t, this would be really awkward. Also the record, it’s easy to tell based on the qualities of the characters that none of the Mehs are transgender or anything. Just put the father Meh in the bathroom without the mother and you would avoid me questioning this scene! Speaking of which, let’s talk about Meh’s parents.

The parents of Meh are referred to as Mel Meh (Steven Wright) and Mary Meh (Jennifer Coolidge), and they serve their purpose. They’re there when they need to be, but my biggest problem with them is that maybe they’re in the movie a little too much. OUT OF THE MOTHERF*CKING BLUE, some subplot comes up that has to do with them separating, which basically does nothing for the film as a whole! You may as well consider this the opposite of “Seinfeld” because “Seinfeld” is a show about nothing and yet it turned out to be something, and here, you get something, but it turns out to be nothing! By the way, there’s a f*cking “Casablanca” reference thrown in somewhere into this subplot. THIS MOVIE TRIED TO REFERENCE “CASABLANCA!” A critically acclaimed, black and white film, was referenced, in this movie! I’m a sucker for references, but movies, TV shows, video games, whatever it may be, in my book, have to make sure these references are utilized properly and doesn’t end up feeling forced! I haven’t seen “Casablanca,” but this reminds me of the “Ghostbusters” remake when they try to reference “Scarface!”

Now part of movie takes place in this inside a real world and another part of it is in a virtual world. Does it sound like something that’s been done before? If you said yes, I’m with you because this idea has been done before. Three movies that pop in my mind when it comes to this are “Wreck-it Ralph,” “The LEGO Movie,” and “Inside Out,” all of which I consider to be great. You can also say this was done in 2011’s “The Smurfs,” but you’d be wrong, that has transporting between dimensions, not to mention it’s just hilarious to call “The Smurfs” a MOVIE. Here, the virtual world is inside a cell phone with all of these apps and Emojis and all sorts of other s*it. The real world is basically during present day, and we see a teenage boy who has a crush on a girl. While they did happen to exchange phone numbers, he’s still a little apprehensive towards the status between him and the girl because he’s having trouble deciding what to say to her and what Emoji to send to her. Now one movie reviewer whose content I frequently check out is Jeremy Jahns, he has an “awesometacular” YouTube channel. He mentions in his review that this makes no sense because the boy and the girl already has given out phone numbers to each other so the boy should have no problem contacting this girl. Believe it or not, I don’t use Emojis quite often, but I am in high school, and IF I have a crush on a girl, I might sometimes not know what to say or type, or if I know there’s something I know I want to say or type, I might not know exactly when I want to say or type it. The boy in this movie, the one who owns the phone all of these Emojis are in, wasn’t a horrible character, but watching him at times in this movie was just weird. His role in the movie involves trying to ask out Addie, the girl he has a crush on to what is referred to as the “Fall Dance.” That’s a pretty cliche dance name if you ask me, but that’s not important. He also is trying to take his phone to tech support because it’s starting to go crazy due to all the activity going on in there with the Emojis. He certainly moved the plot along, but when you combine the world of the Emojis with reality, it suddenly becomes cringeworthy. This is especially noticeable during the “Candy Crush” segment of the movie. In fact, let’s compare this to two other animations, “Wreck-It Ralph” and “Inside Out.” This also just goes to show you how much this movie is like those!

When it comes to both of these movies, both of those take place in two different dimensions which can’t be crossed. In Wreck-It Ralph, you have the real world, which is basically inside an arcade, and for the virtual world, it’s inside the games which make up the arcade. In “Inside Out,” the movie took place in the real world, where we see the life of Riley, the film’s main character who moves to San Francisco with her parents, along with the virtual world, which is inside Riley’s head and we get to look at all of the emotions such as Joy, Fear, and Anger. What makes “Wreck-It Ralph” and “Inside Out” great is that they focus a lot on their story and happen to remain smart, which is kind of funny because this movie takes place in a “smartphone.” Also, “Wreck-It Ralph” was a fun ride for kids and adults alike, “Inside Out,” wowed me and almost made me cry at the end. Another similarity is that these three films contain a character going on an adventure away from where they primarily belong, which is fine, I don’t mind that, but the other movies did it better. Also, the inclusion of “Candy Crush” kind of reminded me of “Sugar Rush” from “Wreck-It Ralph.” The way the characters and apps are in “The Emoji Movie” remind me of “Wreck-It Ralph” too because in “Wreck-It Ralph” you’ve got all of these iconic video game characters like Pac-Man, Q*bert, Bowser, Zangief, and Sonic the Hedgehog, who actually was played by the same guy who did the voice for him in “Sonic Free Riders” and “Sonic Generations.” In this movie, it’s kind of hard not to include these characters, after all, this is “The Emoji Movie,” but “Wreck-It Ralph” did a better job at including those characters by not including anything that would be considered forced or cringeworthy. Not to mention, the characters that are all in the Wreck-It Ralph video game are exclusive to this movie, they aren’t based off of any sort of video game, they were made up for the “Wreck-It Ralph” movie. When I first heard about “The Emoji Movie,” I thought this movie wasn’t necessary. I gave kudos to the animators for making it look good, but then again you can look at an animation like “Ice Age: Collision Course” and say it looks good. Also, in “Wreck-It Ralph,” the video game the main character belongs in goes out of order due to “technical difficulties,” and in “The Emoji Movie,” the phone might not have much time left because of its own technical difficulties. And there’s one moment in this movie, specifically towards the end, which reminded me of a flashback that occurred in “Wreck-It Ralph” in Sugar Rush.

One thing I DETESTED in this movie is the obnoxious product placement! This movie has more product placement than a Michael Bay “Transformers” film! You can argue that “The LEGO Movie” was a commercial, but here’s the thing, the story came first. It almost felt like Sony Animation or someone else behind this film thought about contacting a bunch of companies who make apps and say “Hey, you want to be in our s*itf*ck in the ass?” and they somehow put them all in there so they can just make s*itloads of money! “The LEGO Movie” utilized product placement to a certain degree and there’s only one moment in the movie that feels commercial-esque (the moment that talks about a bunch of LEGO sets) but not only does it fly by, it’s kind of makes me laugh. This movie has an entire segment inside “Candy Crush” that moved the plot along, and when it comes to other stuff, it’s almost like this: “You guys know Facebook? Oh look, here’s Facebook!” “You guys know YouTube? Here’s YouTube!” “You guys know Instagram? Oh look, there’s Instagram!” There’s also a segment containing a dance sequence which was PAINFUL to watch. Guess where it takes place? “Just Dance!” There’s even a moment where our heroes have to get to Dropbox! Not only that, but guess how they get there? Twitter! No, they don’t go through the app, instead, the Twitter bird mascot shows up! What the f*ck?!

I want to ask something, were you expecting a good movie out of this? Because I sure wasn’t. This was one of my least anticipated films of the year, and the reason why I saw it is basically people wanted me to go see it. I’m doing this for others, not myself. “The Emoji Movie” is nothing but a rip off of better animations, a s*itty idea which became a s*itty movie, and a poorly written, anger-inducing f*ckpile of a film created by a bunch of c*cksucking jackasses that just want to capitialize on a trend! If this movie makes enough money, there’s a slight chance that some motherf*cker might make a “Fidget Spinner” movie! I have a good idea for one, but we DON’T NEED ONE! If you bring your family to this film, you’d all probably be bored. If you bring your boyfriend or girlfriend to this film, they’ll dump you. If you bring your husband or wife to this film, they’ll divorce you. If you bring your best friend to this film, they’ll call the friendship off. If you bring your boss to this movie, they’ll fire you. If you bring a celebrity or someone like that whom you admire because they like you well enough and want to hang out with you, they’ll need a restraining order in order to protect themselves from you. “The Emoji Movie” is a quality example of a s*itty Hollywood movie that f*cks up people’s minds and makes them all explode. I’m gonna give “The Emoji Movie” a Sir Patrick Stewart/10, which can translate to 💩/🔟 if you speak Emoji, which can also mean s*it/10, although if you’re a kid it would be better for you to say poop/10, which in plain English, comes out to 1/10. There’s no reason for this movie to exist, I’ve only seen a few movies in my life that are worse than this damn pile of holy s*itness. I would probably much rather go back in time and f*ck Adolf Hitler in the ass than watch this movie again. Also for the record, I’m heterosexual so that makes it extra embarrassing. Thanks for reading this rant–err–I mean, review. Please don’t see this movie. You’re better off watching “Dunkirk” with your kids. Sure, it may be a war film with scary events happening, but at least you’ll be watching art. Speaking of which, check out my review for “Dunkirk,” the link is down below, it’s a good read, I highly suggest you check it out. Stay tuned for more reviews! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

“DUNKIRK” REVIEW: https://scenebefore.wordpress.com/2017/07/26/dunkirk-2017-a-bloodless-yet-realistic-depiction-of-war/

The Emoji Movie Scores 0% on Rotten Tomatoes, IS IT REALLY THAT SHOCKING?

Posted on by Jack Drees

mv5botlly2zkywetmzuzyy00yte3lwiymmqtnjiwmzjhmzcynzixxkeyxkfqcgdeqxvymjmzmti2nzu-_v1_sy1000_sx675_al_

Hey everyone, Jack Drees here! One of my last posts of 2016 had to do with “The Emoji Movie.” In that post, I dove into the sheer awfulness of the teaser promoting the movie, along with the idea of the movie itself. By the way, if you’re interested in that post, the link for it is down below. There was also another trailer for this movie, which by the way, was better, but that didn’t get me any more excited for the film. This flick has a cast with names I like, including TJ Miller (Silicon Valley, Deadpool), Anna Faris (Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs, Mom),  Patrick Stewart (Star Trek: The Next Generation, X-Men), and even Sofia Vergara who I like despite how I think “Modern Family” might as well just be the single most overrated show, if not in the territory for sitcoms, ever made. The animation overall, at least from what I’ve seen, isn’t all that bad either. Aside from these statements, I can’t really think of any other positives I can give based on what I’ve witnessed other than one example of toilet humor from the main trailer. Why am I doing this post? Well, this isn’t a review of the movie, I haven’t seen it. Other people have though, and so far the results are not looking good.

The Emoji Movie: How is This a Thing?!: https://scenebefore.wordpress.com/2016/12/27/the-emoji-movie-how-is-this-a-thing/

2017-07-27 (1)

As of now, this movie has 0% on Rotten Tomatoes! This is something that I don’t normally see with many films. Although there are films that currently stand among this category, including “Superbabies: Baby Geniuses 2,” “Space Chimps 2: Zartog Strikes Back,” “Fred: The Movie,” “Max Steel,” “The Ridiculous 6,” “Beethoven’s 4th,” “Mulan II,” “The Fox and the Hound 2,” and “United Passions,” a movie so poorly received that The Guardian’s own Jordan Hoffman said in his review “as cinema it is excrement.” Haha, love that quote. I just want to remind everyone, that there’s this one movie that came out last year in January, which was also animated. That my friends, is “Norm of the North.” I never saw it from beginning to end, although if that’s something you’re interested in (laughs), it’s free on Amazon with Prime Video. Many people consider this to be one of the worst animations ever made, especially when you consider the fact that it was in theaters. It currently has a 3.7/10 on IMDb, along with a 9% on Rotten Tomatoes. I know “The Emoji Movie” literally just came out, but this could be worse than “Norm of the North.” A lot of people disliked “Norm of the North” due to it’s animation and content displayed in the movie. I can only imagine how this movie would be compared to that. The animation looks decent in the trailer, so either it looks like crap in some scenes of the movie I don’t know about, or everything else is beyond horrible and the animation is just fine.

I wasn’t even expecting this movie to be good, I was just hoping the folks over at Sony Pictures Animation would put at least a shred of effort into this movie, and speaking of underwhelming animations, Sony Pictures Animation came out with a movie last year as well, which also has to do with something iconic related to phones. That, ladies and gentlemen, is referred to as, “The Angry Birds Movie.” Much like “Norm of the North,” I didn’t see this, but I heard it wasn’t too great. It got decent ratings on IMDb, 6.3/10 to be specific. But this film does have its haters, haha, I kind of just made them sound like trolls. This film was considered underwhelming due to how it seemed to display conservative propaganda, from my view from watching the Cinemasins video on this movie I have no idea if the people behind this movie ere even go for that or what. There’s also how it seemed to make particular viewers think that some of the movie might actually be a little over the edge for certain children, and other reasons. Also, you have to consider the fact that this was written by the same screenwriter who wrote the first two live-action “Alvin and the Chipmunks” movies.

This almost makes me think that in the near future, we’ll be seeing more movies based on stuff having to do with your phone or other electronics. What’s next? A movie about Twitter where we have to root for the blue bird who has some necessary story arch? A movie about Snapchat where we have to root for the ghost in the middle of the yellow square? A movie based on Subway Surfers where there’s a subway surfing competition? A movie based on Jetpack Joyride which is basically an escape movie the whole time? A social media mascot cinematic universe? People are saying that movies based on video games are crappy, let me just remind you that I have an idea for a video game based movie and I do think it has potential, but I don’t have time to get into that. Movies based on Emojis is probably, on paper, one of the dumbest concepts I’ve heard for a movie, AND IT GOT GREENLIT! AND RELEASED! IN THEATERS! IN REAL-D 3D! Just be glad Christopher Nolan’s “Dunkirk” came out last week or else this would receive a greater chance of being an IMAX movie!

So I was right, this movie is very likely to be an abomination. If I go see this movie, I wonder if I’ll just mark it as the worst movie of the year. I can only imagine what would happen from here. As much as I don’t want to see the movie to maintain my utter sanity, I also feel like seeing it just to see how truly awful it really is. If I don’t see this in the theater, I’ll more than likely buy it or rent it when it comes out on home video. If there’s anything else left to say, it’s this. First off, f*ck you Sony and Sony Pictures Animation for releasing this. Second, to this movie, I gotta say, good luck at the box office, good luck. Who knows? Maybe my ten dollars could go towards this movie, only time will tell. Thanks for reading this post, and also be sure to check out my latest review for the movie “Dunkirk.” Just click on the red box that will take you to the review, or who knows, maybe if you scroll down, that review will be right below this post. I love the movie, I highly recommend it, but also recommend you read the review just you know what to expect going in. Also, be sure to look forward to my future reviews, I mentioned I MIGHT review this movie, not sure though. Although I will say I do want to check out “Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets” and “Atomic Blonde” because they do sound intriguing. Stay tuned for more great content! And since we’re talking about Emojis, this is a reminder to everyone to not be a 💩😶, if you don’t know what that means in your native language, unless you speak Emoji, comment down below and I’ll leave a response to that comment saying what that means. Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Spider-Man: Homecoming (2017): The Spidey Reboots Continue

Posted on by Jack Drees

mv5bndcyndczntgtota5os00ymqwlwe2nmitmjfhmdvizjm2mduwxkeyxkfqcgdeqxvymzexmty0mju-_v1_sy1000_sx750_al_

“Spider-Man: Homecoming” is directed by Jon Watts and it has a cast including Tom Holland, Michael Keaton, Robert Downey Jr., Marisa Tomei, Laura Harrier, and Zendaya. This film is the sixth standalone “Spider-Man” film to hit the big screen. You may have seen the interpretation of this web slinger once before in “Captain America: Civil War,” but ultimately, this is Spidey’s own movie, hence the name “Spider-Man: Homecoming.” The overall plot of this film involves Spidey trying to balance his life in school, while at the same time, having to take down the Vulture. Oh yeah, and Iron Man’s there too.

Going into this movie, I was pretty excited. I’m not much of a comic book junkie, but I do enjoy Spider-Man as a character, and pretty much every aspect of him resonates with me as a person. He’s a nerd, he’s smart, he’s trying to just get his life together, and he’s kind of an outcast when it comes to society despite having a number of friends. Although at the same time, I was worried, because the trailers did reveal a little more than I had hoped they would, and this movie was being advertised almost as an “Iron Man” film. I mean, you could argue that “Captain America: Civil War” qualified as an “Iron Man” film but to me, it actually worked there because part of the title is Civil War, signifying that there is a war among the Marvel heroes, and it still focused a bit on the story of Captain America and what he’s got going on during various portions of this film. If you watch the trailers for this film, you might as well think it should be called “Spider-Man: Homecoming (Featuring: Iron Man).” However, this movie isn’t really like that. Sure, Iron Man is in some of it, but it’s not like he’s taking up a good portion of the movie’s runtime.

Let’s talk about Peter Parker in this movie, now if you have watched all the other big screen “Spider-Man” flicks, you may be aware that in at least a portion of each series these flicks are part of, Peter’s a teenager in high school. That’s no different here in this movie. Parker establishes at one point in the movie that he’s 15 years old. Why do I mention this? Well, one thing people point out about the other flicks, is that Parker is being played by someone pretending to be a teenager, but they’re really in their twenties. For the record, Tom Holland, the guy playing this interpretation of Spidey, is actually 21 right now. I would imagined he would have been 19 and 20 throughout the process of filming this movie. After all he was 19 when “Captain America: Civil War” came out. So while it is not exactly age accurate, it is closer to being age accurate than the past Spider-Men we’ve received. Now, I gotta say, I have nothing really terrible to say about Tom Holland as Spider-Man, at times, when he’s in the suit, he reminded me of Andrew Garfield’s interpretation of Spider-Man. I’m not saying there’s anything wrong with that, I liked Garfield’s interpretation. It was like the comics, he had all sorts of technology, he had some quips, which we’re gonna get to. Speaking of Andrew Garfield, I mentioned I had some cons with his interpretation as Peter Parker. I can’t say the same for Tom Holland. It was never awkward, it was fluid, and it felt like I was watching an actual nerd at times. Some of this is shown through his various complications he’s received through his personal life. Speaking of his personal life, let’s talk about one of Peter’s friends.

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! I mean, at times, I liked his character, he was a nerd like me, but there were times in this movie where it almost sounded like he was jacked up on caffeine and he was just, I don’t know how to describe him. Simply put, he was annoying. He eventually finds out Peter is Spider-Man, not a spoiler, it was shown in the advertising, and after that, he starts asking all of these questions, and it’s just too much to handle.

Let’s talk about Peter’s love interest in the movie. In Raimi’s trilogy, the love interest was Mary Jane Watson, played by Kirsten Dunst. In Marc Webb’s films, the love interest was Gwen Stacy, played by Emma Stone. In this universe, the love interest is Liz Allan, played by Laura Herrier. If you remember before this movie came out, rumors were going around saying the love interest in this movie was going to be Mary Jane, played by Zendeya (Shake It Up, K.C Undercover). However, none of that’s true. Sure, Zendeya’s in the movie, but she is neither the love interest, nor is she Mary Jane. Zendeya actually plays a character named Michelle, although at one point she does say people call her “MJ.” Anyway, back to Liz. When it comes to all of the love interests in every “Spider-Man” series we’ve gotten so far, I must say the relationship between her and Peter may be the most authentic. Is it my favorite? I don’t know, but in terms of coming close to a real relationship, this is something Peter and Liz have going for each other.

Now let’s get to where Marvel usually leaves a bit to be desired, the villain. In this movie, the villain is the Vulture. He’s played by Michael Keaton which I actually find rather interesting considering how he once played Batman. He’s one of the better villains I’ve seen Marvel put out recently. He’s not the best Spider-Man villain I’ve seen in all of cinema, that’s a close call between Alfred Molina’s Doc Ock and Willem Dafoe’s Green Goblin. His relationship with Peter in this movie is interesting, he was almost terrifying at times, and his motivation was pretty clear.

Going into this film, I knew about this, but Happy Hogan (left), played by Jon Faverau, is also in here. What I didn’t expect is how much of a crucial role he’d have in the film as a whole. I’m not against it or anything, I’m just saying. Overall, I had no major problems with him, although he pretty much did the same actions as Tony Stark throughout the movie so there’s not too much separating the two characters in that sort of aspect. The two were basically mentors to Peter. The relationship between Peter and Tony was a bit more prominent, but there was a relationship between Peter and Happy too.

I want to talk about the movie’s screenplay and how it was presented. Multiple people wrote this movie, and while I do think they did a fine job, it could have been better. I’ll just put it this way. In “Captain America: Civil War,” Spider-Man, at least in my opinion, was the best part of the movie. Why? Pretty much every single line of dialogue uttered by him, mainly during the big throwdown at the airport, was comedy gold. Almost every line from Spidey was a quip, and they were all hysterical! Sure, you get some chuckle-worthy quips here, but nowhere near as good as “Captain America: Civil War.” And this kind of sucks because you have an entire movie dedicated to Spidey, as opposed to a movie that has him for about ten or so minutes. Now, if you read my reviews, you may be thinking I’m an idiot, because I happen to revere Tobey Maguire’s Spidey and I mentioned before that he doesn’t give too many quips and it works for him. Here’s the thing, it was established in “Captain America: Civil War” with this Spider-Man that he’s a s*it-talker. These are two different universes.

On the topic of humor, there was this one line given in the movie. A bunch of people are going on a bus, I honestly can’t recall who said this, it could’ve been Peter, I don’t know. But they’re all headed to Washington DC for Nationals, and one person talks about protesting and that’s a reason why they’re on this bus to DC, this is followed by a reply from someone else saying that protesting is patriotic. When I heard that, I couldn’t help but think about the following ideas. 1: This was one of the later days of shooting and Trump was in office. 2: The writers pretty much predicted Donald Trump would win and they had the balls to write this. 3: This may be anti-Trump propaganda. 4: This could have been a reshoot just to get that line in because Trump was in office and the people behind this movie wanted to insert a joke per se. I don’t know, but this almost sounds like the movie just wanted to bash against Donald Trump. I’m not against bashing Donald Trump, but that line was cringe-worthy and just all around forced.

Another problem I have with this movie involves Spider-Man’s suit. Tony Stark has a form of control over it, which yeah, it’s almost in the same way you operate a kid’s bike. That’s fine and all, but the problem with that is, at one point, Peter turns it off. Yes, that’s a spoiler, but I assure you, it very likely won’t affect much of your experience watching this movie. The thing I consider to be wrong with this is how the suit operates when turned off. There’s this artificial intelligence thingy inside the suit essentially, and it’s pretty much the Spider-Man equivalent to JARVIS. The mode Peter turns off is referred to as Training Wheels. Peter and Tony never get into an argument over this, but that’s not worth talking about. What I do feel like talking about is the fact that Spider-Man has an assistant in his suit, it’s basically helping him. It’s giving him advice on all sorts of tactics and stuff like that. If you have a mode called Training Wheels, wouldn’t that have the voice? Spider-Man has to figure out everything on his own without that voice. I mean, you could argue that the mode is called training wheels because Spider-Man doesn’t have access to all of the advanced s*it. But even with that, how does this resolve the artificial intelligence problem? Let’s look at it this way, there’s a sequence in “Iron Man 3” where a bunch of people are falling out of a plane and Iron Man has to save them. He has JARVIS who’s actually able to assist him. He asks JARVIS how many people are in the air, JARVIS replies saying a number somewhere in the teens, I believe it was thirteen. Tony then asks how many people he could carry, JARVIS responds telling him he can only carry four people. Tony is able to use his artificial intelligence to his own benefit and Spider-Man can’t, because, it’s too advanced for him. That’s like telling a student that he or she can’t refer to a textbook when they’re doing their homework.

Speaking of artifical intelligence problems, there’s more. At one point in the movie, Spidey actually tells her about Liz, and how he feels about her. Now, I won’t get super-spoilery, it might be minor-spoilery, but it’s not gonna affect much of your experience. Peter Parker actually TELLS her about Liz, but at no point does it reveal Peter SHOWING pictures of Liz or anything like that. At one point later in the movie, I won’t say when, the AI says that Spider-Man should kiss her. YOU DON’T KNOW WHAT SHE LOOKS LIKE! WHY ARE YOU SAYING ALL OF THIS CRAP?!

One thing I have a very minor problem with is the movie’s title. It’s called “Spider-Man: Homecoming” and based on the content presented in the movie, it’s called that for a reason. During the movie, there’s this homecoming dance, but that barely has anything to do with the movie. If you want a better title, I’d go with “Spectacular Spider-Man,” “Spider-Man: The Inspired Hero,” “The Web Slinging Spider-Man,” “Spider-Man: Rise of the Vulture,” or “Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man.” As far as other complaints go, I was going to say there was one point which one of Iron Man’s suits come in and rescues Peter from an incident, and I began to question how it even knew where Peter was, but another part of me says that Tony might be tracking Peter and it happens to be something movie isn’t telling me, so I’m wondering if that complaint will either stand or fall.

In the end, “Spider-Man: Homecoming” is somewhat fun, but overall, it could have been a much better “Spider-Man” experience. There were some things I liked in the movie, and quite a few things I didn’t like in the movie. I haven’t even talked about Aunt May, I’ll say she was average. Certainly better than the last Aunt May we had. Considering how “Spider-Man” was established in “Captain America: Civil War,” this film was rather disappointing. By the way, if you don’t know my thoughts on “Spider-Man 3,” I believe it gets too much hate, and honestly, when compared to “Spider-Man 3,” I’d actually rather watch that instead of “Spider-Man: Homecoming.” Sorry guys, this is just how I feel. I’m gonna give “Spider-Man: Homecoming” a rather low 7/10. This might drop to a 6 sometime in the future, I’m honestly not sure. This film had a lot of good things about it. The high school scenes felt rather authentic, the villain was great by Marvel standards, I liked Tom Holland, but he was given better dialogue in “Captain America: Civil War.” Oh yeah, and Ned is just a chatterbox that I wanted to punch in the face. I may be judging this film rather harshly, but the thing is, this is Marvel Studios, who are usually known for making good movies, nine of them being at least 8/10 in my book, so this ultimately somewhat let me down. Sure, Sony was involved, but Marvel Studios collaborated so I feel something like this is worth mentioning.

Thanks for reading this review, Christopher Nolan’s newest movie, “Dunkirk,” comes out in two weeks, so right now I’m doing a series of reviews dedicated to past Christopher Nolan films, this week I reviewed “Interstellar,” I haven’t made a final decision on what my next review should be, but you’ll see what I decided on when I finish the review. Although if you do want to check out my review for “Interstellar,” you’ll either see an icon that can take you to the review, or that’ll be the post below this one. Also, since this is a review for “Spider-Man: Homecoming,” I’ll have links down below to all of my other “Spider-Man” reviews. Check those out if you’re interested, I had fun making them, and I hope you have as much fun reading them. Stay tuned for more reviews! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

“SPIDER-MAN” REVIEW: https://scenebefore.wordpress.com/2017/03/18/spider-man-your-friendly-neighborhood-2002-movie/

“SPIDER-MAN 2” REVIEW: https://scenebefore.wordpress.com/2017/04/14/spider-man-2-best-superhero-movie-to-date-spoilers-for-this-movie-spider-man-1/

“SPIDER-MAN 3” REVIEW: https://scenebefore.wordpress.com/2017/05/11/spider-man-3-2007-is-it-really-as-bad-as-everyone-says/

“THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN” REVIEW: https://scenebefore.wordpress.com/2017/06/06/the-amazing-spider-man-2012-is-it-really-so-amazing-spoilers/

“THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN 2” REVIEW: https://scenebefore.wordpress.com/2017/07/02/the-amazing-spider-man-2-2014-a-crappier-version-of-spider-man-3-spoilers/