“The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent” is directed by Tom Gormican (Ghosted, That Awkward Moment) and stars Nicolas Cage (Con Air, The Croods) as himself, kind of. Joining the Academy Award-winning thespian are stars including Pedro Pascal (The Mandalorian, Wonder Woman 1984), Sharon Horgan (Everyone’s Talking About Jamie, Game Night) Tiffany Haddish (Girls Trip, Uncle Drew), Ike Barinholtz (Snatched, Blockers), Alessandra Mastronardi (To Rome with Love, Master of None), Jacob Scipio (Bad Boys for Life, Without Remorse), and Neil Patrick Harris (How I Met Your Mother, The Smurfs). This film follows Nicolas Cage, or Nick Cage if you want to be more technical, as he hits a bit of a rough patch career-wise. When a high-paying opportunity arrives to meet with a superfan, Nick Cage is in for the role of a lifetime, working for the CIA.
When it comes to actors, Nicolas Cage is the definition of an enigma. He won an Oscar for “Leaving Las Vegas” and received another nomination for his work in “Adaptation” years later, so he is not short on talent, nor is he short on resume-worthy credits. But he also has a history of being an Internet meme. For example, one of my favorite YouTube movie critics, Chris Stuckmann, does a series of reviews by the name of “Hilariocities,” and the intro to each episode is centered around Nicolas Cage because of his tendency to take certain roles that make him look over the top and zany, sometimes not in the right ways. Cage has a history of choosing movies that are not remembered, movies that have gone straight to DVD, movies that occasionally make me wonder if he even reads the script before he signs on. One of my first positives of “The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent” is its tendency to be effectively tongue and chic regarding Nicolas Cage. Or in some cases, the way society, especially on the Internet, paints a picture of him.
I think putting Cage in the center of this film was a brilliant idea, because while I know Cage has done some prolific work in recent years like “Spider-Man into the Spider-Verse” and “The Croods 2,” he is an actor I would think of these days when it comes to, “X actor needs to pay bills, therefore X actor stars in Y movie without hesitation.” But even with that in mind, Cage commits every time, no matter how unrealistic the script. And for this movie, a lack of realism is perhaps no exception. If I invited Nicolas Cage to my birthday bash this year, he would likely tell me to screw off. At least this is what my head tells me, because actors are not always in the business of entertaining for parties or other related events. But the moments that arguably lack verisimilitude make “The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent” worth watching.
The bond between Cage and Pascal is a highlight of the film. I like both actors by themselves, but if you put them together, that is a recipe for greatness. Much of the movie involves Nicolas Cage being tasked by a couple people affiliated with the CIA to stay and keep an eye on Javi, who to his surprise, becomes his newfound companion. This takes a toll on Cage as he came into this situation with partial hesitancy and now that he is here, he now has a sense of trust with his new pal. The duo literally bonded over “Paddington 2!” I have never seen “Paddington 2,” mainly because I have not seen “Paddington 1” from the mid-2010s, but I will give this film credit where it is due, it has made me want to check out “Paddington 2.” But this movie is not just about Cage finding out he likes “Paddington 2,” or trying to get people he knows to watch “The Cabinet of Caligari,” this film can also qualify as a tribute to Cage’s career and legacy. Fans of his previous movies will probably rejoice as to how one particular aspect of this movie unfolds, as it is one gigantic callback to his cinematic library.
This film also knocks its portrayal of celebrity culture out of the park. Obviously, given how this is a Nicolas Cage film, it would be wise to realize how his fans see him on screen. But there is a great moment in the film that reminds me of how ballsy it is as a fan to stop a celebrity in the street. Because the reality is, celebrities have lives. They have places to be. That is a good reason you should not stop them in the street. But at the same time, getting to meet them presents itself as a once in a lifetime opportunity, making it that much more palatable to stop them and ask for a picture. This is why events like comic con exist. That way the celebrity guests are in one place and possibly there almost solely to make the fan’s day while also making a profit. But I will be real, if someone stopped me in the street to compliment that one review I did, I would be thankful and happy enough to take a second out of my day to talk to them. But the way this movie presents a case like that shows how unexpected such a moment can be. Nicolas Cage came off as the kind of guy who would not mind taking a selfie with a fan, but I also noticed how quick this scene was handled, showing that one person or the other had things to do. Entertainers are amongst an interesting profession because they are perhaps more likely than others to be stopped. Imagine if you were working in a landscaping company and someone came up to you and screamed, “Wow! I love what you did with my neighbor’s yard! All my friends are talking about it!” You don’t usually see that as much with people in such a profession.
This film, genre-wise, is part buddy comedy, part crime investigation, part action adventure. All in all, I have to say it is one of the most delightfully charming, exciting movies I have watched in the past few months. Cage and Pascal are ridiculously funny together, and I totally buy their out of nowhere friendship. I think their chemistry is more prominent to me at this point however compared to the CIA plot, which is not a bad entry to the script by any means. I enjoyed what I saw. But Cage and Pascal’s scenes together grabbed my attention so much that it made a good portion of the film feel rather forgettable, and I think that is its biggest weakness. Although at the same time, one thing I did not forget is how the film seemingly takes jabs at today’s somewhat cookie cutter approach to storytelling, where you have basic ideas regurgitated over and over and fewer adult-centric tales out there for people to consume. The way “The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent” handles such an idea is not only entertaining, but also increasingly relevant in a studio system that is often dominated by blockbusters and franchises of “things people remember.” And as much as I love movies like “Free Guy,” I can see why people find them uninteresting or out of line with what they find watchable.
In the end, “The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent” will leave you laughing, it will leave you smiling, it will make you want to befriend Nicolas Cage yourself. Not to take away from Nicolas Cage, but the supporting cast is also likable and charismatic. You have some great actors like Tiffany Haddish, Ike Barinholtz, and Neil Patrick Harris. All of them have an attractive screen presence. When it comes to movies about stars playing themselves, I prefer “The Big Sick,” starring the hilarious Kumail Nanjiani, but “The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent” is still worth watching. I recommend it. I am going to give “The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent” a 7/10.
“The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.
Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for one of the biggest movies of 2022, the latest entry to the Marvel Cinematic Universe, “Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness!” Expect that review sometime soon! If you want to see this and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite movie where an actor plays themselves? Don’t you dare say “Space Jam…” Or the sequel, for that matter. Both are atrocities. Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“The Secret Life of Pets 2” is directed by Chris Renaud, who directed the previous installment to this specific franchise. He also has a voice role as multiple characters. Renaud is directing alongside Jonathan del Val, whose work has mainly been in the animation department for other Illumination titles such as “The Grinch” and “The Lorax,” which makes this his directorial debut. This film stars Patton Oswalt (King of Queens, Ratatouille) as the character of Max, a dog who has many pet pals in his vicinity around the city of New York. What’s interesting about that is the first movie had Max be voiced by Louis C.K., but based on eventually surfaced controversy, C.K. was replaced by Oswalt. Alongside Oswalt, we have Eric Stonestreet (Modern Family, Identity Thief), Kevin Hart (Ride Along, Central Intelligence), Jenny Slate (Obvious Child, The LEGO Batman Movie), Tiffany Haddish (Night School, Uncle Drew), Lake Bell (BoJack Horseman, Childrens Hospital), Nick Kroll (Operation Finale, Sing), Hannibal Buress (The Eric Andre Show, Neighbors), Bobby Moynihan (Saturday Night Live, Me, Myself, & I), and Harrison Ford (Star Wars, Raiders of the Lost Ark).
“The Secret Life of Pets 2” follows the story of the recently mentioned Max as he adapts to having a human child by his side, only to eventually become protective of said child, not to mention, his own self. Meanwhile we get side stories involving the bunny Snowball as a superhero and the dog Gidget guarding a toy as she tries to learn the traditions of being a cat.
I saw the original “Secret Life of Pets” back when it came out, and it was also one of my first reviews I have ever done (view my continuously developing content here). When I did that review, I managed to view the movie as decent, and I managed to address a complaint that I imagine a decent number of people had while watching the film. Specifically, the notion that “The Secret Life of Pets” is too similar to “Toy Story.” Yes, there are similarities, but “The Secret Life of Pets” is fine enough to stand on its own if you ask me.
That first movie managed to make $800 million more than its original budget of $75 million. Regardless of the movie’s quality, that is something both Universal and Illumination should celebrate. So naturally, a sequel seemed to be inevitable.
Well, here we are. And honestly, while I imagine some people like Chris Renaud may be doing this as a passion project, this almost feels like one of those movies that only exists just to make money. I could just say that just from viewing the movie on paper, but I viewed it on a screen. Guess what? I still feel that way! “The Secret Life of Pets 2” is the worst animation of the year so far! If I had to be honest, this just makes me feel bad for Illumination. I know the studio is pretty popular right now, especially with the following of “Despicable Me,” a trilogy I still have yet to see from start to finish. I saw part of the second film, and that is it. No, I have not seen “Minions.” But even though I enjoyed “Sing” and sort of enjoyed “The Secret Life of Pets,” I have yet to see that one film which defines the studio. To add onto this, I watched last year’s “The Grinch” and it was freaking awful. My gosh golly! That movie was a mean one for sure! Sadly, I think this movie’s worse. Because for starters, much like “The Grinch,” there is some occasional nice looking animation in this, but I think “The Grinch” slightly edges out its competitor because “The Grinch” was colorful and zazzy. There was nothing in this film that had a real wow factor. In fact, most of the film is cringe if you ask me!
Seriously! The writing is terrible! The plot is nearly convoluted! Not to mention, the movie almost has this rushed feeling to it. And if you look at the runtime, this statement would not surprise you. I say that because the runtime is 1 hour and 26 minutes. Coincidentally, that is also the runtime of what may be the worst animated film of all time, “The Emoji Movie,” another rushed disaster that might as well exist because, well, the thing it is about is trendy! “The Secret Life of Pets” was a success, why not make another one? We’ll make it the s*ittiest waste of time and money imaginable, and everyone will go see it. The script will be so lazy that it will eventually spend lots of time in one of the crew members’ junk drawers! Granted, “The Secret Life of Pets 2,” admittedly, is much better than “The Emoji Movie,” so this does not say much.
I felt like I already gave a teaser to how chaotic this movie is in terms of building blocks, because it didn’t feel like a movie. Instead, it felt more like a bad situation comedy episode with pets as the main cast. There are multiple plot lines for individual characters, which is fine for a number of films, but the execution was poor in this one. There are cheap jokes that don’t land, and there are anger-inducing moments that make playing a game of pinball where the flipper buttons shock you with each press look fun!
As for Max himself, there is one question I want to ask to the general audience going to this film. Do you care about the replacement voice actor? I could tell the voice difference betweent Oswalt and C.K., but I understand why the replacement happened so it’s not like I entirely give damn. Oswalt did a fine job with the voice, but as an avid moviegoer, I am gonna inevitably notice things, and Oswalt’s voice is not the same as C.K.’s. If you ask me, I would have probably done an audition process to see if someone could be a good match to Louis C.K.’s voice for the movie. Then again, I imagine some people don’t want to think about that guy so that could backfire. In terms of characterization, I understand the purpose of his character throughout the film and how he was written, but Max’s main problem in the movie in terms of how it was executed, nearly made me roll my eyes. Did I feel bad for him at times? Sure. But I still hated myself throughout the experience.
But as he tries to cope with this we get to meet the absolute best character in the movie, Rooster. For one thing, he’s voiced by Harrison Ford, who definitely brings a likable screen presence into a lot of projects, perhaps even if he sleepwalks. He has a couple of funny moments during the film, sadly I saw the characters’s main highlights prior to going into the auditorium. I guess this is what you get for watching promotional material and talk shows. Although unfortunately, because this movie quite literally cannot get any shorter, the amount of screentime Rooster manages to have is slightly underwhelming. I could tell that Harrison Ford was likely trying, but I would almost bet that this was a paycheck movie as far as Ford was concerned. As soon as I saw what I then gathered would be Ford’s final scene in the film, I almost wanted to turn off my brain. And I don’t mean turn off my brain and shove popcorn in my month as I stare at the screen. I mean lose all processes of thinking, knowing, and realizing. Because while I’m not psychic, I imagined that whatever would come next in the film, would be nowhere near as fun or entertaining as the scenes with Ford’s character. And of course, this super genius of film is right once again! Boom! Although I will say one thing about Harrison Ford’s character that is kind of interesting, I guess Han Solo got to play Chewbacca for once!
*Cricket noises*
Chewbacca derives from a Russian word for dog.
There is a lot of crap that happens in this movie to the point where I don’t even have the time to hit all of it (and some hinges into spoiler territory). Some of it includes a scene where Chloe (Lake Bell) is slowly taking in the effects of cat nip as if it was some sort of illegal drug, which might qualify to be one of the most unintentionally disturbing scenes in animation history. The ending is kind of absurd that it almost feels like it is too much for a cartoon, but there is one thing I have yet to cover regarding this film that I absolutely hate as a viewer.
They say a story is only as good as its villain. If that’s the case, THEN THIS STORY IS BULLCRAP! “The Secret Life of Pets 2” has a villain that even makes a good portion of the underwhelming MCU villains come off as menacing and watchable. Specifically, a character by the name of Sergei. The lackluster Sergei is partially responsible for running a circus. His latest addition to the crew is a wild tiger named Hu. Maybe I could appreciate the villain if he wasn’t so over-embellished, but crew went ahead and uttered “F*ck that! Quality? Who cares about quality? Let’s make him talk deep, with a unique yet cliche voice, give him the most boring lines imaginable, give him less personality than a bowling pin, and possibly make him more evil than he should be!” It would be fine if Sergei were some alien from another world or if he… I dunno, just didn’t happen to be human, but behind his black clothing and sidekick wolves, he is very likely just a regular guy. I imagine he would do other things in life aside from his dayjob at the circus. Once he gets home, I imagine he turns on the TV, watches the news, heats up a microwavable pizza, drinks a glass water, takes a shower, lives a normal life. I don’t mind ordinary people becoming extremely villainous for one reason or another, but in this case, it just didn’t work. If this is supposed to be propaganda against the circus or keeping wild animals where they don’t belong, maybe I could appreciate the movie for the direction it decided to take. But I’m sorry, it is overshadowed by cringe, insanity, stupidity, and a villain who makes this movie even more of a waste of my time than I ever imagined it would be. Remember the movie “Up” where the main villain is basically an elderly man who just loved to explore and hunt? He was not a maniac for the sake of being a maniac! Much like this film’s villain, he’s got a pack of animal sidekicks, but they have more dimension than chasing after potential victims. Then again, that’s because in this movie, the wolves are loyal to their one-dimensional owner whereas in “Up” the owner of the mob of dogs managed to have a personality. Man, this movie sucks!
In the end, “The Secret Life of Pets 2” is more intolerable than a bite from a vicious dog. I cannot even believe I am still talking about this movie! But in all seriousness, this movie could have been a lesson to children to make them realize they may have to face their fears, but sadly, I’m a teenager, and now I have self-diagnosed disease of TheSecretLifeofPets2phobia. Maybe it could be a lesson for adults and parents to not to make their children too soft, but even with a lesson like that intact, I learned a different lesson from “The Secret Life of Pets 2.” That lesson by the way is that I don’t ever want to watch this film again! This movie is a bad boy! Bad boy! Or… girl??? Is it a boy or girl? I dunno, who cares? The jokes don’t the work, the screenplay doesn’t work, and everything feels as rushed as math homework done by a student who answered each problem with the phrase “I dunno.” The first movie was OK, and now I am starting to wonder if someone put heavy drugs in my body because maybe if I watch that original film now it could suck. You know, kind of like this movie did. I’m going to give “The Secret Life of Pets 2” a 2/10. Thanks for reading this review! I just want to remind everyone that next week I am going to releasing a giant post related to my Scene Before experience so far this year, which will also include a preview for what I’ll be doing for the rest of the year. Stay tuned for that! Be sure to follow Scene Before either with a WordPress account or email so you can stay tuned for more great content! I want to know, did you see “The Secret Life of Pets 2?” What did you think about it? Or, what is the worst animated movie of the year for you? I did not see “Wonder Park,” but if I did see it, I imagine that would be in the conversation for sure. Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“The LEGO Movie 2: The Second Part,” AKA “The LEGO Movie 2,” AKA “The LEGO Movie 2: Part 2,” AKA “The LEGO Movie 2: The Fourth LEGO Movie In This Current Franchise,” AKA “The LEGO Movie 2: The One After The LEGO Movie” is directed by Mike Mitchell. This film stars Chris Pratt (Guardians of the Galaxy, Jurassic World), Elizabeth Banks (Power Rangers, The Hunger Games), Will Arnett (Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, Arrested Development), Tiffany Haddish (Girls Trip, Uncle Drew), Stephanie Beatriz (Brooklyn Nine-Nine, Ice Age: Collision Course), Charlie Day (Fist Fight, Pacific Rim), Alison Brie (BoJack Horseman, The Disaster Artist), Nick Offerman (Parks and Recreation, The Founder), and Maya Rudolph (Grown Ups, Saturday Night Live). This film takes place five years after its predecessor, exposing what exactly happened as a new, invasive LEGO army referred to as LEGO Duplo turns the happy go-lucky land of all its LEGO citizens into pieces of crap. Survivors are camping out in a city referred to as Apocalypseburg, which is basically a Mad Max-like wasteland in LEGO form. However, that’s not all, because the main character of Emmet must go on a quest to save his recently captured friends.
This film is the sequel to the box office and critical success that is “The LEGO Movie,” which to me is one of the most surprising flicks ever made. On paper, “The LEGO Movie” is one of the dumbest ideas of all time, despite how it somehow worked for video games over the years. It’s a movie about plastic building blocks that take forever to assemble and will instantly kill you once you step on them, and it somehow worked. And I don’t just mean worked, it’s up there with “The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies,” “Whiplash,” and “Interstellar” as one of my favorite movies of 2014. Such a great year for movies. AND I’M STILL PISSED IT DIDN’T GET NOMINATED FOR BEST ANIMATION AT THE ACADEMY AWARDS! Dumb f*ckery indeed! In fact, when I go to the movies, one of my frequent partners is my father, and I never see him have such a passion for many of the new releases we go see together. “The LEGO Movie” is one of the few exceptions. In fact, I’d say I’m willing to bet he likes “The LEGO Movie” more than I do, which says something especially given how I gave it a 10/10 score when I reviewed it here on Scene Before.
When it comes to the sequel however, it’s… just… good.
I am somewhat disappointed with the results of “The LEGO Movie 2: The Second Part.” While there is still LOTS of fun to be had, while there is still TONS of humor, while there are still MANY grand ideas, it just suffers from being less of a “family” movie, and catering a little more towards the kids. “The LEGO Movie 2” may be an enjoyable experience, but it drags a bit from its occasionally kiddy and less than satisfying original song track. I am not saying that the original “LEGO Movie” had no original songs put in, “Everything Is Awesome” was the definition of “catchy pop earworm.” In fact, I think there’s a song from “The LEGO Movie” that is significantly underappreciated.
Darkness!
No parents!
Continued darkness!
More darkness, get it?
The opposite of light!
Genius! Those are the actual f*cking lyrics to Batman’s Untitled Self Portrait! Sadly, we don’t get any songs as cool as that, or even as cool as the kick-ass opening number in “The LEGO Batman Movie.” However, I must say, Batman is as cool as ever.
Comic book nerds, if you guys are having a debate as to who the best on-screen Batman happens to be, this universe’s LEGO Batman (Will Arnett) interpretation BETTER qualify in your future debates, because he is freaking spectacular! There’s a meta joke in this movie between him and another character where he goes on about how awesome he is just because there were “nine movies already made about him and three currently in development.” Batman shines once again as being the ultimate version of a superhero narcissist. I can’t dive much deeper than that because, well, spoilers.
When it comes to the main character of Emmet (Chris Pratt), one part of this movie that I kind of dug is how despite being able to save an entire universe, Emmet is still technically lacking any special traits, which is pointed out in the first few moments of the flick. In fact, he’s literally back to being the same old hyperactive, giddy, happy go-lucky optimist that we were introduced to into the first movie. There’s a rehash of the first scene from the original movie when Emmet wakes up and says good morning to his city, but this time it is to his apocalyptic wasteland.
Speaking of things taken from the first movie, the movie continues its meta humor trend. I already mentioned the Batman thing, but there is a vast amount of other insertions of meta humor throughout. They make fun of convenient movie tropes. For example, hasn’t anyone ever noticed how slow doors close in movies for dramatic effect? There’s a brooding scene where the characters realize exactly how angsty they are. And there’s even an entire character dedicated to making fun of Chris Pratt!
“The name’s Rex. Rex Dangervest. GALAXY-DEFEDING ARCHAEOLOGIST, COWBOY, AND RAPTOR TRAINER WHO LIKES BUILDING FURNITURE, BUSTIN HEADS, AND HAVING CHISELED FEATURES PREVIOUSLY HIDDEN UNDER BABY FAT!”
In other words, you have Chris Pratt from other movies, combining his own characters from “Guardians of the Galaxy,” “The Magnificent Seven,” “Jurassic World,” and even Emmet himself! THANK! YOU! WRITERS! I will say, he was not as funny as I was expecting him to be (I may have hyped him up a little more than necessary), but he was still pretty dope. I will say, should they make another “LEGO Movie,” I really hope Universal undoes the cancellation of “Cowboy Ninja Viking,” because that was supposed to star Chris Pratt and if that movie comes out before “The LEGO Movie 3” and if Rex Dangervest makes a return, it would be interesting to see a modernized version of him where he partially contains the personality of the main character of that movie. That way, instead of being a galaxy-defending archaeologist, cowboy, and raptor trainer, he will then become a galaxy-defending archaeologist, cowboy ninja viking, and raptor trainer. Make it happen Warner Animation Group! Also, Universal, make that other project happen too.
If worst comes to worst, they can evolve him to “galaxy-defending archaeologist, cowboy, raptor trainer, and ship roamer.”
If you don’t get that last one, just watch “Passengers.”
On second thought, don’t watch “Passengers,” it’s not a good movie.
This movie, much like the first one, has a handful of cameos. You’ve got the DC Universe, Gandalf, Abraham Lincoln, Ruth Bader Ginsberg, Gary Payton, Sheryl Swoopes, even John McClane from “Die Hard” (or if you are IMDb, Bruce Willis)! And by the way, Bruce Willis actually has a voice in this movie! That is brilliant in every sense of the word! When it comes to this movie, it is a frenzy of fantastic ideas that are sadly hindered by musical numbers that are occasionally a pain to get through (although there is a good one featuring DC characters). I just feel like this movie is a kiddier version of its predecessor. Granted, it could definitely be worse. There aren’t many poop jokes that I recall, which is DEFINITELY a good thing.
Phil Lord and Christopher Miller worked on this movie, not the in the directing department, but they still worked on it, just like they did with the first one, and the duo are becoming two of my favorite people working in the industry. Between “The LEGO Movie,” “Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse,” “Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs,” and what I imagine would could MAYBE be a better version of “Solo: A Star Wars Story???” I feel that this duo is becoming more and more relevant by the day, with this movie being the duo’s latest success. Granted it falls more into “Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs” territory as opposed to “Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse” territory, but still. These two have a pretty solid track record thus far, and it is quite possible they could end up building a legacy similar to that of Christopher Nolan, Steven Spielberg, or Wes Anderson in the near future. Granted, I have not seen all of Lord and Miller’s work. I still haven’t seen “21 Jump Street” despite having owned it on Blu-ray for quite some time. I have faith in the Lord and Miller duo, and while this is be one of their inferior films, they still have my respect.
In the end, “The LEGO Movie 2” is a solid time at the movie theater. I’d say bring the kids, chances are they will end up enjoying it. If you really enjoyed the first “LEGO Movie,” you might find enjoyment in this as well. I will give praise to the “The LEGO Movie” franchise as a whole for having a consistent feel that doesn’t really come off as tiring. It’s lighthearted, wacky, creative, and amazingly fast-paced. I can’t confirm entirely given how I skipped on “The LEGO Ninjago Movie,” but I’ve seen three of this universe’s films at this point, and all of them have been at the very least, entertaining from start to finish. Is this the worst of the LEGO franchise? Yes, but it’s better than stepping on a LEGO brick. But to be completely real, just about anything is. I’m going to give “The LEGO Movie 2: The Second Part” a 7/10. Thanks for reading this review! If you are subscribed to this blog, stay tuned because it is currently Oscar season, and there is a good chance that I’ll have at least one post related to the Academy Awards coming up in the near future. I’ve made it a tradition to do a recap, which I may do again this year. And to be honest, I have the exact opposite of good feelings for this year’s ceremony. Between how the Academy has treated its technical members, to nearly implementing a Best Popular Film category, to not having a host this year, I am just scared at this point! But fear not! Because I just did my own awards show! If you want to view the 1st Annual Jackoff Awards, there’s a box down below that will take you right where you need to go! I should warn everyone who plans on reading this thing, BUCKLE UP, because it is a LONG post. But it is intentionally long, it’s a creative choice! Be sure to follow Scene Before either with a WordPress account or email so you can stay tuned for more great content! I want to know, did you see “The LEGO Movie 2: The Second Part?” What did you think about it? Or, of the current franchise of LEGO movies, which is your favorite? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“Uncle Drew,” otherwise known as my latest near death experience is “directed” by Charles Stone III (Mr. 3000, Drumline) and stars Kyrie Irving, Lil Rel Howrey, Shaquille O’Neal, Chris Webber, Reggie Miller, Nate Robinson, Erica Ash, JB Smoove, Mike Epps, with Tiffany Haddish and Nick Kroll. This “film” is about a character named Dax who doesn’t play basketball anymore due to a personally embarrassing moment that happened to him as a youngster. However, he’s not done with the sport in its entirety, because he still finds fun in coaching. One day, he convinces the legendary Uncle Drew to play basketball one more time, thus helping him win a tournament along with Drew’s squad. I’ll be completely honest with you, I’m actually getting a headache as I write this description. That’s what this movie did to me! YOU DID THIS, MOVIE!
Upon research, I managed to find out that the character of Uncle Drew is actually not an original character made for this very film. Turns out this is based on an episodic web-series which also stars Kyrie Irving. As I found out on IMDb, this web series was originally conceived by Pepsi. That’s right. Pepsi. You know, that thing that Cindy Crawford hypnotized people to drink? Yeah, that one! When I watched this movie and I saw that Pepsi was actually a producer of the film in the opening credits, I thought the sky was falling. NO! THIS IS REAL! AND NOW I KNOW THIS HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR YEARS! And this is probably the biggest negative I have with this movie, it’s not a movie, it’s a commercial. There are a few movies that work as commercials I’ve seen. Movies like “The Internship,” “The Greatest Movie Ever Sold,” and I may be cheating since I haven’t seen this but I know a good number of people like “The Wizard,” which if you break it down is essentially a commercial for Nintendo. The sad thing is, when it comes to all of the product placement, and trust me, there is A LOT, of Pepsi in this movie or any product made by Pepsico, none of it stands out as funny, entertaining, anything like that. People give a lot of flak towards movies like “Transformers: Age of Extinction” for having lots of product placement and coming off more like a commercial than anything else. At least in that, you get a rather badass scene with Bud Light. It’s forced, in some cases it may be considered cringeworthy, but it just makes you want to crack a drink open with force. So, I’m gonna be doing something special for this review…
This review is unofficially sponsored by Pepsi!
Drink it!
Share it!
Love it!
And most importantly… shake it to play a prank on your friend who will eventually open it and get delightful taste of Pepsi all over their precious pants!
Now back to the review, had I known that this movie is not completely original and partially responsible because of Pepsi, I may have possibly enjoyed it just a bit more. Not to mention, maybe if I were a different person with a different mindset, that could contribute as well. This movie is being advertised towards maybe a couple audiences. These audiences are probably really into basketball, maybe know what the character of Uncle Drew is, and maybe they’re black. As I bought my ticket for this movie at the box office, I recall being the first person to possess a ticket based on the seating options. That didn’t last, you know, like the good old-fashioned Pepsi everybody seems to be drinkin’ because it just tastes so freakin’ good. When I entered the theater however, I was the first one in, and I thought to myself I was gonna get to watch the movie alone, in silence. Oh how awesome that would have been. Instead, I get a lot of people laughing. And you know what? It’s fine. It’s a comedy, it’s expected, not to mention encouraged. Although there were some people, this includes someone a couple seats away from me, who seemed to laugh at just about everything that was on screen. Now I am not revoking their right to laugh, but they are either easily impressed or have a completely different sense of humor than I. Either that or they drank enough Pepsi to enjoy the movie! Out of everyone in the auditorium, I probably was the most out of place person there. I was the only one of a few people who actually happened to be white in the theater. Oh, there were like, three people around me who I can see using their phones during points of the film. If this was out of absolute boredom, than something like this is understandable, but for the sake of a theater environment that doesn’t associate with chaos, would putting the phone away really be that hard?
Let’s talk about some of the characters in “Uncle Drew.” They all suck. They don’t drink enough Pepsi in the movie!
In all seriousness, let’s talk about Dax, played by Lil Del Howery. If this movie as a whole were a tad more competent, I would honestly like Dax better. Because the movie does try at making him looking like a lot is being taken away from him. And you know what? I almost feel bad for him. Although at the same time, I feel like the main thing that I’m supposed to feel bad about concerning him is just one enormous overreaction. Dax gets a shot blocked and loses a game. That was one time. Apparently the fact that the blocker was a white guy makes it extra embarrassing. Maybe in some ways, this kinda makes sense, but wow. I feel bad for him, and makes me hate the crowd of people against them, because they’re a mob against him for a reason having to with something so minor. Maybe I’m overreacting, maybe I have to pump the hate brakes, but I feel like some people in this movie are just mean-spirited to the point of annoyance. You know they need? Pepsi!
PEPSI IS THE CURE TO F*CKING EVERYTHING!
Kyrie Irving is one of the many basketball stars in this film, and it is clear that maybe he wanted to do this film more than anybody else. I do buy him as this elderly, wise man. I will admit, as much as I didn’t enjoy this movie as a whole, I thought Irving’s character was definitely one of the stronger highlights. I didn’t expect grade A range acting from him, nor should I. He did a fine job given his stance in the realm of acting. In this movie, I’ll give some credit and say that Irving at times is kind of funny, but the problem with his character, much like some others in the film, is that it’s not funny enough for me to exactly recall what was funny about them. It’s not like it’s “Anchorman” where you recall Ron Burgundy is funny because he said things such as “Go f*ck yourself, San Diego.” Then again, it’s comedy, it’s art, it’s subjective. And my subjective thoughts towards this movie is that it just didn’t do much of anything except chop my head off.
Let’s talk about Shaq in this movie. This guy has had quite a lifetime. He’s been in the NBA for a very long time, won a few championships, made albums, movies, appeared on TV in several shows and commercials, and even has the pleasure of making a fighting game that even he realizes was terrible. Yeah, he made a game called “Shaq Fu” which released in 1994 for multiple platforms. This is highly regarded as one of the worst video games ever made. And somehow it recently got a sequel which is currently pumping out downloadable content, including a piece containing former president Barack Obama! Not to mention, I’m not alone on this sort of thing, but I consider him to be one of the funniest basketball players on the planet. And since this is a comedy with Shaq in it, you expect him to deliver the goods. And it’s just a f*cking shame that the movie wastes this guy! I could tell Shaq was trying, but it didn’t feel like the aspect of trying lifted through all the way. This could have been a result due to bad direction, lackluster writing, maybe a combination of those two things. Either way, Shaq is not funny here. The first scene of Shaq is him teaching martial arts, which funny enough, is kind of what he does in “Shaq Fu.” That was one of the only memorable parts of not just Shaq in the movie, but the movie itself. And that’s most likely because a part of me was going “Oh, it’s Shaq! Can’t wait to see what he does!”
*hands planted on cheeks* My gosh, I need a Pepsi.
Oh, and you know what? I have not even gotten to the absolute biggest piece of s*it this movie has! This movie takes a second to turn into every single animated movie that is trying to sell an album! Ladies and gentlemen, I give you… THE MOST. POINTLESS. DANCE SEQUENCE. IN HISTORY!
You know how a lot of people don’t like “Spider-Man 3?” For those of you who don’t know, part of the endless reasons some people dislike that movie has to do with a song and dance sequence in a jazz club. I gotta say, at least that sequence helped a bit in telling us the current state of Peter Parker’s character, at least that sort of helped with the movie’s overall story. This sequence, it feels like it was just done for s*its and giggles. I never thought I’d say this, but this scene makes “The Emoji Movie” look like “Back to the Future!” Who ever thought I’d need to use “The Emoji Movie” as the positive in a comparison JUST UNDER A YEAR AFTER IT RELEASED?! Seriously! This is an actual quote from my “Emoji Movie” review!
“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!”
To have a comparison like this is a true feat! Because around the halfway point in “The Emoji Movie,” there’s this sequence that’s basically trying to promote “Just Dance.” And it’s just abysmal! But, at the same time, for the very few people who would be invested in the story, our “heroes” have to run away from particular enemies who are also in the area. To get to their destination, part of it involves dancing. It’s full of cringe, but at least if you actually have the urge to care, you can root for the heroes to make it to where they need to go! The dance sequence here isn’t really trying to promote a song (at least I hope that’s the case), but it just doesn’t feel like it has a place in this movie! You could literally remove this entire sequence and it would make NO DIFFERENCE on the overall product! This movie is an hour and forty-three minutes long. This dance sequence can be removed and still provide a decent runtime! WHAT WAS THAT FOR?! Listen to me movie! You’re “Uncle Drew,” not “Family Guy,” you’re not getting a giant chicken to fight some dumbass on the streets! That doesn’t work for you! Just focus! And you know what? I guess if you’re going to this movie just to laugh, maybe this sequence might ultimately work for you. That is, if you’re not me. I was watching this scene, imagining how much better it would be to put a gun on my head, while everybody else was just dying laughing. I probably died too. Maybe after imagining what it would be like to take that gun on my head and kill myself. But if I just drank more Pepsi I think I would have been just fine!
In the end, “Uncle Drew” is worse than Coca-Cola on its best day! Pepsi rules! “Uncle Drew” is a very unfunny comedy which ultimately says something about this year’s movies, because there’s one comedy that I saw this year, that was actually worse than this. This is almost my worst movie of the year so far. If it hadn’t been for a few laughs then I really would have pulled out all the stops, push people out of the way at the theater, demand a refund on my food, drink, and ticket, and call the news about the plague this movie is bound to spread. Let me just tell you something. One of my favorite drinks is Diet Pepsi. Having seen this movie, it almost made me never want to buy another Pepsi product again. While this personally isn’t my worst movie of the year overall, it is certainly the worst I’ve seen in terms of product placement. Also, I would like to congratulate this movie for something.
This possibly made the extended video with Kendall Jenner promoting world peace the 2ND worst Pepsi ad of all time! Congrats, “Uncle Drew!” I’m gonna give “Uncle Drew” a Pepsi/10, whoops! I mean, I’m gonna give it a 2/10! There, that’s better! Thanks for reading this commercialized review! Be sure to go out to your local grocer and buy yourself some Pepsi! The Movie Reviewing Moron’s personal choice of beverage to drink to make him forget about “Uncle Drew.” You know, because bleach is a bit extreme. I do have another review coming up, and it is for a movie that I’m honestly surprised at the amount of people who went out to watch it when it was in theaters (or lack thereof). That movie is “A Wrinkle In Time,” so be sure to stay tuned for my thoughts on that! I want to know, did you see “Uncle Drew?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite Pepsi product? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks, and have a Pepsi day!
Hey everyone, Jack Drees here! Before we go any further, let me just say, I admittedly put this post out a little later than I once anticipated. I had my mind going around on three posts at once, part of me was begging to nap this week, some distractions have gotten in the way, and I also had this thing going on over on my Twitter where I’m giving shoutouts to women on International Women’s Day. With those things in mind, you might as well say that if this blog or my posts happened to be my kid(s), I might not be the best of fathers. I’ve been distracted, wanting to fall asleep, and just didn’t have enough of a focus on the things that matter. Speaking of parenting, let’s talk about Genevieve and Paul. Who are they? Well, they’re a couple who are currently expecting, but their journey to get there was like trying to find a way to defy gravity. Impossibly long and stressful. Ladies and gentlemen, this is all documented in “What The IVF?!”
“What the IVF?” focuses on the recently mentioned couple, Genevieve and Paul. The two are happy together and one day decide to have a baby. Turns out they realize, the process of having a baby isn’t all fun and games, and now they’ve got to deal with various problems. These problems range in areas including: Sex, math, exams, and those freakin’ needles! The first episode of the series up right now, it’s actually the video listed above, it’s a few minutes long, so if you need to waste some time and you feel like you should watch something, this is a good deal for you. And I said to the couple that I’d promote the material, and I’m not just saying this to be nice or push their buttons or receive a fat paycheck in the mail, in fact at this point they’d probably need it for baby food or something, I actually watched the first episode, and I thought it was very well done. If you look at this video, you’re in for a well edited treat. Be sure to catch up on the latest regarding Genevieve and Paul and to help you do that, I’ll post links to various “WTIVF?” social media pages, and if you check this stuff out, be sure to tell them that Jack Drees sent you over!
Getting back on track, it’s official that the Academy Awards are now over, so now I can look back and say to myself, “What happened to the politics?” If you think I’m asking that negatively, think again. Because I know one thing for sure, politics and the Academy Awards associate with each other quite well, and at times, it’s not exactly annoying, but they seemed to tone it down this year. When it comes to the politics, it was basically a sigh of relief. There were barely any comments regarding our current administration and when the comments were uttered, they were actually quite funny!
“That’s not the point. We don’t make films like ‘Call Me by Your Name’ for money. We make them to upset Mike Pence.” -Jimmy Kimmel
Then again, this isn’t the Golden Globes, where political and social issues, at least from my eyes and ears, seem to be more prominent and forced. At this Oscars, the insertion of all this commentary regarding politics and society didn’t feel that awkward because while they were there, there seemed to be more of a focus on awards and film.
Not every single person made it a big deal to wear black. People either did or they didn’t. The jokes weren’t as cringe-worthy. And let me just have you know, the stuff that’s being represented in terms of social issues happens to be stuff I personally support! Racial equality! Gender equality! I mean, Barbra Streisand and Natalie Portman didn’t get up on stage and come off as depression lords. Yes, time IS up, but there are more important issues than having male nominees and winners for Best Director. One of my favorite quotes regarding social issues comes from Kumail Nanjiani, who you may know as one of the writers and actors in last year’s “The Big Sick,” which is one of my favorite movies of 2017.
“Some of my favorite movies are movies by straight white dudes about straight white dudes. Now, straight white dudes can watch movies starring me, and you relate to that. It’s not that hard. I’ve done it my whole life.”
Well said, Kumail!
One of the other highlights of the night was something I didn’t actually expect. I came in for an award show, not a game show. Now when I say that, you may expect me to follow up with something negative, that is unless you realize my fanaticism for game shows. So as Jimmy Kimmel is finishing up his opening monologue, he reminds everyone that the Oscars is “a very long show.” Before those words are spoken, he states that the first Oscars show lasted for fifteen minutes from beginning to end, he adds in humor by saying “and people still complained.” So in order to spice things up, the show was going to give away a prize. So I start hearing “The Price is Right” music and suddenly, I see Helen Mirren standing right next to a new jet ski. The total value of the jet ski is $17,999, and whoever was to give the shortest speech, will go home with the prize. Kimmel adds, “Why waste precious time thanking your mother when you can give her the ride of her life on a new jet ski?” The man claimed that he was going to be timing everyone who wins an Academy Award with a stopwatch. Once they pick up their trophy, the clock begins ticking. Some of Kimmel’s conclusive words are “And in the unlikely event of a tie, I need to say the jet ski will be awarded to Christopher Plummer.”
By the way, Mark Bridges, the costume designer for “Phantom Thread,” was the winner of the jet ski. Also, for those of you who never heard of or seen “Phantom Thread,” the main character of Reynolds Woodcock, played by Daniel Day-Lewis, is a dressmaker. So of course, a movie about making clothes, won a category which involves making clothes.
Before I tuned into the Oscars, I made a hope/prediction post, which admittedly I rushed in some parts, but overall it was a somewhat effective list coming in over 4500 words. Although to be fair, it was crunch time, and I was just trying to get my major category predictions down. Much like in that post, I’m not gonna go through all the categories and stick to talking about anything from the categories that stand out to me. In my post I didn’t talk about anything such as Best Animated Short Film, Best Documentary, stuff like that. I’m just gonna talk about a category if I have some sort of interest related to them or if there’s something to me in it that stands out compared to other categories. To start this off, I’m going to dive into a category that I didn’t discuss on my prediction post. Specifically, Best Animated Short Film.
Here are the results for Best Animated Short Film!
Dear Basketball (WINNER!)
Garden Party
Lou
Negative Space
Revolting Rhymes
Regardless of familiarity, this category interested me because of its winner, “Dear Basketball.” For those of you who haven’t seen or heard of “Dear Basketball,” I don’t imagine many people will blame you, including Lakers fans. It has less than 2,000 ratings on IMDb, but it appears the Academy liked it. I have no problem with them liking it. I haven’t seen the short, so I can’t judge all that much. Although the real shocker for me here is who happens to be behind this “Academy Award winner.” OK, well, John Williams composed the music, which may have partially contributed to the overall verdict. The animation was a different style than what I usually see, and while I don’t think that in itself is award-worthy, maybe the idea of being different contributed to it. The creative developer, Brian Hunt made this his first project as a creative developer, but he also had experience in the industry prior to this. Although when it comes to the entire world of diverse, differently-minded, and film-focused people, the Academy decides to give an award to…
Kobe Bryant.
Yeah, Kobe Bryant. Kobe. Bryant. KOBE… BRRRRYANT. A former NBA Basketball player who has won the NBA Finals in the past, achieved an Oscar! I’m not saying that this is the end of the world, but seriously! If you told me a week ago, that Kobe Bryant, a guy who angrily swears at his own basketball team during practice, saying that his teammates are motherf*ckers who don’t do s*it for him, was going to win an Academy Award, I’d die laughing, get up, and tell you to get out of my sight because I’d think you’re incredibly dumb.
But he did.
Although one thing I really liked about this is how Mark Hamill was presenting the award. Because for one thing, he’s f*cking Mark Hamill. And another thing, the joke he made right before “Dear Basketball” was announced.
“Don’t say ‘La La Land.’ Don’t say La La Land.'”
Speaking of animations, let’s dive into Best Animated Feature Film.
Coco (WINNER!)
Ferdinand
The Boss Baby
The Breadwinner
Loving Vincent
“Coco” won. What a surprise.
“The Boss Baby” lost. Big fat shocker as well, not to mention a sign that Earth is still sane.
Enough said. Moving on.
Next up is Best Actor, and here are the results!
Gary Oldman (Darkest Hour) (WINNER!)
Daniel Day-Lewis (Phantom Thread)
Timothée Chalamet (Call Me by Your Name)
Denzel Washington (Roman J. Israel, Esq.)
Daniel Kaluuya (Get Out)
In total honesty, it would have been nice to see Daniel Day-Lewis win. Not just because he’s a terrific actor, but because this is his last performance. I have not seen “Phantom Thread,” much like how I haven’t seen any of the other films listed above, but seeing Day-Lewis winning would have been a treat. I have nothing against Gary Oldman. I don’t have anything against him winning, I think he’s a fine actor, and he definitely has potential to take on some more great roles in the future. I didn’t think about this while I was doing my hope and prediction post, but I did find this out going into the show. If Timothée Chalamet ended up winning Best Actor, he would have been the youngest person to win that award. For the record, Chalamet could have possibly been a 22 year-old Oscar winner, beating out then 29 year-old Adrien Brody (The Pianist) who won an Academy Award for this specific category for the 2002 movie season.
Once again, a category filled with movies that I just haven’t gotten around to watching! OK, well except one, which was “Three Billboards.” Having seen it, I approve of McDormand’s win. Very well deserved! Part of me thought at one point that Margot Robbie was gonna win for “I, Tonya” based on a clip I saw for it, but I guess not. Meryl Streep… I have nothing against her. I still have to see “The Post.” But I seriously wonder if this nomination happened just because she’s Meryl and the Academy has a fetish for nominating her. Part of me is also surprised the Academy didn’t go with Saoirse Ronan for “Lady Bird.” Although at the same time, it surprises me how many people saw the movie and didn’t like it. I didn’t see it, but I’m trying to.
One of the next categories we’re gonna get into is Best Adapted Screenplay.
Call Me by Your Name (WINNER!)
The Disaster Artist
Logan
Molly’s Game
Mudbound
I’ll state something similar to what I said in my prediction and hope post. “Mudbound,” to me, doesn’t qualify as a movie that associates with the Oscars. To me, the Oscars is about celebrating cinema. While there are a number of people who clearly worship this movie for various reasons, I refuse to call it a technical “Oscar film.” To my knowledge, this movie has released in a couple theaters if that. And while I do think a movie with even the smallest theatrical release can qualify to win an Oscar, it’s mainly known to me as a straight to streaming film. Now don’t get me wrong, if Amazon or someone like that distributed this film, I would have possibly supported “Mudbound” more. But instead, Netflix did. And since Netflix doesn’t give movie theaters a chance (do some research on “The Cloverfield Paradox”), I refuse to watch it, review it, and call it a movie that others seem to call it. So unless Netflix starts releasing films in theaters as a tradition and not a special occasion, I refuse to review any of their films or consider them for awards like Oscars, or if you want to be more accurate on my end, my top 10 BEST movies of the year lists. Now “Call Me by Your Name” won. I didn’t see it, therefore I was in a somewhat of a shock when its, well, name was called. I was glad it wasn’t “Mudbound,” but I didn’t really expect this film to win, and I was actually rooting for a couple of other films. One film I saw earlier this year because I couldn’t get to it last year was “Molly’s Game.” The film itself? Barely passable. The screenplay though? If this were a film class and I were teaching, I’d give it somewhere around the A range just for the diction choices and the snappy tone it provided at times. I was especially disappointed that they didn’t pick “The Disaster Artist” because humor-wise, it was the funniest movie of 2017, maybe aside from “The LEGO Batman Movie.” Not to mention the way it was written was partially realistic and another part felt like a homage. And while this is based on a true event, I totally appreciate the callbacks to some things that happened that can be associated with “The Room.” A lot of people are kind of disappointed that “Logan” didn’t win this award. I haven’t seen “Logan,” I’ve heard phenomenal things, but I haven’t seen it. Part of me wonders if this is just coming from people who either have a bias towards comic book movies or just go see comic book movies and ignores everything else, or if it’s a bunch of people who appreciate the screenplay for its differences compared to other comic book movies. It’s darker, grittier, contains more violence and foul language, and it just contains things that makes anyone who works at Disney hide in the corner. I’m not gonna focus on Best Original Screenplay, I don’t really have much to say about it. Like I mentioned earlier, I’m gonna just dive into categories which can feel more like an essay as opposed to a couple of forced complete sentences. Either that or if I feel if it has some sort of relevance to me, that will play into this sort of thing as well.
Next up is a category containing something I often think about, Best Original Score.
Alexandre Desplat (The Shape of Water) (WINNER!)
Hans Zimmer (Dunkirk)
John Williams (Star Wars: The Last Jedi)
Jonny Greenwood (Phantom Thread)
Carter Burwell (Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri)
Before we get into discussion concerning the winner, let’s talk about John Williams. John Williams, without a doubt, is a great composer, and there’s a reason why people love his work. Not only has he done some of the most iconic movie scores of all (Raiders of the Lost Ark, Harry Potter, Jurassic Park, Home Alone, Jaws), but he’s proven to be talented for many many years. Although him being nominated for his work on “The Last Jedi” is just… Bogus. I have seen every single “Star Wars” film scored by John Williams, including the latest one in the franchise, “The Last Jedi.” The movie’s mediocre overall, I admittedly overhyped it when I first saw it, it was a whole thing. When it comes to John Williams, I honestly don’t see how he could have been nominated for an Oscar other than the fact that he’s the one doing the score. You remember the score for “Rogue One?” That one was the only score for a theatrically released “Star Wars” film that isn’t from John Williams. That score, while not recognized all that much for awards, was not only a delight to hear, but a different take on what could qualify as “Star Wars” music. I’ve given some sort of praise to “The Last Jedi” for being different, but one aspect that didn’t feel different was the score. It felt like it just took themes from “The Force Awakens” and other “Star Wars” films and shoved them right into this one. I still remember the climactic scenes and I’m hearing the “March of the Resistance” song and it just felt underwhelming unlike the first couple of times. I like John Williams, I think he’s skilled, but what the hell? There are other scores that weren’t even nominated that could have qualified! “Blade Runner 2049!” “Wonder Woman!” And even though this film wasn’t really that good, I’d be fine with live-action “Ghost in the Shell” because at least various aspects of the movie, such as the music, made it sound like it was trying. “Revenge of the Sith’s” score was never nominated for any Oscars, but if you actually think “The Last Jedi” had a better score than “Revenge of the Sith,” I’m gonna force-choke you. Now onto something that matters.
I wanted “Dunkirk” to win Best Original Score. Although in the end, it turned out to be “The Shape of Water.” And funny enough, the composer for the score in “The Shape of Water,” Alexandre Desplat was originally going to compose the music for the recently mentioned “Rogue One” before that job ultimately went to Michael Giacchino! Desplat has also scored 2014’s “The Grand Budapest Hotel,” which I saw, enjoyed, but can’t say I liked as much other people. You know, kind of like its score. Seriously? It lost to “Interstellar?” You done goof, Academy. I’ll say this is one of those wins, much like a couple of others that really make me interested in checking out “The Shape of Water.” It would be interesting to hear what music related to a woman and fish who wanna f*ck sound like. I thought “Dunkirk” would win for its grand and fast-paced feel, but I guess not. But seriously though, no love for “Blade Runner 2049?”
Speaking of that, let’s talk about the nominees and winner for Best Visual Effects.
Blade Runner 2049 (WINNER!)
Star Wars: The Last Jedi
Kong: Skull Island
War for the Planet of the Apes
Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2
From what you can tell, I love “Blade Runner.” I love both the original film and its sequel. An enormous part of me is beyond glad that it won Best Visual Effects. I will say though, I imagine some people have these every once in awhile. They have certain categories in award shows where they don’t care who wins because they think all of them are deserving of the prize. This to me, was one of them. I will say, part of me is shocked that “War for the Planet of the Apes” didn’t win because a lot of people were impressed by that film visually. Interestingly, that was the only film of the five nominees I didn’t watch at the very least in portions. I’ve seen part of “Kong: Skull Island,” and every other film including “Guardians,” “Star Wars,” and “Blade Runner,” were ones I watched from beginning to end. Part of me even wonders how many people are thinking right now that “War for the Planet of the Apes” got snubbed. Nevertheless, I’m happy “Blade Runner 2049” won. If you have not seen “Blade Runner 2049,” you might occasionally drop your jaw at the city of Los Angeles, the fact that they did a clear recreation of Sean Young who played Rachael in the original film, and how much you’ll be immersed that a part of you might end up wanting to jump in this world. If “War for the Planet of the Apes” won, I think it would have been a very much deserved win, but I’m incredibly happy that “Blade Runner 2049” took the cake.
One category that got a number of people talking was Best Film Editing. This is partially because of not only who DID win. But also because of who DIDN’T win. Here are the five films to have been recognized for their achievement here.
Dunkirk (WINNER!)
The Shape of Water
I, Tonya
Baby Driver
Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri
So “Dunkirk” came out on top as you can clearly see, and as someone who has watched the movie, I can understand why it won. It was told in a non-linear fashion, which only made the film a tad more interesting than it already was. Although it’s a Christopher Nolan movie, so this puzzle-like editing isn’t exactly a shocker. One movie that people were surprised didn’t win however was “Baby Driver.” I feel like part of why this didn’t win is because the Academy usually goes after dramatic movies like “Dunkirk” instead of movies that some people would refer to as “less serious” and “fun” like “Baby Driver.” Not only that, but I’m willing to bet part of it has to do with the whole Kevin Spacey scandal that’s been brought to the world’s attention months ago. Granted, this isn’t Kevin Spacey’s nomination specifically, but still. Am I disappointed “Baby Driver” lost to “Dunkirk?” Not really, I think both films are well edited in their own little way. “Dunkirk’s” non-linear fashion makes the movie more of a challenge to watch and ultimately more fun. Although with “Baby Driver,” the editing in that movie has given us some of the best action sequences of the decade. In my review, I praised “Baby Driver” for its thrilling action sequences and how it made me want more of them once one ends. I can see why “Dunkirk” won, but some love for “Baby Driver” would have also been appreciated.
If you remember the nominees for Best Sound Editing and Best Sound Mixing, something in particular may have stood out to you.
They’re the same nominees.
Not only that…
THE SAME MOVIE TOOK BOTH AWARDS!
Dunkirk (WINNER!)
Blade Runner 2049
Baby Driver
The Shape of Water
Star Wars: The Last Jedi
One thing I’d like to say about “The Last Jedi.” I actually beg to differ because I think it had 2017’s best LACK OF sound editing or sound mixing. Remember that scene where one ship goes into hyperspace and crashes through another ship in the process? HOLY. F*CKING. S*IT. As much as that movie could have been better, THAT. WAS. AMAZING. While I do think the general editing for “Baby Driver” was praise-worthy to the point where I can’t contain myself, the sound work is basically not a competition anymore when “Dunkirk” steps in the ring. The sound choices were authentic! The audibility was extreme! The immersion provided from all the noise was 100% pure! How can you go wrong with “Dunkirk” in these categories?! “Dunkirk” put me in a war zone, and if you tell me you missed out on seeing this movie in a theater, shame on you.
When it comes to Best Director, this was yet another one of those categories where I was left feeling a lack of a surprise.
Guillermo del Toro (The Shape of Water) (WINNER!)
Greta Gerwig (Lady Bird)
Jordan Peele (Get Out)
Christopher Nolan (Dunkirk)
Paul Thomas Anderson (Phantom Thread)
So… Del Toro won. Doesn’t shock me whatsoever. I don’t know what you may have thought as the one to come out on top, but this was rather predictable to me. And I feel like a big part of it has to do with his presence at other awards shows, how much del Toro’s name has been spoken recently, and also how many Best Director awards I’ve been aware of this film getting thus far. One that really stuck out to me was the Golden Globes, mainly because of Natalie Portman’s “all male nominees” comment, which honestly would have been better left unspoken due to its awkwardness. I wanted Nolan to win, partially because he’s my favorite director, and also because of the excellent job he did on “Dunkirk.” But yeah, you can’t have everything. Although, I will say, something in the same realm as Portman’s Golden Globes utterance occurred. Last year’s winner for Best Actress, Emma Stone (La La Land, Birdman), said this:
“It is the director whose indelible touch is reflected on every frame. It is the director who, shot by shot, scene by scene, day by day, works with every member of the crew to further the story. And it is the vision of the director that takes an ordinary movie and turns it into a work of art. These four men and Greta Gerwig created their own masterpieces this year.”
This was so much better than seeing Natalie Portman onstage and having myself hear what she said. Don’t get me wrong, Portman’s a fine actress. Although let’s take a look at the situation at hand with her. She was standing next to RON HOWARD, someone who has directed a number of films. Films that by the way, are still remembered to this day! Howard even recently directed a film in the “Star Wars” franchise! A franchise which Portman was once a major part of as an actress! The two are talking, they’re about to present the award, and at one point, I hear Portman say…
“And here are the all male nominees.”
Yes, it is true that female directors aren’t usually getting as much attention as males. It is also true, that more males are directing movies as opposed to females. But to literally shame a director just because they have a penis, is just unbelievably ridiculous. How do you think del Toro felt taking that award home? I imagine he felt happy because he won, but seriously, he won after being accused of simply being a man. Emma Stone on the other hand, didn’t exactly make an awkward joke and instead quickly stated some words before moving on. It’s actually kinda funny. It was presented in a setting and manner that didn’t have a forced vibe, and I don’t have any feelings of cringe to describe to you. This comment, while it does point out the lack of women in the director’s chair when it comes to filmmaking, doesn’t feel like something that a man should be ashamed of hearing. Because for one thing, it mentions a woman got nominated. Also because it’s still technically a comment of praise. Literally pointing out that nominees are male the way Natalie Portman did almost feels like a comment meant to point out disdain towards the potential winners. Just look at the difference between the tone, delivery, and choice of words between the two people. Just look and see what I mean!
Speaking of women making achievements, one of them was involved in Best Cinematography… Although to me, that’s not even CLOSE to the best part of this category. The best part, is who finally f*cking won, after FOURTEEN nominations.
Roger Deakins (Blade Runner 2049) (WINNER!)
Hoyte Van Hoytema (Dunkirk)
Rachel Morrison (Mudbound)
Bruno Delbonnel (Darkest Hour)
Dan Laustsen (The Shape of Water)
Best Cinematography. Sounds like a category that some people don’t care about. In reality, when it comes to filmmaking, I’m a writer. If there’s one thing I’m not, it’s a cinematographer. Although more than one name for me stood out on this list. You’ve got Hoyte Van Hoytema, who has to proven to be a great cinematographer with not just “Dunkirk” as a notable achievement, but also “Interstellar” and “Spectre.” I really admired “Dunkirk” when I saw it partially because of how well done the camerawork itself was presented from an immersion perspective, but also the fact that it was shot on mostly IMAX footage. If you didn’t go see this film in an IMAX theater, especially one with laser projection or 15/70mm projection, you may have just missed out on a one of a kind experience.
Another standout to me was “Mudbound,” and part of me thought the Academy was going to pick the cinematographer for that movie, Rachel Morrison. For the record, she was the first woman ever nominated for the award in all ninety of the Academy Awards shows. I’ll mention once again, I refuse to call “Mudbound” a movie. I have nothing against Rachel Morrison, I just have a problem with Netflix. I’d be rooting for Morrison more if she was given a movie that doesn’t associate with a company which will make me always say, as pervy as it may sound, “I’ll just take chill,” when asked the common meme-worthy question “Netflix and chill?.”
Then we have “Blade Runner 2049.” My runner-up for my favorite movies of 2017 list for a gigantic number of reasons. And speaking of gigantic numbers, let’s talk about the number 14. OK, in some realms it’s not really that huge, but you’ll see my point. Roger Deakins was the director of photography for “Blade Runner 2049.” And I imagine when some people heard his name, they got excited. Chances are, if these people have followed Deakins’ work, it might not be the first time they got excited about something like this. I can’t exactly relate, but having seen Deakins’ work in movies like “Skyfall,” “The Shawshank Redemption,” “Hail, Caesar!,” and “No Country For Old Men,” I agree with others when they say he’s one of the greats when it comes to cinematographers. Once again, the guy has been nominated for Best Cinematography by the Academy, FOURTEEN TIMES. Here is a list of all the times other than the one of focus when he’s been nominated. Note that the year listed is the year the film he shot came out and not the year he was nominated.
The Shawshank Redemption (1994)
Fargo (1996)
Kundun (1997)
O Brother, Where Art Thou? (2000)
The Man Who Wasn’t There (2001)
No Country For Old Men (2007)
The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford (2007)
The Reader (2008) (shared with Chris Menges)
True Grit (2010)
Skyfall (2012)
Prisoners (2013)
Unbroken (2014)
Sicario (2015)
What happened to Deakins when he was nominated those thirteen times? Well, that can be explained in a video by TIFF Originals that starts off with the statement: “Roger Deakins is a loser.” The video is called “Roger Deakins’ 13 Oscar Losses.”
After watching this video if you have done so, you probably got a thought on your mind, and it may have been “Roger Deakins is a f*cking loser.” I’ll be fair and say some of the competition he had were deserving of their awards, take “Gravity” for example. Although this year with “Blade Runner 2049,” I only thought Roger was deserving of HIS Oscar. We get to the big moment. I see Sandra Bullock holding an envelope with “CINEMATOGRAPHY” labeled on it. She says some words before introducing the nominees, and when they are introduced. I just thought this was gonna be a year where the Academy doesn’t give him the award and just gives an award to Rachel Morrison just because she has a vagina. Again, I have nothing against Rachel Morrison. She actually did the cinematography for “Black Panther” which was such a treat. It came out really well! I imagine she’s a very nice lady, but I was rooting for Roger. I’ll admit, I’m not that religious. My main philosophy is to be a nice person, I am however not that religious. But as the nominees were introduced, I had my hands, containing all sorts of cells, interlinked. I WAS PRAYING. People were cheering for Morrison, and the others seemed to get some applause, but I heard more for Morrison than anyone else. So they’re introduced, and it’s time. Sandra Bullock still has the envelope in her hand, and she says this as she quickly opens it for the result:
“And the Oscar goes to, Roger A. Deakins (crowd erupts in a roar), “Blade Runner 2049.”
My reaction to that can be described in many ways. Part of me wished I had fireworks to set off after that win! Part of me wanted to go around the house doing cartwheels after the win! Part of me wanted to find some confetti to throw around after that win! My reaction, quite possibly woke up my mother and sister. I might as well have been a young teenage girl at her favorite boy band’s concert! I might as well have been at an event where I find out my kid in school won student of the year! I might as well have been a Chicago Cubs fan at the end of the 2016 World Series, where they finally had a victory after years and years trying to get it. People may say that Leonardo DiCaprio waited a bit to get his Oscar, which I’ll say, when he won it, I kind of wanted Matt Damon to take it, but that’s just me. Although for Leo, he won it on his FIFTH nomination. When you’re nominated THIRTEEN times, it’s almost like you’ll be that one person who gets a nomination, but that’s all. What if Meryl Streep never won a single Oscar? All of her wins, “Kramer vs. Kramer,” “Sophie’s Choice,” “The Iron Lady,” they never happened. Streep received her TWENTY-FIRST nomination for a role she did just last year in “The Post.” I can imagine the crowd roaring like a bunch of T-Rexes in an argument if that turned out to be her first win. Let’s take another example, because why the hell not? Imagine the New York Yankees. Some people don’t like the New York Yankees because they always win. But they’ve been in 40 World Series Championships. Imagine all their titles where they were victorious, all gone. The 40th appearance is the charm. That’s how I feel about Deakins here, the fourteenth time’s the charm. I can wholeheartedly approve of Deakins winning not just because it took forever and a half to happen, but just look at these shots and tell me they actually look terrible. I dare y’all!
Nice shot now isn’t it?
Take a gander at this beauty.
Look at this bad boy and tell me it sucks. I’ll wait.
Is it just me or does this define the meaning of life?
This shot screams something that in some worlds, would qualify as one word. Fan-freakin’-tastic.
LOOK AT THIS SHOT!
LOOK AT THIS F*CKING SHOT!
LOOK AT THIS MOTHERF*CKING SHOT! NO! SERIOUSLY! THIS IS THE DEFINITION OF PERFECTION! THIS IS A F*CKING MASTERPIECE! I’M GOING F*CKING INSANE!
My point is made. Roger Deakins’ victory, to me, may be one of the most deserved Academy Award wins in history. THANK GOSH! So many people can sleep now and have less dreams and concerning nightmares!
And now, as mentioned, we won’t get through every single topic listed for the Academy Awards today, but here’s one that people look back on years and years from now, Best Picture. Before we get into that, you may remember the whole “La La Land” and “Moonlight” mishap from last year? Warren Beatty and Faye Dunaway come up onstage to present the award, they state the nominees, they’re looking at the card, and somehow awkwardness ensues. Suddenly, Dunaway announces “La La Land” won Best Picture, but the two had the wrong card. Celebration ignites! Cheering be heard all over the Dolby Theatre, and a moment later, Jordan Horowitz, a producer behind “La La Land” is onstage and he states “Moonlight” won Best Picture. He even showed the card! Turns out Beatty and Dunaway were handed the wrong envelope. So… What happens now? What idea could be better than bringing Beatty and Dunaway back? Jimmy Kimmel had some fun before diving into the nominees. “We’re in the home stretch. Nothing could possibly go wrong from here. Here, on the 51st anniversary of Bonnie and Clyde, are Warren Beatty and Faye Dunaway.” They come out, Beatty says, “We’re glad to see you all again.” Dunaway adds, “As they say, presenting is lovelier the second time around.” The two continue speaking, eventually arriving at the point where they announce the nominees and the winner. By the way, they had the correct envelope this time. Here are the movies that have been nominated for Best Picture!
The Shape of Water (WINNER!)
Dunkirk
Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri
The Post
Lady Bird
Get Out
Darkest Hour
Call Me by Your Name
Phantom Thread
In my prediction post leading up to the Oscars, I said this was gonna be a close race to the finish between “Lady Bird,” “Dunkirk,” “The Shape of Water,” and “Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri.” I will say however for “Lady Bird,” that kind of changed throughout the night because it was nominated for five awards during the show, but the four that were already presented were all losses on their end. For “Dunkirk,” I thought it had a solid chance. The Academy seemed to give a lot of praise towards this film and it already won a few Oscars throughout the night. For “Three Billboards,” I figured it could win solely because it won Best Motion Picture- Drama at the Golden Globes. It also made a sweep at the Screen Actors Guild Awards. And it was nominated for a ton of Oscars beforehand, and it ended up taking home two before getting as far as Best Picture. Although if there was one I “knew” was going to win, it was going to be a movie with thirteen nominations including Best Picture. It was going to be a movie that already took home a few awards. It was going to be a movie praised by many critics and average moviegoers alike. It was going to be… “The Shape of Water.”
…And it won.
I have nothing in particular against “The Shape of Water.” From what I’ve seen in promotional material, it’s very good from a visual perspective, but I haven’t watched the movie so I can’t really say much else. Funny enough, I take a film studies class in my school, and my teacher actually asked if anyone in our class has actually seen “The Shape of Water.” Once asked, the class pretty much unanimously declined to put our hands up. I wanted “Dunkirk” to win. But hey, it’s already got some well deserved awards, especially in the sound categories. Also, remember, Roger Deakins won. So I was beyond satisfied. Although if “Blade Runner 2049” were nominated for Best Picture, you’d know I’d choose it. Or “Colossal,” that was my #1 movie of last year. Although I can understand why it’s not exactly been nominated for anything. But seriously, check that movie out if you can! It’s on several streaming services as we speak! So congrats to “The Shape of Water” and its crew. That movie is actually going to be out on home video in a number of days, so maybe I’ll watch it very soon!
Guys, that’s all I have to say for the 90th Academy Awards! It was personally a great show on my end. All of the commentary for the most part, wasn’t all that awkward. I may be in the minority, but the monologue between Tiffany Haddish (Girls Trip, The Carmichael Show) and Maya Rudolph (Big Hero 6, Bridesmaids), despite how it’s on a topic regarding issues I can side with, just came off as something that would belong in a one of those “SNL” sketches that gets shoved in there when the writers have nothing else that they can come up with. It took a topic that I would, could, and should agree on, and it just sullies it. I imagine both Rudolph and Haddish are pleasant people, and I’M SORRY that Rudolph had to suffer through “The Emoji Movie,” but this just felt weird to watch. But other than that, it was one of the greatest nights ever. I’ve spent some time watching people react to their favorite team winning the Super Bowl on YouTube before, and when it comes to Best Cinematography, that’s legit how I felt. My team won the Oscars, which is MY Super Bowl. Congratulations to everyone who has been nominated and has won awards, I’m looking forward to seeing who will be in the 91st Academy Awards show, and finally. Finally. FINALLY! I can now call one of the world’s greatest cinematographers, Oscar-winning Roger Deakins. I’d like to thank the Academy for making that happen.
Thanks for reading this very long post! Pretty soon I’m gonna have my review for “Annihilation” up for you all to read, and if you are wondering, I don’t live in one of the countries where you have to use Netflix in order to watch it so if that were the case, I wouldn’t have seen the film. Also, stay tuned for my Tom Cruise “Mission: Impossible” review series which will have its first entry up this month. Stay tuned for more great content! I want to know, did you watch the Academy Awards? What are your thoughts? Did your picks win? Did they lose? Is there someone you really wanted to win or lose? Did you make any bets? Have you decided to check out any movies after watching the show? Let me know all of that info for an unofficial possible nomination for Best Comment. Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“Hey thank you, thank you. I better say something or else they’ll give me a jet ski and I don’t see myself on a jet ski somehow. I want to share this with my wife of 27 years, James, whatever. I want to share it with Andrew, Broderick, and Denis Villeneuve. Y’know I really love my job, I’ve been doing it for a long time as you can see. But y’know one of the reasons I really love it is the people I work with. Both in front of the camera and behind the camera. Some of my crew on “Blade Runner,” I’ve been working with for over thirty years. And others-others I met for the first time in Budapest. And this is for every one of them. Every one of them. In fact, I gotta say, it’s for us, because it was a team. It was really team- a team effort. Thank you. Thank you very much.” –Roger A. Deakins
Scene Before 