“Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning” is directed by Christopher McQuarrie, who also directed the three “Mission: Impossible” installments leading up to this one. This film stars Tom Cruise (Top Gun, Risky Business), Hayley Atwell (Captain America: The First Avenger, Cinderella), Ving Rhames (The Wild Robot, The Garfield Movie), Simon Pegg (Run Fatboy Run, Hot Fuzz), Henry Czerny (Revenge, Ready or Not), and Angela Bassett (Black Panther, Akeelah and the Bee). This film is the eighth installment to the Tom Cruise-starring “Mission: Impossible” franchise and once again centers around Ethan Hunt and his team in a race against time to keep the artificial intelligence known as the Entity from destorying mankind.
After nearly three full decades and seven installments leading up to this one, I think it is safe to say “Mission: Impossible” has become a reputable franchise. Not every installment has worked for me. The second film is overly goofy despite one or two okay scenes. Other than that, I had a ball watching the franchise over the years. Tom Cruise not only shines as his character, Ethan Hunt, but his commitment to making the best movie possible alongside his fellow filmmakers is deserving of my respect.
This is the latest “Mission: Impossible” project directed by Christopher McQuarrie. The bad news is that this is probably his weakest installment yet. But I feel the same way about the McQuarrie-directed “Mission: Impossible” installments that I do when it comes to Pixar movies. Even a weak “Mission: Impossible” installment directed by Christopher McQuarrie, like a weak Pixar film, is typically a swell time. And a swell time this is.
Am I disappointed by the outcome of “Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning?” I would not necessarily say that. But I should note that my expectations for this film were, perhaps, unfairly high. The track record for this franchise has been excellent, especially in recent years. Per usual, a lot of the action and stunts done in the film were done for real, on location. Based on the marketing, this was also supposedly the last time that we would see a film in this particular franchise. After all, Tom Cruise is getting up there in age. There was a lot riding on “Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning.” Having seen the film, I can say it is, overall, good, but not fantastic. That said, there were plenty of “fantastic” things in what is ultimately a “good” film.
If you are familiar with the “Mission: Impossible” movies, chances are you know about all the bonkers stuntwork that goes into them. If I had one critique with the stuntwork in this film, it is that the main stunt sequences in this film are semi-borrowed from “Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation.” You may remember that film having a scene where Ethan Hunt hangs on the side of a plane. You may also recall that film having an underwater scene as well. Variations of those two concepts make their way into “Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning.” That said, the sequences in this eighth film are done on a much bigger scale than they are in the fifth film. The two sequences, which take place in a submarine and around a canyon respectively, are worth the price of admission. If there is any reason not only to watch “Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning,” but to get off your couch and watch it in a theater, these two scenes make for a compelling argument.
In fact, if I had to be honest, the sequence around the canyon is maybe the franchise’s best. To me, this film felt like watching “Revenge of the Sith,” which deep down, might be a personal favorite “Star Wars” installment, even though its flaws do stand out. For example, even though I had a blast watching every minute of this film as it went by, I truthfully think the pacing could be a smidge better. The film completely caught my attention, but I should note that I was watching it in IMAX. The true test would be to see what it is like to watch this movie at home. I would be curious to see how that goes because I had a great time watching this film in the theater despite it feeling overstuffed. In fact, much like “Revenge of the Sith,” I will likely remember this film most for its franchise-best climax. This is a film where you are not only concerned that its protagonist might not make it out alive, but you have to wonder if the actors had their hearts beating out of their chests while filming.
Speaking of not making it, “Mission: Impossible” is truly a film where the mission at times feels, well, impossible. That is easy for me to say as someone watching this in an auditorium. But not only does the mission itself reek of enormous stakes, the film does a great job at presenting the worst case scenario. Both through its visuals, and the thoughts racing through my head while watching everything play out. The film is also quite timely with its interpretation of artificial intelligence. We got glimmers of the AI, also known as “the entity,” in the previous installment, but here we get a better, more terrifying glimpse.
There are a lot of “Mission: Impossible” movies out, and for some viewers, they might not know every little detail about them or have seen all the movies. This film contains tons of flashbacks to previous films. The flashbacks did not bother me, but there were a lot more in this film than I was expecting. I get why they are there. You want to remind viewers where things have gone in this series. But I would be curious down the line to see if there would be any attempts at making a future cut of this film where the flashbacks are reduced. I would be curious to know how that turns out.
If I had any other complaints about the film, I do think the villain could have been written better. Esai Morales does a decent job playing Gabriel, but he feels like he belongs in a different film at times. Though admittedly, I did find some of his Saturday morning cartoon-like quips and expressions to be quite entertaining. While not perfect, it works sometimes. In “Mission: Impossible” speak, if I had to give him a score between the number 1 to Philip Seymour Hoffman, Morales’ character winds up somewhere in the middle of that scale. He is not perfect, but at times he oozes charisma.
And speaking of charisma, Hayley Atwell continues to prove she is a welcome addition to the franchise as Grace (left). While her character could be improved with a little more depth, watching her in these past two films convinces me that if she were to do another film like this as the lead, I would pay to see it in a heartbeat. Even in the film’s darker moments, she was able to provide a sense of fun. If I cannot have Rebecca Ferguson in this film, Hayley Atwell is more than a fine alternative.
The marketing for this film has pushed it as a big, epic finale. And in a way, it feels like it. Not only do the stunts come off as the most ambitious in the franchise, but the film concludes on a note that is satisfying. But if I had to be honest, if they announced a ninth film, I would not be mad. Other than the second one, I have enjoyed all of the “Mission: Impossible” movies, so chances are I might enjoy another one. That said, now that we are supposedly at the end, I look forward to finding out what Tom Cruise has lined up next in his career. I know he and Christopher McQuarrie have talked about projects like “Top Gun 3” but I am also excited to see what other originals he will take on in the coming years. Heck, I would like to see that one movie where he supposedly goes into space. But if he comes back to “Mission: Impossible,” I will be waiting with a smile on my face. If not, it has been a great run, and this is a solid end to a wonderful franchise.
In the end, “Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning” is far from a perfect film, but I cannot deny that there are a few things in it that would be considered perfect if they were judged by themselves. The underwater scene, the plane scene, the editing, the camerawork. All of it is very exciting and jaw-dropping. Like usual, returning cast members Simon Pegg and Ving Rhames offer their own hints of charisma. If you have never watched any of the other films in the franchise, there are some points where you might have questions while checking out this one, but the story does its best to answer them. This film can definitely be enjoyed by itself, but I would say at minimum, it would be best to check out “Dead Reckoning” before watching this. After all, this film, while not specifically titled as such, is a part two to that one. Tom Cruise and Christopher McQuarrie, again, deliver another thrilling action flick that despite it being great, is ultimately their worst in this franchise. Note my specific use of “their,” I still think John Woo’s “Mission: Impossible II” is an abomination. Nevertheless, this is a triumph that many filmmakers would kill to make. I am going to give “Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning” a 7/10.
“Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.
Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for another action sequel, “The Accountant 2.” Stay tuned! Also look forward to my reviews for “Bring Her Back,” “Friendship,” and “Ballerina.” If you want to know my thoughts on the previous “Mission: Impossible” films, good news, I reviewed all of them. Click the following links to know more about my thoughts regarding “Mission: Impossible,” “Mission: Impossible II,” “Mission: Impossible III,” “Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol,” “Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation,” “Mission: Impossible – Fallout,” and “Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One.” Yes, I still call it that. If you want to see more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning?” What did you think about it? Or, now that the series might be over, how would you rank the “Mission: Impossible” films from worst to best? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
Hey everyone, Jack Drees here! I said in some recent posts that I am somewhat behind on my movie reviews. Unfortunately, that does not appear to be changing, because today I am going to be talking about a passion of mine I do not often get to discuss on Scene Before, game shows.
Today we are going to be talking about the upcoming season of “Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?”, and just how peeved I am by the current state of it. But before we get to why that is the case, I want to give some background on my relationship with this show.
As a game show fan, I have grown up watching “Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?” in the U.S. and have sometimes gone online to find variants of the show in other countries, including the original in Britain, and watch those as well. If I had to name a favorite game show format of all time, it would easily be “Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?”. In fact, I say that as someone who has not had the best luck with the show as a fan over the years. For one thing, I was born in 1999. So I was never conscious enough to truly experience Regis Philbin’s run on the U.S. version. I felt the changes later made to the show on syndication such as the eliminated lifelines, the eradication of the hot seat, as well as the lackluster music they decided to go with from 2010 to 2019 made for a product that I felt was significantly inferior to what the show had before.
Then came 2020, it was announced the show would come back to primetime. Good. They also announced there would be a hot seat. Good. They also brought the back the original music. Good. They also announced it would be a celebrity exclusive season. Okay… I mean… It is not ideal, but I will let it slide this one time.
Nevertheless, the fanboy in me was excited. I was truly bouncing off the walls. They even picked a decent host in Jimmy Kimmel, who I enjoy through his late night talk show, as well has his then recent gigs at the Oscars. I even reserved seats in the audience to see the first taping of the show in Los Angeles.
Then COVID-19 happened and nothing was ever the same.
Long story short, I got two free tickets for my mom and I. We got a flight to LAX. We got a hotel in Beverly Hills. All is fine and dandy. Then things start shutting down, and hours after we land and get to the hotel, I get a message from the ticket provider saying that the taping has been cancelled. I basically flew to Los Angeles for pure disappointment.
So what happens next? The show tapes its all celebrity season without an audience, and I have to say, despite some occasional bumps in the road in terms of the rules and question difficulty, it was a really good season. I had a ball watching the show return to its roots, and Jimmy Kimmel did a good job with hosting. The show did well with ratings, and it returned later that year. This time around, celebrities were still playing, but they also brought in some essential workers. It was a respectable balance of famous and not so famous players. A lot of those players across the board appeared to do very well with their individual games and they were all fun to watch. Though if I had one weakness, I think Jimmy Kimmel does a lot better communicating one on one with celebrities than he does the regular contestants. It could be attributed to his experience in late night television. He knows a lot of these people, and in some ways, a lot of the back and forth delivered a vibe that was similar to talk show banter. That is my one big gripe with the season I came to realize. If I had another one, it is the guaranteed minimum of $32 thousand given to each contestant. Essentially that means, no matter what, everyone leaves as if they successfully answered the 10th question of 15. It makes the game somewhat less engaging. Though the money is for good causes and for people who probably need it, so it is nice seeing the money going somewhere where it is needed.
Then a couple years go by where the show is essentially on hold, until it makes its triumphant return in 2024 for its 25th anniversary. Despite the special title, there was not much of a reason for me to get excited about it, as the program was showcasing all celebrity contestants again. And not just one, but two celebrities were playing each game! I was disappointed, but I was still onboard because it is still better than no “Millionaire” at all. Plus, the audience was back! And so was the Ask the Audience lifeline! Finally! Unfortunately, I was not a part of the audience like I would have been in 2020.
Then we get to this year… Just kill me.
Assuming we only get one season this year, the 2025 season of “Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?” is going to be the exact same format as the 2024 season. All celebrities, with two contestants per game. When will this end?
I love the “Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?” format, but it does not change the fact that the people running it do not know what to do with it. If anything, them bringing the show back this year, and perhaps also the year before, comes off as an obligation. I do not have a lot of time for television as I watch so many movies, but game shows have always been some kind of exception. “Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?” is a great idea for a show, and if done right, it is exceptional. This season feels underwhelming based on what I have read so far. I have no problem with Jimmy Kimmel coming back. He is a good host. I think when it comes to suspense, I think he does a better job with that compared to Regis Philbin. For the record, I think Regis Philbin is the superior host, but Kimmel holds his own. He is funny, he has good delivery with the prompter lines, and he times himself well with what the contestants have to say. Do I think there are people who I would rather see have a chance at hosting? Perhaps. If I had a few desired picks, I would go with Levar Burton from “Star Trek: The Next Generation,” Taylor Tomlinson from CBS’s “After Midnight,” or heck, let’s throw Howie Mandel in there as well. I liked him on “Deal or No Deal.” Or even bring back one of the older hosts! I have a soft spot for Meredith Vieira. I think she did a fantastic job during her run. Jimmy Kimmel is a fine choice though, I dig him. So that is one positive with this renewal.
Now onto the negatives. This show is becoming increasingly dumbed down. I understand the need to dumb things down during the 2020 seasons with the standby experts each contestant brought in. Many of the players were giving money to charity, and there was also an ongoing health crisis. While we still have people playing for charity in this upcoming season, I will not deny that we are at a point where it sounds like the people making this show are intentionally making it as insultingly easy as they can. I do not know what the questions will be. I will note, there have been a few million dollar questions over the past 5 years on this show, and all of them were actually quite difficult. I had trouble figuring them out myself. But regardless of what questions the contestants end up getting, the journey to get to that million dollar question is inevitably going to be less exciting.
I would have no problem with two people playing at the same time if it were a special occasion during a long season. It has been done before. There have been Couples Editions of the show when Regis Philbin was hosting. I also have no problem with bringing in a second player to help out. On top of the expert in the shadows that assisted the contestant during the 2020 season, there have been lifelines on the show that involved back and forth communication between two people like Phone a Friend, Ask the Expert, and Plus One. But those lifelines only help the contestants for a certain window of time. When you have two players answering questions simultaneously for the entire game, you basically have a permanent lifeline. On top of that, if this season is going to be like the last one, then chances are some of the lifelines are going to be Phone a Friend, which again, involves communication between multiple people… Ask the Host, where Jimmy Kimmel tells the contestant what he thinks, or knows, the answer is… And Ask the Audience, where a bunch of people with keypads give away what they think the answer is.
When making a game show with a million dollar top prize, it should have the feeling of high stakes, tremendous pressure, and utter intensity. “Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?” has mastered that through many of its past seasons. But the way things seem to be laid out for the current iteration of “Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?” feels smaller and less exciting. In fact, it sometimes feels scripted. If you watched “Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?”, even in the daytime, you would notice that not every show starts with a contestant playing their first question. They could be on the second, third, maybe even the 15th. If you watched the last season, every episode was the same. You had two contestants playing at once during the show’s initial half. And for the second half, another duo would take their place. It gets repetitive after awhile. I have no idea what the tapings were like. I have to imagine some significant editing must have taken place to allow each pair of contestants to fill the hour without going over or under. But even if any of these contestants’ runs were authentic, it made “Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?” feel more predictable than it has ever been. Predictable is probably the last adjective I would want to use to describe this show. The beauty of “Millionaire,” as well as just about every other game show in existence, is that it does not follow a script. Sure, there are some lines the host has to say. Sure, there is a format that is often followed. Sure, many games are played so they can easily be completed in one episode. But the contestants fill in the gaps. While the pairs of contestants from the previous “Millionaire” season may have filled those gaps, the show sometimes felt rushed or unfinished.
I remember watching some episodes of “Who Wants to Be a Millioniare?” in the United States as well as other countries, and when some people win the million dollars, the host will take time to talk with them, congratulate them, and let the audience breathe. That kind of communication did not happen every single time, but even when it did not, the show still gave a moment for everyone in the room to celebrate. I think this is a moment best exemplified by last season, when contestant duo Ike and Alan Barinholtz won the top prize. Unfortunately, there was not much Jimmy Kimmel could do to build up the million dollar win because the contestants used the Ask the Host lifeline. When that lifeline is used and a contestant locks an answer in, Jimmy must let the computer “reveal the correct answer.” The answer turns green, the contestants lose their mind, and so do Jimmy and the audience. Confetti shoots out, Jimmy acknowledges the win, and suddenly, the show is over. Maybe that is how things were when this specific portion of the show was being taped. But as a viewer, I would have liked to have maybe digested the moment a little more. Maybe once the music stops, you could hear the audience cheering, or we could get to know a little more about the duo’s charity and what this money means to them. I feel something was missing here. Yes, I know what I am saying sounds scripted. But come on. Would you rather see these celebrities take the money and run? Or would you want to take a moment to celebrate the win with them? It is not like this kind of thing has not happened in recent years.
Heck, during Jimmy Kimmel’s second season, that actually happened when celebrity contestant David Chang won! The player became the first celebrity in history to win the million, which was acknowledged on air. He and Jimmy celebrated with elbow bumps. The sideline expert joined in. They paused for a moment to breathe, and then they sit down and discuss how everyone felt in the moment. They even took time to call David Chang’s phone a friend, ESPN’s Mina Kimes, to bring her in on the celebration. In fact, you can see this for yourself in the full episode, which as of this post’s publication, you can watch on YouTube. The million dollar question begins around the 17 minute mark. You’re welcome.
Fast forward to the Barinholtz duo, Jimmy simply hands the check and the show is over. I was thrilled they won. Very thrilled, actually. I did not know much about his father, Alan, but deep down I knew Ike Barinholtz could make it to the end because I had the privilege of also watching him on “Celebrity Jeopardy!”, where he also did very well, and not just by celebrity standards. I just wish “Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?” could have celebrated an achievement as unbelievable as this with a little more pizzazz. In film speak, it is like if a movie wins Best Picture at the Oscars, but they do not let anyone give an acceptance speech. Again, if you want proof, the full episode is available on YouTube as of this post’s publication. The million dollar question begins around the 38 minute mark. Once again, you’re welcome.
I know during Regis Philbin’s time on the show, the contestants who won the million, or in Ed Toutant and Kevin Olmstead’s cases, anywhere between $1.86 million to $2.18 million, would also be given a check and shortly leave after. But that is supplemented with a bit of a breather where the music dies down. Maybe they celebrate with someone they know, or they get a thunderous response from the audience, perhaps even the people working behind the scenes.
I love some of the changes that have been made to the U.S. version of “Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?” in recent years. Jimmy Kimmel is a fine addition to the show. I appreciate the production going back to its roots with the hot seat and the original music. Those are two of my favorite production elements in any project I ever watched, and not just game shows. The current set, which was inspired by the latest one used in the United Kingdom, is spectacular. Ask the Host is also not a bad lifeline. It shows that the host does not always have the answers. They do not make the questions. They are just providing them.
Although if I must be honest, as great of a format as “Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?” is, this current edition of it needs improvement. I am not necessarily suggesting for it to air multiple nights a week. But there needs to be a prioritization of regular contestants. I am not going to pretend I know how much money every celebrity contestant has in their bank accounts. Although if the game is called “Who Wants to Be a Millionaire,” it is much less inspiring and captivating to know that a lot of the contestants playing the game are already rich and famous. You think John Mulaney WANTS to be a MILLIONAIRE? No! His net worth is somewhere in the tens of millions! At this point, I would think he wants to be a NEPTILLIONAIRE! Yes, I know Mulaney, and other celebrity contestants, are playing for charity. But in all seriousness, why not let a regular Joe try for a million? Game shows are built to let people potentially win big, make it rich. People dream of going on “Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?”. While it may not be the pinnacle of trivia programs that “Jeopardy!” seems to be at this point, it has become a staple in game show history. Why not let some average people live out that dream?!
The beauty of watching “Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?” when it started was the potential of it making someone an overnight sensation. NO ONE could have predicted John Carpenter, an IRS officer from Connecticut, making it to the million dollar question with all of his lifelines, reading the question, finally using his phone a friend to call his dad, only to tell him that he does not need his help because he is going to the win the million dollars, which of course, he did, because the answer was “Richard Nixon.” That is must see TV.
You might be questioning me right now. After all, I did say earlier that I think Jimmy Kimmel does a better job communicating with celebrity contestants than he does with regular ones. That has been established. But it does not mean he lacks potential. It is not like he only communicates with celebrities. In fact, he spent some time on another game show with some non-celebrity contestants through “Win Ben Stein’s Money.” He has showcased some solid hosting skills on that show and I think he has the potential to do the same on “Millionaire?” should they bring back non-celebrity contestants there too.
I am going to let the crew behind this season of “Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?” have their fun. Maybe I will watch the show. Maybe I will not. Who knows at this point?… But this format is slowly losing its flair. Make it an event. Make it engaging. Introduce the viewers to some nobodies who could potentially become somebody. Let some regular people phone a friend instead of letting Jimmy Kimmel have an excuse to talk to his friends. He already has “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” for that. I want this show to do better, and that, is my final answer.
Thanks for reading this post! Interesting enough, this is not the only game show-related post you will see on this blog in a matter of days. Because if you are curious to know what my next review will be, it is “The Luckiest Man in America.” For those not aware, that movie is based on the events of the infamous “Press Your Luck” episode featuring Michael Larson. I was really looking forward to checking out that film. I hope you all are looking forward to reading my review of it. If you enjoyed this post and want to see more like it, follow Scene Before either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, are you looking forward to the upcoming season of “Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?”. Am I an idiot for making this post? Please tell me in the comments, I assure you I do read them. What are your thoughts on “Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?” as a show? Do you like it? Dislike it? Leave your thoughts down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“Saturday Night” is directed by Jason Reitman (Ghostbusters: Afterlife, Juno) and stars Gabriel LaBelle (Snack Shack, The Fabelmans), Rachel Sennott (Bottoms, Bodies Bodies Bodies), Cory Michael Smith (Call Jane, 1985), Ella Hunt (Dickinson, Cold Feet), Dylan O’Brien (Teen Wolf, The Maze Runner), Emily Fairn (Mary & George, The Responder), Matt Wood (Law & Order: Special Victims Unit, Difficult People), Lamorne Harris (Call Me Kat, New Girl), Kim Matula (LA to Vegas, The Bold and the Beautiful), Finn Wolfhard (It, Stranger Things), Nicolaus Braun (Zola, Succession), Cooper Hoffman (Licorice Pizza, Wildcat), Andrew Barth Feldman (No Hard Feelings, A Tourist’s Guide to Love), Kaia Gerber (Bottoms, American Horror Stories), Tommy Dewey (Casual, The Mindy Project), Willem Dafoe (Spider-Man, The Lighthouse), Matthew Rhys (A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood, The Post), and JK Simmons (Spider-/Man, Whiplash). This film is a showcase of the chaotic 90 minutes leading up to the production of the first episode of “Saturday Night Live.”
People look at “Saturday Night Live” today with a mix of opinions. Of course, when a television series of its notability has been around for several decades, chances are that not everyone is going to have the same thoughts on it, and there may be moments some find to be better than others. I often find myself going back and watching the series’ gutbusting “Celebrity Jeopardy!” bits with Norm MacDonald as Burt Reynolds and Darrell Hammond as Sean Connery. Those sketches are comedy gold and I find myself quoting it on a regular basis. I have even used one of those bits as part of my Film Improvements segment during the 5th Jack Awards. But the movie “Saturday Night” dives into a time long before that when the show had its humble beginnings. The film has a star-studded cast including Gabriel LaBelle as Lorne Michaels, Cory Michael Smith as Chevy Chase, and Rachel Sennott as Rosie Shuster just to name a few people. Audiences of all kinds know the names of these characters today, but this movie is kind of an underdog story about a bunch of nobodies. One of the most positive things I can say about “Saturday Night” is that it easily gets me to root for its cast to do anything and everything they can just to make it on the air by 11:30. The film definitely has a Hollywoodized feel to it at times, but I think it works because some of the hyped up situations definitely add to the entertainment of everything on screen.
For those who do not know, since 2023 I have worked in live television, particularly local news. So while I might say the film “Broadcast News” is sometimes more specifically reflective of my work environment, even though that movie came out years before I was born, “Saturday Night” also does a great job at encapsulating the vibe of working in a live production. This film dives into the first episode of “Saturday Night Live,” but I must say as someone who has been working in local news for almost a couple years now, even when the formula may be familiar, there have been times that feel as if we are making a live broadcast for the first time. After all, there is so much that has to be done for several shows in a single streak of hours. Therefore, something down the line is bound to screw itself up. It is unavoidable. Sometimes it is my fault. Sometimes it is someone else’s bad. Sometimes it is a technical problem. But one thing I will note about my job is that we are lucky that we have a schedule that is set in stone. Sure, not everything goes right, but there is a lot that does. We have a history of shows behind us, and planned broadcasts for the hours ahead. We have a good team of people who all do their job as best as they can and offer excellent results. But our crew in “Saturday Night” learns that they are potentially going to be sidelined by a rerun for “The Tonight Show Starring Johnny Carson.” They might not even have a first broadcast.
There are so many things that this crew has to deal with in just a span of 90 minutes… Making sure the entire cast is ready to go. Convincing John Belushi to tolerate being in costume. Figuring out what to cut for time. Standing outside the building and trying to get people to join a live studio audience. Trying to sell the show to various affiliates. This entire film is a stress streak from start to finish. It is anxiety-inducing. The movie contains a moment or two that allow the audience audience to breathe. There are slower moments in the movie, but even in those scenes there is a sense of everlasting tension. There is a wonder if certain wrongs will be made right.
I mentioned this film has a star-studded cast, so chances are you are going to recognize at least one name on the list. But my favorite performance in the film is from Cory Michael Smith as Chevy Chase. From the moment I witnessed this son of a gun fall to the floor, get back up, and so casually utter the words, “Sorry, tripped over my penis,” I knew we were in for something special. Even though he has a legacy, I have heard about some of the controversy surrounding Chase, such as when he was on “Community.” Having heard about that almost makes this movie, and this particular performance, just a tad funnier. Although that makes me wonder how this movie will sit with certain people, because it reminds me of how hyper-obsessively knowing about certain comic book movie news stories over the years made me appreciate “Deadpool & Wolverine” in a way that I imagine some people would not. It makes me question how well the movie will age.
Also, Gabriel LaBelle as Lorne Michaels is a superb pick. This is a young, fresh actor who I would guess not everybody knows at this point, and I think some people will still not know a few months later, but I hope this review helps a soul or two get to know him, because he is talented. Michaels is the center of this rollercoaster of a film, and you can tell that in every single frame, he is nervous about whatever crazy derailment could come up. And those nerves rubbed off on me. This is a young guy with a lot of potential. But the thing about potential is that not everyone has seen it. Even though this is based on events that happened and I had an idea of how things in this movie would go, I was rooting for Michaels and crew to unleash said potential by the end of the film.
I also want to bring up the ending of the film. It is one of those endings that had me perplexed, yet satisfied. Because it comes out of nowhere, but it also closes on a note where anything after it is practically bonus content. The main story finishes by the time we get to said ending, but it comes at me like a bullet. It feels jarring. Given time to marinate though, I love what they did with the ending. I will not go into detail for those wanting to see the movie, but between the timing of the dialogue and the credits music, I am having a hard time imagining this movie capping things off better than it did. On the note of the music though, Jon Batiste, who actually has some recent variety TV experience as the bandleader on “The Late Show with Stephen Colbert” for seven years, does the score for “Saturday Night,” and it is perfect. At times it is subtle, but it is almost a character of its own in the film. Just thinking about parts of it gives me chills and nerves.
One good question to ask is whether this movie is a good watch for people who for whatever reason, have not seen an episode or sketch from “Saturday Night Live.” I think this film will definitely land harder for those who have seen some of the sketches, some of the episodes. That is for sure. But I think those who have not seen “Saturday Night Live” can still get plenty of laughs out of this film. Because if you have not picked it up already, this is not “Saturday Night Live” in movie form. It is not like “Jackass” or “Impractical Jokers,” two shows starring real people that end up taking their show’s format and converting it into a feature film. This is not this generation’s version of “Movie 43” so to speak… This is instead a buildup into how “Saturday Night Live” became what it is. This is, again, an underdog story, and I think a lot of people can appreciate those. And of course, there’s laughs, there’s tension, there’s a lot of big stars. Heck, JK Simmons makes an appearance in this movie, which I was not expecting at all. And I really was not expecting him to be cast in the kind of role in which he was picked to play. At one point he is just dancing like a moron, and he plays it up so well that I am laughing not because of the physical movements, but the guy doing said physical movements. I often pick apart animated movies nowadays for an overreliance on star power, but this is a movie that uses star power like few others I have seen recently, and I would say it does a great job with it. The cast is stacked and everyone plays their part to a T.
Maybe you know the names Kaia Gerber or Willem Dafoe or Dylan O’Brien. But what makes this movie is not the stars, it is the compelling narrative, ferocious pace, and laugh out loud funny comedy that honestly could match the feeling of a watching a spectacular “Saturday Night Live” episode at home on your couch or on your bed.
In the end, “Saturday Night” is an utter delight. I absolutely loved this movie. Granted, I am a bit biased because I work in live television so it kind of reminded me of the environment in which find myself on a regular basis. These are for two very different programs, but when putting two and two together, I found some commonalities. This was a movie that from scene one takes you on a ride, and I did not want it to end. That said, when it did end, I was satisfied and infatuated with what I saw. Does it sometimes feel hyperbolic in its execution? Perhaps. That’s probably my biggest critique, but the movie still works with that feeling intact sometimes. “Saturday Night” has the vibe, filmmaking style, and comedic flair of “The Disaster Artist,” but it uses those ideas and presents them in a movie with the pacing of “Speed” starring Keanu Reeves. I am going to give “Saturday Night” a 9/10.
For those sticking around, I wanted to end on this note because what I am about to say was intended as a part of the review, but it ultimately become a bit of a tangent. Nevertheless, I am proud of it. So I kept it here for you all to read.
This film is led by Gabriel LaBelle, who is still in the early days of his career, but he is proving himself to be a fine talent. But I am impressed by his luck, if you can call it that, in terms of his resume. Because a couple years ago he starred as the lead of “The Fabelmans,” which is an excellent movie by the way. For those who did not see the movie, it is directed by Steven Spielberg and is loosely based on his life. In that film’s case, LaBelle ends up playing a version if you will of Spielberg in his youth. Now, he has gone from playing one of the most iconic filmmakers of all time to playing perhaps one of the most impactful TV creators of all time. I would not imagine people today know Lorne Michaels like they know the name Steven Spielberg, but it does not change the fact that Lorne Michaels has become one of variety TV’s staples over the years. Whatever your definition of variety TV is, I will leave that up to you. However, to this day, “Saturday Night Live” is still doing weekly episodes. NBC’s “Late Night” format is still kicking with Seth Meyers at this point, who I would say is doing a very good job. I particularly think his “A Closer Look” segments are well timed and always end on a high note. It makes me wonder what is next for LaBelle. Is he going to take on notable game show hosts next and play young Alex Trebek? I think he’d do an okay job with that. They’re both Canadian! Just an idea! Heck, he could probably play Bob Eubanks! Peter Tomarkan! I could even see him as Pat Sajak! LaBelle has chops, I am just saying!
“Saturday Night” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.
Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for Francis Ford Coppola’s “Megalopolis,” his passion project which has now been in theaters for several weeks. Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “Venom: The Last Dance.” If you want to see these reviews 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 “Saturday Night?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite “Saturday Night Live” sketch? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“The Fall Guy” is directed by David Leitch (Bullet Train, Deadpool 2) and stars Ryan Gosling (Barbie, La La Land), Emily Blunt (Oppenheimer, Edge of Tomorrow), Aaron Taylor-Johnson (Godzilla, Bullet Train), Hannah Waddingham (Ted Lasso, Sex Education), Teresa Palmer (The Choice, Point Break), Stephanie Hsu (Everything Everywhere All at Once, Joy Ride), and Winston Duke (Us, Black Panther). This film is inspired by a 1980s TV series of the same name and centers around a Hollywood stuntman named Colt Seavers who is tasked with finding the missing star of a film directed by his ex.
July 21st, 2023 to me will forever be known as one of the biggest days in the history of moviegoing. You have two high profile films opening on the same day, “Barbie” and “Oppenheimer,” both of which have high anticipation and dedicated audiences. Both films ended up making tons of money overtime with “Barbie” becoming the biggest film of the year and “Oppenheimer” earning more at the box office than any other biographical film in history. Now, less than a year later, a couple of the stars from those competing movies join forces for “The Fall Guy,” a project I was curious about for some time. You have “Barbie’s” Ryan Gosling, who I’d argue gave the best supporting performance of the past year. And you have “Oppenheimer’s” Emily Blunt, who also stood out in her role.
This leads to my first positive of the film. Gosling and Blunt’s characters, Colt and Jody, are a match made in Heaven. And I am not necessarily talking about their attachment to each other, or much they like each other, or how good they look together.
Although to be real, they do look pretty freaking good together…
In fact, the movie makes it clear that these two are not always on the best terms. But what I mean is that these two, even in moments where they clearly are not supposed to align with each other, have undeniable chemistry. Honestly, it is some of the best chemistry I have seen in a big budget movie in a while. I am not going to pretend that either one of these actors are giving performances equal to their “Barbenheimer” outings, but when it comes to “The Fall Guy,” these two deliver stellar portrayals of their respective characters, and when they are on screen together, it is simply put, magical.
There are a lot of stories out there in the realm of movies where the people behind the projects are expressing their passion for the craft. Steven Spielberg’s “The Fabelmans” does a good job at tributing filmmakers trying to get into the industry. Damien Chazelle’s “La La Land” is a salute to the dreams of stars, including hopeful actors. I even thought Kevin Smith’s “Clerks III” was a great encapsulation of what it is like to make a passion project. What it is like to be an auteur. What it is like to take on such a monumental effort of a film without realizing what it is you’re getting into. Similarly, “The Fall Guy” is clearly a love letter to stuntwork. The movie itself is about a stuntman, has tons of stunts in it, and it is directed by someone who has a history of overseeing stunts in film. David Leitch has helmed some of the biggest action movies in recent years like “Deadpool 2” and “Fast & Furious Presents: Hobbs & Shaw.” Before that, he was responsible for stunts in “The Matrix Reloaded,” “Underworld: Evolution,” “300,” “Tron: Legacy,” and “Jupiter Ascending.” On paper, if anybody was qualified to direct “The Fall Guy,” it would be David Leitch. In execution, the results are fantastic.
“The Fall Guy” is packed with one thrilling action sequence after another. Whether it is a simple moment where you have characters on foot, a high speed chase through the city, or a so-called fight in an apartment, everything in this movie had me glued to the screen. Even the moments where we just watch Colt Seavers doing his job is engaging as heck. One of the best scenes of the movie is where we see his character repeatedly set on fire. Not only does it showcase the dangers of his job, but again, this movie is a love letter to stunts, and it also showcases what the people making our movies go through for our entertainment. This movie showcases that in a way that is informative while also doubling as a standout scene.
One thing I always noticed in David Leitch’s movies is that at some point, there will be at least one big A-List celebrity cameo. In “Hobbs & Shaw,” the movie seamlessly finds a way to have Kevin Hart and Ryan Reynolds pop up for a scene. During my initial watch of “Bullet Train,” I found myself delightfully shocked to see the latter of those two actors appear in that film for a hot second. Without giving much away, the last moments of “The Fall Guy” has a cameo from a celebrity that I am sure many of you reading this would probably know. As far as cameos go, it is probably one of my favorites in recent years. I burst into pure laughter when this person showed up. Regarding who that person is, I will just let you find out for yourself.
“The Fall Guy” is one of those movies that is clearly going after a wide audience. If it sticks the landing, that is of course, a big fat win. And thankfully, it does. Perhaps the biggest compliment I can give “The Fall Guy” is that the movie presented itself in such a way to the point where my mom ended up going to the theater to check it out. Turns out, she had a great time. She is not an action movie person. But I must say that if you do not like action movies and are hesitating on checking this film out, I would hold those hesitations at the door and give the movie a shot anyway. Because this film is more than just action. It also does well in the humor department. I found myself laughing quite a bit. I also would say the film works well as a romance story. It does not feel overly cheesy, and as mentioned, I like the two leads enough to the point where I would not mind seeing them together in a relationship. With “The Fall Guy” going after a multitude of demographics, perhaps even the “Swiftie” crowd at one point, it is arguable that there is some noticeable potential for disappointment because of how many things the movie tries to shove in a single package. But somehow, everything flows naturally.
“The Fall Guy” is probably not going to win any Oscars. Not only because there is no such thing as a Best Stunts category. By the way, I was not surprised that the movie found a way to note this fact in the script. But on top of that, I would imagine “The Fall Guy” is not the kind of movie the Academy would hail as one of the year’s best. It could pick up a technical nomination or two. But I doubt it is going to get much more than that. But this is the kind of movie that I think is best watched with a group of people. The film is now available to stream at home, so you could gather some friends and watch it at your place. But if you want my recommendation, if “The Fall Guy” is playing in a theater near you, go see it there. The action is worth seeing on the big screen. The sound is incredible. And it is undoubtedly an immersive experience. Nothing beats watching Ryan Gosling speed through the city in a car with a dog who only understands commands in French. And it is even better on the big screen.
In the end, “The Fall Guy” is a rare flick that has something for everyone, and also one where those somethings exceed the bare minimum. “The Fall Guy” is a movie that I would honestly recommend to just about anyone looking for something to watch because if you are not an action junkie, I think this is nevertheless a fairly accessible title. It’s got comedy. It’s got romance. It’s got drama. It’s got all you can want in a movie. As far as mainstream titles go, this should have done a lot better at the box office than it did. Ryan Gosling and Emily Blunt are excellent in the film. As for other standouts in the cast, I really enjoyed Hannah Waddingham as Gail, a producer on Jody’s film. If you do watch “The Fall Guy,” please stick around for the credits. There are some cool behind the scenes moments you might not want to miss. I am going to give “The Fall Guy” an 8/10.
“The Fall Guy” is now playing in theaters and is available to rent or buy on VOD.
Thanks for reading this review! Coming soon, I will have reviews for “Tarot,” “IF,” “The Garfield Movie,” “I Saw the TV Glow,” “Back to Black,” and “Summer Camp.” If you want to see these reviews 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 Fall Guy?” What did you think about it? Or, if you could take one star from “Barbie” and one star from “Oppenheimer” and put them in a movie together? Which ones would you want and what would the movie be about? For me, I’d love to see Simu Liu and Florence Pugh do a movie together where they play love interests. I think they’d have good chemistry. Let me know your selections down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Mutant Mayhem” is directed by Jeff Rowe and stars Micah Abbey (Cousins for Life, Grey’s Anatomy), Shamon Brown Jr. (The Chi), Nicolas Cantu (The Amazing World of Gumball, Sofia the First), Brady Noon (Boardwalk Empire, Good Boys), Ayo Edebiri (Big Mouth, The Bear), Maya Rudolph (The Mitchells vs. the Machines, Saturday Night Live), John Cena (Peacemaker, Blockers), Seth Rogen (Neighbors, Sausage Party), Rose Byrne (Neighbors, X-Men: First Class), Natasia Demetriou (The Cuphead Show!, What We Do in the Shadows), Giancarlo Esposito (Maze Runner: The Scorch Trials, Harley Quinn), Jackie Chan (Snake in the Eagle’s Shadow, Drunken Master), Ice Cube (Ride Along, xXx: State of the Union), Paul Rudd (Ant-Man, Dinner for Schmucks), and Hannibal Buress (Spider-Man: Homecoming, The Eric Andre Show). This film is the latest incarnation of the “Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles” property. In this film, the four turtles must earn the love of New York City while taking down an army of mutants.
I will be real. “Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles” has never been my thing. I am not knocking on the franchise, it is just something I never got into for one reason or another. I never grew up with it, I never watched any of the shows or movies, I never read the comic material, so I never gave it a solid chance. I did watch an episode of the 2012 television series at someone’s house, but I was not in control of the television. When it comes to this latest attempt at revitalizing the property, I was not sure what to think other than to hope whatever was in front of me would be good. I did not have much to compare this to, so all I could wish for is that I would walk out not regretting my purchase. To be honest, I almost did not even see this movie. My friend wanted to see it, and of course, seeing more movies means more reviews, so he and I went together.
The big question is, did I have a good time?
Sure. I would say so.
Despite my good time, however, this does not mean the film is free from problems. The biggest problem with this film that comes to mind is that it spends way too much time expositing certain things in perhaps the most forced ways one could imagine. The way this movie introduces Baxter Stockman allows for the inclusion of some of the most on the nose lines I have heard in recent memory. We spend more time getting to know the characters through what they say as opposed to what they think, how they feel, how they emote. Now I imagine some people will say that this is a movie for kids. And yes, this movie is definitely something that could be enjoyed by kids. Perhaps primarily so. But I always say that if you want your movie to age well, tell your story with kids in mind, but do so in a way that treats them as if they were watching something adult. I just recently rewatched “The Incredibles” and I was in awe of how much that movie respects its audience all the way through. It has such a natural flow in how it tells its story that has made the film age like a fine wine. I imagine that kids watching “Mutant Mayhem” today may end up watching it again after it hits streaming and DVD. A lot of kids will end up enjoying the film, but the question is, how will they view the film once they become adults? That is something I would like to see put to the test.
And I am not saying that the film does not work. Again, it is good. Not great, but good. I think one of the things this film handles well is the teenage aspect of its characters. Their problems feel like situations a lot of people would come by during their teenage years. Whether it has to do with anxiety, confusion over one’s identity, or wanting to fit in. While those last two concepts, specifically for the turtles, are handled in a way most humans probably would never experience, they nevertheless feel down to earth. When it comes to anxiety, that is something that is particularly handled well with the character of April O’Neil, her arc in this film may be my favorite of all the characters. Overall, the buildup was great, and I was excited to see the payoff eventually come into play.
But even with that in mind, the script does not reinvent the wheel. The story beats are sometimes overwhelmingly familiar. What happens in the movie can occasionally come off as predictable. And if they just toned down on the exposition just a little, the whole movie would have been a slightly easier, less irritating watch. That said, it is still an easy watch in some ways. It has a short runtime that flies by. Even with my problems, I never found the movie outright boring. From start to finish, I would say I was entertained.
Despite this film’s tendency to follow a formulaic path with been there done that methods of storytelling, I will say some of the writing is pretty solid. Not all of it works, but the jokes in the film are not bad. My favorite joke in particular, and I am not from the area, but I appreciated this movie’s balls to have a character say that Staten Island is “the best borough” in all of metropolitan New York. I have never been to Staten Island, but I know enough about it to laugh whenever I hear someone say what they just said. “Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Mutant Mayhem” has plenty of great humor. But it also has jokes that may as well have been stolen from a rejected “Sonic the Hedgehog” movie. But part of what makes these jokes click sometimes would be the chemistry between the cast. One of the neat things about the turtles in this film is that they are played by actual teenagers. In fact, the oldest of the bunch, Nicolas Cantu, turns 20 in less than a week as of this review. There is not only a sense of authenticity amongst the four characters, but when it comes to the people chosen to play them, there is camaraderie.
I also admire this film’s approach in its animation. I imagine a lot of people would say this film as an animation style that reminds them of the past couple “Spider-Verse” movies. In some ways, I would say that is true. It has this 2D feel to it that still emits a modern 3D vibe. But one thing that separates this film from those “Spider-Verse” movies, and I am not saying this is better, just to make myself clear, is that the film intentionally presents a certain messiness to its animation. It is certainly a unique approach that works at times for this film. I don’t know if I want to see it in every animated movie going forward, but for the way this film is executed, it seemed to work just fine. In fact, the way I can describe the animation for “Mutant Mayhem” is also a perfect way to describe the movie itself. It is all over the place. In one moment, it hits. In another moment, it becomes somewhat messy. I am not doubting that quite a bit of effort was put into animating this film. But at the end of the day, I wish that the crew tried as hard to make a story as fresh and exciting as its unusual visual style. If that were done, then this movie possibly could have been better. Instead, it is settling for a passable, but still somewhat lackluster experience. At least for me.
In the end, I will not doubt that “Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Mutant Mayhem” will find its fans. I will not doubt that kids may end up watching it multiple times. I will not doubt that some longtime fans will appreciate it too. But I was a semi-virgin of the franchise before watching this film, and as a newcomer, I do not think this is the introduction that would have made me want to continue exploring what else it contains. I would say “Mutant Mayhem” is on the same level as “The Super Mario Bros. Movie.” It plays things safe, but nevertheless has some good moments sprinkled in from start to finish. Based on this, I am going to give “Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Mutant Mayhem” a 6/10.
“Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Mutant Mayhem” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.
Thanks for reading this review! Pretty soon I will have my thoughts on “Talk to Me,” “Blue Beetle,” “Strays,” “Gran Turismo,” “Meg 2: The Trench,” and “Bottoms.” Stay tuned! 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 “Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Mutant Mayhem?” What did you think about it? Or, are you a “TMNT” fan? What do you recommend from the franchise? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One” is directed by Christopher McQuarrie (Jack Reacher, The Way of the Gun) and stars Tom Cruise (Top Gun, Risky Business), Hayley Atwell (Agent Carter, The Duchess), Ving Rhames (Lilo & Stitch, Pulp Fiction), Simon Pegg (Ready Player One, Run Fatboy Run), Rebecca Ferguson (Dune, Reminiscence), Vanessa Kirby (Pieces of a Woman, Fast & Furious Presents: Hobbs & Shaw), Esai Morales (Resurrection Blvd., Bad Boys), Pom Klementieff (Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2, Oldboy), Mariela Garriga (Bloodline, Nightmare Cinema), and Henry Czerny (Ready or Not, Revenge). This film is the seventh installment of the ongoing “Mission: Impossible” movie franchise based on the hit television series of the same name. In this latest installment, Ethan Hunt and crew must track down a dangerous weapon before it is too late.
The “Mission: Impossible” franchise is, in some ways, the definition of irony. Because there is a general saying that a movie’s sequel is not usually as good as the original. If “Mission: Impossible” stopped at two movies that would be true, because I liked the first film quite a bit, but felt a significant dip in quality in John Woo’s “Mission: Impossible II.” Thankfully, “Mission: Impossible III” was better. Not perfect, but J.J. Abrams at least did enough to thwart the franchise in the right direction. “Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol,” directed by Brad Bird, not only ended up being really good, but revitalized the franchise. I still think about the scene set around the Dubai Tower on a regular basis. Then we get “Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation,” directed by Christopher McQuarrie, which much like its predecessor, had incredible action sequences and stuntwork that define Tom Cruise’s career. That would have been my favorite “Mission: Impossible” movie, had it not been for the fact that Cruise and McQuarrie reunited to make the last “Mission: Impossible,” specifically “Fallout.” That film is the peak of what I consider to be one of the greatest action franchises. It was my favorite film of 2018, and I would put it right next to “Risky Business” as my favorite film starring Tom Cruise. The film is simple in plot, but has jaw-dropping action, likable characters, and a bone-chilling climax to back it up. It is everything a modern action movie should be.
This is also part of why I was excited for “Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One,” which I put my as my #2 for my top 10 most anticipated movies of 2023. This franchise has a special talent. Specifically, a talent where almost each film ends up surpassing its predecessor. With how good “Fallout” was, this seventh installment had big shoes to fill.
Time for some good news and bad news. Bad news, the streak of these sequels surpassing their predecessors has ended. I think “Fallout” is a better film than “Dead Reckoning Part One.” Good news, “Dead Reckoning Part One” is all around, a great time at the movies. It contains the essentials I am used to seeing in these films between the quick pace, the character moments, the fun action sequences, and everything in between. If you are looking for summer blockbuster thrills, look no further. This film is an excellent outing for everyone involved, and it will make an excellent outing for you once you step outside your home and into the theater.
One of the reasons I, and I imagine many others, ended up looking forward to “Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One” is because it is a continuation of Tom Cruise pulling off death-defying stunts. In fact, much of the marketing pushes the moment where Ethan maneuvers a motorcycle off a cliff and shortly thereafter removes himself from said motorcycle, allowing himself to fall through the air like an absolute moron. I can tell you, that stunt alone is worth the price of admission. When that scene came up in my auditorium, I could tell just about everyone felt a shiver through their body.
But what if I told you that is not even the most intense thing this movie has to offer? Because there are a couple of other scenes that continue to stand out to me. First off, there is a chase through Venice that will go down as not only one of my favorite sequences in the “Mission: Impossible” franchise, but also as one of the funniest action scenes I have ever watched in the history of cinema. I do not think I laughed this hard watching action either since “The Suicide Squad” or “Free Guy.” One of those two movies. When I say this action scene is funny, I mean it. There are a lot of visuals that caught me off guard in the best possible way. Although I must say, I apologize to the company because their car is prominently featured in said sequence, I do not think I will be buying a Fiat anytime soon. If there was any product placement involved, I think this action sequence basically told me to not spend my money on one of those cars. I will stick with my Ford for now.
Another standout sequence in “Dead Reckoning Part One” is set further into the movie, specifically on a train. First of all, the interior of the train, which was assembled for this movie from scratch, is stunningly designed. If the Oscars were tomorrow, I would consider putting this film amongst the Production Design nominations for how solid the inside of that train looks. Secondly, this movie may have the greatest train scene since “Spider-Man 2,” which is an impeccably high standard to match. But the reason why this train sequence will stick with me for a long time is because it does what “Mission: Impossible” does best. It does not only put our characters in danger from a story perspective, but as I watch the sequence, I am increasingly worried for their physical safety. Both the characters and the actors playing them. Anyone can do a train sequence in a film if they wanted to. I have seen boring train scenes before, just go watch “Solo: A Star Wars Story.” But this film does it in such a way that had me wondering how the heck anyone could make it out alive. Heck, there is a movie from last year called “Bullet Train,” and the train scene in “Dead Reckoning Part One” is arguably more thrilling than that entire movie. For the record, I liked “Bullet Train.” But my point stands.
If I had a problem with the film, it would be the opening scene. Sure, it is a homage to a respected title, “The Hunt for Red October,” but the dialogue during this scene honestly felt wooden. Maybe if I watch it again it would be better, but it felt more like a parody of “Mission: Impossible” rather than an actual “Mission: Impossible” movie. Which, quite frankly, is a dead on way to describe “Mission: Impossible II.” I said what I said. But other than that, there are not many flaws to point out about “Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One.” If there is one, maybe the A.I. was not as threatening as it could have been, but maybe the crew is saving the good stuff for part two. Staying on topic though, I think the antagonist, Gabriel (Esai Morales), is a bit of a step down for the franchise. Especially when compared to August Walker (Henry Cavill) from the previous installment.
On the note of multi-part efforts, despite having part one in the title, I will contend that “Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One” plays as a complete movie. It contains a full, concrete story. Sure, there are loose ends, but the main story ties itself up in a bow. It is a much better part one than what “Fast X” gave us a few months ago, which offered possibly the dumbest, most insultingly complicated cliffhanger in recent film. It did not feel like an end to a movie. It felt like the beginning of something much worse. I left “Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One” feeling satisfied with what I saw. Maybe I overhyped it a little, but it does not change the fact that it is a solid option for the big screen this summer.
Going back to “Fast X,” when it comes to the big spy movie franchises out right now, the “Fast & Furious” and “Mission: Impossible” franchises are the two that immediately come to mind. This movie manages to get something right that the “Fast & Furious” movies do not. Characterization. Sure, maybe every once in awhile it is soothing to hang out with the “family,” but those movies fail when it comes to getting me onboard with the characters due to a lack of stakes. Once again, this film reinstates the notion that I am worried for everyone’s safety. Part of it is because a lot of the stuff on screen is done for real, but they flesh out the characters and treat them more like people as opposed to big muscular bodies moving from one place to another. Grace (Hayley Atwell) is layered and has an intriguing mysteriousness to her throughout the film. Additionally, Paris (Pom Klementieff) is another new character that stands out and brings a lot to the table. There continues to be genuine chemistry between Cruise, Rhames, and Pegg as friends. When I left this film, one of the thoughts in my mind happened to be that I cannot wait to see “Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part Two.” Not only to get back to a franchise that I adore, but to continue seeing cool characters like these. Here is hoping the upcoming sequel is a worthy entry to the franchise, much like this one.
In the end, if I had to rank the “Mission: Impossible” movies, “Dead Reckoning Part One” would not be my favorite, but it would be on the higher end. I would put it above “Ghost Protocol,” but I would put it below the last two. The more I think about it, I think I like it just a little more than the 1996 original, which is a great movie on its own. When it comes to pure summer action, “Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One” delivers. It is exciting, thrilling, and I left the film satisfied, but still wanting to know what is next. While this may not make as much money as Tom Cruise’s last outing, “Top Gun: Maverick,” “Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One” brings in some big guns of its own. I am going to give “Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One” an 8/10.
“Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.
Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “Oppenheimer,” the brand new movie from my favorite filmmaker, Christopher Nolan. Also, I will soon be dropping reviews for “Haunted Mansion,” “The First Slam Dunk,” and “Barbie.” 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 “Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite “Mission: Impossible” movie? Mine is “Fallout,” but I want to know yours! Comment below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
Hey everyone, Jack Drees here! I do not talk about TV that much here on Scene Before, but it has been over three and a half years since I talked about ten of my all time favorite “Family Guy” episodes. Some examples from the time include “PTV,” (S4E14) “Wasted Talent,” (S2E20) “The Simpsons Guy,” (S13E01), and “Blue Harvest” (S6E01). If you are wondering, no, I do not have any current plans to update the countdown anytime soon. Maybe in a couple years if I’m desperate, but who knows? Besides, even though “Family Guy” is still on the air today, many of the newer episodes are either unfunny, disposable, overly cruel, or downright unwatchable. But there have been some diamonds in the rough, most notably “Three Directors,” (S16E05) where it is one short story presented in the “visions” of Quentin Tarantino, Wes Anderson, and Michael Bay, and “Trump Guy,” (S17E11) where Peter works for the Trump administration. But my favorite episode has aired during a time where “Family Guy” was just getting into the HD age.
Today, September 26th, 2020, is the tenth anniversary of my favorite “Family Guy” episode of all time, “And Then There Were Fewer.” Now I have a lot of respect for the “Family Guy” series. It is a show that I started watching at one point, and convinced my father to watch alongside me. I guess I got lucky, because at this point my father thinks Seth MacFarlane is a genius. In fact, I’m attempting to work on a bit of a “Family Guy” project myself. I can’t say much about it, but if Seth MacFarlane, Fox, or Disney reads this, I will be happy to talk with them about an idea or two I have!
When it comes to the adult animation genre, I think “Family Guy” reigns supreme in terms of humor and likable characters. From Peter to Stewie to Joe to Quagmire, the list goes on. Throughout the seasons, they all have their highlights in various episodes. And even if the episodes themselves are not that great, I still like the characters because at the end of the day, they have a likable presence or personality to keep the show afloat. Peter is a lovable idiot. While he is somewhat entitled and lazy, he plays the part great. I’m not a dog person, but Brian is probably one of my favorite dogs in media, mainly because of how well executed he is as a voice of wisdom. I occasionally enjoy myself realizing that Seth MacFarlane sometimes puts a bit of his own personality into Brian’s character. As for Stewie… He is probably in my top 10 most relatable characters of all time. Well, minus the desire to kill my own mother.
The supporting characters of “Family Guy” show themselves to be quite admirable too. From Tom Tucker, the charming newscaster who has a knack for dry commentary, to Mayor West, who is basically a college frat boy in a geezer’s body (RIP Adam West), and even though the actor himself is a controversial name as of today, James Woods had some of the greatest moments of screentime in the entire series.
This all adds up to something… That, kinda feels like a culmination.
The reason why I enjoy “And Then There Were Fewer” more than any other “Family Guy” episode is the same reason why I consider “Avengers: Infinity War” to be the best installment in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Every other movie felt like they played a part in a series of buildup. These movies eventually let “Infinity War” take elements from them to give a big, grand story that stands on its own and recognizes what came before, and even builds the story further in the end.
Keep in mind, “And Then There Were Fewer” is the premiere episode of “Family Guy’s” ninth season, but at times, it feels more like a finale. People die. The vibe is incredibly grand and massive. Also keep in mind, even though I mentioned “Infinity War,” this is not exactly like an epic. After all, this episode is a quirky but somewhat serious murder mystery. This episode relies a ton on its own, heavy, unique atmosphere that quite frankly, I have not seen in too many other “Family Guy” episodes. Your typical “Family Guy” episode goes straight for humor. Maybe it’s dark humor, controversial humor, or some plethora of pop culture references. And those are not always bad. These are in the show’s collective wheelhouse. In “And Then There Were Fewer,” the humor is there, but I stay for the story and characterization.
Let’s go over how the episode goes down, and I’ll give some of my thoughts along the way. *MAJOR SPOILERS AHEAD*
The episode begins with the Griffins finding out they were invited to a party at Rocky Point Manor, a massive location where the rest of the episode would take place. This episode is the first one in series to be presented in 16:9 widescreen and high definition. In fact, the intro that is not often shown on television due to time constraints (it can be found on the DVD version of the episode, however) tries to make the viewer aware that they are in for something new. Not just in regards to looks, but the overall vibe. The scope is massive, almost movie-like perhaps. Instead of the traditional intro where they show the main characters in the Griffin House and an alternate venue singing, they rely on scenery and atmosphere. When the main location of the episode is revealed, the music, which by the way is a full-blown orchestra, is kind of bombastic and triggers an emotional punch. The music does a solid job of reminding me as a viewer of the beauty regarding the massive mansion up ahead. The colors and animation in these opening scenes are vibrant and finely detailed.
Now, this is a cartoon, meaning that you can get away with more in a presentation of its kind compared to something in live-action. Thus, this episode handles a crossover sort of situation at hand. Turns out the Griffins were not the only ones to get the party invitation, but as Lois points out, “the whole town got invited.” Not only did they get invited, but they got invited “in their honor.”
This brings every single character imaginable into the episode. Your main tag team including Mayor West, Quagmire, and the Swansons. They’ve also got Mort and Muriel Goldman, the Channel 5 news team, Dr. Hartman, you name it. This episode seems to open with big promise, but does it deliver above and beyond the idea of bringing tons of people together? You betcha.
“Good evening, everyone.” -James Woods
I know a lot of people are currently divided over James Woods as a person, but regardless of his personal views of the world, I will say that he has appeared in some of the best “Family Guy” episodes, and this one is no exception. His role in here is perfect as it solidly relies on previous buildup. “Family Guy” has had a history of using James Woods as an antagonist against several characters, including Peter, when he tried to copy several aspects of his life. He ruined Brian’s TV pilot, changing the core aspects of the script and overall vibe of the production. Throughout the episode, there are a couple of other things that other characters briefly bring up that make Woods look like an undesirable monster. Quagmire reveals Woods stole Cheryl Tiegs from him, Tom Tucker mentions Woods kept him from being the star of “A Nightmare on Elm Street,” and Mayor Adam West says James Woods took the Twitter name @MayorWest, meaning he had to then use @Mayor_West. His presence in the episode is a reminder of how far this series has come and raises questions as to where it goes from there, and I admire that about Woods here.
Woods reveals he has recently become a born-again Christian thanks to his girlfriend, Priscilla (voiced by Ashley Tisdale). Because he’s just become a man of god, he felt it was necessary to invite all the people he wronged to make amends. The guests wonder why they should trust him, but James Woods begs for said guests to give him a chance.
When Woods exits the dining room where everybody happens to be sitting, waiting for dinner, Priscilla tags along. Quagmire’s annoying girlfriend, Stephanie, goes over to the Woods’ chair and sits down. Soon thereafter, blood pours out of her chest.
She dies. Head flat on the table.
To quote Agatha the Pre-Cog from “Minority Report…”
“Murrrrderrrrr.”
This is the perfect catalyst to bring darkness to this episode. “Family Guy” is usually known for being dark, but that’s usually just from a comedic perspective. From this moment, it might as well be gathered that some serious stuff is about to go down.
Everyone assumes James Woods killed Stephanie, thus leading them to flee to their cars. Upon beginning their drive, a tree collapses a bridge, the only way they can go in their escape.
Retrieved from TVGag
So it’s back to the mansion!
Unfortunately, nobody is getting reception on their cell phones, and even though there’s a landline, it’s dead. Everyone is in panic mode. until James Woods enters the room, where such panic is dialed up a couple notches. After a penis joke, scolding, and further realization that Stephanie is kind of a gag character. James and Priscilla are confused by everyone’s fear. James claims he’s unaware of what’s going on. So they go to the next room, where Stephanie’s body no longer remains. A power outage ensues, summoning a series of black frames, and “Family Guy” does what it does best.
“Oh my god! Is this what black people see all the time?” -Peter Griffin
James Woods dies with a knife in his back.
We don’t see who strikes Woods down, nor does anybody in the mansion. Joe Swanson catalyzes the rest of the episode.
JOE: What I’m saying is James Woods isn’t the murderer. The murderer… is one of us.”
*Collective gasps*
JOE: And someone ate the last goat cheese tartlet.
*Collective yammering*
PETER: Now I hope I die next!
We soon see that Stephanie died due to a timed gun, which went off as soon as Stephanie sat down in the chair that was supposed to be for James Woods. Nobody admits to wanting James Woods dead, so it’s time to play Clue!
Unfortunately for Joe, he’s soon knocked unconscious by Peter, who takes over the investigation. The characters remind us, the audience, that everyone at the dinner had a motive for wanting James Woods dead, but one was willing enough to get revenge. We see tons of finger-pointing. Diane Simmons points at Tom Tucker, who points at Seamus the pirate, who then points at Mayor Adam West. We get into a finger-pointing frenzy! No answers in sight!
Carl shoves Chris into a bookshelf, causing books to gravitate downward. One hits a particular floor tile that pushes down, making the bookshelf slide, thus revealing an opening to the basement.
Everyone goes downstairs, Peter opens a book revealing James’ misdeeds. He’s written each one down so he remembers who to make amends to. Upon some investigation, Brian comes across tons of Oxycontin bottles with James Woods’ name on it. All of it comes from Goldman’s Pharmacy, appropriately owned by Mort and Muriel Goldman. James Woods blackmailed Muriel specifically, as he was being supplied with free medicine. Everyone assumes Muriel is the killer, but she escapes before she can be captured.
Peter divides everyone into teams, and if you watch “Family Guy,” a couple of these combinations make complete sense.
“Chris, you check the basement with Herbert.”
*Herbert stretches over to Chris, emitting a twiggish sound*
Perfect.
Peter even points out Joe and Priscilla, who are currently passed out, therefore they’re labeled the “unconscious team.”
We see these teams in action. Derek and Jillian investigate an attic, where a black cat, voiced by Patrick Stewart, jumps out. There’s even an inside joke to “X-Men” where the cat reveals himself as a “professor.” Chris and Herbert collaborate, and Herbert makes a request to Chris to burn his house down if he dies. Diane Simmons and Tom Tucker enter an art gallery, where Tom clicks a button with his shoe, thus sliding a painting automatically. Tom goes inside, but he gets trapped! Diane raises some concern, but where did Tom go?!
Meg and Carl enter a billiard room, as if this wasn’t like “Clue” enough already. Meg bumps into the stuffed bear from “The Great Outdoors” written by John Hughes.
CARL: Oh, it’s okay. It’s just the stuffed bear from “The Great Outdoors.” Did you see “The Great Outdoors?”
Even though the duo are searching for Muriel, they decide to take a break and play some pool. Meg finds the pool cues, but she falls down a chute as soon as she grabs one of them.
We see Brian and Stewie humming TV themes to each other, when suddenly, a shriek is heard in the distance. The two run to the scene.
Retrieved from CutawayGuyHD (YouTube)
Muriel lies down with the knife inside her. Everyone else comes in as well.
And if you’re wondering, the thing I love about this death, not to mention a couple others in this episode, is that the people who died here have not been revived. In fact, the only person to die in this episode who has been revived is James Woods.
The clock ticks. The lightning strikes. The tension could not be higher. There is no other episode in the “Family Guy” series that I can think of that has given stakes like this.
Meg and Tom Tucker reveal their journey through an underground passageway to the rest of the crew, who are all standing together in the dining room. This is where we get one of the best jokes in the episode, and honestly, it has aged like a fine wine.
Derek reveals he’s getting reception on his cell phone. Peter speaks up.
PETER: Oh my god is that–…
*reveal Derek’s phone cover picture, him in front of the Hollywood sign
PETER: Are you holding up the whole Hollywood sign?
DEREK: No no no no, the sign was way in the background. I was standing in the foreground going like this (raises his arms) while Jillian took the picture. So, by forced perspective it looks like I’m holding up the whole sign.
PETER: I don’t believe you. I think you are a god. And I would die for you or kill others.
It’s stupid, but simultaneously brilliant, which to me is a core element of what makes “Family Guy” worthy of its cultural relevance.
Derek goes to the roof to call the police. Unfortunately, not everyone heard him say that. As evidenced by this next quote…
“Oh my god, Priscilla’s gone!” -Brian Griffin
We angle on the couch where Priscilla was laid to rest. We don’t know her fate, but she is nevertheless gone. But guess who isn’t gone? Joe! He’s back!
Some assume Priscilla’s the murderer. Some think there’s more data needed to confirm if that’s true. Then we get arguably the funniest outburst of the episode. Everyone’s arguing about the situation. Peter just jumps in being himself.
PETER: Derek lifted up the Hollywood sign.
*Collective yammering*
PETER: He did too, I saw the picture!
Derek reaches a balcony, dials for the police, but he’s smacked off. Splat! He hits the ground. Dr. Hartman steps in, confirms he’s dead, also noting his head was hit by a blunt object.
Everyone flies back into the mansion, gathers together in a room. Lois assumes Priscilla’s up to this, then Consuela discovers James Woods’ Golden Globe is missing. Everyone gathers around Joe, who suggests that if anyone leaves the group, they’re assumed to be the killer. They investigate Glenn Quagmire’s room, which doesn’t have anything of note. Although Stephanie’s huge underpants get some screentime, which provides for some funny lines.
LOIS: Oh it’s got flowers! I mean, why bother? Who’s gonna see em?
CHRIS: Maybe someone in space!
*Collective laughter*
The gang moves onto Tom Tucker’s room. They search around, Meg gasps, slowly revealing a bloody Golden Globe in her hand.
Everyone turns on Tom Tucker, Joe wheels himself over prepared to possibly turn him in. Tucker brings up Priscilla, noting that nobody knows what she’s up to. Joe suggests that’s possible, then blood starts dripping from the ceiling.
Peter lifts Joe to the ceiling, Joe opens a vent, and a dead Priscilla is revealed, everyone screams. Tom Tucker flees the room as many of the men track him down. They capture him in the dining room, where he’s cuffed. The police take him in once the sun rises.
The music in all of these scenes, and the entire episode for that matter, is simply put, “ear porn.” That’s the best way I can describe it. I know “Family Guy” is often known for their numbers that they’ve sprinkled into various episodes, but this episode has my favorite musical score, or my favorite musical job without lyrics, particularly in the “Family Guy series.” It’s intense, grand, and it pulls you right in. It’s kind of like some movies such as “Star Wars” where the music practically plays a supporting role.
The episode’s not over. We’ve just witnessed the main course. Now it’s time for dessert.
Retrieved from CutawayGuyHD (YouTube)
Everyone’s about to leave, Peter and Lois are packing up. Peter checks his stuff and notices his Hot Wheels fire engine does not appear to be in his luggage. He asks Lois if they’re in the bathroom, but she suggests she put them all in his bag. Lois walks down the hall, enters Diane Simmons’ room. She asks if Diane’s okay, to which she responds saying she’s managing. Then comes… this quote.
Retrieved from CutawayGuyHD (YouTube)
“You sound like my mother, she actually bought me this blouse for my first solo broadcast. I guess that’s sweet, huh.” -Diane Simmons
Lois is confused, until she puts what Diane said together.
As Peter often says, “Holy crap!”
Retrieved from CutawayGuyHD (YouTube)
Lois backs away, suggesting she’s looking for Peter’s fire engine, but Diane points a gun at her. She’s the killer.
As if this wasn’t exciting enough, the backstory behind all of this is incredible. At times when I watch it, I feel like I am viewing this story from the point where Diane is the protagonist. It kind of gives a grand, emotional “John Wick” vibe. I even teared up a couple times by watching the last 5 to 10 minutes of the episode because it’s that good.
Diane reveals that she and James Woods met at a press event, but their relationship was a secret from the media. Then she does something that NO CARTOONS EVER DO. Age. The footage reveals she turned 40, and around this time, James dumps her. Speaking of being left behind by straight, white men, Tom Tucker started promoting a younger blonde anchor, who we now know by the name Joyce Kinney. This anchor was set to take Diane’s place in a matter of weeks.
“I saw my career and my love life crumble, and I wasn’t gonna stand by and take it.” -Diane Simmons
From here, Diane reveals she has previously taken advantage of an intern named Priscilla. Sound familiar? At Diane’s discretion, Priscilla persuades James Woods to become a born-again Christian. This inspired the dinner where Woods invited everyone he wronged. Diane wanted everything to go as smooth as possible so she could kill James Woods and frame Tom Tucker.
“Oh my god. You’re 40?” -Lois Griffin
As for Diane killing everyone else, this was not part of the plan. Stephanie, as suggested earlier in the episode, was an accident. As soon as the power went out, Diane took advantage of the darkness and put a knife in James Woods’ back. From here, she reveals that due to Priscilla and Muriel realizing Diane’s true motivations, they had to die as well. For Priscilla specifically, Diane hid her in Tom Tucker’s room. Muriel was left on the ground as everyone gathered around, and Diane was lucky enough to be “part of the scene.”
When everyone gathers in the dining room, Diane notices Derek running to the balcony.
Remember this line?
“Derek lifted up the Hollywood sign.”
Yeah, you want to know why that’s possibly the best line in the episode? Because even though it was delivered in a manner where Peter was pretty much being a smartass, Diane Simmons utilizes it and takes it seriously.
“When Peter was yelling at everybody about that picture of Derek holding up the Hollywood sign, I grabbed the Golden Globe and slipped out. I followed Derek outside and did what I had to do.” -Diane Simmons
She then reveals the rest of her plan was a success as everyone turned on Tom Tucker.
But what about Stephanie? She was the first to die! But Diane didn’t acknowledge what happened to her body and where she went!
Turns out, Quagmire had Stephanie’s body locked in his trunk. Because when your annoying girlfriend dies, you might as well keep their body as a memento! It’s a lesson for everyone!
But of course, Diane has one thing left to do. Kill Lois.
Retrieved from CutawayGuyHD (YouTube)
Peter comes in the room, asks Lois if she’s on her way, and adds the notion that he wants to listen to tapes, but he can’t do that without the car key. Diane says she and Lois are going to take a quick walk. So Peter just asks for the key.
Retrieved from CutawayGuyHD (YouTube)
Lois awkwardly hands the key, Peter runs out of the room, and Lois is forced to follow Diane’s orders. Realization sets in that these may be Lois’s final moments. She and Diane walk to the back of the property, they stumble upon a cliff. Diane is set for the kill.
LOIS: Diane, please! You don’t have to do this! I won’t tell anybody, I swear to god!
DIANE: That’s right, you won’t. Goodbye, Lois.
By the way, the music here is glorious.
*GUNSHOT*
Retrieved from CutawayGuyHD (YouTube)
We zoom out on Lois, looking as normal as ever. Then we cut to a close-up of Diane, who has a bullet through her chest. She falls off a high cliff into the water. This is the last we’ve seen of her since.
Now who killed Diane? Lois didn’t do it! Nobody else was at the scene! So who killed her? Tom Tucker? Joe? Peter? Nope!
Retrieved from CutawayGuyHD (YouTube)
The answer is all kinds of badass, none other than Stewie Griffin himself!
“If anybody’s gonna take that bitch down, it’s gonna be me.”
Not only does this support Stewie being one of the most kick-ass cartoon characters of all time, but from a story standpoint, I am curious to know exactly he did this. I’m not saying there’s a plot hole behind it or anything, but for years, one of the biggest storylines in “Family Guy” history is that Stewie continuously desires to kill his own mother. The series even dedicated a two-part special where Stewie and Lois try to kill each other! This is how far they’ve taken this concept! Now, Stewie subversively SAVES Lois from danger. Why does he do this? Does he love his mother? Does he realize he needs a mother figure in his life? Did Diane piss him off one time? Does he just hate the news? I’m probably asking more questions than I need to! This is a complete twist, but I love it!
Chevapravatdumrong at the San Diego Comic-Con International in July 2017
This episode is written by Cherry Chevapravatdumrong, and she honestly went above and beyond with it. All the characters within this massive cast had a purpose of some kind. Each one a motive, something to do, and unfortunately this episode has quite a few clips that cannot be shown on most TV broadcasts due to timing purposes. So I will definitely recommend you check this episode out if it plays on TBS or Adult Swim or something, but if you have the motivation, buy the DVD. I know the series is on Hulu as well, but I am not sure how long the episode is on there.
And Then There Were Fewer also uses a classical orchestra to its fullest potential, providing for a soundtrack that I still wonder why is not on iTunes or something. The opening theme for this episode is also used in a “Family Guy” mobile game, subtitled “The Quest for Stuff.”
The animation in this episode is incredible. Not only do we get to see everything in high-definition, but they utilize flashy water, crisp skies, and I must say that the manor inside and out is wonderfully detailed. I must say, this being the first episode in widescreen must have really set the tone, because this episode goes long. Not only because it’s an hour, but because there’s so much that goes on. A vast of number of characters! Plot point after plot point! Stakes dialed up to an 11! The episode barely has any dead air.
But I think the best part about this episode is that it relies less on comedy than usual. “Family Guy” is one of my favorite shows of all time, and I will say part of the reason why is because it makes me laugh harder than perhaps any other show I can think of. But when the show can do something different, make me feel emotions, almost get me to tear up WHILE STILL BEING FUNNY, that is a sign of a masterpiece. This thing gives me chills, man! I felt for everyone during the episode. Everyone who wondered if they were the next to die. Those who were perhaps about to die. Maybe not Stephanie, but she was a gag character, so it’s not like I was supposed to get emotionally invested in her. I even felt bad for Diane by the end of it. I understood her motivation despite the reveal that she killed everybody, because I got a sense of her struggle. This is a character that has appeared every now and then on the show, and to see her at this point, where she defends herself for her deadly actions, is kind of hauntingly beautiful.
But just a reminder, the most important thing we all learned in this episode iiiiiissssss…
“Derek lifted up the Hollywood sign.” -Peter Griffin
Don’t you forget it!
In the end, And Then There Were Fewer is incredibly rewatchable, insanely beautiful, and provides perhaps the greatest blend of comedy and emotion in the entire series. Characters develop, thus allowing the show to develop down the road. It’s something I kind of wish this show would do more. Yes, it said goodbye to a few characters, but with an ending like this, comes a new beginning. We say goodbye to Diane Simmons, but now we have Joyce Kinney. They say change is inevitable, but I think “Family Guy” handles such an inevitability brilliantly. And Then There Were Fewer to this day, officially ten years after it came out, is my favorite “Family Guy” episode, and may just be my favorite television episode of all time.
You want to know how good this episode is? Even Seth MacFarlane himself says that this is favorite episode!
“I think this is my favorite episode of the series. A classic format, great-looking direction, and, I hope, a genuinely surprising ending. It was also the first episode to air in HD. It was really cool to finally see Lois’ pores.” -Seth MacFarlane (Retrieved from: Seth MacFarlane Reveals His 20 Favorite ‘Family Guy’ Episodes)
If the creator says its the best, that says something! Also goes to show that great minds think alike!
Today, “Family Guy” is continuously losing steam despite a few great episodes here and there. Although I will give the show credit for being a pioneer in adult animation for going where say “The Simpsons” can’t, and essentially making the cutaway gag a trademark. Season 19, not to mention the show’s 350th episode, is set to premiere on Fox tomorrow. I will most likely be watching, but “And Then There Were Fewer” is an episode that reminds me of what makes this series so watchable. The characters, the storylines, the brilliant writing. It all comes together beautifully. I will be looking forward to season 19 of “Family Guy,” not to mention the recently announced seasons 20 and 21. But I long for the day where “Family Guy” makes an episode as good as this. Although, just remember one thing, and one thing only.
“Derek lifted up the Hollywood sign.” -Peter Griffin
It’s in the picture!
Thanks for reading this post! It’s not every day that I decide to talk about television, but I figured since And Then There Were Fewer turns ten today, that would make for a good opportunity to do a post like this. But if you are interested in my movie content, feel free to check out my review for “Tenet!” Or, as some call it, the only movie in theaters right now! I’m not sure when I’ll get to talk about TV again. Maybe when another streaming service comes out or something, but we shall see. Be sure to follow Scene Before either with an email or WordPress account so you can stay tuned for more great content! You know what grinds my gears? The fact that more people are not checking out my Facebook page! So do yourself a favor, and check out the official Scene Before Facebook page! I want to know, did you ever watch the “Family Guy” episode titled And Then There Were Fewer? What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite “Family Guy” episode? As of today, you have 349 to choose from, which is quite a buttload! Leave your freakin’ comments down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
Before we begin this post, I just want to remind you all that next month is going to have a movie-based theme. I will not go into it, but for the sake of having content and not having to worry about talking about how crappy the world is, that’s what’s happening. Also, while I do share my thoughts on HBO Max right here, you can also check out my half-hour long video of my first day with the service. If you want to check it out, click down below and if you like the video, feel free to subscribe to my YouTube channel, which will have an all-new Blu-ray collection update coming this June!
PLEASE NOTE: If this is buggy, the video is currently being processed for copyright reasons.
Hey everyone, Jack Drees here! Here’s a post you don’t see often! Me talking about a streaming service! As you know, I have a large physical media collection, one in which I don’t plan on getting rid of ANYTIME soon. But today, we are going to be talking about the new streaming service HBO Max.
HBO Max is marketed as a platform “where HBO meets so much more.” Essentially, if you have HBO Now, it’s basically that, but with more shows and a purple background! Heck, it’s even the same price at $14.99/month! Although I did find a discount that let me get it for $11.99/month, so yay! Discounts! By the way, that discount is no longer available as it is a pre-order offer.
You get all sorts of old and new HBO content including movies and TV series. From everything to the fantastical, dark realms of “Game of Thrones” to a display of our reality within “Last Week Tonight with John Oliver.” There are also new original shows on the service as well that you cannot get anywhere else. One of the most notable titles is “Love Life,” starring Anna Kendrick, which dropped three episodes to the service on day one. It still has more episodes remaining, all of which are supposed to drop later on. Also joining the club with “Love Life” is “Craftopia,” a competition where 9 to 15 year old contestants get creative and try to take home the “Craftrophia.” You also have all new “Looney Tunes Cartoons,” a staple of the Warner library for years with brand new episodes. Plus “On the Record,” which centers around Drew Dixon, a former A&R executive. When it comes to originals and exclusives, the lineup does not intrigue me. But there is plenty more coming in the future including “The Flight Attendant” starring Kaley Cuoco, “Raised by Wolves,” exectuive produced by Ridley Scott, and there’s even continuations of past IPs such as an all new season of “Search Party,” which started as a TBS original, but will now be releasing new episodes via HBO Max.
I like the selection of outside content this service is starting out with. It’s got all twelve seasons of “The Big Bang Theory,” four seasons of “Impractical Jokers,” the Without Borders specials of “Conan,” and even though I haven’t sat through a whole episode yet, “Rick and Morty” is also on the service, and I have always been wanting to check that out. Plus, for those of you who smashed your television set once “Friends” was taken off of Netflix, you are in luck as HBO Max now has the entire series on their service. However, if you were going to watch the planned “Friends” reunion special, well that’s impossible at this point as production was halted due to COVID-19.
The service has individual libraries including Crunchyroll, Adult Swim, Cartoon Network, Turner Classic Movies, and DC. For those of you who are DC fans, a lot of the big players are there when it comes to movies including “Wonder Woman,” “Aquaman,” “Shazam,” “Supergirl,” “Joker,” and “Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice.” However, when it comes to missing titles, some big ones are unfortunately not on the service. Including “Man of Steel,” Christopher Nolan’s “Dark Knight” trilogy, and “Superman: The Movie.” Keep in mind that other services have these movies including Netflix and the separate DC Universe streaming service. Given how this new HBO Max service has shows including “Doom Patrol” on it, it would not surprise me if DC Universe fizzles out and HBO Max picks up a lot of the load that DC Universe left over. It’ll probably take shows like “Harley Quinn” or “Titans” and maybe implement them in the DC section. Given how HBO Max is trying to be a colossal service full of content, why not have these DC shows, which are likely being presented to a somewhat niche market be given to a wider audience? I would like to watch the new “Harley Quinn” show, but I don’t need another subscription to do it. As for other DC TV shows, HBO Max also has CW’s “Batwoman,” Cartoon Newtork’s “Teen Titans,” and HBO’s own “Watchmen.”
As for movies, HBO originals make a presence, including the recently released “Bad Education” starring Hugh Jackman and Allison Janney. But a lot of the movies present are either from Warnermedia in some capacity including all the “Harry Potter” films, minus the first “Fantastic Beasts” installment, the “Lord of the Rings” franchise, “The LEGO Movie,” “King Kong,” and “2001: A Space Odyssey.” Also included are a bunch of movies that you can find airing on the HBO airwaves regardless of who owns it including “Fast & Furious Presents: Hobbs and Shaw,” “John Wick: Chapter 3 – Parabellum,” “Die Hard,” “Alita: Battle Angel,” “American Pie,” “Madagascar,” and “Stuber.” So while this is basically a Warner Bros. streaming service, it is welcoming other distributors and outlets to join the party, which if you are going to have a variety of content like this, it kind of makes the $14.99/month price worthwhile. Disney+ is $6.99/month, which kind of makes sense as it only seems to be catering to particular demographics. If you are a fan of “Star Wars,” Marvel, Pixar, or if you have a kid, Disney+ is for you. But HBO is more on the side of Netflix where they have content for everybody, including some of the most adult media of all time. But if you want to put on say “Sesame Street” or “Adventure Time” or “Scooby-Doo” or “Happy Feet Two” for the kiddos, it’s good for that too.
Now for a few negatives, I will point out that a variety of platforms will be getting HBO Max including Chromecast, PS4, Xbox One, Apple TV, newer Samsung Smart TVs, as a YouTube TV addon, and so on. But of the range in platforms available for HBO Max viewing, two of them ARE NOT Amazon Fire and Roku. Keep in mind, the other HBO apps, specifically HBO Now and HBO Go are still availabe on these devices but HBO Max is not as there is currently no deal that will allow HBO Max onboard. I would also be willing to bet if there is ever a case where HBO Max does wind up on those platforms that it will go in HBO Now’s place given how the services are basically the same thing but one has more content. Also, I will point out that I get a lot of my media on my Sony Android 4K HDR television, which DOES get HBO Max, thankfully. But one of the things that I noticed that was missing at launch happened to be options for 4K. This sort of surprised me as a lot of the movies already on the service happen to be able on 4K elsewhere, including through physical media. Plus, while HBO does not necessarily have a 4K channel setup through regular television, they do have 4K content. A couple of seasons of “Game of Thrones” are available on 4K Blu-ray, and the same goes for “Westworld.” Going back to Disney+’s $6.99/month asking price, I will also point out that while the library is smaller and catering to a niche demographic, one of the pros of the service is that there’s plenty of 4K content available and there is no extra cost for it unlike services such as Netflix, in which you have to upgrade to their premium package if you have a lower tier. Maybe 4K will be a future implementation, but 4K TVs in general have been getting cheaper year after year so I figured HBO might want to start keeping up with these times a little bit. Again, as much as I think HBO Max will serve me well overtime, I see benefits to my physical media collection which I have spent years building. Yes, I can go watch “Wonder Woman” with the push of a button through HBO Max, but what if I want to watch it on 4K? Boom! I got the disc! That and I don’t need internet for it! Booyah! I will also point out, even though HBO Max has a variety of content that I am willing to watch, there’s a lot that I wish they had. Even though I already own it physically, I noticed that one of the key movies they were going to put on the service were those of the “Matrix” franchise. In fact, if you watch promos for HBO Max, you’d know that “The Matrix” was a core player in those promos. It’s kind of weird how it’s not on the service! The only “Matrix” property on HBO Max as of writing this is “Animatrix,” otherwise known as the one “Matrix” thing nobody talks about. It’s kind of bonkers!
Oh yeah, and I am looking forward to the Snyder Cut. If you asked me, I personally enjoyed the 2017 “Justice League” film more than most people and I will not deny that I had fun with it. But getting an alternate version of the film that may line up more with what the director could have originally put out does excite me. I wish it would also physically come out on Blu-ray and 4K as it would be nice to have on disc, but only time will tell.
I want to know, HBO Max just recently launched, but what are your thoughts on the service? Are you enjoying it so far? What have you watched on it? Why did you get HBO Max? To watch “Game of Thrones” again and be disappointed with the final season once more? To watch “Friends” in a time where you literally cannot hang out with friends? To watch real REAL CINEMA like “Casablanca” or “Citizen Kane?” Where does HBO Max rank for you in a world with seventy thousand streaming options available to buy? Let me know down below! Speaking of things down below, if you want to check out HBO Max for yourself and maybe sign up, go to the link below the paragraph!
Thanks for reading this post! Here’s a weird thing to talk about in a post about a brand new streaming service! Physical media! Coming soon, for my 400th post, I’m going to be providing an all new update on my Blu-ray collection, which will contain new movies, but the same movie reviewing moron talking about them all! I will be doing it in video form on my YouTube channel but I will also be talking about it on here and sharing the video for you all to watch. To check this out along with other great content, be sure to follow Scene Before either with an email or WordPress account so you can stay tuned for more great content! Also, maximize your time by liking my Facebook page, otherwise known as that thing you’ll be checking when you’re distracted from whatever you’re watching on HBO Max. Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
WARNING: The following blog post contains paragraphs of graphic fanaticism among a Movie Reviewing Moron who writes to avoid embarrassing himself.
Da-na-du-dun!
“Impractical Jokers: The Movie” is directed by Chris Henchy, a name behind the scenes on various Will Ferrell titles and co-creator of the website, Funny or Die, one of the production companies behind this movie. The film stars Joe Gatto, James Murray, Brian Quinn, and Sal Vulcano as the four Jokers that pull pranks on unsuspecting people all the while trying to embarrass each other. Joining them is Paula Abdul, who is throwing a party in Miami. She invites the Jokers to come down to the party, but due to how they are missing an extra ticket, the four lifelong friends compete against each other to see who will and who won’t go to the party. Given how there’s four people, the one big loser sits out.
If you know me, it would not be that much of a secret that I adore the “Impractical Jokers” TV show. It is probably the best thing on TV right now that is not a game show. I’ve watched the show, I’ve been to their live comedy gigs, I’ve bought their merch, and I have personally talked to one of them up close. These humble gentlemen honestly deserve every solitary speck of success they can get. They may play cruel boys on TV, but trust me, they are some of the finest men I have seen in my life.
With this in mind, this brings up a problem that I will continue to highlight in this review. Not with the movie specifically, but with me reviewing the movie. Although my review process could admittedly, end up translating to what I think of the film. I am an “Impractical Jokers” fan. As a fan, there are certain expectations that I am waiting to have fulfilled. I want fun challenges that are purely hilarious. I want the four guys interacting with each other, maybe having a good time, or getting angry at one another. But I was honestly curious not only how an “Impractical Jokers” movie could work, but if it will work. After all, the equipment they use for television works for what it is, but I wondered if that is what they’d use for the movie. I have no idea what the movie is shot with, but they did a good job in terms of differentiating this film in terms of appearance from the TV show. It looks bolder, the color grading looks really good, and it still maintains a similar feel to the show itself. After all, the aspect ratio looks similar and the on-screen graphics are within the same barrier, while having some differences.
Speaking of similarities, I think like the TV show, the movie is really good. Now, there are several episodes of the show I’d probably rather watch again before this movie, but “Impractical Jokers: The Movie” is a fun trip from start to finish. “Impractical Jokers: The Movie” is a film that knows exactly what the fans want. Great challenges, a fine display of chemistry between the four Jokers, and “in the moment” stakes. Honestly, it’s funnier than a good portion of the recent comedies to have come out. Why? Because like the show, this movie tries its best to be raw. During the challenges, I felt a connection to the guys. The reason why “Impractical Jokers” as a concept works so well is because these guys are not pranking because they want to be jerks. Scour them in real life, they’re wonderful! but they highlight how scary pranking unsuspecting people really is.
However, this also brings a flaw into play. I will admit, even though I did enjoy the road trip bits, that is the inferior portion of the film. The reason being is because “Impractical Jokers” becomes reliant on a written script. “Impractical Jokers” is at its best when it is spontaneous, because I cannot see exactly what is coming. The best thing about the real lives of Joe, Q, Sal, and Murr is that you cannot write what happens next, making you willing to go along with what is happening as if everything was improv. When I was watching “Impractical Jokers: The Movie,” I noticed a few scenes that took place in hotels, and they specifically focused on Murr. The movie basically could have left out those scenes and barely affect the final product perhaps.
I will probably end up remembering this movie for how far it goes with its challenges. I am not going to go into all of them, because you know, spoilers. But they teased one scene online involving a tiger. INSANELY AWESOME. I cannot go into specific detail about it, but it is one of those things you kind of have to see to believe.
Speaking of things you have to see to believe, Murr faces a challenge that he called the most embarrassing moment of his life. All I can say is that it takes place in a club. That scene alone is worth the price of admission, because I lost my ability to breathe from laughing so hard at such a scene.
And of course, the guys are charismatic and relatable. They are legit best friends and this movie made me feel like the fifth Joker joining the ride alongside them. Each Joker has their moment, especially considering how this movie takes the time to insert multiple dedicated punishments. Each one of these is as great as the next and some of these I cannot even talk about because I need to guarantee that everyone going into the theater will laugh as uncontrollably as I did while watching it.
I will also mention once again, I am an “Impractical Jokers” fan, and as a fan, I have been impressed by what I saw. I enjoyed myself from beginning to end. But that brings a question… How much would this movie appeal to people who have never seen the show?
One of the things about “Impractical Jokers: The Movie” that I personally enjoyed is its tendency to deliver on inside jokes. There are cameos from people who are heavily affiliated with the show, there’s a “Where’s Larry?” joke, and even a mention of “Up your ass, and to the left,” one of the show’s commonly used phrases.
But this movie, based on what I have heard, was mainly made for the “Impractical Jokers” fanbase, which I believe is quite honestly an underestimated fanbase. One of the issues that can come from that is the fact that there seems to be an inserted sense of exclusivity. As a fan, I had fun with this tribute of sorts, but I still wondered what the average Joe (whose last name is not Gatto) would think of it. I think if you are not familiar with the “Impractical Jokers” show, you can have a good time with this movie. The guys are likable, but the road trip elements could be a little bit iffy. Plus, Paula Abdul is someone in this film that I am surprised I am not talking about more. It is at its core, FUN. And of course, pranks are not for everybody. I have grandparents who probably won’t watch stuff like this. I get it, no biggie. I think if you go into this movie expecting to chill with four friends on screen who maybe you’ll want to befriend yourself, this could be a movie for you. If you have never seen the show, some things could fly over your head, but the movie does stick to a story that many can enjoy. Maybe this movie will end up being swell enough for you to want to check out the show on television. It’s on literally all the time on truTV, so if this film is good enough in the theater, it could translate to how much you’d like the show on television.
I will say though, as much as I enjoyed how “Impractical Jokers: The Movie” differentiates itself from the show instead of just simply being an extended episode of the property, although ultimately brought to the big screen, it’s also a detractor. If I were to make another movie in this franchise, which I do want to see, I wish there was a tremendous focus that goes to what makes the show great, and if they were to have a subplot again that steers away from challenges, I wish it just had a little more dimension. Granted, the concept is intriguing. Having the jokers resolve an incident from high school was a pretty good idea, but for some reason, based on the sudden steer from reality at certain times, it just didn’t pay off every once in a while. I don’t know why. Again, when I think “Impractical Jokers,” I think of “in the moment” challenges, I don’t think of extended plots. Speaking of which, I get that this movie does have to make money, and I’m not suggesting “Don’t support it,” but there was one scene that felt like it was made for television. Why? Because it censors nudity. “Impractical Jokers: The Movie” is PG-13, and has some language to back it up. But there is a scene shown in the marketing where Murr is getting on a boat and his butt is revealed. Only thing is, it is censored by a graphic of Murr’s face. Should “Impractical Jokers: The Movie” have been rated R? I’m not so sure, but it would make some parts of this movie somewhat juicier. But again, gotta make that money! Besides, the show itself is TV-14, so by the movie being PG-13, it sort of does attract a similar audience. Maybe they ultimately made the right move. Does this take away from the buttload of fun I had with the movie? HELL NO! I dug this film! That my friends, is no joke!
In the end, “Impractical Jokers: The Movie” is a fun film. In fact as of this review, I saw it twice! Is the road trip plot a little lackluster? Sort of, but the guys make up for the lackluster plot by being themselves. Four breathtaking dudes who have a connection. The movie does a good job at adapting the source material for the big screen, allowing it to feel like a separate entity from truTV’s long-running program. The challenges are gutbustingly funny, there is a sense of replay value that could be achieved with this film over time (again, I saw it twice), and there seems to be a lot of passion put into the final product. Now, the movie would definitely be better if they heightened the situations a A LITTLE LESS, and if I cared more about the recently mentioned road trip stuff, but I can probably confirm that when I look back at 2020 in film, this will be one of the year’s funniest flicks. I’m going to give “Impractical Jokers: The Movie” a 7/10.
Thanks for reading this review! Just want to let you all know that my next review is going to be for “Emma,” directed by Autumn de Wilde and starring Anya Taylor-Joy. The film is based on a Jane Austen novel and is being marketed as a new vision of the classic tale. What do I think of it? Find out in my next review by following Scene Before either with an email or WordPress account! Another way to find out is by liking my Facebook page, and supporting Mark Zuckerberg’s quest for world domination of all mankind. I want to know, did you see “Impractical Jokers: The Movie?” What did you think about it? Or, who is your favorite Joker? You know, what the hell? I’ll even count Batman Jokers! Who is your favorite Impractical Joker? Or who is your favorite on-screen interpretation of the Joker character from DC’s Batman? Let me know down below, or you’ll be tonight’s big loser! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
Hey everyone, Jack Drees here! As an American, there is no denying that during this time of year, football is one of the priorities of most people around me. Personally speaking, I think it is a complete waste of time and nothing more than grown men hitting each other over a brown object. It does have its moments, but football is obnoxious to the point of insanity at times, and sports are not my thing in general. Granted, I live in New England, which would mean I would be somewhat pressured to celebrate my “culture of victory” from time to time, but it doesn’t mean I enjoy football as a sport. That being said, I come from a country that seems to put football over literally anything else, so I find it to be no surprise that AMC Theatres is planning to capitalize on the sport.
While we aren’t getting a thousand football-oriented movies right now, we are in the middle of the current NFL season. And during this season, AMC is planning on showing football games at select theaters on Sundays. Keep in mind, I said select theaters, there’s a chance that the closest AMC to your house might not be taking part in this.
What are the requirements?
First, you must be an AMC Stubs member. It doesn’t matter what level you’re subscribed to. If you don’t want to waste any money on a membership, you can snatch a Stubs Insider ID for free. The other membership levels, Premiere and A-List, come with more perks, but also with higher prices.
Second, you don’t have to buy a ticket to watch a football game in the theater, BUT if you want to sit down in the theater and watch the game, you need to spend at least $10 on food. I think this manages to make a lick of sense, because let’s say you are watching a game at your house. You might intend on ordering food sometimes like wings or pizza. Or you go outside of the house to a bar and buy food. This is AMC’s equivalent to that, because let’s face it, food and sports have gone together since the dawn of time. That, and food is how AMC usually makes its money as opposed to tickets.
Also, keep in mind that these are for SUNDAY GAMES ONLY. Typically, NFL games are played on Sunday, so this doesn’t seem to be much of an issue, but if you were say looking forward to this Monday’s game between the Bears and the Redskins and planned on catching it at an AMC, don’t get your hopes up.
One interesting thing about this concept is that on AMC’s website, users can vote for which teams or games they would like to see. This is sort of surprising, because I figured AMC would already have these games preplanned. Because when you go to a local bar, you’d most likely expect them to have at least one TV playing the “local” game. If you go to a bar in Boston, you’d expect to see a Patriots game. If you go to a bar in Philadelphia, you’d expect to see an Eagles game. If you go to a bar in Miami, you’d expect to see a Dolphins game. Keep these thoughts in mind by the way…
On the list of theaters testing this out, there are three in my area, specifically the Boston/Massachusetts markets, showing NFL programming: AMC DINE-IN Framingham 14, AMC Liberty Tree Mall 20, and AMC Methuen 20. One surprise about this to me however regards the state of New York. If you look on the website showing all of the participating theaters, not one happens to be in New York, which surprises me since it is such a highly populated state. Not one theater in even New York City, of all places, happens to be doing this? If you want, you can drive down to Edison, NJ which has the AMC DINE-IN Menlo Park 12 but I am not here to control your life.
Another thing I noticed that may get some people excited is that the games seem to all be in reclined theaters. Of the three recently mentioned theaters, they all have the leather reclining seats that go back to make you feel like you are in your living room. I feel like that was intended because one of the disadvantages of a bar for some viewers, from what I would imagine is that the environment could be lively, but they have no choice except to sit in a a less than comfortable chair (depending on the occasion) or to stand. This does suggest that the games will be shown in theaters that do not have the largest capacities in the AMC chain, but there is no doubt that the environment will be comfortable.
One slight inconvenience about this idea however is that if you want to get tickets, you can’t do it a week in advance or even a few days in advance if you really wanted to. Why? Because times for NFL games at AMC locations are listed every Friday evening. And since AMC only airs Sunday games, this gives you a maximum of perhaps two full days to snag tickets.
To be honest though, if you are a football fan and are picky about your teams or will only choose to support whatever team is close to you, you won’t always get what you want. Because let’s take the three theaters I brought up in the Boston area, they are airing multiple games at different times, and their schedules are not exactly the same. That’s fine, I actually like the variety factor, but not a single one of those theaters is airing a Patriots game! And you may be wondering, “Hey, Jackass! New England is a combination of several states, what about those other states? Do they get Patriots games?” From what I’m seeing on AMC’s website, it doesn’t look like they will be showing any NFL games in states like Connecticut or New Hampshire to begin with. In fact, as I scroll through the markets, it seems that just about nobody is going to get their local time. Want to go to an AMC in Dallas? Boom! No Cowboys games! Want to go check out a game at an AMC in Miami? Sorry, no Dolphins games! Oh, how about San Francisco? There’s a 49ers game this Sunday! AMC Manteca and AMC Metreon are airing some games! One of them has to be with the 49ers! NOPETY-NOPETY-NOOOOOO.
Now let me just point out one thing, there is a disclaimer on AMC’s website that says the following:
“Game selection varies by participating theatre location, local teams will not be shown.”
Before these games were even announced, I did manage to see said disclaimer. I thought that suggested maybe “local town teams” such as those commonly represented in local high-school football leagues or something. Turns out, they meant local NFL teams. According to NFL local TV station blackout rules, airing local games at certain theaters would interfere with the exclusivity of the local stations. I personally think this is going to hurt AMC a little. I say that because why wouldn’t a fan obsessed with their local sports team take a 10 to 30 minute drive to see them play on the big screen? Although at the same time, I wonder if this will provide an opportunity to several people who live far from where their local team play. If you live in the Atlanta area but happen to be a fan of say the Houston Texans, than you have the opportunity to check them out in a stadium-like vibe at the AMC Colonial 18 located in Lawrenceville. It would either take an extended road trip or a flight to Houston to go see them play in person, specifically with a seemingly common audience, which makes something like what AMC is doing a good deal for certain fans, especially for $10.
I gotta ask. What do you think about this? Even though there are no local teams playing at certain theaters. Is this enough to get you off the couch and see a game on the big screen? Are you in the middle with all of this? Or is this all a big fumble to you? Let me know your thoughts! Thanks for reading this post! This weekend is the release of “Ad Astra,” and to be honest, I’m not quite sure if I’m gonna be able to catch it by the end of Sunday. So if that’s the case, I do have a small amount of time I could waste before going into school for an evening class on Tuesday, so I’ll probably end up seeing it then. Also, “Joker” tickets just went on sale, so I officially have priorities regarding that movie as well. Be sure to follow Scene Before, and check out the Scene Before Facebook page so you can stay tuned for more great content! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
Scene Before 