Will First Man Be Shown on IMAX 70mm Film? If So, Where?

Hey everyone! Jack Drees here! If you know me personally, you’d probably be well aware of my fanaticism for IMAX. I freaking love IMAX. At times, they’re brutal liars (if you don’t trust me, ask Aziz Ansari), but at the same time I can’t help but love them. They’ve partially contributed towards my love of film. I would love to make several movies and release them in the IMAX format, and even on IMAX film. Speaking of that, I got to ask something today in this post.

mv5bywfhzgvjmtatzdcwmc00yty3ltljywutnzriodzlowfknjezxkeyxkfqcgdeqxvymjmxote0oda-_v1_sy1000_cr006311000_al_

One movie I’m really looking forward to this year is “First Man.” This movie is being directed by Damien Chazelle (Whiplash, La La Land), stars Ryan Gosling (Blade Runner 2049, Crazy Stupid Love) and Claire Foy (The Crown, Vampire Academy) and is based on the true story (depending on your knowledge or thoughts on various conspiracy theories) of the famous Apollo moon landing from 1969.

A new trailer just released for this movie and I’ll just say to you all right now that I have no intentions to do a review on it. However, there is one thing I caught at the very end of the trailer. One of the last pieces of text the trailer states is “Select Scenes Filmed with IMAX Cameras.” It doesn’t exactly specify what type of IMAX camera is specifically used to shoot the movie, but according to IMDb, the movie is partially being shot on what is referred to as an IMAX MSM 9802. This camera was used to shoot select scenes of various films including “The Dark Knight,” “Mission: Impossible: Ghost Protocol,” and “Star Wars: The Force Awakens.” This is an IMAX camera that is capable of shooting in 2D and 70mm. Therefore, “First Man” is being shot in IMAX 70mm, which makes me ask, “Will you be able to watch this in the IMAX 70mm format?”

According to IMDb, if you look in the technical specifications page for “First Man,” it’ll say that some scenes will be shown in a 1.43:1 aspect ratio, which is the proper ratio for an IMAX theater with 70mm equipment that covers the entire screen. For those of you who are unfamiliar with IMAX technology, let me just inform you, if the year this movie happened to be coming out is a year such as 2014 and I found this info on IMDb, chances are I’d at most GUARANTEE you that this movie will be shown in the IMAX 70mm format. However, it’s not 2014, it’s 2018, so I can’t make any guarantees at this point. I say that because IMAX has a technology which has been steadily growing, which is their 4K laser projection system (picture up above). They’ve installed it on several screens around the world. Some of these screens include the TCL Chinese Theatre (Los Angeles, CA), Cineworld Leicester Square (London, UK), CGV Yongsan (Seoul, SK), Event Cinemas Queen Street (Auckland, NZ), Scotiabank Toronto (Toronto, Canada), Miramar IMAX (Taipei, Taiwan), and I even have one that’s about a ten minute drive from my house, the Sunbrella IMAX 3D Theater, located inside Jordan’s Furniture, in Reading, MA. I can pretty much guarantee that given today’s technological preferences that at least one laser theater will be showing the movie. I say that because IMAX, like most movie theater owners and operators, typically show their movies in some format related to digital projection. It’s simpler to operate, simpler to handle, and you don’t have to worry about any degradation of picture quality for one reason or another.

The IMAX laser system works on multiple types of IMAX screens, but one of its main purposes is to be a digital equal/replacement for IMAX’s 70mm film projectors. If you ask me, IMAX 70mm projectors are capable of showing clearer images than the company’s laser projectors, but that’s for another time. With that sort of idea in mind, that means if you put an IMAX laser projector in an older IMAX theater that contained a film projector prior to it, there’s a good chance that the laser projector was installed to play media and said media will be displayed in an aspect ratio that would have been shown the same way had IMAX kept their film projector. For those of you who do not know much about IMAX, the laser projection system IS NOT IMAX’s only digital projection system. They’ve had another one which they introduced in 2008, which is pretty much the reason why some people refer to the company as LIEMAX. IMAX has installed many of these all over the world, which started an enormous growth in IMAX theaters in multiplexes. However, the projector couldn’t show any images in the tradtional IMAX aspect ratio and when people watch something say, shot with IMAX cameras, it would be shown in a 1.90:1 aspect ratio. The IMAX laser system by the way, first began rolling six years after the first IMAX digital system was introduced, in December 2014.

In the year of 2018, we have yet to see one major Hollywood release be shown on IMAX film. Yes, “Star Wars: The Last Jedi” was shown in IMAX film this year, but that technically released in 2017. We have yet to get one big film release, I’m not talking about any of those IMAX documentaries, I’m talking about films that most of the public would see advertised on TV, shown in the IMAX 70mm format this year, and I believe there is no other film this year that is more qualified than “First Man.” This movie involves a rocket launch, takes place in space, looks very compelling, and was shot entirely on film, part of it with IMAX cameras.

One big question I have though is this. If this were to be shown on IMAX film, what would our options be for going somewhere to view the movie in that format? Because two major releases in IMAX theaters were shown in IMAX film last year, but one release was much wider than the other. The first release was “Dunkirk,” which was shown in 37 IMAX theaters with 70mm equipment. This included a variety of theaters from giant IMAXes in multiplexes, to museums, to standalone locations. The second release was “Star Wars: The Last Jedi,” which as I state in one of my posts I did in October of last year, the number of theaters this movie happened to be shown in which was playing it in the IMAX 70mm format is less than the number of seasons in “Criminal Minds,” “Grey’s Anatomy,” “Supernatural,” and “NCIS.” If you want to get more specific, the movie was said to be shown in 11 theaters in the IMAX 70mm format. Also, not many of the places which the movie was to be shown appeared to be what one would call a traditional movie theater. Most of these were in museums.

With the upcoming release of “First Man,” I honestly don’t know what will happen when it comes to releasing it. This movie doesn’t come out until October 12, so there is plenty of time for something to be announced when it comes to where this film will be shown. Although with a film like this, I would certainly like to see it shown in more than just a select few IMAX 70mm theaters. If it can’t be as wide as “Dunkirk,” I would at least like it to be close to as wide of a release as “Dunkirk.” Because just like “Dunkirk,” I feel like this is one of those films that is literally made for movie theaters, and in a case like this, IMAX. As an audience member, it is the responsibility of the filmmakers and in a case like this, IMAX, to immerse me into the movie. I’ve experienced a rocket launch in the IMAX format, and I’ll even state, the IMAX 70mm format! A rocket launch is by far one of the most powerful things a man could ever witness. Just a two minute video of a rocket launching would be a great test video for the IMAX experience. Now if that is accompanied by a great story and interesting characters, you have something more nifty on your hands. So IMAX, please give this a wide release in your 15/70mm format, and if you want my preference on where to see it, I want to see it at the Providence Place Cinemas IMAX in Providence, RI. Just… Get crackin’.

If this does not get a wide release in IMAX 70mm, the least I ask is that this gets an IMAX 70mm release in some notable areas having to do with NASA or space exploration. But seriously, if you ask me, the wider the release, the better! So why be good when you can be better? Chop chop, our lives only last so long!

“First Man” is in theaters and IMAX everywhere on October 12th, and it is by far one of my most anticipated movies of the year. If you guys ever think about seeing it, I imagine this would be one hell of a ride in IMAX. Thanks for reading this post! This week I’ll be releasing at least couple of new reviews. I’ve got my review for “Tag” which I pretty much already finished, it just needs to be released once I’m allowed to share it to the public. I will also soon have my review for “Incredibles 2” which comes out later during the week, and if I can manage my time well enough, I might be able to insert my review for “Mission: Impossible: Ghost Protocol.” I just need to watch it from start to finish, gather my thoughts, and then unleash those thoughts to you all. If I don’t have it this week, I’ll probably have it next week because the week after I’ll be on vacation, and I’ll probably still be posting while I’m away if my creative juices are flowing, but there’s a good chance I’ll be watching the movie at home as opposed to a hotel. Stay tuned for more great content! I want to know, if you had to guess how many theaters happened to be releasing “First Man” in IMAX 70mm, what would your guess be? Or, what are your thoughts on the trailer we just got for “First Man?” Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

 

Pacific Rim: Uprising (2018): This Year’s Independence Day: Resurgence?

*SPONSORSHIP ALERT* (although nobody’s payin’ me)

Before we dive into my review for “Pacific Rim: Uprising,” let me just take a moment to ask you, how ya doin’? How’s life? What’s going on? If it were around this time frame in 2016 and you asked what a couple named Genevieve and Paul what’s going on, one of them might respond saying, “A ton of s*it.” That’s because at the time, they were trying wicked hard to make a kid, but the overall task of doing so was an absolute nightmare. All of this is truthfully documented in their new web series, “What the IVF?!”

“What the IVF?” is about Genevieve and Paul’s journey to having a baby, where they discover that having a child is not all fun and games, it’s work! Not because of the child, but because they can’t make the child! Watch the couple as their life gets serious and begins to change dramatically as they face several challenges! Sex becomes less than sexy! Math apparently is now useful in real life! Trips to visit doctors are now more nerve-racking than ever! And needles are nothing but ungrateful sons of bitches! Then again, when were they not? Those pinches are killers! You can watch all of the content posted on the “WTIVF?” YouTube channel simply by going through the links down below and clicking on the one to the YouTube page. And speaking of YouTube videos, “WTIVF?” has an episode posted earlier this week! I won’t go into too much detail, but Genevieve refers to it as her favorite episode so far and as the video that highlights the moment that probably most dramatically changed her life. Be sure to watch the video listed above if interested, subscribe to the YouTube channel, hit the notification bell, that way you can get the latest “WTIVF” content before your friends who aren’t subscribed, who in which case, may become your enemies because they aren’t subscribed. Also, check out their website, and their other online pages such as Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, all down below! Also, be sure to tell them that Jack Drees sent ya!

WTIVF? WEBSITE: http://www.whattheivf.com/

WTIVF? YOUTUBE: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCILXSidkzWgwrQ5Oa1py78w/featured?disable_polymer=1

WTIVF? TWITTER: https://twitter.com/WTivF

WTIVF? INSTAGRAM: https://www.instagram.com/wtivf/

WTIVF? FACEBOOK: https://www.facebook.com/What-The-IVF-288868031634125/

mv5bmji3nzg0mtm5nf5bml5banbnxkftztgwote2mtgwntm-_v1_

“Pacific Rim: Uprising” is directed by Steven S. DeKnight and stars John Boyega (Star Wars: The Force Awakens, Detroit), Scott Eastwood (The Longest Ride, Suicide Squad), and Cailee Spaeny. This is the sequel to 2013’s “Pacific Rim,” directed by Guillermo del Toro, and if you are keeping up with the Academy Awards, this guy recently won Best Director for “The Shape of Water,” a movie which also won Best Picture. When it comes to “Pacific Rim: Uprising,” it revolves around John Boyega’s character of Jake Pentecost, the son of Stacker Pentecost, played in the first movie by Idris Elba. His character teams up with another character from the first movie, Mako Mori, played in the first movie by Rinko Kikuchi, and leads a team of new Jaegar pilots against a new Kaiju threat.

As far as the first “Pacific Rim” is concerned, I’ll say I personally enjoyed it. I saw it in IMAX when it came out, I had a good time, I got to see some kick-ass robot/monster fights up on the big screen, it was pure popcorn fun. I got connected to the human characters a little bit, the music was not half-bad, and Idris Elba gave a speech to remember.

“Today. Today… At the edge of our hope, at the end of our time, we have chosen not only to believe in ourselves, but in each other. Today there is not a man or woman in here that shall stand alone. Not today. Today we face the monsters that are at our door and bring the fight to them! Today, we are cancelling the apocalypse!” –Stacker Pentecost

I’ve only seen the movie twice, with last time being a month ago, but no matter when I watch it, I can imagine myself getting goosebumps just listening to that. The first “Pacific Rim” is definitely not a masterpiece, but certainly a good time. This movie, is the complete opposite. Not the opposite of definitely not a masterpiece, but the opposite of a good time.

Speaking of movies that aren’t masterpieces but also good times, remember “Independence Day?” That’s a fun movie. Remember the sequel? Yes? Unfortunately, I do too, I had to review that crap for y’all. I’m gonna go as far to say that “Pacific Rim: Uprising” is this year’s “Independence Day: Resurgence.” It’s an attempt to kickstart a new franchise and rely more on spectacle than proper storytelling. Ask me, do you remember many likable, intriguing moments from “Independence Day: Resurgence?” I don’t. And you know what? I’m gonna say that personally I found this movie to be worse than “Independence Day: Resurgence.” Heck, I watched the first movie literally the day before I went to see the second one in theaters. Someone I had a connection with wanted to see the then new “Independence Day” movie, and I was unfamiliar with the first one, so I watched it on HBO for free, but it was something that I just had on in the background. I actually had attention directed towards “Pacific Rim” and personal enjoyment from gazing at the pixels on the screen. “Pacific Rim: Uprising” currently has a 6/10 on IMDb, and it is receiving more positive ratings than negative ratings, so it clearly has people who like it. And I will say, I imagined in my head that there are certain types of people who will watch this movie and have a good time. Let’s go through the list.

GROUP 1:
Fans of the first “Pacific Rim” who don’t care what others have to say and are just happy this movie exists.

GROUP 2:
Fans of the first “Pacific Rim” who clearly know the lore or are interested to see what other lore can be developed.

GROUP 3:
Kids who like giant robots, monsters, fighting, or any combination of those things. Yes, anyone can fit in here, but I’m mainly imagining kids.

GROUP 4:
People who just want to see John Boyega in something new for whatever reason.

GROUP 5:
Judging by what I just said, I guess the select few people who happened to enjoy “Independence Day: Resurgence.”

GROUP 6:
Me on Opposite Day.

GROUP 7:
Michael Bay. Just… Michael Bay.

I mean, seriously, how does this not feel like “Independence Day: Resurgence” all over again?! This movie’s a sequel to a film with a character who some might say gave a terrific speech. A black character who is not present in this movie has a kid who plays a big part instead of them. Both sequels take place in a future far from its predecessor. Oh yeah? And did I mention that both movies suck? That’s another thing too, it’s kind of important!

I don’t care about any of the movie’s characters, but since it is now a cliche for me to talk about at least one character in detail with a big fat image listed above, I guess it’s time for me to inject myself with the poison in front of my ugly face. Let’s talk about John Boyega’s character of Jake Pentecost. Gah! Why do I have to do this?! I don’t even monetize this site! It’s not even worth it! Alright, just for the sake of having a good review, let’s tackle this bitch. Pentecost is a fine character, and by fine I mean, you don’t want to kill him by the end of the movie. But probably the main reason you’ll end up liking him or caring about him is that he’s John Boyega. If you have been a fan of the new “Star Wars” movies, you might end up rooting for this character because you know he’s Finn. By the time you walk out of the theater, you’ll probably end up forgetting this character and go back to your life where you buy tickets for, hopefully, better movies.

Moving onto the main girl in this movie, Amara Namani, played by Cailee Spaeny, I was watching the movie and I thought to myself that she reminded me of the young girl in “Logan.” I can’t say too much about that though. Because to be honest I haven’t seen “Logan.” My comparison would be invalid given how I’ve only watched the film’s promotional material. But from the way she looks, and seemingly, acts in the movie, I was given that thought at one point.

Let’s talk about Charlie Day in this film.

More like… Charlie Good Day Sir!

Like, NO! JUST NO! NO!

WHAT! THE! HECK! DID THEY DO WITH HIM?!

For those of you who haven’t watched the first movie, Charlie Day was a character in it, and he went by the name of Newton Geiszler. He was a wacky scientist who studied the Kaiju during the whole war. Take Emmett Brown from “Back to the Future,” put him in a blender with JJ Abrams, maybe a pinch of the Cowardly Lion from “The Wizard of Oz,” and add in the voice of like, I dunno, let’s just say Michael Scott from “The Office,” and you get Newton Geiszler. I won’t talk too much about him in this movie, because I want to stay out of spoiler territory, but there was a point where the character of Amara was getting on my nerves a little, then all of a sudden something happened with Newton, and then my brain tried to find all the ways it could electrocute itself. Its reaction might as well have been this GIF featuring a clip from “Family Guy.”

Image result for family guy oh okay gif

Another gripe I’ve got with this film is that it’s just boring as f*ck! I mentioned how this movie relies more on spectacle than proper storytelling, the story itself bored me, and so did the character interactions. I’ll be honest, I’m a defender of the first Michael Bay “Transformers” film, and I didn’t mind the human characters. While in that movie, you came to see giant robots fighting and may have been disappointed due to forced human character storylines, a movie such as the one I saw, had us wanting to see giant robots and monsters fight, but also made me as an audience member suffer through unlikable humans communicating with each other. In fact, one thing that I’ll point out about the first “Pacific Rim” is that while the movie isn’t exactly reliant on you giving a crap about the characters, I still cared about them and possibly rooted for them. Here, I wasn’t doing that. If somebody received any sort of pain, I wouldn’t have cared. This movie felt too extended and dull, and it ended up being an hour and fifty-one minutes. There are so many movies that are longer than this pile of garbage that are better and more worth your time! Let’s give a list!

  • 2001: A Space Odyssey
  • Citizen Kane
  • Jurassic Park
  • Every Lord of the Rings movie (including Hobbit installments)
  • Star Wars
  • Braveheart
  • La La Land
  • Interstellar
  • Titanic
  • V For Vendetta
  • The Dark Knight
  • The Matrix
  • Lincoln
  • The Fifth Element
  • The Big Sick
  • Kingsman: The Secret Service
  • Ray
  • Once Upon a Time in the West
  • Metropolis
  • 12 Years a Slave
  • Inception
  • The Martian

And you know what? I don’t know how long this statement will hold up in my book, but at this point, I might say this is worse than all of the Michael Bay “Transformers” films.

This movie isn’t all negatives, in fact, one positive I can actually give the movie, is some of the cinematography from Dan Mindel, cinematographer of such films including “Star Wars: The Force Awakens,” the 2009 “Star Trek” reboot, and “John Carter.” Now don’t get me wrong, it’s not the best I’ve ever seen, but it almost comes off as one of the only things that can make this look like a film that is trying. But unfortunately, that’s sometimes ruined by occasional choppy editing! How wonderful! I didn’t come to the movie to admire the cinematography and editing, but it doesn’t mean both of those things can be bad!

In the end, when I’m talking about a big blockbuster that is SUPPOSED to entertain you and have you enjoy yourself while munching on popcorn for a couple of hours, and the only positives that come to mind include some of the shots and maybe tads of humor, that’s an epic fail! I really wanted to like the first movie. When the first trailer came out, it sold me. It prepared me for what was to come. I was somewhat pumped. The future bits of marketing were not as great, but I thought maybe the movie could be a chunk of fun. I think I’d honestly have more fun flying Spirit Airlines than I would watching this movie. At least Spirit Airlines, as much as they suck, and trust me, THEY SUCK, can take you to places you want to go. If I wanted to see all sorts of pretty lights and maybe watch some drunkards duke it out, Spirit could take me to Las Vegas. If I wanted to go see one of my best friends in person or make fun of the way people in Texas talk up close, Spirit could take me to Houston. If I bought tickets to go to a convention that might as well be an excuse to pay lots of money to stand in line after line after line, Spirit could take me to San Diego. “Pacific Rim: Uprising,” also took me to a place, and that place, is hell. I’m gonna give “Pacific Rim: Uprising” a 2/10. I admire John Boyega, and continue to hope some brightness shines throughout his career, but to say that he may have just been shown in a movie that is possibly worse than “The Circle,” is just unfathomable.

Thanks for reading this review! Next week I’m going to have my review for “Avengers: Infinity War,” because I already have tickets to see the movie opening night, and probably right after I get done watching that, the first thing I’ll do is get right in front of my computer, type like a maniac until perhaps three o’clock in the morning, and post my review for y’all to read! By the way, I’ll warn you in advance in case you read that review, I’ll do my best to make the review spoiler-free, for the sake of not feeding the trolls who throw spoilers around the Internet, and to avoid ruining the experience of going to see “Infinity War” for those who aren’t seeing it as early as I am. Not to mention, according Anthony and Joe Russo, the two directors of “Avengers: Infinity War,” Thanos demands my silence, so I might as well respect Thanos’ wishes.

#ThanosDemandsYourSilence

Also, stay tuned because pretty soon, I’ll have my review up for “Mission: Impossible II.” This review will be up by the month’s conclusion, and it will be the second entry in my “Mission: Impossible” review series leading up to “Mission: Impossible: Fallout.” So look out for that! Stay tuned for more great content! I want to know, did you see “Pacific Rim: Uprising?” What did you think about it? Which “Pacific Rim” movie was better? The first one or the second one? And since it’s relevant, did you see “Independence Day: Resurgence?” Leave all your thoughts down below, and PLEASE remember, if you are making an early review of “Avengers: Infinity War,” #THANOSDEMANDSYOURSILENCE. Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Blockers (2018): When Parents Don’t Want Their Kids Gettin’ Cocky

Alright fellow moron followers, it’s that time! We’re gonna talk about sex! And to do that, we’re not just gonna go over my thoughts for the movie “Blockers,” we’re gonna be doing a usual promo. Sex may be fun, hot, and climactic. You know, unless you’re Genevieve and Paul. If you’re Genevieve and Paul, sex is not all fun and games! It’s work! Hard work! No! They’re not f*cking porn stars! They’re in a YouTube series where they’re trying to conceive! Watch them… in “What the IVF?!”

“What the IVF?” is an all new series on YouTube that goes over one couple’s long journey to conception. Watch Genevieve and Paul as they deal with various struggles and small victories! As time passes, they realize, them becoming parents will only become a reality if they push themselves to the limit instead of just having sex and having a natural procreation method. Not to mention, getting injected with tons of needles. You can find the latest videos from Genevieve and Paul on the “WTIVF?” YouTube channel. Also be sure to hit the notification bell and subscribe for all new content! Their latest entry to the series involves a fertility appointment, and things just don’t go according to plan. If YouTube doesn’t satisfy you, check out all the other “WTIVF?” social media profiles and the series’s own website. All links are down below, tell em Jack Drees sent ya, and now let’s continue getting sexy!

WTIVF? WEBSITE: http://www.whattheivf.com/

WTIVF? YOUTUBE: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCILXSidkzWgwrQ5Oa1py78w/featured?disable_polymer=1

WTIVF? TWITTER: https://twitter.com/WTivF

WTIVF? INSTAGRAM: https://www.instagram.com/wtivf/

WTIVF? FACEBOOK: https://www.facebook.com/What-The-IVF-288868031634125/

mv5bmje0odiznjkzml5bml5banbnxkftztgwodq3mzu4ndm-_v1_sy1000_sx632_al_

“Blockers,” or C*ckblockers, as the promotional material implies, is directed by Kay Cannon and stars John Cena (Trainwreck, The Wall), Leslie Mann (Knocked Up, This Is 40), and Ike Barinholtz (Suicide Squad, Neighbors) as three parents who get together who try to stop their daughters from losing their virginities on prom night. Basically if you watch the movie, take the concept for “American Pie,” add in some elements of modern-day s*it in there, change the gender of the teens in a pact to get laid, and make the parents bigger parts of the story, and you get “Blockers.”

This movie is the directorial debut of Kay Cannon, who is mainly known as a writer and producer when it comes to her work in Hollywood. Cannon has written all three “Pitch Perfect” films, and produced the two sequels. I only saw the first one, I thought it was one of the worst comedies I’ve ever seen, even though a number of people seem to like it, but it certainly kept me from seeing the next two movies. Cannon also wrote several episodes of “New Girl,” which honestly, I need to still watch! They have reruns now, so I have a good opportunity on my hands. As I went into “Blockers,” I didn’t expect much, and my low expectations had partially to do with Kay Cannon, who I imagine, is a rather nice woman, but as far as I’m concerned, I didn’t like her s*itty movie from about six years ago. But hey, if were sitting in a chair in a coffee shop, having a coffee with her, I wouldn’t feel like I was tied to that chair. How someone is as a writer and someone is as a person are two completely different ideas! And luckily, in terms of how this movie was not only from the perspective of director Kay Cannon, but also the perspective of writers Brian and Jim Kehoe, it was so much better than it deserved to be! Seriously, from some of the advertising, I was somewhat convinced that this movie would be mediocre at best, but I walked out thinking to myself that I watched a movie where “American Pie” and “Revenge of the Nerds” had a lovechild! Is this movie a masterpiece? Heck no! But not only did I have a fun time, part of me feels that this movie goes over some very important themes. But before we get into why I’m craving this movie like ice cream, let’s dive into negatives.

First off, this movie has a ton of points where I nitpicked the hell out of it. I won’t go into extreme detail because it seems rather spoilery, but he biggest standout to me is when Ike Barinholtz’s character said he’s never watched anyone have sex before. My first thought after hearing that line was, “You’re a grown man who has impregnated someone, and raised a kid.” There’s not one point in your life where you rented something from the adult video store? I don’t know, That’s how he comes off to me. The more I thought about it, maybe he was just referring to in-person sex, but it doesn’t change how that original thought popped into my mind. Another thing I sort of didn’t like, is one joke that kind of makes fun of “Fast & Furious” and Vin Diesel. While it was somewhat executed well, audiences have seen a joke similar joke to that almost three years ago now in “Vacation.” Granted, that movie from what I heard was trash, but having promotional material, I imagine some people might watch this movie, witness this joke play out, and view it as perhaps less funny than if it was had “Vacation” never happened. I remember witnessing other various nitpicks, but I’ll be real with you, I can’t exactly recall them off the top of my head. It just goes to show how many positives there are in this movie compared to negatives.

Let’s talk about the three parents in this movie. You have the recently mentioned Ike Barinholtz who plays Hunter, whose daughter goes by the name of Sam, played by Gideon Adlon (The Real O’Neals, Z Nation). Hunter used to be married, but after reveals of him cheating on his wife, divorce happened. Barinholtz did a great job playing a very hyperactive, overenthusiastic, and somewhat aware dad. And by somewhat aware, I mean in terms of how teens communicate. This is something that the movie dives deep into. When the other two parents were trying to decipher whatever it was the teens were trying to say based on what was being typed out and shown on an accidentally left open laptop, Hunter was basically helping the two parents out with knowledge. To add some hilarity to the mix, Hunter treated the text reading like a puzzle, and some lines given in context to that were nothing short of lovable. I was totally able to buy him as a single parent and his connection with his daughter, especially towards the end of the film, was believable and charming.

Speaking of divorced parents, you’ve also got Leslie Mann’s character of Lisa. She is portrayed as this somewhat kick-ass, caring, and memory-sharing mother. She gave birth to a daughter named Julie played by Kathryn Newton (Paranormal Activity, Lady Bird), and their chemistry was totally believable. Mann’s character definitely delivers a fine performance of a parent who is somewhat concerned about the future of her child, and when it comes to overall concern, Lisa shines more than any other character.

Now we have an interesting character, and when I say that, I mean in terms of who plays him, not so much of how he’s laid out in terms of overall characterization. We’re about to talk about a little someone in this movie.

AND HIS NAME IS JOHN CENA!

How is John Cena in this movie? I’ll be completely honest with you, I don’t know. I couldn’t see him. He wasn’t anywhere in sight.

OK, I saw him.

John Cena plays the character of Mitchell, and he’s basically this overprotective father. His daughter goes by the name of Kayla, who in the movie is played by Geraldine Viswanathan. Out of each chemistry between each main parent to their daughter, this one was believable as well, but if I had to choose the one that is the least believable, I’d pick this one for now. Here’s why. I’ve done some research regarding this movie. John Cena is white, and he was born in West Newbury, Massachusetts. You’ve got Mitchell’s wife, Marcie, played by Sarayu Blue. She was born in Madison, Wisconsin, and she kind of looks like her family has an Indian origin. As for their daughter, the girl who plays her is from Australia. She might look like a mixed race child, but something feels off. Again, I’ll mention, most of my problems in this movie are nitpicks. John Cena though gives a great interpretation of a father and in some ways, reminds me of my own father a little bit.

Moving away from mature people, let’s move onto the movie’s three main teenagers. As you can see in the image above, they’re standing along with three guys, all of which you can probably guess are their prom dates. The three girls, Kayla, Julie, and Sam, have great chemistry and I buy them as best friends and dates to their boys. I’ll also have you keep in mind that part of that great chemistry may have resulted from the very thing that happened at the beginning of the movie. The film starts off with a montage in 2005, when the girls meet in kindergarten, otherwise known one of those times when you realize your life is about to go through a downward spiral of crap. The montage itself was sweet, effective, and illustrates the point that these girls are best friends maybe without having to make you question it. Their setup to actually plan on simultaneously declare their quest for virginity loss, might be a tad bit rushed, but you could also make the argument that they’re teenagers and teenagers often rush into things and I can totally get that. Maybe, and I’m not being sexist here, I would have believed this if the girls were actually boys. Because in real life, people usually think of boys talking more about sex and losing their virginity than girls do. In fact, this movie an interesting topic that I often think about in relation to that, which we’ll get to in a bit. But in all seriousness, girls, after seeing this movie, I want to know, would you say that from experience or personal thought that girls talk about sex and stuff like that as much as guys? Maybe in a positive light? I seriously want to know because this movie is honestly just making me think and I kind of want some experience or two cents from someone who would apply in the realm I’m referring to.

By the way, the girls’ dates were all pretty cool to watch here, but my favorite teenage boy in the movie has to be Kayla’s date, Connor. He’s played by Miles Robbins (The X-Files, Mozart in the Jungle) who not only does a great job with the character, but I also have to give kudos to the writers. The movie sets up Connor as someone who Kayla likes, but not as someone Kayla’s father likes. Granted, in some ways, it almost makes her father look like a dick, but it didn’t really take too much away from the movie. Listen to me, imagine if I were taking some girl to prom, I pop into her house, and the girl’s father looks at me and I have the hairstyle Connor has, there’s gonna be some s*it going down soon. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with it, but I’m not Kayla’s father.

Now let’s dive into this movie a little bit deeper and talk about how it tackles some issues regarding teens, parents, those kinds of people. You have many movies out there that might as well be quests to losing one’s virginity. Movies like “Porky’s,” “American Pie,” and f*ck, I’ll say it, “The 40-Year-Old Virgin.” Out of these movies, I’ve only seen “Porky’s” and “American Pie.” From what I’ve seen, I wouldn’t say they’re terrific. “Porky’s” almost seems like a good background movie in some cases, and “American Pie” was enjoyable, but I didn’t really connect to any specific character. Maybe it takes a couple watches, but I will admit, I didn’t enjoy that movie as much as I thought I would. Also, when it comes to these “virginity loss quest” movies, they’re usually from a male perspective. I will bring up that “Blockers” has all male writers, but the director for this movie was a female. To me, this brought an interesting balance in terms of what both genders thought of teenagers and sex.

When it comes to the parents, they’re obviously worried. John Cena comes off as very overprotective, not just because her daughter’s virginity is going to be taken, but perhaps even because it’s going to be taken by a guy whose hair probably doesn’t even belong in this world. Hey! I never said that! I’m not John Cena! Connor seems like a nice guy who knows that he wants his first time to be special, but hey, parents will be parents.

Leslie Mann is going through a bunch of worries when it comes to her daughter. She’s going to college soon and the mother is concerned of losing the kid she raised forever and ever. She wants her daughter to go to a local college and stay near her mother, but this girl wants to go to UCLA, and that’s just an upset to her. Oh yeah, and her daughter’s on a virginity loss quest, don’t forget about that! By the way, her daughter is technically the one to jumpstart this whole quest!

Ike Barinholtz, as mentioned, doesn’t even live with his daughter. Like Leslie Mann’s character, he’s divorced, but he lives alone without a child. And when it comes to his daughter, not only is he concerned about her being in this sex pact. He’s worried about her sexuality. Sam, the daughter of Ike Barinholtz, is gay. She’s going out with a boy. We actually see her worried about this and have a desire towards a certain girl later, but Ike’s character doesn’t have that knowledge.

This movie as a whole dives really deep into a ton of the main characters and unleashes little figments of their personality. It’s a sex comedy that doesn’t feel like a comedy where sex is bound to happen and it’s really all you think about. It’s almost more like “Revenge of the Nerds” in some ways because that’s a sex comedy, but it also dives deep into the characters and their own little individualistic traits to get you to care about them. There’s not many people who feel like they are just written on a page or cookie-cutter. This feels like a vision. Sure, it has that typical studio comedy feel, and it is complete with tons of Apple product placement, but the characters in this movie all have a chance to shine.

I will also admit, I was watching this film alongside my mother, and I was wondering how awkward it would be for the two of us. For one thing, I was not expecting much out of this movie, but also another thing is that I’m eighteen years old. I gotta say this movie came out at what might be a proper time for me. Relying on numbers from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the average age for one to lose their virginity according to them is 17.1 (both males and females). Sex is something my mother and I don’t talk about, and why would we talk about it? What… benefit… is there to life… of having a sex-related conversation between a parent and a child? It’s gonna do nothing except make one of us want to exit the room! My mother actually reads this blog, and I’m trying to get inside her mind. What if there’s one day she finds out about me having sex? Sure, maybe when I’m an adult maybe that’s natural. OK, well, I’m technically an adult at this point, but certain members of society would probably still refer to me as a child or teenager. I’m willing to bet a number of adults know that teens, especially ones in my gender, think about sex all the time, but they always see us doing it as dangerous or horrifying. As a teen, I get why, but I feel like that no matter what gender the characters are, whether it’s the kids I’m talking about or the parents, this movie does a fantastic job of not only highlighting the thoughts of the young and the old when it comes to teen sex, but it also seems to add a nice touch by not choosing a side in this debate and calling one right or wrong. This feels like a film, not propaganda. I don’t know if it will open much discussion between kids/teens and parents about sexual activity, but maybe it will develop some along those lines with maybe close friends.

In the end, I honestly couldn’t have gotten more of a surprise from “Blockers” than I already have. “Blockers” feels like one of those movies that we as a society didn’t really deserve, but someone was nice enough to let us have it. I’d love to thank Kay Cannon for directing the hell out of this, and I’m sorry that I called your other movie a piece of crap. I’m gonna give “Blockers” a 7/10. Thanks for reading this review! Next week I have a week off from school, giving me more opportunities to go to the theater and see something. Maybe I’ll go see “Rampage,” “Pacific Rim: Uprising,” “A Quiet Place,” “Isle of Dogs,” we’ll have to find out! Also, be sure to stay tuned for my review for “Mission: Impossible II” which will be up by the end of the month! Stay tuned for more great content! I want to know, what did you think of “Blockers” if you saw it? Or, what is your favorite sex comedy? Me personally, I gotta go with “Risky Business.” It feels natural, the characters are great, and the music is awesome! Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

New Animated Super Mario Bros. Movie in the Works and Why I Have Mixed Thoughts On It

mv5bnzgzodkzmzetywe4my00njfilwiwmdatmdlhytfmyjfjzgrml2ltywdlxkeyxkfqcgdeqxvyndmzmja3ndy-_v1_sx1777_cr001777999_al_

Hey everyone, Jack Drees here! A couple weeks back, I found out that Illumination Entertainment is working on a new “Super Mario Bros.” movie and there was a part of me that thought that was cool. Another part of me however, was trying to set my body on fire. Part of me wanted to make a “Mario” movie at an older age, but that’s not the main reason I’m worried.

Let’s remain rather positive for now and talk about what I think might as well be considered “the good.” The best thing about this new “Mario” project is that it might turn out fine. I know, this sounds VERY LIMITED, but you have to realize the history moviegoers have with video game movies and how much of a tragedy it has been in said genre for the most part. Sure, there are a number of people who say they enjoyed movies such as “Mortal Kombat,” “Lara Croft: Tomb Raider,” and even “Warcraft.” I’m willing to bet that last one may be due to its faithfulness towards the game, but people enjoyed it nonetheless. As for “Super Mario Bros.,” if you weren’t aware already, there already has been two movies based on the games. Yes, two. If you know about only one of them or even none for that matter, I wouldn’t be that surprised considering the earlier one only released in Japan in 1986 and it was called “Super Mario Brothers: Great Mission to Rescue Princess Peach.” The American version, released in 1993, known as “Super Mario Bros.,” was met with negative reception once it came out and is still remembered as an abomination. As for my reaction towards the film, I completely concur with the enormous number of people who were enslaved by a couple of plumbers for over an hour and a half. I even consider that garbage pile of a film to be my least favorite film of all time. I didn’t know it when watching it in 2013, but as time marched on, I began to realize, the complete and utter bullcrap shoved in front of me. I saw news of this film happening and I thought, filmmakers can only go up from here.

The 1993 s*itshow known as “Super Mario Bros.” was made in live-action, and while I have not much of a problem with a “Mario” movie being in live-action, “Mario’s” universe comes off as this magical place that would make as much sense as defying gravity. This brings in some news that the new “Mario” movie will be in animation form as opposed to live-action. Given what I just stated about logic and “Mario,” I’m not opposed to this. In fact, based on results I saw from IMDb, the Japanese “Mario” movie from 1986 was actually an anime and that got mostly positive verdicts, giving it a barely passable rating. I’ll remind you though, not many people rated the film. I’ll also remind you that this barely passable rating of 6.0 is greater than the failure of a rating that the American “Mario” film has, which is a 4.0. Most of the verdicts for the Japanese film came in around the 6 and 7 spots and the American flick has ratings mostly ending up as a 4. Try playing one of the newer “Super Mario” games. Try playing “Super Mario Galaxy” or “Super Mario 3D World” and tell me the textures in those games won’t work well in an animated movie. Or at the very least, a live-action movie with tons of CGI.

Now with the news I just stated, some of you “Mario” fans might be thinking, this might turn out well. Let me just remind you that one studio stands in the way of this movie’s ultimate fate. And that studio, as mentioned, is Illumination Entertainment, or as I like to call them, Making Minion Cash-Ins Forever Entertainment.

I’ve seen a few pieces of Illumination’s work, and while I will say, they are well animated, they can’t even compete with works from other animated studios. I give a lot of flak for Disney making repetitive content based on some works they’ve done in recent years along with works that will be out in years to come, but at least they’ve done glimmers of brilliance in the animation department recently! Have you seen “Wreck-it Ralph?” If you haven’t, go out and buy it right now on Blu-ray if you don’t have it! Have you seen “Zootopia?” If you haven’t, stop wasting time and find a copy! Don’t get me wrong, I do think they’ve done terribly overrated pieces of dogs*it in the animation department in recent times as well. If you like “Frozen,” that’s fine, but I’m glad that I’m not a father, because if I was, I probably would have been dragged by the ear to that film if I had a daughter instantly. I haven’t watched the film in its entirety, but based on what I’ve seen, I don’t want to. Speaking of that, I haven’t seen all of “Moana,” but I’ve seen enough to say, despite the stellar animation, I can’t say I can get past an annoying chicken and brain damaging musical numbers. As for Illumination, I’ve seen a portion of “Despicable Me 2,” “The Secret Life of Pets,” and “Sing.” The portion I saw of “Despicable Me 2” didn’t please me, and as for the other two films, they were passable, but not that memorable. To me, Illumination is just that animated studio that tries to make serviceable content that could potentially entertain kids, and maybe some adults, but mainly kids. Yes, kids are a target demographic in animations, but to say that the animations are just for the kids is baloney. Think about what adults want, mature stories with proper life lessons, something that the kids can think about in order to be a good person. And while I have seen films from Illumination that showcase those things, it must be kept in mind that those are probably films that are only good for one watch. I know a friend who reads this blog who has watched “Despicable Me 3” and she says its awesome, but I haven’t seen it so I can’t make any judgment of it whatsoever.

The more I think about it, the more I want this to be perhaps a Dreamworks movie, maybe a Blue Sky movie even. Both of those studios have created GREAT animations I have watched over and over again. “Kung Fu Panda” is one of my favorite animations of all time. Not just the first one, but all three to me, qualify as animated tour de forces. Blue Sky’s first two “Ice Age” films are terrific in my personal book. Yeah, the franchise has declined to a point of utter insanity at this point, but it doesn’t mean Blue Sky hasn’t made other enjoyable pieces of work such as “Epic.”

I mean, the more I think about those things, the more worried I get because those studios have been around for awhile. Sure, they’ve both had their share of original and unoriginal ideas that have been effective films, there are points where people run out of ideas and thus start creating whatever cash-in is necessary. Have you guys seen “Ice Age: Collision Course?” If you haven’t, LUCKY YOU! If anything, this Mario movie can only work if people tried to make an effective product. By that I mean, instead of thinking of it as something based off of something that people like that you have to make, think of it as something that has been loved by many for years, and go on to create something those people will either love equally or perhaps more than the original product. Given their track record, I wouldn’t mind seeing Laika taking on this project. I saw two Laika films and both of them were absolute pieces of genius! I still remember going to see “Coraline” in the theater, and the animation not only looked amazing, but it was well written, well voiced, and it had a terrific story. “Kubo and the Two Strings” is another film I saw from Laika, and that somehow managed to be better than “Coraline!” Laika is well known for its stop-motion work, so it would be rather interesting to see what they can do with “Mario.” Although this might bring some problems given the traditional design of “Mario’s” world. If gravity could be defied, this might work 100%.

Sticking with Illumination, I’m also worried about one other thing, marketing and handling of the product. Are they gonna use an unoriginal character or create some new character that might as well be an excuse to stock toy shelves? That’s basically what they did with the Minions in “Despicable Me,” so that wouldn’t be surprising here. This also makes me think if they will just make “Mario” less like “Mario” and more like a cliche animation. If they don’t take time to actually have Mario do several missions like he does in the games, I will rage. “Mario” is famous for its missions where you either have to touch a flag or collect a star. If they don’t pay much respect to the game in that regard, perhaps numerous times, I might be disappointed. I don’t want the characters taking too many breaks to sit around and have a conversation. I don’t mind conversations being in there, but they can’t be in there the entire time. Also, PLEASE, don’t make the missions have a popular song with lyrics, and don’t do another version of “Happy.” Either take the music from the games or establish your own score and keep it that way. You can make the movie feel like a movie, but also blend in a high number of elements from the video game, I imagine some people will go nuts.

At this point, I’m just rambling. I wouldn’t doubt that this would be a step up from “Super Mario Bros.” released in 1993, but the question is, how much of a step up can it be? Video game movies in general are not that great, but if this were under a different studio such as DreamWorks or an independent studio, I’d have more faith in it. Oh well, I guess we’ll just have to face that boss when we get to it.

Thanks for reading this post! This weekend, “Black Panther” is out, meaning I’ll definitely have a review up sometime soon because I do have intentions to see it. You know, unlike “Fifty Shades Freed.” I probably won’t be seeing that unless I manage to find a date in a matter of days and they end up dragging me to it. As for other movies, I want to go see “Game Night,” a comedy starring Rachel McAdams, Jesse Plemons, and Jason Bateman. That movie comes out February 23rd, so maybe I’ll catch that a little later. Speaking of films coming out that day, I’m also going to try and catch “Annihilation,” which is directed by Alex Garland and that name alone is enough to get me in the theater because he directed “Ex Machina,” and that movie is, well, “Ex Machina.” Stay tuned for more great content! I want to know, do you have any thoughts on the upcoming “Mario” movie? Also, did you see “Super Mario Bros.” from 1993? If you haven’t, chances are you haven’t been locked in the closet for a period of time by a couple plumbers. Let me know your responses! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

10 Movies That Have Changes You May or May Not Have Noticed *SPOILERS*

mv5bmja1mjqynju5mv5bml5banbnxkftztgwntc1nji1nte-_v1_sx1777_cr001777755_al_

Hey everyone, Jack Drees here! You might have clicked on this post thinking “Oh, crap! Clickbait! GO BACK! GO BACK! GO BACK!” First off, thank you for giving me one extra view, very much appreciated. Second, regardless of how clickbaity this sounds, I will say what you’re about to read is somewhat interesting. When movies come out, you might think of it in a certain way. You might go back and watch it the way you remembered. Although in some cases you might go back and watch it, and there’s something different about it. Today we’re going to be looking at some of these changes, see if you see the movie in a different view than you did before. One rule I’m making for this list is that no made-for-TV changes apply here. If a movie gets a change from its original release because it airs on TBS or something, it doesn’t count. So changes as the one from “Home Alone” where Buzzy doesn’t say “I wouldn’t let you sleep in my room if you were growing on my ass,” and instead says “butt,” doesn’t qualify. Just for the record, this is not a countdown, these aren’t in any specific order, and I’m not sticking to any sort of idea, stating how much I like or dislike these changes. I might go into that, but I’m not saying I like every single change or dislike every single change. So let’s dive into this.

Revenge of the Nerds: Phone Number

mv5bodu1nzm4nta4nl5bml5banbnxkftztgwmtkxmzcxmte-_v1_sy1000_cr006631000_al_

The first change comes from the 1984 comedy “Revenge of the Nerds.” This is one of my personal favorite comedies. The sequels? Not so much. The movie has been released on VHS, Laserdisc, DVD, and Blu-ray. However, the sequels haven’t gotten past the DVD mark. This is a change that is seen on both the DVD and Blu-ray editions of the film. In 2003, the film was put out on DVD, but with a reedit brought to the mix. There’s a “For Rent” sign in the movie which had a genuine phone number on it. For legal reasons, the footage where the phone number was displayed was removed. Note, I didn’t say blurred, but removed. I have never seen the footage of where the phone number is revealed and as I write this, I’m looking at originaltrilogy.com, where a bunch of users are talking about this change and a couple of them called it “jarring.” I will have to watch the original cut in order to agree or disagree, but if you really want to make everyone happy, just blur the phone number. Also to everyone, please don’t call the phone number. Don’t be a dick.

All the Right Moves: Lea Thompson In the Nude

Remember how I said this isn’t a countdown? Well, I guess this may be an excuse to talk about movies I haven’t seen. Ladies and gentlemen, I give you “All the Right Moves,” starring Tom Cruise (Risky Business, The Outsiders) and Lea Thompson (Jaws 3-D, Back to the Future). Why am I talking about this? Well apparently I was in Connecticut and while I was there, I managed to pick up a bunch of Blu-rays to add to my collection. This movie happened to be one of them and I figured it would go great in my Tom Cruise collection. Due to random research, I came across something interesting. When “All the Right Moves” came out in 1983, there’s a sex scene featuring Tom Cruise and Lea Thompson which contains full frontal nudity, however when the Blu-ray released in 2012, the framing of Lea Thompson’s character in the nude was altered. This prevented people from seeing Lea nude below the waist. I don’t want to sound like a pervert, but I don’t know why that change had to be there. First off, the movie’s rated R. Second, if people who have watched this before are rewatching this today, they might be slightly jarred by what they’re seeing and the experience of that scene might be ruined for them. Not to mention, this is a Blu-ray cut! Not a cut made for television! On TV, I can sometimes understand some movies being altered for certain viewers for a number of reasons. But, on a Blu-ray?! What do I know really? I’ve yet to see the film so I can’t really say much.

2001: A Space Odyssey: “Affirmative, Dave” and Nineteen Minutes of Footage

It’s been almost fifty years since the release of “2001: A Space Odyssey.” In that span of time, the movie has been considered a classic by fans of science fiction and film from a general perspective. You know what they say, if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. This change, much like the “Revenge of the Nerds” change, didn’t really break the film or anything for some people. In fact you can say it broke the film less because if you think about this, it’s not really that jarring compared to the “Revenge of the Nerds” change. In 1998, MGM released “2001: A Space Odyssey” on DVD, with a slight change in the dialogue. During the scene when Dave is trying to get through the pod bay doors, he asks HAL “Do you read me, HAL?” In that particular release, HAL responds by saying “Affirmative, Dave.” Although in the original release, HAL says “Affirmative, Dave. I read you.” What makes this change extra wacky is that the English subtitles for the DVD released by MGM actually still displays the line from the original release. The full dialogue however was revived in future home video releases from Warner Brothers. Speaking of changes, when “2001: A Space Odyssey” was first released, it was slightly over two and a half hours long. The version which is seen on most home video releases is a version that’s just slightly shorter than two and a half hours. Stanley Kubrick, the director of the film, removed nineteen minutes of footage after the film premiered. It would be nice to see that footage restored for when “2001” comes out on 4K, I’d totally buy that!

Blade Runner: Endless Cuts (SPOILERS AHEAD)

“Blade Runner” is one of the best sci-fi films ever made. In fact, a sequel just released in October and it might be just as good, if not better, compared to the original. Followers over the years have been exposed to multiple editions of what director Ridley Scott regards as “probably his most personal and complete film.” Ridley might not be lying when he says that, and we’ll get to that in a second. “Blade Runner” has had seven different cuts of the film released to the public.

In 1982, the workprint prototype version was shown to test audiences in Denver and Dallas. This was also shown in 1990 and 1991 to audiences in San Francisco and Los Angeles as a “Director’s Cut.” Although it didn’t have the approval of Ridley Scott. We’ll get back to that in a sec.

There was also a San Diego sneak preview version shown to audiences only once in May 1982. This version included three scenes that was never shown in any other version of the film (before or after).

Then we have the version the US audiences saw in theaters. This included a “happy ending” that the studio wanted in the film. Fun fact by the way, there are aerial helicopter shots which weren’t even filmed for “Blade Runner.” These shots were actually from Stanley Kubrick’s “The Shining.” The movie also included narration by Harrison Ford, who played the lead character of Deckard. While some might say Ford either was angry about his task or he intentionally narrated poorly, he said it was simply bad narration. This was also referred to as the “Domestic Cut,” which wasn’t released on DVD until 2007 as part of a collector’s set of the film.

Then we have the International Cut. This cut is a minute longer than the US version, and included more violence in three action scenes than the US version. This cut was eventually released in the US on VHS and Criterion Collection laserdiscs. Interestingly, this version was shown to the US on HBO during the 1980s, the 1990s, and 2015.

In 1986, the US broadcast version was released. This was put together by CBS to meet TV broadcast requirements. There’s even narration that wasn’t in any other version of the film leading up to it, plus a different opening crawl. And yes, I said made-for-TV changes don’t count, but I’m just providing evidence to prove my point.

Next came the Director’s Cut, which was created technically by film preservationist, Michael Arick. This cut was discovered as a 70mm print which nobody had an idea that it actually was the movie’s workprint version. This was discovered after a screening of the film in Los Angeles. Ridley Scott said the cut was roughly edited, lacked a key scene, and the climax missed Vangelis’s score. The Director’s Cut was very popular that it rereleased theatrically in 1992. This cut also brought up a very popular fan theory if you will to the table. At one point in the film, we cut to a clip of a moving unicorn. The original idea for this scene was to cut between Deckard and the Unicorn, but the condition of the print associated with this was not presentable, so it just shows the unicorn trotting. This scene along with a clip of Deckard holding an origami unicorn, may suggest he is a Replicant. Speaking of things this film removed, the movie no longer has the narration from Deckard along with the happy ending the studio wanted. Despite being called the “Director’s Cut,” Scott wasn’t satisfied. To be fair, he was busy with “Thelma and Louise,” time and money happened to be a problem, however this cut brought more satisfaction in general to Scott than the original. There’s one cut although, that brought even more satisfaction to Scott…

Here’s where we get to “The Final Cut.” This is the cut where Ridley Scott had complete artistic control. Remember the unicorn dream? Turns out in this version, the original dream was included. You know, the one where it cuts between Deckard and the unicorn. Other additions include alternate edits and violence featured in the international cut. It turns out there were parts of this version that went through reshoots to fit in this version. One such example is Zhora’s death scene. Fun fact, if it weren’t for Warner Brothers gaining total control over distribution rights in 2006, this would have probably never been released. This project started once the 21st century began, and in mid-2001, legal and financial troubles put the project to a halt.

Porky’s: Cherry Forever’s Extra Nudity

“Porky’s” is an interesting movie to say the least. When it comes to its reception, critics weren’t exactly pleased, but it did gain a cult following and there are still people who go back and watch it today. As far as 1980s coming of age stories go, this isn’t my goto pick. However, back in the 80s, this was a hit among many people who flock to the cinema. The film was #1 at the box office for nine consecutive weekends, suggesting that either a lot of people either wanted to see it, liked it and went multiple times, or happened to be really horny. The film eventually released on VHS and something appeared in that which never appeared in the theatrical release, or the future DVD release. Based on how the release was open matte, more nudity was revealed in the VHS version. This happened during the Cherry Forever scene. The additional nudity was a result of the transfer, and was never intended to be shown. You know, unlike my secret identity–whoops! That was close! I almost told you guys I’m the guy who saved the Golden Gate Bridge from absolute destruction. Oh, crap! I did it! I’m a failure! I was told by a wizard to keep that a secret! Oh, well! Sucks to be me!

xXx: Head-butt

One interesting move executed in battle is a headbutt. There’s something about it, you’re literally using your head to bounce off someone else as a fighting technique. Plus, the term itself is awesome. One movie where a headbutt is shown is 2002’s “xXx,” starring Vin Diesel. This movie isn’t exactly the next “Citizen Kane” or anything, however it is a fun action flick with some interesting lines in the lines in the script. Going back to headbutts, when this movie was released in several territories, audiences were exposed to a moment where a headbutt occurs. One territory where audiences didn’t get to see this however, was in the UK. Similar to the US’s MPAA, the UK operates under a rating system referred to as the BBFC. The BBFC has a rating labeled as 12A/12, which was the rating “xXx” was given. If the headbutt was kept in, the rating wouldn’t have been secured and would have bumped up to 15. This is how the film was presented for years. The headbutt wasn’t even in the eventually released Director’s Cut DVD. Although on January 5th, 2017, the film was rereleased on Blu-ray in honor of the film’s 15th anniversary. It was at this point that the BBFC waived the cuts to the film, and the headbutt was then inserted. The BBFC must have had this slogan for years:

BBFC: We’re buttheads!

Ferris Bueller’s Day Off: Paramount Logo

I love “Ferris Bueller’s Day Off.” It’s a coming of age story that a lot of people in high school can relate to. In fact, you can also include anyone going to school in general, not to mention anyone who’s working a s*itty job can relate to. Sure, “Office Space” kind of does the same thing, but this came first. This change doesn’t even affect much of the movie, it just has to do with the logo. This movie is from Paramount, and if you know who they are, there’s a good chance you’ve seen one of their logos. Some time after the movie was in theaters, it came out on VHS. However, the VHS versions contain a plastered Paramount logo depending on the year the print released. The original logo although was restored on all future DVD and Blu-ray releases.

American Graffiti: Digital Effect

Ah, George Lucas. What have you done? You took a bunch of people’s childhoods, which were epic because of your “Star Wars” movies, and you threw them in the garbage! Because if you haven’t noticed, the original “Star Wars” trilogy has made a crapton of changes over the years! Well ya know what?! I’m not gonna focus on that! Because I already did a countdown focusing on those changes, and apparently George Lucas made a change to “American Graffiti” as well! This change didn’t exactly offend me as much. Then again I only saw this movie once. The change is shown in the 1998 Collector’s Edition DVD and VHS, and once you hear what it is without any specification, it almost sounds like something George Lucas would do. Lucas requested for the opening scene which features Mel’s Drive-In to have a sunset with clouds. The original opening had a cloudy sky with buildings in the background. In this opening, the buildings are still there, but the weather is different. Interestingly, there was also a documentary on the making of “American Graffiti” included as a bonus feature on the DVD, and the original shot was inserted there. Time travel much?

Kindergarten Cop: Little Terrorists

I imagine some people getting a sense of surprise from “Kindergarten Cop.” The film itself is a comedy where a cop goes undercover as a kindergarten teacher in order to locate the ex-wife of a dangerous criminal. This movie released in 1990 and stars Arnold Schwarzenegger. It’s kind of interesting to put the Terminator as the star of a comedy, but stranger things have happened. Although I wouldn’t say it’s all too strange because another comedy, “Twins,” released two years before this one, and while not all critics and audiences appreciated the film, there were a number of them to say it was worth a watch. Interestingly, both comedies were directed by Ivan Reitman, who also directed “Ghostbusters” 1 and 2. And the movie does have some witty Schwarzenegger lines and also has some funny lines given by a bunch of kids as well. Speaking of lines, let’s talk about one of them. As mentioned, this movie released in 1990, which is eleven years before 9-11. Once that day occurred, it inspired the removal of one particular line in all future versions of the film. After Schwarzenegger’s first day with the kindergartners, he has this to say about them.

JOHN KIMBLE: They’re horrible. They’re like little terrorists.

I’d just like to state that if I were in kindergarten watching this film, it would probably be debatable on whether or not I should be watching it given it has a PG-13 rating. However I don’t know if this one incident means this line should be deleted. I don’t know if Reitman decided on this or if Universal did or anyone else for that matter, but you don’t really need to get rid of it. Sure, in reality, kindergartners aren’t commonly associated with terrorists, although that would make for an interesting cartoon or something, but I don’t see how this would offend anyone. I mean, it’s probably better than changing the line, but the elimination felt unneeded. Let’s face it. Kindergartners are crazy, and I know that because I was one. I wouldn’t blame someone comparing me with a terrorist at that age because I was a chaotic brat. Anyways, let’s move on.

Jaws: Smile, You son of a… (SPOILERS AHEAD)

“Jaws” is considered by many to be one of the greatest films of all time. It has a terrific script, admirable characters, and an awesome score from John Williams, who went on to do “Star Wars,” “Superman,” “Raiders of the Lost Ark,” “E.T,” “Home Alone,” “Jurassic Park,” “Schindler’s List,” “Saving Private Ryan,” and “Harry Potter.” If you’ve seen the ending, you’d probably know how it ends. Part of that ending involves the character of Brody. He’s in a duel against the shark and he’s got a gun. He’s in full concentration mode, trying to take the creature down. In honor of the movie’s 30th anniversary, a DVD was released in order to celebrate. This brought a very minor change in one line, in fact, it’s actually one of the lines of the movie that I remember most. In versions prior to this release, before Brody shoots his gun to kill the shark, he says “Smile, you little son of a bitch.” Here, he says “Smile, you little son of a…” and then his gun is shot. Like the original, all the blood and gore remains, but the word “bitch” is removed. I’m glad I’m not Jesse Pinkman from “Breaking Bad,” because finding this out would be the worst day of my life. I can now say that my memory suggests that all the versions of “Jaws” I’ve seen in my life at this point, have this specific “bitch” removed. I want to know how this feels for everyone who has either seen the original version and possibly been exposed to alternate editions of the film. How does this “bitch” removal come off to you? Does it take away from the scene? Does it not take anything away at all? Does it anger you? I really want to know. I can’t say much about this change, but if they ever alter “You’re gonna need a bigger boat,” there will be riots.

Thanks for reading this post, there’s a good chance I just possibly either ruined a scene for you, so if I did, I apologize. If so, don’t blame me, blame the people who changed them! Nevertheless, the year’s almost over, the holiday season is coming to its conclusion, but that also means I will have two countdowns coming up. Like at the end of 2016, I’m counting down my top 10 BEST and WORST movies of the year. I’ve seen a number of films that came out this year. Most of those films are ones I reviewed, and there are others I’ve watched but couldn’t make a review of for the sake of time such as “The Great Wall,” “American Assassin,” and “King Arthur: Legend of the Sword.” Believe it or not I will still be going to see more movies as the year comes to a close, because I have aspirations to go see “Downsizing,” “Father Figures,” “The Disaster Artist,” and if any other opportunities come up to see a movie released this year, I’ll take those as well. Stay tuned for more great content! Also, what is the worst alteration you’ve ever seen in a movie? For me, I gotta say Darth Vader screaming “no” at the end of “Return of the Jedi.” Leave your responses down below! And yes, can also includes ones from TV. Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

The Space Between Us (2017): I Need More Space

mv5bnjyzodu1otkwn15bml5banbnxkftztgwmda3mtmwmdi-_v1_sy1000_cr006751000_al_

“The Space Between Us” is directed by Peter Chelsom who also directed “Hannah Montana: The Movie” and “Serendipity” and stars Asa Butterfield, Carla Gugino, Gary Oldman, and Britt Robinson. This movie revolves around a guy who was born a Martian, he travels to Earth and hangs with a girl which leads to eventual self-discovery.

I’ve heard about this movie months ago when it released in theaters, but I’m reviewing it now considering I found it for ten bucks at Newbury Comics, which if you’re from New England or Long Island, you’d probably already know they’re a chain of stores whose main focus happens to be products in the realm of nerd culture. Interestingly enough, it’s where I buy a good portion of my movies. I also know someone who saw this movie. If you ever notice the header of my blog, you may notice this blog’s operated by “the #NerdArmy’s film critic.” The Nerd Army is a social media group I’m a part of, and one of my pals in that group, Kayla, saw this movie too. She thought it was horrible, so maybe I wasted ten bucks on a piece of crap. Guess what? Kayla was right! I honestly think “The Space Between Us” might just be up there with movies like “Star Wars Episode I” and “Battlefield Earth” as one of the worst science fiction movies ever made.

On paper, this sounds like a cool concept. You’ve seen movies with Earthlings on Mars like “John Carter,” now we have a Martian on Earth. Now, that has been done before generally speaking, just look at all the alien invasion movies we’ve gotten over the years. And I will say this film does look nice at times. Not as nice as Ridley Scott’s “The Martian,” that’s a whole different ballgame. While I may be praising this film from a cinematography perspective, it’s not perfect, because there are jumpcuts in this film and I have seen films like “Manchester by the Sea” where you might just find one and let it slide. Here however, I found three of them. They were all quickly paced and they aggravated the crap out me! Going back to the concept, if you take out the whole interplanetary idea and have the two main characters on the same planet, you might as well have a love story as cringeworthy as Anakin and Padme’s love story when they’re in “Star Wars Episode II.” Although I will say, the movie’s tone had been set far before the romance.

As mentioned, this movie is about the first person born on Mars, or Asa Butterfield’s character of Gardner, who we will get to. It’s established in the very beginning that one character is pregnant with him. The birth of Gardner is soon shown for us all in order to prepare ourselves for what we’re about to suffer through. And speaking of which, we as an audience aren’t the only folks suffering, because the mother dies. By the way, a pregnant woman has never been in space, so I can’t talk about any scientific inaccuracies there. Also, the mother’s death is not a spoiler because this is less than ten minutes into the film. It’s almost as if the mother dying instantly is a signal for how either this movie will make you want to die or the movie itself feeling like it’s going to die.

Asa Butterfield plays the character of Gardner Elliot, the character isn’t exactly someone I hate, in fact that would be directed towards the next character I’m gonna talk about, but the script makes him look like someone I will be eternally ashamed to hang out with. Granted he’s from Mars, but regardless of wherever the heck he’s from, seeing his character was the equivalent of a mom that tries to sound enthusiastic about something when she’s really not as enthusiastic as she sounds. …Or Tyra Banks when she hosts “America’s Got Talent.” By the way, if anyone from NBC or “America’s Got Talent” is reading this, please replace Tyra Banks in season 13 of the show.

Britt Robinson plays Tulsa and as suggested in the recent paragraph, I don’t like her. Sometimes she’s rather annoyed by Gardner which I can understand because they’re from different planets so they wouldn’t behave identically. However as I got to see more of her character, I became irritated with her for a brief period. I wouldn’t say she’s one of the worst characters of all time, but seriously, she was a nutjob!

Also in this movie you have Gary Oldman, or as I like to call him, Robert Carradine with long hair. I don’t even know if that’s all that good of a comparison, but as I watched the movie I thought that was what he looked like at a point. So Bobby–err I mean Gary plays Nathaniel Shepard. Now Oldman probably gave the best performance out of everyone in the movie, but despite what I said, it doesn’t really make the movie that much better. Because I’ve seen good performances in bad movies, such as Emily Blunt in “The Girl on the Train.” For the record, that performance was better than this one, how much better you ask? Well that one would have probably been nominated for a Golden Globe or an Oscar in my book had the movie been better! Oldman’s performance is alright, but there’s not much of anything all that redeeming about it.

Now the love story could definitely be worse. This isn’t like, love at first sight, the movie seemed to establish that the two grew a connection between each other. But the way the movie in general plays out when the love story builds is that it goes from random conversations on videochat to the point when the character of Gardner Elliot travels to Earth making the movie develop a fish out of water story. There was a movie that released this year that actually came out after this one, that being “Wonder Woman.” The fish out of water cliche worked in “Wonder Woman,” but it didn’t work in “The Space Between Us.” In this movie, the fish out of water segment was just awkward, it made me engage in untypical body movements, so based on that you can tell it was just plain awful. There are also moments when I can easily tell it’s supposed to be funny, and maybe it got some chuckles in theater auditoriums, but I watched this movie alone in my room, the only laughs that are going off in here are… actually none. I have not much else to say there. And when we get to a moment when the love takes full effect, guess what happens? Cheesy dialogue! WHO SAYS THE STUFF THAT IS SAID IN THIS MOVIE?! Granted, I’ve never been in love nor have I gone out with anyone with the exception of a prom night, but in real life, this isn’t how people talk! For the record, the guy from Mars is actually saying this mumbo jumbo, but it’s still cringeworthy as hell! I said part of this before, but I’ll say it again! When it comes to the Earthling, I hated her. She reminded me of that teenage girl from “Independence Day: Resurgence” who I actually recall more than a good number of the characters from that movie. Annoying, angry, and unfriendly. This was just a relationship that was just hard to watch, and when the love is in the air, you can’t just help but think about putting a gun in your mouth.

In the end, “The Space Between Us” is simply a movie I’d never want to watch again unless I was being paid. My friend Kayla wasn’t lying after she saw this movie, this really was a meteor that was about to destroy a planet. This movie was originally scheduled to come out December 16, 2016, which is the same day that “Rogue One: A Star Wars Story” came out, although STX pushed it back to February 3, 2017. While it may be good for STX because they didn’t have to compete with a much bigger film, it might just be bad for the viewing public because this probably increased chances of people suffering. By the way, when I said this movie didn’t have to compete with a much bigger film I might as well be lying to you because it competed against “Rings,” which made over thirteen million dollars in the United States as opposed to this movie which made over three million dollars in the United States. Granted the ratings for “Rings” on IMDb at least are lower than “The Space Between Us,” but it doesn’t change the fact that this was pure s*it. I’m gonna give “The Space Between Us” a 1/10. As an idea, this movie sounded cool in ways, but so did “The Girl on the Train.” My next mission is to find a t-shirt that says I survived “The Space Between Us.” One last thing is that there’s an alternate ending to this film. I was watching the Blu-Ray and it was in the bonus features. I’d probably have to watch the original ending again to compare completely, but for now I gotta say the alternate ending’s better. Thanks for reading this review. On the subject of sci-fi, I am planning to see “Blade Runner 2049” sometime soon, I think that’ll be, without argument, a better movie than this crap. Also, if you are currently in a “Blade Runner” frenzy, be sure to check out a post where I talk about what “Blade Runner” has gotten right about the future ahead of its release. Stay tuned for more reviews, and also, I have a couple questions, what is your favorite movie involving Mars? Or, what is the worst science fiction film you’ve ever seen? Answer those questions in the comments! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

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

American Made (2017): Tom Cruise and Doug Liman Are Back!

mv5bmtuxnzuwmjk1nl5bml5banbnxkftztgwndkwodi1mji-_v1_sy1000_cr006751000_al_

“American Made” is directed by Doug Liman (Edge of Tomorrow, The Bourne Identity), and stars Tom Cruise (Risky Business, Mission: Impossible), Domhnall Gleeson (Ex Machina, Star Wars Episode VII: The Force Awakens), and Sarah Wright (21 & Over, Marry Me) and it is being marketed saying that it’s “based on a true lie.” The film’s about a pilot played by Tom Cruise who lands work transporting contraband for the CIA and as a drug runner for the Medellin Cartel in the south in the 1980s.

Going into “American Made” I was expecting a number of things. First off, a good movie, which by the way I did get. Second, a fine Tom Cruise performance, that was there too. Some moments of comedy despite having a serious situation at hand, that was also there. And I also expected an interesting story, for the record, I never really heard about this because I wasn’t born until 1999 and I just never researched it. I got all of that and a little more.

My favorite aspect of the entire film is how it looks. I went to see this film in IMAX, which I will say enhanced the experience a bit. By the way, if you do want to see this film in IMAX, make sure you can fit it in because this won’t be there long before “Blade Runner: 2049” comes out on October 6 and there could be a good chance that this won’t be playing at your local IMAX. As far as the camera goes, this film was shot on an Arri Alexa, which is a camera capable of shooting in 2K, which is higher than HD but lower than what is typically considered Ultra HD, or 4K as some people may call it. Even so, the film looked amazing. The aerial shots looked beautiful, the locations were gorgeous, and I truly felt like I was in the movie at times. But then again, I’ll mention, I saw the movie in IMAX. Also, one more thing. As much as I appreciated the cinematography in the movie, I wouldn’t say it was perfect. At times, it would zoom on certain things, and I have seen that before and it worked in other pictures, but here it’s kinda sketchy.

Let’s talk about Tom Cruise’s character of Barry Seal. If you ask me what I think of Tom Cruise himself, personally, I think he’s a fine actor. As a person, he may not be the best when it comes to relationships, or in terms of controlling his own ego, but as an actor, he’s got chops. He even starred in one of my favorite films of all time, and quite possibly my favorite coming of age movie, “Risky Business.” He’s also proven to be a stellar action star, just watch the “Mission: Impossible” movies! When it comes to Tom Cruise in “American Made,” I’d say that this is what happens if his performances from “Top Gun” and “The Last Samurai” got together and had a baby. The elements are there! In “Top Gun,” Tom plays a pilot, and as far as Tom Cruise in “The Last Samurai” goes, I didn’t really see much of Tom Cruise in that movie, and I mean that in a good way because Tom Cruise felt like a different person. Not to mention, both “American Made” and “The Last Samurai” take place way back before the time they came out. I will say, Cruise’s performance isn’t necessarily as good here as “The Last Samurai” because I can still see Tom as I watch “American Made,” but it is definitely a fine performance.

Sarah Wright plays Barry’s wife, Lucy. Wright did a fine job as her and while I can’t really say many redeeming things about her that makes her character stand out from many others, she definitely was a fine character and moved the movie along very well. Quite possibly Wright’s best scene, performance wise, is when she’s watching TV and she sees something that if I said it, would spoil some of the movie for you.

One of the biggest shockers for me in this movie is that Jayma Mays is in it. You may know her from “Glee,” a show which I actually never saw and it’s also a show I personally don’t want to see in the near future. However I have seen Mays in other movies which critically, were spat in their faces. I’ve seen Mays in 2009’s “Paul Blart: Mall Cop” and 2011’s “The Smurfs.” “Paul Blart: Mall Cop” is a guilty pleasure of mine, but I’ll mention to you I live near the shopping centers where this movie was shot. As far as “The Smurfs” goes, that might have been the worst movie I’ve seen to have released in 2011, now keep in mind, I haven’t seen “The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Part 1” or “Jack and Jill” so before you comment below, think wisely. Speaking of surprises, Jayma Mays probably gave the best performance in the entire flick. I honestly want to see her nominated for Best Supporting Actress when the Oscar season comes up. She plays Dana Sibota, the Assistant Attorney General of Arkansas, so when you go see this movie and it’s about halfway done, look forward to this character.

One thing that didn’t surprise me but I imagine could surprise some people who haven’t heard much about this movie is that at times, it’s funny. Now it’s not hilarious, it’s not like “The Hangover” or “Anchorman” or anything like that, nothing slapstick, it’s just rather comedic at times. I was watching one of the TV ads for this movie, it shows a plane crash, and Tom Cruise is talking to this guy on a lawn, and that actually turned out to be the part of the movie where I laughed the most.

In the end, “American Made” is worth checking out. I’m aware that awards season is around the corner, and I do hope this does get nominated in a couple categories: Best Supporting Actress for Jayma Mays’s performance, Best Cinematography, and Best Sound Editing, although in that aspect I don’t really think it stands a chance against “Dunkirk,” which basically turned the entire auditorium into a war zone. The replay value for this movie personally is a little low, and there are some characters that don’t really stand out as much as others, but all in all I had a good time watching this movie. I’m gonna give “American Made” a 7/10. Thanks for reading this review, next weekend I’m hoping to go see “Blade Runner: 2049,” the sequel to what is considered one of the greatest sci-fi films ever made, I can already tell it’s gonna be great just based on reviews, so I can’t wait. I’m also hoping to see “Stronger” which stars Jake Gyllenhaal as a man partially affected by the Boston Marathon bombings. Also, if you’ve got Tom Cruise fever right now, I’ll leave some reviews for movies that have Tom Cruise in them, feel free to take a gander, they are worth reading. Stay tuned for more reviews! Also, what is your favorite movie with planes in them? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

“THE LAST SAMURAI” REVIEW: https://scenebefore.wordpress.com/2017/09/11/the-last-samurai-2003-not-a-perfect-blossom-but-not-a-bad-one-either/

“RISKY BUSINESS” REVIEW: https://scenebefore.wordpress.com/2017/09/18/risky-business-there-is-no-substitute/

“THE FIRM” REVIEW: https://scenebefore.wordpress.com/2017/09/25/the-firm-1993-lifes-a-mitch/

Sharknado 5: Global Swarming: Another Attempt at Jumping the Shark

You know what I’m afraid of? Sharks. You know what I’m also afraid of? I’m afraid of the “Sharknado” franchise and what it is doing to the movie-viewers of our world! These movies just keep on coming out even though they just plain suck! Now that we have five of these, I have yet another crapfest to suffer through!

mv5bmjq3mzk5nzawnv5bml5banbnxkftztgwndkwotc3mji-_v1_

So… it’s come to this. “Sharknado 5: Global Swarming” is directed by Anthony Ferrante, who also directed the first four “Sharknado” installments. This movie stars Ian Ziering (Beverly Hills, 90210, Godzilla: The Series), Tara Reid (The Big Lebowski, American Pie), Dolph Lundgren (The Expendables, Universal Soldier), and Cassandra Scerbo (Make It or Break It, Not Another Not Another Movie). I could tell you that this movie is about stupidity and leave at that, but since I attempt to put a lot of effort into my reviews, perhaps more than various films I watch, I’ll dive into the plot. The plot is that the whole shark-tornado phenomenon has gone global. This all starts in the city of London, where our heroes are meeting with NATO, unfortunately for Ian Ziering and Tara Reid’s characters, they lose their son, Gil. Now in order to save him, they must travel into a sharknado (laughs).

I’ve watched multiple installments of “Sharknado” before, in fact I’ve actually reviewed “Sharknado 4: The Forth Awakens” when that came out. What did I think of that movie? Well, it was a piece of s*it. And you know something? The same can be said about “Global Swarming.” “Sharknado” is a franchise I know a number of people like… for some reason. They know it’s cheesy, they know it’s bad, but they still enjoy it. What do I think? I can’t stand it. To me, “Sharknado,” as far as movies on TV go, is like the “Transformers” franchise when it comes to movies you see in the theater. Only difference is that I can find enjoyment out of “Transformers.” Although when I saw the fifth one, I was kind of just done with it. Now that we have FIVE “Sharknados,” I’m just BEGGING to Syfy to just bury it in the ground. I get this is a TV film and it’s kind of meant to be cheesy, but there’s so much that is happening, so much that I complained about while watching this crap that it literally destroyed my mind afterward. Down below I have an actual tweet from my account that I posted last night, moments after finishing “Sharknado 5.”

Also, I livetweeted through this s*itfest, much like a great portion of people who own a TV, here’s some of my tweets:

Want to watch this movie? If you said no, I wouldn’t blame you. Anyway, let’s talk about the characters. That is if, they’re actually characters, to me they’re really just people written, I’m sorry, I mean, SCRIBBLED on a page for the sake of making a so-called story.

We’ll start off by talking about April, played by Tara Reid, one of the only positives in the entire movie, and possibly the franchise, only because she’s hot. Although then again, saying that is almost like saying that I’m dating the best girlfriend in the world because she’s the best looking woman I found on, I don’t know, Tinder or something, and she’s great at sex. But in reality, my girlfriend has no personality, just sex appeal. Well I guess my girlfriend’s actually not that great then. Other than that, I don’t care about her, I can’t really relate to her, I just literally wanted every character in this film to die. Although one plus I can give April is that she didn’t ruin the “Star Wars” line “May the force be with you,” once more. All the other things I remember about her character is that she is basically an 80’s humanoid at one point, and she does all sorts of shark-killing s*it. What else is there to remember? Oh my gosh, I’m GETTING A HEADACHE WHILE WRITING THIS REVIEW! I DON’T THINK I’M KIDDING WHEN I SAY THAT! Then again you can’t see me, so, what do I know, what do you know, what does anyone know?

Let’s get to stupid character #2 and talk about Fin Shepard, played by Ian Ziering. I barely recall anything he did in this movie much like April. I just remember he was there for shark killing, he was looking for his son, and I also remember him at the end. I SWEAR to you, this movie is ultra-forgettable. It’s RARE for me to actually forget about a movie shortly after I see it. When the movie’s two leads are barely even memorable other than their names, that’s a problem. And I’ve seen every “Sharknado” movie. THAT’S A FACT. I watched the first one, I saw the sequel but it was being riffed by Rifftrax, I saw the third one but it was more of something that was just on in the background, I don’t really recall that much, I witnessed, livetweeted, and reviewed the fourth one, and now I saw this monstrosity. Also, one of the things I hated the most about this film is this line he gives to the pope, “Forgive father, for I am Fin.” I lost my mind when I heard that crap!

Also returning in “Sharknado 5” we have the character of Nova, played by Cassandra Scerbo. I remember her more in the first minutes of the original “Sharknado” compared to “Sharknado 5” so that says something you need to know about this character. Once again, I barely remember anything about Nova, I don’t care about her, and I was just like, why are all of these people I’m tweeting alongside with obsessed with her? Is it because of how hot she looked in the first movie when she was in her bathing suit? By that logic, Nicola Peltz’s character from “Transformers: Age of Extinction” must be a phenomenal character because she’s a 10/10 when it comes to looks, even though she didn’t give a good performance.

Last but not least when it comes to “characters,” we’re gonna focus on Gil. I don’t have an image for him, couldn’t find too many likable ones, so bear with me. I HATE GIL. I thought he was just plain annoying in “Sharknado 4” but now that we’re somehow here in “Sharknado 5,” he’s gone from bad to worse. While he wasn’t technically as annoying as he was in the installment before this new one, he played a huge part in the movie, which ultimately made me not root for anybody in. He got sucked into a sharknado, and now it is up to April and Fin to save him. I may be a dick for saying this, but seriously, after hearing this kid squeal in the last movie I was just done with him, I was like, “Goodbye kid, I don’t need you no more.” Although when it was revealed that April and Fin were going to try saving him, I lost my s*it. Sure, it’s their kid, but that kid f*cked up my brain in the worst way possible!

Another reason why people watch these films are the celebrity cameos. And while they aren’t really cringeworthy, you can’t help but think, “Why are they here?” You’re seeing all of these people: Claudia Jordan (Deal or no Deal, The Price is Right), Abby Lee Miller (Dance Moms), Fabio, and Tony Hawk, how much are they being paid? Are they being forced to do this against their will? The only cameo I ended up liking and remembering was Gilbert Gottfried’s, which was one of the cameos, if not the only cameo I ended up liking in the fourth movie. Although after seeing this movie, I’m glad I can think to myself that Gottfried is still putting out quality content and not just this stuff. Seriously! Have you seen a couple of this year’s episodes of “Last Week Tonight?” His voice is dubbed over the voice of Jared Kushner!

Let’s get this out of the way. Two things I hate in life are Comcast and product placement. This movie, unfortunately, combines the two together. This is actually, believe it or not, something that occurred in “Sharknado 4,” and seeing it here, it’s actually not as bad here as it was there. In fact, if I remember correctly, I believe there’s less product placement in this movie than the previous one. Although when it comes to Xfinity at the end of the film, the film began to make me screech like a fire alarm. I get it Syfy, you’re owned by NBCUniversal, a Comcast company, doesn’t change the fact I think this is s*itty product placement and it makes me angry!

In the end, “Sharknado 5: Global Swarming” continues to make me lose my faith in humanity. We’ve created masterpieces such as “The Wizard of Oz,” “Back to the Future,” “Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory,” now this is the entertainment that people want. I want more quality content, I don’t care what it is, just give it to me! At least “Jaws” listened to viewers and knew when to stop making movies, they stopped at four installments, this series is still going, and it’s gonna keep going until the end of time… (Sigh). One last complaint I have before I give my final verdict is the screaming. I get it, it’s a sharknado, but this movie didn’t learn it’s lesson from the last movie and to not give a headache to its audience from the screaming. Surprisingly, Tara Reid gave an annoying scream. I couldn’t believe what I was watching. I don’t watch “Game of Thrones,” but I was watching this, and I knew someone else on Twitter who was watching this too, at one point they changed the channel to HBO to watch “Game of Thrones,” I imagine they made the right choice. I’m gonna give “Sharknado 5: Global Swarming” a 1/10. “Sharknado,” I need you to learn from the pros, although I don’t think you’ll listen to me because you’re a TV movie, know when to settle down. Joel Schumacher’s “Batman” series stopped after a couple of installments, the older “Superman” movies stopped at “Superman IV: The Quest for Peace,” “Back to the Future” stopped as a trilogy, take notes. Just let your series become obscure enough for no one to ever have to experience again, and we shall have peace. Thanks for reading this review, I kind of hope I’d watch a better movie after watching “The Emoji Movie” recently, but what can you do? Although if you do want to check out my review for “The Emoji Movie” be sure to click the link down below and check it out! Also, if you’re somehow into “Sharknado” or you just want to see me talk about more bad movies, be sure to check out my review for “Sharknado 4: The Fourth Awakens.” It’s been over a year since I reviewed that piece of crap and the fact that it exists, much like the movie we’re focusing on, is a sin in itself. Stay tuned for more reviews! I want to know, what do you think of this movie? Do you like the “Sharknado” franchise? Do you think I’m being too hard on it? Let me know in the comments! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

“THE EMOJI MOVIE” REVIEW: https://scenebefore.wordpress.com/2017/08/02/the-emoji-movie-2017-a-literal-pile-of-sir-patrick-stewart-warning-strong-language/

“SHARKNADO 4: THE FOURTH AWAKENS” REVIEW: https://scenebefore.wordpress.com/2016/08/01/sharknado-4-the-fourth-awakens-may-the-absurdity-be-with-you/