Welcome To Marwen (2018): Back to the Future Part IV: A Robert Zemeckis Film

MV5BMjIxMjUwMjItMGIxYS00NTlmLTgxZTQtMzg2Yjc1ZWQ3YTYxXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyMjM4NTM5NDY@._V1_SY1000_CR006311000_AL_

“Welcome To Marwen” is directed by Robert Zemeckis (Back to the Future, Forrest Gump) and stars Steve Carell (The Office, The 40-Year-Old Virgin), Eiza González (True Love, Baby Driver), Leslie Mann (Blockers, Knocked Up), Merritt Wever (Signs, Nurse Jackie), Janelle Monáe (Hidden Figures, Moonlight), Gwendoline Christie (Star Wars: The Force Awakens, Game of Thrones), Leslie Zemeckis (The Polar Express, Beowulf), and Neil Jackson (Quantum of Solace, Abesentia). This film is about an assault victim who likes cross-dressing. The victim’s specific name is Mark Hogancamp, and after the attack, it has been revealed that his memory is not in good shape. In order to restore his memory, Hogancamp decides to build a World War II village in his yard.

I saw the trailer for “Welcome to Marwen” a while back, and even if I didn’t see the trailer, I probably would have been excited for the film no matter what. Why? Well, Robert Zemeckis is directing the film. I loved his work in numerous films including “Back to the Future,” “Who Framed Roger Rabbit?,” “The Walk,” I just think the dude has serious visionary talent when it comes to crafting a film. “Welcome to Marwen,” on paper, is no exception to this notion. The film manages to focus on the real life events of Mark Hogancamp while simultaneously giving a nearly animated look at his dolls. So in a way, you can also call this the live action version of “Toy Story.”

If you want my short thoughts on the film right away, I’ll be honest, I really f*cking enjoyed it. In fact, I have to say it’s one of the year’s best films, but to be completely honest it is not for everyone. When I say that, I don’t mean that in a way that is sort of related to the movie showing mature content or giving viewers scares or anything, but there is something in this movie that I noticed, but when I went on social media, it kind of got an uplift in terms of how it was addressed.

Without spoiling anything, Steve Carell’s character has a certain “attachment” if you will to his dolls. I have a feeling some will consider it cute, some will consider it creepy. I am on the side that finds this to be cute. But if you really want to know if I have problems with the film itself, I only really have one thing that I think I can address, and it’s kind of in the nitpick territory.

“Welcome to Marwen” is based on a true story, and I haven’t looked much into said story or watched the documentary from which this movie adapts, so I don’t know how much is altered. Although there is one story that applies to the dolls, I won’t go into detail about it, it could be possible that Hogancamp came up with bits and pieces of the story at the very least, and it involves time travel. The dolls are supposed to go into the future by 15 lightyears. The fact is, I have to be Mr. Movie Reviewing Moron and point out that lightyears are a unit of distance and not time. A lightyear is nearly six trillion miles. If this were fiction, I’d probably be a bit more harsh when it comes to this film, especially if it were a movie specifically revolving around time travel, but I still couldn’t help but point this out.

The reason why I love “Welcome to Marwen” so much not only has to do with visuals, characterization, directing, anything like that, but it also has to do with the fact that this is a story about storytelling. A good portion of the movie focuses on the CGI world of dolls. It partially helps us in understanding who exactly our main character is, not to mention, who he wants to be. Not only was the world immersive, engaging, and charming, the doll characters are also a delight. They have this vibe to them that makes you want to hang out with them, or at least one that makes you think they can protect you. And in total honesty, the last time I saw some sort of concept similar to the style executed in “Welcome to Marwen” is probably… …well, I don’t know. If they ever make a live action “Toy Story,” I’d remind Disney and Pixar “Welcome to Marwen” beat them to it.

Speaking of this world, this is also responsible for many of my personal surprises in the movie. This is technically a vision where dolls can talk, but I didn’t expect the badassery out of some of the action scenes which were given to me here! In fact, there are times, when this movie, despite being PG-13 and not R, goes for dark violence. There is a scene in the movie where a doll splits in half! There is also a scene where a doll falls into a fence, and the top of the fence is going through its body like a sword!

Before we discuss Steve Carell’s character of Mark Hogancamp, I would just like to say that this year has been interesting for a couple cast members of “The Office.” You have two transitions from a couple of actors who were once comedy-oriented and now they’re trying to get more serious. You have John Krasinski who did “A Quiet Place” and you also have Steve Carell who was in “Beautiful Boy,” “Vice,” and this movie. Also, when it comes to Carell I gotta say, the dude can act. I was able to buy this character and see him for the way he was. He manages to deliver certain mannerisms that made me feel for his character. If I were to make a comparison, if you have ever seen “Anchorman” and you wanted a more serious version of his character in that, with perhaps ten times the depth provided to his character in that movie, this is the flick for you.

The other real highlight in this movie for me in terms of characters is the one played by Leslie Mann, specifically Nicol. Yes, there is no “e” in her name. Mann’s character in this film is someone who not only has a story of her own, but manages to play quite a bit into the story of Hogancamp as well. There is a scene in this film that was extremely well acted by both Carell and Mann, and no matter what you think of it in terms of realism, I thought it was very well done.

When it comes to all of the dolls Hogancamp owns, each one manages to have its own story, which I really liked. They are not just pieces of plastic that Hogancamp plays with. In fact, his own doll even helps explain the story of him getting beat up for cross-dressing. If you had to ask me personally, I have no interest in cross-dressing, but for those of you who do, that’s your thing and I don’t care, I’m not gonna straight up attack you over it. The film does a great job at making you side with someone because they were attacked for something they wore. If they wore a t-shirt that said “EVERYONE DESERVES TO DIE,” that’s a different scenario, but nevertheless, this film succeeds.

I also will say one thing about this movie, it’s directed by Robert Zemeckis, director of “Back to the Future.” The thing about “Welcome to Marwen” that I want to talk about has to do with my recent nitpick. One of the gadgets that plays into the story of the dolls in the movie is a time machine, and it nearly resembles a Delorean. So if you guys want to see Robert Zemeckis direct another “Back to the Future” movie, this is the closest you’re going to get.

In the end, I LOVED “Welcome to Marwen!” Is this a movie for everyone? From the way it is marketed, almost. It’s not for kids, there’s some serious s*it that goes down in the movie. But I wouldn’t say that I’d recommend this movie for every single audience. But for ME, and ME PERSONALLY, I ate this movie up. It sort of blends “Toy Story,” “The Secret Life of Walter Mitty,” and “Back to the Future.” This film might be an Oscar contender, but I don’t think it’s gonna make much money though. Aside how this film is seemingly going to be divisive in terms of criticism, it is competing against “Aquaman,” “Bumblebee,” “Mary Poppins Returns,” and “Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse,” but if you want to support an artistic vision, this is for you. I have no idea how long this is going to last, and I’m sorry for saying this based on how many reviews are trashing on this movie, I’m going to give “Welcome to Marwen” a 10/10! This is probably one of those scenarios where my unbelievably crazy opinion is going to stand out from a lot of other people. So you know what? In celebration of absurdity, let’s talk about some other unique film opinions I have.

  • ANIMAL HOUSE WAS BORING!
  • MAD MAX: FURY ROAD IS NOT AS GOOD AS EVERYONE SAID!
  • I ENJOYED PAUL BLART 1 & 2!
  • GROWN UPS 2 IS NOT JUST BETTER THAN THE ORIGINAL, IT’S ACTUALLY A GOOD FILM!
  • I LIKED CARS 2!
  • REVENGE OF THE SITH IS THE BEST STAR WARS MOVIE!
  • I LIKED A COUPLE OF LIVE-ACTION TRANSFORMERS FLICKS (1 & 3)!
  • I LOVE TIM BURTON’S CHARLIE & THE CHOCOLATE FACTORY!
  • FANT4STIC WAS BAD, BUT NOT AS BAD AS EVERYONE MAKES IT OUT TO BE!
  • GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY VOL. 2 IS NOT GOOD!
  • THOR: RAGNAROK IS OVERRATED!
  • THE HOBBIT MOVIES HAVE A PURPOSE IN SOCIETY!
  • OZ THE GREAT AND POWERFUL MIGHT MATCH THE ORIGINAL WIZARD OF OZ IN TERMS OF QUALITY!
  • I LIKED VALERIAN AND THE CITY OF A THOUSAND PLANETS!
  • I HATED WE BOUGHT A ZOO!
  • PITCH PERFECT IS ONE OF THE WORST COMEDIES I’VE EVER SEEN!
  • DISNEY NEEDS TO STOP THE TREND OF THEIR LIVE ACTION REMAKES DESPITE HOW BEAUTIFUL THEY SOMETIMES MANAGE TO APPEAR!
  • BLACK PANTHER IS OVERRATED!
  • IRON MAN 3 IS MY FAVORITE IRON MAN MOVIE!
  • SPIDER-MAN 3 WAS AWESOME!

So there you go. In the comments section, I want to know a few things. Did you enjoy “Welcome to Marwen?” Not everyone has seen it yet, but still. Also, what are some controversial or odd opinions you have about movies? Your full honesty is absolutely appreciated. Thanks for reading this review! This weekend is a pretty big one for movies, and maybe I’ll catch one of the films that come out on Christmas weekend. The one I want to see, aside from ones that could have potential at winning an Oscar, is “Aquaman.” After all, if I do so, it’ll mean I’ll have given my thoughts on every major comic book movie this year. Be sure to follow Scene Before either with an email or WordPress account so you can stay tuned for more great content! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

The Grinch (2018): Two Sizes Too Small In Quality

mv5byme5yjg0mzktyzgzmi00ytfilwjjytity2m5mmi1odi4mdy3xkeyxkfqcgdeqxvymtmxodk2otu-_v1_sy1000_cr006311000_al_

“The Grinch” is directed by Yarrow Cheney (The Secret Life of Pets) and Scott Mosier (Clerks). This movie stars Benedict Cumberbatch (Star Trek: Into Darkness, Sherlock) as the title character who hates Christmas and everything associated with the holiday. There have been multiple on-screen adaptations of Dr. Seuss’ children’s book, and now Illumination (Despicable Me, Sing) has attempted to create their own version of the famous story.

One strange thing about my life is how I have no memory of seeing the Jim Carrey adaptation of “How the Grinch Stole Christmas!”, despite how it released a year after I was born. However, I do recall watching the rather well known animated edition which took the drawing style of Seuss himself. That version was short, sweet, and very much got the point across. The Grinch is a dick and shall never be tolerated. In this new, slightly more lighthearted adaptation of the popular children’s story, The Grinch is a bit more relatable than his 1966 on-screen counterpart voiced by Boris Karloff. And to be honest, when it comes to tone, that’s where this movie sometimes fails. I know it’s a kids movie and kids movies are supposed to be less frightening than some made for adults, but I really wanted a darker tone here. I will say though, some of the music in this film, created by Danny Elfman (Spider-Man, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory) actually matches that dark tone I want from a movie like this.

However, with 2018’s “The Grinch,” we get less of an emphasis of The Grinch as a monster and make him more like Squidward Tentacles from “Spongebob Squarepants.” He despises life, he lives without wanting company, and much like Squidward, hates Christmas. There’s some parts of this new Grinch that totally work. For example, Benedict Cumberbatch seems to make the Grinch his own character. If anybody can pull off The Grinch from a voice perspective, it might as well be Cumberbatch. After all, he did give one of my all time favorite voiceover performances as Smaug in “The Hobbit.” Cumberbatch comes off as depressed yet sinister, which I can tell is what the crew behind “The Grinch” was going for. Although despite mastering this Grinch, I gotta say that it didn’t equate to a quality movie. I know the formula for family movies nowadays is to inject as many silly gags as possible while still maintaining a lesson for children, and the movie does succeed at both things. However when it comes to the silly gags, some of these just felt off-putting, awkward, or just forgettable. I remember explicitly putting my hand on my head in disdain during certain parts of the film. I don’t recall which parts, but that brings two negatives to the table. Maybe a positive because now I don’t have to recall what moments made me dissatisfied. There’s this one moment during the first half of the film where The Grinch is in preparation mode, his dog notices him, and we get a shot with The Grinch’s butt going directly in our face. Keep in mind, I saw “The Grinch” in IMAX. The screen was eight stories high. So I got to see eight stories of The Grinch’s ass right in my face (including black bars, which reduces the size a ton in all technicality)! At least it wasn’t in 3D, that would be worse!

One side of the story that I honestly cannot stand involves a family in Whoville. This family has a heavy involvement with the film’s plot and even triggers in a couple of other Whos. The main thing I want to bring up is the relationship between a mother (Donna Who) and a daughter (Cindy-Loo Who). Both actresses behind these roles (Rashida Jones and Cameron Seely) did a fine job with their performances. My problem doesn’t involve their acting abilities. The big problem however is their chemistry. I know this is a kids movie. I know kids are a target audience. But keep in mind, adults are watching these films too. Who do you think happens to be taking the kids to these movies? As a technical adult at 19 years of age, I honestly felt like some of my intelligence was insulted. I can suspend my disbelief during movies. I enjoy the “Fast & Furious” franchise, and there’s a lot of other animations that wouldn’t work in the real world which I happen to admire. There are some things however, regardless of whether they are written to be animated or put into live-action, in this very movie, that I thought were an insult as soon as I saw them. The chemistry between the mother and daughter is one of those things. The mother came off as this individual who seems to know she has a daughter, but it’s like she’s viewing her as someone she doesn’t even need to protect. Keep in mind, based on her IMDb profile, I can definitely tell Cameron Seely, the voice of Cindy-Loo, is younger than me. Wouldn’t the mother be a little more worried about some of the things she does? That’s not the only suspension of disbelief I couldn’t achieve, I also couldn’t buy into the fact that one character in particular, without giving a name away, was able to find The Grinch’s house without really knowing a thing about him or where he lives. And if you think about it, it’s somewhat easy to find, but still, my complaint stands. Maybe I missed something earlier on in the movie, but when you’re in an auditorium with somebody who literally had their tablet on for pretty much the entire first half of the film, you can get distracted at times. And yes, I said TABLET. NOT A PHONE! A TABLET! And even worse, there was lots of time wasted when the kid using the device and not even doing a thing on it! It was just on the home screen! If it were being used as a closed captioning device then that’s a different story (not sure how the technology works entirely).

Let’s also talk about Kenan Thompson (Snakes On a Plane, Saturday Night Live) in this film.

What the f*ck?

His character might be the biggest stereotype for a black person I’ve seen in a film since Patty from the “Ghostbusters” remake. My f*cking gosh, I HATED this guy! One of the worst casting decisions I’ve seen in my entire life. Kenan Thompson is not a bad actor, I’ve seen him do some fine roles on “SNL.” He’s especially fantastic as Steve Harvey on all of the show’s “Family Feud” parodies. But I feel like the biggest problem with this role is that I could especially tell that Kenan Thompson’s voice is involved. Thompson has such a recognizable voice in my mind that out of every voice given in the movie, his was the most obvious. I knew Benedict Cumberbatch was playing The Grinch before going to see the movie, but had I not seen any stories or marketing related to this film, I could potentially think to myself, “Wait, that was Benedict Cumberbatch?” Kenan Thompson to my knowledge cannot alter his voice enough to make me think he’s playing someone other than himself. Part of me is willing to bet the people casting everyone into the movie wanted to cast Kenan Thompson just to say they’ve put a black guy in the film. And that is sad, because while it does bring diversity to the table, his performance just blows! The narrator for this film is black as well (Pharrell Williams). As a narrator, I felt like his voice didn’t work entirely, but it could have been worse. You know, it could have been Kenan Thompson. I’m guessing Morgan Freeman wasn’t available to narrate this bitch?

I’ll give some credit to the movie though on a few positives before I give my final verdict. This film is very well animated. It comes off as polished and some of the images from the film are some of the better ones I’ve witnessed from Illumination. Some of the voice acting worked, except for of course, Kenan Thompson. And this movie is short enough to avoid inducing a feeling of a snail’s pace. After all, it is only an hour and a half, which can be a good thing because of what I just mentioned, but to me it also makes this movie feel like even more of a cash grab than it already is. I don’t feel like I’m going to remember this “Grinch” adaptation all that much, and maybe it will be played a lot around Christmastime in years to come. Heck, “Christmas with the Kranks” is going to be on FX during the 24th of this month and the reviews of that movie certainly weren’t praising it. Anything’s possible.

In the end, “The Grinch” is certainly a mean one, and it made me feel like a Scrooge. If this movie does one thing well, it’s making The Grinch’s character relatable. Sure, he hates his life sometimes even though life for him is the complete opposite of pain and suffering. Yes, he might be out of shape. But thanks to this movie, it made me hate Christmas a little bit more than I once did! Because now we have another bad Christmas movie! Kids who watch “The Grinch” might enjoy it, but the film might end up making them dumber without said kids even realizing such a thing. Aside from some neat animation and decent voicework, there’s nothing that stands out or appears to be excellent regarding “The Grinch.” Parents, if your kids drag you this movie, do them a favor and put coal in their stocking on Christmas morning. Please? Also, tell them Santa isn’t real. I’m going to give “The Grinch” a 3/10. Thanks for reading this review! Tomorrow night I’m going to see “Second Act,” which comes out on December 21st, a little over a month from the time I’m finishing this post. I got passes for an early screening of the film, so therefore I’m gonna see “Second Act” a month early. My review will most likely be up sometime around December. Also, while I don’t really know my plans for the rest of the week or this upcoming weekend, I do have aspirations to see the new Julius Avery film “Overlord.” I heard “Overlord” flopped this weekend, so this might affect me even being able seeing it in the theater, but if it’s still there this next weekend, I should hopefully have an opportunity to check it out. Plus, I’m too behind on “Harry Potter” to see the new “Fantastic Beasts” movie. Be sure to follow me on Scene Before either with a WordPress account or an email so you can stay tuned for more great content! I want to know, did you see “The Grinch?” What did you think about it? Or, which on-screen adaptation of “How the Grinch Stole Christmas!” is your personal favorite? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Marrowbone (2018): Crossing the Line Into An Unmemorable Horrorland

mv5bmza5ndm1mjmznl5bml5banbnxkftztgwnduymta4ndm-_v1_sy1000_cr006651000_al_

“Marrowbone” is directed by Sergio G. Sánchez and stars George MacKay, Anya Taylor-Joy, Charlie Heaton, Mia Goth, and Matthew Stagg in a movie that starts as every happy-go-lucky story does, with the mother dying immediately. This mother’s death now leaves four children varying in age to take care of themselves. At the same time, this death has to remain in secret. If the secret gets out to the town lawyer, Tom Porter (Kyle Soller), it’ll be revealed that the new caretaker, Jack, the oldest of the children, has nobody in his home that is over the age of 21. This gives the alert that Jack, is illegally taking care of his younger siblings. That’s not all, because throughout the movie, they have to deal with a monster inside the house.

I bought this movie for $15 during my time at New York Comic Con, so why not watch it? Going into the flick, I was somewhat intrigued as to what I was about to see. I am not a complete and total stranger to the studio behind this movie, Magnolia Pictures, although in this case the studio label is Magnet. They made a movie that came out earlier in the decade, “Grand Piano,” starring Elijah Wood (Lord of the Rings, Happy Feet) and John Cusack (Better Off Dead, Say Anything), which I wholeheartedly admired. Naturally, while I wasn’t expecting to compare this movie to “Grand Piano” (different genres, different crew, etc), I did have some faith in Magnolia because their name is not as prominent as Disney or Sony, which for the most part, seems to be all about the money as opposed to quality. They operate on the more independent side of the spectrum, much like another prominent studio, which I honestly probably like a lot better than Magnolia, A24.

Another thing to consider is how good 2018’s movies have been so far, specifically in the horror genre. “A Quiet Place” came out in April and it was one of the most innovative horror flicks I’ve seen. What John Krasinski was able to do not only with as someone who had little materials to work with, but also as a first-time director is astounding to me. My favorite horror film of the year however, has to be, coincidentally, an A24 film. To be specific, “Hereditary.” Toni Collette better be nominated for an Academy Award, the cinematography was stylistically successful, and it is a truly wild ride.

“Marrowbone” is not as good as those two films.

Before the crew sends their pitchforks flying in the air, all the way to my house, let me just state, it’s good.

One of “Marrowbone’s” biggest strengths comes from the cast. The chemistry between all of the children is extremely believable, there’s even some chemistry between one couple I was able to buy into, and as far as everyone’s general acting ability goes, a job well done is in order.

Another aspect I totally found myself getting into was the score. It’s been days since I watched the film from start to finish, but it somewhat reminded me at times of what Howard Shore did for “Lord of the Rings.” Since I seem to be spitballing Shore’s name right now, I’ll also give a shoutout to Fernando Velázquez for creating the excellent score for this very film. The score also manages to accommodate the stellar cinematography, most notably the land shots. Will this receive any Best Cinematography awards during the upcoming season? Hard to tell, this movie didn’t make much money during its limited release and it is not even out on digital yet.

When it comes to the main characters, the oldest of the siblings goes by the name of Jack. He is the one responsible for hiding the family secret throughout the whole runtime. While there are moments in the movie where I do side with him, while there are moments where I do root for him, there’s also this thought that I’m currently having in my mind that is trying to get me to gather all of my other thoughts about him. Jack is a likable, although slightly unmemorable character. Then again, it’s not as easy for him to stand out when you have a young kid in the mix who occasionally serves as comic relief.

By the way, that young kid’s name is Sam and he is played by Matthew Stagg. Out of everyone in the film, I gotta say that he delivers the best performance. No, he is not the next Jacob Tremblay, he is not the next great child actor to be remembered for eternity (might need to see more work before my ultimate verdict on that though). I also got to give credit to the writing for the movie because some of the character’s most notable lines are pretty much what the audience might as well be thinking. He is curious, he is suggestive, and he is charming. Having seen Matthew Stagg perform as this character, I can’t imagine anyone else playing him.

Also, I can’t go without mentioning that this is a horror movie and there are supposed to be some scares in this thing. The scares are there, but I feel like maybe they could have been taken up a slight notch. I wasn’t really genuinely terrified by what I’ve witnessed. However I must say I will say that the monster this movie seems to heavily revolve around is very well done special effects-wise. Nice work! The scares are not horrible, but they are also not as memorable or outstanding as I’d hope they’d be.

In the end, I don’t really have much else to say about “Marrowbone” because everything else I really do have to say is in spoiler territory, and if I actually had the ability to remember more of the movie, I would be talking about it more. Again, it’s not a terrible movie. It could be some decent background noise on Halloween, but there’s not really much more credit I can give to it other than that. Well, maybe except the production value, that is excellent. Also, I must say, another factor that makes me think this is worth a second viewing is that there is a 4K Blu-ray for this. By the way, I used that for my review. So I guess that copy is a hearty $15 well spent. Perhaps this movie would also get the same verdict I gave to live-action “Ghost in the Shell” last year. It’s not a fantastic movie, but if you want a movie that can show off a new giant TV, this wouldn’t be a bad pick. Especially when you consider there’s a 4K edition of it available. Maybe part of my lack of remembrance towards “Marrowbone” has to do with my review coming days after seeing the movie, as opposed many of my other reviews which traditionally are posted in much less time compared to when I finished the movie. So in that case, maybe some human error applies to this. I’m going to give “Marrowbone” a 6/10. I have a strong feeling this grade could go up in the future during a potential rewatch, but for now, this verdict stands. But still, going back to the beginning, 2018 has been one of the best years for movies I’ve ever seen. By far the best year for movies since I started Scene Before. The good movies this year have certainly outweighed the bad. There were a number of all timers like “Avengers: Infinity War” and “Won’t You Be My Neighbor?.” Even some of the stinkers this year couldn’t rival some of my worst movies of the past couple of years. Maybe “The Hurricane Heist” sucked, but it was certainly better than “The Space Between Us.” Melissa McCarthy’s “Life of the Party” took every ounce of life I had and set it on fire, but it was not as bad as that 2016 “Ghostbusters” movie she starred in. “Marrowbone” is a slightly forgettable movie, but it still gets a 6 from me. Well done.

rhodeisland_comiccon_november2018_eventimage_600x280-copy-24e2513026

Thanks for reading this review! I just want to say to everyone reading this that I wish you all a Happy Halloween and good luck avoiding teepees, eggs, and most importantly, police officers telling your kids they are too old to trick or treat. Speaking of treats, this weekend I’ll be my making 4th annual trip to Rhode Island Comic Con, and I’ll be documenting all of the craziness that is bound to go down. I should also have you all know that it is my birthday weekend, so hopefully, I can beg somebody to give a free autograph or photo. Cons are not cheap! Also, there’s a movie theater not far from me in the area, so if I have the time, maybe I’ll catch something there. I’m well aware that this weekend is the release of “Bohemian Rhapsody,” one of my most anticipated movies of the fall. And no, I’m not reviewing “The Nutcracker and the Four Realms” (depending on how many requests I end up getting)! Maybe if I want to torture myself I will do such a thing, but for now, I’m staying away! Be sure to follow Scene Before with a WordPress account or email so you can stay tuned for more great content! I want to know, did you see “Marrowbone?” What did you think about it? Or, since it is Halloween, what is your favorite horror movie? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

First Man (2018): One Giant Spacegasm

mv5bywfhzgvjmtatzdcwmc00yty3ltljywutnzriodzlowfknjezxkeyxkfqcgdeqxvymjmxote0oda-_v1_sy1000_cr006311000_al_

“First Man” is directed by Damien Chazelle (Whiplash, La La Land) and stars Ryan Gosling (Blade Runner 2049, The Notebook) as Neil Armstrong. This movie takes place during the events of Apollo 11, the most famous of the Apollo missions. Many people going to see this movie probably know the story, Neil Armstrong and some other astronauts attempt to land on the moon, but this movie explains a little bit more than that. It goes into the personal and family life of Neil Armstrong, and shows off all the preparation that went into executing such a daring mission.

I don’t know if many people reading this remember, or even knew when this movie was first announced, but my first time hearing about it was around January 2017 if I recall correctly. As if the concept alone of the moon landing was interesting enough, it was to be helmed by one of my favorite directors working today, Damien Chazelle.

Damien Chazelle is known for his work on “Whiplash,” but in my eyes, his popularity skyrocketed during the release of “La La Land.” That movie is a 2016 musical which went on to win 7 Golden Globes, which also happened to be the total number of awards the movie happened to be nominated for. Speaking of awards, the movie went on to receive 13 Oscar nominations, 6 wins, which doesn’t happen to include the rare instance of the kinda sorta maybe victory of Best Picture. So kids, if you are reading this and think that your dream will never come true, if you think you’ll never be able to colonize Mars one day, just remember this. Two films were labeled Best Picture at the 89th Academy Awards!

When it comes to “First Man,” this is actually a really interesting movie though because out of all the feature-length films Damien Chazelle has done as a director, this is actually the first one he doesn’t have a screenplay credit for. Granted, this movie was actually written by Josh Singer, who also wrote the screenplay for 2015’s “Spotlight,” which won Best Picture at the Academy Awards. Even so, the fact that this was not written by Chazelle himself made me slightly worried. I was beginning to wonder if I didn’t like this movie, it might partially lead to me thinking Chazelle is another Brad Bird. He’s a fantastic director, but only fantastic when it comes to directing his own material. Having seen this movie, that worry is meaningless, because I’ll be honest with you, this is one of the best movies I’ve seen all year. In fact, when putting Chazelle into the conversation, it’s my second favorite film of his directly behind “Whiplash.”

Just about everything in “First Man” worked. The acting, the directing, the score, the entertainment value, the sound work, the effects, everything just felt as if it was created by a god. I went to see “First Man” in IMAX, which I will get to, but I must say, regardless of whether or not you went to see “First Man” in IMAX, I must tell you, this is one of those films that you have to get off your ass and see in the theater. This joins some recent films like “Dunkirk,” “Blade Runner 2049,” “Avengers: Infinity War,” “Ready Player One,” and “A Quiet Place” on the list of films to watch on the big screen. What the crew did for this movie in terms of cinematography is genius.

In all honesty, part of me wonders how many people will notice or care to notice, some of the images in the movie, are incredibly fuzzy or grainy and it just feels like they were gathering dust before processing. Let me just have you know that this movie was shot on 16mm film. Most of the scenes early on in the films, that take place on Earth, looked somewhat old-timey. And I honestly thought that fit, because believe it or not, I don’t know how much you guys know about Neil Armstrong’s life, but when this movie started it was basically a soap opera. For some people, I imagine that will take them out of the movie, but to me, it fit because for one thing, you can’t alter history. It partially comes into play when developing Armstrong as a character. Also, it showcases the excellent acting ability of Ryan Gosling.

Ryan Gosling is the star of the movie and he seems to have a decent range as an actor. You can put him in a movie as a sex doll that girls will dream about. You can put him in a movie where he happens to be somewhat passionate and upbeat. And you can put him in a movie where maybe he happens to be intentionally robotic. To call Ryan Gosling my favorite actor of all time is a stretch, but he is a true force in the industry. And when it comes to his portrayal of Neil Armstrong, overall it is really good, but I have a couple minor complaints. For one thing, Neil in this movie is incredibly stoic at times. If he was as stoic in this movie as he was in real life, then whatever, then my complaint will be taken off. That’s not to say he doesn’t show any emotion at all. He’s actually seen in the beginning of the film shedding tears. It’s a great performance, but part of me wonders how much Neil Armstrong would say it’s “him” had he been alive to see this picture come to life. Ah well, where’s Buzz Aldrin when you need him? Another minor complaint I have is a bit nitpicky, but Neil Armstrong was born and raised American, and yet they cast the very idea of the “Sexy Canadian Boy” Halloween costume. Again, nitpicky. It does not however change the fact that the interpretation of Armstrong is still a top-notch performance. Plus, it’s still a pasty white dude, so it’s not like they’re trying to make Neil Armstrong a woman or black and erase history by doing so.

Speaking of minor casting issues, I also should point out that Claire Foy (Unsane, The Crown), who plays Neil’s wife, Janet, is British. Let me just point out that much like Neil Armstrong, Janet was born and raised American. It’s still a great performance and BY FAR the best one in the entire film. I really hope Foy receives a Best Actress nomination. Several scenes from her add tons of emotional weight to the film and I can imagine in a way, back in the 1960s, her character would not only encapsulate the thoughts of just herself, but those people who are out of Neil’s family who have to watch the crew go to the moon. Granted, it’s a lot worse for her, because she can lose her husband, but still.

All my complaints in this movie are legit complaints for sure, but in reality, they are easily forgivable because they fall under the classification of “minor” or “nitpicky.” One small complaint I have is something that occurs towards the end of the film that I wonder if it actually happened. Without going into spoilers, when Neil Armstrong gets to the moon, he has an object with him that happens to be very significant. As far as I’m aware, there is no concrete evidence to this happening. If it did happen, cool. But if it didn’t, maybe it added some emotion, but there would also be that part of me who thinks that shouldn’t even be in the movie.

Speaking of objects on the moon, let’s get controversial! One report that has been going around about “First Man” is that there is no scene showing the American flag being planted on the moon. As someone who witnessed this movie, let me confirm to you all, THIS IS TRUE. Many conservatives for what I know are upset about this and they’re hoping this movie fails. Based on the box office for the opening weekend, it lost big time to “A Star Is Born” and “Venom,” which retained its first place spot for the second week in a row. By the way, f*ck “Venom.” I will say though, this is kind of a spoiler, but it’s not really going to affect your viewing experience, at least I don’t think. If it’s any consolation, the American flag is shown on the moon during the film. I can understand why people would be upset about this, but honestly I don’t really care. I live in America, and this is an American achievement, but at the end of the day, “First Man” is supposed to be a film, not a propaganda piece. Also, if you like your flags so much, let me just remind you that the astronauts have American flags on their spacesuits, and there’s actually a scene where an American flag is being raised. Also, I’ll be honest, I’m glad that someone like Damien Chazelle directed this movie as opposed to someone like Michael Bay. I say that because there would be an American flag overload to the point where the planting scene would involve Neil Armstrong breaking the laws of physics, jumping into space bumping into one planet into the next like a pinball. Once that’s all done, he flies back to the moon striking the surface with the flag like Link did to Ganon in “The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker.” Also for fun, we cut to explosions happening in Russia therefore symbolizing their loss in the space race. There are reasons why I wouldn’t mind seeing the flag planted in the film, but the direction Damien Chazelle took with the movie worked very well and made me not care about seeing the planting of the American flag. The emotional journey mattered more in the end to me than seeing a country’s representation, even if I do happen to be a part of that country. Plus, you also have to consider international audiences. How will they respond to this? I don’t know. There’s always room for experimentation. Even so, I guess it is not wrong to assume that international audiences will be able to recognize the accomplishment that the US made with the moon landing, but at the same time, since it is not their accomplishment, they’d probably find the scene less relatable. I really think I should do a separate post someday on why it might be a good idea to have the planting of the American flag shown in the movie and why it might not be a good idea. Now let’s move onto…

Screenshot (362)

SPACE.

Before we actually dive into my thoughts on the space scenes, I gotta say that I saw this movie with my mother and sister. I can understand why some people would have certain complaints but one that really stuck out to me is that my mother said the movie spends too much time in space. I find this amusing because “First Man,” after all, is a space movie. I’m not saying it’s invalid, each to their own, but I thought the space time was fine. And trust me, it does spend a bit of time. Aside from focusing on Apollo 11, the movie spends some time focusing on Gemini 8. I’m willing to bet this is where my mother complained. Although I appreciated that the movie decided to include that, because this establishes not only the dangers for anyone who has to go to space, but as far as Neil Armstrong goes, he had to experience said dangers before moving onto another dangerous mission that is amazingly daring, to the point where he might never see his wife and kids again. One thing I also admire about this scene is the music, which is very reminiscent of “2001: A Space Odyssey” when they play “The Blue Danube.” ALSO, THE SOUND WORK IS TOP-NOTCH! If this movie doesn’t win best director at the Academy Awards, it better get something in the sound categories because it is something worth hearing. While the movie is great overall when it comes to sound, in fact some of it reminded me of “Gravity,” one of the best scenes when it comes to sound comes after the lunar lander touches down on the moon.

In terms of sound, cinematography, and theatricality, the walking onto the moon is definitely one of the best scenes I’ve witnessed all year in a movie. And you even get an added bonus if you see this movie in IMAX. As you can see, the crew is getting ready, opening their hatch, as they are about to see the moon outside their craft. So you get to see the camera coming out, and BOOM! Silence. Scientifically accurate for sure, but that’s not the point. The effect that lack of sound has on the scene literally dropped my jaw. And as if that’s jaw dropping enough, the lunar sequences for this movie were shot on IMAX film. So once the camera comes out of the craft, we go from the aspect ratio we’ve been seeing for the entire movie so far to full fledged, screen-covering glory. WALL TO WALL. FLOOR TO CEILING. Looking at Neil Armstrong up close makes you feel like you are an ant compared to him. The screen dominated me in that moment. The way everything plays out in that from acting, directing, and camerawork just felt like I was in a museum looking at paintings instead of a movie. And another reason why I love this IMAX transition goes back to how this movie was shot on 16mm film. Everything looks fuzzy, it was somewhat of a more unsettling time back then. This takes all depression out of the equation and we have gone from a sad movie that felt like a soap opera, to the end of an epic. It’s one of the best movie transitions I’ve seen in recent memory, and some of the all time best use of an IMAX camera that I am aware of.

I will say that a number of movies shot with an IMAX camera happen to be ones I enjoy. Take the “Transformers” movies out of the equation however. On the subject of cinematography, something happens in this movie that made me realize how awesome this movie truly was. When it comes to filmmaking, one term I’ve always hated was “shaky cam.” But there are several scenes in this movie that actually use shaky cam, and it almost made me change my mind on it entirely! Shaky cam is probably a reason why some critics aren’t massive fans of certain action movies. Aside from hiding poor stuntwork, one reason why I imagine some people use shaky cam in their movies may be to heighten tension. I can’t really recall many moments where shaky cam increased tension for me. Here in “First Man,” there’s moments where shaky cam happens to be prominent and believe it or not, I am not bashing on it. A good movie can do things that people have seen before which have been done with care and everything works. A great movie can take something that might not be your thing and change your perspective on it. While I do enjoy space movies VERY MUCH, I don’t traditionally find myself bowing down to the gods of shaky cam. Shaky cam is a reason why I find shows like “Modern Family” somewhat off-putting. I honestly don’t know if I am overrecating, I wonder how other people would react to something like this, but this is just how I felt from my experience.

In the end, I wouldn’t call “First Man” an A+, but it sure comes close. This is by far one of my favorite movies of the year, and when it comes 2018’s new releases, “First Man” is up there with “Ready Player One” as one of my favorite theater experiences. It has the potential to shoot itself up to an A+ depending on replay value or depending on how I view this movie outside the theater, but in reality, from a critical point of view, while it has some minor things to complain about, there are really no glaring errors (then again, I don’t work for NASA, so science isn’t my biggest strong suit). What Damien Chazelle did with this movie is truly something to appreciate. The cast, while not technically completely matching with their counterparts were believable and added to the movie’s overall grit. The score is appropriate for the film and perhaps something maybe I’ll listen to for motivation. While there were not really any shots to pick out to say that they were really innovative for the most part, the cinematography in “First Man” is certainly something I hope not to forget sometime in the future. Also, if you can, please, go see “First Man” in IMAX. You’ll thank me later. I’m going to give “First Man” a 9/10.

Thanks for reading this review! For those of you who read my work often, you may be aware that I’ve gone to New York Comic Con. I went almost a couple of weeks ago, and don’t worry, a post on that is coming. I just need to put it together. I’m actually going to be in a hotel room in Connecticut this weekend because I’m going to see the Impractical Jokers live, so when I have some free time, or if I choose to be a madman and stay up all night (which would be appropriate because I’m in a casino), maybe I’ll work on this post then. As far as movie reviews go, I will say that my next pick is currently undecided, maybe I’ll go see “Bad Times at the El Royale,” “Goosebumps 2: Haunted Halloween,” maybe “Night School.” A good comedy is soothing every once in a while. Seriously though, I’m almost considering going to see “First Man” again sometime soon. It’s that good. Be sure to follow me on Scene Before either with an email or WordPress account so you can stay tuned for more great content! I want to know, did you see “First Man?” What did you think about it? Or, you know what? F*ck it. Was the moon landing faked? Please comment below, I would like your honest answers, I won’t judge (maybe). Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Apollo 13 (1995): Houston, We Have a Movie Review

Hey everyone, Jack Drees here! Apologies for the slight delay on this review. My goal of this space movie review series is to do one new post in the series every Thursday. Although work (and fun) have gotten in the way, so you’re getting this on a Friday and for that, I apologize. Right now, “First Man” is in theaters everywhere, and I do have plans to review it (as long as I can get my “A Star Is Born” review up first). For those of you who are curious to know what “First Man” is about, it revolves around the moon landing and how Neil Armstrong and his family cope with the enormous difficulties of the Apollo 11 mission. Funny enough, that is not the only movie involving the moon landing I’ll be talking about this year. Another one goes by the name “Apollo 13.” Without further ado, let’s dive into the review!

mv5bztzlmtliodktzmq3mc00ytizlthknjutmdyzngexntqxzmu3xkeyxkfqcgdeqxvynjuxmjc1otm-_v1_sy1000_cr007491000_al_

“Apollo 13” is directed by Ron Howard and stars Tom Hanks (Big, Forrest Gump), Bill Paxton (Weird Science, Aliens), and Kevin Bacon (Footloose, Friday the 13th) as the trio of astronauts who go on a mission associated with the movie’s title. This is the seventh manned mission of Apollo and the third which involves an attempt to land on the moon. Based on true events, the three astronauts are onboard a ship which eventually faces damage, thus making the journey back home more difficult. It is up to NASA to help strategize a plan to get the trio back to Earth.

When it comes to the Apollo missions, the one that we mainly still talk about to this day is Apollo 11, which is getting covered in the upcoming movie, “First Man.” However another mission that got covered a while back, specifically 1995, in movie form was Apollo 13. As far as this movie goes for me. I first watched it in 2014 in a science class during eighth grade. I enjoyed the movie and thought it was a very compelling mission. I appreciated the space scenes, the music, and the launch sequence. Having watched it now, I’d probably say I MIGHT like it less than I did back then, but I still enjoyed it. In fact, now that I’m older, I feel like I paid a bit more attention to the dialogue, which probably felt a tad more compelling than it did when I was 14 years old.

When it comes to the music, this honestly feels like some of the most patriotic music I’ve ever heard in a movie. The main theme almost reminds me of a theme that used to be on CBS Evening News until getting rid of it in 2016. And I’ll be honest, that’s probably where this movie excels more than anywhere else. The music basically does the talking. It reminds you to pay attention. It sometimes give you a feeling that you need to silence yourself. At times it is almost eerie. When I watched this movie, one piece that can be heard almost reminded me of some of the last music you hear before the credits in “The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug.” Looking at this movie now, I can totally see why they decided to put this music in, and it does symbolize how this mission is not just for the world to see, but just like the groundbreaking Apollo 11, it was for the United States to see.

Let’s talk about some of the performances in this film. I mean, you do have star power from folks like Tom Hanks, Bill Paxton, and Kevin Bacon, but in reality their individual performances do not really make the film what it is. As a matter of fact, it’s their chemistry. It’s how they get along as a team and how they cooperate with each other in space. These three look like they get along with each other, they look like buds, and they also look like they are actually trying to help each other in a time of need. But I’ll be honest, the performance I’ll probably forever credit is Ed Harris (The Abyss, Jacknife) as Gene Kranz.

Gene Kranz is a guy who I occasionally still hear about today. He was part of the documentary “Mission Control: The Unsung Heroes of Apollo,” which I have reviewed on here. I have a friend who works for NASA who has met this fine gentleman. And I will say that my friend has also brought up his name every once in a while. When it comes to his portrayal in “Apollo 13,” my gosh. I f*cking loved it. Ed Harris literally knocked it out of the park when it comes to not only talking, but believe it or not, remaining silent. One thing I often think about when it comes to talented actors who go on to get nominated for Oscars is how they have that one moment where they just talk. The talking seems to stick out to a point where it stays in your head. It’s very compelling. But as I’ve learned from another movie this year, “Won’t You Be My Neighbor?,” silence is a great gift. There is a moment in this movie, specifically towards the end, where we see Ed Harris say no words. If you have not seen this movie and decide to check it out one day, be sure to look out for that. By the way, Ed Harris was nominated an Academy Award for this performance and lost to Kevin SPACEYYYYOW! Gross! Get that away! Get out! Get out!

Speaking of mission control, the set for mission control was very well done. It felt rugged, the colors seem to be accurate, and the computers just scream like they are from the time frame which this movie takes place. Also, as far as your NASA employees go, they seem to fit the time frame as well. Nerdy, white males who could have potentially gotten kick me signs on their backs or atomic wedgies when they were in school. And to add a little extra nerdiness to the mix, I even noticed pocket protectors. As I was watching the movie I was just saying to myself that everyone resembled Lewis or Gilbert from “Revenge of the Nerds.” And now that I think about it, maybe George McFly from “Back to the Future.” Costume design and casting was very well done here.

One thing I do find interesting about this movie though is the PG rating. If this movie came out today it would probably be PG-13. I find it really interesting to see that a movie  with as much smoking and language as it has actually managed to get a PG rating. Then again, according to Wikipedia, smoking wasn’t really as big of a problem until 2007. It almost reminds me of “Back to the Future” which got a PG even though it has multiple utterances of the word s*it and some other vulgar language that parents wouldn’t want their kids to hear. I’ll say though for “Back to the Future,” PG-13 was a new concept back when it came out. When “Apollo 13” arrived it actually was a thing for a decade.

One of my favorite scenes of the movie, despite how Apollo 13 was a mission where the astronauts attempted to go to the moon and never made it, involves being on the moon. We cut to a scene where Tom Hanks’s character, Jim Lovell, is actually getting off a craft and envisioning himself walking on the moon. It’s almost sad looking at that. In a lot of movies, I imagine some people saying that they care about historical accuracy, and I’m with those people. Here though, I don’t want to know if Jim Lovell actually envisioned that. If that vision was fabricated, I don’t give a flying f*ck. That actually enhances the movie in so many ways. And in a way, it almost shows how dreams can slip away from you. Many boys dream of being an astronaut. Sorry, kid, lower your expectations.

Also, one more thing.

SPACE.

That’s a tradition in this series, so I might as well keep it going!

In the end, I don’t really have much to say about “Apollo 13,” but what I do have to say is that it is a watchable, enjoyable space flick based on a great story. “Apollo 13” is directed by Ron Howard, who also directed “Solo: A Star Wars Story,” which I suffered through this year. To those who must know, this movie truly showcases the talent of Ron Howard. Leave “Solo” in the dust! Overall, I think “Apollo 13” is a good movie, and I would say while it is the worst of the films I tackled in this review series, it is certainly worth watching. I’m going to give “Apollo 13” a 7/10. Thanks for reading this review! I hope you enjoyed this space movie review series, apologies for the delay once again. But at least I was able to get this out. Stay tuned for my review of “First Man.” I don’t think that’ll be up right away, but given how I am seemingly seeing it on Sunday, I’ll have my thoughts on it probably sometime next week. Be sure to follow me on Scene Before either through an email or WordPress account that way you can stay tuned for more great content! I want to know, did you see “Apollo 13?” What did you think about it? Or, what is a dream you had as a kid that never became a reality? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

The House with a Clock in Its Walls (2018): I Believe in Magic 8-Balls

mv5bmtk1mzm1odewov5bml5banbnxkftztgwmte0ota4ntm-_v1_sy1000_cr006311000_al_

“The House with a Clock in Its Walls” is directed Eli Roth (Death Wish, Cabin Fever) and stars Jack Black (Kung Fu Panda, Goosebumps), Cate Blanchett (Thor: Ragnarok, How to Train Your Dragon 2), and Owen Vaccaro (Daddy’s Home, Mother’s Day) as a young orphan named Lewis meets up with his charismatic uncle Jonathan. This uncle happens to be a warlock who lives with an elderly witch by the name of Florence Zimmerman. Together, they are all living in the same house that is said to be haunted. Throughout the movie, Jonathan is trying to get rid of a clock through magic in order to preserve the world.

“The House with a Clock in Its Walls” is one of those films I just didn’t know much about before going to see it. I remember seeing one trailer for it in the movie theater. And in all honesty, the first time I even heard about this was when the film was doing advance screenings. Then again, I live 30 minutes from Boston and Eli Roth, the director behind this film, actually was born around the area. So I don’t know what other areas happened to be doing regarding this film, but I remember getting some alerts for screenings going back as far late August. Although I must say, the screenings were far ahead of when I was alerted of them. The screenings actually happened to be on the week when the movie actually released. Guess Universal didn’t have too much faith in this film. Most of the marketing I saw came towards the time before the movie went into theaters.

I have to say though, despite some apprehension with the marketing, “The House with a Clock in Its Walls” is a fun time! I’d say it’s a decent flick for kids and adults alike. It doesn’t treat people like idiots (for the most part, because it is apparent these days that you can’t have a kids movie without poop jokes). The biggest praises I can give to this movie is the lovable chemistry between the characters. Some highlights include Jack Black and Cate Blanchett, who play off each other calling each other rude names. The gag increasingly dies down as the movie goes on, which is kind of unfortunate considering once I first witnessed this, it was one of the best parts of the movie.

As far as the kid goes in this movie, his name is Owen Vaccaro. I wouldn’t go ahead and call Vaccaro the next great child actor, who is gonna go onto win Oscars one day. I mean, he could, but his name probably wouldn’t be as prominent. It’s not like I’m witnessing another Jacob Tremblay (Room, Wonder) or Macaulay Culkin (Home Alone, My Girl). However, Vaccaro’s performance serves both the character and the movie very well. His character, known by the name of Lewis Barnavalt, is pretty much a wiz. He reminds me of a more humanized version of Mindy Kaling’s character from “A Wrinkle in Time.” I’m not saying he often quotes other people, particularly those who happen to be famous and have perhaps above average intelligence, but he does seem to have some abnormalities to him. He often looks in a dictionary, and I mean that in a way that technically qualifies as a hobby. In fact, what makes this kid weird, is kind of what this movie tries to teach people. It’s similar to other lessons that may have been provided in children’s films before, but it doesn’t mean the film fails on trying to emphasize such a lesson.

While the kid may be weird, the character played by Jack Black is just plain crazy. He almost reminds me of a mad scientist in some ways because he doesn’t seem to believe in the concept of sleep. So in a way, I guess you can say I can relate to this character. The character’s name is Jonathan Barnavalt and he is a warlock. Jack Black is probably my favorite character in the movie, and perhaps the one that kids might want to emulate the most. For one thing, his house has one rule (don’t open a particular cabinet), but other than that, there are literally no rules. He’s enthusiastic, hyperactive, and it adds up to make him rather charming.

As for Cate Blanchett, her character goes by the name of Florence Zimmerman. Out of everyone in the movie, she wasn’t my favorite character. She was pretty close, but Jack Black takes the cake. But the thing is, I literally had no idea I was even witnessing Cate Blanchett in this movie. So out of everyone in the movie, I’d say this character was the most well performed. Maybe it’s because I didn’t really know Cate Blanchett was going to be in this film and I knew Jack Black was. Plus the film reminded me of “Goosebumps,” which also had Jack Black as a character with some similarities to his character in this movie. I’ve seen Cate Blanchett in some films before like “Lord of the Rings,” “Thor: Ragnarok,” and “How to Train Your Dragon 2.” I’m somewhat surprised that I wasn’t really able to discern Cate Blanchett because to me she seems to have one of those voices you can easily pick out. But you also have to consider how Cate Blanchett looks in this movie compared to how she does off screen. Even so, I feel like Cate Blanchett embodied this character well and it just goes to show one actor can truly slip over your head sometimes. I am not saying Cate Blanchett’s performance is gonna get her an Oscar nomination, maybe at best she’ll be recognized for a Saturn Award, but I’m not sure.

But in all reality, what makes this film so interesting to me is the vibe and the spirit of the film itself. This film is in the fantasy genre, and it’s particularly aimed at families. I will have you know that when I was actually at the theater to watch this movie, I was the only customer in attendance. “The House with a Clock in Its Walls” manages to balance humor, story, and character development very effectively. In fact, in some ways, I guess you can also say this is a horror movie as well. One reviewer on YouTube by the name of Chris Stuckmann actually went to see this movie, and somebody told him that children walked out of the theater early because they were scared. When I saw his review, it reminded me of how I studied something scary from a childhood show I watched. I’m not sure what it was, but it was probably from a show on PBS or something. I could understand why some children would walk out. Comparing this film to “Goosebumps” once more, there are some light scares that almost seem like scares that fall into the “playing safe” category, but then there’s one scene that stood out to me as I watched it and almost reminded me of what I “must” have witnessed as a kid. If you like horror, I wouldn’t say to go out of your way and watch this movie. This isn’t like you’re watching “A Quiet Place” or something. But if you want to have fun and escape reality, “The House with a Clock in Its Walls” is for you.

In the end, “The House with a Clock in Its Walls” is a fine fantasy film that probably won’t be remembered throughout time, but it is certainly good for a watch. It’s intriguing, occasionally suspenseful, funny, and perhaps the most effective commercial for the Magic 8-Ball that I’ve seen since maybe “Angels in the Outfield.” Would I buy the movie on Blu-ray? Probably not. If it were used and available for a decent price maybe I’d put my hands on it. However I am proud to say that my recent viewing of this film was not a waste of time. I’m gonna give “The House with a Clock in Its Walls” a 7/10. Thanks for reading this review. Be sure to stay tuned for my review of “Apollo 13,” which will be up on October 11th (hopefully). This will be my last space movie review before I make the trek to see “First Man,” so be sure to check that out. Also, be sure to check out my eventual reviews for “Venom” and “A Star Is Born.” One more thing, I just got back from New York Comic Con, and I’ve got a bit to talk about regarding that, so look forward to my review on that sometime soon! Be sure to follow Scene Before with a WordPress account or email so you can stay tuned for more great content! I want to know, did you see “The House with a Clock in Its Walls?” What did you think about it? Or, given how this film is directed by Eli Roth, what is your favorite film Eli Roth was involved in? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

The Last Sharknado: It’s About Time (2018): At Least They Listened…

Oh boy! A new “Sharknado” movie is out! Time to suffer once more– wait, this is the last one? I should hope so… But just in case…

NOW NO REBOOTS, PLEASE! Unless there’s some sort of plan to unleash quality towards the “Sharknado” franchise I AM NOT GOING TO ACCEPT ANY OTHER MOVIES UNDER THE “SHARKNADO” NAME! UNDERSTAND?! This franchise can rot in hell with the live-action “Smurfs,” “Fifty Shades of Grey,” and as much as it pains me to say it, just about half of the “Star Wars” movies, I’m done with “Sharknado!” I’m done! Man that felt good.

P

A

U

S

E

I still have to review the sixth one, cra–

mv5bzdm5m2rlymitntqyoc00ngfjlwjhndqtnte2mji0ytq1mznjxkeyxkfqcgdeqxvymju0otawmdc-_v1_sy1000_cr007201000_al_

“The Last Sharknado: It’s About Time” is directed by Anthony C. Ferrante, the director who also unfortunately helmed the previous five “Sharknado” films. This movie stars Ian Ziering (Beverly Hills, 90210, Godzilla: The Series), Tara Reid (American Pie, The Big Lebowski), and Cassandra Scerbo (Make It Or Break It, Not Another Not Another Movie) and is marketed as the supposedly final “Sharknado” installment ever. This time, Fin and his pals are time-traveling to rid of the damages of nasty Sharknados in the past.

I’ve seen all of the “Sharknado” movies in at least one way, shape, or form. I’m not gonna go into specifics since I’ve already done such a thing in my “Sharknado 5” review and I just don’t want to sound repetitive. Let me just say, I’ve seen all of them, I don’t like any of them. End of story. Here’s the thing about certain good intellectual properties or movie franchises that seems to stand out to me. They all know when to stop. “Back to the Future” stopped at three movies! Director Robert Zemeckis said “over my dead body” on the thought of a reboot. You’ve also got “The Dark Knight” trilogy which had a solid beginning, middle, and end. Back before the “Star Wars” prequels released, the original “Star Wars” trilogy stopped at three movies, all of which have been appreciated by fans and critics (unless you count “The Empire Strikes Back” when it first came out). And no, the holiday special is not in this discussion. Franchises like “Sharknado?” It just keeps on going. Granted compared to some other franchises it does have some benefits. Depending on the situation, you are more likely to watch “Sharknado” for free whereas you have to pay $12 to go see the new “Transformers” movie. The movies are around an hour and a half compared to certain titles like “Fifty Shades of Grey” or “Twilight” which are around a couple hours long. Those are just a couple of perks throughout what can truly be regarded as a s*itfest of an experience.

It honestly baffles me why people watch these movies. The only reason why *I* watch these movies is to give you guys a review. And as much as I suffer during the movie, I do look forward to the review. This has the worst that a cheesy bad movie has to offer. It says it’s big in quantity but it lacks quality! Stupid cameos! Moments that make me lose IQ points! I don’t understand why, other than the fact that they get high ratings on Syfy, that the “Sharknado” movies have to keep on happening. As the movie begins, and we start to get reintroduced to characters along the way, I just remind myself of how much I don’t care about anyone in the franchise. Granted, I will admit in my “Sharknado 4” review, I mentioned I cared more for the characters in the first movie. But there are some things to consider: I was just getting to know them. It wasn’t known to me that Ian Ziering would practically be god in these movies. Not to mention, since it was the first movie, I didn’t have to complain that I’m seeing these f*cking hooligans again.

One thing I want to talk about before moving onto the characters is something I cannot even believe I haven’t brought up in any of my reviews yet. Throughout the movie, I couldn’t help but think to myself that the color grading is some of the worst ever put on screen. When I watch “Sharknado,” I do expect a natural disaster, and granted, natural disasters are depressing, therefore meaning maybe a depressing color grade might work. However, “Sharknado,” a movie where Ian Ziering jumps into a shark with a chainsaw and escapes with no problem whatsoever, a movie where many intellectual properties are butchered by insanely forced references, a movie that needs to have some stupid promotion for Xfinity or The Today Show, does not associate with that type of grading! This movie, if it truly tries and cleans up its s*itty effects, can be a buttload of fun. I can also say the same if it just changes the color grading. I feel like there are way too many blacks in the images to the point where it feels like I’m watching a World War II period piece or something. This movie’s color grading almost made it feel like I was staring at very dark cigarette smoke with sharks behind it. Just brighten the images a little bit! A little color makes a big difference!

I also really don’t like the direction of this film. I clearly watch more movies than TV. And I’m almost picky when it comes to TV shows, partially because I don’t review them. But this movie at times reminds me of two very similar shows that are incredibly popular that I don’t watch. Specifically, “The Office” and “Parks and Recreation.” I don’t watch either of those shows because the way they’re shot is almost headache inducing. The whole style of footage containing actions suddenly interrupted by an interview is almost distracting to me. Not to mention, the camera is constantly shaking whenever something is being shot unless we’re talking about an interview. It’s just annoying. Some may say it’s immersive, it honestly does the opposite for me. And speaking of shaking the camera, there are some minor shakes I witnessed, most noticeably during an establishing shot of a sharknado! WHAT HAS THIS WORLD COME TO?!

Moving onto characters, let’s talk about God–err I mean Ian Ziering. He’s basically what you’d come to expect at this point. He survives everything. He is the biggest badass on the planet. Essentially if Domenic Torretto had hair and had to deal with sharks all the time, that is Ian Ziering’s character. Oh yeah, right, he has a name, Fin Shepard. WHY AM I STILL TALKING ABOUT THIS?!

Now let’s move onto Tara Reid’s character of April. When it comes to Tara Reid, I didn’t really see much of her work prior to watching the “Sharknado” movies, but I did watch a couple of films after watching “Sharknado 5” that had her in it. In those films, say what you want about her, she was personally serviceable in those roles of hers and did what needed to be done. Here in “Sharknado 6,” it’s like I’m watching an amateur porn star trying to adapt to being in a disaster film. Really hot, but the acting is PUTRID.

One thing that I found interesting about this film however is that with the time travel element in play, we managed to see the adult version of Gil. For those who don’t know who Gil is, he’s a very young kid that April and Fin have. And while I can’t say much of anything positive regarding the characters of this movie, I will say that Gil was a lot less annoying than he was for the past couple of installments. Then again, what do you expect? He’s an adult.

I don’t even know why I’m still writing. My head is honestly about to explode, but just like all of the other “Sharknado” films, “The Last Sharknado” doesn’t shy away from giving you the film industry’s worst examples of how to do special effects. You know how a lot of people look at the shark from Jaws at find it to be very fake-looking? Look, if I was thirteen, THAT F*CKING KILLER SHARK FROM “JAWS” WOULD HAVE BEEN MORE BELIEVABLE THAN THE HUNDREDS OF SHARKS FLYING IN YOUR FACE IN THIS PIECE OF CRAP!

Let’s talk about the ending. I am not a mega-fan of the franchise, and you know what? If I were a mega-fan, then I probably would have appreciated it more. But in all reality, I was just kind of checked out. Then some of the last lines come in and I’m just begging to get on with my life and do something that’s worth my time. The movie, and the franchise, THANKFULLY ends. That’s one of the few, and there a few, positives in the entirety of “The Last Sharknado.” It ends the saga. It’s… over. It’s f*cking over. But I gotta say, I was kind of angry (partially due to my bad mood received from watching this movie) that I had to see a text card come up with the word “Fin.” You’ve already destroyed my brain, you don’t get to do that, movie! Bad movie! BAD movie!

As we get closer to my final verdict, I have to point something out. As I’ve done with “Sharknado 4” and “Sharknado 5,” I was livetweeting to this movie during the premiere on Syfy. Here are some of the tweets I’ve made:

Yes, one is more related to Instagram, but it’s on Twitter, so who really cares? Since I’m a movie reviewing moron, I wonder if some people would think I know way more than I should know about film. And maybe I do. Maybe it’s unimportant that I know that every “Sharknado” film was directed by Anthony C. Ferrante. Why should that even be something worth bringing up in a casual conversation? Let me just say, that name confuses the hell out of me. Because he was observing the livetweet session and those tweets I just put up? HE RETWEETED THEM! So I went to look at his account, and see what other tweets have been posted, and while they are related to “Sharknado,” they all seem to be on the positive side of the spectrum. Does Anthony hate his own creation and side with me? Does he not know what to think of it? I NEED TO KNOW! Anthony Ferrante? If you’re reading this, if you hate your movies, it’s OK, we can talk s*it together!

In the end, I may have been excited to do this review just because I can rage out about a s*itty movie and sometimes that’s rather fun, but this review is not all fun and games. Watching “Sharknado 6” was one of the first things I did once I got home from vacation. And by the way this vacation was comic-con, which involves a lot of walking. It was fun, but it does feel like a workout at times. Instead of coming home to relax and unwind, I decide to review this s*it. But hey, it’s over! So, goodbye “Sharknado,” you won’t be missed! I’m gonna give “The Last Sharknado: It’s About Time” a 1/10! I mean, what else do you expect? I mentioned there are a few positives in the movie, but it doesn’t make all of the infinite negatives go away! This movie had a nice animated intro, had one moment where I chuckled, and most importantly, ended everything. But seriously, WHY WAS NEIL DEGRASSE TYSON IN THIS MOVIE?! And just to stay positive, I will say that this actually was better than “Sharknado 5.” They toned down on Xfinity, and it didn’t have an annoying kid. And best of all, this movie means the series… is over! Thanks for reading this review! Pretty soon you’re gonna get some more posts coming your way. These include movie reviews on “The Hurricane Heist,” “Love, Simon,” and my look back at my time at this year’s Terrificon! Be sure to like this post and follow my blog so you can stay tuned for more great content! I want to know, did you see “The Last Sharknado: It’s About Time?” What did you think about it? Or, do you think we’ll ever see another movie, TV show, or video under the “Sharknado” name again in the future? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Skyscraper: Die Hard Without Christmas (2018) *PLUS RANT ON OBNOXIOUS MOVIEGOERS*

mv5bogm3mzqwyzitnda1ny00mziyltg5y2qtytawmznmmdu2zdgxxkeyxkfqcgdeqxvymjmxote0oda-_v1_sy1000_sx632_al_

Before we aim high and go into my “Skyscraper” review, let me just say that this film revolves around a family. This family’s relationship seems to play out in a significant amount of runtime for this film. Speaking of family, a new family is bound to form in California. A couple by the name of Paul and Genevieve at one point thought they’d never see the day the dream of starting a family would ever come true. Not because they didn’t try starting a family due to a lack of motivation or something, but because they endlessly tried and had no success. This is all explained… in “What the IVF?!”

“What the IVF” is a YouTube series starring the recently mentioned couple. These two explain their journey to conception. Every Monday, a new story is told, and usually the story that’s told is never one that’s all that happy. When it comes to the story of the couple’s journey to conception, many unfortunate realities occur throughout. Experience the ride alongside Paul and Genevieve as they face the misfortunes of math, exams, anger, sex, crying, pain, needles, and pain from needles! You can find the latest episodes of “WTIVF?” on the show’s personally dedicated YouTube channel, but if you want to watch one right now, check out the latest episode that goes over the past events of the couple’s IVF journey. I’ve watched it, and trust me guys, it’s a good one, check it out. Speaking of checking things out, be sure to take a gander at the “What the IVF?” YouTube channel, subscribe, ring the bell, click whatever button will make Paul and Genevieve happy! Aside from YouTube, you can also find stuff related to the series on other forms of media, be sure to check all of that out and follow those pages. Also don’t forget to check out the website to “WTIVF?” which is included in the links below. And be sure to tell them that Jack Drees sent ya over!

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/

“Skyscraper” is directed by Rawson Marshall Thurber (Central Intelligence, Easy A) and stars Dwayne Johnson (Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle, Fast Five), Neve Campbell (House of Cards, Scream), Chin Han (Ghost in the Shell, The Dark Knight), Roland Møller (The Commuter, Atomic Blonde), Noah Taylor (Vanilla Sky, Shine), Byron Han (Altered Carbon, The Big Short), Pablo Schreiber (13 Hours, American Gods), and Hannah Quinlavin (Moon River, The Shanghai Job). This film mostly takes place in or around what this movie’s universe considers the tallest building in the world. Unfortunately, this building eventually gets to a point where it’s on fire, and now it is up to a man by the name of Will Sawyer, a caring father, who also used to be a US military member and FBI Hostage Rescue Team leader, to save his own family, and survive against certain individuals, not to mention, time.

My first exposure to something related to “Skyscraper” came around the time of the Super Bowl. To be more specific, I read a tweet from The Rock calling the film original. Just from that alone, I was intrigued. We’re getting as many sequels, adaptations, and reboots as we are getting news reports of someone we know or happen to like being called out for something terrible. Once I heard about this film’s “originality,” I was intrigued. But then the advertising started, and everybody started comparing it to “Die Hard.”

F*CK.

Don’t get me wrong, I’ve seen “Die Hard” and I enjoyed it. It’s been forever since my experience watching it, but I found pleasure in what was on screen nevertheless.  However, if you’re advertising yourself as an original film, although in this case, an actor from the film is doing the advertising, and a good number of people see this as a “Die Hard” wannabe, that’s not good.

And you know what? One of my biggest problems with the film that doesn’t necessarily have to do with whatever is in the final product is the marketing. Now that people are calling “Skyscraper” 2018’s “Die Hard,” apparently there was a poster inspired by “Die Hard” made for it! Not only that, but there was also a “Towering Inferno” inspired poster. What does this movie want to be? And you know what? This might be an even more important statement: What does The Rock want this movie to be? Months ago, he was saying that this is an original production, and now he’s talking about other films that were basically inspirations for “Skyscraper,” which kind of therefore makes “Skyscraper” feel less original than maybe it once was. I will say though when it comes to tone, as I watched the movie, the tone was rather clear, it was trying to be an edge of your seat popcorn action thriller. I don’t think there is anything wrong with that. And in some ways, “Skyscraper” succeeded at doing such a thing, but I wouldn’t say it was enough. Sure, it’s summertime, so big, explosive, expensive movies are to be expected, but overall the story at times is somewhat cliche and the script is predictable. There are some moments I didn’t expect, but if you don’t dive into specific detail, you might as well say the script is predictable.

In fact, some of you might be asking how predictable the script to “Skycraper” actually was. It was SO predictable, that a few audience members had a number of moments where they would say something out loud, and in a split second, that thing would happen. First off, if you’re going to the movies, PLEASE DON’T TALK! IT’S RUDE! I PAID GOOD MONEY FOR THIS! Seriously, these audience members to my left, they just couldn’t stop making noise! Granted, I talk during the movies, but only on occasion, and when I do it, I whisper. These hooligans showed up about thirty to forty minutes after the scheduled showtime, which in terms of seeing the movie, is about fifteen or so minutes through the runtime. I knew something was going to happen when I heard loud laughing from the back of the theater. Then they came into my row, and all of them were sitting to my left. DID “A QUIET PLACE” TEACH ANYTHING TO PEOPLE?! DON’T! TALK! DURING THE MOVIE! Gosh, I hate my life.

In all seriousness, the characters in “Skyscraper” weren’t really all that interesting. Sure, there’s The Rock’s character, but then again, he’s The Rock, everybody likes The Rock. I bought into his relationship with his wife, not to mention his kids. I also bought into him as a guy with a prosthetic leg. Although at the same time, I feel like a lot of people, regardless of whether or not they actually have a prosthetic leg can play this character. Maybe they can’t do it as well as The Rock, but there are times that I can probably imagine another actor in The Rock’s shoes. If you ask me, I still think The Rock is actually a fine choice for this character, but my thought still stands.

I recently mentioned that the script is a bit lackluster for this film, and when it comes to specification on that sort of thing, some of it has to do with poor characterization. If you ask me, I think when it comes to the protagonists, I don’t have too many complaints, especially when you compare that to the antagonistic side. The script spent a lot of time focusing on the main family and treating the tall building as if it was its own character. Seriously! It’s possible that the skyscraper in “Skyscraper” has more character development than the Transformers in the “Transformers” movies! As I watched this film and noticed the antagonistic side of things, I thought I was watching a film in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, because of how cliche or underwhelming or underdeveloped their villains happen to be. I wouldn’t say I thought the main villain was bad at what he was trying to do, but I just probably won’t remember him.

You know how I mentioned the mixed messages I got from the film’s marketing? This film at times did feel like “Die Hard” to me. I’ll be honest with you, I’ve never seen “The Towering Inferno” so I can’t say much about it. But there is another film I saw that I didn’t even realize would click into my mind at a certain point. Specifically, “Enter the Dragon.” If you’ve seen “Enter the Dragon,” chances are you’d know that there’s this climactic fight that takes place in this hall of mirrors. There’s a fight in “Skyscraper” that doesn’t seem to be exactly like that, but it’s very similar to it. Much like “Enter the Dragon,” this scene is competently shot and edited. There’s not a moment where I look in a mirror and notice a camera or a cameraman, then again most of this movie is on a green screen so I doubt they had actual mirrors on set. I’ve seen a number of reviews for this movie, and one comment that stuck out to me is that this movie borrows something particular from a lot of other titles, and usually that other title would do that particular thing better than “Skyscraper.” When it comes to this mirror scene, I can’t agree more. Not only was this sort of thing done better in “Enter the Dragon,” I’d say it was done better in “John Wick: Chapter 2!”

I also feel like a big problem in this movie may be because of the guy helming it. “Skyscraper” is written and directed by Rawson Marshall Thurber, and most of his work is in the comedy genre. Granted, there is comedy in “Skyscraper.” There wasn’t much, and not all of it landed for me, but it was there. This is not his first action film however, it’s not even his first film with The Rock either. One of the better movies I’ve watched during 2016 happened to be “Central Intelligence,” an action-comedy starring Kevin Hart and The Rock. I haven’t watched it since seeing it in the theater, but I had a really fun time with it and I certainly wouldn’t mind watching it again. This movie however, not so much. I wouldn’t say “Skyscraper” needed more comedy, if anything that would have killed the movie unless they were going for an R rating. It just needed a different director and better writing.

Another problem I had with “Skyscraper” is that while it was technically written and directed by the same person without cooperation from others, it almost feels like a film that a bunch of stereotypical cigar-smoking studio executives would come up with. I was exposed to a podcast recently where two guys were talking about this movie, and I actually know of these guys from YouTube too, shoutout to Chris Stuckmann and John Flickinger! They thought of “Skyscraper” as a pitch movie. It’s almost like the pitcher gave a list of movies that this can be compared to, and all of those elements can be easily implemented into the final product. And when some people think of The Rock, the phrase “big money” might possibly pop in their heads. After all, he’s a big name in current Hollywood based on the number of projects he takes on, including “Fast & Furious.” I don’t know, this just feels more like a corporate product than a movie. I saw that coming upon seeing more and more advertising, but I just can’t help but point that sort of thing out.

In the end, I wouldn’t say “Skyscraper” stands tall. Sure, the movie may be doing well overseas, but that doesn’t mean I’m seeing something of quality here. The Rock is very charming, I bought into the chemistry between him and his family members, and I do think the building had an interesting design to it. Although when it comes to overall positivity I can give, there’s very little I can give towards this sometimes badly paced, cliche, and predictable thing that some may call a film. But one thing’s for sure, this is not gonna spark any “Christmas movie or not a Christmas movie” debates. I’m going to give “Skyscraper” a 4/10. Thanks for reading this review! Be sure to stay tuned for upcoming content, including my “Mission: Impossible: Fallout” review, and I do have some other films in mind when it comes to future reviews. These films include “Eighth Grade,” “Sorry to Bother You,” or if I have an excuse to do an older film review series like I did with “Mission: Impossible,” I’ll be sure to get that going sometime as well. Stay tuned for more reviews and other great content! I want to know, did you see “Skyscraper?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite movie starring The Rock? Mine is “Fast Five,” let me know yours down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Mamma Mia!: Here We Go Again (2018): Having the Hour and Fifty-Four Minutes of My Life

mv5bmjewmtm3oti1nv5bml5banbnxkftztgwndk5nty0ntm-_v1_sy1000_cr006311000_al_

“Mamma Mia!: Here We Go Again” is directed by Ol Parker (Now Is Good, Imagine Me & You) and stars Lily James (Baby Driver, Cinderella), Amanda Seyfried (Ted 2, Mean Girls), Christine Baranski (The Good Wife, Chicago), Pierce Brosnan (GoldenEye, The Matador), Dominic Cooper (Preacher, Captain America: The First Avenger), Colin Firth (Kingsman: The Secret Service, Love, Actually), Andy Garcia (Ocean’s Eleven, The Godfather: Part III), Stellan Skarsgård (Good Will Hunting, The Man Who Killed Don Quixote), Julie Waters (Brave, Paddington), with Cher (Moonstruck, Mask), and Meryl Streep (The Post, Sophie’s Choice). This movie is the sequel to 2008’s “Mamma Mia!: The Movie.” Five years after the events of the original film, Sophie learns about past events involving her mother, while the movie chooses to simultaneously focus on what the movie’s universe would call present events.

This “Mamma Mia!” installment might as well only be made because of how much money the first one actually made. Based on words I’ve heard just the other day, I’ve been totally shocked by the numbers of the first “Mamma Mia!,” finding out it has actually brought in a total of over $600 million at the worldwide box office. Funny enough, it was never #1 at the box office on ANY of the weekends of its run! Seriously! “Iron Man” came out the same year, it was #1 on both its opening weekend and its second weekend, and yet it still made less than “Mamma Mia” did during its entire run! Now that we have that we have this sequel, I must ask… Will the box office numbers be as high as this film, or is this one giant fluke? The answer, will have to wait because this movie, when it comes to its official public release, is only a short number of days old. Another question I found completely unanswerable is “How was the movie?”

Upon walking out of the theater, I couldn’t even answer how the movie truly was. I could confirm I didn’t like it, I thought it was somewhat flawed. But at the same time, it was kind of fun. This movie is not necessarily just another bad movie, it’s also the kind of bad that to me, didn’t really make me hate myself. But part of me wondered why. Sure, maybe certain musical segments were well choreographed, I guess there were some chuckleworthy moments here and there, and there was also times where I just admired the main locations of the film. In fact, part of why I actually enjoyed myself very much may have been due to watching the film in the IMAX format. If I went to see “Mamma Mia!: Here We Go Again” in a regular theater with a normal screen, I would have probably enjoyed myself a bit less than I did in my circumstance of viewing this film. I had low expectations going into “Mamma Mia!: Here We Go Again,” and just because I enjoyed myself, doesn’t mean I thought the film was anywhere near absolute perfection. It just means I don’t want to bang my head on a wall for an hour.

The biggest problem I have with “Mamma Mia!: Here We Go Again” is just that it’s kind of confusing. Granted, part of it be my fault as a viewer, because I’m willing to bet if I saw the first film, this sequel would be a lot more crystal clear. I won’t go into detail because the movie just came out and not everyone has seen it yet, but I just felt like there were maybe a huge amount of clutter in terms of characters, plot lines, etc. Granted, you can argue “Avengers: Infinity War” has that same issue, but the thing is, that movie plays out like a TV show. Everything has been leading up to it, if you’ve seen MCU movies released prior to that one, you’d probably have some sort of connection with the characters based on their journeys, and the way the screenplay and direction came together in that film made it feel like a thrill ride. “Mamma Mia!: Here We Go Again” expands the story of the franchise, but it does that by including something that doesn’t really have much stakes attached to it. For a film like this, that might be a weird complaint, but I just didn’t really care for anyone in this film. Again, I didn’t watch the first installment, so I may be cheating with that statement. But I just found this film boring at times because it felt like it was a story that just had so much going on with occasional interruptions from musical numbers.

If you know me in person, chances are you’d know that I love thinker movies, I love movies that make you figure out what’s going on, movies that don’t give you all the answers right away, movies that rely on being complicated therefore making them come off as a fun puzzle. I love movies that don’t make you feel stupid! Although, one complaint I can’t believe I’m saying here is that I thought this movie was a bit more complicated than it had to be. Was it intentional? I doubt it. In fact, I feel like the only real intention of this sequel was to get money. This movie goes back and forth in time, only to make me wonder which character is which, and which part of my brain hurts the most. I think if the movie really wanted to tell its story from a perspective that goes over both the past and present, it should have really had some more work done during the edit. What should have been done is if you want to go over a past event, you should color grade or put a filter over the footage to make it look old-timey. I wouldn’t call something like this dumbing down, but I would consider it to be hint of help or aid for those who don’t even know what’s going on.

As far as the movie’s characters go, I’m not even gonna go into detail about a lot of them. To make a long story short, most of them are rather quirky, and have their own individual qualities that make them who they are. If you’re expecting to see Meryl Streep in this movie, you do get her, but as far as actually getting HER, don’t expect much. Because the movie mainly focuses on a younger version of her character (Lily James).

Having seen Lily James play this younger version of Donna, I can kind of buy into her interpretation of the character, and I’d say she did a fine job with the role for the most part. But in all seriousness, this does beg a question. The question I have to ask is… Is Lily James the next Meryl Streep? Granted, you don’t really need to be a powerhouse actor to be in a movie like this. It’s recommended, but that’s not the biggest thing that I’d say you need. In fact, in some cases, your ability to sing would probably have a higher importance. I do think Lily James is an alright actor. I haven’t seen her in much, but I’d say she’s an alright actor nevertheless. But here’s the thing, will the Academy see this movie and forever think of Lily James as that one actor to nominate every single year no matter what she does? I’m not sure how much longer Streep has in terms of her career, but if you consider how many times she’s been nominated for some award throughout her life, it only makes me wonder how many James is bound to get down the road.

But in all seriousness, I feel like the only things I can truly appreciate in “Mamma Mia!: Here We Go Again” is that it exceeded my expectations, it was well choreographed at times, and it had some neat location choices. Other than that, it’s just a bunch of sequences shot on a camera placed together in a certain order for the sake of calling something a movie. It’s not good, and while I’m not in the target audience, I gotta be honest, I just didn’t think this was worth my time.

In the end, “Mamma Mia!: Here We Go Again,” spectacle-wise, doesn’t fail to impress, but on every other level, it’s not on par with what I’d call a proper movie. I mean, it has its audience, they might as well enjoy the film, good for them. This movie to me however, it was boring, although in reality, it ended in a much quicker rate than I thought it would. Maybe it’s because it almost felt like nothing happened. If it weren’t for a few pluses sprinkled in or seeing this movie in IMAX, I probably would have lost all sanity. With that being said, I’m going to give “Mamma Mia!: Here We Go Again” a 4/10. Thanks for reading this review! This Wedneday I’m going to see “Skyscraper,” so expect a review for that pretty soon, and speaking of that, be sure to follow my blog so you can stay tuned for more great content! I want to know, have you seen “Mamma Mia! Here We Go Again,” what are your thoughts on it? Or, which of the “Mamma Mia!” films do you like better? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Won’t You Be My Neighbor? (2018): A Reminder of an Unfulfilled Childhood *SPOILERS*

mv5bmjm1ndg1mjuznf5bml5banbnxkftztgwntaxnjizntm-_v1_sy1000_cr006741000_al_

“Won’t You Be My Neighbor?” is directed by Morgan Neville (20 Feet From Stardom, The Music of Strangers) and stars Joanne Rogers, Betty Aberlin, McColm Cephas Jr., François Scarborough Clemmons, Yo-Yo Ma, Kailyn Davis, Joe Negri, David Newell and is a look behind the curtain of the life of Fred Rogers. If you don’t know that name, then you aren’t familiarized with children’s television programming from the 1960s or 1970s.

Going into “Won’t You Be My Neighbor?,” it was one of my most anticipated films of the year. I don’t traditionally review documentaries, I don’t usually watch documentaries, but this one, regardless of my intentions to review it, felt special on paper. I never had a childhood, for what I remember, where I was exposed to Mr. Rogers on television. To my knowledge, not many people today have that either. With today’s kids it’s mostly “Paw Patrol” or other things that happen to be similar to that. I remember my grandmother singing the theme to “Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood” as she was watching over me from time to time however. But watching “Won’t You Be My Neighbor?” taught me the absolute specialty of “Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood,” which not only made me realize how great the documentary was, which by the way, it is, GO SEE IT NOW, but made me think that my childhood may have been… really s*itty.

Don’t get me wrong, my childhood was awesome. I went on several getaways, I went to amusement parks, I went to all sorts of malls, I enjoyed time with friends, but watching “Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood” would have probably taught me something I needed to know more. To be specific, the need to be nice to others. I was a stupid kid in elementary school (for the most part), I did a lot of things I really shouldn’t have done, and ultimately regret. Part of it almost makes me hate my life. While the movie tries to set a counterargument that maybe Fred Rogers made some kids feel more entitled than they need to be, I think that I would have had a better childhood if that were in my life, maybe even a better life in general. Let me tell you what I watched in my childhood. I watched “Power Rangers,” a flashy live-action hyper-mania f*ckstravaganza with explosions and people screaming for the sake of making noise. I watched all sorts of things that are based on “Hot Wheels” cars, which had tons of replay value, but I was more into racing than I was into inserting any kind of real world events into my head. I watched the newer seasons of “Spongebob Squarepants.” WHAT WAS I THINKING?! Granted in my preschool years, I watched some decent content regarding that age group, such as “Blue’s Clues” or “Dora the Explorer,” but as far as I recall, there was probably NOTHING like Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood. It takes a concept that may sound corny, but kind of works! You have this guy who is on a low-budget set, with low-budget props, and has a show shot on low-budget film equipment (at least for some time), and lets people, although mainly children, know they are special the way they are. What really sets Mr. Rogers apart from other people in children’s television is his raw charm. You know how in religion there is one figure that everyone is guided to be? In this case, Mr. Rogers basically combines religion with the real world. I’m not gonna give my religious beliefs away, because that’s not exactly what I intended to do here on WordPress or Scene Before, but let’s just say, if I were a hardcore Christian and saw this movie having no idea who Mr. Rogers was, I’d say he’s quite possibly the closest person to qualify as the second-coming of Jesus.

In fact, to some people’s minds, they’d disagree, because Rogers was essentially someone who opened up his heart and loved everyone. Straight. Gay. Bi. White. Black. Young. Old. Boy. Girl. You name it. He was someone that just wanted to spread positivity, happiness, anything that associates with being a joyous person. This movie goes into detail about how some people were against Mr. Rogers for telling children they were special, saying that it either goes against traditional values or makes them bratty. Honestly, if I were a kid, being told that I’m special or a joy to have in this world would be amazing. Being told I’m a failure would only lower my confidence, not to mention my will to live. Handing down the necessary joy of life, no matter if it’s being given to a child who can take care of themselves or somebody else, is a pretty important task for parents or guardians to take on. Mr. Rogers almost comes off as if he is the ultimate parent. He’s very calm, he’s inviting, and he wants to hear what children have to say. In fact, a good number of the stories we consume nowadays happen to be stories of good vs. evil. I’m not saying these people are evil or anything, but to say that someone can’t be anything is wrong and diminishing on so many levels. Now if your kid tells you they want to be the world’s nastiest destroyer then that’s a different story, but if your kid wants to be something that can shed something positive, light, or joy in the world, you might as well help in getting them to their goal by supporting them, listening to them, and guiding them.

When it comes to the overall goal of “Won’t You Be My Neighbor?,” it tries to make Mr. Rogers look like the definition of a role model and a hint of guidance, and I’d say the movie did its job. Along the way, the movie tells the highlights of Rogers’ life, this includes “Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood” (of course), his sitcom “Old Friends… New Friends,” and how he broke ground in aspects regarding children’s television and the way we look at others. Mr. Rogers was a lifelong Republican, not to mention an ordained minister for a church. This guy was doing television in the 1960s and the 1970s, and for a guy to be doing something such as telling people it’s OK gay to be gay, not to mention sharing that statement to an audience alongside someone who actually is gay, is ballsy given both his background and the time which he lived. But he did it, and I appreciate the dude for it.

Speaking of ballsy, as the documentary went on, I discovered that Rogers really pushed the limits on children’s television without exactly coming off as dark. He talked to children about death! He talked about divorce! He’s basically a televised therapist that everybody didn’t need to travel outside their house every few months to see. I have divorced parents, and when they were separated, I went to a therapist to talk about my life during that sort of time, and I didn’t really feel so good. It’s hard to talk about, no matter who you are. But no matter the difficulty, Mr. Rogers was able to talk about it!

One of the best quotes I’ve heard in the movie, is something I can’t say word for word only because I’m not sure how it goes piece by piece, but it goes something like this:

“I believe silence is one of the greatest gifts we have.” -Fred Rogers

I can associate with that quote with just about any part of my life. I have sensitive ears, so therefore, I’m not fond of loud noises. I enjoy my alone time, I’m not saying having friends sucks, but I really admire alone time. I even grew to know that just because a movie is big and loud, doesn’t make it good. It can be good from being big and loud. A large number of movies in the Marvel Cinematic Universe for example are explosive and can still maintain a feel of intelligence (for the most part), but some movies like those in the Michael Bay “Transformers” franchise can sometimes make you feel stupid because it’s nothing but noise. Silence can allow you to concentrate, dissect, and sometimes keep an audience in suspense. What Mr. Rogers was able to do with a show that the more I think about it, can associate with something such as peace and quiet, makes him all the more admirable.

Also, considering how nice and joyous Mr. Rogers presented himself both on “Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood” and in real life, I always think to myself, there’s nobody like him. Although one comment from an interviewee truly caught my attention, and it’s because he said the opposite of what I said. And maybe he’s right. This may not count for everyone, but for a number of people, we are all trying to be nice, a role model, and have a positive attitude. Rogers embodies all of those things. There aren’t really many people that *I* can think of that rank alongside Rogers in that sort of way. The closest I can think of are a few people such as Bill Nye, Curtis Armstrong (I’m biased here), and Robert Carradine (again, I’m biased). This documentary taught me that we need more people like Mr. Rogers. Maybe someone watching this will say that they want to be more like him, maybe they’ll say they had a life more like his, and if they’re like me, they’ll say they want to have a childhood with Mr. Rogers. As someone who thought the live-action “Alvin and the Chipmunks” movie was entertaining as a kid, I want the kid version of me to have Mr. Rogers to in their life to make them realize how wrong I was for thinking such a thing.

In the end, “Won’t You Be My Neighbor?” is one of the most amazing pieces of art I’ve witnessed not only this year, but this entire decade. It might even be in the conversation of possibly being my favorite documentary ever. I haven’t seen too many of them, I’ve seen a good number, but not a lot of them were epic. I must say, this was not epic. This was beyond words one could ever think of. I know that as a guy it makes people like me look like a wuss to cry at the movies, but from scene one, my eyes were watering. And I held all my tears in, but if I were Sadness from Pixar’s “Inside Out,” this would have been the most defining experience of my entire life. “Won’t You Be My Neighbor?” is not just a reminder of the awesome person that Mr. Rogers is, it’s a reminder to be a decent human being, not to mention a reminder to be the best person you can be. I’m gonna give “Won’t You Be My Neighbor?” a 10/10. Thanks for reading this review! Pretty soon I’m gonna have a couple more reviews coming up, such as my thoughts on “Uncle Drew,” and also my thoughts on “A Wrinkle In Time.” Be sure to stay tuned for those articles and more great content! I want to know, did you see “Won’t You Be My Neighbor??” What did you think about it? Or, did you grow up knowing the name Mr. Rogers? If so, can you tell me a bit about that? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!