Warner Bros

What We Know So Far About Christopher Nolan’s TENET (2020)

Posted on by Jack Drees

mv5bmdbjntyymzetndzkny00njg2ltgwogetyzi4mtezzgi1ote5xkeyxkfqcgdeqxvyodu5oti5oty40._v1_sy1000_sx675_al_

Hey everyone, Jack Drees here! As you may know, I am massive fan of Christopher Nolan (The Dark Knight, Memento). I have seen almost every single one of his films. And if you have been following the news this year, you’d know that Nolan is coming out with a new movie called “Tenet.” Prior to the reveal of the title, this was first leaked as an “event” film. I had no idea what this would entail, and I figured by event, it would be a follow-up to one of Nolan’s recent films such as “Inception” or “Interstellar.” Because let’s face it, whether you like those films or not, they felt like events. And what would be more “event-like” than a follow-up to a Nolan film that received overwhelmingly positive reception and good box office returns? Especially “Inception,” because that movie came out in 2010. What if we got a sequel in 2020? It would be marketed as “the one movie we get every ten years.” And if that’s successful, we’d get another “Inception” in 2030. But that’s not the case, and I’m also not disappointed because originality is ALWAYS something I’m asking for in Hollywood, so I’m proud to see Christopher Nolan deliver it. Without further ado, let’s dive into some things that could easily be gathered about Christopher Nolan’s upcoming movie, “Tenet.”

THE FILM WILL BE IN THE ACTION GENRE
We now know that Nolan’s new movie is an original project. The film is being described as a “massive, innovative, action blockbuster.” Recent news has pointed out a more detailed description of what this film would entail, specifically that it is “an action epic evolving from the world of international espionage.” I personally consider action to be one of my favorite genres, in fact, action is also a genre that Nolan has nailed thus far. After all, he helmed the entire “Dark Knight” trilogy and “Inception.” Both movies have bits and pieces of memorable action scenes and I have a feeling that Nolan can use his prior knowledge and put it into this movie.

THE CAST
John David Washington (BlacKkKlansman, Ballers)
Robert Pattinson (Twilight, Good Time)
Elizabeth Debicki (Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2, The Cloverfield Paradox)
Aaron Taylor-Johnson (Godzilla, Kick-Ass)
Kenneth Branagh (Dunkirk, Much Ado About Nothing)
Clémence Poésy (Last Love, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1)
Dimple Kapadia (Bobby, Luck by Chance)
Michael Caine (Batman Begins, Interstellar)

Let me just say, of course Michael Caine was gonna be in this. I mean, he’s Michael Caine. Christopher Nolan literally goes to bed every night in a room containing at least three posters. There’s one in the middle that says “MICHAEL CAINE IS GOD,” and it is accompanied left and right by posters for “Dirty Rotten Scoundrels” and “The Cider House Rules.” This is a long way of saying, Christopher Nolan clearly loves Michael Caine and they are working together again. Can’t wait to see what Caine can bring to the table. As for some of these actors including John David Washington and Aaron Taylor-Johnson, I am well aware of their names and have liked them as performers in what they’ve done. I just saw Washington in “BlacKkKlansman” this January and his performance was good enough to get a nomination from me in the Jackoff Awards. As for Taylor-Johnson, I remember reviewing Amazon’s “The Wall” months after it came out and calling it a pile of crap, but I also gave praise to his particular performance. A win’s a win, even when it’s a loss. Yes, Robert Pattinson from “Twilight” is being cast here but for one thing, I have not seen much of his work. In fact, I’ve heard he’s been pretty solid in some indie flicks. And for another thing, if he’s not only being cast as Batman, but also in a Nolan film, I have a feeling his name could grow on me. Only time will tell. But Nolan is not a stranger to odd casting choices, because if you all remember “Dunkirk,” he somehow managed to cast One Direction member Harry Styles, and he turned out to be solid! I’ll wait for the movie, but for the most part, the cast looks promising.

THE FILM IS BEING SHOT WITH IMAX AND 65MM CAMERAS
For those of you who follow Nolan, you’d probably know that he has, no pun intended, experience with IMAX. “The Dark Knight” was the first feature film to be shot in IMAX. Since then, he has used the same technology in “The Dark Knight Rises,” “Interstellar,” and “Dunkirk.” All of those films are shot using advanced IMAX cameras that use horizontal 65mm film. It should therefore come as no surprise that he is bringing the technology up to the plate once again for “Tenet.” Plus, the movie will bring back Hoyte Van Hoytema to man the shots, who also was involved with the cinematography for “Interstellar” and “Dunkirk.” I remember one of the first announced details was that this film was going to be shot in IMAX, and when I hear that about a film, I am automatically intrigued. Also, according to IMDb, the film is also being shot with a Panavision 65 HR Camera, which uses standard, old school 65mm technology. I am pretty interested to see what Nolan would do with the IMAX technology in a film involving espionage. This would definitely provide a big scope for the action scenes when viewed in IMAX theaters and maybe provide a few jaw-dropping shots. I remember “Mission: Impossible: Ghost Protocol” being shot with IMAX cameras, but unfortunately, I never went to an IMAX to watch the movie. I really don’t know how this movie will play out, but part of me hopes to walk out saying “this is a “Mission: Impossible” film that only Nolan could create.” Then again, based on other details I’m hearing about this movie, this might be a bigger idea than “missions, should people choose to accept them.” Speaking of old school technology…

THE FILM WILL BE PRESENTED IN 35MM, 70MM, AND IMAX 70MM
This may have already been implied, but in case it didn’t, “Tenet” is going to be screened not just in today’s traditional digital formats found in multiplexes everywhere, but also in a select number of auditoriums featuring film stock projection. Christopher Nolan’s most recent films have marketed themselves as being “experiences” and part of said experiences involve presentations in analog formats, which honestly, I prefer over digital projection. Seeing “2001: A Space Odyssey” in 70mm last year (twice) was game-changingly epic. It’s partially due to the experience of going into an arthouse-style theater while also having projection that provides greater material than my local chain locations. And since “Tenet” is seemingly being shot entirely using 65mm technology, the film will fit very well when projected on film. Granted, I imagine it will look great almost matter where it’s shown, but there are places where I can probably tell you to see it as opposed to others. Since it is being shown in IMAX 70mm, I can guarantee that the film will have select sequences where the aspect ratio changes to fill the entire screen from top to bottom.

And for those of you who don’t know, this is why I went to a theater over an hour away from my house to see “Interstellar” and “Dunkirk” and people close to me probably think I’m insane.

But it was SOOOOO worth it.

HANS ZIMMER IS NOT INVOLVED
Unfortunately, for all of the Christopher Nolan fans who liked movies such as “Inception” or “Interstellar” partially because of Hans Zimmer’s scores (I’m one of those fans as well), I’ve got some news for you. He’s not gonna be around for “Tenet.” In fact, the reason for this is due to Zimmer currently being busy with another acclaimed director who I happen to like, Denis Villeneuve (Blade Runner 2049, Arrival) as he is scoring the upcoming movie “Dune.” As for other movies next year he is focusing on, he is involved with “Wonder Woman 1984,” which I’m currently anticipating. He’s also doing “Top Gun: Maverick,” which only makes me more intrigued for how that movie is going to play out. And he’s also scoring “The Spongebob Movie: It’s a Wonderful Sponge,” which was once scheduled to compete with “Tenet” on its opening weekend, but the movies are now a further distance away from each other on the current release schedule.

LUDWIG GÖRANSSON IS COMPOSING
As for who will be composing the music in “Tenet,” that position will held by Ludwig Göransson. I have slightly mixed thoughts on how this is going to pan out, but I like to remain optimistic. For one thing, Nolan and Zimmer go together like bread and butter. Plus, Ludwig Göransson is also responsible for scoring “Venom,” and the score was not really the highlight of that film. Then again, what was the highlight of that film in the first place? The score felt manufactured, generic, and kinda dull. You know, like the movie “Venom” itself. Although at the same time, he scored another comic book movie, which like “Venom,” I don’t think I enjoyed as much as other people, and by other people I don’t just mean general audiences, I’m also referring to The Academy. Y’know, the gods of the movie industry? That movie by the way, is “Black Panther,” and while I think that movie is tremendously overrated (but still a solid flick) it had one of the better scores I’ve heard from a movie in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. It’s not my all time fave, but if I were to do a countdown on my favorite MCU scores, “Black Panther” would probably be high on the list. I am quite curious if Goransson will deliver an epic score to remember forever or if there will be some sort of disconnect between him and Nolan that will make me wish Zimmer would’ve been involved. Göransson’s music has been used in recent television programs including TBS’s “Angie Tribeca” and Fox’s “New Girl.” He’s also recently scored movies like “Creed II” and the 2018 remake for “Death Wish.”

PALINDROMES MAY BE AN IMPORTANT FEATURE IN THE SCRIPT
Now if you thought that Christopher Nolan is going to change his ways and simplify his movies, think again. Because from what I’m gathering so far, this movie sounds like it is going to be heavy. For one thing, look closely at the word “Tenet,” and you’d know that it is a palindrome. One of my favorite sci-fi movies of the decade, “Arrival,” directed by the recently mentioned Denis Villeneuve made palindromes play a bit into that movie, and if this movie manages to do the same, I would not be surprised, and I have faith that the palindrome insertion could be more than just a cheap gimmick.

Screenshot (5)

Also, last week, I shared a post on Facebook from a page with the handle @ChristopherNolan.info on what I thought was an official poster for “Tenet” but it turns out that’s more than likely not the case. However, one detail that stood to me regarding what I’ve shared is the number inside the image, 2701072, which like the word tenet, is a palindrome. People have pointed out in the comments that if you rearrange the numbers in that image, you can get the release date for this movie, July 17th, 2020. I also did some research regarding that number and this is not the first time that the account did a post with that number in it. On January 28th, the same Facebook page made a post that was literally just this exact number. Unless they had insider information about this movie and Nolan’s life/career, it’s almost as if they predicted that the title will be a palindrome or the movie would heavily involve palindromes. However, this Facebook page was not the first social media account to post something like this, because data suggests another Christopher Nolan-related account on Twitter by the name of @nolantalkcom did so on January 27th. Based on this information, and based on differences in followers, this is probably a bit of a stretch. I’m willing to bet the operator of that Twitter also operates the Facebook page. If you want to check this out for yourself, click the links below!

@ChristopherNolan.info

@nolantalkcom

THE FILM MAY HEAVILY INVOLVE TIME
Speaking of expected traditions from Christopher Nolan, it would not be surprising if he made time a major element in this film. Heck, one of the posters features numbers from one to twelve with arrows sticking toward multiple twelves. It’s a like an ongoing watch or something! I don’t know how time will play into this film, but it is an action film involving espionage, so maybe there will be some sort of race against the clock. Maybe there’s a bomb that has to be diffused. But knowing Nolan, it may as well be something completely unthinkable.

In a way, this poster almost reminds of “Interstellar” because if you remember the Endurance from that film, you may notice that the ship resembles a clock. “Interstellar” is easily one of my favorite sci-fi flicks of the decade, so I cannot wait to see what happens with “Tenet” and if it could possibly be compared with “Interstellar.”

There are a few other things I could talk about related to “Tenet,” but I already have gone way past scratching the surface when it comes to this movie. I even have a growing theory of this movie being part of a universe that Christopher Nolan previously established, specifically “Inception,” which I think could be a plot twist in this movie based on certain factors. As much as I would like to get into that, it would involve heavily digressing from the main topic, so I might make a separate post for that one day. But only time will tell, so who knows? I’m really looking forward to “Tenet,” and as of right now it is probably my most anticipated film of 2020. Anything Marvel announces next year? Forget it! There is a reason why Christopher Nolan is my favorite director of all time!

So I gotta ask all of you, how are you currently feeling about “Tenet” as we build up to its release? Are you excited? Worried? Could you avoid caring about the movie whatsoever? Do you think Christopher Nolan is a hack who deserves to die? Let me know your thoughts down below!

Thanks for reading this post! This Saturday I’m going to see “Godzilla: King of the Monsters.” It’s a film a part of me is REALLY looking forward to from an entertainment perspective, but from a critical perspective, I’m simultaneously nervous. I kinda don’t know how to feel going into the movie, so we’ll just see what happens. But I am going to see it in IMAX, which I think is the best way to see big scale movies like this, so I am still pretty excited. 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!

What THE BIG BANG THEORY Has Meant To Me: A Nerd’s Perspective

Posted on by Jack Drees

mv5bmtq3nzm2mtc5m15bml5banbnxkftztgwnta4ndqwmdi40._v1_sx1777_cr001777999_al_

WARNING: The following post DOES NOT spoil the final two episodes of “The Big Bang Theory”

Hey everyone, Jack Drees here! Here on Scene Before, I like to make special occasions for myself to talk about TV news. Sadly, I have still yet to see a single episode of “Game of Thrones,” therefore I cannot talk about the chaos or excitement that may be going on in its final season. However, there is another show that recently concluded that has meant the world to me, “The Big Bang Theory.” A show that has literally impacted my life to the point where I wanted to write my own version of how its eighth season would begin. And no, I do not have available copies of this, they’re on a computer I cannot currently access. Also, I have no intention on sharing them with you anytime in the future, some of them kind of associate with cheese.

This is not going to be a review of the finale (although I do give my thoughts on it). I review movies, not TV shows. If I watched more TV, I might consider doing an analytical review, but that is not going to be the case. Instead, this is going to be a story of my life and how it connects to “The Big Bang Theory” in general.

My first exposure to “The Big Bang Theory” is most likely in 2009. I didn’t watch it, in fact, I wouldn’t do so for another 2 years. However, in 2009, my parents introduced me to a guy who I would come to know as “Sheldon.” A name that found particularly interesting. Why? Well, if you were born in the late 1990’s, chances are you grew up at some point watching “Spongebob Squarepants.”

When you dedicate part of an episode to mocking the character “Plankton’s” first name, which, as you may have gathered, is “Sheldon.” How can you not think of this character as you observe another Sheldon?

On November 5, 2011. I was in the living room watching TV with the rest of my family and my parents decide to catch up on “The Big Bang Theory” since it is currently on our DVR. We then turn on one of the many interestingly-named episodes, this one in particular being “The Pulled Groin Exploitation.” While I had no real attachment to anybody after this half-hour experience, plus another half-hour dedicated to the follow-up episode, “The Wiggly Finger Catalyst,” I enjoyed what I saw. The first episode contained a funny bit at a wedding involving “The Chicken Dance.” I got to look at Sheldon Cooper being a railfan, which is a character type I’m honestly surprised to this day that we even got on mainstream TV, or even TV in general. The second episode was very intriguing, even without knowing who the characters were simply because one was constantly interacting with another character who happened to be deaf. Also, going back to that railfan thing. I consider myself a railfan as well. For all you mainstream people, that means I am fascinated by trains. I didn’t even realize it then. Sheldon was me.

There are arguments to made involving other TV shows and forms of media, that I have embodied traits, mannerisms, words, and phrases from its characters. And I certainly have embodied traits of Sheldon as I watched “The Big Bang Theory.” I found him to be fascinating as I watched various episodes, therefore he became stuck in my head. There was no denying he was smart, which was a kind of man I myself aspired to be. I didn’t aspire to be a scientist, but I would aspire to at least have the collective knowledge that Cooper contains. After all, one nerd aspect that has rarely been touched on the program, probably because in some ways, it is not always seen as a nerdy thing, is game shows. Ever since I was a young kid, I would continuously watch shows like “Who Wants to be a Millionaire,” “Wheel of Fortune,” “Jeopardy!,” and “Family Feud.” And the day that I discovered the Game Show Network was the day that I personally felt like I discovered the holy grail of life. In fact, aside from “The Big Bang Theory,” the amount of regular “new episode” programming I happen to watch is kind of small. There’s a certain level of commitment to regular TV programming that I usually tend to avoid. This is why I usually watch game shows. You usually don’t need background info from a prior episode or season to know what exactly is going on. The fact that “The Big Bang Theory” has allowed me to commit to a regular TV program for as many years as possible is a true feat. How many times do you watch a show on TV and stop watching religiously because you missed an episode or two? That happened to me with “The Middle.” It’s a good show, but there’s a lot of competition and shows like “The Big Bang Theory” became more attractive to me. And as a movie reviewer, commitment to TV is only getting more difficult. Yes, the DVR is a good invention. But as someone who prefers watching TV live as if it were an event, I have missed a lot of what might seem to be good television.

But in reality, another reason why I keep coming back to “The Big Bang Theory” is because there are a lot of situation comedies out there, but they all have this feel to them that kind of makes you feel like you’re looking at the same characters over and over. Yes, “The Big Bang Theory” is not exactly the definition of an exception to this rule, but it comes really close. A lot of situation comedies that I have seen over the years seem to have never made a “nerdy” group too prominent. Sure, you have special stereotypes like Urkel from “Family Matters,” but that’s about it. Although you can also consider Lisa and the Comic Book Guy from “The Simpsons.” “The Big Bang Theory” however, has Sheldon, Leonard, Howard, Rajesh, Bernadette, Amy, Stuart, and more unmentioned characters. It’s like I’m watching the “Revenge of the Nerds” of sitcoms. It made nerds relevant and cool, and if it were not for shows like this, I don’t think a show like “King of the Nerds” would have seen the light of day, or at least a second season. Part of me even wonders if we would even have things like the Marvel Cinematic Universe if it weren’t for “The Big Bang Theory.” Yes, superheroes are cool, but they’re traditionally meant for a nerdy demographic. This show managed to present itself fairly well to a mainstream audience to a point where they might as well have picked up nerdy interests along the way. Now I mention mainstream audience, and when it comes to this show, one of my friends made an interesting comparison about this show with another popular sitcom, specifically “Friends.” As nerds, he and I seem to agree that “The Big Bang Theory” has lost its touch over the years. Personally, in this last season, I think there have been a number of great episodes to feel like it has gotten said touch back, but that’s not the point. My friend said that the show has become less about nerds being nerds (even though there are occasionally nerdy activities or references) and has simply become “Friends” but with nerds as the main characters. I can sort of agree with that statement. It’s now more about the relationships between the characters more than anything else, which is not necessarily a bad thing, in fact as the show went on, I gave enormous praise for the program having some of my personal favorite bits of character development in anything I’ve seen. Whether it is between Sheldon and Amy or Leonard and Penny or even Rajesh and alcohol, it all adds up to be a work of art. In fact, speaking of characters, let’s talk about them.

I already mentioned I embody Sheldon, and I can honestly almost confirm that the creators behind “The Big Bang Theory” spent years trying to spy on my every behavior. Because let’s face it. Sheldon is practically a young child on the Autism spectrum. I myself have high-function autism, and it’s not necessarily a bad thing. He and I cannot stand when people are arguing in a distance which I can hear everything that’s happening, which REALLY sucks because I have sensitive ears. I still have many fears that remain from my childhood (dogs, loud noises, needles). But then again, who doesn’t fear needles? He’s obsessed with collecting comic books as I am with collecting movies. He’s always afraid of change, and there are very rare exceptions in which I would be willing to accept change. I also to this day don’t have a driver’s license! Just for the record, I’m 19 years old, and Sheldon, who started off the series in his twenties, still didn’t have his back when the show kicked off. I’ve even been told as a kid that I mumble a lot. I don’t always think that’s a bad thing, I think that just makes me look like I have informative words to say. Granted, I wouldn’t say everything about myself completely links me as a Sheldon Cooper wannabe.

This is why we move onto Leonard Hofstadter. If Sheldon is the part of me that resembles my thoughts that make me feel like a child. Leonard is me as I grow up. I started watching this show in middle school, and I kind of became aware that at this point I probably had no chance with girls. As far as I know, boys and girls would hang out together, but based on how boys wouldn’t hang out with me (I thought homework and my 39″ TV were more important every night), why should I even have a chance with girls? Granted, as middle school began to conclude, the thought of wanting a girl to hang out with became more prevalent, but if you knew me in person, you’d probably consider putting a “kick me” sign on my back. Although that is hard to know for sure because I was generally a well-liked as a person in school, and some people appreciated me at one point for being “the guy who likes game shows.” Plus, I grew up in an area where pretty much everyone to my knowledge would treat others with respect. There are various exceptions that I have witnessed throughout my life, but for the sake of not calling people out, I shall remain silent on that subject. But when you consider how the show starts out, with Sheldon and Leonard heading into their apartment and they end up meeting their new neighbor, Penny, and Leonard begins to crush on her, it’s almost similar to what my fantasy was in life.

“Our babies will be smart and beautiful.” –Leonard Hofstadter

I wouldn’t call myself the worst looking guy in the world, but there is no way that I am Channing Tatum-level attractive. I think a good chunk of women would probably not want to go out with me if they found out my interests. In fact, I have almost evolved to the point where I don’t really need a woman to be happy. Maybe that will change once I graduate college, maybe start my life’s work, and I need a new purpose or something, or if I become close with someone in college, but the future is unwritten, and I cannot control it. In fact, much like Leonard, I still have yet to have my first kiss.

“…Maybe you’re graduating and you still haven’t had your first kiss. By the way, nineteen, Geraldine Coco, wherever you are thank you.”

For the record, I turn 20 this November.

I might even resemble a little bit of Howard, who I honestly think when it comes to this show, I think any teenage boy can relate to him. Let’s face it, if this show were “Family Guy,” Howard would be Glenn Quagmire. Only thing is that he THINKS he’s outgoing but he is not as successful as would he hope. Much like Howard I appreciate my parents and I’ll be honest, I like sex. I mean, who doesn’t? Although this brings me back to how I cannot get girls, I cannot say I have ever slept with anyone. Then again, I’m rather young so it might as well be wise of me to remain in my current position. I can’t really say I have a belt buckle collection, but much like Sheldon and Leonard, I tend to collect a lot of t-shirts. Also, Howard is an engineer, and apparently when I was twelve, I took an online test and it determined that I’ll be an engineer one day. I don’t believe everything I read on the Internet, but it’s still an interesting statistic.

One thing I’ll miss from the show is how it managed to tackle current geek phenomenons. There was an episode where everyone is trying to go see “The Force Awakens,” but that is slightly interrupted by Amy’s birthday, which many consider to be one of the best in the series. There’s also an episode where the guys are trying to buy tickets to San Diego Comic-Con, but not everyone bought tickets successfully despite refreshing computer screens with extreme effort. That episode by the way has a cameo from Carrie Fisher and an AWESOME guest appearance by James Earl Jones. Then there was another one that was basically an entire parody on our current gaming market. Sheldon has trouble deciding on two competing gaming systems (PS4 & Xbox One) and he feels the need to choose one cause, ya know, upgrades!

I’m guessing if Stuart from the comic book store showed up, he’d probably go with “PC.”

I was able to relate to these topics. I was obsessed with “Star Wars,” I love video games, and the idea of gathering with other nerds in a giant building just sounds like a hoot.

In fact, there is an argument to make that if I weren’t introduced to certain ideas that “The Big Bang Theory” manages to present, I’d be a completely different person. In fact, as of now, I don’t play many sports. I am now trying to go to more “event-type” experiences at the movie theater, and I have also given a greater appreciation to a lot of overlooked art, particularly in the film industry. I say this because while I think it is fantastic that nerdy has become cool, it has me worried that comic book movies (along with live-action remakes, sequels, etc.) is all we will be witnessing from major studios like Disney for years to come. I am now latching onto independent studios like A24, Neon, and more. It allows me to have a different perspective on movies than maybe some of my friends. I’m not saying they’re stupid for watching comic book movies, because those movies are great. Did anyone see “Avengers: Endgame?” If you haven’t, I recommend it! But when it comes to film, I have now fallen into a path where I tend to sometimes watch whatever the crowd isn’t watching. Kind of like video games, when everybody was talking about “Fortnite,” I never picked up my controller to play it because EVERYBODY. WOULD. NOT. STOP. TALKING ABOUT IT. Coincidentally, the show did have a funny episode dedicated to “Fortnite.”

Also, even though I mentioned I don’t like sports, I gotta admit, bowling is pretty fun.

When I am not watching the show, I would make references to it, borrowing various quotes from the characters, and it’s definitely more than just “bazinga.” I’ll occasionally wear t-shirts associated with the show. I have watched various bonus features, including one revealing how tapings work for the show. My family and I were going to California together for the first time, and the trip to LA in particular was a Christmas gift. While we could not get into a taping for “The Big Bang Theory,” we got the next best thing. A tour of Warner Brothers Studios, where the show holds its tapings throughout each season. I got the opportunity to look at Stage 25, which was recently renamed as “The Big Bang Theory” stage, in person. Unfortunately, I do not have pictures, as I was not permitted to take them, but going into a space that I have on my TV screen perhaps more times than my PS2, was kind of a dream come true. I got to know various hidden secrets about the set, and what parts of the soundstage remained during season 12. This set was used for movies like “Casablana,” “Blade Runner,” and “Gremlins 2: The New Batch.” As for TV shows aside from “The Big Bang Theory,” it was used for “Maverick,” “Cheyanne,” and “What I Like About You.” This experience had the magic of Doctor Strange and the wonder of being above a slightly cloudy sky while possessing a window seat on a Southwest flight.

And now, since we’re at the end, I must bring something up about a season 1 episode titled “The Nerdvana Annihilation.” This episode is perhaps the most unrealistic of the entire series. That does not mean it is the worst one made, but it has elements of extreme fiction intact. Why? Leonard wins a fully-functioning time machine on eBay. Another thing to consider is that nobody else bid for said time machine. C’mon! There’s no young guy who would want to go back in time and fix that one mistake he made on his geometry test or something? But if this episode has taught me something, it’s to never let go of what makes you “you.” There’s an entire side of the story dedicated to Penny being late for work and she takes her rage out on the guys. Her frenzy allows her to reveal her bewilderment towards the guys being “grown men” who own action figures, comic books, and other nerdy items. Yes, being a nerd can make you look like a kid. But I am one, even as I grow up, who would give anything in the world to keep various aspects of my childhood. I love “Star Wars,” I love superheroes, I love game shows. It’s all been a form of escapism for me throughout many years. Even in my house, a lot remains the same. My bedroom has the same furniture for almost a lifetime. I’ve had a baseball glove chair in the room since maybe age 12. Also, you know how I don’t like sports? Eh, baseball’s actually kinda fun sometimes. I have kept just about every gaming console I have ever owned. Why? Because it is all a part of me. If I get rid of even a console I don’t play as much as I used to like my Nintendo DS Lite, a part of me would feel incomplete. Much like Sheldon Cooper, it is hard for me to adapt to change. I have lived in the same town all my life, therefore I’ve always had my spot. Similar to Sheldon’s “bazinga,” I would always use the word “amazing” when I was young. And while the show may not always showcase this, he and I both seem to be night owls. In fact, in that recently mentioned episode, “The Nerdvana Annihilation,” Sheldon got out of bed at 2AM just to fool around with the time machine.

Change is inevitable, and sometimes it just SUCKS. And it especially sucks when you can’t get over changes that have happened ages ago. Thank you Sheldon, without you, I would probably have nobody to relate to.

Without spoiling the final episode. “The Big Bang Theory” ended as it all started. With a big bang. I thought the opening few minutes (either with or without the epic “PREVIOUSLY ON” segment), made for the single best opening in the entire series. It might be up there as my favorite sitcom episode opening ever. Why? It was like I was at an “Avengers” premiere where I started cheering for the positive things that happened. I kind of regret not throwing a party. Throw a few laughs in there, you’ve got yourself the perfect appetizer for that night’s episode. It puts a perfect bow with what has been built up from the beginning of season 12, and even adds in some fan service. The episode is not perfect, witnessing Sheldon, while definitely in-character, was a tad awkward at first, but as the episode goes on, it improves to the tenth degree. I highly recommend you’d watch it, especially if you have followed the series for an extended period of time.

I’d like to thank “The Big Bang Theory” for being an amazing and one-of-a-kind source of entertainment for these years. I honestly think this show will go down as one of the greatest sitcoms of all time. And only time will tell if there is another show like it. Only time will determine if there will be another show of “Big Bang’s” quality, while also being a great influence on our modern day nerd culture.

THANK YOU JESUS! …As my mother would say. –Sheldon Cooper

And as for “Game of Thrones,” let’s hope the fans don’t cancel HBO.

Thanks for reading this post! This Tuesday I am going to see “John Wick Chapter 3 – Parabellum,” so I will have a review of that by the end of next week. As for other content, I am currently working on a post involving “Avengers: Endgame” and its odds of beating “Avatar” at the box office. Will it ever see the light of day? That’s hard to say, but I am working on it, and there is a good chance that if I have nothing else to do over the next few days (which is technically false, since I’m going to Rhode Island), I will spend some time working on that post. Be sure to follow Scene Before with an email or WordPress account so you can stay tuned for more great content! I want to know, what is your relationship with “The Big Bang Theory?” I will admit, I know some friends who think it is the worst thing on the face of the Earth, and they are entitled to that opinion. To me, it is a small part of what has shaped my life. Also, if anybody watched the recent series finale, what are your thoughts on that?

And, I would like to ask another question. What is your favorite episode? As for mine, I gotta go with “The Cruciferous Vegetable Amplification” (S4E02). Sheldon as a robot kills me every time. Scene Before is your click to the flicks, and if you would like a behind the scenes tour of the set given by someone who worked on the show, check out the video below from Mayim Bialik!

Bazinga!

Pokémon Detective Pikachu (2019): Pokémon GO To the Movies

Posted on by Jack Drees

mv5bndu4mzc3nze5nv5bml5banbnxkftztgwmze1nzi1nzm40._v1_sy1000_cr006741000_al_

“Pokémon Detective Pikachu” is directed by Rob Letterman (Monsters vs. Aliens, Shark Tale) and stars Ryan Reynolds (The Hitman’s Bodyguard, Deadpool), Justice Smith (Paper Towns, Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom), Kathryn Newton (Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri, Blockers), Suki Waterhouse (Assassination Nation, The Bad Batch), Omar Chaparro (How to Be a Latin Lover, Show Dogs), Chris Geere (You’re the Worst, Modern Family), Ken Watanabe (Inception, The Last Samurai), and Bill Nighy (Norm of the North, The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel). This film is based on the video game of the same name and is about a guy who teams up with a Pikachu to solve a mystery involving said guy’s father.

For those of you who don’t know, I really do like video games. In fact, when it comes to video games, if I were to make movies of my own, I’d base them on various video games. Granted, there is a part of me that thinks this vision would ultimately backfire because let’s face it. Video game movies suck. They just do. Even if they prove to be faithful to the source material like in “Warcraft,” it might not be something a person like me would want to watch on a Friday night. In fact, my least favorite movie of all time is based on a video game, specifically “Super Mario Bros..” Naturally, I went into this movie hoping for something. Not necessarily for the best movie ever. In fact, for many movies, those expectations are hard to live up to. I was just hoping that we would see an above average video game movie. Granted, last year’s “Tomb Raider” was rather solid in some places, but the video game movie industry/genre had some ways to go before its first kick-ass project. Granted, I have yet to see various highlights in the industry such as “Mortal Kombat,” “Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time,” and “Silent Hill.” Much like the type of movie itself, I guess I have some ways to go. But I can confirm that after seeing “Pokémon Detective Pikachu,” it was… alright. The genre didn’t really… level up… if you know what I mean.

I have been exposed to various opinions and reviews prior to going to this movie. And a lot of what is being said about this movie, I can agree with. This is a good movie for “Pokémon fans.” It goes into strategies that players may come across in their mind as they play the games, there are references that I imagine will fly over some non-gamers’ heads, but it is not to the point of utter cringe, and all of the CGI Pokémon look very appealing. They have a slightly unrealistic look to them, but that actually works for a movie like this. It’s fantasy-like, they’re not supposed to look like they’re a creature out of a live-action Disney film containing bunches of animals. They’re freaking Pokémon. The games don’t try to present them as realistic, and I thought the style that I have seen in the games made a good transition to their style on film. Although at the same time, this comes from a guy who usually doesn’t play “Pokémon” titles. I never owned a single game in the franchise, and while I did download “Pokémon GO” on my phone when it first came out, I didn’t even use it. I eventually deleted the app and it let it rest for all of eternity. But through various means such as the Internet and friends, I have been exposed to gameplay of various titles.

I have played all of the “Super Smash Bros.” games though! So there is that! *Mumbling* By the way, if you guys have yet to buy a Nintendo Switch, just buy it for “Super Smash Bros.: Ultimate” because it is a freaking masterpiece of a game that I will recommend to everyone and I think you will become a better person in life just for picking up your controller and going to town on it. Cancel all your Friday night plans and drop hundreds of dollars at GameStop just to prepare for a masterpiece of a lifetime. Just do it.

Anyway, back to the review. Let’s talk about this movie’s story. It’s weird. I can buy a city where mankind and Pokémon are equals. I can buy all of the insane creatures this film contains. I can buy a lot of this film’s absurdity. You know what I can also buy? The fact that I didn’t really care about too many characters! When it comes to the Pokémon, they’re fine. I liked pretty much all of them. Ryan Reynolds as Pikachu was a delight. Although at the same time, Reynolds becomes problematic, which is sort of a collision with a perk. As many moviegoers know, Ryan Reynolds is Deadpool. But when I see him as Pikachu, I’m almost comparing the character in my head as a more kid friendly version of Deadpool. Granted, there’s not as much meta humor that Reynolds has to deliver in terms of dialogue, but there’s still plenty of one-liners and funny lines that he manages to utter.

As for the main human in the movie, Tim Goodman, he is kind of stale. A lot of storytelling involving his character happens in the first few minutes of the film, including the mystery of his father, and I ended up not really caring for him. It’s sort of like where I was watching the “Transformers” films where I don’t entirely care about Marky Mark and (insert bangable chick’s name here) and I am mainly watching for the action and everything about the Transformers. I’ll slightly defend Sam Witwicky, partially out of probable bias through nostalgic roots, but still. The movie is called “Transformers,” much like this movie we are talking about has “Pokémon” and yet they kind of make it mainly about the human characters. Granted, I think this movie does a much better job at making it more about Pokémon at various points compared some of Michael Bay’s “Transformers” installments, but this is still an issue that is worth bringing up.

And much like “Transformers,” there is of course… a girl. Granted, they don’t sexualize her, which for a movie like this, wouldn’t have worked in the first place. It’s a movie with a family demographic partially in mind, the target audiences of “Pokémon Detective Pikachu” are not going to their local AMC to watch a porn shoot. That girl by the way is Lucy Stevens played by Kathryn Newton, who I think is a good actress. And she plays her role well in this film. I can’t see anyone else playing her. Too bad the human characters in general just don’t have the same charm as some of the Pokémon. I’m not saying I hated her character, but I had almost no reason to care about her. Although during the climax, I had a reason, but I won’t go into it.

Also, before we get into the “super effective” verdict, I would like to just point out something. Without spoiling the ending, there’s a part of it that kind of took me out of the movie. Remember how I talked about how much I can buy in this film? This ending’s too expensive for me to buy! Granted, the last scene of the film is pretty cool, because it features a particular actor (whose name I won’t reveal), but again, I would prefer savoring the flavor as opposed to spilling milk all over the floor.

In the end, while visually appealing to the point that I can call this movie “Blade Runner” meets “Pokémon,” it fails to impress on all necessary levels. There are various jokes and scenes that fell flat. I started forgetting about some elements of the movie about 24 hours after I saw it. And while this is definitely a serviceable movie for fans that I imagine even non-fans can enjoy, it did not have the oomph factor for me. For me, this is almost a good background noise movie in case there’s nothing else on TV and I am, say, writing a movie review like a moron who has nothing better to do all day. It’s kind of like “The Amazing Spider-Man.” It has great writing that fans and non-fans can latch onto, but it’s missing something. There are many positive factors behind “Pokémon Detective Pikachu,” but it does not change the fact that I would probably be fine if I had to go the rest of my life without needing to watch it again. I’m going to give “Pokémon Detective Pikachu” a 5/10.

Thanks for reading this review! This weekend is the release of “John Wick Chapter 3 – Parabellum,” one of my most highly anticipated movies of the year. I have not gone to any advance screenings of the film, I tried getting into one, but it was full once I checked. And as for my chances of seeing the film on opening weekend? Forget about it. My dad, who probably REALLY wants to see the movie, is busy this weekend. I considered going opening Thursday, but that is the night of the series finale for “The Big Bang Theory,” so I already have plans. Plus, I am going away to Rhode Island for a night on Sunday, and while there are movie theaters in my area, I doubt that will be part of my getaway activities. So the earliest I will see the movie might be Tuesday or Wednesday. As long as I can get together with my father, I can make it happen. But don’t worry, that review is coming. Be sure to follow 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 “Pokémon Detective Pikachu?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite Pokémon? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Shazam! (2019): Manchildren For the Win!

Posted on by Jack Drees

Shazam! (2019)

“Captain Sparklefingers,” I mean “Captain Marvel,” err I mean “Shazam!” is directed by David F. Sandberg (Annabelle: Creation, Lights Out) and stars Zachary Levi (Tangled, Chuck), Mark Strong (Zero Dark Thirty, The Imitation Game), Asher Angel (Audi Mack, Criminal Minds: Beyond Borders), Jack Dylan Grazer (It, Me, Myself, and I), and Djimon Hounsou (Guardians of the Galaxy, Gladiator). This film is about a young, adopted boy who comes in contact with a wizard. Once finding himself in that particular situation, he is chosen to wield magical powers. To engage with such powers, he transforms himself into an adult by utterance of the word “shazam.”

Wow! Finally! I’m reviewing this movie! This is long overdue! I saw this film in April, a week before “Avengers: Endgame” came out, so this review is not coming in at a time I’d personally prefer. Am I a Marvel fanboy for this? Nope. I’m just a busy college student. Life happens. However, I did manage to see this film a couple weeks after its initial release in 3D, which somewhat enhanced my viewing experience. And this is a comic book movie that admittedly, sounds somewhat different than others that are coming out today. Yes, much like some others, it’s packed with humor. Although, the thing that makes this pop is its elements of a coming of age story. The two main characters are young boys, one of them was just recently adopted into a family, and they learn to bond with each other. Another main difference that I won’t dive too much into is it doesn’t really make the story of fighting the villain the main factor. Origin-story-wise, it puts A LOT of emphasis on testing powers and seeing what could be done with them. The execution that went into the power testing scenes is beyond brilliant. Especially when you consider the undeniably delightful chemistry between the two main characters involved.

Speaking of positive reactions, this movie was definitely worth a watch! And I’ve been noticing something. If you have been following the DCEU for sometime during its inception, you may have noticed it has built up to a Justice League team-up. One of the neat things about this movie is how it tries to stay in this cinematic universe viewers have come to know, but there is practically little to no connection to outside lore. There are slight exceptions, but I can dig those exceptions. For example, the young brother who was already living in the main character’s new home possesses a bullet used in a fight against Superman and he’s even got a Batarang. There’s even a scene where we see a toy section in a store displaying figures of previously established DC characters. When it comes to this kinda sorta maybe cinematic universe approach, part of me digs it because this would perhaps allow filmmakers to have more freedom to think outside the box. Although then again, similar to the Marvel Cinematic Universe’s Kevin Feige, Warner Brothers hired Walter Hamada (The Conjuring, Lights Out) as the president of the Detective Comics Extended Universe. As much as I can appreciate Marvel for its consistent vibe and TV series-like format, I also appreciate DC for being less about making a connected story and more about making a story in general.

Let’s talk about Zachary Levi as the adult version of Shazam. HE’S FREAKING AWESOME. And despite meeting him in person at New York Comic Con, this is totally not biased! If anything, this is probably one of the best modern day superhero casting choices I’ve witnessed in my life. And I think part of it his to do with, believe it or not, my first impression of Levi upon meeting him in person. Think about it. He’s supposed to be playing the “adult” version of this main kid in the movie. He knows nothing about that life. At heart, he’s still a kid, but stuck in a man’s body. While I cannot really say I thought about this much when meeting him, he was kind of hyperactive and happy to be in his current position. This energy is also applied to the character of Shazam, or Billy Batson if you’d prefer to call him that. It’s like a slightly more paranoid version of Po from “Kung Fu Panda” or something. Hyperactive, curious, but also cautious of his surroundings. But one of the best parts of Shazam’s character that I already sort of implied is his will to check out his powers just for s*its and giggles.

Let’s face it, if I were a kid and I magically became a superhero, of course I’d want to try out my powers! Think about it! As a kid, I would roleplay and it would partially involve superheroes from time to time. If I have enough fun pretending to be a hero, how much fun do you think I’d have using something like a flashy laser beam to break my own window and be forced to pay for by my own parents? It would be f*cking worth it! Because, ya know, superpowers! That’s honestly where this movie happens to display some of its biggest strengths, but it doesn’t stop at superpowers. There’s actually a scene where Shazam is dealing with a couple robbers in a convenience store. Words cannot describe how funny it is. It’s almost… I dunno, god-like humor.

But in all seriousness though, I am not joking around when it comes to Zachary Levi. He is the perfect Shazam. He looks like what an adult version of Billy Batson would be, he’s occasionally hyper, not to mention an incessant goofball. As a superhero, he may not look that intimidating to villains, but this is one of those cases where that actually works from a screenwriter’s and artist’s point of view. C’mon, there’s a time when this guy happened to be referred to as “Captain Sparklefingers.” I mean, “Captain Marvel” might as well have been taken, so yeah, I can see why he’d be called that.

Now I mentioned this movie focuses more on its hero’s development as opposed to its villain story. Granted, that may be an understatement, because this villain has some family matters that play throughout the story. That villain by the way is Dr. Sivana played by Mark Strong. I have nothing against this character, in fact, if I had to complain about him to y’all, I’d be a liar. This guy is a great villain, but he partially suffers from a partial lack of memorability. There are one or two scenes where his true power is absolutely displayed that made me attached to the screen. But based on the excessive amount of time focused on our hero, the villain almost does not seem to matter as much. Part of me wants to call this a fault of this movie that shouldn’t be left undisclosed, but at the same time, based on the execution of our hero’s origins, I almost cannot even complain.

But speaking of our hero and mistakes, there is one thing I have to bring up. The main character in this movie is adopted. There is a sideplot to the film where he is trying to find his birthparents, and I won’t go into whether or not he finds them. I won’t go into much about it, but as that side plot manages to come to a conclusion, there is an utterance of dialogue that may not only be cheesy, but conceptually, it is FLAT-OUT IDIOTIC. I won’t go into it for the sake of not spoiling anything yet, you might not even know what I am talking about, but if I were doing a spoiler review right now, I’d probably make a mention of this somewhere because it sort of pissed me off. You know how some people may watch a really good movie but the ending just SUCKS? This was not the ending, in fact the actual climax of the film itself is freaking spectacular. This is almost what it reminded me of. I can tell the filmmakers wanted to get some sort of audience reaction out of what I am talking about. And they succeeded. I say so because I for one reacted angrily.

With that aside, there is still a lot to enjoy in “Shazam!.” There are a couple of cool action sequences, a ton of humorous scenes and gags, the writing is off the chain! The story feels very self-contained and unlike some MCU movies, you don’t really need to watch any thing that precedes this film. Granted, I have no idea where the DCEU is going to go, but I have a feeling that depending on whether or not the franchise continues to have success, that is going to change. But for now, I am willing to appreciate this film’s intimate screenplay. In fact, the closest that this movie actually gets to being connected in the same universe is probably towards the last scene, which I won’t talk about that much. It doesn’t necessarily tease an upcoming film, but it is something to take note of.

And one last thing I have to note before moving onto my final verdict, for those of you who are not that invested in comic books, you may not be aware that Shazam is not this movie’s hero’s original name, it was actually Captain Marvel, but due to a legal battle between comic creators DC and Fawcett, Marvel Comics eventually started their own series with a hero by said name. How MARVELOUS indeed. Now, as most modern moviegoers know, one of the most recent films in the Marvel Cinematic Universe is “Captain Marvel” starring Brie Larson as Carol Danvers. I gotta be honest, the movie was not that great. So you know what? When it comes to “Captain Marvel” films, DC did this concept better! I know a lot of people look at the DCEU and consider it to almost be a joke, but in all seriousness, not only is it getting better compared to how it was in say 2016 with movies like “Suicide Squad,” but this is just another scenario where I thought DC did a film concept better than Marvel. Coincidentally, if you guys have ever read my “Captain Marvel” review, you’d know that I said towards the end that when it comes to doing solo movies with female leads, that’s another win for DC. I personally liked “Wonder Woman” better than “Captain Marvel.” Yes, Marvel seems to have the better collective universe, but much like anyone else, they have bad days at the office. Ever seen “Thor: The Dark World?” Please don’t.

mv5bmtdizjuwzjatmdrlni00n2e1lwfkmdqtntkymdq2yja2mgmyxkeyxkfqcgdeqxvynjg2njqwmdq40._v1_sx1777_cr001777999_al_

In the end, “Shazam!” is just a good time at the movies that can put an idiotic grin on your face. It’s hilarious, charming, and conceptually pleasing. Also, I would not mind watching it again and buying it on Blu-ray in the future. Maybe if Best Buy puts out a steelbook, I’ll shell out some money for that. I like my collector’s items. Zachary Levi is a national treasure and I would like to see more work for him in the future whether it is in the DCEU or in some other realm of media. Something like comedy, perhaps a buddy cop film maybe? I’m going to give “Shazam!” a 7/10. Again, one thing that takes away points for this film is the whole side plot and that one thing about it that kind of pissed me off, other than that, this is a fun and wacky superhero flick that is certainly worth your time and money.

MARVEL: We’re making a “Captain Marvel” movie! Dope, eh?

DC: Same bat-hold. Same bat-my beer.

Thanks for reading this review! If you are interested in more superhero related content, I reviewed two other comic book movies this year, and no, I have not seen “Hellboy.” If you want to get your fix of comic book movie reviews, click the links below and check these things out! I’ve got my review for “Captain Marvel” and “Avengers: Endgame,” please check em’ out! Be sure to follow 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 “Shazam!?” What did you think about it? Or, what would you do if you happened to be a kid and found out you had superpowers? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Captain Marvel REVIEW

Avengers: Endgame REVIEW

Christopher Nolan: The Bright Auteur Rises

Posted on by Jack Drees

WARNING: The following post is a piece of college work based on months of research. As you may know, I, Jack Drees, continue to operate Scene Before every day for a general audience and film lovers everywhere, dedicating time to film reviews, news updates, countdowns, and my general opinion on various matters. If this post sounds abnormal or differing in style, it is due to an attempt to follow guidelines in order to achieve a positive grade in my class. Thanks for your attention, enjoy the post! 

Hey everyone, Jack Drees here! For the past few years on Scene Before, you, my viewers, have been exposed to a variety of film reviews, four of which are for movies directed by Christopher Nolan. For a portion of my life, I have practically been an evangelical towards his work, and if you followed this blog for some time, you’d know that. Today, however, I would like to take the opportunity to discuss something that some of you might find to be a con when it comes to Nolan. If you know about Nolan’s statistics, you’d know he generally receives extremely positive reviews, in fact the lowest Rotten Tomatoes score he received for a film he directed was a 72%. This and other factors have solidified Nolan as a filmmaking powerhouse and an auteur with an unusual amount of power.

Film buffs happen to know that Nolan is dedicated to his craft and will do a film his way, which to him, is his absolute preference. Think of Nolan as a newer incarnation of Steven Spielberg or George Lucas. In fact, as I personally watch his movies, I happen to find a similar vibe between all of them, even if they aren’t in a linked franchise or have completely different storylines. For example, Nolan’s scripts tend to have a main character who is a white male with darker hair, because diversity is totally, without objection, a top priority. Speaking of repetition, Nolan often inserts a wife character in some way who will eventually meet her fate with death. Nolan’s trademarks also include puzzle-like plots, tons of practical effects, and relying on film stock. In fact, relying on film stock is not just a trademark for Nolan, but it’s a lifestyle.

In an age where people lack the attention span to pick up a paper case, open it, and insert a media file into a player (unless you’re me, as proven above), it is almost surprising that film stock is still a thing.

But based on the efforts of Christopher Nolan and other directors including Quentin Tarantino, it is still thriving for a select number of directors, cinematographers, and movie theaters. As more and more theaters switch to digital projection, Nolan still had no problem with releasing his films the way he intended in certain areas. After all, these are his creations, not anyone else’s. Nolan and his recent films such as Interstellar and Dunkirk have surfaced in the news because they released either on 35mm or 70mm film. Digital projection, which Nolan and others see as inferior, has gotten an enormous boost thanks to the release of James Cameron’s Avatar in 2009. This is partially due to its use of 3D, which is primarily shot digitally (unless there are certain cases of post-conversion), which Nolan has yet to use for any of his films, even for cases like The Dark Knight Rises, released in 2012, a time when post-conversion to 3D was a new and popular fad and 3D Blu-rays were still being made for American audiences. Speaking of movie gimmicks, Nolan also broke ground by being the first director to shoot a Hollywood feature with IMAX cameras.

If the IMAX experience has proven anything aside from the fact that consumers are willing to pay extra money to watch Spider-Man shoot a web into their faces, it has proven that Christopher Nolan changed moviemaking by shooting The Dark Knight on what is theoretically the highest quality format for a motion picture. Nolan shot The Dark Knight with select scenes, about thirty minutes of footage to be precise, on IMAX film. IMAX’s film stock is technically 65mm film, but unlike traditional cameras of that sort, IMAX’s film camera holds film that goes horizontal as opposed to vertical. Nolan’s IMAX footage covered its brand-specific screens from floor to ceiling during the film’s theatrical run, which then carried over to the film’s Blu-ray release. Speaking of carrying over, Nolan’s pioneering efforts allowed directors like Michael Bay and Zack Snyder to create films of their own using IMAX-shot footage.

The reality is, Christopher Nolan, above all, is not necessarily a filmmaker, he’s an auteur. While people who worked with him managed to point out his calmness on set, Nolan also embodies the qualities of a filmmaker who needs to get his way. Luckily for Nolan, he has had successes from his previous films which allow him to make whatever kind of film he wants. Much like how the franchise name Star Wars is likely to get people to watch a movie, even with a character like Jar Jar Binks, the director name, Christopher Nolan, is likely to do the same. This is even during cases where Nolan does a movie that doesn’t base itself on a popular or preexisting franchise. Inception, Nolan’s first film after The Dark Knight, grossed over $800 million at the box office. Interstellar, which came out four years after Inception, managed to make under $700 million.

mv5bmta0nti5njq0nzbeqtjeqwpwz15bbwu4mde1mzkwotiy._v1_sx1500_cr001500999_al_

There is also an argument to make is that Nolan’s freedom and control comes from family roots. Aside from directing, Nolan often receives credits for writing and producing on the same films. After all, Auteur Theory, developed in the 20th century, gives cases like these as support for a director being the film’s author per se. In fact, one of his scripts is based on a short story from his brother, Jonathan Nolan, but since Christopher claims the director’s chair, he is obviously receiving more attention. Speaking of which, Nolan has a wife by the name of Emma Thomas who often works alongside him. Most of the projects where they worked together had Nolan as the director and Thomas as a producer. While this is not technically family, Nolan has managed to release almost every single one of his films (at least internationally) under the Warner Brothers label. In fact, he is not stopping, because his next film, set to release in July 2020 starring John David Washington (BlacKkKlansman) is also from Warner Brothers. Wait a minute… What happened to the white dude cliche? I’m intrigued…

To link common roots even further, followers are also aware that Nolan often recruits the same people to work on his films. Aside from his family members, he has done three films with Tom Hardy, five films with Cillian Murphy, and for each film Nolan has directed since 2005 (Batman Begins), Michael Caine had an appearance in every single one of them. Such a correlation between Nolan and Caine for example can be traced through relationships between other directors and the actors they have worked with. Jon Favreau and Robert Downey Jr. for example had an ongoing relationship that has been present through their work on films like Iron Man and Chef. Another auteur often pointed out, Tim Burton, has a significant business relationship with Johnny Depp based on their collaborations during Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, Alice In Wonderland (2010), and Corpse Bride.

If Nolan had not succeeded, developed business relationships, had family by his side, or ignored his individuality and developed a cookie cutter style that didn’t particularly pertain to him, chances are he wouldn’t have the success he does today. I love Christopher Nolan, but there is no denying that part of why I love him so much is due to his position which he practically earned. He, unlike other directors, has the ability to make whatever films they please with little to no interference from others, including studios. While the film industry as a whole has an ideology of saying that big, known franchises, and expensive, perhaps disposable films with tons of special effects are the ones that make money. Nolan steps up to the plate and doesn’t exactly cheapen the filmmaking process, nor does he ignore preexisting material, but he makes all of the material his own, which is part of why audiences like me continue to support him.

Thanks for reading this post! If you want to see more from Scene Before, be sure to follow either with a WordPress account or email! Once you hit that follow button, be sure to stay tuned for more content like my upcoming reviews for “Shazam” and “Long Shot.” I also recently scored some passes for the “Dirty Rotten Scoundrels” remake, or more specifically, “The Hustle.” So I might check that out next week depending on whether I get someone to go with me because I actually have a +1 on my pass. But let’s face it, you guys don’t care about those movies, because according to quite literally every movie-related site in existence, everybody cares about “Avengers: Endgame.” It’s what all the cool kids are talking about, even if it was made for a nerdy demographic. If you want to see my SPOILER-FREE review of the film, feel free to click the link below and check it out! Again, follow Scene Before if you haven’t already and be sure to stay tuned for more great content! I want to know, who is your favorite auteur director? Also, what is your favorite Christopher Nolan movie? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Avengers: Endgame Review! (NO SPOILERS!)

The LEGO Movie 2: The Second Part: Another Excuse to Make a Batman Movie

Posted on by Jack Drees

mv5bmtkyotkwndc1n15bml5banbnxkftztgwnzkymzk3njm40._v1_sy1000_cr006741000_al_

“The LEGO Movie 2: The Second Part,” AKA “The LEGO Movie 2,” AKA “The LEGO Movie 2: Part 2,” AKA “The LEGO Movie 2: The Fourth LEGO Movie In This Current Franchise,” AKA “The LEGO Movie 2: The One After The LEGO Movie” is directed by Mike Mitchell. This film stars Chris Pratt (Guardians of the Galaxy, Jurassic World), Elizabeth Banks (Power Rangers, The Hunger Games), Will Arnett (Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, Arrested Development), Tiffany Haddish (Girls Trip, Uncle Drew), Stephanie Beatriz (Brooklyn Nine-Nine, Ice Age: Collision Course), Charlie Day (Fist Fight, Pacific Rim), Alison Brie (BoJack Horseman, The Disaster Artist), Nick Offerman (Parks and Recreation, The Founder), and Maya Rudolph (Grown Ups, Saturday Night Live). This film takes place five years after its predecessor, exposing what exactly happened as a new, invasive LEGO army referred to as LEGO Duplo turns the happy go-lucky land of all its LEGO citizens into pieces of crap. Survivors are camping out in a city referred to as Apocalypseburg, which is basically a Mad Max-like wasteland in LEGO form. However, that’s not all, because the main character of Emmet must go on a quest to save his recently captured friends.

This film is the sequel to the box office and critical success that is “The LEGO Movie,” which to me is one of the most surprising flicks ever made. On paper, “The LEGO Movie” is one of the dumbest ideas of all time, despite how it somehow worked for video games over the years. It’s a movie about plastic building blocks that take forever to assemble and will instantly kill you once you step on them, and it somehow worked. And I don’t just mean worked, it’s up there with “The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies,” “Whiplash,” and “Interstellar” as one of my favorite movies of 2014. Such a great year for movies. AND I’M STILL PISSED IT DIDN’T GET NOMINATED FOR BEST ANIMATION AT THE ACADEMY AWARDS! Dumb f*ckery indeed! In fact, when I go to the movies, one of my frequent partners is my father, and I never see him have such a passion for many of the new releases we go see together. “The LEGO Movie” is one of the few exceptions. In fact, I’d say I’m willing to bet he likes “The LEGO Movie” more than I do, which says something especially given how I gave it a 10/10 score when I reviewed it here on Scene Before.

When it comes to the sequel however, it’s… just… good.

I am somewhat disappointed with the results of “The LEGO Movie 2: The Second Part.” While there is still LOTS of fun to be had, while there is still TONS of humor, while there are still MANY grand ideas, it just suffers from being less of a “family” movie, and catering a little more towards the kids. “The LEGO Movie 2” may be an enjoyable experience, but it drags a bit from its occasionally kiddy and less than satisfying original song track. I am not saying that the original “LEGO Movie” had no original songs put in, “Everything Is Awesome” was the definition of “catchy pop earworm.” In fact, I think there’s a song from “The LEGO Movie” that is significantly underappreciated.

Darkness!
No parents!
Continued darkness!
More darkness, get it?
The opposite of light!

Genius! Those are the actual f*cking lyrics to Batman’s Untitled Self Portrait! Sadly, we don’t get any songs as cool as that, or even as cool as the kick-ass opening number in “The LEGO Batman Movie.” However, I must say, Batman is as cool as ever.

Comic book nerds, if you guys are having a debate as to who the best on-screen Batman happens to be, this universe’s LEGO Batman (Will Arnett) interpretation BETTER qualify in your future debates, because he is freaking spectacular! There’s a meta joke in this movie between him and another character where he goes on about how awesome he is just because there were “nine movies already made about him and three currently in development.” Batman shines once again as being the ultimate version of a superhero narcissist. I can’t dive much deeper than that because, well, spoilers.

When it comes to the main character of Emmet (Chris Pratt), one part of this movie that I kind of dug is how despite being able to save an entire universe, Emmet is still technically lacking any special traits, which is pointed out in the first few moments of the flick. In fact, he’s literally back to being the same old hyperactive, giddy, happy go-lucky optimist that we were introduced to into the first movie. There’s a rehash of the first scene from the original movie when Emmet wakes up and says good morning to his city, but this time it is to his apocalyptic wasteland.

Speaking of things taken from the first movie, the movie continues its meta humor trend. I already mentioned the Batman thing, but there is a vast amount of other insertions of meta humor throughout. They make fun of convenient movie tropes. For example, hasn’t anyone ever noticed how slow doors close in movies for dramatic effect? There’s a brooding scene where the characters realize exactly how angsty they are. And there’s even an entire character dedicated to making fun of Chris Pratt!

“The name’s Rex. Rex Dangervest. GALAXY-DEFEDING ARCHAEOLOGIST, COWBOY, AND RAPTOR TRAINER WHO LIKES BUILDING FURNITURE, BUSTIN HEADS, AND HAVING CHISELED FEATURES PREVIOUSLY HIDDEN UNDER BABY FAT!”

In other words, you have Chris Pratt from other movies, combining his own characters from “Guardians of the Galaxy,” “The Magnificent Seven,” “Jurassic World,” and even Emmet himself! THANK! YOU! WRITERS! I will say, he was not as funny as I was expecting him to be (I may have hyped him up a little more than necessary), but he was still pretty dope. I will say, should they make another “LEGO Movie,” I really hope Universal undoes the cancellation of “Cowboy Ninja Viking,” because that was supposed to star Chris Pratt and if that movie comes out before “The LEGO Movie 3” and if Rex Dangervest makes a return, it would be interesting to see a modernized version of him where he partially contains the personality of the main character of that movie. That way, instead of being a galaxy-defending archaeologist, cowboy, and raptor trainer, he will then become a galaxy-defending archaeologist, cowboy ninja viking, and raptor trainer. Make it happen Warner Animation Group! Also, Universal, make that other project happen too.

If worst comes to worst, they can evolve him to “galaxy-defending archaeologist, cowboy, raptor trainer, and ship roamer.”

If you don’t get that last one, just watch “Passengers.”

On second thought, don’t watch “Passengers,” it’s not a good movie.

This movie, much like the first one, has a handful of cameos. You’ve got the DC Universe, Gandalf, Abraham Lincoln, Ruth Bader Ginsberg, Gary Payton, Sheryl Swoopes, even John McClane from “Die Hard” (or if you are IMDb, Bruce Willis)! And by the way, Bruce Willis actually has a voice in this movie! That is brilliant in every sense of the word! When it comes to this movie, it is a frenzy of fantastic ideas that are sadly hindered by musical numbers that are occasionally a pain to get through (although there is a good one featuring DC characters). I just feel like this movie is a kiddier version of its predecessor. Granted, it could definitely be worse. There aren’t many poop jokes that I recall, which is DEFINITELY a good thing.

Phil Lord and Christopher Miller worked on this movie, not the in the directing department, but they still worked on it, just like they did with the first one, and the duo are becoming two of my favorite people working in the industry. Between “The LEGO Movie,” “Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse,” “Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs,” and what I imagine would could MAYBE be a better version of “Solo: A Star Wars Story???” I feel that this duo is becoming more and more relevant by the day, with this movie being the duo’s latest success. Granted it falls more into “Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs” territory as opposed to “Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse” territory, but still. These two have a pretty solid track record thus far, and it is quite possible they could end up building a legacy similar to that of Christopher Nolan, Steven Spielberg, or Wes Anderson in the near future. Granted, I have not seen all of Lord and Miller’s work. I still haven’t seen “21 Jump Street” despite having owned it on Blu-ray for quite some time. I have faith in the Lord and Miller duo, and while this is be one of their inferior films, they still have my respect.

In the end, “The LEGO Movie 2” is a solid time at the movie theater. I’d say bring the kids, chances are they will end up enjoying it. If you really enjoyed the first “LEGO Movie,” you might find enjoyment in this as well. I will give praise to the “The LEGO Movie” franchise as a whole for having a consistent feel that doesn’t really come off as tiring. It’s lighthearted, wacky, creative, and amazingly fast-paced. I can’t confirm entirely given how I skipped on “The LEGO Ninjago Movie,” but I’ve seen three of this universe’s films at this point, and all of them have been at the very least, entertaining from start to finish. Is this the worst of the LEGO franchise? Yes, but it’s better than stepping on a LEGO brick. But to be completely real, just about anything is. I’m going to give “The LEGO Movie 2: The Second Part” a 7/10. Thanks for reading this review! If you are subscribed to this blog, stay tuned because it is currently Oscar season, and there is a good chance that I’ll have at least one post related to the Academy Awards coming up in the near future. I’ve made it a tradition to do a recap, which I may do again this year. And to be honest, I have the exact opposite of good feelings for this year’s ceremony. Between how the Academy has treated its technical members, to nearly implementing a Best Popular Film category, to not having a host this year, I am just scared at this point! But fear not! Because I just did my own awards show! If you want to view the 1st Annual Jackoff Awards, there’s a box down below that will take you right where you need to go! I should warn everyone who plans on reading this thing, BUCKLE UP, because it is a LONG post. But it is intentionally long, it’s a creative choice! Be sure to follow Scene Before either with a WordPress account or email so you can stay tuned for more great content! I want to know, did you see “The LEGO Movie 2: The Second Part?” What did you think about it? Or, of the current franchise of LEGO movies, which is your favorite? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

The Mule (2018): Clint Eastwood’s Second Disappointment of 2018

Posted on by Jack Drees

MV5BMTc1OTc5NzA4OF5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTgwOTAzMzE2NjM@._V1_SY1000_CR006741000_AL_

“The Mule” is directed by Clint Eastwood (Million Dollar Baby, Sully) and stars himself alongside Bradley Cooper (Guardians of the Galaxy, A Star Is Born), Laurence Fishburne (The Matrix, Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice), Michael Peña (American Hustle, Crash), Dianne Wiest (Life in Pieces, Law & Order), and Andy Garcia (Geostorm, Ocean’s Eleven). This movie is based on a true story and an article from The New York Time called “The Sinaloa Cartel’s 90-Year-Old Drug Mule.” It’s a about a guy by the name of Earl Stone, who is a war veteran, and he claims that he made the mistake of putting work before family. He missed a couple of important events, he cared for his plants more than his children, and he seems to be always doing something that will keep him from his family. Throughout the film, we see Stone trying to get cash for transporting loads on his truck under the responsibility of a Mexican drug cartel.

I haven’t seen much of Clint Eastwood’s work. As a film buff, or at least that’s what I like to call myself, part of me is slightly surprised that I have not looked into more of his stuff. I have seen “Sully,” “The 15:17 to Paris,” and “The Good, the Bad and the Ugly.” Now that “The Mule” is in cinemas everywhere, it allows me to dive deeper into seeing how talented Clint Eastwood really is, not only as an actor, but as a director. What I’ve seen from him acting-wise is pretty serviceable, including what I’ve seen from him in this movie. However, thus far, I have seen him direct competently, but there are other directors I prefer compared to him. I much prefer the work of filmmakers like Christopher Nolan (Interstellar, Memento), Wes Anderson (The Grand Budapest Hotel, Isle of Dogs), and Damien Chazelle (Whiplash, La La Land). While this is at times, a nice looking, and rather well done film from a technical and acting perspective, the fact is that I was honestly disappointed.

When I saw “The 15:17 To Paris” this year, I felt the same way as I do now. Clint Eastwood is a household name in Hollywood. But throughout a portion of the year, a part of me thought that was just Eastwood’s appetizer to get to the real film he wants to tackle in 2018. After all, the movie was released in February, which is one of the dumpster fire months for movies, so there’s a good chance that either the studio or Eastwood himself may have been dissatisfied over the outcome of what eventually became “The 15:17 To Paris.” The good news was that this was not the only film to be released in 2018 that is directed by Clint Eastwood. Maybe “The Mule” would be better than “The 15:17 To Paris.” Well, it was, but that’s not saying much because, again, I was disappointed.

Let’s talk about Clint Eastwood in this film, he does a good job performance-wise, but when it comes to his character, I have mixed thoughts about him. I can understand the way he felt at certain times. The way the character manages to develop is also charming. But there are certain qualities attached to him that are kind of off-putting. He would occasionally tell people they are stupid for using cell phones and the Internet, and there’s actually a scene that makes him come off as a less likable version of Hugh Hefner. I say that because Clint Eastwood is in his eighties, he’s playing a character around his age range. There’s a scene where we see him with some chicks in a bedroom, they’re all seducing him and removing his clothes, it’s not traditionally something that I would pay to see. Granted, “The Mule” is not a family movie, and I never asked for it to be. But I can’t recall the last time I said, I’m gonna go see Clint Eastwood f*ck someone twice as young as him. I also will say, age is just a number, and I’m not against someone dating a person much younger or older than them as long as it makes both partners of the relationship happy, but seeing an eighty-something year old Clint Eastwood engaging in sexual behavior with women that are much younger then him is not even close to my cup of tea. I don’t hate sex in movies, and this is based on a true story, so it could be worse, but it is cringeworthy as an idea.

I will say, despite my gripes with Eastwood’s character, I wouldn’t consider him the worst character in the movie, because a good portion of the film involves us as an audience getting a glance at the DEA investigators played by Bradley Cooper, Michael Peña, and Laurence Fishburne. I really didn’t care for any of these people. After all, the only time I legit gave a flying f*ck about them was towards the end of the movie. Oh yeah, I even completely forgot Laurence Fishburne’s character was even in the movie! Why are we here?!

This movie seems to pack in the moral that family is more important than work. It seems to suggest that being a part of a group of people you are attached to by relation is more important than being famous or busy. I will say, as a freshman in college, I did not choose to be busy for five days a week, other classmates who got to submit class choices before me did. But that’s not the point, my biggest wonder about the film is if Clint Eastwood has ever applied this moral that he seems to be hammering in towards his daily life. Granted, Eastwood did not write “The Mule” or the source material which it is based on, so therefore it cannot completely be his vision, but I wonder if someone as famous as Eastwood has been through his life making a similar mistake to this movie’s main character. Part of me wonders if Eastwood even relates to him. The regret of not seeing your family as much as one would desire can make for a compelling character, but the thing about Clint Eastwood is that he is such a famous actor and director. Not to mention he’s cheated many times. Granted, things are not as always as they seem, people change, and Eastwood is portraying a “character,” not himself. Nevertheless, despite a fine performance, part of me doesn’t completely buy Eastwood as his character.

I will say though, while I may be bashing this movie a little bit, one of the biggest positives I will point out is that there is one scene, I won’t specify, that has to do with death. It shows how people come together in a time of need, the fear of not knowing what’s going to happen when you’re going to die, not to mention the fear of dying itself. That is the best part of the movie and is probably the part I’ll admire the most as I reflect on “The Mule.”

In the end, “The Mule” is yet another dissatisfying attempt at a film from Clint Eastwood this year. I was talking with some family members as the year was coming to a close, and there are a few people I know who were anticipating and excited for “The Mule” to come out. I don’t know how many of them saw the movie by now, but in all seriousness, I don’t think got much good out of seeing “The Mule.” It’s not the worst movie of the year, not even close to be completely honest, but for a movie with Eastwood’s name on it, it seems that there could have been a lot more delivered to provide satisfaction than what was given to me as an audience member. I will say though, the acting is five times better than “The 15:17 To Paris” so that’s a plus! I’m gonna give “The 15:17 To Paris” a 6/10. Thanks for reading this review, pretty soon I’m gonna have my review up for “Instant Family,” a comedy starring Mark Wahlberg and from the same director who did “Daddy’s Home,” also starring Mark Wahlberg. Also, after I finish that review, be sure to stay tuned for my top 10 BEST movies of 2018 and my top 10 WORST movies of 2018! I will also say that the Golden Globes are on this Sunday, so if you want to see me talk about them, I might do a recap, but if I don’t, there’s a high chance I’ll be livetweeting throughout the show. To see my potential livetweets to the Golden Globes this Sunday, follow me on Twitter at @JackDrees, and feel free to hit the notification bell if you want Golden Globes tweets shoved right in your face. Be sure to follow 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 “The Mule?” What did you think about it? Or, since Clint Eastwood has worked on both “The 15:17 To Paris” and “The Mule,” which of these two movies do you prefer? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Aquaman (2018): A Big Splash of Fun

Posted on by Jack Drees

MV5BOTk5ODg0OTU5M15BMl5BanBnXkFtZTgwMDQ3MDY3NjM@._V1_SY1000_CR006741000_AL_

“Aquaman” is directed by James Wan (The Conjuring, Furious 7) and stars Jason Momoa (Game of Thrones, Conan the Barbarian), Amber Heard (The Danish Girl, 3 Days To Kill), Willem Dafoe (Spider-Man, xXx: State of the Union), Patrick Wilson (Fargo, Insidious), Dolph Lundgren (Rocky IV, Masters of the Universe), Yahya Abdul-Mateen II (The Get Down, The Greatest Showman), and Nicole Kidman (Boy Erased, Big Little Lies). This film is based on the Detective Comics property that is probably mocked more than any other. Fittingly, this movie is most likely to be seen by people who are mocked more than any other. The plot to “Aquaman” is that Arthur Curry is the heir to the throne in his underwater kingdom, Atlantis. He also must unleash his inner hero and defend the world.

The world as we know it seems to have a very complicated relationship with the Detective Comics Extended Universe, and this includes myself. I have seen all the movies in its franchise thus far. I really enjoyed “Man of Steel.” “Batman v. Superman” is not as good as I would have hoped, but it’s still watchable. “Suicide Squad” is just plain awful, even though I enjoyed it the first time around. “Wonder Woman” was spectacular, and at one point, was probably my favorite movie of 2017. “Justice League” was pretty good, in fact, I honestly think I enjoyed it more than a lot of other people did. However, there is no denying that the turnout of the movie, almost felt like a movie that went through development hell. There were some clashing tones, lackluster effects at times, and Steppenwolf was kind of a one-dimensional villain. Then again, it’s hard to blame everybody because the technical director, Zack Snyder, needed Joss Whedon to fill his shoes for post-production because he lost his daughter to suicide, but nevertheless. I personally thought while DC was not as big or as close to quality as the Marvel Cinematic Universe, they were heading in the right direction. This direction personally tends to continue with “Aquaman” because it’s just a damn good time at the movies.

Comic book movies are perhaps the biggest trend in film right now, and I don’t know when it is going to stop, or even IF it is ever going to stop. If somebody were to ask me, what the definition of “comic book movie” would be, I’d just point them straight to “Aquaman.” Now I mean that in the most generous of ways, because the reality is that I tend to be a complete nerd who enjoys comic book movies. But when I think of comic books, superheroes, and stuff like that. I tend to think of big spectacles, compelling characters who have interesting backstories, epic fights, and stories that don’t necessarily need to be completely catered to logic. This is THAT movie. Without getting into heavy spoilers, let me just tell you about some of the weird s*it that goes down in “Aquaman.”

  • An Octopus plays the drums!
  • Laser sharks!
  • Underwater gladiator fights!
  • Occasional cartoony music!
  • Jumping off an aircraft and landing into a desert with no pain whatsoever!
  • Getting inside a giant fish who apparently doesn’t eat everything in its mouth!
  • Witty banter!
  • A shark nearly breaks the glass in an aquarium!
  • And of course, a man can talk to fish.

This is not just a movie, it’s a Saturday morning cartoon in all of its glory. And in all honesty, it’s actually better than “Thor: Ragnarok,” which I’ve heard from some people is like a Saturday morning cartoon, but in my eyes, that’s not what it should have been. I would have much preferred seeing a darker version of the story, one where there is despair! But no, you gotta get kids in the theater! La-de-frikin-dah! But the thing about “Thor: Ragnarok” is while it is a superhero movie and might as well be something that kids can enjoy, it seemed much lighter compared to the previous two “Thor” movies. It feels like a change of pace that I wasn’t able to grasp onto. “Aquaman” has yet to have his own standalone film, so therefore, I didn’t really know what to expect. A lot of information prior to the to release of “Aquaman” can be interpreted in one’s own imagination. What really matters is how people like me react to the execution. And I thought the execution was pretty swell if you ask me.

Visually speaking, this is one of the best movies of the year. Someone really must have had fun with the concept art for this film, because this film feels like what happens when you create Dungeons & Dragons underwater. I wanted to know more about the lore and mythology behind Atlantis. I mean, it really doesn’t surprise me that this movie looks good. After all, I have the fighting game “Injustice: Gods Among Us” and Atlantis happens to be my favorite stage in the entire game.

Let’s talk about Arthur Curry, AKA “Aquaman.” He’s played by Jason Momoa who we’ve seen in “Justice League” as the title character but now we get a much more personal look. One thing I will say about many superheroes is that they seem to highly associate with one certain word. With “Spider-Man,” he seems to clearly define an outsider, a nerd. With “Thor,” he seems to define a powerful god. With “Aquaman,” he may be that “chosen one” cliche per se, but he also seems to come off as a regular, everyday guy. There’s a scene with him at the bar where I got this vibe that he is that character on a sitcom that a main character would want to have a beer with. Also, out of all the superheroes that I’ve seen on screen, “Aquaman” by far, possibly might be the most masculine out of all of them. He’s ripped, he’s ready to have a good time, and that haircut, while it makes this dude look like a lady, it certainly just screams “MAN!”

Also, Mera? Yeah. She’s cool. I’d just say she’s hot and leave the description at that, but that’s not the point. I will say that prior to seeing “Aquaman” I went out and bought Mera’s Funko Pop before even going out to see the film. Not only did it look cool, but based on how awesome Mera is in this movie, the Pop was well worth the money. When I saw the “Ghostbusters” remake back in 2016, I imagined personally how much better the movie would be had it included half a team with girls and half a team with boys, to show gender equality, not to mention men and women working together for the better of society. This dynamic duo does not disappoint! Mera doesn’t feel like a sidekick and instead feels like Aquaman’s equal. They go together like bread and butter!

Also, one common complaint that many comic book movies seem to be getting nowadays is the inclusion of lackluster villains. Out of the DCEU films, I gotta say that one of the villains of “Aquaman” is the best one in the DCEU thus far. Specifically, Aquaman’s brother, King Orm. And to add to all of this Saturday morning cartoon glory, in my eyes, this guy really does resemble the word dick if you ask me. He reminds me of Legolas’s father from “The Hobbit.” Also, one thing that we’ve seen in a couple of recent comic book films like “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2” and “Spider-Man: Homecoming” is that the main villain has some previous relation to the main character, “Aquaman” manages to continue that trend, while not necessarily improving upon it, but not destroying it either.

I really want to talk about the action in this film. One thing I’m noticing a lot nowadays is that in certain action flicks like “Kingsman: The Secret Service,” “Atomic Blonde,” and “The Hitman’s Bodyguard,” there is a really long one-take sequence where the camera does not cut away from whatever is going on in terms of action. While this movie doesn’t have THAT, there is one notable longer than usual take action scene in the beginning of the film that completely set the tone for what’s to come. Now keep in mind, this movie was directed by James Wan, who also directed “Furious 7.” That is not my favorite “Fast & Furious” film, but in terms of action and stunts, it’s probably the best. Based on his stellar action choreography and directing in that movie, it provides an excellent transition from there to here. Going back to Saturday morning cartooniness, a lot of the fighting is not just stylistically pleasing, but it’s big and loud, it kind of sent chills down my spine at this point. And, to compare this movie to “Black Panther,” Aquaman has to duel against his brother in a gladiator style ring, all of it is epic, brings things that I usually don’t see in movies. The most notable difference is that a lot of the fighting is done underwater. Granted, it’s not like the filmmakers went into the water and created a gigantic world by hand. In fact, if they actually did that, this movie actually would have probably been worse because it wouldn’t look as fantastical as it does now. Granted, there are times where I do draw a line on a movie looking fantastical, but this to me is a believable fantastical vision.

When I got home from this movie, I was able to say that this movie in no way breaks new ground. Granted, some of the action is stellar, but I felt like I’ve seen a portion of it before. However, the movies I was able to compare this to were actually likable choices. One of the easiest picks was “Black Panther.” You have this guy who is heir to the throne, who is eventually challenged by somebody for that position. The way they get to determine whether someone is worthy is through a duel. And honestly, the way they do the duel in this movie is honestly better than “Black Panther.” It feels more like an event, whereas the duel in “Black Panther” just like a couple of friends watching you play Classic mode on “Super Smash Brothers.” It was more like an underwater version of the Planet Hulk scene in “Thor: Ragnarok.” Coincidentally, this movie reminded me of “Thor,” because you have this one slightly out of place being trying to be a better version of himself. Not to mention, like in “Thor,” Aquaman is destined to rise to the throne. I also said this film kind of reminded me of a “Lord of the Rings” movie. While this is nowhere near as compelling as say “Return of the King,” it had elements of “Lord of the Rings” intact. There is a scene where our main characters have to trek through a piece of land for some time. At times the movie feels like a road trip, one moment you’re in the Sahara, the other you’re in Italy. La-de-la-de-da. Not to mention, there are some big, massive fights in the film with tons of special effects. This is where you also get to see the laser sharks in action at times. The other film this reminds me of is “Fast & Furious,” which to me is no surprise because of the director once being attached to direct “Furious 7.” It’s big, loud, absurd, and overall just balls to the wall.

Going back to the action, I gotta point one thing about it. As I said before, the action in this movie is f*cking amazing. This is one simple comparison I have to make because I’m a complete and total nerd, and nerds have opinions. When it comes to Marvel, they know how to create a story, they know how to write something, maybe not always something compelling, but something that is structured properly and is not in danger of breaking apart. When it comes to DC, one thing I’ve noticed in all of their movies is that the action is always worth the price of admission. Granted, Marvel tends to have good action, but it doesn’t hold a candle to DC. It’s always fast paced, rumbly tumbly, and it feels like something that would be in a nerd’s fantasy world. I would like to thank “Aquaman” for keeping DC’s action-based identity alive.

In the end, “Aquaman” is not the best superhero movie of the year. In fact, it came out a week after “Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse,” so it already has a tough competitor. What it really is though is the definition of what a superhero movie should be. Fun, big, and a fine form of escapism. This is certainly a crowd-pleasing movie, and honestly, I enjoyed it more than “Black Panther.” I know some people will want to kill me for saying that, but I’m just telling the honest truth. Jason Momoa’s great as Aquaman, Amber Heard is equally as wonderful as Mera. The two have great on-screen chemistry together, and I loved every minute of the movie. I’m gonna give “Aquaman” a 7/10. Before I go any further, I gotta point out something about this movie that sets it apart from a film like “Justice League.” One thing I noticed about this film is the runtime, and it is two hours and twenty-three minutes. While some people might consider that a bit long for their liking, I honestly don’t mind it, and in some ways, it’s better than “Justice League.” When it comes to “Justice League,” it comes in nearly a couple of hours even. That is a movie with more heroes and a lower runtime. It really just feels more like a corporate cash-in effort than anything else. Granted, somewhere around the two hour mark is your typical superhero movie, but some could argue that “Justice League” deserved to be more than two hours in order to make a better product. “Aquaman,” which comes in nearly two and a half hours, feels more like it is part of a vision as opposed to a corporate product. And for that, I have nothing but respect for the studio and the filmmakers. Granted there is an argument to be made that “Batman v. Superman” is too short at a two and a half hour long runtime, but I imagine there are some people arguing it is also too long. This world is divided! Also, to enhance your experience as much as possible, go see this in a theater, on the biggest screen possible, with the highest sound quality possible. Go to RPX or IMAX, you won’t be disappointed, and stay for the mid-credits scene! Thanks for reading this review! Pretty soon I’ll have a couple of reviews up for “The Mule” and “Instant Family,” as far as I know, those will be my last reviews before I put up my countdowns of my top 10 BEST and WORST movies of the year. Stay tuned for all of that, and if you like content like this, be sure to follow 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 “Aquaman?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite superhero movie of 2018? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

A Star is Born (2018): Lady Gaga Can Act?!

Posted on by Jack Drees

mv5bmje3mdq0mta3m15bml5banbnxkftztgwmdmwndy2ntm-_v1_sy1000_cr006741000_al_

“A Star is Born” is directed by Bradley Cooper (Guardians of the Galaxy, Joy), who also stars in the film as well, alongside Lady Gaga (Machete Kills, Sin City: A Dame to Kill For) as two singers who have both of their individual problems in life. Bradley Cooper plays a country vocalist who has a drinking problem and Lady Gaga plays someone who writes her own songs but lacks the courage to sing those songs. Both meet each other, fall in love, and go on a journey together as they sing.

This was a movie I was looking forward to this year. Bradley Cooper is not a bad actor, and judging by the idea of this movie alone, it seemed like a good idea on paper to get a singer (Lady Gaga) to act in a role that primarily involves singing. Also, one thing that really interested me was the fact that Bradley Cooper, someone who is usually known for acting, actually decided to write and direct this film. Granted, this just shows his range in the film industry, especially when you begin to consider how great this film truly is. But you know what? I gotta get something out of the way, it has problems, so just to scratch those off the board, I’m gonna tackle those first.

One problem that I imagine is going to get some controversy is the songs in this movie. This may be just me, but the main song in the movie, “Maybe It’s Time,” just didn’t work for me. I don’t know, the fact that the same lyrics are used more than a single time in a row just felt slightly off-putting. Granted, it might almost make me look like a hypocrite because there’s a song that has nothing to do with this movie, known by the name “Roadhouse Blues,” which has a similar tactic. Then again, I find this movie’s song to be a bit more serious, and I found the tactic in “Roadhouse Blues” perhaps a bit funnier. Speaking of songs, I don’t feel like there’s going to be many songs from this movie that I’m either going to remember or want to listen to again. And that’s kind of sad because this movie revolves around music and singing. I imagine the studio wanted to sell an album based off this movie. Chances are they just lost a customer! It’s not like I walked out of “La La Land,” where I not only remembered songs from the movie, but I had some of urge inside of me that made me want to listen to certain songs again.

I’ll say once again, this film is directed by Bradley Cooper. This is actually his directorial debut and I gotta say, this is a pretty good debut. Not as good as it could have been. I will say there could have been some improvements. But as far as lighting goes, I really like the bar scene. The lighting of the bar really stood out to me. I don’t know why, but it just felt like something you’d probably encounter in a big city. Cinematography wise, some of the shots sometimes immersed you into concerts, maybe even toward’s Bradley Cooper’s typical everyday life. As decent as the directing may have been, especially for a debut, it doesn’t hold a candle to the fantastic acting. Bradley Cooper’s performance as Jack was believable and had some emotion beneath it. You can see this broken singer who is still chugging along with his life. Also, for those who don’t know, the singing in the movie is Bradley Cooper’s actual voice. It kind of reminded me of Tim McGraw if he happened to combine with Rick Deckard from “Blade Runner.”

The best performance in the movie however, hands down, is Lady Gaga. While this movie is mainly about Bradley Cooper’s character’s life, I gotta say, character and acting-wise, Lady Gaga dominates as the character of Ally. Casting-wise, I gotta say, it may almost feel cheap on paper getting a singer to do an acting gig. Why not give it to an actor? But when you consider the fact that Lady Gaga is playing a singer, you know why she was chosen for her specific role. And it’s not like Lady Gaga is new to the world of acting. Just look at her IMDb! Seriously though, great casting! Although my one problem with the character, despite Lady Gaga’s killer performance, is the nose story. I seriously have to ask, is this based on true events? I can understand people being insecure about their looks. But not only am I not aware of people being insecure of how their nose appears, but when it comes to Lady Gaga, she didn’t make that story believable. I sort of said this before, and I’ll say it again This is like getting Mila Kunis, who was then recently nominated at the Teen Choice Awards in the Female Hottie category, earned the #2 spot on AskMen’s Top 99 Women list, and earned Esquire’s Sexiest Woman Alive in 2012 to play a stay at home mom who wears “typical mom clothes.” Maybe this statement is technically a little invalid because I’m a guy, and it seems to be a gender-oriented stereotype that guys don’t usually care about their own looks as much as women do, but I usually don’t see people complain about their nose, or say someone’s nose looks ugly. That idea is almost cheesy at this point. But in reality, despite the weird writing, Lady Gaga hit it home with her performance and made the movie.

Another highlight performance comes from Sam Elliot (Road House, Mission: Impossible), who plays the brother of the main character. This character goes by the name of Bobby and he seems to know that something is up with his brother. He’s trying to get the message across to his brother that he shouldn’t be drinking as much as he is. Clearly the brother is not listening. His performance is maybe a little more quiet than some of the others in the movie, but in the end that’s what makes it great.

Also, for those who are curious to know, there is a dog that plays a role in the movie and believe it or not, that dog actually happens to be Bradley Cooper’s own pet. When I first heard about this, I thought that little factoid was rather interesting. I went to see this movie with my mother and sister, they thought the dog was cute, but I’ll be honest with you, and if Bradley Cooper is reading this, I love your work, I apologize, it looks like a canine Fozzie Bear, and not in a good way. This does not affect the score, and my opinion of the dog has nothing really to do with how I feel about the movie, but I just thought I’d let you know about the little factoid if you were curious.

In the end, “A Star Is Born” is awesome, and if you are planning on seeing this, don’t wait for streaming, don’t wait for the DVD, don’t wait for On Demand, go see it in the theater. I actually went to see this movie in Dolby Cinema at AMC, there were literally parts where I felt like I was in a concert. I have my gripes with the movie, but this movie certainly had enough to admire to the point where I consider it one of the better flicks I’ve seen this year. As far as Bradley Cooper as a director goes, I’d like to see more of his work, and given how he also has a screenplay credit for this movie, I’d like to see more from him in that field as well. I’m going to give “A Star is Born” an 8/10. Thanks for reading this review! Tomorrow I’m going out to see the new movie directed by Damien Chazelle, “First Man,” which is based on the events of the Apollo 11 mission. Be on the lookout for that. Sticking on that topic, I’m not sure, but depending on my work load this week and how I feel, I’m going to do an extra post related to “First Man” aside from the review. I’m not gonna give any details as to what it is, but please stay tuned. Speaking of things of to be on the lookout for, I am also going to have my analysis of my time at New York Comic Con, so stay tuned for that. Be sure to follow Scene Before with your WordPress account or email so you can stay tuned for more great content! I want to know, did you see “A Star is Born?” What did you think about it? Or, just out of curiosity, not that it’s going to happen, but do you see Bradley Cooper potentially being able to direct “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3?” Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Gravity (2013): Life in Space Is Impossible

Posted on by Jack Drees

Hey everyone, Jack Drees here! Some of you may be aware that I am currently doing a series of reviews which involve space movies. Last week I did my review for “2001: A Space Odyssey.” I’m pretty sure I HAVE NOT talked about the movie before. LOL. Now it is time for my second entry in the series. After this week, I will be tackling another space movie, which is all being done in preparation for the upcoming Damien Chazelle directed “First Man.” This movie is going to release on October 12th everywhere in 2D and IMAX so look around for your local showtimes regarding the film. As for the movie we’re going to be talking about today, that is going to be the 2013 flick “Gravity.” In fact, coincidentally, this review is being brought to you EXACTLY FIVE YEARS AFTER “GRAVITY” CAME OUT IN THEATERS EVERYWHERE. Therefore, this review feels very fitting. Without further ado, let’s blast off, and get going with the review!

MV5BMTY1NTc0NTA0OV5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTgwOTE4MjgwMTE@._V1__SX1859_SY884_

“Gravity” was directed by Alfonso Cuarón (Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, Children of Men), stars Sandra Bullock (The Proposal, The Heat) alongside George Clooney (The American, Batman & Robin) and revolves around a girl by the name of Ryan Stone (Bullock). She is in space working with Matt Kowalski (Clooney) when all of sudden their mission doesn’t go according to plan. A bunch of debris coming towards them causes a separation in crew members, and now it is up to Kowalski and Stone to survive together in space.

Now this is the start of the review so I might as well set the mood.

AT 600KM ABOVE PLANET EARTH THE TEMPERATURE FLUCTUATES BETWEEN +258 AND -148 DEGREES FAHRENHEIT

THERE IS NOTHING TO CARRY SOUND
NO AIR PRESSURE
NO OXYGEN

LIFE IN SPACE IS IMPOSSIBLE

Aside from the Warner Brothers logo which happens to introduce the movie, this is the first thing that can be seen on screen regarding “Gravity.” There are many introductions to a movie that can either remind you what you’re in for or get you excited for what’s to come. This one succeeds at both tasks. The rise in the music, the black screen, and the fades of the text. All of these remind you that you’re in for a ride. You have to strap yourself in. Many bumps are ahead. There’s even some sounds in the background that might as well associate with what a disaster in space would end up being.

Then… you cut to…

SPACE.

Much like the space shots in the last movie I reviewed, specifically “2001: A Space Odyssey,” pretty much all of them are insanely gorgeous. I will probably give the 1 up to “2001” over “Gravity” when it comes to space shots based on what it is shot on and how they actually crafted everything in space as supposed to using CGI (you can’t really do that in 1968), but given how realistic the CGI looks in this movie, I am almost convinced at times that this actually is space. I had a conversation with a companion months after this movie came out where she uttered this movie is basically “all visual effects.” She’s right. The amount of effective green screen used in “Gravity” actually blows my mind. It’s almost like we’re witnessing “Jurassic Park” in space. I say that because “Gravity,” like “Jurassic Park” relies heavily on CGI and the way they’ve executed visual effects in both movies just feel like they can blow your mind out of the water.

Speaking of shots, this movie came out in 2013, and as far as movies released that year go, this one won Best Cinematography at the Academy Awards. And holy crap this movie deserves it. Let’s talk about some of the unique shots in “Gravity.” When it comes to “Gravity,” the first shot I think of is actually the earliest one we see in the film. We see Earth, and a spacecraft is coming in. We also get to see our characters. If you have never seen this movie, this is probably gonna get you to want to check this movie out. That shot goes on for somewhere around ten minutes! Can you imagine how much rehearsing went into that shot? Can you imagine how much preparation the director and people behind the camera had to go through? I wonder what the storyboards must have been like!

Another cool shot is one that is pretty much reminiscent of a first-person game. And I mean that literally, they have FIRST-PERSON shots in this movie. There’s one in the middle of the film that has Ryan Stone trying to get into the International Space Station and as she opens the door to get inside, you can get a view into her helmet just before the door flies as she tugs onto it.

Take that, “Hardcore Henry!” You stole “Gravity’s” idea! I’ve seen this movie in IMAX, and as I reflect on what this movie has, it just makes me want to create a petition to rerelease this film in the format so I can experience shots like the ones I mentioned in such an immersive way.

Going back to visual effects, we need to talk about 3D. There are VERY few movies that I think have been worth the extra money for 3D. Some include “The Hobbit” trilogy, “Mad Max: Fury Road,” and f*ck it, even the stupid “Ghostbusters” remake. Gotta give it credit for something, ya know. “Gravity” is also in such a category. You have many scenes where debris and characters are flying everywhere and it’s all just a visual spectacle to the face. It’s like you’re in space and you’re constantly getting hit in the head with debris! Only thing is you’re much more likely to survive because in all practicality you might as well be Dominic Toretto from “Fast & Furious.”

I can’t wait for “Fast & Furious” in space. It’s gonna be great.

One of the most immersive scenes in the movie comes from when Ryan Stone changes spacesuits and is outside the ISS. More debris is incoming, and all of a sudden, the ISS is doomed. You’re seeing bits and pieces flying everywhere and it is just like going on a ride at Universal. While Ryan Stone is certainly in danger, you feel like you’re in danger as well. I also love the line given by Ryan after she is free from any more suffering in this incident.

“I hate space.”

One of the main characters in “Gravity” is played by George Clooney. His name is Matt Kowalski, and he seems to have a knack for telling stories. As I watched this movie, I noticed that when the mood seems to be light, he would tell a story, maybe it is one the characters have heard before. If not, he tells one that has a similar vibe or structure to it.

Another main character, and I’m talking about someone who is technically THE main character is Sandra Bullock’s Ryan Stone. Talk about one of the best established characters of the decade. She starts off this movie as a seemingly normal character and then you get into her backstory. It’s almost like watching a Pixar movie that doesn’t really gear itself towards children. I mean, HER KID DIED. All she does when she isn’t in space, is go to work and drive. That’s gotta be the most boring life imaginable. I mean, she doesn’t clean McDonald’s restrooms, but even so. Given her backstory and the fact that she is TRULY pulling through, it just makes you root for the character that much more.

I gotta say though, when it comes to the end, that’s where this movie falls flat. This film is an hour and thirty-one minutes, but I don’t know how to feel about the ending. Without going into spoilers, it’s not an out of place ending, but I don’t know, I kind of wanted to see more than just what we got. Also, speaking of out of place, there’s a song that you can hear at the end of the movie and the credits, one of the weirdest song choices in movie history.

Also, regarding out of place stuff that I won’t really spoil, George Clooney’s character does something towards the end of the movie that really, honestly, makes zero sense. If you want to get technical with me, I might even say there are two things. I don’t even know, it just feels out of place. If anything, I could say it might be associated with an illusion or some sort of vision, maybe symbolism, it just makes the movie feel very strange and I just don’t understand why he would be doing what he’s doing.

Now it is time to get…

NITPICKY!

I’ll be honest with you, I don’t do work with rockets, I have no scientific background in anything related to space, I don’t work for NASA. My friend does, but she’s busy doing her own thing, so no, I didn’t ask her to help me out with this post. And you know what? I’d probably do a fine job noting some inaccuracies that can be seen in “Gravity,” but the fact is, I’d really be taking the words out of someone’s mouth. To be specific, the words of Dr. Neil DeGrasse Tyson.

Some of you might remember the pointing out of scientific inaccuracies since early on in this movie’s release. But one of the more notable bits when it comes to that is from Tyson. He went on Twitter and had a few things to say.

Again, it’s nitpicky, it’s not like we have everybody in the world going around saying the same thing as this guy. Maybe some people would complain about the single-dimension of George Clooney or the cheesy lines that occasionally pop up. But at the same time, science is something that I’m willing to bet a number of filmmakers want to get right in their movies. If your movie has something that maybe in the screenplay was written to be completely compelling, but on screen has the most glaring scientific flaw, some people might point out the scientific flaw as opposed to what makes the scene a thing of beauty. In fact, you know that friend at NASA I was talking about? Even she sometimes says that Hollywood and science don’t always mix and she is not into that sort of thing.

And for those of you who think Dr. Tyson hated “Gravity…”

And this is something that can be taken seriously. While you can certainly enjoy a movie for what it is, there is certainly no shame in pointing out problems, even if they are nitpicky. After all, the more accurate the science is in the movie, the more I might end up enjoying it. “Gravity,” according to my memory, might as well be the first movie where I didn’t exactly question the science on screen, but it had me realizing that when it comes to science, not everything was perfect. In that sort of way, this movie is kind of special to me. How often can you say you remember a movie for its flaws? OK, well, more than you think, I still remember “The Emoji Movie.” But at least these flaws aren’t game-breaking.

In the end, “Gravity” is scary, it’s suspenseful, it’s what you can totally ask for in a space disaster film. To this day it is by far one of the most immersive movies I’ve ever seen. Some of the camerawork is not only masterful, but just so brilliant that it basically changes the game of how future movies could be made. And it did in a way if you think about it given how “Hardcore Henry” took the first-person concept and made an entire movie out of it. I could be wrong. Maybe video games were a bigger inspiration, I don’t know for sure. But if “Gravity” was bigger, cool. Not to mention, “Hardcore Henry” uses GoPro as its source of cinematography whereas this movie’s main source happens to be Arri Alexas. Like Dr. Tyson, I enjoyed this movie very much and I’m going to give “Gravity” an 8/10. While this movie does have some problems, what really gives “Gravity” the 8 mark for me is the journey of watching this film. Our main hero who is just trying to survive is definitely one of the more compelling characters I’ve come across over the past few years. The sound work done in this film is scary as s*it. The visual effects feel like in a way that they may be somewhat groundbreaking, or in some cases, International Space Station breaking. And the cinematography is just so brilliantly done.

*IF YOU LIKE RAMBLING OR BEING INFORMED ABOUT THINGS, READ ON FROM HERE*

Thanks for reading this review! Next week will be my final installment in my space movie review series in preparation for “First Man.” Just a reminder, “First Man” is in theaters everywhere on October 12th, but the day before I will have my review up for “Apollo 13.” I’ll be honest with you, and I’ll let you guys know in advance, I’m not sure how this review will turn out. I’m not saying it’s gonna suck. In fact, if I knew it was gonna suck, I’d scrap the review altogether. But compared to this movie and the other one I’ve reviewed in this series, “2001,” “Apollo 13” just happens to be a film I don’t have as much experience with. I will say one thing I’ve noticed with reviews for older movies is if I know the movie, I put more detail into the review. In my Tom Cruise series, I barely put anything into my review for “The Firm” because my review for it was composed after my first viewing whereas “Risky Business” was something I not only seen before but also happened to have a deep passion towards. My “Firm” review ended up at over 1800 words and my “Risky Business” review ended up at over 3400 words. Then again, it’s not about quantity, it’s about quality. And I may be underestimating myself. I have seen “Apollo 13,” but it’s been years and I only deeply remember various parts. Plus I’m going to New York this weekend and I haven’t even watched the movie yet. Maybe I’ll watch it, go to sleep, wake up, and start my review on the train ride to New York, I dunno.

Speaking of New York, be sure to stay tuned for my thoughts on this year’s New York Comic Con! I will be going to the con on Friday and Sunday. I do have Columbus Day off, so if I have time, maybe I’ll use it reviewing the con and telling you what I purchased there. For those of you who want to see more of my work, be sure to follow Scene Before with a WordPress account or an email so you can stay tuned for more great content! I want to know, did you see “Gravity?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your personal worst scientific inaccuracy you’ve ever seen in a movie? Doesn’t even have to be scientific, maybe history-related. Your choice. You have the power.

Only you can control your future. -Dr. Seuss

Scene Before is your click to the flicks!