Lee Review

...I don't know what this is. We got no trailers or posters for this movie, it just kinda appeared. I heard it was a biopic. It has to be better than all the other biopics that have came out this year. It has to be better than Reagan and Back to Black. It has to be.

What's the Movie About?

This is a biopic about Lee Miller, a war photographer during WWII who had to push back against sexism. 

What I Like.

It is better. Lee's pretty good. It's well made, presents a interesting person is an accurate light, and does so in an entertaining way. I hadn't heard about Lee Miller before this movie, although I had seen what is probably her most famous photo, and I like her. She a badass, take-no-shit yet compassionate person, who's hard drinking and pops pills but always strives to present the hard-hitting truth. Yes, she's basically every Noir protagonist but a woman and war photographer instead of a detective, but that's what I like about her. And looking it up it seems fairly accurate to the real life woman. Kate Winslet is, of course, great as the titular character, but I really liked Andy Sandberg in the movie too. He is, of course, a lighter presence in the movie, but he also has the saddest scene in the movie. I won't get into it because of spoilers, but I really like the way movie sets up Lee's story. There's a twist that I didn't really see coming, and the way they presented it was fascinating. There is also a pleasant amount of boob shots in the movie, I approve.

What I Didn't Like.

If I have to be critical, it is a WWII and "this women stood up to oppression" movie. They go through the beats you expect, and with the exception of the twist on the set-up, you know what is going to happen and when it will happen. But is that so bad? 

Final Summation.

I like Lee. It's a shame no one is watching it, but I can't expect anything else if this movie got no marketing. If you read this before it leave theaters, I recommend checking it out.

Megalopolis Review

There were whispers. Whispers the Francis Ford Coppala was making a movie that was a Libertarian parable. But they were just whispers, since we got no trailers for this movie. We got that poster, but what the hell is anyone supposed to take away from that poster? That Adam Driver is gonna use a T-Square like a pick-axe? I've never seen a movie directed by FFC before, but I heard he only makes wine now, so I was slightly surprised that this was an actual movie that was coming out. And then there were more whispers. Whispers that the movie was bad. 

What's The Movie About?

Okay so... Bear with me. Adam Driver is an architect/engineer/mad scientist who wants to build a city called Megalopolis in another city called New Rome which is New York but Roman and Cyberpunk and Megalopolis can shapeshift into whatever it's citizens need, but since New Rome is super decadent and the mayor hates Adam for convoluted reasons involving a dead lady who may or may not be his wife, there is a conspiracy among the political elite and banks to stop Adam. ALSO, Adam can stop time and the mayor's daughter notices him doing it so she meets up with him and they fall in love. And also gender-fluid Shia LeBeouf starts a fascist popular uprising and fucks his aunt. 

What I Like.

There are some shots that looked cool, and some concepts of the visuals are interesting. I think it's physically impossible for Giancarlo Esposito to act badly, so he was good as the mayor.

What I Didn't Like.

Oooooookay... Uh... Well, to start with, I'm not sure what happened in the movie. The plot is basically FFC combining The Fountain Head with The Fall of the Roman Empire and writing half of it in Middle English. The dialogue is terrible. I can only understand half of it, which is due to a mix of the weird prose and word choice that makes every sentence indecipherable, the fact that every other sentence is a non sequitur topic change, the awful attempts at juvenile humor that comes out of nowhere, or Adam driver mumbling all of his lines. Despite the star-studded cast, almost all the actors look either bored or just as lost as I was. The only one who didn't act like that was Shia, who was just acting insane. I'm not convinced he didn't just wander onto the green screen and he thought banging his sisters in real life. Because there is a shit load of random incest in the movie! 

Speaking of shit and incest, I had no idea that this movie was gonna look like Trump's toilet. Covered in cheap gold film, not at all distracting from content someone forgot to take care of properly. Seriously, the special effects in this movie are ass. Actors pop out of green screen so badly that they might as well fall out of the movie screen too. The mega-substance or whatever the miracle element that made Megalopolis is called looks like it was  a placeholder they were going to replace with the actual special effect later. I was confused for the longest time about the setting. New Rome is a sci-fi Rome, complete with a massive circus where chariot races and wrestling happen and everyone wearing togas. But also it's New York City? The movie opens with Adam almost falling off of the Empire State Building, complete with establishing shots of the actual NYC skyline that they forgot to scrub the METLIFE logo out of, and at one point someone mentions the Statue of Liberty. 

I also don't know why Adam can control time. I know HOW, it's the power of love, but the only relevance is to introduce the mayor daughter to Adam. There are long stretches of the movie where I'm pretty sure it just forgets he can do it, and then they have to randomly insert him doing it in random trip out sequence that has absolutely no connection to anything else. That might sound fun in a weird, almost debaucherous way, but they movie half asses it and it's just boring. They make vague motions in that direction as well, there's this whole song and dance about New Rome falling into decadence but the worst it gets is a bunch of people enjoying a circus performance and doing ecstasy. That's not a whole lot shocking or, well, sexy about the movie. It tries to be. There's a ton of dirty jokes, and some sex scenes, but they are so flavorless. I don't know why it is that way, the movie is rated R, and they don't really shy away from gore or talking about taboo subject matter. It almost feels like FFC thinks he's better than showing nudity. Sure I get that the movie isn't really about sex and sexuality the same way a Yorgos Lanthimos movie would be, but then bring it up at all? Why have Aubrey Plaza grind her cooch against Shia's face if you're gonna hide any good stuff. This movie is so boring and confusing otherwise, at least a random explicit sex scene wouldn't lessen anything. I would just feel really weird because Aubrey is playing Shia's aunt in the movie and she makes him call her Aunty while doing the humping. 

Am I harping on the incest too much? Well, sorry, but this movie harps on about... Actually, I don't know. I think the movie is about everyone getting out of this visionary's way and letting him cook, but events are so disjointed and the dialogue is so unable to be parsed this movie could equally be about 5 other things. I do know one thing though. FFC does have opinions about things that are happening. I shit you not, a plot point in this movie is Adam Driver being "cancelled" via a deep fake video with an underage pop star. But not only was that not him in the video, but the pop star was lying about her age to get some award or something. AND she was lying about origin. AND this was all set up by Shia in a dress strongarming people with Jason Shwartzman neo-Nazi. So, let me get this straight FFC. Not only are genderfluid people insane fascists, but they also try to ruin the lives of the upstanding smart people by manipulating immigrants who lie in order to get higher standing in society. Now. I don't know if that was your intended message. But that was kinda the message you sent out. It's not just in construction of scenes, random bits of dialogue will slip in little beliefs that he clearly holds dearly, like how women are really to blame for men being unfaithful. What, am I reading Heinlein? God, I even hate this movie's title. I keep thinking it is called Megatropolis, but no. That's me reflexively jumping to my Superman comfort zone in the face of shittiness. 

Final Summation.

My initial impression of this movie was that I was too stupid to understand it, but then I remembered that Adam Driver gets shot in the face by a twelve-year-old in this movie, so I don't think it's that intelligent. I may not understand Megalopolis, but I do understand that it is shit. If I need to give it any credit, well, it is unique. There's not another experience out there that is like this movie. But the same thing could be said about swallowing a handful of bullet ants. If you want a movie about a corrupt society reforming with a famous cast including a wise Lawrence Fishburne, watch Transformers One. That movie the CGI actually looks good.

Transformers One Review

Yes finally! I get to talk about Transformers! The franchise I am absolutely obsessed with! A franchise that is so cool and good, while also being super cheesy and terrible! A franchise that is about an epic clash of ideologies over centuries, the corruption of power turning a noble hero of the people into a tyrant, and seeing how many gimmick toys they can sell to children by making them one note characters. A franchise that has Satan as a planet eater, God as a planet, and Jesus as a psychiatrist, ALL BEING TRANSFORMING ROBOTS AS WELL.  THIS IN THE SAME UNIVERSE AS THE MY LITTLE PONIES, GHOSTBUSTERS, AND STAR TREK! Okaaaay, deep breathes Roan. Stay on focus just talk about this movie.

I was excited as soon as I saw this trailer. Don't get me wrong, there was like a 65% chance it would be completely awful, but the designs looked like they took inspiration from the original cartoons! So many of the cartoons after Gen 1 try to make the Transformers sleek or make them look like every other mech or robot that already exists. And don't even get me started on the metal shard monstrosities that the Michael Bay movies used. Also, the trailer music was dope. I actually watched this movie before The Substance, but I decided that I just wanted to sit and enjoy the movie without worrying about a review for my first viewing. (Also I watched it super late and kinda forgot to take notes until halfway through the movie.)

What's The Movie About?

This movies is a retelling of the origins of Optimus Prime and Megatron, where they both start out as miners who can't transform, but team up with Elita-1 and Bumblebee to travel to the surface and regain their transformation cogs, discover the truth about their world, and step into the roles they are more recognizable for.

What I Like.

First off, the animation is amazing. The textures and shine on everyone is pitch perfect. The details on character models and movement is spectacular. I love that the cog-less bots are all grimy and dirty while the one who can transform are shiny and polished. The designs of the Transformers are excellent. They definitely take inspiration from the G1 designs, WHICH ARE THE BEST DESIGNS DON'T COME FOR ME I WILL DIE ON THIS HILL, and the reflections on various characters and objects is sublime. The story is great. I love the message of rising against corrupt authority without become too consumed with vengeance that you become a bigger threat. And the action is awesome, with really creative set pieces! The Cybertron presented in this movie is the coolest Cybertron ever, I like that it actually has wildlife and that the planet's landscape is ever-shifting and transforming ehhhhh. That joke was bad and you should feel inadequate. I always do Buggnutz. The attention to detail and franchise callbacks is a lot of fun. The first time watching the movie, every time there was a group shot of background characters, I'd just be scanning the crowds seeing what transformers I could recognize. And they aren't in people's face about it. There will be parts where characters are transforming and I swear there's some parts-forming in the mix, but nobody comments on it. 

And finally, little bits that I only like because I'm a dumb Transformers fan: I really like how the Quintessons look in this movie, they are like cyborg Cthulhu monstrosities with exposed sinew. I'm glad they chose Elita-One to be the female lead in this movie, I feel like the usual default is Arcee and Elita, if she's even mentioned, is a background character. But considering her origins in the first cartoon, I think she makes so much more sense here. I like how they showcase Transformers' abilities to do little transformations, like Optimus needs to go faster, he transform some jets onto his truck form. All of the future Decepticons being the Cybertronian High Guard and dogmatically following who they perceive is the stronger bot is really fun, and makes sense that they eventually take over the planet as they are led by Megatron. I wasn't sure about the Energon returning to the Cybertron at the end of the movie but thinking about it, it work considering how G1 starts out. I also love when Megatron becomes evil, his eyes go red and they do a cool streaking light effect in some scenes, awe it looks frickin' awesome!

What I Didn't Like.

Just the voice acting, really. It's not that it's bad, but it's absolute stunt casting of the highest degree. Nobody really melds into their characters except for Lawrence Fishburne, and the only one who really make the character their own is Steve Buscemi. Again, it's not bad, and Chris Hemsworth is trying to sound like Optimus. But it's definitely the lowest part of the movie. 

Final Summation.

Transformers has been truly great 5 times. The original 80s animated movie, the Bumblebee movie I heard was pretty good, anytime Transformers Prime was allowed to cook and wasn't clearly trying to push toys, the 2019 IDW comic line, and the Deck Building Game. With the introduction of this movie, increase the number to 6! THIS MOVIE IS AWESOME! It was incredible entertaining for me, a Transformers Fan, I think kids will really like it, and parents probably won't fall asleep during it. If you have any slight interest in the movie or the property, check this movie out. It's SOOOOOO GOOD! (Seriously, play the Deck Building Game if you have a chance. It slaps.)

Anyway, now onto an exhaustive detailing on every Transformers Continuity, and which one this falls into. CODE ALPHA SIGMA, SHUT THE REVIEW DOWN! NOW!

The Substance Review

What did I know about The Substance before the movie released? That it was weird and Dennis Quaid was in it. Yeah that's it. I did learn before I watched it that it was a body horror movie, which I wasn't excited about. I'm not ashamed to admit that I don't like body horror. It's just gross. Doesn't that mean you're a bad person to review this movie? I mean, I guess. But you're still here anyway. Besides, a great movie would be able to convince someone who doesn't really like the genre that it is good. 

What's The Movie About?

Demi Moore is an older (I hesitate to call her old, she's like 50.) exercise television show host who gets let go because Dennis Quaid is ageist and she takes a drug that gives her a second, younger body to relive her glory.

What I Like.

This movie is if David Cronenberg shot an Edgar Allen Poe story in an Apple Store that's simultaneously shooting a Brazzers video. YES! What? What are you screaming about? You just used a weirdly sexual metaphor to describe the movie! I just have one more square on my Bingo card left to fill! Oh shut up Buggnutz! Get the hell outta here! Anyway, it was funny that the movie started by telling me it won the Cannes Film Festival Award or something for best screenplay. Which is true, the screenplay is really good. The metaphor of the movie is about beauty standards and rekindling your youth, and the story itself was pretty interesting. The directing is fabulous, the way shots are framed, the way the female body is showcased, and the close ups and sounds design create the perfect uncomfortable atmosphere. The effects are perfectly disgusting as well. Impressively, none of the gore grossed me out so much I couldn't watch. Nah, it was a cooking scene that made me feel like I was gonna hurl and had to leave the theater during. I really like Demi Moore's and Margaret Qualley's acting. It is mostly physical and face expressions, and it's pretty damn impressive. Dennis Quaid being a massive asshole was something I need to see too, so thanks for that.

What I Didn't Like.

However, this movie could have used a little more dialogue. I didn't really understand if Demi Moore and Margret Qualley were actually the same person, or if they were two versions of the same person with a connected biological functions. Both of them act like the other is doing things that the other has no memory of, but they also have these nightmare that would require them to know what the other person is up to. It's confusing and I think it is to hid the fact that it is inconsistent. But what kills this movie is it is too long. BINGO! SHUT UP! Seriously, you can shave like 15, maybe even 30 or 40 minutes off the movie by doing two things. One, delete the repetition. They repeat the rules of the Substance like 4 times. I understand that the main character, for whatever reason, doesn't understand that breaking the rules is what is causing her to wither away, but I figured it out the first time it happened! The second thing is the ending. They ending is totally stretched out. Some of it was kinda fun, like when Monstro was revealed on stage, but most of it was just unnecessary. 

Final Summation.

I fully admit my rejection of this movie is because this was long and I don't like this kind of movie. That's not fair! And I don't care! Look, if my description of the movie sounds like something that you'd be into, check it out. I hope you take this approach with all of my reviews honestly, I am not and will never seriously claim to be the absolute authority on what movies are good and which ones aren't. But I never want to see this again.

Super/Man: The Christopher Reeve Story

HELL YEAH MORE SUPERMAN. And this is a documentary about the guy who played Superman in the original movies? Awesome. I've never seen those movies, but I don't have to know they are infinitely better than those fucking Zack Snyder ones. Anyway, as soon as I heard about it I was incredibly excited. I wasn't sure if I was gonna review this movie, since I don't think people engage with documentaries the same way they engage with structured narratives, so I didn't know if my review style would work. But I want to tell people about this movie so I'll muddle through.

What's The Movie About.

Christopher Reeve and his role as Superman, his accident and subsequent adjustment to life, and the founding of the Christopher & Dana Reeve Foundation.

What I Like.

The whole movie, pretty much. I like the way they present the information, I like the glimpse into Christopher Reeve's life. They were incredibly respectful of the man while still acknowledging his flaws. They showed a lot of footage of home videos his wife took and I liked seeing hi trying to spend time with his kids after his accident. I didn't know Christopher Reeve directed movies either, that's pretty cool. I actually didn't know a lot about him, so this movie was fascinating. Probably the coolest thing was learning that he was best friends with Robin Williams, although it seems obvious in hindsight. Like of course the man who's still who I want to be when I grow up is best friends with Superman! The biggest thing I like about this movie was the message of never giving up. Christopher (and his wife, who I learned died of cancer only two years after he died) was faced with an impossible situation, and he never gave up. There were moments of weakness, sure. But he persevered. He kept fighting. I'm absolutely not ashamed to admit this movie made me cry like four or five times, and all of them were in relation to Chris overcoming or succumbing to the more tragic parts of his life. (Or when Glenn Close said Robin would probably still be alive if Chris was like WOMAN YOU CAN'T DO ME LIKE THAT.) There's a really cool visual of a stature of Superman/Christopher floating through spaces that get's green crystals when they talk about Chris's injuries and the movie opens with an awesome shot of the statue right in front of nebula that looks like a cape. It's so cool that I completely disregard that the movie should have ended on that shot instead of opened on it. Either way, this movie is really quite excellent.

What I Didn't Like.

It's just a shame YOU CAN'T WATCH THIS ANYWHERE. WHY THE FUCK IS THIS A LIMITED RELEASE?! I get it's a documentary and maybe that doesn't have as much appeal as a regular comic book movie, but our theater is showing this movie for only TWO DAYS. I HAD TO PAY TO WATCH IT. Yes, I was happy to, it was a worthwhile experience. But why limit the opportunity for people to watch it? Seriously. This is baffling. 

Final Summation.

This is a movie about Superman and hope of course I like this movie. I guess watch it on Max in like a month. I guess I was kind right about not being able to review documentaries as easily, but honestly the half-assed nature of this piece might be just because this movie is pretty damn good. I don't have much to say beyond that.

The Killer's Game Review

We didn't get a trailer for this one, but we did get a poster. A physical poster we didn't use. Yeah, we use tv screens to display digital posters, but movie companies will still send us physical posters anyway. The managers just give them away to whoever wants them, so I'm proud to report that I've taken none of them. I'm not posters person. Anyway, this movie was getting savaged by critics. It's got only a 39% of Rotten Tomatoes. Which is actually misleading, since that percentage is the percentage of critics who recommend the movie, not an average of what critics rank the movie. If you want that, look at IMDB, which gave this movie a 5.8 out of 10.

Sigh. Man, how come the action movies this summer sucked? It's been a mostly horror centric year, since we opened up the year with the writer's strike so a lot of projects got delayed and horror movies are easier to make. So I would hope that means the four action movies that came out over the hot months would be good right? Nah half of 'em suck and the other half were just okay. And recently I've been very unenthused about everything I've watched. Yeah, I really liked Beetlejuice Beetlejuice, but I'm starting to realize my enjoyment was heightened by going to see it with my family and making it an event. Not that the quality of the movie has gone down, I think I just overhyped my personal enjoyment. My depression is kicking my ass recently too, so maybe I'm just being a sad sack.

What's The Movie About?

Dave Bautista is Joe Flood, a hitman who finds out he has a terminal illness, so he puts a hit out on himself to end his suffering early. Then he finds out his doctor mixed up the test results.

What I Like.

Well. Beetlejuice Beetlejuice sure got dethroned quickly. This movie gave me the kind of joy I haven't felt since, well, May. 

First off, the action is amazing. It's fast paced, well choreographed, and damn fun. All of the hitmen who go after Joe are colorful and have gimmicks, like two brothers who kill their targets with motorbikes. Or a bisexual stripper team. This movie honestly reminded me of the action from The Crow reboot with it's inventiveness and brutality, but it was much more frequent. A lot of this movie kinda reminds me of The Crow if it didn't suck ass, since they also take time to set up Joe's girlfriend who then gets put in peril and he has to save her. But unlike THAT movie, the time it takes is actually interesting, the leads have good chemistry, and they set up way more than just two kids making moony eyes at each other. The characters are a lot of fun. Not only is Joe and his girlfriend a very cute couple, but the various hitmen and side characters are incredibly entertaining. I actually think the story was really good. The set-up seems stupid at the front, which it is, but they go out of their way to justify it and I think it made sense. The depiction of Joe's depression after he gets diagnosed is pretty damn realistic, and I think Dave Bautista nails it. I like the editing and pacing. It is very dynamic and interesting, there's a lot of fade ins and comic panel style compositions, but when it gets to the action they go to more standard camera. It's not a steady cam but it's not too shaky and the cuts are fairly restrained. The movie is funny as well. It's a lot of quips but it still had heart and there's a little bit of physical comedy to spice things up as well. 

What I Didn't Like.

But the movie isn't perfect. While all the characters are fun, they are mostly stereotypes. Not just the colorful assassins or side characters, Ben Kingsley plays Joe's contractor who's a Jewish guy and his accent is so thick it felt kinda racist. Not that I'm accusing the movie or anything, I liked all the characters and it feels more like the over the top accents and ridiculous behaviors are there to characterize the hitmen rather than make us hate them or perpetuate a harmful ideal, but that might be why this movie got crapped on critics. Also, it's kinda sloppy in a lot of cases. I thought the movie was really funny, but not every one liner lands. The pacing jumps a bit. And the acting from pretty much everyone except Dave and Sofia Boutella is ehhhhh. Mostly because the actors seem to be the kinds of actors who just play themselves but with a slightly different gimmick each time. Like you don't expect Terry Cruz to be anyone else except Terry Cruz but meaner in this movie. Although the good actors like Ben Kingsley and Alex Kingston seem to be doing the same thing? So I guess it's purposefully? All of these little things really makes the movie feel scrappy instead of amateurish.

Final Summation.

There has only two movie that have come out this year which I wanted to watch a second time in theater. The first was The Fall Guy, which is still the best movie that has come out this year. And the second is this one. The Killer's Game is awesome, don't let the negative critical reception fool you.

Speak No Evil Is A Movie That Happened To Me.

I stayed up way too late to watch this. This being the new Blumhouse movie, which is about Creepy James McAvoy inviting a nice family to his house so he can steal their kid and murder them. (Uh... Spoilers.) It's also a remake of a movie from only two years ago. This new takes a more crowd pleasing ending, which is to say it ends happily. (Spoilers again.)

There's a lot to admire about Speak No Evil (2024). For starters, it's well made. The finale was fun and exciting, and very well set up. The wife main character was a bad ass, and I felt like this movie was what The Strangers should have been in certain places. (Especially with the killers having a "we only chose you because you let us" motive.) The acting is pretty good, especially from the kids. This is a movie where James McAvoy acts like a lunatic for the majority of it, and that's always fun to watch. But most of the movie is James and his wife pushing the victim couple further and further out of their comfort zone, seeing how much they can get away with abusing their kid before the normal couple say enough and try to leave. Only then does the victim family get kidnapped and the fun home invasion part happen.

So let's get this out of the way, the reason this isn't a review is the same reason why my rant about Anyone But You wasn't a review. Because I didn't watch the entire second act. The way James and his wife act throughout the entire middle of the movie was much too awkward and uncomfortable for me to sit through. I was getting a panic attack watching the victims contort themselves to avoid a confrontation with these weirdos, I just couldn't take it. I went out and stacked cups for like half an hour before I could go back into the theater. This was at like 2 in the morning too. That doesn't really anything to do with the quality of the movie, just has to do with how stupid I am. 

Now, this dreadful atmosphere is clearly intentional on behalf of the writers and director. You aren't supposed to like James and his wife, you are supposed to feel on edge has they needle the victims. It is a horror movie, part of the experience can be feeling discomfort to some degree. But is it a win in the movie's favor if it made me so uncomfortable I couldn't bare to watch? I honestly don't know. 

Of course, this is all just me. It you can't tell by the fact that I argue with myself in pretty much every review I post, I'm not exactly the most sociable person. I have an extremely hard time dealing with awkward situations and tend to violently reject people who try to influence their will on others, maliciously or not. Plus, child abuse is a topic that is too intense for me, in pretty much any context. I actually can't listen to babies' cry without curling up into a ball, wanting to die. (Especially if the crying goes unaddressed. I hate when horror movies pull that shit of a ghost pretending to cry or a demon baby doing it.)

Anyway, I guess the point of this non-review is just to say: I couldn't stand to watch Speak No Evil (2024). But maybe you can. 

Beetlejuice Beetlejuice Review

 

What's The Movie About?

Lydia's grownup and has a punk kid of her own, and after her father dies she starts seeing Beetlejuice pop up again. Meanwhile, Beetlejuice's ex shows back up and starts hunting him down, causing him to become more desperate to marry Lydia, and Astrid (Lydia's daughter) meets a cute boy while dealing with the fact her mom can't see her dead dad.

What I Like.

Hoo man, I don't know where to start. Pretty much everything about this movie is great! The returning cast is excellent, Winona Ryder especially hasn't lost her touch. I like the expansion to the original story. I like how Lydia's daughter is all punk which bothers the goth Lydia the same way she bothered her parents in the first moment. There's some pretty nice moments between Lydia and Delia when Lydia is having trouble with Astrid, and I like the resolution at the end. Beetlejuice makes more of an appearance in this movie than he did in the first one, and he is slightly sanitized, but he's still pretty much the same character and Michael Keaton is super funny. He's just no longer groping women. (Which isn't a huge loss because those "jokes" weren't funny. That was the worst part of the first movie.) They actually go over his backstory in the movie, and it was hilarious. I wasn't expecting that scene to be as good as it was. Speaking of hilarity, the movie as a whole is extremely funny. They repeat a couple jokes from the first movie, mostly just physical gags, but the new characters and scenarios are hilarious. Willem Dafoe's character thinks he's in a noir and I loved him. Beetlejuice isn't the only thing they expand on, Beetlejuice Beetlejuice shows off more of the the afterlife and different types of ghosts. Plus, the movie looks super good. The effects are mostly practical, and show the 38 year time gap because they look so much better than the first movie. There's a point where they literally replace Willem Dafoe with a wax statue and I loved it. The story is nice, it has the same family reconnection story that the first one has but with biological family. I think it's nice. The finale is also a lot of fun, I like the song choice and watching everything collide with each other is entertaining. I did mention this movie is funny right? Because this movie is damn funny. There's a lot more background gags in this movie that I was constantly pointing out and laughing at. This movie is so good you guys.

What I Didn't Like.

There's some inconsistencies between the sequel that get handwaved away for kinda dumb reasons, but it's all either to cover-up actors who don't return  (for a good reason *cough cough*) or to set-up the new story elements that I like, so I didn't mind. Honestly, probably only noticed because I was looking for things to nitpick. I wish they didn't ignore what I thought was the funniest joke of the first movie, but it's fine. Also, much like the first movie, it's just stuff happening and it feels random until the various plot points domino into the finale. That's fine, and it is a comedy so the structure is based around telling jokes, but it still suffers compared to 90% of other movies. Also, Tim Burton directs the movie. It has a random racist moment in the movie. The second in inevitable with the first. I dunno, I feel like I'm hand waving a lot of the problems with this movie, but it's coming up on Halloween at time of writing. I was just feeling the spooky spirit and enjoying the laughs. 

Final Summation.

Beetlejuice Beetlejuice is damn good. It might be the second best movie that has come out this year. Maybe this doesn't come as a surprise to anyone who has been paying attention to reviews, but I was somewhat surprised on how much I liked it. I like it maybe slightly less than the first one, but it depends on when you catch me. My father, who's a big fan of the original, likes this one more, so take that as you will. Either way, I don't think you can go wrong with Beetlejuice Beetlejuice, check it out!

The Front Room Review

*Walks onto stage in front of the mike* Ahem. *Looks left, then looks right*...A24, as a movie company, is overrated. 

BOO! BOO THE HERETIC! BOO ME! I DON'T CARE! Half the A24 movies I've watched have been GOD AWFUL. Do you want to guess what The Front Room is, Buggnutz? Based on this opening, bad? Wrong, IT'S WORSE THAN THE EXORCISM. A MOVIE THAT WAS SO BAD I COULDN'T COMPREHEND WATCHING IT. HOW YOU ASK? I wasn't goin-

What's the Movie About?

This is a "psychological horror" movie about taking care of an old lady. Not an old lady possessed by a demon or she's a witch, or the characters have to do it while being chased by a monster. Just a regular old woman. She's incontinent and racist ooooohhhh spooky.

What I Like.

The ending made me laugh. Unintentionally, yes, and a major part of that laugh was bitter since I wasted two hours of my life watching this piece of shit. But I'm saving the empty 'What I Like Section' gag for something really special, so what do you want from me?

What I Didn't Like.

The scariest thing that happens in this movie is a dream sequence about an adult man being breast fed by an old woman. That sounds horrifying. ...Fair, but they don't get up close with any details to make it disturbing. It's just kinda gross. That's what a lot of the movie is. It never goes too far with anything so it's not like it's supposed to be scary, it's just like... Do you want to watch a montage of flushing toilets? Or see every character vomit at some point? Not really. Those dream sequences are bizarre, and not in a fun psychedelic way. In a "someone told us this movie needs to be scarier and this was the first thing that we came up with" way. 90% of this movie is the old lady (who has a ridiculously over-the-top southern accent, check "Roan complains about accents" off your Bingo Card) being overbearing or obnoxious on purpose. It doesn't help that the dialogue is possibly the worst I've ever heard. It's not just that it's unnatural, it all sounds like it went through Google Translate twice. That's not the only poorly made part of the movie. They somehow fuck up the continuity between shots of the same scene! Seriously, there's a part where the the main character is putting on two earrings, the shot cuts to her husband saying something, and then it cuts back to the main character getting up to leave and she only has one earring on. How the fuck did that happen? And AMAZINGLY, despite ALL OF THAT SHIT, this movie is pretentious. The villain of the movie is basically a Southern Baptist strawman, and the lead is a a wet dream for someone who believes that "woke culture" exists and is fully in favor for it. The first scene (Well, the first scene after a ridiculously long credit sequence. Seriously, I think the end credits are shorter.) is the main character teaching a bunch of bored Gen Z'ers about the symbolism in chairs is actually about "Goddess". The she quits her job because they were boxing her out of classes because of racism. Like... On principal I should like all that, buck the system and this is the reality flack people have to deal with and all that. But the way the movie presents it is very unlikable. It gets even worse when the old lady in introduced. Every aspect of this character is presented as the worst a human being can be, and while yes, the old lady says and does some reprehensible things, there is a difference between faking being pushed over and telling the nurses your step-daughter-in-law pushed you, and hanging up a crucifix. There's literally a part of the movie where I said, "This seems movie really hates Christians." The movie hates the elderly even more. I think the biggest problem the main character has with the old lady is that she has lost control of her bathroom functions. Like, yeah, it's gross and a pain to deal with along with a baby. But they way the movie harps on about it is so needlessly mean. There is a scene when the old woman messes the bed in the night, and the way the couple reacts feels really cruel to old people. Christ, this movie is red-pilling me. Even Reagan didn't do that. But don't worry everyone, the movie has a happy ending. The main character smothers the old lady to death with a pillow.

This is how this movie is worse than the Exorcist. Because at least the Exorcist doesn't advocating for euthanasia. 

Final Summation. 

This might be the most half-assed movie I've ever seen. It's so half-assed that it might be more appropriate to say it's quarter-assed. Or one-eighth assed. Like there are some ideas here that could have been interesting or scary, but the movie makers were too lazy to actually make it such. Is A24 resting on their laurels? Like after Everything Everywhere All At Once was declared the best-movie-to-grace-this-sinful-earth, they just decided to stop trying? Why did they do that after I decided to do this stupid "watch every movie that comes out" thing!?

Reagan Review

Our theater isn't getting 1992. Our theater didn't get Young Woman and the Sea or The American Society of Magical Negroes either, despite the fact that all 3 movies we had posters for the longest time. AND YET WE GOT REAGAN. FUCK.

So if I haven't made clear hundred of times over, I'm not a conservative. In any sense of the word. I hate most of the Republican party, I think that most of their ideals are either stupid or incredibly dangerous (most both!). And I think it all started with Reagan. I hate "Reagan-nomics", I believe that he had Alzheimer's while in office, and I believe some of the most harmful American ideologies originate from him. So, no, I wasn't looking forward to this movie. I was just hoping it was funny bad. 

What's The Movie About?

It's a biopic, about guess who. Reagan from the Exorcist. What? No, Buggnutz, Ronald Reagan! The 40th US President!

What I Like.

This movie is good actually. WHAT?! Yeah, I know. I'm shocked too. For starters, the story is actually told in a way that makes sense unlike several other biopics I watched this year. The set-up is pretty cool, basically an ex-KGB guy is telling a rising star in new Russian government about the fall of Communism. That's a pretty cool angle to take a Reagan biopic, and it's presented incredibly well. Not just in comparison to One Love and The Dark One, but just in general. It's pretty quickly paced, there's lots of cool sizzle reels of various world events happening as well as fun cinematography to keep things visually interesting. You're mostly just shocked that it makes sense, right? Yeah kinda. There's also some crazy shots I wasn't expecting, like Reagan foreseeing the nuclear apocalypse. Or kid Reagan's slow-motion baptism by Kevin Sorbo. Acting it pretty good as well, I admire the kid playing teenage Reagan. He was pretty good at the role. The story is a little batshit, but I still liked it. Dude, they claim that Reagan could see the future because he was a lifeguard. How can you not laugh at this? Plus he get a prophecy for his priest that he's gonna president. You're making that up. NOPE IT'S IN THE MOVIE. And it's pretty well made. Not just in the cinematography, acting, and pacing. The effects aren't too bad (except for the greenscreen. The greenscreen is god awful. I've seen a more real child grave in cartoons.) and the directing id pretty solid. True, there are some moments where they are clearly covering up something, the actor they have play Jimmy Carter not looking anything like the real Jimmy, but they do it in a way that gives the movie style. 

What I Didn't Like.

So this movie is ridiculous. It does make it a fun watch, but unfortunately this is the dangerous kind of ridiculous, one that certain people are going to take way to seriously. Also, like the titular character, it's 90% full of shit. 90%? Mmm 95%. They completely gloss over certain more distasteful parts of presidency (AIDS Crisis, anyone?) and they make some questionable changes to events that happened. They claim the LBJ only won in a landslide against Reagan because he bribed the electorates. The worst case in my opinion is Nancy Reagan. Nancy Reagan in the movie is just a stick to prop up Ronnie. There's only the briefest mention of her "War on Drugs" and there's no mention of her involvement in the AIDS crisis. Neither do they mention she had the lead singer of the Sex Pistols killed! Roan that's from a NOFX song, not reality. Whatever. At least sometimes the questionable choices lead to funny moments, like Ronnie admitting to Nancy that he's "Damaged Goods" because he was divorced. Also all the accents are absurd and at one point pretty racist! And Dennis Quaid looks more like Nixon than Reagan most of the time. 

Final Summation.

So yes, Reagan is good. Don't watch it. God Roan, can't you watch one movie without getting political? Hey, I think it is completely fair to talk about politics, considering the subject material. But my bigger problem is actually about the information presented about Ronnie. It's absolutely not a fair look at the guy's life. Which, honestly, I'd be okay with if it weren't for the fact that he's like the second face of a dangerous political group that is currently trying to strip everyone of their rights. Trump *vomits* is using old clips of Reagan in his campaign ads. It's a clip that they recreate in the movie. I just think that anyone who is genuinely looking for information of Reagan will be severely misinformed. So how about this instead: Only watch the movie is you are already 100% on who you're gonna vote for in November/are pretty much a member of one political party. People dead set in there opinions are either gonna like it because they agree with everything the movie says and this is just a well made movie about one of their political heroes, or they'll think it's so absurd that they can't take it seriously and will just enjoy a well presented movie. 

[EDIT: Wait Dennis, am I in the 20% of critics who like the movie, or the 90% who just attacked it?]

AFRAID Review

Well I hate that title. It's a horror movie about AI, what's wrong with it? I dunno Buggnutz, it just rubs me the wrong way. Maybe because of the way the pun is formatted. Looks dumb. Otherwise, I only got the trailer once, and my opinions was, "It's a horror movie Blumhouse is making a movie about the dangers of AI... Huh." Trailer looked alright. I like that the director is also the writer. I heard it was stupid from my coworkers and the reviews were bad, but this wouldn't time I've disagreed with both of those group of people about Blumhouse specifically in the past, so maybe this movie will be another Imaginary. I'm not exactly optimistic, but it could be something.

What's The Movie About?

A family gets chosen to host an AI called AIA (No way. Yep. Look at the poster.) and it slowly forces it's way into every aspect of their lives. But is it for the better? (No way. Yep. As in you are correct to say it isn't.)

What I Like.

I dig the premise, actually. To risk a spoiler, the story heads in a very Mommie Dearest direction with AIA's motivation and how she manipulates the family. I think it's a whole lot more realistic than the "Robot decides humans a weak/detrimental to their development/the real problem for the earth and so they will kill all humans" angle, anyway. I also like how AIA manipulates the kids, it was incredibly creepy and would absolutely work. They don't, like, try to stab their parents or anything so it's not ridiculous, AIA just bribes them and gaslights them into putting themselves in danger. The ending is pretty damn dark and I was there for it. There's actually a pretty interesting mystery about what AIA is specifically and I kinda dug where it ended up, it seemed like a pretty cool bit of satire. Speaking of which, the way that AIA takes over the main characters' lives was just the extreme of what AI is doing now, which was incredibly smart. I felt like the writer was doing the classic dystopian focus-on-one-aspect-of-society-and-make-it-absurd this which was pretty cool and scary. There were some pretty tense moments over all, especially when AIA is able to convince the younger kids into basically walking into danger. All the acting was good too (except the younger kids, which I will not hold against them or the movie), as well as the cinematography. Nothing too crazy cool, but there's some fun focus shots and I liked the actors who played the parents. 

What I Didn't Like.

The characters are kinda dumb. Almost all of them seem to flip flop on a dime on whether or not AIA is cool or totally evil, and none of them give a second thought to the AI taking over their phones until like, the end of the movie. The younger kid was fine, but the two other kids' plotlines my eyes were glazing over during. The older daughter's would have been fine as it's own separate movie, because it is weirdly horny! It's not just the teen's plotline, there's a couple other moments that I felt had out of place sex jokes. Prude. I mean, I guess, but the jokes weren't particularly gross or anything. They just felt out of place when the main plot is this very sterile, tech-corporate futurist atheistic. Also, while I liked the ending, it does feel like it jumped the shark a little bit. There's like five twists back to back and while none of them are particularly outlandish, it did make some parts of the climax seem absurd until I thought about it a little bit. And as tense as some scenes where, there was an equal amount that were trying to be scary and were either bland or silly.

My final point is that I can't figure out of this movie uses AI art or not. It seems like they do, but it's purposefully bad and uncanny because it's supposed to part of the message of the movie. They credit a company for the digital images, and when I looked it up all the articles where about how the story of the movie talks about the dangers of AI images. (Which, I don't need to say this, but the images aren't strictly speaking the problem. Most sensible people can tell they are fake. The problem is that people will use an AI generated images instead of hiring an artist, thus giving money to a big tech company than a flesh and blood human being.) But isn't it on theme to use AI art in this movie? It's all about how dangerous AI is. Read my aside closer. Can you guess what I'm about say? *Sigh* To pay an artist to fak- PAY AN ARTIST TO FAKE IT, YES. Give no quarter everyone. Read my Late Night With Devil review or listen to the Video Brews podcast about the Borderlands to see what I mean about this. Man you've really sold out Roan. I'M SELF PROMOTING. Also I don't get paid for any of this shit.

Final Summation.

This movie's aight. It's biggest failing is that it tried to bridge the gap between a sterile horror sci-fi dystopia, and a some-what grimy slasher modern 'splotation movie that creates tonal dissonance. I'm annoyed it's not better to be perfectly frank. The movie is a great idea, but tries to spread itself too thin. Still, worth a watch. But not worth a "How I'd Fix It'? Nah. I'd have to rewrite the whole movie, not just a few parts. And if I'm gonna do that I need to get a writer's credit, got it?