Reviews

**Disclaimer: Some spoilers are mentioned in the summaries.**

Cinema has evolved from the flickering black-and-white films of the past to today’s vibrant, high definition epics, capturing viewers' hearts and producing breathtaking stories of nostalgia, adventure and wonder. Films evoke laughter, tears, and deep contemplation, often within the span of just a few minutes. With plot twists, cameos and other surprises, viewers are drawn into the unknown. 

Here are some of the highlighted movies of this year:

The Wild Robot

Get ready for a heartwarming adventure that will sweep anyone off their feet. The Wild Robot by DreamWorks Animation is a must-watch for all ages. This enchanting film, based on Peter Brown’s beloved book, tells the tale of Roz, voiced by Lupita Nyong’o, a robot stranded on an uninhabited island.

Picture a world where a robot forms bonds with animals. Roz’s journey of survival transforms into a touching story of friendship and family, illustrating that no matter how diverse everyone is, coming together makes them unstoppable. The vibrant animation and emotional depth will captivate hearts, while the original score by Kris Bowers adds a magical touch.

The film beautifully conveys that family isn’t just about blood relation- it’s about those who stand by one another and share the journey of life. It also reminds viewers that a place isn’t truly home unless it resonates with a sense of belonging, no matter where one originally comes from.

The Wild Robot offers a delightful blend of sci-fi and heartfelt narrative, celebrating unity, resilience, and the power of love. It’s not just a movie–it’s an experience that will linger long after the credits toll.

Verdict: 8/10

Beetlejuice Beetlejuice

Sequels are usually not the best. Unfortunately, this narrative carries into Beetlejuice Beetlejuice.

Now, it’s certainly not bad. Full of corny jokes and slightly overused gags, it’s actually quite a funny movie. The all-star cast does a decent job portraying their characters in an iconic way (especially Bob), the movie’s special effects are slightly unrealistic but are reminiscent of the first film, and there are plenty of confusing little easter eggs that prove fun to wrinkle out. It’s not the filmed pieces that are the problem here–it’s mostly the plot.

Again, it’s not a terrible story. We focus more on the Deetz family, mostly Lydia (played by Winona Ryder) and her daughter Astrid (played by Jenna Ortega). We see her mother Delia (played by Catherine O’Hara) come and go, making her an iconic side character. We are also introduced to Lydia’s new love interest, who is not Astrid’s father but rather the producer of Lydia’s paranormal TV show titled ‘Ghosts’ (you can already see his character arc). Micheal Keaton also does a wonderful job of portraying the eccentric title character, and we even get to see Dad again, after his tragic death by shark-bite. And saving the day is Willem Defoe’s Wolf  ‘Keep It Real’ Jackson, who was probably the best part of the movie.

But there are so many holes in the storyline. The main villain ends up being a driving force that keeps the movie progressing, but fails to be of any importance whatsoever in the film. The characters fall in love way too fast, and the betrayals lack a sense of depth. Astrid reads a book and suddenly Beetlejuice can’t force Lydia to marry him. Even the Jupiter Worms are a little overused. 

Despite all that, it’s a satisfying sequel to the original. Sure, it’s not a movie that most viewers would watch again, but for hardcore Beetlejuice fans, it’s a good movie to see. It’s got a reasonably good ending, the jokes will make you laugh, and it'll make you want to re-watch the first one.

Oh, and the playlist is a banger. There’s nothing like a wedding scene with ‘MacArthur Park’ playing in the background.

The verdict: 6/10

IF

Personally inspired by his two daughters, John Krasinski challenges the narrative of childhood through the lens of a director, producer, writer, and one of the starring actors in his latest film IF. Nominated for the 2024 Kids’ Choice Awards, IF focuses on the coexistence between a person’s inner-child and maturity.

Starring Cailey Fleming as Elizabeth or Bea, Ryan Reynold as Calvin, John Krasinski as the unnamed father of Elizabeth, and other co-stars, the movie takes on another world of its own. With intricate plot twists and clever details that take viewers deep into their past, it reminds the audience that in many ways, childhood never ceases.

Cailey Fleming, known for starring in The Walking Dead in 2010 and appearing in the Star Wars’ Episode VII - The Force Awakens in 2015, appears in the role as the main character, trying to find the inner-child that her mother once loved. 

Centered around the death of her mother at a young age, Elizabeth returns to New York to live with her grandmother, reuniting with her father. As a twelve-year-old girl with a constant fear of deja vu, her personality grows from maturity back to childhood. Rediscovering herself, the meaning of childhood, and how the two worlds can coexist in one setting, she reunites with her own Imaginary Friend or IF along the way as she takes on the task of helping others remember theirs.

Verdict: 8.5/10

Cinema teaches viewers about possibilities of the future and allows people to learn from the heartache and joy of the characters. Tune in to one of these movies and experience a world full of magical wonder.

On April 19, 2024, Taylor Swift released her 11th studio album titled The Tortured Poets Department, otherwise shortened to TTPD. Living up to the name, the album boasts poetic verses and lyrics that are sure to intrigue. 

Cementing herself as one of the best songwriters of the era, Swift brings an even more enhanced version of her current lyricism and composition work to The Tortured Poets Department by taking the art of metaphors in new directions that will keep fans speculating.

Produced by Jack Antonoff, who collaborated with her on poppier songs, and Aaron Dessner, the leading producer in her pandemic albums and another previous album, “Midnights,” the songs vary from light synth to deep drum beats. 

After announcing the album at the 66th annual Grammy Awards, Swift introduced Post Malone and Florence & the Machine as feature artists, with Post appearing on “Fortnight,” the lead single of the album, and Florence + the Machine featured on “Florida!!!”

Thematically, the album tackles the feelings of heartbreaks, relationships, and learning how to move on. It also contains a song mentioning her current romance with Kansas City Chiefs Tight End, Travis Kelce. As she mentions in “So High School,” he knows how to ball, and she knows Aristotle. 

Her fan base, known as Swifties, was able to enjoy 16 brand new tracks immediately upon release but were told to wait two hours for an additional surprise from the pop singer. Sure enough, two hours later, she announced The Tortured Poets Department was actually a double album with "The Anthology," adding an additional 15 songs.

With references to previous celebrity feuds, wrecking people’s bikes, and the Salem Witch Trials, she achieves pop greatness yet again in the most diverse way yet. 

Lyrically, she heavily experimented on TTPD, and the creativity shines through on tracks such as “loml,” where she changes the meaning from “love of my life” to “loss of my life,” and “Clara Bow,” where she mentions herself verbatim after a theoretical journalist tells a young girl that she has an edge that Taylor Swift never did.

As seen in previous albums, Swift illustrates stories through her words. Though this album may focus more on her personal life, it has the same story-telling and fantastical aspects as her folk-style albums Folklore and Evermore.

A track like “Who’s Afraid of Little Old Me?” can only be described as a warning to those who care to hurt the singer with words when she claims people should be afraid of little old her. Referencing a year-long hiatus during her reputation era after being on the receiving end of brutal media, she sings, “Is it a wonder I broke? Let’s hear one more joke.” Swift since then has rebounded in popularity and even broke multiple Spotify single-day streaming records, clocking in over 300 million listeners on April 19. 

Swifties are “Down Bad” making The Tortured Poets Department the most streamed album on its release day on Spotify, Apple Music, and Amazon Music. For Spotify, Taylor Swift also became the most streamed artist in a single day, and “Fortnight,” the lead single off of TTPD, gained the title of the most streamed song ever in a single day.

Though it seems like each album will be the peak of her career, Swift continues to dominate pop music and bring new stylistic choices to the industry, making her one of the most popular artists of all time. Her path has been on an upward trajectory over the past couple of years, and there’s no doubt that she’ll continue to break records and grow her dedicated fanbase for eras to come. 

TTPD may take a while to digest, especially upon first listen, but the more you're able to dive into the album and listen to the brilliant lyricism and work of the producers Aaron Dessner and Jack Antonoff, the more you see all the intricate details they've added in. The parallels and the image each word illustrates are fantastic and arguably her best work. Though she opted to not be concise with the message, she should be credited for venturing outside the classic album structure and experimenting with the idea of tortured poetry.

With both heartbroken ballads and power anthems alike, The Tortured Poets Department is debatably Swift’s best album and a must-listen for anyone who wishes to enter the world of fantasy, love, and dense lyricism. 

The verdict: 9/10

When you think of the novel Dune, the words that often come to mind are “epic,” “sweeping,” and “magnificent.” To name it a masterclass in the science fiction genre is an understatement of its grand aura and the influence it has had on film and literature since its publication. 

So it is clear that director Denis Villeneuve had lofty aspirations when he approached Frank Herbert’s 1965 book. As a story that long held a reputation of being unfilmable due to the intricacies of its plot and world-building, adapting this over 600-page dense novel is in itself an ambitious goal. 

However, in 2021, Villeneuve achieved the seemingly impossible: bringing to life the first part of Dune with artistry and skill. His cinematic feat was a perfect adaptation of the sci-fi epic, doing justice to its intricate world-building and characterization, complemented with cutting-edge visuals and a well-rounded cast.

The director’s ambitious vision, along with a top-tier cast and crew, undoubtedly paved the way for a promising sequel. After three years, the work has grandly paid off in this second installment of the Dune saga. While its predecessor often felt like half of a film, Dune: Part Two takes the story to new heights with significantly higher stakes and an emotional core that adds depth to its nuanced themes. 

Picking up closely where the first film left off, Dune: Part Two expands the futuristic desert setting of Arrakis with captivating detail and world-building. The story builds upon the cultures, prophecies, and conflicts established in Dune: Part One, with more time to explore the political and religious aspects on a deeper level. The character arcs and relationships are further refined and are in the foreground for most of the story, bringing a greater sense of emotional depth that was somewhat missing in the first film. 

Dune: Part Two does a lot more with its all-star cast this time around. Rebecca Ferguson as Lady Jessica and Timothée Chalamet as Paul Atridies are the powerful mother-son duo of the film. Chalamet reprises his role with impressive skill, portraying Paul’s arc from a tentative young man at the beginning of the first film to a cold, fierce leader. 

Zendaya is incredible as always in her role as Chani. With more screen time and development, her character brings heart and humanity that warmly complement Paul’s understated manner. Their characters’ dynamics tie in well with the emotional core of the film.

The rest of the talented cast carry out excellent performances as well, including Florence Pugh, Dave Bautista, Stellen Skarsgård, Josh Brolin, and Léa Seydoux. Austin Butler’s performance is spine-chilling as the psychotic and menacing Feyd-Rautha. And Javier Bardem’s character shines in the comic relief department, sprinkling in a much-needed light dose of levity in an otherwise bleak and serious film. 

The film also boasts grand visuals, one of its greatest strengths. Depicting the breathtakingly beautiful and dangerous Arrakis, every scene is filled with sweeping shots that never lose their sense of awe, with some shots reminiscent of 2001: A Space Odyssey.

Despite the necessary use of CGI, the imagery maintains a strong sense of realism, incorporating state-of-the-art visuals that still manage to make it look like they were shot on film. Rather than having hard-edge battle shots and perfectly pristine-looking sandworms, everything has a certain layer of softness to it, replicating many of the VFXs from older movies shot on film that still hold up well today.

The battle sequences and choreography are spectacular. Dune: Part Two is packed with suspense and edge-of-the-seat action, coupled with stunning cinematography by Greig Fraser. Each scene is breathtaking in scope, and with Hans Zimmer's pounding score, the film delivers action sequences that are so vivid they practically erupt from the screen.

But even with all its explosive battles and rattling sound effects, one of the best action scenes comes from the climactic finale. The close-up shots are intensified and the music fades away, creating one of the most powerful moments of the entire film. During this fight scene, the lack of background score brings out the intensity of the battle in a way that feels raw and realistic. Hearing the grunts, slashes, and pain of each punch packs a more immersive and visceral experience.

For much of its 166-minute runtime, Dune takes its time to build up the action and tension, bringing its characters and their stories to life gradually. The pacing can be slow at times, but despite its extended runtime, the ending still feels a bit rushed.

Villeneuve packs a long and complex story into a film just under three hours long fairly effectively. However, there are parts where the shortened timeline and the extended time jumps become apparent, resulting in some unresolved elements of the story and the characters. 

However, such flaws may be perceived as intentional creative decisions, as Dune: Part Two only concludes the first book in a six-novel series. There is certainly potential – and talk – about continuing the saga with an adaptation of Dune: Messiah, a story that is in some ways even denser and more intricate. 

In the end, Dune is more than just a simple “chosen one” story. Themes of power, politics, religion, and sacrifice take center stage and are all thoughtfully explored with nuance. The battle for power serves as the backdrop of the film, fueling the conflict brewing throughout the series.

As a sequel, it succeeds in the same ways that The Empire Strikes Back and The Godfather: Part II work for their film franchises: there are higher stakes and a certain darkness that makes the heartfelt moments and tension feel all the more earned. Despite the abruptness of its ending, the story still concludes in a way that is enthralling, dramatic, and emotionally satisfying. 

Dune: Part Two is cinema at its grandest scale, rich in storytelling, world-building, and epic spectacle. Ultimately, it is a movie that begs to be seen on the biggest screen possible to fully appreciate the grandeur of it all. 

With its brilliant craft and careful dedication to the source material, Dune will long hold a legacy as one of the greatest science fiction sagas of the generation. 

The verdict: 8.5/10

The long-awaited Percy Jackson and the Olympians series, based on Rick Riordan's best-selling books, finally made its debut on screens in December 2023. The question among every Percy Jackson fan is… does it do justice to Riordan’s books?

Between 2010-2013, there were two blockbuster films released, Percy Jackson and the Lighting Thief and Percy Jackson and the Sea of Monsters. Starring Logan Lerman as the lead, these movies were widely criticized for their drastic changes from the original storyline and lackluster acting. However, compared to these films, the Percy Jackson and the Olympians TV series is a much stronger adaptation, with the actors fitting much better into their roles and the story following closer to the books.

Actor Walker Scobell does a solid job at portraying the lovable hero, Percy Jackson, accurately depicting this young boy as a befuddled tween desperate to find answers about his family’s mysterious background. Aryan Simhadri plays Grover Underwood, Percy’s charming and loyal sidekick, and Leah Jeffries is great in her role as Annabeth Chase, a clever and witty heroine. All the actors perform adequately in their assigned roles. However, none of their performances stand out, and some moments are better than others.

The show does an excellent job of bringing Riordan's whimsical world full of supernatural elements and Greek mythology to life. The TV adaptation is infused with a comedy spin, full of witty gags and banter that perfectly captures the charm of the story. However, at times, the show can get a little corny, and there are a few flat acting scenes, especially from Scobell and Simhadri.

However, despite a few shortcomings, Percy Jackson and the Olympians is well worth watching on Disney+ as a faithful adaptation of the books. Season 2 has been confirmed, but the date is yet to be announced. 

The verdict: 7.5/10

Mean Girls, famous for its brilliantly witty quotes like, “On Wednesdays, we wear pink,” and “Get in, loser, we’re going shopping,” was released in 2004 and instantly became a classic among the era of early 2000s films. The movie, written by Tina Fey and Rosalind Wisemen, detailed a previously homeschooled girl, Cady Heron, attending a classic high school where she learn the effects of popularity, the color pink, and the Plastics. 

The 2004 film starred A-list actors including Lindsay Lohan as Cady Heron, Amanda Seyfried as Karen Smith, and Jonathan Bennett as Aaron Samuels. 

20 years later, Mean Girls has resurfaced again in theaters with its 2024 musical adaptation starring pop singer Reneé Rapp as Regina George and actress Angourie Rice playing the role of Cady Heron. 

Boasting its marvelously intense ballads, like “World Burn” and “Stupid with Love,” and Gen Z flair, Mean Girls provides a sense of maturity to the film that wasn’t present in the original juvenile-esqe 2004 Mean Girls.

While the 2024 version was able to shine a light on the importance of inclusivity and cultural mentions, it lacked when it came to setting them apart from the original. Many of the quotes from the 2004 movie were still present in the new remake, but there wasn’t the excitement of new plot lines and twists. If the previous film hadn’t existed, it would instantly be a Gen Z staple, but with the existence of Tina Fey’s original creation, it didn’t quite provide a meaningful update.

The all-star cast mildly lived up to expectations, with some of the actors doing a slightly worse performance in comparison to the original. However, one actor, or may it be said, actress was even better than the original. Regina George, played by Rachel McAdams in the 2004 film, was brought into a new era by Reneé Rapp, and her musical acrobatics and passive-aggressive sassiness provided a new vibe and aesthetic for the classic leader of the Plastics. 

In addition to Rapp, Christopher Briney, recently popularized due to his part as Conrad on Prime Video’s series The Summer I Turned Pretty, transformed jock Aaron Samuels, known for his charm and charisma, into a real sweetheart. 

The greater sense of cultural diversity was a particularly noticeable part of the remake. Gretchen Wieners, before her gorgeous ballad to Regina, mentions the role of her abuelita in her life and Karen Smith soon became Karen Shetty to honor the South Indian background of the new actress, Avantika. 

Additionally, students at North Shore High were updated to feature a less idealistic approach to an American high school. You’ll see students in dark clothing, brooding in corners, others on their phones during class, and lots with sweats and hoodies on. 

While staying true to the plotline, Mean Girls was also able to acknowledge the injustices and wrongs in the world with Auli'i Cravalho’s song, “I’d Rather Be Me.” It brings a new power of addressing issues in the world without straying from the campy focus of the movie. 

Although the new and updated clothing, technology, and brands were apparent in the 2024 edition, the brand promotion was overkill. In the intro of the movie, you immediately segue into an Apple ad with the feature of their new iPhone’s camera, later in the film you see Elf Cosmetics products, there are TikTok features, and to end the film, Cady Heron uses a Samsung Galaxy Flip phone to take selfies. The movie was simply one big ad, and not always in good fashion.

Despite its faults, the 2024 adaptation of Mean Girls will go down in history as one of the best remakes of the decade. With incredible Broadway-style musical pieces and an astounding plotline that stays true to the original, Mean Girls will continue to unite fans for years to come. 

The verdict: 8/10

What's whimsical, sweet, and full of scrumdidlyumptious treats? 

That would be Paul King’s latest movie, Wonka, a musical origin story of candy-coated wonder and pure imagination. 

Ronald Dahls’ beloved novel Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, on which the story is based, has already inspired its share of movie adaptations: There’s Tim Burton’s eccentric and somewhat sinister 2005 version, starring Johnny Depp, and Mel Stuart’s 1971 picture with Gene Wilder, whose sly and enigmatic performance represents the gold standard of Wonka representation. 

Working with Paddington 2 screenwriter Simon Farnaby, director Paul King puts his own brand on the lore of Wonka. It’s a careful departure from the representation of Willy Wonka that we’re most familiar with, building upon the previous movies in a respectful way while creating its own world.

Stepping into the role of the titular chocolatier is a difficult set of shoes to fill, but Timothée Chalamet puts his own spin on the character as a young, wide-eyed Willy Wonka full of charisma, with a dream of one day opening his own candy factory. It’s unlike the eccentric mad-hatter portrayed by the original Wonka films or even Chalamet's previous dramatic roles in Dune and Lady Bird, but his charming performance proves his capabilities of acting in a wide range of roles. 

The rest of the stellar cast includes Calah Lane, Olivia Colman, and Keegan-Michael Key, who all blend perfectly into their supporting roles. Hugh Grant as the Oompa-Loompa is perhaps one of the best and most unexpected highlights of the movie. The film is full of the vibrant and quirky characters you would expect from a Wonka movie, and there isn't a weak link among them. 

Notably, the film's greatest strength lies in its visual feast. Set in a quaint town that resembles London and Paris, the vibrant set and costume design bring Wonka’s imaginative world to life in all its glory, where the visual aesthetics are nothing short of spectacular. Much of this is credited to Nathan Crowley, the production designer behind films like The Dark Knight and Interstellar, bringing meticulous attention to the film's details and design. Coupled with Paul King's signature whimsical flair, the movie crafts a lighthearted and magical atmosphere reminiscent of his previous Paddington films. 

Wonka’s full-blown musical aspect is another big part of the film, which slightly draws away from the previous adaptations it was based on. The movie pays homage to the 1971 original, with a rendition of the classic song “Pure Imagination,” though the bulk of the film introduces an original soundtrack written by Neil Hammon. The opening number, “A Hatful of Dreams,” sung by Chalamet, has a classic and jaunty musical feel, which establishes the fantastical atmosphere of the film within the first few minutes. The rest of the musical numbers, filled with lavish spectacle, are thoroughly enjoyable but don't quite have the unique qualities to stand out, falling to generic melodies and forgettable lyrics. 

Wonka's charm is then somewhat diminished by its chaotic story. The plot tends to get tangled up in convoluted storylines and a heavy reliance on plot conveniences, further exacerbated by the film's sudden shift towards musical territory. The inconsistent and borderline nonsensical plot doesn't seem to care about making sense or reason, either – much like the rising climax scene of a VFX giraffe chasing a frantic Rowan Atkinson through a church. 

Don’t think too much about it. Just suspend your disbelief and enjoy it. 

The story is unapologetically formulaic as well, but self-aware enough that the corny puns and gags don’t get too overbearing. 

At its best, Wonka is fun for what it is: a sweet, scrumdiddlyumptious treat filled with musical wonder and fantastic performances, but its chaotic story and forgettable soundtrack leave it feeling bittersweet. 

In the end, Wonka doesn't quite reach the heights of the original films, but it doesn't have to. Unlike Tim Burton's 2005 version, Paul King notes that he didn't want to reinvent the story but instead created Wonka as a companion piece to the iconic Gene Wilder film. It's not likely going to win any golden tickets to grand cinematic achievements. Instead, it’s content to inspire laughter, a few sentimental tears, and cheers when the villains are defeated. 

But if there’s one thing this movie proves, it’s that a little bit of candy makes everything better, even if it’s a mixed bag of treats like Wonka. 

The verdict: 7/10

The new Hunger Games prequel, The Ballad of Songbirds and Snakes, has finally arrived at the theater. The question is, was it worth the nearly decade-long wait?

This new film is centered around President Coriolanus Snow, a young man of only eighteen. Actor Tom Blyth puts an interesting spin on the character, proving himself to be an excellent actor and fitting into the role of Snow incredibly well. He shows a kinder side to Coriolanus that nobody thought existed. Blyth shows us his heart, while also portraying Snow’s progression into evil, and that evolution helps drive the plot.

Things start to get interesting when Snow is forced to mentor Lucy Gray Baird, a female tribute from District 12. Played by Rachel Zegler, Lucy Gray brings a musical aspect to the 10th annual Hunger Games. With a passionate personality and a fiery spirit, she reminds some fans of Katniss Everdeen, the protagonist of the original The Hunger Games trilogy. Zegler does a solid job at portraying this young woman, and she is definitely a top-tier actress. Both Blyth and Zegler depict Snow and Lucy Gray’s nuanced relationship and their different personalities. Moviegoers get to see Lucy Gray’s influence on Snow and how she brings a unique twist to the Hunger Games that nobody has seen before. The Hunger Games were never musical films, but Rachel Zegler changed that, giving the film a more musical element to the story. 

The cinematography is another interesting aspect of the film. Director Francis Lawrence, who also directed the previous Hunger Games films, gave the film many unique effects, and many fans had high expectations compared to the original trilogy. The movie has a balanced pacing of exciting, action-packed scenes and emotional moments. With detailed lighting effects that match each scene and good sound work as well, the special effects enhance the film without distracting from the action.

The film also features a stellar soundtrack. With many of the songs sung by Rachel Zegler, there are a lot of moments where the songs will play at certain points to enhance the effects and the mood, such as soulful songs in emotional parts. Songs such as Olivia Rodrigo’s “Can’t Catch Me Now,” and Rachel Zegler’s “The Hanging Tree,” really put a spin on the movie that the previous films don’t have.

However, as a live adaptation of the book, The Ballad of Songbirds and Snakes is considerably different from the original plot of the novel. But while some readers may be disappointed by the movie’s tendency to stray from the plot, the beautiful cinematography of the film makes up for it.

Considering the already great plot of the story, cast of actors that wonderfully fit the characters, marvelous soundtrack, and spectacular cinematography, this is an excellent prequel to a truly epic series.

The verdict: 9/10

Disclaimer: Contains minor spoilers.

Leo is a newer movie released in 2023 on Netflix. This animated family comedy stars Adam Sandler as the lovable 74-year-old lizard Leo and Bill Burr as his terrarium buddy, Squirtle the turtle. Leo makes his way through the houses of fifth graders, helping them and delaying a long-planned “escape” — only to find out that he doesn’t actually want to leave after all.

Adam Sandler does a remarkable job voicing Leo, though not quite living up to his performance in Hotel Transylvania as Dracula. In this movie, Sandler sings a lot more than he did in the Hotel Transylvania movies. And Bill Burr brings the perfect amount of sarcasm into Squirtle’s character, making him seem like an average adult human in turtle form. His jokes will appeal to older viewers, too. The rest of the cast also includes Sandler’s wife, Jackie, and two daughters, Sunny and Sadie, who also give solid performances.

Somehow, animated musicals seem easier to believe than regular musicals. In live-action, it always seems so random when a character bursts into song, but since the animation is so thoroughly make-believe, it makes more sense. The musical numbers bring a more whimsical and lighthearted element to the story and while many of the songs seem to come out of nowhere, it definitely leaves an impression. One of the most memorable songs in this musical is where Leo sings that the students shouldn’t cry because “it’s really annoying.” Leo sings a number of other evocative songs, such as one about thinking about the things he’d never done before the final year of his life.

The story’s pacing, however, is where the movie isn’t quite as good. The first half of the story is better than the second half, which suffers from poor pacing and loses steam. Some character arcs feel inconsistent and sometimes convoluted and nonsensical, which contribute to a final act that feels rushed at times and slow at others.

The animation has solid visuals and effects, but it’s nothing really unique or special compared to the usual 3D animation you see in every movie. There are a few scenes in which the animation feels inconsistent or out of place. The movie also crams in awkward product placement and cheap visual gags whenever it can. 

But despite the mild animation issues, Leo is a satisfying movie that will please viewers of all ages. It succeeds in the world of comedy, drama, and hilarious kindergarteners that are absolute gold. 

The verdict: 7.5/10

2023 was a big year for summer blockbusters. Let’s take a look at some of the most popular movies of the season. 

Barbie

Barbie was the blockbuster of the summer, sweeping over $1.4 billion at the box office and quickly becoming a pop culture phenomenon. 

The film is a dazzling spectacle of visuals and design, paying homage to the iconic original while subverting expectations. While many initially thought the pink flick would be a silly movie with no substance, director Greta Gerwig didn’t have the same idea. The film instead tackles powerful messages while keeping it easily accessible for audiences of all ages. Its social commentary is on the chin and filled with meta humor, focusing on themes of friendship, acceptance, and the struggles and triumphs of growing up.

Barbie packs a powerful all-star cast. Margot Robbie is the perfect embodiment of the iconic doll, with an aura full of charisma and charm. Her excellent performance brings the doll to life while providing more depth and relatability to the character. Ryan Gosling is Barbie’s fun-loving sidekick, full of charm and humor. Kate McKinnon, Michael Cera, and Will Ferrell also stand out in their roles. 

The film has plenty of references to pop culture and cinema, most notably 2001: A Space Odyssey in its opening scene. Music producer Mark Ronson curates a brightly exuberant soundtrack of disco pop hits – with the likes of Lizzo, Dua Lipa, and Billie Eilish – that serves not only as an excellent companion piece to the colorful movie but also as a fun and energetic album on its own. 

The movie stands out in its impressive set and costume design. Barbie herself has forty different costume changes throughout the movie – from bright disco jumpsuits to an all-pink cowgirl ensemble. The wide assortment of fashion all bring out each character's personality. Jacqueline Durran, the costume designer, said she wanted the outfits to feel “timeless,” which is why she didn’t stick with any specific trends or styles to keep the style relevant. 

However, as great as the movie is, the story still suffers from plot holes and inconsistencies. Some narrative elements tend to fall on gimmicks and plot conveniences, which can hurt the flow of the film. 

The Barbie movie is still turning heads beyond just the silver – and pink – screen. Director and writer Greta Gerwig shows her skill in creating a modern reinvention full of heart and humor. It is also the first female-directed film to rack up over one billion dollars at the box office. Much of the success is credited to its large influence on pop culture and widespread audience. It has an impact not only in cinemas but also in culture, sparking conversations, community, and pink attire. 

The verdict: 9/10

Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse

Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse is widely praised as one of the best animated movies of recent times, matching bold storytelling with striking animation for an enjoyable adventure with heart, humor, and plenty of superhero action. 

But how do you top that? By being its sequel. 

Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse is everything great about its predecessor and more, effectively capturing the magic and intrigue of the first film while building upon its strengths. 

This film is a visual tour de force. With its dazzling visuals, magnificent soundtrack, and colorful comic-styled animation, Across the Spider-Verse is a masterpiece dripping in art and style. Each character has a moment to shine with their own individual art style and personality, bringing an interesting depth to the story. The movie features a variety of locations offering their own unique twist on the animation design, with some of the best action sequences on-screen.

The movie makes the best out of its talented cast. Shameik Moore, Hailey Steinfield, Oscar Isaac, and Jason Schwartzman stand out in their roles, portraying their characters with warmth and humor. Dialogue is full of witty banter and fun gags.

Many recent superhero movies have tried to explore the idea of alternate universes – with Dr. Strange in the Multiverse of Madness and The Flash – but none have done it better than Across the Spider-Verse. This movie does the multiverse concept justice through effective worldbuilding and well-rounded character development. With this, the interdimensional setting allows the movie to pay homage to the other Spider-Man characters – with numerous easter eggs and references – while offering something new. 

However, its action-packed story is held back by its overstretched runtime. Running over two and a half hours, the story starts to feel tedious and repetitive at times. Character arcs and plot points get repeated without adding anything new, and the excessive focus on supporting characters at the expense of the protagonist starts to take a toll on the narrative and screen time. 

As the first half of a two-part story, a lot of the focus is on setting up content and characters for future payoffs. However, the movie lacks a satisfying resolution or climax sequence, leaving a cliffhanger ending that feels rushed. 

None of these flaws are enough to derail the movie, but they do hold it back from reaching its full potential. Even so, it still leaves audiences satisfied and excited for a promising sequel. 

The verdict: 8.5/10

Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One

Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One is the seventh and penultimate sequel to the Mission Impossible franchise. For the first film of a two-part finale, director Christopher McQuarrie returns to the series to deliver another impressive sequel.

This film is a two-hour 43-minute adrenaline rush that boasts some of cinema’s most stunning stunt work and choreographed action sequences. From intense car chases to jumping motorcycles off cliffs, Tom Cruise is an action star who knows how to make a thrilling adventure full of suspense, humor, and stakes higher than ever. 

The ensemble cast all bring their A-games back to their roles. Ving Rhames, Simon Pegg, and Rebecca Ferguson remain the best IMF team, and Esai Morales’ charismatic yet terrifying character proves to be one of the best villains in the franchise. However, it is Hayley Atwell who shines in her role as a new addition to the series, bringing charm and wits to a likable character. 

There’s never a boring moment in the film. Nearly every scene is filled with action-packed sequences and quippy dialogue. However, some scenes tend to drag on a bit longer than needed, stretching out the 163-minute runtime. It’s a long movie with a lot going on, feeling like it’s in a perpetual third act, but manages to balance out its fast pacing with effective character development and subtle plot twists. 

The film pays homage to Brian De Palma’s original, while still developing its own style established by McQuarrie's previous entries. Lorne Balfe’s score does an excellent job of elevating the film and hammering home the emotional beats. The film doesn’t overly rely on CGI but instead blends smartly choreographed stunts to pack a more powerful visceral experience. 

Occasionally some dialogue and exposition grow too chunky telling rather than showing, and a few quips and gags don’t quite stick the landing. At times, plot points tend to fall to gimmicks or just simple plot conveniences, but it's not enough to derail the story. 

Despite a few missteps, Dead Reckoning makes the most out of its grand blockbuster budget, talented cast, and production. It’s a movie best seen on the big screen to truly feel the grandeur of the action. With its compelling story and high-stakes stunts, Dead Reckoning sets the stage for an exciting part two while still being a satisfying adventure on its own.

The verdict: 8.5/10

Asteroid City

Asteroid City is Wes Anderson’s most distinct film yet. 

With his unique blend of quirky characters, madcap humor, vibrant colors, and whimsical narratives, it’s not hard to name him as one of the most influential modern filmmakers. 

His latest cinematic offering is Asteroid City, a movie stylistically undifferentiated from most of the filmmaker’s recent output. This retro sci-fi tale of a UFO sighting in a 1950s desert town certainly delivers Anderson's expected whimsical charm.

Stylistically, the movie’s set design is visually striking, from its perfectly symmetrical frames to vibrant pastel colors that pop on screen. Each shot shows immaculate attention to detail, with precise cinematography and meticulously crafted costume design. 

However, the film falls short as it fails to pair the visuals and auteur elements with an engaging, emotionally impactful plot and character development.

The star-studded cast includes actors ranging from frequent collaborators like Jason Schwartzman, Adrien Brody, and Tilda Swinton to new additions like Tom Hanks and Scarlett Johansson, all of whom deliver solid performances. Despite its large ensemble, the story doesn’t allow most of them to leave a lasting impression, with only a handful of truly memorable characters. There are few standout scenes among the new faces, and instead, most of the supporting cast is reduced to forgettable cameos without enough screen time to fully develop. 

The film is a true ensemble piece without a clear main character. This would have worked well if the wide array of characters were more compellingly written, but the screenplay treats their motivations as second fiddle to style, world-building, and more abstract themes. As a result, the film tends to feel emotionally distant, as its full weight has been sacrificed for visual storytelling. 

The movie is structurally similar to Wes Anderson’s more recent work, most notably The French Dispatch, in its use of black-and-white scenes, meta-commentary, and unique framing techniques – a story within a story within a story. At times the screenplay tends to get lost in its own convoluted, meandering narrative, but on occasion, bursts forth with interesting new angles to the story and its characters. Its deep inquiries about art and existentialism are tinged with a subtly thoughtful and poignant tone but are too buried under the film's multi-layered narrative and visual style. 

Although the film maintains its signature visual flair and quirkiness, it fails in its most important aspect: the ability to emotionally connect with its audience. In the end, Asteroid City would still be appreciated by dedicated fans of the director’s work but may alienate any potential newcomers. 

The verdict: 6/10

Author’s note: Some ratings seem too low? On this rating scale, anything with a 5/10 or above is a decent movie, or at least worth a watch. A 10/10 is reserved for the select few pieces of media the ranker would view as perfect. This is to avoid cheapening the value of a great movie by giving it the same score as a good movie. A 10/10 is hard to achieve. 

A lot has changed in the six years since Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 was released in theaters. Since then, Marvel films have tackled universe-altering events like Infinity War and Endgame, and the Guardians franchise director James Gunn was fired and later re-hired by Disney. Returning to the trilogy for the first time since 2017, Gunn was tasked not only with putting together a satisfying final chapter for the Guardians, but also injecting some life back into an MCU that was quickly losing favor with fans. 

As expected, Vol. 3 starts off much differently than the first two Guardians films. Although Gunn used 2022’s 40-minute The Guardians of the Galaxy Holiday Special to set up some of the world of Vol. 3, other MCU films have left the Guardians in such a different spot since Vol. 2 that the first half hour or so of this film is spent frantically updating the audience. It’s necessary but a little awkward, and it takes longer than it should to become immersed in the story of the film. 

There’s a noticeable tonal shift from the first two films, too. While Vol. 1 and 2’s first needle drops were fun action scenes set to Redbone’s “Come and Get Your Love” and Electric Light Orchestra’s “Mr. Blue Sky,” respectively, Vol. 3 starts with a slow, introspective long take backed by the acoustic version of Radiohead's “Creep.” While the Guardians films haven’t shied away from tugging on heartstrings in the past, Vol. 3 has an underlying somberness that sets it apart from the rest of the franchise.

However, once the story gets rolling, the usual jokes start peppering the script. Gunn’s unique sense of humor, paired with the veteran cast’s delivery, makes for a winning combination. Still, despite Gunn being Marvel’s best at balancing humor with emotional stakes, there are some moments when he undercuts serious scenes with unneeded comedy. Horrific events are occasionally brushed aside to move on to the next joke or scene. Gunn’s writing gets the character interactions absolutely right, though. The Guardians truly feel like a dysfunctional but loving family, giving every scene in this superhero space opera a touch of authenticity. 

The film’s unevenness is somewhat masked by great performances by the cast. The usual Guardians crew has great chemistry and is stellar as always, with leading man Chris Pratt really showing off his range. The two biggest new additions to the cast, Chukwudi Iwuji’s High Evolutionary and Will Poulter’s Adam Warlock, are great as well. Iwuji chews up the scenery of the entire film as the antagonist, reveling in his role as one of Marvel’s most detestable villains yet. He has no sympathetic backstory or witty sense of humor – he’s just pure evil. And Iwuji does a fantastic job getting the audience to root against him. On the other hand, Poulter’s Adam Warlock is barely even an important part of the plot, but his comedic value is surprisingly off the charts. He’s a fun addition to the movie. 

From a technical standpoint, Vol. 3 is quite impressive. The visuals are miles above Marvel’s last project, the disappointing Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania, with a variety of interesting locations and hyper-realistic CGI animals. The camerawork is active and creative, with plenty of spins, movement, and some excellent long takes. The action scenes are lots of fun as well, especially in the finale. The editing can be jarring at times, although it smooths out over the course of the movie. Much of Vol. 3 is built around flashbacks, and the cuts to them feel awkward and unexpected most of the time. It’s a shame because these scenes are excellent, but they often feel very out of place. 

However, where Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 shines the most is not in its flashy presentation or barrage of jokes, but rather in its character work. It’s hard not to care about what happens to the Guardians. The characters have been a big part of pop culture for nearly a decade, and thankfully, their final chapter is a satisfying and well-written conclusion. Much of the story is built around dark subject matter that really pushes the boundaries of the usual MCU fare, giving the story a unique, high-stakes feel. Despite its action-comedy setting, Vol. 3 is an impactful film filled with genuine emotion.

Still, like everything the Guardians touch, Vol. 3 is a bit of a mess. But it’s a beautiful one. If you can peel back the layers of alien gore, over-the-top jokes, and more characters and locations than you can keep track of, you’ll discover a real heart at the center of this film. You’ll laugh, cry, and sing along to some 90s hits before the end credits roll. You might roll your eyes a few times as well, but Vol. 3 is still quality entertainment. It’s easily the best Marvel film since Spider-Man: No Way Home, and a touching sendoff to some of the franchise’s most lovable characters. 

The verdict: 8/10 

Comic book movies might finally have some competition: video game adaptations. HBO’s recent The Last of Us TV show received extensive critical acclaim, and April’s The Super Mario Bros. Movie just surpassed all of its box office expectations, garnering the best opening weekend in animated film history. It is now far and away the highest-grossing movie of 2023. 

Of course, numbers don’t tell the whole story. The Super Mario Bros. Movie had a large, guaranteed audience thanks to its status as an adaption of the most recognizable video game series of all time. As anyone in modern Hollywood could tell you, nostalgic value is the name of the game. Unsurprisingly, The Super Mario Bros. Movie is about the furthest thing from a standalone film. But that doesn’t make it bad. 

The movie knows that its greatest strength is the long list of previous Mario titles it has to pull from, and it certainly leans into that. It incorporates aspects of the classic platformer games, Super Smash Bros., and Mario Kart, along with plenty of other Mario-related references (some of which this reviewer likely missed) rather seamlessly into the movie. The result is a product made by people who clearly love the source material, and any viewer who has enjoyed even one Mario game in the past should find something recognizable in the film. 

The celebrity voice cast is hit and miss, with Chris Pratt’s much-maligned casting as Mario being unsurprisingly mediocre. He doesn’t ruin the movie by any means but he sounds far more like Chris Pratt than Mario throughout the film, which can be distracting. Similarly, Anya Taylor-Joy is somewhat one-note as Princess Peach. On the other hand, Jack Black as Bowser absolutely excels in a role he was born to play. He’s by far the most entertaining and interesting character in the film, and Black is clearly having the time of his life behind the microphone. He’s a clear standout in a movie that more often than not lacks personality. Other members of the voice roster, including recognizable names like Charlie Day, Seth Rogen, and Keegan Michael-Key, are all solid in their supporting roles. 

The animation is vibrant, colorful, and well up to modern standards, but it’s largely identical to past Illumination titles. It captures the spirit of the movie well but lacks uniqueness – the film had a number of classic Nintendo games to look back on for visual inspiration, but it largely fits it all into the studio’s preferred art style. The music selection has a similar flaw. The film successfully incorporates some past Mario themes into its soundtrack, but for its bigger scenes, it turns to radio hits like A-ha’s “Take On Me” and AC/DC’s “Thunderstruck.” These tracks kill the immersion of the film, especially when countless other songs from past Mario games were available. And on a smaller note, the movie’s repeated use of slow motion shots gets old very quickly. 

It would be hard to mention The Super Mario Bros. Movie without talking about its highly publicized musical number, sung in an all-out performance by Jack Black’s Bowser. The segue into the scene is a little awkward but the song itself is as catchy and hilarious as advertised. It’s a clear highlight of the movie. Like most other aspects of the film, The Super Mario Bros. Movie’s humor isn’t bad, but it’s hardly superb despite Black’s best efforts. No jokes fall horribly flat, but the movie is full of far more half-smiles and chuckles than genuine laughs. 

Whether it’s the art style of the film, the humor, or the characters and story in general, The Super Mario Bros. Movie plays it very safe. It’s simply a string of events meant to introduce classic characters, locations, and loads of video game nostalgia, all held together by a straightforward, predictable plot. Characters are introduced quickly with minimal depth and they barely have any meaningful arc by the time the credits roll. The writing is unimaginative and the world-building is fun but extremely surface-level. 

But at the end of the day, who cares about that? No one going to a Mario movie is expecting the next Best Picture winner. 

The Super Mario Bros. Movie doesn’t need to help the audience become invested in its characters and locations. It doesn’t need extensive backstories, strong internal logic, or high emotional stakes. All of that came from the countless hours of Mario video games that its audience had already enjoyed. The film was marketed as a fun-for-the-whole-family movie based on characters and settings everyone already knows and loves, and it absolutely delivers on that premise. Still, it would have been nice to see a few risks taken in some aspect of the film, as The Super Mario Bros. Movie fails to hold a candle to some of the more groundbreaking and memorable animated titles of the past decade. But it’s worth noting that despite the film’s lack of strengths, there’s an equally small amount of true weaknesses – rather, just missed opportunities. 

When the showing of the film ended, all the kids and families in the theater gave it an enthusiastic ovation. The Super Mario Bros. Movie is a success. It’s good, but it could have been super. 

The verdict: 7/10

Disney Plus’ flagship Star Wars TV show, The Mandalorian, comes back for another fast-paced, action-packed season after the success of the first two.

Even though the show is directed by a handful of people, the balance of action and story is better managed than in past seasons. The plot flows nicely, and every episode builds suspense for the next one.

Pedro Pascal delivers an excellent performance as Din Djarin as he tries to redeem himself after the events of season two. His dynamic as both a father and warrior keep viewers invested in the story and characters. It is truly heartwarming watching Grogu, Mando’s force-wielding sidekick, learning how to talk in the first few episodes.

The character Bo Katan Kryze, who first appeared in the animated series Star Wars: The Clone Wars, was brought to life by Katee Sackhoff in earlier episodes of The Mandalorian, and she returns as a key character in the third season. We get to see more of her character’s backstory and internal struggle as she reflects on the tragic events in her life, and Sackhoff does a great job portraying these complex emotions.

While the story arcs build at a more intriguing rate than in past seasons, that doesn’t mean that this season is better than the others. In the many episodes of the past seasons, only a few stood out, and this issue is also prominent in season three.

The Mandalorian season three has a solid start. Star Wars fans are already excited for season four, which was announced to be in development earlier this year by Jon Favreau, a showrunner of The Mandalorian.

Overall, this season is definitely worth watching, and the quality holds up well compared to the past two seasons. It may not have as compelling of a storyline as Star Wars’ Andor, but The Mandalorian sure comes close.

The verdict: 8/10

The MCU needed a new Thanos. 

Marvel films post-Avengers: Endgame (known collectively as “Phase Four”) had felt aimless and largely unnecessary. There was no Avengers-esque team-up to look forward to, and that was mainly due to the lack of a villain worth teaming up against. 

Marvel Studios’ head executive Kevin Feige noticed exactly that, confirming at 2022’s San Diego Comic-Con that the villain “Kang the Conqueror” would become the MCU’s next overarching antagonist for the studio’s upcoming slate of films. Kang, played by Jonathan Majors, was first introduced to the MCU in the 2021 Disney Plus series Loki as a multiversal being with infinite variants, posing a new type of threat to Marvel’s heroes. 

Kang’s movie debut (as a different variant, of course) was announced as being February’s Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania, which would also kick off the start of Marvel Studios’ “Phase Five.” 

Quantumania is tasked with establishing a new phase of MCU films, introducing a massively important villain, and continuing the Ant-Man storyline. These are some big, multiversal shoes to fill, and unfortunately, Marvel’s smallest hero isn’t quite up for the task. 

Quantumania’s biggest issue is its tone. The first two Ant-Man films happened on a very small scale by MCU standards, so their lightheartedness and wisecracking characters fit right in. In this movie, entire universes are at stake, but the script can’t get out of its own way with one-liners and comedic relief. A number of the jokes do land, but the majority of Quantumania is a ridiculous cheese-fest that lacks the winking-at-the-camera charm that has let past Marvel entries like Thor: Ragnarok and Guardians of the Galaxy get away with it. 

Outside of one creative scene, there are no meaningful emotional beats to balance out the barrage of humor. The cast is full of big-name talents, but the movie makes it hard to care about any of its main characters, even the ones viewers have grown to love over the course of previous films. Paul Rudd brings his usual charisma as Ant-Man/Scott Lang, but he’s lacking in depth more than ever. The recasting of Scott’s daughter, Cassie, as Kathryn Newton is largely disappointing as well, as she lacks chemistry with Rudd and is written as a somewhat annoying character. Michael Douglas, Michelle Pfeiffer, and Evangeline Lilly also have starring roles, but their characters are underwritten and bland. Pfeiffer’s Janet van Dyne often falls victim to the infuriating cliché of withholding information from the other characters just to create more tension in the story.

Worst of all, Michael Peña’s character Luis is completely absent from this film, which is a shame as he was the best part of the first two Ant-Man films. 

If there’s one bright spot, it’s the aforementioned Jonathan Majors and his portrayal of Kang. He’s effortlessly formidable in the role and he conveys the villain’s immense power and knowledge subtly but in an effective way. The story doesn’t show this quite as well, but Majors knows how to be an intimidating screen presence no matter what he’s working with. Quantumania isn’t the Phase Five introduction most wanted, but Majors’ performance shows some hope for the future of the MCU. 

Visually, Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania is a schlocky mess with some hideous, overdone CGI and cheap-looking lighting. The parts of the film set in the Quantum Realm, which take up most of the runtime, will have viewers missing real trees and blue skies in no time. Nothing feels real in Quantumania, which hurts its immersion, especially when it comes to the action scenes. 

An all-encompassing example of Quantumania’s shortcomings would be the introduction of M.O.D.O.K., a popular comics character making its live-action debut in this film. Apparently the adaption is accurate to the source material, but this is a character that should’ve stayed in print. In this film, M.O.D.O.K. is a ridiculous and unfunny VFX abomination who serves as the poster boy for the critique that MCU movies are becoming parodies of themselves. 

If it isn’t clear already, Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania is a bad movie. But aside from a few elements here and there, it isn’t offensively bad. Rather, if you can separate it from its sky-high MCU expectations, you’ll get a somewhat mediocre but still entertaining mid-level action flick. Don’t get the wrong idea – this movie can be very funny when it wants, but it just can’t be serious when it needs to be. If you can deal with that, you might have a good time in Quantumania. 

Of course, for a big-budget film that is supposed to have massively high stakes and usher in a new era of the MCU, Quantumania falls woefully short. It isn’t worth a watch in theaters but it’ll probably be worth seeing for most when it drops on streaming. 

Is Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania an up-to-par entry in Hollywood’s biggest cinematic universe? Definitely not. Is it an acceptable way to spend two hours on a weekday night? Sure.

The verdict: 4.5/10

Director James Cameron’s 2009 film Avatar remains a weird blip on the radar in pop culture. It’s the highest-grossing movie ever made, but in terms of lasting impact, the Avatar franchise has next to none since its release year. 

Sure, Avatar still gets brought up occasionally, generally as a piece of trivia, but it’s the other films on the highest-grossing list that dominate popular discourse: Marvel films, Star Wars films, Jurassic Park films, even Frozen and Minions are talked about more. Avatar is hardly the most popular Cameron project of all time, either. It’s fair to say that Terminator, Aliens, and Titanic have all had a greater cultural impact than Avatar despite their lesser box office performances.

Perhaps one of the biggest factors behind Avatar’s forgotten legacy – besides the fact that superhero films have taken over just about all of modern cinema – is its lack of sequels. Franchise films are the cornerstone of modern Hollywood, but despite the Avatar IP being a proven moneymaker, it took Cameron over a decade to finally release the follow-up. Avatar: The Way of Water was released in December of 2022, around 13 years after the original. 

It wasn’t exactly a Top Gun-to-Maverick sized gap between films, but still a lengthy one. According to Cameron, the delayed sequel date was largely due to the need for modern CGI technology to catch up with his vision for the film. 

And to Cameron’s credit, the visuals are absolutely worth the wait. The Way of Water is a gorgeous film, with near-flawless visual effects for both the character models and the scenery. The hyper-realistic feel of the CGI rarely falls into uncanny valley territory, with only a few scenes having a noticeable computerized feel. It’s hard to understate how much work the VFX team must’ve put into the film, as their incredible effort is easily apparent in every frame. It’s not hyperbole to say that The Way of Water has some of the best CGI in film history. 

The Way of Water’s strength is in its visuals, and Cameron leans heavily into that aspect of the film. Some scenes exploring the film’s setting, the planet Pandora, are shot with as much care as a nature documentary. At times the plot subtly slows down so the audience can spend time enjoying the beautiful cinematography and scenery. These scenes are among the film’s best, but they can drag a little long. With a duration of 190 minutes, The Way of Water is far lengthier than the average blockbuster film, and it could’ve easily been trimmed down to well below three hours. 

This is especially true, as despite the immersive visuals, The Way of Water doesn’t have the substance to match its style. There just isn’t enough story to fill the movie’s marathon of a runtime. The plot is incredibly simple with minimal story threads, which isn’t inherently a bad thing, but at times The Way of Water feels more like a side plot than a part of the franchise’s central storyline. The culprit may be the film’s upcoming sequels which will likely explore more of the story, but regardless, it still hurts the quality of this movie. 

The character work of the film could have elevated the story but it too is rather simple and bland. Some of the character motivations and choices are fuzzy at best, and the dialogue is hilariously awful. It’s predictable, clichéd, and at times cringe-inducing, especially when it comes to the younger characters’ lines. 

The overall acting is solid throughout with some impressive motion-capture work. However, the voice casting of a 73-year-old Sigourney Weaver as a much younger character is puzzling. She’s an accomplished actor in her own right and it’s a shame she couldn’t have been given a better role, because hearing a septuagenarian’s voice from a teenage character just never feels right. 

But at the end of the day, despite the number of issues in The Way of Water’s storytelling, its splendor and spectacle remain undeniable. If you have the spending money, it’s undoubtedly worth the watch on the best 3D IMAX screen around. This film has those magical, jaw-dropping visual moments that make excellent blockbuster material. 

But when the 3D glasses are off and the movie is playing on a small home TV screen, its flaws will begin to show and its impact will lessen. The Way of Water is more of a theater experience than a rewatchable film. It may suffer the same fate as the first Avatar flick: a box office giant with minimal staying power. 

The verdict: 6.5/10

It’s hard to think of a name more synonymous with movies than Steven Spielberg. The award-winning filmmaker is the most commercially successful director of all time, as well as the mind behind countless childhood favorites, gritty dramas, and instant classics over the course of a legendary career. 

But it wasn’t always that way for Spielberg, who fought through the same struggles every young artist faces and more on his way to Hollywood. That story eventually found its way to Spielberg’s longtime collaborator (and The Fablemans co-writer) Tony Kushner, who convinced the famed director to finally commit to turning it into a film, something Spielberg had long resisted due to the project’s extremely personal nature. 

As a result, The Fabelmans – not The Spielbergs – was born, a fictionalized take on Spielberg’s childhood that allowed the director to craft a tale heavily inspired by his upbringing but not bound by the restraints of perfect historical accuracy. 

The result is fantastic. 

Gabriel LaBelle plays Sammy Fabelman, this story’s version of Spielberg, whose love of filmmaking becomes apparent at a young age but is tested as family drama and conflict arise. It’s a tough role for a young actor like LaBelle, especially since he’s directed by the man he’s trying to portray on-screen. But LaBelle performs admirably, rarely a showstopper, but instead remarkably believable – which is equally impressive. 

The rest of the cast is filled out by veteran actors such as Michelle Williams, Paul Dano, and Seth Rogen, all of whom unsurprisingly deliver. But it’s David Lynch and Judd Hirsch, each in very small, one-or-two scene roles, who shine the most. Hirsch especially stands out as Sammy Fabelman’s quirky uncle with some experience in show business, and in his few scenes, he perfectly delivers the crux of the film.

“Family, art… it’ll tear you in two!” he tells an intrigued and slightly confused Sammy. 

That line is what sets The Fabelmans apart from other Hollywood projects made as a love letter to filmmaking. This movie is not Spielberg patting himself on the back for a great career or another self-indulgent tribute to the glitz and glamor of the film industry. It also doesn’t force the “just follow your dreams” cliché into its central message. Instead, The Fabelmans recognizes both the beauty of art as well the danger of it becoming an all-consuming obsession, all in what could have easily been a pretentious film otherwise. 

While The Fabelmans doesn’t exactly land every moral message perfectly, it does succeed in the big one. The film is relatable and encouraging to those interested in pursuing art, but also grounded in reality and in some ways a cautionary tale. 

These deep themes are all expertly coated in Spielberg’s specialty: movie magic. The Fabelmans’ retro setting is charming and stylish, while the script has a great balance of humor and drama. The plot’s occasional additions of the unexpected help keep things interesting, yet they still feel earned as the film’s main storyline, including many of its absurdities, is firmly based on real events. 

In a film as well-crafted as this one, there are few complaints. The opening of the movie is a bit slow and saccharine, and there are a few moments throughout where it feels like a scene can stretch out a little longer than necessary. But overall it’s hard to nitpick decisions that were likely made intentionally to capture specific feelings. Again, this was a deeply personal project for Spielberg. 

With a fairly small marketing campaign, some overly-sentimental trailers, and let’s face it… a rather uninspiring title, The Fabelmans may fall under the radar of many moviegoers. But this top-notch coming-of-age story shouldn’t be missed. Sure, it’s a little long for the genre, but Spielberg’s character-driven narrative is captivating and smartly paced, with the story speeding up whenever it starts to slow and providing a thoroughly enjoyable experience. 

The Fabelmans may not be the perfect movie. And with a filmography as deep as Spielberg’s, it may not even crack his top 10. Although The Fabelmans isn’t as revolutionary or generation-defining as some of Spielberg’s earlier work, it’s still a rare personal reflection and a study on the essence of art from a director who certainly knows what he’s talking about. 

And that’s definitely worth a watch. 

The verdict: 9/10

2022 has been a year for blockbuster books, with a number of quality novels as well as some disappointments. Let’s take a look at some of the year’s most popular books. 

The Final Gambit by Jennifer Lynn Barnes

After the release of its previously successful novel, The Inheritance Games series is back with a third and highly anticipated finale to a thrilling trilogy. And this time, it’s bigger, better, and more complex than ever. 

The Final Gambit delivers all the wit and mystery established in the previous books – but this time with more at stake. 

The story effectively ties in all the plot points and twists that appeared prior in the series, leaving no loose threads behind. Each puzzle and discovery provides a new opportunity for the characters to fully develop and show an emotionally raw side of themselves, gripping with the struggles of guilt and loss that feel genuinely real. 

However, as the third book in the trilogy, The Final Gambit is tasked with expanding the world and intricate storylines introduced in the previous novels, while delivering new additions and twists to keep the story running. It’s successful in that goal, as the novel expertly crafts a brisk plot of twists and turns that are never-ending, but it loses its heart in the process. 

The plot of The Final Gambit becomes exceedingly worse with a convoluted storyline that quickly loses its appeal, as some plot twists come off as contrived and somewhat predictable. Although the story attempts to keep a balanced tone with its witty dialogue and characters, the humor often comes off as cliché-ridden with cheap attempts at snarky comedy.

Due to the large number of storylines, many side characters become redundant while other prominent individuals are pushed to the sidelines without the time to be fully developed. 

Despite these flaws, the book fixes a lot of the mistakes from the previous novel in the series, which was full of dragging structure and heavy in plot conveniences, inconsistent pacing, and dialogue clichés. 

The Final Gambit shows a strong conclusion to the series’ character growth, especially for the protagonist, who grows from a humble, wide-eyed girl to a sharp-witted and resourceful strategist. 

The story’s brisk pacing keeps the pages turning, but often leaves little time to fully develop the weight of the story’s conflicts and build suspense.

Despite the high stakes of the “final game,” the rushed pacing makes the wins feel too easy. This takes away the suspenseful and edge-of-the-seat climax of the story, leaving a rather anticlimactic ending. The conclusion may result in mixed feelings for some readers as well. 

Though The Final Gambit may not be the perfect conclusion to an ambitious series, it’s undeniably a thrilling and compelling journey that ultimately leaves readers satisfied and reeling. 

Verdict: 7/10

Hotel Magnifique by Emily J. Taylor 

In Hotel Magnifique, debut author Emily J. Taylor crafts a dark and twisty adventure that takes readers on an unexpected journey behind the doors of a mysterious hotel. 

Taylor eloquently builds an immersive world of magic heavily influenced by French culture. The story is brimming with it – from magician-like performers with their unique gifts to themed guest rooms that transport visitors to another world. However, the magic tends to veer into vague, hand-waving territory rather than a tangible system. 

The book bills itself as a dark fantasy novel perfect for fans of Caraval and The Night Circus. From the first page, the resemblance is uncanny – from its intricate world-building and dark, mind-bending magic to the poetic writing style. But surface-level resemblances aside, Hotel Magnifique fails to live up to the high standards set by Caraval.

The writing style is where the author’s inexperience clearly shows. At times, the story suffers from inconsistent pacing, as some scenes run too fast for the characters and their relationships to fully develop, while other scenes are overstuffed with descriptions. The first half of the novel drags on with slow dialogue and repetitive scenes but doesn’t pick up until the climax. The big revelations at the end are like an info dump – they are clunky and lessen the suspense they try to build. 

This chunky, inconsistent pacing doesn’t leave a lot of time to properly develop the characters either. Mostly, the personalities are just… bland. There is nothing that makes them feel real or at least relatable, and most of the prominent characters come across as one-dimensional. 

The main protagonist, Jani, is the most fleshed-out character in the story – but that doesn’t necessarily translate to her being likable or relatable. Jani mostly seems to create more problems than she solves, making rash and impulsive decisions without understanding the consequences of her actions. Just as you begin to wonder how much trouble one character can inadvertently get themselves into, Jani somehow manages to surpass those expectations. 

Despite its strong world-building and magical atmosphere, Hotel Magnifique lacks the structure and proficient writing to make for a good story. 

Verdict: 5.5/10

The Maze Cutter by James Dashner

So often authors write spin-offs and sequels to cash in on their previously successful works. But more often than not, these spin-offs don't live up to the success of their predecessors – and The Maze Cutter is no exception.

Dashner's bestselling series, The Maze Runner, has long been recognized as one of the best of its genre, with its unique world-building, complex characters, and action-packed mysteries.

Unfortunately, The Maze Cutter is nothing like the original series. 

The Maze Cutter tries to rehash the plot of the original story but without the mystery, intrigue, and fast-paced suspense that made it so compelling in the first place – all while dragging with slow, inconsistent pacing and including redundant plot arcs. 

The book is about 250 pages – a relatively short read – yet most of it was complete fluff. Half of the story could have been removed, and it wouldn’t have changed anything to the overall plot. 

In fact, almost none of the characters from the original series appear in the book – aside from the prologue and a few minor appearances, which try too hard to cash in on the nostalgia of the original story and characters. The story is simply unnecessary. 

Everything about the initial Maze Runner trilogy made it an original, creative story. But it should have ended there. While the series did have an open-ended conclusion, there was no reason for the story to continue. There’s a certain beauty to ending a book with a loose thread, and leaving some mystery was a satisfying way to conclude the trilogy. 

With The Maze Runner dragging on several more spin-offs than it needed, the impact of its original story starts to fade away. 

But it may just be simply impossible to live up to the success of the original series. 

Verdict: 3.5/10

Gallant by V.E. Schwab

From renowned author V.E. Schwab comes another uniquely dark and chilling adventure in which a girl confronts the ghosts of her family’s mysterious past.

Schwab expertly crafts a vivid and visceral world that is effortlessly immersive. The atmospheric setting, matched with dark and detailed illustrations, visually brings the story to life. 

Gallant is effective in keeping a balanced tone with ominous, spine-chilling suspense and some light, heartwarming moments. Though the pacing is slow, it rarely feels tedious and instead focuses on immersive, descriptive scenes and world-building. 

The mystical elements of the story are subtle – real and somewhat creepy, with a touch of supernatural horror. 

It's an excellent setup for a modern-day gothic novel: a haunted house full of secrets, a spectral undercurrent, a morose and gloomy atmosphere, and a rebellious heroine desperate to find a place she belongs.

With its fascinating narrative, well-rounded characters, and theme of familial love, Gallant may be one of the best novels of the year. 

Verdict: 8/10

During an evening showing of Black Panther: Wakanda Forever, the chatter of the audience could still be heard as the film’s hushed start lit the screen. After a short prologue, the iconic Marvel Studios logo finally appeared, tinged a somber purple rather than the standard bright red. As the usual highlight montage of past Marvel films played as the text of the logo appeared, a notable change was apparent. Every clip was of the late Chadwick Boseman from his various appearances across the MCU, throughout an excellent career that was tragically cut short. 

You could’ve heard a pin drop in the theater.

Black Panther: Wakanda Forever was a film produced in a time rife with tragedy and struggle. Chadwick Boseman was a great actor and by all accounts an even better man, and after he sadly and unexpectedly passed away in the summer of 2020, the Marvel Cinematic Universe was suddenly left without one of its core figures. 

Boseman had captured lightning in a bottle with his portrayal of the Black Panther/T’Challa character in Marvel’s 2016 film Captain America: Civil War and had burgeoned into a full-blown superstar following 2018’s massively successful and influential Black Panther. His equally acclaimed performances in later MCU films had established him as one of the central pillars of the franchise’s future and greenlit a surefire sequel.  

Director Ryan Coogler’s initial script for that sequel, Wakanda Forever, was reportedly finished at the time of Boseman’s death, which added a further challenge to a project already tinged with grief. However, the filmmakers made the necessary rewrites and trudged on through production, leading to the film being released in November of 2022 after some understandable delays. 

Marvel Studios’ decision to not recast Boseman looms large over Wakanda Forever, as his passing is integrated into the plot early on as T’Challa’s death is the emotional centerpiece of the film. As a result, some of the real-life emotions of the actors and director spill over into the movie, making Wakanda Forever one of the most earnest and heartfelt MCU films in a while.  

This is most noticeable in the acting. Letitia Wright’s character Shuri was thrust into the leading role following Boseman’s death, and she carries the weight of the film well. Her performance, and the writing of her character, provide a new depth to Shuri, who becomes far more complex and compelling than before. Similarly, Angela Bassett’s role is greatly expanded, and she absolutely delivers. Her raw emotion, paired with some excellent monologues, result in one of the most riveting performances the MCU has seen. 

On the villain side of things, franchise newcomer Tenoch Huerta does a decent job in his depiction of a classic comic book personality in Namor. However, his delivery of some of the film’s bigger lines can leave something to be desired. Huerta doesn’t necessarily hold the movie back, but he’s definitely a step down from Michael B. Jordan’s memorable antagonist in the first Black Panther film. 

Some of this is the fault of the script, however. While the writing is excellent for Wright and Bassett’s characters, it severely under-develops other aspects of the film. Talokan, the underwater land ruled by Namor, is made out to be a powerful nation with a rich culture and history, but this is told to the audience far more than it is shown. Because of this, Talokan is hard to take interest in and therefore not a compelling threat. Additionally, while the plotting of Wakanda Forever is engaging enough, thinking about the film for a few minutes can result in some plot holes and poor writing becoming irritatingly apparent. 

And while the film is definitely more emotional and serious than the average MCU fare, a number of its few attempts at comedy can still fall rather flat. 

Wakanda Forever is also slightly overstuffed. It has a long runtime, which isn’t inherently a bad thing, but the issue lies in the film’s insistence on following up with side characters from the last movie or introducing new ones – largely to set up future films and TV series for Disney to profit from. The resulting storylines are still somewhat essential for the plot, but they could’ve been easily reduced or combined to center less on future projects and characters the audience doesn’t really care about and instead on the film’s major players. 

This issue is punctuated in the final battle sequence, where a number of side characters wear new, specialized superhero suits. Such instances used to be important plot points in past Marvel movies, but in this case, it’s an undeveloped, unnecessary change made for style points and toy sales that distracts from the focus of the scene. 

That being said, Wakanda Forever does deserve credit for being the best-looking Marvel film in… ever? The usual ugly, green-screen look of even the best MCU flicks over the past decade is largely removed. Gone is the poor color grading and mishmash of purple, brown, and concrete. Well thought-out color palettes and lighting in Wakanda Forever give it an artful feel. Which isn’t to say that the film doesn’t have much CGI – just this time, it feels polished and made from a perspective that prioritized the visual aesthetics just as much as the action.  

The one exception is the final battle sequence, which among a number of issues, feels like it was created in a computer graphics sandbox rather than an actual location. In fact, the entire scene is quite underwhelming in most aspects and overshadowed by a much better one earlier in the film. The visual effects still look finished – an upgrade over the first Black Panther film – but everything is bland and uninteresting. It’s a lone weak spot in an otherwise excellent film visually. 

Black Panther: Wakanda Forever is undeniably a movie made for the Marvel Cinematic Universe. And unsurprisingly, it falls victim to a number of the franchise’s usual faults. There’s a bland finale, some weak internal logic, a focus on setting up the next project over simply making a good standalone film, and the usual over-the-top clichés of superhero movies. But at the same time, it avoids a number of them. Wakanda Forever has some outstanding visuals and acting, and the inauthentic tone of many past Marvel movies is replaced with a film that is unapologetically sincere. 

These major strengths elevate what otherwise would have been a run-of-the-mill blockbuster, as the film’s moments of brilliance are a fitting tribute to a star who was gone too soon. 

The verdict: 7/10

Author’s note: Mild spoilers for Rogue One, Episode IV: A New Hope below.

Cassian Andor. You’ve met him in Rogue One, a 2016 Star Wars movie on how the rebels delivered the Death Star plans to Princess Leia.

Set years before Rogue One, Andor focuses on the titular character long before he was a rebel hero, diving deep into his past and the gritty underbelly of the Star Wars universe. However, this time Cassian Andor isn’t delivering the Death Star plans. Instead, he’s delivering the best Disney Star Wars show in ages. Maybe ever. 

Created by Rogue One screenwriter Tony Gilroy, Andor's plot is very well thought out. With a good balance of action and dialogue, the series will surely keep viewers interested in what will happen next. As the show's tension builds, it gets better and better as it goes on. Each one of Andor’s multi-episode story arcs is constructed masterfully, resulting in tense and compelling finales. 

Diego Luna, who returns as Cassian Andor, does a skillful job portraying his complex character yet again. Although the audience knows what Cassian’s future looks like, the challenges he faces are still suspenseful, and Luna does a great job showing Andor’s struggles. 

Andor is a character-driven show, and as a result, the acting has to deliver. Fortunately, the rest of the cast, including Kyle Soller, Fiona Shaw, Adria Arjona, Denise Gough, Genevieve O'Reilly, and the always-fantastic Stellan Skarsgård, excel. There’s a world-weary sentiment every character exudes, leading to Andor’s remarkably grounded feel and some of the best acting in a Star Wars show up to this point. 

Even Andor’s most heroic souls have a moral grayness to them, while the villains of the show differ from the usual, comically-evil blueprint set by the franchise’s previous content. Instead of cackling emperors with purple lightning shooting from shriveled hands, there are corrupt, and at times frighteningly competent, bureaucrats hoping to move up the career ladder. It’s a refreshing change of pace and arguably more terrifying.

In the rare occurrence where Andor does stumble, it’s due to the show’s episodic format. The pacing is slow but actually quite good, although when the story is split into 45-minute sections released weekly, it’s much harder to appreciate. Andor isn’t designed to be a regular series – it’s a 10-hour movie abruptly chopped into TV-sized segments – and as a result, the slow burn of the story can suffer. It’s a much better viewing experience to binge Andor post-release all at once rather than to catch short sections of the show over its multi-month release schedule.  

If there are any other complaints, it’s that Andor’s lack of a true blockbuster budget can show at times despite there being few cracks in the series’ special effects. The entirely human cast of main characters can feel strange as well given Andor’s setting in a universe famous for its collection of memorable aliens and droids. 

Surprisingly, while Andor may be the best Star Wars show Disney has ever released, it hardly contains any of the franchise’s signature elements. Although there are passing mentions of the Emperor, there are no Sith or Jedi appearances, and mud-soaked workmen are more common on screen than stormtroopers. Still, Andor remains more fleshed out than The Mandalorian, far better directed and scripted than the ultimately disappointing Obi-Wan Kenobi, and much better in every way than the mess that was The Book of Boba Fett. 

Andor proves that it doesn’t take nostalgic callbacks, flashy fight scenes, and super-powered characters to make good television. The show may not have lightsabers or force-wielders, but its reliance on rock-solid writing and well-developed plotlines help craft what has become one of the best TV shows of the year.  

The verdict: 8.5/10

Author’s note: minor spoilers for Hamster and Gretel below.

Hamster and Gretel is an animated action comedy series created by Dan Povenmire, the co-creator of the popular TV show Phineas and Ferb. Hamster and Gretel is about a teenage boy named Kevin, his sister Gretel, and Gretel’s pet, Hamster. The show is centered around Kevin, who was supposed to get a superpower along with his sister Gretel when a UFO hovered over, telling them to “use these powers for good!” However, Hamster received the superpowers instead of him. Hamster and Gretel can be found on Disney Plus or the Disney XD channel.

Many of the show’s jokes are well thought-out, with a lot of them centering around TV and superhero clichés. For example, one running gag is an exclamation text bubble that pops up whenever Gretel screams something like, “Disco Punch!” In past series, Povenmire’s grammar jokes have centered around the English language, with jokes about verbs and adjectives. Now, in this series, Povenmire has stepped into somewhat new territory with language jokes centering around American culture and the Spanish language. For example, the show makes fun of Las Vegas for having the word “Las” in its name or how the dish “ropa vieja” is also the same word for “old clothes.”

Most of the songs in the show are funny, but only a few are great.

The show’s episode structures are sound and consistent throughout, usually following a format of something going wrong, a villain arriving, and the characters learning a moral lesson by the time the end credits roll. 

Visually, the series has the usual art style of Povenmire’s previous work – although Gretel has a more defining silhouette and brighter color tone that contrasts her with most of the characters.

The voice acting is good overall. There are a couple of things that are a little weird, though. You can tell that it is Dan Povenmire who voices one of the aliens on the UFO, which is unimpressive compared to when he plays Dr. Doofenshmirtz in Phineas and Ferb. On an interesting note, Gretel is voiced by Povenmire’s child, Meli Povenmire.

The series’ pacing is decent. It would have been nice if the story explained more regarding how Hamster and Gretel gained their powers instead of rushing through to get to the rest of the show. Other than that, following the usual structure, the show’s pacing is just nice and easy-going and picks up when needed.

The verdict: 6/10

Money can’t buy happiness – but can it buy quality? 

Amazon certainly hopes so. The corporation recently poured $715 million into the making of its show The Rings of Power, putting the project well on track to be the most expensive TV show ever made. Loosely based on the skeletal details of the appendices of J.R.R. Tolkien’s fantasy epic The Lord of the Rings, it was certainly a monetary gamble despite a guaranteed viewing audience. 

But most expensive doesn’t always correlate with best, and The Rings of Power’s disappointing pilot confirmed that. Episode one is an overlong, boring mess that does little to interest the audience in any of the introduced characters and plotlines. There’s little action or intrigue to hook the viewer while the script is full of attempts at poetic, Tolkien-esque dialogue that can border on the point of parody. The episode does succeed in setting the major characters in motion, but it does nothing to further the interest in what they do next. 

Episodes two and three, on the other hand, are a completely different case, and their forward momentum seems to be a promising trend for the rest of the series. Episode two introduces a sense of humor to the show that doesn’t overstay its welcome and provides some direly needed personality. The action is a step up as well, with some clear horror influences that skillfully build suspense and dread. Episode three isn’t quite as riveting, but it further adds to the story and world-building of the show while including many of the same elements that made the previous installment enjoyable. 

The fourth episode is a small step back from the prior two, stalling the pacing much like episode one. It also highlights a major shortcoming of the series: when the show tries to be a slow burn, it does so by just stretching out plot advances with a lot of unnecessary filler instead of using that extra runtime to aid in meaningful character development and depth. Sometimes The Rings of Power feels like it’s trying to be long simply for the sake of it, not because the story requires it. 

Even though some of the character work could be improved, those weaknesses lie more in the writing of the show than the acting. The cast is surprisingly lacking big-name talent, but each actor gives a solid and fairly consistent performance. The show’s greatest weakness, however, lies in the sheer number of characters it follows. The series is well-directed for the most part but there are just too many characters initially to follow. This will inevitably be cleared up as the storylines start to merge, but it’s a bit much at the beginning. 

It’s also worth noting that the main plot of the show revolves around setting up the well-known story of The Lord of the Rings, meaning that some of the suspense regarding what happens next is rendered useless. That isn’t to say that the series won’t have some twists and turns up its sleeve, but the lack of true uncertainty is a detractor. 

While not explicitly stated to be in the same timeline as Peter Jackson’s near-perfect Lord of the Rings film trilogy, The Rings of Power clearly attempts to fit into the world of the former. New faces are cast as characters from the film trilogy that could pass as younger versions of Jackson's original choices. Additionally, Howard Shore, who scored the films, was brought back to compose music for the series alongside Bear McCreary. The final result is a grand, sweeping musical effort that elevates the show and also sonically connects it to the films. 

Where The Rings of Power struggles the most to hold up to Jackson’s films is in the visuals. The show has no shortage of a special effects budget, but modern CGI hasn’t been perfected quite yet and there’s a slight computerized sheen that can give some shots a flat, unrealistic feel. The Lord of the Rings’ lower definition cameras and heavier use of practical effects gave them a more tangible, gritty feel that few high definition, CGI-heavy shows have been able to replicate. That isn’t to say that The Rings of Power doesn’t have some great setpieces, but it still falters in comparison to the originals. 

Another, much smaller nitpick lies in the modern-looking haircuts inexplicably given to some of the elf characters, a baffling creative decision that hurts the overall immersion of the series. 

If it isn’t clear already, it’s the legendary status of Peter Jackson’s trilogy that detracts the most from Amazon’s efforts. Those films, and Tolkien’s novels, are so highly regarded universally that any attempt to replicate or expand on them will undoubtedly be disappointing. Just look at The Hobbit films. 

The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power is noticeably far from perfect, but as the series progresses it continues to find its stride. There’s certainly a grand story to tell, and with hardly any monetary restrictions and plenty of episodes still to be made, there’s a chance that Amazon will deliver. 

The verdict: 6/10

2022’s slate of summer films contained a few pleasant surprises as well as a number of disappointments. Let’s take a look at some of the season’s most popular movies: 

Thor: Love and Thunder

Taika Watiti’s surprisingly uneven direction dooms Thor’s fourth solo outing from the start, which is disappointing as the film gets a lot right. Thor: Love and Thunder packs an absolutely loaded cast, a promising villain, and some fun visuals and jokes.

But it gets Thor completely wrong. 

What had developed into one of the more complex hero storylines in Marvel’s catalog becomes thrown to the wayside as Thor becomes not much more than a joke in his own film. Nearly every semblance of emotional weight and smart storytelling is thrown out the window for increasingly ridiculous gags, while characters and plotlines feel severely underdeveloped and empty. The comedic tone that made Thor: Ragnarok a success is unbearably turned up to 11. 

Still, this movie is fun. Dumb fun. Which isn’t always a bad thing, but it has become an increasingly worrying trend in phase four of the MCU. 

The verdict: 5/10

Top Gun: Maverick

Despite being a few decades late, this sequel to 1986’s wildly popular Top Gun somehow outdid the original in both critical reception and box office success. 

Its appeal is partially due to how heavily Maverick borrows from the formula that made the original such a smash hit, from a roguishly charming cast to the subtle Navy recruiting pitch slickly hidden behind the film’s effortless swagger and catchy soundtrack. It’s an homage to an earlier style of the summer blockbuster in nearly every way, made skillfully enough to be just as entertaining as the best 80s action flicks. 

Maverick loses some speed when it comes to the human-interest side of the story, as a romantic subplot does nothing for the overall storyline and a few of the nostalgic callbacks to the previous film feel ever-so-slightly heavy-handed. But when the fighter jets are off the ground, Top Gun: Maverick is immaculate. The breathtaking in-air sequences, shot with real F-18s, provide a sense of realism and unrelenting intensity that stand head and shoulders above other such action films. 

The lack of a true emotional core, beyond a heavy dose of nostalgia, means Top Gun: Maverick isn’t exactly the groundbreaking piece of cinema some have heralded it as. But it’s undeniably a rock-solid summer blockbuster, and easily one of the most entertaining films of the past few years. 

The verdict: 8/10

Jurassic World: Dominion

This movie is simply terrible. And it’s a shame, as generally films with giant monsters such as this one contain at least a smidgen of enjoyability. But Dominion doesn’t even manage to fall into ‘so bad it’s good’ territory. It’s so bad that it’s just boring. 

Dominion contains far too many cookie-cutter characters to keep track of as well as a dizzying array of storylines and setpieces so hastily strung together that it feels like a scriptwriter’s fevered dream. The frenzied editing doesn’t help either, making the action scenes incomprehensible and further convoluting the story. As the end credits roll, it’s still difficult to piece together what exactly happened in the previous two-and-a-half hours. 

It’s unfortunate that such an iconic franchise comes to such an unremarkable end, although it’s fair to say that none of the films in the series ever came even close to touching the legacy of the 1993 original. Perhaps Universal Pictures should’ve paid more attention to the message of its own movie: maybe it’s time to stop building Jurassic Parks. 

The verdict: 2/10

Dog

This film was released in February of 2022, but an understated theater run resulted in this being a summer movie for many via streaming and rentals. 

Dog is part comedy and part drama, all packaged into one solidly-made road trip movie. It succeeds in its simplicity, with uncomplicated emotional beats and a largely straightforward story. Led by a good performance by Channing Tatum (and his four-legged costar, a Belgian Malinois named Britta), Dog is a surprisingly touching film about a man and dog recovering from the effects of serving in a war. The film still manages to land most of its comedic scenes as well, striking the right balance of somber and funny for a sincere, heartfelt tone. 

If there are any complaints, it’s that Dog’s unmemorable score borders on cliched at times during the more emotional scenes, and a few of the characters’ misadventures can feel a bit contrived. A few blemishes aside though, Dog still stands out as a good old-fashioned feel-good movie. 

The verdict: 7/10

Author’s note: Some ratings seem too low? On this rating scale, anything with a 5/10 or above is a decent movie, or at least worth a watch. A 10/10 is reserved for the select few pieces of media the ranker would view as perfect. This is to avoid cheapening the value of a great movie by giving it the same score as a good movie. A 10/10 is hard to achieve.

Well, they got the title right. 

Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness is certainly strange and just a bit maddening – it’s the rare Phase 4 MCU film to bring something new to the table and succeed in doing so, but ultimately there’s just too much going on at once for it to be truly great. 

Marketed as the first Marvel offering to contain true horror elements, the Doctor Strange sequel largely succeeds in its goal. It’s noticeably darker (and gorier) than its predecessors but still retains the general MCU atmosphere and never feels like it's trying too hard to be edgy or overly ‘safe’ for that matter. It’s a film that fits comfortably into what it wants to be. 

A lot of that can be owed to the brilliance of director Sam Raimi, an experienced filmmaker who cut his teeth on cult-classic horror movies before turning to superhero cinema in the early 2000s with his influential Spider-Man trilogy. Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness attempts to combine elements of both, and Raimi does so brilliantly, balancing horror flourishes and flashy action sequences with just enough goofiness and camp to solidify the film as a Raimi one. 

The film opens with one such action sequence, a thrilling CGI spectacle that introduces one of the major characters and gives the audience a taste of the visual style of the movie. The story then stalls for some exposition before diving into another chaotic battle with a giant monster. It provides a great viewing experience, but it’s one that slowly becomes more and more numbing as the film repeats this cycle for its entire runtime. The plot jumps from action scenes to frantic introductions of story elements and then back again. The relentless pacing never gives the film time to breathe and the bombardment of new information, characters, and fight scenes give the viewer little time to better understand the main characters and their motivations. 

Ironically, it may have been the fan-service success that Spider-Man: No Way Home was that convinced Marvel Studios to add as many cameos to the script of this film as they did. But the movie would have been better off without as many surprise appearances. Some of the cameos are fun, and the multiversal setting provides for easy additions of new faces, but most are somewhat meaningless to the story and result in a further bogging down of the core story by the weight of a greater cinematic universe. 

That isn’t to say that the cast isn’t great in this film. As expected, Benedict Cumberbatch plays Dr. Strange well once again while MCU newcomer Xochitl Gomez turns in a solid debut performance. Supporting actors Benedict Wong, Chiwetel Ejiofor, and Rachel McAdams are good additions as well, but it’s Elizabeth Olsen as Scarlet Witch/Wanda Maximoff who really stands out. Her range, intensity, and emotion steal every scene she has in the film, which is even more impressive given the surrounding cast. 

The writing isn’t quite as gripping. Superhero film screenplays aren’t exactly expected to be airtight, but this one is chock-full of plot holes, contrivances, and poor logic. The role of magic in the MCU has always been ill-defined, but it’s especially bad here, where the rules of the story can be nearly impossible to follow given that there’s no establishment of what can and can’t happen. The worst offender is a magical book that Strange literally describes as being able to do ‘anything the sorcerer needs it to.’ 

The dialogue is about as cheesy as it gets as well. But in a Sam Raimi film, in the golden age of memes, should this be a complaint? Doubtful. 

Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness is visually riveting as well. The interdimensional setting lends itself well to creative set pieces and designs. With the capabilities of modern computer graphics, the film is made up of one amazing aesthetic after another. Raimi’s camerawork is also a fun change of pace. It’s far more dynamic than anything in the MCU up to this point, occasionally ditching static cuts for frenzied camera movement between shots, adding to a sense of dread and claustrophobia when needed. A bevy of noticeable zooms, tracking shots, and even spins give the film a great sense of personality. 

That personality is what makes up for a number of flaws in the movie, as despite its numerous issues, the film provides an unbelievably fun watch. Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness is just too busy, bursting at the seams with different ideas, creative touches, and potential. The 155 minutes the audience gets could’ve been improved with some extraneous elements either left out or even better developed with a longer runtime. 

But are the two hours we got, as overstuffed as they are, still worth the watch? Absolutely. 

The verdict: 7.5/10

Disclaimer: Includes some minor spoilers.

After over a decade since we last saw the character in a Star Wars movie, the Obi-Wan Kenobi series is the “finally” moment for every Star Wars fan. 

Director Deborah Chow is a Canadian filmmaker who has directed two episodes of The Mandalorian, and she’s done pretty well directing this show. Chow incorporates the influences of prior Star Wars content to varying levels of success, including the general feel of the prequels and bringing back the villains from Star Wars: Rebels. Chow may not be George Lucas, but she definitely lived up to his legacy. This show gives the ability to showcase a more personal level of Obi-Wan Kenobi, less like a teacher and more like a regular person, because he cut himself off from force. Also the lightsabers are some of the best yet.

The four minute recap in the first episode is a nice refresher for fans who need a recap of The Phantom Menace, Attack of the Clones, and Revenge of the Sith.

The fighting is definitely not up to the same level as The Mandalorian, but hopefully there will be more lightsaber fighting in the future of the show. The CGI is very believable, and the costumes are finally back to the original Star Wars movies' standards.

Ewan McGregor returns to play Obi-Wan Kenobi, and he does so excellently. McGregor has been in many movies, but this is arguably one of his best roles to date. After the trauma of the end of Revenge of the Sith, Obi-Wan has lost all hope in the goodness of people, and people close to him seem to be helping him understand that it’s okay to lean on others for support.

Moses Ingram plays the main villain, Reva, or Third Sister. Ingram is not known for many movies, but her performance here is solid for the most part. However, she doesn’t portray her rage towards Obi-Wan very convincingly and her acting can falter at times, especially when compared to the rest of the strong cast. 

Hayden Christensen returns to play Anakin Skywalker/Darth Vader. Christensen hasn’t had much screen time up to this point, but when he’s in the show, Darth Vader's nostalgic breathing and the flashbacks of Anakin are a major highlight of the series. Christensen has done well and evoked the same feeling that David Prowse, the original Darth Vader, did in A New Hope, The Empire Strikes Back, and Return of the Jedi.

All in all, Obi-Wan Kenobi has been a great TV show so far and the remaining three episodes should definitely be worth the watch. 

The verdict: 7/10

Geometry Dash is an ongoing mobile gaming series that was created by RobTop Games’ founder Robert Topala. Topala used intriguing designs, 2D displays, experimental musical genres and foundational structures of a platformer to challenge our coordination. Platformers consist of moving your player around specific obstacles, as well as avoiding landing into unexpected trouble during gameplay. There are 21 levels from the easiest to the highest level of difficulty. At the highest level, you can barely glide through before getting splintered from obstacles, anti-gravitational portals, dimensional shunting and more.

However, every level has frequent and bold reminders at the restart that reiterates the amount of attempts it takes to complete them. Is Geometry Dash challenging our minds to do better or mocking us? It’s both. When you enter a level, it usually starts out easy unless you are taking unreasonable risks. 

Geometry Dash Lite was the first game of the series made by RobTop Games, followed by Geometry Dash Meltdown, Geometry Dash World, and Geometry Dash Subzero. Inspired by The Impossible Game, Robert Topala created all four Geometry Dash games that consist of  spin-offs of each other. Every level has a designated tune that goes with the level’s intensity to keep a steady concentration for the user. To further elaborate, the condemning bold attempts banner screams the amount of tries you’ve taken with mocking tones. How many tries can you ascend, before giving up? On top of that, these banners were implemented within Geometry Dash's multitude of levels throughout the entire spin-off series. 

With simple gameplay that consists of tapping the screen in a frenzied manner to avoid the inevitable obstacles that linger in each level, the gameplay replicates a platformer. Though the game is called Geometry Dash, this isn’t played through solving math problems, but by tapping the screen to make your geometric shape jump. In addition to the usual gameplay, there is a level creator for those that want a different setup that wasn’t made by RobTop Games’ team. These are made by Geometry Dash users that want to test others with unique levels. However, as your square jumps on the screen recklessly, you will learn about the importance of timing as you keep practicing each level and get familiar with the workarounds.  

All in all, Geometry Dash Lite and Geometry Dash World are among the best of the whole series. The themes of color-based-on-beats are portrayed throughout the series, timing the gameplay. However, Geometry Dash Lite feels like a classic above all others. Its soothing and carefree beats help the player with concentration and inspire them with determination to reach the end of each level. During play, the patterns of finger orientations quickly become a habit. As for Geometry Dash World, it’s unlike its counterparts. Geometry Dash World is made up of individual levels that all need to be completed in a sequential order, until you can reach the next set or world. 

The Geometry Dash series is available on many different platforms which are Android, iOS, and Microsoft Windows. 

The Geometry Dash series is a great app game to compete with friends, even if it isn’t a multiplayer game yet. However, it is an interesting game to pass the time and earn some high scores while you're at it.

Verdict: 8/10

What’s dark, gritty, and makes a lot of money at the box office? 

That would be another Batman reboot, of course. As one of the most famous and well-loved comic book characters of all time, the caped crusader and his iconic villains have seen countless big-screen adaptations over the years. 

For the most part, the quantity has largely been matched by quality. Adam West’s early iteration of Batman is generally regarded as a masterclass in 60s camp, while Tim Burton’s 1989 film was an important step in the evolution of superhero films being taken seriously. And in more recent history, Christopher Nolan’s Dark Knight trilogy is considered not just some of the greatest comic book films ever made but among the best cinema of the mid-2000s. 

There have been other takes of the character as well – some animated, some built from Legos, and other live-action films of debatable success. But the point still stands – we’ve seen a lot of Batman over the years. 

So why reboot the character yet again? 

It’s rather simple -- Warner Brothers owns a popular IP in Batman, and ever since the chances of a solo film for Ben Affleck’s take on the character died out, they’ve been looking for a suitable replacement. The important part would be producing a film that matched the greatness of those before it, all while bringing something new to the table. 

The first step would be acquiring a great director, and that requirement was more than met with the hiring of Matt Reeves. Reeves doesn’t have many films to his name, but his most recent accomplishments, 2014’s Dawn of the Planet of the Apes and 2017’s War for the Planet of the Apes, more than speak for themselves. Reeves took a bizarre tale of intelligent monkeys taking over the world and turned it into a compelling, serious, and critically acclaimed series of sci-fi films. 

So naturally, a gritty take on a story about a billionaire who dresses up as a flying rodent to fight crime aligns perfectly with Reeves’ skillset. 

And The Batman takes itself very seriously. It’s a solemn, grim affair with clear influences from film noir with its dark lighting and crime drama elements. Gotham City is grimy, corrupt, and often shrouded in a downpour. Despite feeling grounded, the world of the film still feels ripped out of the pages of a comic book. It’s perhaps the best aesthetic yet in a Batman movie. 

The casting is similarly impressive. Robert Pattinson has proven himself to be a top-tier actor in his post-Twilight filmography, and he’s a great fit as the titular character. He’s brooding and menacing all while bringing the character’s flaws to light. The film does the audience a favor by skipping the origin story we’ve seen a million times already, but it still shows Batman early on in his crime-fighting career, making mistakes and miscalculations along the way but growing in the process. 

Playing Batman also comes with the challenge of playing the character’s alter-ego, Bruce Wayne. Here, Pattinson doesn’t hold up quite as well. There is little difference between the masked vigilante and Wayne besides the costume, and the film seems to gloss over the duality of the two -- an essential trait of the character. In fact, it’s a little surprising that everyone in Gotham doesn’t discover Batman’s true identity by the end of the film. Chances are that this was an intentional creative decision, and perhaps a more realistic one as well, but Bruce Wayne seems to put hardly any effort into keeping such an important secret. 

Paul Dano is incredibly chilling and disturbing as the central villain, the Riddler, and his on-screen dynamic with Batman is equally impressive. However, many of his methods and traits as a villain feel similar to Heath Ledger’s iconic take on the Joker in 2008’s The Dark Knight, which takes away from some of the originality of Dano’s performance. 

The rest of the cast, including Zoë Kravitz, Jeffrey Wright, Colin Farrell, and others do an excellent job of disappearing into their roles. The film is full of the vibrant, compelling characters we expect from a Batman movie. There’s really not a weak link in the bunch. 

Composer Michael Giacchino’s score is also a highlight. It fits the mood of the film well with a memorable main theme reminiscent of John Williams’ “Imperial March” of Star Wars fame. The choice to incorporate Nirvana’s “Something In The Way” is a great addition as well, especially as the song seamlessly fits into the rest of the soundtrack. 

Clocking in at just under three hours, The Batman somehow doesn’t feel overly long. The tension methodically builds at an even pace with some excellent action scenes interspersed to keep the audience engaged. The film is slow but steady, a welcome feature when most modern superhero films have a frenetically fast pace. The tone is consistent as well, with the few jokes that appear in the gloomy script fitting in well thanks to Reeves’ dark sense of humor. And despite the grim feel of the film, The Batman provides enough hope and heart-pumping action to prevent it from becoming an emotionally draining 176 minutes. 

In the end, The Batman may not contain as many memorable highs or iconic castings as some of the films before it, but it captures the feel and world of the caped crusader better than perhaps any Batman movie to date. It’s a wonderful showcase of the technical marvels of modern filmmaking as well. It’s not without its flaws, but The Batman is a must-watch for cinephiles and die-hard fans of the character alike. 

The verdict: 8.5/10

Author’s note: This review doesn’t contain any spoilers that were not already mentioned in the film’s trailers and marketing. 

Around two and a half minutes into Marvel’s first Spider-Man: No Way Home trailer, a metallic, glowing green-and-orange object rolled on screen. Explosions followed, and then there was a cut to black. 

Prior to that moment, it was already clear that the latest Tom Holland Spider-Man installment was going to be a good one. The trailer showed that No Way Home would continue to follow the story threads and characters of the first two films of the trilogy, along with an added dose of inter-dimensional visuals and Benedict Cumberbatch’s Doctor Strange -- but the glowing object, known as a pumpkin bomb to those familiar with Spider-Man lore, changed everything. 

Because, as many would know, Tom Holland isn’t exactly the first Spider-Man to grace the silver screen. Directed by Jon Watts, the Marvel Cinematic Universe’s Spidey is the third major live-action iteration of the character since Sam Raimi’s 2002 film. 

And that pumpkin bomb belonged to none other than the supervillian Green Goblin, played by Willem Dafoe -- from Raimi’s movie. 

Later trailer footage would reveal that Dafoe’s villain wouldn't be the only one from a separate franchise joining No Way Home. Alfred Molina’s Doc Ock and Thomas Haden Church’s Sandman from the Raimi movies would be joining the cast, as well as Jamie Foxx’s Electro and Rhys Ifans’ Lizard from Marc Webb’s mid-2010’s Amazing Spider Man films. 

It isn’t an exaggeration to say that this crossover -- between three separate and wildly popular film franchises -- would be among the most ambitious in cinema history. 

And despite the sky-high expectations, the sheer number of characters and plot-lines to balance, and the risk of making the wrong changes to many fans’ childhood heroes, Spider-Man: No Way Home is one of Marvel’s best movies. Quite frankly, it could rank among the greats of the superhero genre. 

But it isn’t just the nostalgia of seeing once-retired characters returning to the screen that makes this film great -- rather, it serves to enhance what would still be a solid movie without them.  

It starts with the usual characters in Watts’ trilogy, not the from-another-universe additions, turning in their best performances in the franchise to date. Tom Holland still plays Peter Parker and Spider-Man with the awkwardness, inexperience, and comedy that made his character endearing in the first two installments of the trilogy, but in this case his acting and a strong screenplay show some excellent development. He’s still definitely the same Peter Parker as before, but there’s a new level of emotional depth, strength, and maturity that wasn’t there before. 

In short, it took three movies, but Peter Parker finally grew up. 

Holland isn’t the only one to up his game in No Way Home, however. Zendaya’s MJ is far more than the quip machine she was often written as in the previous films, instead showing some improved chemistry with Holland and providing some meaningful moments on screen. The same could be said of Marisa Tomei’s Aunt May, who is the emotional center of this story despite her predominant use as a side character in the previous films. 

Benedict Cumberbatch as Doctor Strange, in what is largely an extended cameo, is great here as well, displaying a nice mix of solemnity and personality as a strict but loving father figure of sorts to Holland’s Peter Parker. 

The impressive acting all contributes to what is a simple and deeply human story at the film’s core, which keeps it grounded despite the glitz and glamor of it all. Because the villains from another dimension eventually show up, and they definitely steal the show. 

It can’t be understated how fantastically suited Willem Dafoe is for the role of Green Goblin. He’s equal parts insane, terrifying, and surprisingly tragic, making him the perfect foil to the morally-straightforward Parker. And Dafoe’s screen presence is second to none, with his intensity crackling through the screen in each of his scenes. 

Molina’s Doc Ock is similarly unstable but more likable as a voice of reason of sorts for the villains. Sandman, Lizard, and Electro all have a few good moments but are largely there just to increase the action in the third act, which is perfectly acceptable given the many characters the movie has to juggle. 

It’s also important to note that the arrival of these villains isn’t just meaningless fan-service. For the most part, the new additions and the way they arrived plays a vital role in the film’s plot.  

Visually, No Way Home often has the typical CGI-heavy look audiences have come to expect from the MCU, but the film still manages to provide some excellent sequences that really play to the strengths of such visual effects. And there’s just enough physicality mixed into the action scenes to make them feel real, unlike some previous Marvel entries. 

This film does have a few flaws in terms of writing, as a few major plot points feel a little unexplained or illogical, and a few of the lines that were clearly intended to evoke laughs or nostalgia fall a bit short. But for the most part, the humor, tension, and emotion are all balanced wonderfully, creating a compelling and enjoyable story from start to finish. 

The pacing is solid as well, although the first half does feel a little rushed and uneven as it is tasked with wrapping up the last Spider-Man film as well as setting up the current story. But the third act, where recent MCU films have felt the weakest, is superb. In fact, it’s fair to say that this movie just gets better as the runtime goes on. 

The cinematic crossover of Spider-Man: No Way Home is undeniably the most notable aspect of this film. It takes what is already an above-average superhero flick and turns it into a year-defining, and possibly even genre-defining piece of cinema. But while many fans saw this crossover as the film’s best part, others saw it as a downside due to the film’s heavy reliance on nostalgia and knowledge of past franchises. 

But No Way Home’s #1 box office performance, at well over 700 million as of January, shows that audiences were more than accepting of the film’s franchise-heavy formula. In the end, it’s clear that Spider-Man: No Way Home was a love letter to the iconic web-slinger’s biggest fans. 

Ultimately, it’s hard to complain about that. 

The verdict: 9/10

The second film of Marvel Studios’ Phase Four, Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings was tasked not only with helping introduce the next era of superhero movies, but also with providing the first origin story for a post-Avengers: Endgame character. 

And despite Marvel’s recent hit-or-miss nature, Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings is another solid entry into MCU’s filmography. 

Directed by up-and-coming filmmaker Destin Daniel Cretton, Shang-Chi is a fun superhero movie in the mold of Marvel’s Ant Man series, although it does plenty to differentiate itself from prior franchise entries. 

The film is centered around its main character, Shang-Chi, who is played by Simu Liu. Liu doesn’t have the larger than life personality of other superhero actors, but he brings a believable humanity to the character while convincingly playing both sides of his role as a regular citizen and martial-arts master. 

His sidekick Katy, played by Awkwafina, has a somewhat brash style of humor that isn’t for everyone. However, she provides some nice comedic moments in the first half of the film despite coming across as slightly out of place as the story continues. There’s another comic relief character, played by a famous actor in an overlong cameo, that falls rather flat. But for the most part the jokes in this movie are fairly well-placed and they add to the fun, entertaining feel of the viewing experience. 

But it’s the main villain, played by Tony Leung, who really steals the show. He’s hardly the most developed antagonist Marvel has ever had, but he plays his part with an earnest intensity and conviction. His scenes with Shang-Chi have a great dynamic as Leung presents both an intimidating and sympathetic foe. 

The impressive character work of Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings improves on what is a fairly average plot. It feels a little formulaic at times before taking some bizarre turns that are barely developed enough to make sense. Still, the first and third acts of the film are plenty enjoyable, although the second is an awkward segue between the two with heavy exposition and abrupt pacing. 

The film also fumbles the transitions between some of its present day and flashback scenes, as some are placed too early or late in the runtime. But it’s not distracting enough to take away from the central plot. 

From a technical point of view, Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings is brilliant. The action set pieces and choreography may be the best in the MCU up to this point. They draw from a number of influences, from fast-paced hand-to-hand combat shot with refreshingly steady camerawork to visually pleasing wire work sequences. The final battle devolves into the usual effects-heavy CGI-fest, but for once it’s not overused and still incorporates some new elements. 

Despite its later release, Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings fits quite well into the summer blockbuster category. It’s an entertaining, fun entry into what has become a tired and oversaturated genre. There’s undeniable imperfections -- and the film is far from Marvel’s best -- but it gains full marks when it comes to the most important criteria of all: enjoyability. 

Verdict: 7/10

It was always clear that Eternals would try to be different.

The Marvel Cinematic Universe had made a name for itself with fast-paced, entertaining films that were as much action comedies as they were superhero movies. That formula had resulted in a critically and financially successful franchise that had stretched nearly 15 years and over 25 installments. 

But that tried and true formula has been getting old, and by selecting 2021 best-picture winner Chloé Zhao to direct their latest film, it seemed that Marvel was planning on heading in a new direction. Zhao’s introspective, naturalistic style could result in a film that focused on the philosophical and emotional side of the story rather than the standard CGI-filled, studio-controlled toy commercial that more recent Marvel films were becoming. 

Well, in theory, at least. 

Zhao’s Eternals tries its hardest to be a meditative sci-fi drama, but it can never break free from the restrictive mold that is the MCU.

The film revolves around an ancient race of immortal, superpowered beings as they struggle with infighting and the usual task of defending Earth from evil monsters -- but the concept has the potential to be much richer than the final result. There’s flashes of the universe-trotting, time-stretching epic that Zhao likely intended, but in the end the film feels remarkably anticlimactic. 

Perhaps the first mistake made was attempting to introduce 10 protagonists, along with multiple side characters and villains, all in one movie. That isn’t to say that the cast is horrible; it’s largely a veteran group that gives a solid performance across the board. Gemma Chan is somewhat understated as the lead, but it fits the quiet, meek nature of her character Sersi. But while Chan is technically the main character, the other nine eternals share a lot of screen time filled with their own side plots and motivations. 

It’s impressive for a film with as many characters as Eternals to feature as many well-defined character goals as it does, but unfortunately they remain only surface level. It’s hard to care about any of the faces on screen, especially as some are shoved abruptly out of the plot to focus on the others, leaving the audience uninvested in any of them.

The villains are even worse. The film has a few different antagonists, all of whom possess varying levels of blandness, bad CGI, and poor development.

As hard as Eternals tries to be emotionally moving, it remains remarkably cold throughout. 

The pacing and the story itself underwhelm, as the film is overlong in unimportant moments and rushed when it comes to crucial exposition and action. Beyond that, there’s a few distracting plot holes and head-scratching moments, while the ending doesn’t really feel like one at all. 

Humor is another major issue, as some of the biggest moments of Eternals can’t be taken seriously as the script has far too many sub-par one-liners. Multiple scenes that could have explored a big idea or been emotionally impactful are ruined by out of place quips. 

That isn’t to say every joke doesn’t land. Nearly every exchange between Kumail Nanjiani’s Kingo and his human valet, played by Harish Patel, is comedy gold. The two of them save what could have been an incredibly boring second act. 

Eternals’ biggest strength is coincidentally what separates it the most from the other installments of the MCU. Zhao’s eye for natural scenery really shines at times, making it a far-cry from the heavy use of green screen prevalent in the majority of modern superhero flicks. 

In fact, Zhao’s insistence on using real locations can clash at times with the film’s more effects-heavy shots, but it’s a small price to pay for the impressive cinematography.

In the end, Eternals feels like a cautionary tale to any talented indie filmmaker who tries to direct a major studio blockbuster. Some creative touches may shine through, but the final result can be an incoherent mess, overrun by studio executives prioritizing the safe blockbuster format even if it clashes directly with the core creative vision of the film in question. 

Verdict: 3.5/10

The story of Dune has long held a reputation of being unfilmable. 

Frank Herbert’s 1965 novel of the same name is one of science fiction’s most influential and groundbreaking works, but the intricacies and scope of its plot have resulted in it resisting a successful adaptation to the big screen. 

Director David Lynch famously attempted a Dune feature film in 1984, a messy sci-fi dreamscape that felt incredibly rushed despite its 137-minute runtime. It highlighted every issue with converting Dune into the cinematic format. Lynch’s voiceover methods of exposition struggled to convey the complicated rules and customs of Herbert’s futuristic world, while the campy visuals and special effects did little to immerse the viewer in the locations of the story. 

The result was a film that is near unwatchable for some and at best a cult classic for others. Even Lynch admitted it was a colossal failure. 

Enter Denis Villeneuve. 

The French-Canadian filmmaker has become one of the best in his craft over the past decade, particularly when it comes to science fiction. His two most recent films, 2016’s Arrival and 2017’s Blade Runner 2049, were critically acclaimed as masterclasses of the genre. But for Villeneuve, an adaptation of the novel “Dune” was the ultimate goal. 

So with high expectations from the studio, the fanbase and himself, Villeneuve set out to film the unfilmable. 

His first move was to only cover half of Herbert’s original novel, all while increasing the runtime to 155 minutes. Ambitiously titled “Dune: Part One” in the opening credits, the film is set as the first of a two part series, although Warner Brothers didn’t agree to greenlight the second film until recently, a few days after the first was released to box office success. 

The result is a sweeping epic that slowly, thoroughly world-builds in a way that Lynch’s Dune never came close to achieving. The desert world of Arrakis where the film spends most of its time is well fleshed out, with the surrounding cultures, prophecies, and conflicts quite tangible and high-stakes. 

The visuals are unsurprisingly Dune’s greatest strength. From the watery Atreides homeworld of Caladan to the sprawling deserts of Arrakis, each location has a strong sense of realism despite the excessive-but-necessary CGI that fills much of each frame. And everything in Dune is massive. Starships are the size of cities, planets are filled with towering structures and machinery, and the great sandworms of Arrakis are terrifyingly large and menacing. 

But Dune never loses its sense of scale. Each shot has a sense of awe and wonder as Villeneuve unravels the futuristic tale. There’s unmistakable detail and care put into the imagery, and consequently Dune feels like a loving adaptation rather than another tired remake. 

Some of Dune’s many characters get lost in the spectacle of it all, but the all-star cast still carries out a good performance. Oscar Isaac is convincing in his role as the honorable Duke Leto, while Rebecca Feurguson and Timothée Chalamet lead the film well as the stoic and powerful mother-son duo of Lady Jessica and Paul Atreides. 

Jason Momoa and Sharon Duncan-Brewster shine in supporting roles, but the rest of the top-billed cast hardly get any time to shine in their limited appearances. Characters played by big names such as Zendaya, Josh Brolin, Javier Bardem, Dave Bautista, and Stellan Skarsgård are merely afterthoughts in the film’s plot. 

And that’s where Dune’s greatest weakness lies. Behind Villeneuve’s enthusiastic world-building and the unnerving choral swells of Hans Zimmer’s pounding soundtrack lies some rather cold and incomplete characterization. With the story cut in half, many arcs feel distant and the deep political and religious themes of the source material are left largely unexplored.  

The pacing suffers as well, with the plot slowly meandering in the second half before ending at an abrupt finale. 

Such directorial decisions may be perceived as much as flaws as they are intentional creative choices. Dune is clearly a prologue for its second half, where the more complex themes and motivations of the story will take place in a world already established by the first. 

In short, it is strange that a piece of cinema as great as Dune feels so dependent on a quality sequel, especially with the production of Part Two never guaranteed. 

But when that second film is made under Villeneuve’s careful direction, Dune: Part One should be remembered as the brilliant first half of one of the greatest science fiction sagas of the 21st century. Dune may have left its audience wanting something more, but perhaps that was the intent the entire time. 

Verdict: 8.5/10

Following last year’s COVID-19-struck summer, it was nice to return to theaters in 2021. Let’s take a look at some of the summer’s biggest films:

A Quiet Place II

2017’s A Quiet Place was a hit for a multitude of reasons. It skillfully balanced scares, tension, emotion, and originality into a taut 90-minute runtime, managing to build a near-flawless thriller. However, it was the small scale and family-centered story that set it apart from the rest.

For A Quiet Place II, director John Krasinski was forced to move the plot outside the confines of the family farm, enlarging the story beyond where the first had succeeded in its small cast and minimal backstory. The world-building that follows is predictably a letdown at times, but is still good for an enjoyable flashback sequence to begin the film. 

Krasinski once again expertly ratchets up the tension throughout the film, and the acting is equally impressive. Cillian Murphy serves as a fantastic addition to an already talented cast of Emily Blunt, Millicent Simmonds, and Noah Jupe. Much like its predecessor, A Quiet Place II is well shot and paced, with some impressive sound design that was especially powerful in a theater setting. 

As a sequel, A Quiet Place II was tasked with expanding the world of the first movie while delivering new additions and twists to the story to keep it interesting. It’s successful in that goal, as the film is bigger, scarier and more fun than the first, but it loses some of its heart in the process. 

Verdict: 7.5/10

Black Widow

Director Cate Shortland’s Black Widow garnered a lot of hype before its release, and rightfully so. Scarlett Johansson was finally getting her solo outing in the Marvel Cinematic Universe after a string of successful appearances as the character dating back to 2010’s Iron Man 2. What could go wrong? 

Unfortunately, the film doesn’t quite stick the landing. Although an enjoyable adventure, Black Widow is often plagued by what could have been. For a character with as promising a backstory as Johanesson’s Natasha Romanoff, the movie hardly dives into her intriguing, darker past, instead choosing to follow Romanoff near the end of her character arc in the MCU. 

The first act of the film still manages to set up a dark and grounded superhero spy film, but the tone is wildly inconsistent from there out. The story peels back its promising grit with some slightly overdone Marvel humor and increasingly ridiculous CGI action. And for every fight scene there’s plenty of poorly-written exposition, with the pacing often jumping unevenly between the two. 

Thankfully, a strong cast (which sometimes overshadows Johansson herself) and some unexpected heartfelt moments cover up some of the story’s imperfections, while a few strong action sequences and artful camerawork keep the movie interesting. However, Black Widow is a far cry from spy/action flicks such as The Bourne Identity or even Captain America: The Winter Soldier. It’s simply average Marvel fare. 

Is it worth the watch? Sure. But Black Widow could have been so much more. 

Verdict: 6/10

The Tomorrow War

A rare attempt at a streaming-only summer blockbuster, Amazon put plenty of money and marketing into director Chris McKay’s sci-fi action film The Tomorrow War. 

With sloppy time travel mechanics and an uneven tone, The Tomorrow War is saved by the performance of star Chris Pratt, who provides some much-needed consistency with the levity he brings into every scene. 

The movie’s special effects are good although slightly overdone, providing some ridiculous but extremely enjoyable action sequences. The acting is commendable within what the script allows, and the film even delivers some laughs, thanks largely to Pratt and co-star Sam Richardson’s comic relief. 

The Tomorrow War brings together a nonsensical plot, overused CGI, and one-dimensional characters to craft a chaotically hilarious but ultimately enjoyable film. 

Verdict: 5/10

Free Guy

Imagine an Elf-inspired comedy, with The Truman Show-esque issues, all set within the world of Ready Player One. That movie would be Free Guy. 

Directed by Stranger Things producer Shawn Levy, Free Guy is the rare video game movie that actually works. That success should be largely credited to the performance of Ryan Reynolds in the lead role, whose comedic timing and performance as a clueless NPC (non-playable character) in the fictional video game “Free City” is near-perfect. 

Free Guy was advertised as an action comedy, and it largely delivers on that promise. Most of the film’s jokes land, although it’s hardly highbrow humor. The action sequences are predictably video game-like, but loads of fun and their tone matches the rest of the film. Plenty of pop-culture references and easter eggs can be found throughout Free Guy’s runtime, but they are enjoyable additions that don’t overly clutter up the plot. 

Free Guy may be one of the best movies of the year so far. It’s certainly not Oscar material, but it’s a whole lot of fun. 

Verdict: 8/10

Author’s note: Some ratings seem too low? On this rating scale, anything with a 5/10 or above is a decent movie, or at least worth a watch. A perfect 10/10 is reserved for the select few pieces of media the ranker would view as perfect. This is to avoid cheapening the value of a great movie by giving it the same score as a good movie. A 10/10 is hard to achieve. 

“Scaled back and isolated.”

That’s how Twenty One Pilots’ frontman Tyler Joseph described his band’s pandemic-era creative process. A snappy shorthand version became the title of the Ohio duo’s latest album, Scaled and Icy.

But as many fans have noted, the shortened phrase is also an anagram for “Clancy is dead.” The seemingly random anecdote takes on a new meaning due to the deep lore of the band’s prior concept albums, Blurryface and Trench -- in which a main character known as Clancy fights against an evil regime in the fictional city of Dema, a story created by Joseph and his bandmate Josh Dun. 

Scaled and Icy skillfully balances these two themes, weaving in a continuation of the Dema narrative while creating an album that is sonically upbeat and cheerful. This contrasts the darker themes of the past year -- and Joseph’s lyrics. 

Album opener  “Good Day” sets the tone for the entire record in both name and sound. Accompanied by a bouncy Elton John-esque piano riff, Joseph sings about dealing with grief, cheerily adding in the second verse, “Lost my job, my wife, and child,” and later on, “I know it's hard to believe me, it's a good day.” 

Such an upbeat summer sound, contrasted with much darker and introspective lyrics, is a common theme throughout Scaled and Icy’s eleven songs. Similarly, the album’s second track, “Choker,” is reminiscent of the band’s earlier work. Joseph sings and raps over an electronic track while accompanied by a complex beat. Once again, the seemingly happy song sounds much different if the lyrics are taken into account as Joseph ominously sings, “I know it’s over / I’m just a choker / Nobody’s coming for me.” 

Third track and lead single “Shy Away” delivers a dose of reality with a solid alternative rock sound. Showing off his recently learned electric guitar ability, Joseph encourages his brother to break out of a creative shell. The song also marks a notable shift in genre for the band. While “Good Day” and “Choker” were solid Twenty One Pilots fare, a delightfully weird, alternative mix of piano, percussion, bass, and electronic elements, “Shy Away” is firmly in the rock genre -- something the band hadn’t yet explored in its six album discography. 

“The Outside” is one of the strongest songs on the album. It’s a catchy, bass-led tune accompanied by a hip-hop-influenced bridge with some of Joseph’s best rapping on the album. It’s the first of a few new rap flows he experiments with on the album, marking a notable evolution from his previous work. 

The following track, “Saturday,” is hardly as great. It feels like an attempt to recreate a Maroon 5 radio hit, which doesn’t completely land but still results in a solid pop tune. However, Joseph’s lyrics, generally some of the strongest in the industry, fall incredibly short with an underwhelming chorus (“...But on Saturday, Saturday, Saturday, we paint the town”), and some cringe-inducing ad libs (“Ooh, you're good, these are my dancin' shoes”). 

The album recovers with another alternative rock track in “Never Take It.” Notable moments include a first of its kind guitar solo from Joseph and a politically conscious message, uncharted lyrical territory for the band. 

“Mulberry Street,” while similar to “The Outside” in sound, has lyrics more akin to “Good Day.” Joseph sings about living in denial (“Keep your bliss, there’s nothing wrong with this”), perhaps referencing the Dema storyline or simply his own personal issues. 

The eighth track, “Formidable,” is built on a bright guitar riff, with lyrics that seem like a loving letter to a significant person in Joseph's life -- perhaps his wife, child, or even bandmate Josh Dun. It’s another catchy tune, but perhaps the least memorable on the album. 

“Bounce Man” is one of the strangest entries on Scaled and Icy, with a bizarre earworm of a chorus and lyrics inferring that the singer is helping a friend escape to Mexico. It’s classic Twenty One Pilots weirdness -- which makes for a thoroughly enjoyable song. 

There isn’t a true ‘skip’ on the album, but the penultimate song “No Chances” comes the closest. It’s a dark rap track that comes out of nowhere, and an ominous background chant (“We come for you, no chances”) makes it feel even further out of place. However, some fantastic rap verses from Joseph save the track, evoking memories from Trench’s “Levitate” while continuing the Dema storyline.

The final song, “Redecorate,” skillfully combines the record’s bright sound with the somber mood which often permeates the band’s album closers. The slow, emotional track discusses themes such as death and depression, ending the album on a bittersweet note. 

Scaled and Icy wasn’t the album many were expecting from Twenty One Pilots. Nevertheless, their transition to a new sound was much smoother than it could have been. Joseph and Dun manage to shift from the dark, heavy aesthetic of previous eras to a lighter, more upbeat one -- all while keeping the introspective nature of their lyrics unchanged. And while not their best record, this latest entry shows some welcome experimentation from the band. Scaled and Icy should be a definite addition to the summer playlists of new listeners and longtime fans alike. 

Verdict: 8.5/10