Rating: 4.25/5

One of the most comical and unusual entries into the MCU, Guardians of the Galaxy is an absolute blast.

After the death of his mother, young Peter Quill (Chris Pratt) was abducted by an extra terrestrial ship and taken away from Earth. Years later, Quill, now going by the name of Star-lord has dedicated his life to finding and or stealing valuable objects in order to sell them for a hefty prophet. On one such excursion, Peter is retrieving an orb of unknown qualities. By searching for it, he is suddenly on the radar of some very dangerous beings who will stop at nothing to obtain the very orb that he is attempting to possess. After a series of mishaps, Peter finds himself in the company of a fierce warrior named Gamora (Zoe Saldana), a being with a vendetta named Drax the Destroyer (Dave Bautista), a talking raccoon named Rocket (Bradley Cooper), and a large, mobile tree named Groot (Vin Diesel) who only knows three words. Together, they will soon need to band together to save the galaxy from the people after the powerful orb.

When it comes to the MCU, I was quite late to the game. In fact, Guardians of the Galaxy was the first film in the franchise that I actually saw in theaters. Up until that point, I was just catching up at home so I could be ready to see the next release on the big screen. To say I was a little skeptical about this one would be an understatement. I was definitely curious, but when it came to the Marvel stories in their original comic form, this was the one I knew the least about. I saw the trailer, thought it was quite humorous, but wasn't exactly sure how the plot would unfold, especially with the oddball characters that created the movie's lineup. However, I went into the theater with a very open mind and walked out completely in love with the movie. Never would I have thought that this would be one of the entires in the MCU that would have become one of my favorites.

Now, I've said it before, but my knowledge of Marvel comes almost 100% from the film perspective, which I know must be highly annoying for many people to hear, and I can't blame them. I don't consider myself a true fan of the brilliant world created by Stan Lee, because even though I adore the film franchise, I have never delved deep enough in the comics to give myself such a title. That being said, I can say from a movie perspective, that Guardians of the Galaxy is a cinematic treat. It's incredibly funny, possesses a fantastic soundtrack, and manages to surprisingly pull at your heartstrings, despite the fact that the character doing so is a large tree. It's hard to explain how the MCU is capable of delivering such a wide range of emotions with their highly unique characters, but they rarely seem to fail in that regard.

It's pretty well known that superhero movies aren't exactly shoo-ins for receiving accolades at the Academy Awards, but I honestly think it's an absolute travesty that Guardians of the Galaxy did not win for makeup design. Yes, it was nominated, but it without a doubt should have won. I was so convinced by the looks of all the different beings in this film, that I just assumed that they had to have been computer based. This is unusual for me, because I always praise practical effects over virtual ones, but I just had it set in my head that there was no way they could've made all the different species of galaxy dwellers using just makeup. I happily stand corrected. It is almost impossible to fathom the immense amount of time that it must've taken to give every lead, side character, and background extra into their final looks. The end result is something that is highly, highly impressive and deserves every ounce of recognition it can garner. Seriously, all hail the makeup team for Guardians of the Galaxy.

If someone isn't exactly a fan of superhero movies, but wants to dip their toes into the MCU, they're most likely not going to begin with Guardians of the Galaxy, as the many different names of galaxy species and highly sci-fi nature may appear a bit off putting to someone just getting into the franchise. But for those who hesitate to check it out, I say don't dip your toes, but dive headfirst into this film. Even if you're not a huge fan of science fiction, look past all the unusual names and planets, and just enjoy the film for the fun-filled action movie it is.

Rating: 5/5

Enola Holmes, a film I long awaited and one who made the wait very well worthwhile.

Enola Holmes (Millie Bobby Brown) is the clever, confident, daring and lesser known child of the famous Holmes family, but her anonymity will soon change. When her mother Eudoria (Helena Bonham Carter) goes missing, Enola enlists the help of her brothers Sherlock (Henry Cavill) and Mycroft (Sam Claflin) to help search for her. Though her brothers, especially Sherlock, are world famous detectives, Enola quickly realizes that is she, not them, who has the knowledge needed to find their mother, so she leaves home to begin the search. What begins as a quest focused on her mother suddenly turns into a mission to save the young Viscount Tewkesbury, Marquis of Basilweather (Louis Partridge).

I loved Enola Holmes. I loved it so much that I watched it twice in one week. I am sad to say that for awhile, I didn't even know of this film's existence, but a trailer for it crossed my radar about two or three months ago. Once I saw the trailer, I knew I had to see the film for the cast alone, but the plot and premise greatly intrigued me as well. I practically counted down the days until I could watch it, and once it finally hit Netflix, I was nearly giddy with anticipation to finally get home so I could see the film I had so eagerly awaited. Now, sometimes, to put this much expectation on a movie could easily set it up for failure, but in this case, all my anticipation and excitement were fully met with a wonderfully acted and exceedingly entertaining film. On top of it being a highly engaging plot, the old fashioned, almost paper doll like sequences added to the movie were fantastically creative, and just enhanced an already superb story.

I have been a fan of Millie Bobby Brown since I first saw her in Stranger Things years ago, and was incredibly impressed by the maturity and skill she brought to her acting for such a young age. I was, however, very curious to see what she'd be like in a different role. Enola Holmes proved that Bobby Brown can tackle pretty much anything that comes her way. Enola Holmes is a character who exudes spunk and tenacity, but is also not immune to vulnerability. Every facet of the character is perfectly embodied by Brown. Her character breaks the fourth wall and speaks directly to the audience, showcasing Bobby Brown's comedic timing, a skill she doesn't exactly get to flex on Stranger Things, but is shown here as something she excels at along with her wide emotional range. Enola fights, decodes cyphers, wears disguises, and dares to save the day. She is a character that in my childhood I would have been desperate to embody, and even as an adult, I find myself wishing I could be more like her.

Enola Holmes is story that is perfectly balanced. It is certainly about female empowerment, but doesn't present its messages in such a heavy handed way that it loses the ability to be lighthearted along the way. It certainly talks about the importance of women being treated equally, and given that the time period Enola Holmes is set in is during the Women's Suffragette movement, it makes perfect sense. What is so striking though, is that some of the things Enola struggles with, such as being taken seriously or living up to a certain feminine ideal, is something that is still very present today. However, Enola takes the adversity she faces in stride and doesn't let people's stereotypical expectations of her stand in the way of being who she knows she's meant to be. The whole film presents an incredibly powerful and positive message, and I for one hope they make a sequel, because it is a character and filmmaking style the world needs more of.

If you haven't watched Enola Holmes, I implore you to take the time to do so. This year hasn't been exactly ripe with the best films, as many of the ones anticipated to be great have had to be put on hold due to the pandemic that continues to plague the world, but thankfully, a few of the wonderful movies made this year, like Enola Holmes, have found a way to be seen.

Easily one of the best sequels put out by Marvel, Captain America: The Winter Soldier expands the world of my favorite Avenger.

Steve Rogers, aka Captain America (Chris Evans) is now a hero known worldwide and a working member of S.H.I.E.L.D. Though he is still adapting to life in the 21st century, he is doing his best to fight for the greater good and save the day whenever he can. When a new threat named "The Winter Soldier" reveals himself to S.H.I.E.L.D, it will be up to the Captain, along with Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson) and newcomer Sam Wilson (Anthony Mackie) to stop the masked villain and prevent another uprising of Hydra.

The first Captain America was set almost entirely in the past, and we only got to see Steve Rogers adapting to present day for brief moments in The Avengers, so it is in Winter Soldier where we really get a sense of what the fully fledged Captain America is actually like; and we learn that he is even more fantastic than we had previously known. In is two earlier films, we definitely were able to see how great a hero he was, but that gets amplified to a whole other level in this film. In The First Avengers, Rogers is very much the "All-American Boy", just one with more muscle mass than your Average Joe. That sense of patriotism and forties ideals are still definitely present in The Avengers, but we start to see an edge forming around the Captain as his battles grow more personal in this particular installment into his story arc. With that added intensity comes much more hand to hand combat and even more flawless fight sequences.

In The Winter Soldier, the many decades and relationships Rogers has lost appear to weigh more heavily on him than ever before. Though he has been living in the present day world for over two years, it seems impossible for him to shake the past, especially the thoughts of what his life could've been like had things gone differently. Captain America had been a great character before this, but he didn't have as much dimension to him as say, Tony Stark did. We only knew him as a clean cut guy who wanted nothing more than to take down the bad guys. Here, in Winter Soldier, Rogers is given much more depth to his character, making this particular sequel feel incredibly rewarding, which can't exactly be said for some of the other follow-ups that Marvel has released.

Not only does Rogers gain a greater amount of appreciation for his character from the audience, but so does Natasha "Black Widow" Romanoff. Something the Captain America sequels do better than the rest is bring in more of the other Avengers, making their films be grander and more exciting and not just a single character driven story. Even though this is a film centered around Rogers, we get much more insight into Natasha's background and are also able to see even more of what she's capable of, both intellectually and combatively. Seeing her team up with the Captain is easily one of my favorite pairings the MCU has done. If she couldn't receive her own origin film during this span of the Marvel releases, at least she got some well deserved recognition in this one.

If someone had never seen a Marvel film, but didn't want begin the large undertaking of starting the whole franchise from the very beginning, I would likely recommend that they at least watch Thor: Ragnarock and Winter Soldier. The former, because it's just an amazingly fun time, but the latter because it is the epitome of what makes the Marvel films great. It is the perfect blend of engaging plot, impeccable action, quippy humor, and highly entertaining performances.

Rating: 5/5

If you don't enjoy Mamma Mia, then I guess you just don't like to have a good time.

Sophie (Amanda Seyfried) has been raised by her mother Donna (Meryl Streep) on a small island in Greece. She's about to get married to her boyfriend Sky (Dominic Cooper). She wants her dad to walk her down the aisle, but the problem is, she doesn't know who he is. Based on her mother's diary, she's narrowed it down to three choices, Sam (Pierce Brosnan), Harry (Collin Firth), or Bill (Stellan Skarsgard). Convinced she'll know her father when she sees him, she invites all three men to her wedding, but doesn't tell her mother. When her prospective fathers arrive, she's horrified to discover she doesn't know which one is her true dad, and must try to keep them a secret from Donna.

Whenever I'm stressed, sad, anxious, or really any emotion in need of cheering up, I go to Mamma Mia. You just can't watch this movie and not have your troubles be melted away by ABBA. Their music is usually quite upbeat, and even though I've seen this film more times than I can count, I still can't help but sing along as soon as the movie begins. The tracks find a way into your soul and are so uplifting and make you so effortlessly happy that you feel you have no choice but to sing. The cast that make up the film may not all be fantastic vocalists, I'm looking at you Pierce Brosnan, but it doesn't matter. They embody the energy of the music, and that's all that's needed. You see how much fun they're having and it doesn't appear as if it is an act. You can almost see past their characters into their real life selves and just see how much of a joy it must have been to film this movie.

Mamma Mia is certainly over the top, silly, and cheesy, but it fully embraces it. There's no question in my mind that this movie set out to be an upbeat, jukebox musical with very little grasp on reality. Its dance sequences are a hoot and not like anything you'd really see in any of the more modern takes on movie musicals. It's a callback to the days where you'd watch a classic musical where every person was incredibly chipper and performed in very elaborate, and sometimes very funny dance sequences. What really comes to mind for Mamma Mia are the scenes for the songs "Dancing Queen" and "Lay All You Love On Me". The former isn't so much choreographed as it's more a parade of women dancing through the island having a blast, whereas the latter is heavily choreographed, and incredibly goofy and fun. Both scenes, though quite different from each other, are just some of the highlights of what make Mamma Mia so great.

I always try to not let it get to me when people dislike a movie I love, but honestly, it always bugs me more than I'd like when people say they hate Mamma Mia. Usually, the main criticisms I see are that people think it's just too silly or has too much singing. The thing is, if that's how they feel, then they really don't get the point of Mamma Mia. This is not a movie that was trying to become a groundbreaking or edgy movie musical, and it certainly wasn't trying to be serious. With the release of films like Chicago and Sweeney Todd, it seems like many movie goers want their musicals to have more grit to them. Now, don't get me wrong, I adore both of the aforementioned films, but sometimes, I like to go back to movies like Mamma Mia to get a heaping dose of whimsy I can only get from Meryl Streep, Amanda Seyfried and company.

Every time I watch Mamma Mia, I find myself listening to the soundtrack for weeks afterward. It's music perfect for belting out in a car and I love how whenever I watch this movie, it reminds me just how much I love ABBA. Whether it's the music, the performances, or the location, there's really nothing negative I could ever say about Mamma Mia. It's just too darn enjoyable.

Rating: 5/5

The one that got them assembled for the first time, The Avengers is a landmark triumph in the MCU.

Loki (Tom Hiddleston) uses the activation of the Tesseract to create a portal into Earth. His plan is to rule all of humanity, and destroy any that stand in his way, using his own powers along with the help of thousands of other worldly beings. Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson) pulls together the people of S.H.I.E.L.D. and also assembles the Avengers for the first time in order to battle Loki and save the people of New York.

The Avengers was a major game changer. There had been numerous super hero films that preceded it, and the Phase One origin story movies were great, but none of them could match The Avengers in its scope and impact. Each Avenger is leading their own lives, so we slowly see them start to turn into the famous team they'll soon be known as. Where this is the first time they've all been asked to work together, we see their personalities clash and how they all have different ideas of what they need to do to stop Loki in his tracks. It's the butting of their collective heads that makes their eventual teamwork all the more sweet.

The Avengers is a movie that I sadly missed out on seeing in the theaters. There are many reasons I would have loved to have seen this on the big screen, but the primary reason is the incredible tracking sequence during the main battle in New York. The MCU has become pretty well known for their ability to create impressive fight sequences, ones that never feel stale or replicated from other sources, but this particular scene is hands down one of their absolute finest. Of course the tracking sequence isn't an organic one, there is obviously CGI trickery at work, but it's so smooth, that it's incredibly easy to let yourself believe that all this action is happening in one take. It is in this moment that each hero gets their moment to shine as we watch them take down alien after alien in one of America's most famous landscapes. I've seen this scene many times, but I still can't help but smile whenever I watch it.

The Avengers brought together a massive concept of putting all the heavy hitting superheroes and actors into one film. Though the team in this one is much smaller than the later movies, they still are able to create a very strong impact. However, it is crazy when you compare the group shot from The Avengers to that of Endgame or even Age of Ultron. You see just how much the franchise has grown since this one was first released. The Avengers set a very high precedent of what the fans expected from every movie that followed it. Some lived up to it, others, not so much.

The collaborative Marvel movies that followed this one took a darker turn as Thanos began to reign as supreme villain, so it's nice to watch the first Avengers, as it has some more jovial tones to it. Every MCU movie is fairly quippy, but this one has many one liners, but they never really get old. The Avengers is just another movie that proves the MCU most certainly knows what they're doing when it comes to super hero films, and that it would almost be silly for anyone to try to beat them at their own game.

Rating 4.5/5

Enter, my favorite Avenger.

Chris Evans stars as Steve Rogers, a patriotic, brave, and emaciated young man who dreams of fighting for his country in the war against Hitler. Steve has been turned away by the army over a dozen times, but he will let nothing get in his way of being a soldier. One day, a German doctor decides that Steve is the perfect candidate for a secret super soldier project because he has all the heart, just not the brawn. Steve Rogers not only gets enlisted into the U.S. Army, but thanks to the experiment, he takes on the new role of Captain America, which turns out to be not quite what he expected.

I don't know if it's the story, the characters, or just that I am a sucker for anything based in the 40s, but Captain America is definitely my favorite of the first phase of Marvel origin films. I know some people consider it one of the weakest, but I absolutely love it. Chris Evans was the absolute perfect casting choice for the role. Whether his Steve Rogers is rail thin, finally buff but only selling war bonds, or officially saving the day, he embodies the Captain through and through. I loved how in Steve's first moments as his new and improved self, that he's a little unsteady, not fully grasping the strength of his much larger frame. It really makes the transformation feel all the more real. The only thing I found unconvincing in Evans' performance would be the depth of his voice for his character's body in the beginning, but that's not exactly something he could have really controlled.

Each origin film is the epitome of the classic hero's journey, but Captain America: The First Avenger, really hones in on this concept. So much so, that if someone were studying the steps of that journey, they could use this film as a prime example of it. Captain America fights through many different types of adversaries, be it unenthused soldiers, or genetically modified villains. Through it all, he becomes a hero in numerous ways. What I love about Captain America is that he isn't a reluctant hero, at least not in this film. Many times, we see the protagonist fighting against their destiny, not wanting to fully claim their place as a hero, but that cannot be said for the character of Steve Rogers. He wants nothing more than to fight for his country. It's not for any type of fame or glory, just for the sake of doing what's right.

This movie is very unique in the Marvel Universe because it is set almost 100% in the past. We are given a window into the Avengers at its' infancy, yet the film feels entirely connected to its' counterparts, which is really quite impressive. It expertly adapts the classic Marvel fight sequences into a different era, and doesn't lose any of its' charm along the way. I love this movie as a lead into the Avengers. Of all of the origin films, Captain America left me the most excited for what was to come later on in the franchise.

Whenever I go back and start my rewatch of all the films in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, I'm always the most excited to get to Captain America. I'm not even the most patriotic of people, but I still love this film. I love the blending of science fiction and history, and how even though the concept of Steve's transformation is completely unrealistic, the movie still makes it seem possible.

Rating: 4.85/5

Not since Cinderella or The Jungle Book have I truly liked one of Disney's live-action remakes as much as I did Mulan.

Mulan (Yifei Liu) has felt she was different from a very young age. She was always more rambunctious than the girls she grew up with, and was reluctantly told by her father that she must learn to act like a proper woman, so she could find a decent husband. Years later, Mulan has tried make herself into the perfect bride, but she cannot hide her true self nor her powerful chi, which if she revealed to the world could have her exiled as a witch. When war comes to China, Mulan's father is forced to enlist, as he is the only male in the family, but he is old and suffers from previous war injuries. In the dark of night, Mulan steals her father's enlistment papers, armor, and family sword, and disguises herself as a man and takes his place in the Imperial Army, putting her life in grave danger. But it is there that she is finally given the opportunity to try and find her true capabilities as a warrior.

After the release of The Jungle Book, Disney's live-action remakes starting drastically dropping in quality. Instead of putting a new spin on a classic tale, they started falling into the habit of just doing direct, almost shot for shot remakes.The original Mulan is my favorite Disney movie. It is one that has been incredibly special to me for over two decades, so when I heard they were going to be redoing it, to say I was less than thrilled would be a gross understatement. I just pictured all the things they could do to ruin an absolutely perfect film. Would Mushu look terrible? Would they try to recreate the genius of the original and pass it off as their own? The avenues in which it could fail appeared endless. Then I started hearing how it would differ quite a bit from the original, and I began to relax. Now that I have finally seen it, after an incredibly long wait, I can say that I am absolutely thrilled with what the did with it. Of all the remakes I've seen, this one is by far the most different from its animated predecessor. They're technically the same story, but told in very different ways. Those major deviations from the original may be what many people have faulted Mulan (2020) for, but I applaud it.

The story of Mulan is a brilliant one, filled with female empowerment, the importance of family, and being true to oneself. The animated one majorly broke the mold when it came to what the world had come accustomed to picturing when they thought of a Disney heroine, and that power and excellence is not lost in the live action one. Mulan's struggles to keep her true identity and gender a secret were more than hinted at in the original, but that concept is hit even harder in this one. We really see how terrifying it must be for her to be in this situation, knowing that one slip up; forgetting to lower her voice, letting her guard down as she sleeps unbound, would most certainly mean the end of her life. But yet, she persists, because she knows she must fight for her family's honor and prove herself as a powerful warrior. It is in these scenes where Mulan triumphs through training and battle, that we are given some of the most beautiful scenes Disney has put into their live action films. The contrast of Mulan's red armor against the white of the mountains, or the horses galloping into battle, and are all incredibly moving on their own, but add in the phenomenal score, and you have some truly remarkable scenes.

There are only three things that I found as a disappointment with Mulan, one slightly major, one rather nit-picky, and the other just a personal preference. The only big problem I had with Mulan was its villain. In the animated one, Shan-Yu is absolutely terrifying. His reign of terror knows no bounds. For this film, we are given two villain like figures, but the main one, Bori Khan just isn't able to invoke as much fear as I would've liked. I'm not quite sure what it is about Shan-Yu that appears more frightening, perhaps it is because he appears to be vile without purpose, whereas Bori Khan is given more backstory into his villainy. The second fault with Mulan, is something rather small, and it is that they took one of Mulan's more empowering lines from the animated film and gave it to a male character in this one. It's not the end of the world, but I did find it bothering me a tad. My last issue with Mulan is something that was completely out of the film's control. I had desperately been waiting to see this on the big screen. I couldn't wait to see the stunning cinematography and score be projected, larger than life, in front of me. But, thanks to COVID, I was forced try and recreate a movie theater experience in my living room the best I could. A great experience, but definitely not the same. I can only hope that when the world returns to some sense of normalcy, a theater near me will bring it back, so I can see it in the way it was meant to be seen.

I know the reviews coming out for this film are quite mixed, but let me tell you, I absolutely loved it. If only all the live-action remakes were daring enough to shake up the story, then maybe people wouldn't have such strong aversions to them. I can only hope that the ones coming out in the future will follow in Cinderella, The Jungle Book, and Mulan's footsteps, and realize that shot for shot isn't always the best way to go.

Rating 4/5

My rewatch of the Marvel Cinematic Universe has brought me out of the realm of Earth and taken me to Thor. Though I would consider Thor to be my lease favorite of the origin films, it is still definitely not terrible.

Chris Hemsworth is Thor, the mighty and arrogant God of Thunder, who has just been crowned as King of Asgard, taking over the throne from his father Odin (Anthony Hopkins). During Thor's coronation, three members of the Frost Giants break into the family weapon's vault and fuel Thor's rage. Out of revenge, Thor and his warrior friends go to the home of the Frost Giants and attack, breaking the treaty between the two realms. Due to his lack of judgement, Odin banishes Thor from Asgard. Back on Earth, Jane (Natalie Portman) is a scientist searching for the truth about multiple realms, and will stop at nothing to continue her research. Chasing what she thinks is a storm, she accidentally hits a powerless Thor with her car, and romance and adventure ensues.

Thor features some low points for the Marvel Cinematic Universe, but it certainly has some hight ones as well. The major one for this film is that we are given Loki. Tom Hiddleston, who shines as the slithery and morally conflicted villain, brings the acting and comedic/dramatic timing that the Marvel viewers expect. The cinematic universe is notoriously criticized for their "villain problem", which sometimes rings true, but certainly not in any film involving Loki as the primary source of conflict. The greatest villains are ones who are multifaceted. If they're all evil, there's no guesswork in what will happen. We always have a strong sense of what the character will do, but never with Loki. He is constantly pursuing acts of trickery, yet just like Thor, we are always willing to fall for his moments of good, because they are just so convincing. The best scenes in this film are the ones that take place between Thor and Loki, as their drastic differences both in appearance and personality, create a unique dynamic that could only be portrayed by the two perfectly cast actors. They have fantastic chemistry on screen and really save Thor from being much worse than it could have been.

As far as the origin stories go, Thor seems to be a bit separated from the rest of the Marvel Universe. Whether it's because it literally starts in another realm, or if it's because all the human characters in the movie feel expendable, Thor just doesn't seem to reach the high bar expectations of the origin films that Marvel is known to produce. I had a hard time finding myself really being interested in Thor's Asgardian warrior friends, not to say there aren't interesting characters there, but not as many as one would like. The only people who were compelling were of course Thor and Loki, but also Odin, Frigga, and Heimdall. It's not surprising that in Thor's third and most successful installment, many of the other Asguardians are omitted.

I think what I really found fault with in Thor, was the attempts at humor. Thor and Loki bring more than enough comedic timing between the two of them, there really wasn't any need for more. Anything beyond their on screen wit and chemistry, just felt a bit excessive. It certainly made Kat Denning's character, Darcy, seem quite unnecessary, and rather annoying. She definitely has her moments that made me chuckle, but all in all, her character really only seemed to be there in order to make comments, albeit accurate ones, about Thor's rather exquisite physique.

Overall, it is not a bad movie. Thor definitely contains its' enjoyable moments, and the acting and fight scenes aid the film with their Marvel precision. Plus, watching Thor attempt to fit his enormous frame into a human atmosphere is always amusing. Definitely worth a watch, but not the best Marvel has to offer.

Rating: 3.5/5

Though certainly not as impressive as the first, Iron Man 2 is a decent entry into the MCU nonetheless.

Now that Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) has revealed to the world that he is in fact Iron Man, the military has deemed his technology behind the suit and his other inventions shown at the Stark Expo, to be dangerous weapons. Stark assures them that no other weapons manufacturers could come close to understanding the workings of his suit, and that it is in perfectly safe hands. Meanwhile, a man named Ivan Vanko (Mickey Rourke) is set to avenge his father's legacy and begins to work with his own technology to come up with something to take down the great Tony Stark/Iron Man.

When you look at the movies that came out of the first phase of the MCU, most people would say that the first Iron Man reigns supreme, which would mean that its sequel would have a lot of pressure behind it into meeting those high expectations. Iron Man 2, isn't bad, but it's definitely not as good as its predecessor. I personally don't find as much fault with it as many others do, but I can certainly see why most don't exactly have fond feelings towards the movie. The first Iron Man had a great balance between scenes of Tony's conceited humor to ones of more serious moments and action, whereas Iron Man 2 seems to rely a bit too heavily on the concept of comedic relief. Though there appears to be one too many jokes, Robert Downey Jr. had no problems with delivering them with great comedic timing, making them much more tolerable than they could've been if put in less capable hands.

What's really great about Iron Man 2 is that we are officially introduced to Scarlett Johansson's Natasha Romanoff. What appears to be one of the more famous MCU scenes comes from this film, where we really get to see for the first time what Black Widow can do. I've seen the scene where Black Widow takes down Justin Hammer's security guards on numerous clip reels, and it's there with very good reason; it's fantastic. It is a bit gimmicky and predictable with Happy struggling so much, but I don't really care. It's a great action sequence and one that I look forward to seeing every time rewatch Iron Man 2.

Another factor on the plus side for this film is that it's really where the idea of the cohesive MCU seems to come to fruition. It was somewhat attempted with The Incredible Hulk, but definitely didn't have the impact as it did with this film. We get to meet new faces that will soon become iconic within the cinematic universe and get a sense of what is to come later on in the franchise. Seeing the official full feature arrival of Nick Fury is incredibly exciting, and one of those times where I wish I had been an avid reader of the comics when these films were first released, because I can only imagine how it exciting it would've been to see these heroes come to life on the screen if I had been.

Iron Man 2 may not be the best the Marvel Cinematic Universe has to offer, but it's certainly not the worst. With Robert Downey Jr. leading the film as Stark, there's very little ways in which the movie could entirely fail. He's too good at playing the beloved character, making even the weaker films in the franchise still be enjoyable to watch.

Rating: 3.5/5

Though there's nothing glaringly wrong with The Incredible Hulk, I just can't find myself loving it as much as many of the other films in the Marvel Cinematic Universe.

Bruce Banner (Edward Norton) was involved in a terrible lab accident when a test involving gamma rays went horribly awry, causing Banner's chemical makeup to be drastically altered, so whenever he's angry, he turns into a large, destructive, green being known as the Hulk. Since the accident, Banner has been on the run from the U.S. Government, and is seeking out a way to control his anger, so he won't be in danger of becoming the Hulk and potentially hurting someone. While in Brazil, Bruce is corresponding with an anonymous scientist who claims he can help him potentially rid himself of the gamma radiation that created the Hulk. But, even though he's trying to keep an incredibly low profile, Banner is at risk of being discovered, and having the Hulk take over and be exposed to the world.

In all honesty, whenever I think of the films included in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, I always forget about this one. It's not even because in later movies the Hulk is played by Mark Ruffalo, it's because The Incredible Hulk just feels so separate from the rest of the films in the MCU. Now, I'm not someone who can even come close to claiming to be an expert on the films made by Marvel or the comics in which they are based; I am simply someone who became a massive fan of these superheroes primarily through their films. I know people who have grown up devoted to the comics must roll their eyes with annoyance at this proclamation, and with good reason. It's probably very similar to how I feel when someone tells me they're a Harry Potter fan but have never read the books. So with that being said, it's very possible that my opinion on The Incredible Hulk feeling out of place could in fact be very ill informed.

The MCU has become quite famous for their ability to really revolutionize the superhero/action movie. Practically every film they make dominates the box office and is one people talk about for many years after. The Incredible Hulk comes off as quite forgettable in comparison to the other juggernauts that belong to Marvel. I think part of it is that this is supposed to be somewhat of Bruce Banner's origin story, yet his background is completely swept through in the opening credits. I understand why they chose to do this, where his backstory had already been previously established in the unconnected film Hulk, it could potentially seem redundant to repeat it at length, and by showing it only through the opening titles it created a way to charge right into the story. Not a bad idea, but it did make parts of the film feel a little rushed. Again, I know how infuriating this may sound to those who know much about the Hulk through the comics, and if my lack of background knowledge makes this review appear ignorant, I apologize.

For me, what really saves The Incredible Hulk is Edward Norton's performance. In particular, his scenes in Brazil when he's trying to train his body to manage stress and anger. It was in these scenes where I really started to buy into the idea of the Hulk, and I love how it established a sense of panic in the viewer for whenever you hear his heart rate tracker begin to furiously beep. Norton is famous for his dedication to his roles, and you can certainly see that coming through in his performance as Banner. I love what Mark Ruffalo has done with his turn as Hulk, but it would have been really interesting to see what Edward Norton's take on it would have been as the MCU progressed. I question whether it would have been able to sustain the level of wit Ruffalo brought, where Norton played the character a bit more straitlaced.

With The Incredible Hulk being only the second film in the connected Marvel catalogue, it does make sense that this one may not feel as cohesive with the rest. It's certainly not a bad movie, and if you compare it to other superhero films like Spider-Man 3 or its sort of predecessor, Hulk, this movie is a downright masterpiece. It's just when you put it against the other much more impressive entires the MCU has to offer that you really see how it falls short.

Rating: 5/5

It took me far too long to finally get around to seeing the absolutely wonderful movie that is The Big Sick.

Kumail Nanjiani (Kumail Nanjiani) is an aspiring stand up comic who performs weekly at a local club. One night, a girl named Emily (Zoe Kazan) catches Kumail's attention during the show, and they end up spending the night together. What was supposed to be a one night fling turns into a relationship, but not one without serious challenges. Kumail's parents are constantly trying to set him up with a Pakistani girl and then very suddenly, Emily becomes seriously ill. Kumail has to figure out how to balance the expectations from his family and how to care for Emily alongside her parents.

When The Big Sick was released, I heard nothing but rave reviews about it, but for some reason it took being in the middle of a global pandemic where I've watched a movie nearly every night for me to finally get around to viewing it. Now that I've officially seen it, I can say that I absolutely loved The Big Sick. It was humorous, heartwarming, and incredibly well acted. Every performance, even the somewhat minor ones, were absolutely perfect. Given that this was based on Kumail and Emily's real life relationship, the portrayals really needed to be grounded and realistic, and they were 100% just that. I've seen movies based around illnesses before where the characters' reactions to the situation were either under or over exaggerated, but The Big Sick never for one moment felt improbable or unlikely.

What I found to be really compelling about The Big Sick was how nerve-racking it was even though, given that the whole film was based on a true story, I knew how it was going to end. Everything about the movie felt so palpable that part of me wondered if maybe I'd been misinformed and I was wrong about how the story would resolve itself. I was so invested in The Big Sick and its characters, that there were many times where I would forget what I'd already known about Kumail and Emily beforehand, and just be completely pulled into the film and the events within it as they unfolded, as if it was all brand new information. I can only think of a handful of times where I've had a movie based on true events, and I mean really based on those events and not inspired by them , where I've had a similar viewing experience such as this.

I've said it before, and I'll probably be saying it for countless reviews and years to come, but I am a very hard sell for comedy. Now, The Big Sick; this is my brand of humor. This movie without a doubt has a lot of heavily dramatic scenes, but it's blended and balanced with a brilliant level of sardonic and witty moments. I loved Kumail's stand up, but also the comebacks he would have when people would ask him off putting and offensive questions in regards to his culture. Holly Hunter, who played Emily's mother, was also a great addition to the cast. Given that her character's daughter was seriously ill, her role was one that was filled with emotion, but she also brought a wonderfully dry sense of humor and comedic timing along with it.

The Big Sick is a film that I know I will be adding into my collection of movies I watch over and over again. It's definitely a viewing that has made me think that next time I have numerous people recommending a movie to me, that maybe I won't take so long to get around to seeing it, because I really wish I'd seen The Big Sick way back when everyone was telling me to watch it. That way I would have had more time to add many more viewings of this wonderful story to my movie watching history.

Rating: 4.85/5

I found myself wanting to go back to the very beginning and watch all of the films of the Marvel Cinematic Universe from beginning to end, and to do that, I needed to start with Iron Man.

Iron Man starts out with Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) going about his everyday billionaire life, without much care in the world. It is not until he is captured by a group of terrorists in the Middle East, that he sees what his life's work of weapon design is doing to the world and the people in it. From the moment of his escape, Tony decides that he needs to change his path and start creating for the good of the people.

Tony Stark is an enigma of sorts. Traditionally, characters who possess the level of arrogance he portrays would be either villainous or at least meant to be disliked by the audience. However, in a bizarre way, it is his conceit and egotism that make him not only charming and witty, but incredibly enjoyable. From the first moment we see Stark, we think we know exactly what type of person he is, and that he'd be so enthralled in his own vanity that he wouldn't have time to care for the wellbeing of others, but that facade is quickly shattered. What makes him such a fun character is that he's fully aware of his narcissistic tendencies and knows how infuriating they must be for others, yet doesn't change himself too much as long as his quirks don't get in the way of saving those who need a hero. Robert Downey Jr.'s portrayal of Tony Stark could not have been better cast. When you are watching the movie, it is very hard to believe that anyone else could ever have filled the very large, red shoes of Iron Man.

With Iron Man being the first film of the Marvel Cinematic Universe that we know today, you can see the beginning stages of some of their "classic" Marvel tactics. Such as the slapstick but also sarcastic sense of humor that flows throughout the movie, as well as the beautifully designed fight scenes between hero and villain. Action sequences have been done so many times, that I would imagine as a director, there has to be an unbelievable amount of pressure to make the movie feel uniquely energetic and exciting. Jon Favreau certainly found ways to make the action in Iron Man something memorable, and really set the bar for what an audience member would expect to see in any great Marvel film that would follow.

As with any good origin story, we need to see the transformation from human to hero, and this movie shows that in full force. What I truly love about the way Iron Man portrays this, is that it is shown as an incredibly arduous struggle for Tony Stark to finally become adept at his new role of iron clad hero. I've seen my fair share of superhero movies, and some of them, even a small amount belonging to Marvel, have the protagonist becoming too adept too quickly to their new abilities or responsibilities. Not that any movie of this type is exactly realistic, but I feel as if Iron Man makes the whole transition Stark goes through feel more plausible compared to some others. Even when Tony thinks he's finally gotten the hang of things, he still finds parts of the suit that he needs to perfect or learn how to properly use. I think that's partially one of the reasons Iron Man is such a beloved character throughout the entire MCU; he's one that it's really easy to feel as if you've taken a long journey with.

Originally, I used to think the first Iron Man was great, but didn't consider it one of my all time favorites from the entire MCU. Upon my most recent watch, something in my opinion began to change. I'm not sure what made my thoughts on it start to alter, perhaps it's because it was my first time rewatching it since seeing Endgame, but whatever the reason, I found I appreciated Iron Man so much more this time around. I'd always thought it was a fantastic superhero film, but now I feel as if my eyes have been opened even more and I really understand why so many people consider this their favorite in the entire MCU. Still not my number one in the franchise, but it's definitely moved it's way much closer to the top.

Rating: 5/5

Perhaps the most undervalued Disney film, The Hunchback of Notre Dame is in my opinion, one of the best films the studio has ever released.

In 15th century Paris, after the murder of his gypsy mother, Quasimodo (Tom Hulce) has been raised by the vile Judge Claude Frollo (Tony Jay). Due to his severe deformities, Quasimodo is forced by Frollo to live within the bell tower of Notre Dame, with only the gargoyles to keep him company. Every year, Quasimodo looks down from the tower at the Festival of Fools that takes place in the streets below. This year, he decides he will sneak down to join in the festivities. It is there he meets the beautiful gypsy Esmeralda (Demi Moore) and a soldier named Phoebus (Kevin Kline). When Quasimodo is discovered and Esmeralda comes to his aid, Frollo decides to bring his wrath upon Paris until Esmeralda is captured and Quasimodo is locked away from the world forever.

The Hunchback of Notre Dame is my first movie theater memory. I was very young, perhaps five or six, but I distinctly remember being completely entranced by the music within the film. Disney has put out some fantastic scores, but none compare to Hunchback when it comes to the scope, intensity, and magnitude of the sounds that live within the movie. Just from the overture that plays as the titles fill the screen, it is incredibly clear that the music in this film will not be like that of any other animated film created by Disney. I had the absolute privilege of seeing this story performed live, and let me tell you, hearing those bells, the voices of the choir, and the orchestra, was a time in my life where the music gave me immediate chills and nearly took my breath away. Watching this in my home, my meager television speaker cannot do the music Alan Menken created for this film near the justice it deserves, but even on that small scale, the sounds that emanate from the movie cannot be described as anything but epic and brilliant.

Though there are a handful of fantastic characters to be found within The Hunchback of Notre Dame, as a little girl, I was always enchanted by Esmerelda. Though she is not the main focus of the film, she's an incredibly determined, intelligent, and fierce female character, which at the time of Hunchback's release, wasn't overly common. There were certainly some female roles in Disney films that were strong characters, but Esmerelda always felt a little different for that time. She was tenacious and daring, but also incredibly caring and compassionate. She is the first person we see give Quasimodo any semblance of kindness, and those moments always stuck out to me when I was younger.

Many children's films have been adapted from works that were not necessarily intended for young audiences, and therefore had some of the more dark or adult material removed, but not Hunchback. Other than the wisecracking gargoyles, there's really nothing about this movie that says "made for kids" and I absolutely love it. It's incredibly dark and ominous, which makes for some of the best music and characters. Within the first ten minutes there's the murder of Quasimodo's mother at the hands of Frollo, who is easily the most immoral villain Disney has ever produced and has without a doubt the best song given to a an animated antagonist. In "Hellfire" Frollo realizes his lust for Esmerelda and makes the decision that if he cannot have her, then nobody will and therefore she must burn. The song radiates hatred and power, and when I heard it as a child, I didn't quite catch onto what Frollo truly desired from Esmerelda, but years later, I definitely realized what the lyrics were truly saying. Every song in Hunchback is astonishing, but "Hellfire" may be the best, narrowly beating out Esmerelda's plea for mercy when she sings "God Help the Outcasts" within the safety of Notre Dame.

It is an absolute travesty that The Hunchback of Notre Dame is not more widely looked upon as one of Disney's greatest achievements. It absolutely blows my mind that Alan Menken did not receive an Academy Award for his score or that the film didn't receive accolades for its direction. I dare anyone to look at the scene where Quasimodo stands in the towers of Notre Dame holding up Esmerelda, begging for sanctuary, while the fires of Paris burn below, and tell me this is not an incredible film. I don't know if I saw other movies in the theaters before this one, but this is the first I remember, and it's certainly because you cannot watch Hunchback without it leaving a lasting impact on your memory.

Rating: 5/5

Christopher Nolan, Christian Bale, David Bowie, and a plot about magicians? Sign me up!

Two magicians, Robert Angier (Hugh Jackman) and Alfred Borden (Christian Bale) have been arch rivals ever since they worked together and a trick went devastatingly wrong. Now, they will stop at nothing to best the other, and prove themselves as the greatest magician of all time. Whether it be through sabotage or the illusions themselves, their war with each other will be both mysterious and dangerous.

The Prestige is a film that gets better and better every time I watch it. It is one that is famous for its big reveal, and once you're aware of it, it's even more enjoyable to go back and watch through it again and again to try and catch all the moments where the hints to the ending were showing themselves. I first saw this movie when I was much too young to understand it, and therefore really didn't like it. And when I say much too young, I mean in my very early teens, so a large portion of the plot went directly over my head, except I did remember how it ended, though I was quite confused. I desperately wish that I hadn't seen The Prestige until I was older, because trying to figure out twist endings is a great pleasure of mine, and I feel this one was robbed from me by my own childhood. I really wonder if, had I watched it years later, if I would have caught onto the plot, or if it would have been just as surprising to me now as it was then.

The Prestige contains a plot that certainly keeps you on your toes. It doesn't have any moments of intense action scenes or fast paced sequences, it's much more methodical with the way it unfolds its story. Each moment is strategically placed as to keep the audience guessing, and it's absolutely brilliant. There's a moment I noticed for this first time recently, where just by the angle of the camera, you aren't one hundred percent sure which character's hand you are looking at. For most stories, this may not seem like an important feature, but for The Prestige, it is. It's a shot that is only briefly there, but it is nonetheless incredibly impressive. It's scenes like that and countless others that show what a remarkably talented director Christopher Nolan is. Just like any good magic trick, this film is all about the details and the misdirect, and it's executed impeccably well.

I have always been fascinated by magic tricks. When I watch a magician on stage, I want to be completely pulled in by the illusion, but part of me is also trying to figure out how it was actually done. Having little to no experience on such types of skills, I can only guess the ways in which the trick was completed. The Prestige gives a window into that world, showing how some of the more famous illusions were potentially pulled off. A large portion of the film is entirely rooted in reality, and that's what I really love. In some movies about magicians, the tricks they do don't seem possible, and it's because they technically aren't, or even if the trick is possible, the actor playing the magician isn't proficient enough and CGI then has to come into play. I love that with The Prestige all the majority magic you are witnessing appears like it's actually happening. You don't feel like you're being duped by the concept of computer generated trickery. Now whether or not the actors in the film really performed the bulk of the plausible tricks shown in the film, I don't know, but at least it all comes off as incredibly believable.

I used to think I didn't really love The Prestige, because my only real memory of it was being confused by it. Now, seeing it again as an adult, my viewpoint is entirely different. I've seen quite a few of the films directed by Christopher Nolan, but this one is by far one of my favorites. It's fairly lengthy, and sometimes movies appear to overstay their welcome, but The Prestige fully uses every minute of runtime to its advantage, making every moment of film completely worth watching.

Rating: 3/5

Now You See Me, though very over the top at times, is still a mostly enjoyable time.

Four magicians, Daniel Atlas (Jesse Eisenberg), Merritt McKinney (Woody Harrelson), Jack Wilder (Dave Franco), and Henley Reeves (Isla Fisher) are teamed together by a mysterious organization known as "The Eye" and then dubbed The Four Horsemen. Each has their own brand of magic they specialize in, and they use their skills to help their unknown creator perform one of the flashiest and biggest heists the world has ever seen. With F.B.I agent, Dylan Rhodes (Mark Ruffalo) hot on their track, their illusions will have to be extra crafty in order to complete their mission.

Now You See Me is set up like a big magic trick. It’s cocky, showy, and constantly trying to use the misdirect until it makes its big reveal. For a film centering its focus around the wonder that is magic, the structuring of the plot is a pretty ingenious concept, but even the greatest of ideas can fall short if they aren't executed right. The main problem with Now You See Me is, as fun as this movie can be at times, it’s runtime makes that big reveal seem like too much work to get to, and you kind of lose some of your interest by the time it officially happens. Not to mention its plausibility is quite questionable.

Now You See Me is very much a magical heist movie. It’s like The Oceans franchise but with hocus pocus added into the mix. Heist movies are a lot of fun, but this movie just had one too many elements to it. There are so many plot twists, points, and distractions, that the excitement of the heist gets a little lost. There's such a large combination of tricks, fights, chases, and planning that it seems all too much at times. Plus if you factor in the massively grand scale of the magic shows the Four Horsemen perform, it just seems like there's a lot going on, and for quite a long span of time. There were definitely some scenes that weren't crucial to the plot that could have been pulled, therefore reducing the movie's runtime just a tad.

With heist movies, the cast is usually a major pull, and though Now You See Me has some great actors in it, a lot of their characters are really unlikable and hard to root for, especially Jesse Eisenberg's. I know his character is supposed to be overly confident, but I couldn’t help but find him much too arrogant to enjoy. It was like the movie didn't quite know how to use the talent of the actors they had on board, and only honed in on one or two of the typical acting tropes they have become known for; example being Eisenberg's characters usually having a very fast paced speech pattern, as was the way of speaking for his Daniel Atlas in this film. Mark Ruffalo and Woody Harrelson are usually actors that I immensely enjoy watching, but even their performances just seemed a tad off the mark to me.

I've had a bizarre journey when it comes to the Now You See Me movies. When I first saw this one a few years back, I wasn't really that impressed, but I was still a little compelled to see the sequel just to see what happened next. A year or so passed, and I found myself wanting to revisit the original film again, to see if I'd like it more than I previously did, and I to my surprise, I did, but then this most recent rewatch has put me back on the side of being slightly less enthused by it. I'm not really sure what it is about the movie that has me so undecided. Perhaps it's because no matter how cheesy it is, I will always have a soft spot for magic tricks, and even though Now You See Me certainly has it's flaws, it still has the illusionist element to it, and I think I'll always gravitate towards it a little.

Rating: 4.75/5

Though it may not be the greatest genre, I'm a sucker for romantic comedies, and Sleepless in Seattle is one of the best.

Annie Reed (Meg Ryan) is engaged to Walter, a perfectly nice guy, but not exactly what Annie would describe as exciting. On her way home from family Christmas, she tunes into the Dr.Marcia Fieldstone Show, a radio program where people call in for advice, and she hears a little boy named Jonah (Ross Malinger) asking Dr.Marcia how to get his widowed father, Sam (Tom Hanks) a new wife. Immediately women all over the country who've listened to the show are falling in love with Sam, but for Annie, it's more than just a crush; she feels an inexplicable connection to him, though she's never met him. On opposite sides of the country, Annie and Sam live out their lives, never knowing if their paths will cross.

When it comes to the romantic comedy genre, Nora Ephron reigns supreme. She has written/directed numerous hits, and her works are generally a step above the movies that are typically labeled as romcoms. It is a genre that doesn't usually receive much critical acclaim, but she almost always managed to sidestep that trap. As someone who has seen countless films of this style, I think what made her works so different, was that there was always less silliness involved and much more heart. The story isn't usually just about finding love through one comical high jinks after another. There's actually some depth found within the characters, to the point where you wish the movie could have a slightly longer runtime so you can see what their lives are like once they finally get together. That sentiment rings especially true for movies like this and You've Got Mail, considering the two main leads don't actually see each other for the bulk of the film's runtime.

Sleepless in Seattle is often considered one of the best romantic comedies, and that statement is most certainly true. For many years, I couldn't say for sure if I agreed with that idea, because I had only seen bits and pieces of the movie from when I'd catch it on tv, so when I finally sat down to watch the entire film from beginning to end, I officially understood why everyone loved this movie so much. There's something intrinsically charming about it. The concept itself is a bit farfetched, but it's a story about the power of true love and the potential for soulmates and second chances, so I don't really care how unlikely the plot is. And even taking into consideration that the events of the movie most likely wouldn't happen in "real life", the actors' performances are so natural, that by the end of the movie, you almost believe it to be real.

As fantastic as the story and direction of Sleepless in Seattle is, what really makes it shine are Tom Hanks and Meg Ryan. Hanks' career has spanned practically every genre out there, but Ryan's has stayed very much in the romcom zone for the most part, and it's clear to see why. As previously stated, romantic comedies aren't usually movies looked at for critical praise, but that cannot be said for ones starring Meg Ryan. Her characters are usually ones with very bubbly and charming personalities, but ones that are also not afraid to take chances. Meg Ryan is wonderful in this movie, where you can't help but love her character for all her adorable quirks, but are also quite moved by her emotional scenes as well. Tom Hanks can improve practically every film he steps into, and where his character is dealing with the loss of his wife, he is given more of the poignant moments in the movie. The two actors rarely share a frame together, yet their chemistry is still wonderful. A concept that is certainly not an easy one to pull off.

When it comes to Nora Ephron stories, I am very partial to You've Got Mail, given that it was a movie I watched countless times a child and have watched numerous times more as an adult, but Sleepless in Seattle is definitely up there in the list of my favorites of her films. It wouldn't surprise me one bit, if in twenty, maybe thirty years or so in the future, when people look back at the movies from the '90s that would be considered "classics", that Sleepless in Seattle would be found in that collection.

Rating: 4.25/5

Very unexpectedly, Cars 3 may be my favorite in the entire franchise.

Famed racecar Lightning McQueen (Owen Wilson) has been one of the top racers for quite some time and assumes he's nowhere near ready for retirement, but when a new generation of sleeker and technologically advanced racecars come onto the scene, McQueen has a much harder time keeping up with them and finds himself in a pretty significant crash. Many of the older generation racers are throwing in the towel, but McQueen can't bring himself to quit. Instead, he goes to an elite training program run by a racing history fanatic named Sterling (Nathan Fillion). It is there that Lightning hopes he will be able to work himself hard enough to not only compete with the new racecars, but once again find victory at the finish line.

After Cars 2, I didn't really have much hope for the franchise, especially considering the original wasn't one of Pixar's strongest efforts. The second and third installments into the Cars universe were, until recently, some of the only films put out by the studio that I hadn't yet seen. I just couldn't find myself having much interest in them, but once I finally got around to watching Cars 3, I was very pleasantly surprised. Unlike it's two predecessors, this particular movie has a bit more heart to it and seems more like a film worthy of the Pixar name. It's still not one of their best, but it's certainly not one of their worst.

I absolutely love it when animated films have portions of their story set in the past or are heavily influenced by it. It's one of the many reasons I love The Incredibles so much, because it has a very strong '50s-'60s vibe about it. It is that concept that really made me enjoy Cars 3. In order for Lightning McQueen to make his comeback, he takes time to dive into the history of his mentor, Doc Hudson (Paul Newman). In doing so, we are given flashbacks to Doc's racing days that took place back in the 1950s. It was great to see how the animators made these particular sequences in the film look. The colors were tinted to make the film appear aged, the cars were obviously what would now be considered antiques, and even the sounds felt vintage, especially that of the ambulance sirens after Doc's crash. As much as I enjoyed the concept for Cars 3, it's because of these scenes that made me wish they'd made the entire third film as a spinoff about Doc Hudson's time as a racer. That is something I would love to see.

One of the reasons I feel that Cars 3 is perhaps the more superior of the three films, is that Lightning McQueen becomes a slightly more likable character. In the first movie, he's incredibly arrogant, but does learn the error of his ways. In the second, he is hardly even in it other than to assume he's better than his small town friends, and in the third, he's being humbled by the fact that he's no longer the best, and a new side of him reveals itself. His character journey in this film feels quite meaningful and it really brings a lovely sense of closure to the trilogy.

I would imagine that after this film, Pixar won't be releasing anymore Cars stories except for maybe the occasional short film staring Mater. This franchise is definitely a successful one, especially when you consider the merchandise sales it must have garnered, but it's definitely not their most moving or heartfelt. I am quite surprised they dared to make a third film after the reception of the second, but I am actually glad they did, because Cars 3 is certainly worth at least one viewing.

Rating: 2.75/5

What To Expect When You're Expecting is one of those movies you watch, fully knowing it's not great, but find yourself not really minding.

The lives of five different couples intersect as they all navigate the ups and downs of starting a family. Jules (Cameron Diaz) and her new boyfriend Evan (Matthew Morrison) struggle to compromise on even the simplest of decisions, Wendy (Elizabeth Banks) and her husband Gary (Ben Falcone) are over the moon about their pregnancy, as they struggled to conceive for many years. Holly (Jennifer Lopez) and Alex (Rodrigo Santoro) are considering the adoption process, Rosie (Anna Kendrick) and Marco (Chase Crawford) have only had one night together, but now must deal with an unexpected pregnancy, and Ramsey (Dennis Quaid) and his much younger bride, Skyler (Brooklyn Decker) are expecting twins. Though their lives appear incredibly separate, the different couples will cross paths as they deal with the surprises of pregnancy.

For every film fanatic, I would guess they all have what they would call their guilty pleasure movies. Some love cheesy, low budget monster flicks, others may be more inclined towards sappy romances. For me, my guilty pleasure films are ones I watched as a kid and romantic comedies with interwoven stories, i.e. What To Expect When You're Expecting. I watch this movie, completely aware that it is silly, over the top, and gimmicky, but I just don't care. Personally, I find it really fun to see how the story attempts to weave all the different character arcs together. Some are definitely more far fetched than others, and some seem to be thrown in just for the sake of finding a character connection, but it's enjoyable nonetheless. There are some movies that do a much better job at this concept than What To Expect When You're Expecting, for example, Love Actually, which is really the standard to what all movies like this should be compared to, but even so, What To Expect is entertaining for what it is.

Years back, I remember hearing this movie was going to be made and I was more than a little curious to see how they were going to take a self help pregnancy guide and turn it into a romantic comedy. The sentiment had been done before with the movie He's Just Not That Into You, but even that seemed a little more attainable when it came to creating an actual plot line. Now, as someone who has never read the book What To Expect is based on, I can't say much as far as a comparison goes, but I can pretty much assume I'm not incorrect in saying that the two mediums only share their name and pregnancy topic in common. The title appears to be there more to grab people's attention and make them curious, which if that was the case, proved somewhat successful, as it is one of the reasons I first watched it.

Whenever I watch a movie like this, I always find myself more focused or interested in certain characters' storylines over others. With this particular movie, I really enjoyed the plots involving Gary and Wendy and Rosie and Marco. The latter two characters' stories seemed the most disconnected from the rest and when they interacted with the other couples in any way, it seemed to be an afterthought, but even so, I am quite the fan of Anna Kendrick, and I really enjoyed watching her scenes in the film. Some of the acting in What To Expect was a bit too played up, but not in Kendrick's character, and not as much with Elizabeth Banks and Ben Falcone's characters either; their's were the most heartfelt ones in the bunch. Even though I knew how their parts of the movie would end up, I still couldn't help but find myself smiling along the way.

When times are stressful and my mind just needs a rest, that's when I usually find myself with the urge to watch movies like What To Expect When You're Expecting. There's absolutely no guesswork in the plot and it's usually stress free. Many would fault a film for having those qualities, which, in many cases, they wouldn't be exactly wrong to do so, but I like having movies like this exist. There's something a little comforting about watching something that's not exactly a great film, but is a little goofy and just fun to watch.

Rating: 4.75/5

A movie I enjoyed significantly more the second time around, Moana is a visual marvel.

Moana (Auli'i Cravalho) is the daughter of village Chief Tui (Temuera Morrison). She has always been drawn to the ocean, but her father insists upon the dangers of the water and is constantly telling her that her place is on the island. The fruit in her village is rotting away and the fish are disappearing, which many believe to be the result of the demigod Maui (Dwayne Johnson) stealing the heart of Te Fiti. One night, Moana's grandmother takes her to a cave where she learns that her ancestors used to be voyagers, giving Moana the knowledge she needs to know she is capable of taking a boat beyond the breakers so she can set sail to find Maui, return the heart to Te Fiti and save her village.

In all honesty, when I first saw Moana, I wasn't overly excited by it, but it also wasn't a great theater experience, so I think that heavily influenced my initial opinion of it. When I decided to watch through all the Disney Princess films in order, I was actually a little eager to get to Moana, because I wanted to see if my opinion on it would change, and boy did it ever. Upon this most recent viewing, I suddenly understood why everyone loved this movie so much. I'm still not over the moon about the Kakamora or Tamatoa, they tend to bore me a little, but the rest of the film is absolutely wonderful.

Something I have felt for a long time about computer generated animation is that the style of the films can seem to blend together after awhile. With the movies from the days of the hand drawn style, you could see a clear difference in the illustrations of the animators from film to film. For example, if you compared Pocahontas to The Little Mermaid, it would be incredibly apparent to see the how the animation differs between the two. The same can't be said for many of the modern animated films, but not for Moana. Moana was really the first time I've noticed a distinct technique and look really appear in a Disney animated film. To date, there aren't any other movies put out by the company that look like this, not in the animation of the people, animals, and certainly not in the landscape. The water in Moana is a character all its own, so it essentially has to look alive and not just like a breathless form of water. The vibrant colors add so much life to the ocean, making it just as exciting to watch as the sea creatures that are swimming within it.

Most Disney movies have scenes where the main character, very commonly a princess, come into their own and reach the peak of their hero's journey and have their moment of power. So many films have done this incredibly well, but Moana is one of the best. Between the swell of the music, the spirits of the sea, Auli'i Cravalho's phenomenal vocals, it all combines to create a chill inducing sequence. It was one that I actually rewound so I could see it all over again. There are many great scenes in Moana, plenty involving Dwayne Johnson's character, but this one part of the movie is, in my opinion, the best in the entire film.

What made me dislike Moana the first time around, I couldn't fully say, but I can tell you that my thoughts on the film have entirely changed. I somehow didn't appreciate the brilliance of having Maui's tattoos be animated or the greatness of the music; it all just seemed to bypass me until now. Moana is one of those times where I really wish they were able to award two films an Oscar for Best Animated Feature. I am definitely glad Zootopia won that year, as it is an excellent film, but I feel Moana was deserving of the accolade as well.

Rating 4.25/5

Though it doesn't contain anything completely new from Nemo, Finding Dory is still a very adequate and amusing sequel.

Time has passed since Nemo (Hayden Rolence) was lost out in open ocean and found by Dory (Ellen DeGeneres) and Marlin (Albert Brooks), and now the three fish live together as a family. Dory still suffers from short term memory loss, but Nemo and Marlin have found ways to work with it. One day, Dory has a sudden memory about when she was little, and quickly remembers that she has parents. Now she is desperate to find where she came from and sets out on an adventure in search of her past.

Pixar is no stranger to sequels, but this particular one seemed to be a long time coming and one of the most anticipated. When Finding Nemo came out, I remember everyone talking about how much they loved the film, but more specifically, how much everyone loved Dory, so it was only natural that Pixar decided to focus their sequel on her. This is similar to what they did with Cars 2 and Mater, but unlike Cars 2, this idea actually worked. Even though the gag of Dory constantly forgetting things she was just told is used often throughout the film, it never seems to really get old. You'd think it would, but the forgetful trait of the fish is just humorous and charming enough to remain funny, no matter how many times it is used.

It is completely expected that with a sequel new characters will need to be created. In Finding Dory, we are introduced to a handful of sea creatures that Dory meets when she finds herself at the Marine Life Institute. As it usually goes with sequels, with the exception of Toy Story 2, the new characters aren't as exciting or memorable as the ones found in the original, but they are perfectly enjoyable, though not overly special. Oddly enough, though she isn't exactly a physical character, one of the best new roles in the film is that of Sigourney Weaver, or rather, her voice. Weaver is the vocal spokesperson for the Institute, and Dory has many an interaction with her. It's quite a rather bizarre addition to the movie, but I couldn't help but chuckle every time Dory or any of the other characters spoke directly to Sigourney Weaver. A very random choice of humor, but honestly, probably my favorite aspect to the film.

Just like it's predecessor, Finding Dory is absolutely stunning to behold. The colors are so incredibly vibrant and it's really just a remarkably beautiful piece of filmmaking. Given that this was a sequel, it really made perfect sense that the creators would want to take the characters out of the setting in which the original was placed. This is a very common tactic, but one that is much trickier when your characters can't breathe out of water. I loved the idea of bringing Dory and company into the Marine Life Institute, and even though they are out of open water and in a fabricated ocean environment, the brightness of the animation never fades, unless of course they are somewhere in the depths of the ocean and it is supposed to.

When Finding Dory was first released, I remember being slightly disappointed when I saw it. I think my expectations were just unrealistically high based on my love for Finding Nemo, and I honestly hadn't revisited it until just recently. Upon my second viewing, I enjoyed it much more than I did the first time around. Knowing it wasn't going to be quite as good as the first, I was able to take it in for what it was, and had a really great time watching it.

Rating: 1.75/5

Just when I thought Pixar couldn't sink any lower than Cars 2, I am proved wrong by the existence of The Good Dinosaur.

When the famous meteor narrowly passes by the Earth, the dinosaurs don't go extinct and remain on the planet. Two Apaterosauruses are anxiously awaiting the hatching of their three eggs and when it finally happens, they get to meet their children for the first time. Arlo (Raymond Ochoa) is the runt of the bunch and is seemingly afraid of everything. His siblings have no patience for him and his father frequently tries to help him grow in his confidence and courage. When a small human boy gets into their family silo and eats their crops, Arlo is given the task of killing the pest, but he can't do it. After his fear causes a family tragedy, Arlo decides he must find the boy and kill him, but sets out on an adventure much bigger than he could ever have anticipated.

Before seeing The Good Dinosaur, I hadn't heard great things about it. I'd been told the story was very boring, but the animation was fantastic. When I sat down to watch this, I really hoped I'd find people's opinions on the plot to be wrong, and that I'd end up loving it, but instead, I found The Good Dinosaur to be the worst film put out by Pixar. I enjoyed it a bit at the very beginning, but that enjoyment didn't stick around for long. The famed studio is usually incredibly consistent with their releases, only having a very small few that just didn't quite hit the mark, but this movie was so far off from the mark, that aside from the animation, you'd never guess that it was worthy of the Pixar name. Without the look of the film, especially when it comes to the landscapes, there wouldn't be anything positive to say about The Good Dinosaur because, other than that, the movie is just down right obnoxious.

Other than occasionally Mater, I couldn't think of any Pixar characters that I didn't like, unless they were ones that were created with the intention of being disliked, but that sentiment changed upon seeing The Good Dinosaur. I absolutely could not stand the hero of the story, Arlo. As the viewer, we are supposed to be pulling for the dinosaur to overcome his fears and root for him each and every step of the way, but it wasn't long into the film where I couldn't stand Arlo's cowardly screeches any longer. It was a trait that I assume was meant to make him endearing and as someone to sympathize with, but it just made me wish the movie would blissfully come to an end sooner than it actually did.

The Good Dinosaur seemed like Disney's attempt at tackling a story like The Land Before Time, but got confused at whether or not it wanted to be silly, heartfelt, or dark. The latter film notoriously is one that made countless children cry and fear Sharptooth, but all The Good Dinosaur did was bore the audience until it traumatized them with the surprising deaths of beetles and fluffy big eyed creatures. I get that the characters are dinosaurs and that carnivorous behaviors make sense, but it just seemed a bit too much and too jarring, considering the low-key nature of the rest of the film.

I am honestly really glad that this movie didn't come out when I was a kid, because I'm sure I would have seen it in theaters and then would've been either greatly disappointed or disturbed. It's no wonder there hasn't been talks for a sequel to The Good Dinosaur. It's really something Pixar should look back at as one of their more failed attempts and hope that, like the dinosaurs, any thoughts of a sequel will go extinct with time.

Rating: 4.25/5

Though I know it's not many people's favorites, Monsters University is a fun prequel to one of Pixar's most original films.

Before Mike (Billy Crystal) and Sully (John Goodman) were one of the dream teams working at Monsters Inc, they had to go to school to learn how to be in the scaring business, and that place was at Monsters University. Mike has wanted to be a scarer ever since he was a little monster and his class took a field trip to Monsters Inc, but he isn't what would be considered as a natural, due to his size and harmless appearance. Sully on the other hand, comes from a long line of scarers, but is too cocky in his natural abilities to take the classes at MU seriously. When a string of unexpected events pair Mike and Sully together on a team to win the Scare Games, they must figure out how to work together so their team can win and prove themselves to be the top scarers on campus.

Monsters University was Pixar's third attempt at creating a sequel, or in this case a prequel, to a preexisting film in their archive. Toy Story 2 and 3 were great successes, Cars 2 was horrible, and Monsters University finds itself somewhere in the middle, but leaning more towards the side of success. It's not as fresh and innovative as Inc was, but it still manages to tell an entertaining story with likable characters and fantastic animation. I for one am glad that they chose to make a prequel instead of a sequel to Monsters Inc. I wasn't exactly overly interested to see how using laughter was going to keep the city running, and I felt the way Inc ended was a perfect close to the story. By making this a prequel, there wasn't any unnecessary attempts to try and bring Boo back into the picture, and we get a much better idea about the world in which the monsters are living.

I am someone who is always quite partial to stories when the characters have to go through some types of trials or competitions like they show in this film with the Scare Games. It's probably why, even though it's not the strongest in the franchise, Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire is still one of my more enjoyed films in that series; I love the idea of the Triwizard Tournament. I find myself always eager to see what new events or challenges the characters will have to face, knowing that with each round, the games will get more and more difficult. The idea of showing Mike and Sully at college was a brilliant one, but then adding in the Scare Games made it even better. I loved how they evolved the relationship between the two main monsters, and showed how they became the dynamic duo we all know and love.

With every Pixar film, the animation just gets better and better as the technology advances. For Monsters University, the look of the characters was about the same, but they were definitely bolder, brighter, and had more detail, especially for the monsters with fur. Given that these characters don't live in the "real world" and in fact fear humans, there's not much realism for the majority of the movie, but that changes in the film's second act. When I was watching this again the other day, I was struck by how incredibly realistic the water was when some of the characters go into the human world. Mostly in these movies, we'd only seen inside the bedrooms of the children who were going to be scared, so we didn't get to see any elements of nature to get a sense of how impressive the animation was. In this scene by the lake, the monsters stand out against the highly realistic woods and water and it is a truly brilliant piece of animated film. It's really striking and one of the best moments in the entire movie.

Monsters University isn't one of my all time favorite Pixar films, but it's definitely one of my more enjoyed. It's a little simple when it comes to its emotional depth when you compare it to some of the other heavy hitters from the studio, but it's wonderfully colorful and really just enjoyable to watch. It's what you expect from any sequel or prequel; the ability to not necessarily top its predecessor, but still be a good all around movie.

Rating: 2/5

Long live lemons? Come on Pixar, you're better than that.

Since his time in Radiator Springs, Lightening McQueen(Owen Wilson) has become a very famous race car, so much so that he has been invited to compete at the World Grand Prix. At first, McQueen turns down the offer, but after Mater (Larry the Cable Guy) argues over the phone with a very flashy racer name Francesco Bernoulli (John Tuturro) about how McQueen is the best racer, he has a change of heart. Once challenged by Bernoulli, he decides to enter the race. When he and Mater arrive in Japan, McQueen is pulled into all the pre-race events, but Mater accidentally finds himself in the middle of an espionage filled plot, where he is mistaken as a secret agent.

I had heard from many people that Cars 2 was the weakest film in the Pixar catalogue, and that it appeared to be created only for the purpose of making money. I very much wanted to disagree with everyone who had said that, but within less than twenty minutes of the film starting, I completely understood the reasons for all the criticism the movie received. Cars 2 isn't a horrible film, but it by no means ever comes close to reaching the standards one would expect from a Pixar movie. It's basically a giant toy selling pun machine. There is no real depth to the plot, and it's one of the very few times where a movie made by the highly esteemed studio seems only fit for juvenile viewers, and not one that could be enjoyed by the adults as well. I'm sure the older audiences who were also fans James Bond like movies may have found some charm in the secret agent aspect to the plot, but even that seemed over the top given that the criminal mastermind's reason for revenge seemed rather absurd.

Up until this movie, the only film by Pixar that had received a sequel was Toy Story, and their second attempt for that franchise was an absolute slam dunk, and their third was no slouch either. The thing is, what I feel made those sequels so successful is that they were branched off an already phenomenal first film; one packed with creativity and emotion. The first Cars film isn't bad, it's quite fun, but it doesn't have the same heart that one finds in Toy Story, so therefore it's sequel didn't have as much going for it. However, even considering all that, I didn't expect Cars 2 to be as trite and ludicrous as it was.

I think what really killed this film for me was the fact that they took Lightening McQueen away from being the main character or focal point, and put all that attention on Mater. In the first film, Mater was great for quick jokes and sidekick wit, but making him a main character was something I found to be very grating. His character is supposed to go through this great journey in discovering his own self worth, but for me, and I know this may sound harsh, I just didn't really find myself really caring about him discovering whether or not he was more than just a rusted tow truck. His constant mistakes and chaos inducing antics didn't make me laugh, and in fact, just made me keep checking how much time was left in the film.

Based on the words written above, the rating I gave Cars 2 may not make complete sense. I thought about rating it even lower, but even though the story is sub-par, the animation is still well above average. Even when Pixar can't deliver a fantastic plot, their visuals never fail.

Rating: 3.5/5

Much better than I expected, Eurovision Song Contest: The Story of Fire Saga is a fun movie filled with even better music.

Lars Erickssong (Will Ferrell) has dreamed of winning the Eurovision Song Contest since he was a little boy and first saw ABBA perform in the competition. Many years later, he and his childhood best friend Sigrit (Rachel McAdams) have formed a band called Fire Saga and perform in their small Icelandic town, Husavik, hoping to be chosen to go to Eurovision. Through chance and a very unexpected incident, Fire Saga finds their way to Scotland to compete in Eurovision, hoping to win and make their home country proud.

Not being a huge Will Ferrell fan, I went into this movie when minimal expectations. I love him in sketches, but have learned I usually only find him palatable in small SNL sized bits, so I knew watching a 2 hour comedy with him was going to be a stretch. So, why did I watch this movie then? It was mainly due to Rachel McAdams and the subject matter. I recently started becoming very interested in the Eurovision Song Contest, and I really wanted to see how this movie would tackle the topic. All in all, I quite enjoyed this movie, even including Will Ferrell.

When I watched the trailer for this, I really wanted to see more of what the music in the film was going to be. Though Rachel McAdams didn’t actually sing her character's vocals, she was dubbed by former Eurovision contestant Molly Sanden, I was still completely enthralled by the music. I know the movie’s main purpose was to be comedic and it was about a musical duo, but I couldn’t help but get a little frustrated every time Will Ferrell would start singing in the songs as well. I know that’s a ridiculous complaint to make about this movie, and it’s not even really a negative remark towards the film, I just loved Sanden's voice so much that I wanted to hear more of it on its own. That being said, I was impressed with Ferrell's vocals, though I assume they received some doctoring.

When it comes to comedy, I can be a really hard sell. I have definitely found comedies that I’ve loved, but even then, I rarely laugh out loud when watching them. It’s not that I don’t enjoy films that are meant to be funny, it’s just that I don’t find a lot of the crude humor that is so commonly found in comedies to be overly enjoyable. However, I have recently tried to change my tune, so to speak, when it comes to my mindset when going into a comedy. I’ve tried to vow to let my silly side come out, which doesn’t usually see the light of day, to see if I’d enjoy a comedy more than usual. I did that for Eurovision, and I really feel that allowed me to enjoy this film more. This movie is definitely filled with foolish moments, not all great, but many were a lot of fun. Eurovision isn’t the best comedy I’ve seen in years, but it’s unique and has breathtaking scenery to back it.

Though I enjoyed watching Rachel McAdams more than Will Ferrell in Eurovision, I really liked this movie a lot more than I expected I would. I can definitely say I’ve never seen a comedy like it, and I very quickly began listening to parts of its soundtrack as soon as it was over. All in all, not a bad way to spend an evening.

Rating: 5/5

Tangled is a perfect blend of Disney's past and present and hands down one of the best films the studio has put out within the past two decades.

Gothel (Donna Murphy) is petrified of growing old, and one day discovers a flower that will keep her young forever. When the queen of the nearby kingdom is taken ill right before giving birth, the palace soldiers search far and wide for a cure, and unearth the same flower. They take it and give it to the queen, saving her life, and instilling her new baby, Rapunzel, with magical hair that can heal. Once Gothel realizes the flower is gone, she kidnaps Rapunzel and raises her as her own. Eighteen years later, Rapunzel (Mandy Moore) yearns to see the world beyond her tower and decides she must take an adventure to learn the mystery of the floating lights that appear each year on her birthday.

Though Tangled came out fairly recently, it is often forgotten about or overshadowed by the massive success of the film that came out after it, which was Frozen. Now, don't get me wrong, I absolutely love Frozen, but it saddens me that Tangled doesn't receive the attention that it so rightly deserves. It tells the tale of a story known by many, but adds some new spins to it, while still being able to include crucial details from its original fairytale basis. Tangled is absolutely packed with adventure, excitement, emotion, and of course, some fantastic musical numbers; it is a princess film after all.

I listened to a podcast not too long ago where a person said that they felt Tangled was a great representation of how Disney could take the original stylings of their classic animated films, and combine it with the newer, self-sufficient princess ideals of today, and I couldn't agree more with that statement. When you watch Tangled, you can completely see the influences of decades old Disney films like Snow White being intertwined within the plot; Mother Gothel's story arc is a prime example of that concept. Rapunzel, though kidnapped and compliant at first, eventually takes charge of her own fate, and is the one who is responsible for her first real adventure; the fact that she may find love along the way is not what drives her story, but is just an added bonus. The modern idea of a powerful princess is great and important one, but sometimes the message can come off a bit heavy handed and lacking in subtlety, but not for Tangled. It's theme is clear, but it doesn't lose that classic Disney enchantment in the process.

Alan Menken's music has filled the soundtrack for numerous Disney films, this one included, and though I love practically everything he's done, Tangled is easily one of my favorites. What's unusual about this, is that though I love the songs with the lyrics, it is the background score that really captures my attention. When Rapunzel enters the kingdom for the first time, music begins to play in the background, slow at first, as Rapunzel is spending most of her time just taking in her surroundings, but as the festivities within the courtyard begin, the score picks up, and this particular sequence is one of my most beloved Disney moments ever. I adore the music, the colors of the animation, how tangible the characters' emotions are, just absolutely everything. It is a truly brilliant moment of cinema.

I don't know the history for why Tangled was not nominated for Best Animated Feature, but it's really a travesty that it wasn't. I'm confident there are many logistics behind that decision that I don't know or understand, but it still bothers me that this film wasn't able to receive even a nomination for such an accolade. Bizarrely, in this time of confinement that we are living in, Tangled has recently garnered more recognition and praise. Though I'm not thrilled with the circumstances it took for this wonderful movie to get brought to the surface again, I suppose the silver lining would be that Tangled is at least finally getting some more of the attention it should have been getting since its initial release.

Rating: 4/5

The Princess and the Frog is a seemingly under-appreciated entry into the Disney princess archives but one that is well worth viewing.

In the mid 1920s in New Orleans, Tiana (Anika Noni Rose) dreams of one day opening her own restaurant, but she grew up not having an excess of riches, so she works hard everyday as a waitress in order to save up enough to buy the perfect location for her business. One night at a party thrown by her childhood friend, Tiana is mistaken as a princess and in her attempts to help Prince Naveen (Bruno Campos) who has been turned into a frog by Dr. Facilier (Keith David), become human again, she gives the amphibian a kiss, but turns into a frog herself. Now she and Naveen must find a way to break the curse put upon them before it's too late.

Prior to The Princess and the Frog, Disney, and many other studios, had jumped on the 3D animation bandwagon, and didn't appear to be turning back to hand drawn animation anytime soon. So when the trailer for this movie came out, I remember being very surprised, but also incredibly excited to see that it was going to be done in the traditional style of the other princess movies. I love the realism and boldness you can get with computer animation, but there's something very special about this older illustrative style of storytelling. For this film, I loved that, even though it came out decades after films like Cinderella and Sleeping Beauty, and technology had greatly improved since then, you could still see the little flourishes and designs in the drawings made by the animators. It was like being transported back in time, and given the era in which the film was set, I found that to be very fitting.

Most Disney films have music that is styled to the setting of the film, but it is also very flashy, meaning that if you took the story off the screen and put it on the stage, it would blend quite nicely. The Princess and the Frog does have it's big musical numbers, but I would describe them more as swingy rather than showy. I really love this aspect to the film. Princess Tiana's song "Almost There" does have it's Broadway elements to it, but it is also rich with a New Orleans jazz sound, where if someone came in late to the song, and didn't know where it was from, they may not guess it was from a Disney musical. Sadly, many people can be put off by the loudness and flamboyance of some types of show tunes, but for those who fit that description, I feel they would have a hard time finding an aversion towards the music in The Princess and the Frog, because it's never really over the top.

Years ago, I acquired some framed pictures that were supposed to imitate the look and style of the art commonly used 1920s posters. This is a particular look that I have always loved, both for its design and the ability to take me to the past when looking at it. My absolute favorite moment in The Princess in the Frog is when, during Tiana's musical explanation to her mother about how her restaurant dream will come true, the animation switches its into that style of those classic poster art illustrations. This was such a clever and ingenious technique to include in the film. Not only does it add a really unique feature to it, but it also really hones in on the movie's time period. Even if the clothes of the characters or the music in the background didn't sell the viewer on the idea of the story being in the '20s, that one sequence completely brings that concept home.

I hadn't seen this movie in a very long time, but I was anxious to get to it on my Disney princess watch through, because I wanted to remember what I had liked about many years ago. Though I do feel like it gets a little muddled in the middle, the bulk of The Princess and the Frog is wonderful and a film that deserves much more attention than it appears to receive.

Rating: 3.5/5

Stick It is very much a product of its time but a fun sports film nonetheless.

Haley Graham (Missy Peregrym) finds herself in trouble after she and two of her best friends get caught biking through a construction site and accidentally crashing through a window. As a form of punishment, Haley is forced to return to the rigorous world of professional gymnastics that she had abandoned a few years back. Once at the gym, run by Coach Vickerman (Jeff Bridges), Haley is not greeted with a warm welcome by the other gymnasts, and at first, refuses to train. However, she soon changes her mind and decides to start trying to throw the tricks she used to so she can make the team before the next competition.

Though I am past the target viewing age, I still find myself wanting to watch Stick It about once every year or so. I mostly watch for pure nostalgia's sake, and it does hold up better than some of the other films I watch for the same purpose. There's certainly some jokes or scenes that haven't exactly aged well, for example, the comebacks found between the characters, especially Haylee and the classic teen movie mean girl character, which are incredibly cheesy, but that's pretty much to be expected with a film in this genre. Even with the occasionally bad written retaliation, Stick It does boast some strong performances, and as per usual, Jeff Bridges is great from beginning to end.

Stick It is an energetic and entertaining movie, and it is one that seems to be somewhat forgotten about when it comes to sports movies from the mid 2000s, which is unfortunate. If you haven't seen it and are a fan of films with a similar mindset, then I'd suggest giving it a watch, because it's an overall good time. Maybe I have let my nostalgia cloud my writing, but I'm not so sure that's a bad thing. Sentimentality aside, there really is a lot to like about Stick It. For one, there aren't a lot of teen sports films that are geared towards female audiences and I remember when I first watched this many years ago, being really impressed with the athleticism of the characters, especially considering many of them were real gymnasts and not stunt doubles. There also aren't very many movies about gymnastics, so it comes of as being unique in that way.

When you look at reviews for this film, it's rated quite low, and mainly for being formulaic. Personally, I get really irritated with reviewers constantly knocking movies like this one, that are clearly not trying to shatter the mold. Not every movie has to be groundbreaking, and when you're a teen, sometimes you just want to watch a film where you can likely predict the outcome, but have some fun a long the way. Of course those types of movies aren't going to be up for any awards, but they're enjoyable, and that's what they're meant to be. If someone were to watch this movie and be irritated or disappointed by the cliches, occasionally corny dialogue and somewhat predictable story arc, then they really shouldn't be watching a teen sports movie anyways.

Whenever I review a film that I loved as a kid or in my teens, I occasionally find it tough not to be too biased. Even though I know Stick It is not great, I still really love it. It brings back fond memories of going to the theater with my friends and coming home and trying out gymnastics moves while simultaneously failing at them through fits of teenage laughter. Isn't that why we revisit movies from our childhoods so much, to be able to be brought back to a simpler time and be comforted by familiar characters and storylines? Perhaps that's not true for everyone, but it definitely is for me.

Rating: 5/5

What is probably the biggest film surprise I've had in a long time, Fighting With My Family is an absolute gem.

Saraya (Florence Pugh) and her brother Zak (Jack Lowden) come from a family that lives and breathes wrestling. Their parents run a wrestling gym where they train young wrestlers and the whole family performs, but both Saraya and Zak have bigger plans; they want to be a part of the WWE. When Zak and Saraya get the opportunity to audition for the WWE, they are ecstatic, especially Zak. Saraya loves wrestling, but not the extent of her brother. At the audition, Saraya, who now goes by Paige, performs alongside her brother to the best of their abilities, but shockingly, only Saraya is chosen to go to the States and start the next phase of becoming a WWE professional. Now Paige has to make the decision of whether or not she'll go to America and risk the consequences of leaving her brother behind.

Let me say quite bluntly, that I am not a fan of wrestling, professional or otherwise. I've never really understood the appeal, and it's honestly something I've actually avoided watching. So why, may you ask, did I decide to watch a movie where wrestling was its primary focus? Well, as silly as it may sound, it was based on the reviews it was receiving and listening to an interview with director/writer, Stephen Merchant. His description of the film really piqued my interest, and I was also intrigued by the cast members that made up the film. So, after listening to that interview, I sat down to watch a movie about a subject matter I wasn't a fan of, and absolutely fell in love with the story. Fighting With My Family does follow some of the classic sports movie plot points, but the performances and edge it has, are all its own. Now, I'm not exactly going to start watching the WWE in my spare time, but this movie 100% gave me more respect for the grueling aspects to the sport that I wasn't aware of.

Fighting With My Family really opened my eyes to how people get interested in wrestling. I had never really viewed it like other sports, and it honestly used to baffle me as to how people could be so invested in something they know to be fixed and performed, but after watching this, I understand the draw so much more. This movie shows how the sport can bring families together. The characters cheer on their favorites and get pulled into the world created within the ring. They are raised around it and therefore it is something they love. I myself grew up in a baseball family, so I personally get overjoyed at the sound of the bat hitting the ball, the classic look of a baseball diamond, and the memories those things evoke. Fighting With My Family promotes quite a similar sentiment, just with a very different sport. I wouldn't say I'm a converted fan of wrestling now, but I certainly understand the appeal a lot more.

Never so quickly have I become a fan of an actress like I have with Florence Pugh. The first thing I saw her in was 2019's Little Women. Her performance absolutely floored me in that film, making her character of Amy go from one I had historically disliked into one that I suddenly loved. After seeing that film, I was really curious to see other movies she'd done, and her starring role in this, is one of the handful of things that made me want to see it. Her role in Fighting With My Family is a very physical one, but also quite an emotional one as well. Her character goes on an intense roller coaster throughout the plot, and Pugh completely pulls you into the story every step of the way. You believe every sarcastic comment she makes and every tear she sheds. It is honestly one of my favorite performances of the entire 2019 film catalogue.

After seeing this movie, I genuinely could not stop thinking about it. I recommended it to anyone who would listen, and continued to gush about it probably to the point of annoyance to those who I was talking with. I can't say enough great things about Fighting With My Family, and as I am writing this, I'm am already toying with the notion of watching it again today.

Rating: 4.75/5

Waitress is a film that could technically be described as a romantic-comedy, but is unlike other movies of the genre due to its' strong emotional core.

Jenna (Keri Russel) is a waitress at a pie diner. All she wants to do is make pies and earn enough money to leave her abusive husband Earl, but her plan to get away is stalled when she learns that she is pregnant.

Unlike most expectant mothers, Jenna resents the unborn child that has seemingly ruined her way out of her marriage. With her friends at the diner and her new doctor (Nathan Fillion) for support, Jenna has to find a way to deal with a pregnancy that she does not want and a marriage that she fears she cannot escape.

Waitress is unique in many ways and its' director is definitely one of them. Adrienne Shelly directed this film and she added a very unusual and charming style to the movie that almost places it in a genre all its' own. I have always felt that even if you weren't aware that a movie was directed by a female, as soon as it starts you can usually tell. Female directors generally don't follow the patterns or formulas that most main stream films seem to fall into. Shelly certainly did not stick to any traditional movie design, and Waitress is a better romantic-comedy because of it.

The characters that surround Jenna's life are full of offbeat and eccentric traits, and they add a wonderful sense of whimsy to the film. Adrienne Shelly acts as well as directs, and makes her character adorably awkward. Keri Russel is able to tap into the emotions that are going through Jenna's mind as well as be able to make her strong exterior fit her character and not seem out of place.

I remember seeing Waitress in discount bins back when Blockbuster was a prominent business, and that always lead me to believe it was just another basic rom-com, and that initial impression couldn't have been further from the truth. Not long after that, I was thankfully shown this movie and immediately fell in love with it. For anyone who has held that same original idea about this movie that I had, I strongly urge you to watch it, because I can practically guarantee you'll be impressed with it. Every ingredient of this film works together to make a perfect recipe, and one that has not been done many times before.

Though Waitress isn't incredibly well known, it definitely should be. It flawlessly balances its' poignant emotional scenes with perfectly placed moments of humor; with the end result being a film that is both comical and touching.

Rating: 4.5/5

Hail, Caesar! is as quick witted as it is paced.

In the 1950s in Hollywood, Eddie Mannix (Josh Brolin) spends his days being the "fixer" for Capitol Pictures. His job is to hide the many indiscretions of the stars on contract with the studio. One day, Baird Whitlock (George Clooney), the lead of the production company's newest sword and sandals picture "Hail, Caesar!", is kidnapped right in the middle of shooting. It's up to Eddie and a handful of others to try and find out where Baird has been taken while putting out numerous other fires along the way.

As someone who is almost always fond of movies based around filmmaking, especially during Hollywood's golden age, it's truly shocking that it took me this long to finally give Hail, Caesar! a watch. I knew I wanted to see it, and the fact that it was a Coen Brothers movie added to my anticipation, but for some reason, it is just recently that I finally got a chance to see it. I'd heard mixed reviews about it, but in my opinion, it's a pretty great film. It has the Coen Brothers' trademark humor and originality with the added appeal of the glamor of Hollywood.

The biggest complaint I had heard people make about this movie was it's runtime. The film itself isn't incredibly short, but for the amount of content that's packed inside, I can see why some people's impressions are that Hail, Caesar! should have been a bit longer. It is a movie where everything that happens in it occurs in roughly twenty-four hours, but a lot goes on in that short span of time. Because it follows Eddie Mannix and the may coverups he's working on, the movie is told more through somewhat connected vignettes rather than a plot where every role is connected to one another. In a way, all the characters in Hail, Caesar! are connected to each other, because they are all involved in something that Mannix has to fix, but they may not be in scenes with any of the other more prominent figures in the film. With the movie being less than two hours, it does feel like some of the mini plots could have been fleshed out a bit more, but the main overarching story of the kidnapping is supposed to feel like a race against the clock, so the sometimes manic tone the movie has makes sense.

With a cast filled to the brim with impeccable actors, it's really hard to choose one to be the standout. Though she is only in the film for an incredibly brief moment, Frances McDormand's bit part was way up there with my favorite performances in the movie. McDormand is an actress that can be incredibly funny without the need for grand gestures, and she proves that in the five minutes or so of screen time she has in Hail, Caesar!. Tilda Swinton is also brilliant with her duel role as twin reporters, and was without a doubt one of my favorite people to watch in the film. After that, it's really splitting hairs as to what other actors I enjoyed the most, but I was very glad to see Scarlett Johansson in this movie, because I've always thought her to be the perfect performer to play a Hollywood starlet from this time period.

Though I wouldn't say Hail, Caesar is my top rated Coen Brothers movie, it is definitely one I immensely enjoyed. It's lighthearted, comical, and unpredictable. The perfect combination for a film to watch when you're looking for an entertaining movie.

Rating: 5+/5

As fantastic as the first one is, I personally enjoy Toy Story 2 even more.

Since the family moved, the toys of Andy's room have settled in and are happy with their lives. Woody (Tom Hanks) and Buzz (Tim Allen) are best pals and they help lead the rest of the toys together. Things couldn't be better.

On the day that Andy is to go to cowboy camp, Woody is very excited to go, but his arm rips and he has to stay home. Now Woody is worried he is going to become a forgotten toy, like Andy's old toy Wheezy. When Wheezy is put in a box for a yard sale, Woody goes to the rescue, but is stolen by the owner of Al's Toy Barn. Now it is up to the rest of the toy gang to find Woody and bring him home.

They say its hard to improve upon perfection, but Toy Story 2 proves that it's possible. The original Toy Story is absolutely magnificent; there's an infinite amount to love about it, but for me, the sequel is even better. There are so many aspects to Toy Story 2 that I adore, whether it be the opening where you see Rex trying to defeat the Evil Emperor Zurg in a video game, the entire sequence of Andy's toys exploring the aisles of Al's Toy Barn, or the idea of Woody's Roundup; I absolutely love it all. With the Woody's Roundup part of the plot, we get a window into the history of Sheriff Woody, and that may be my favorite part overall. The vintage toys, the tv show, the record player; they're all things I am instantly drawn to. Best of all, in this part of the film, you get to meet Jessie. Jessie has been my favorite character of the entire franchise, so it makes sense that, given she's introduced in this film, that the second Toy Story is the one I go back to watch the most out of the four movies.

When I watch Toy Story 2, I always have very strong memories attached to it. Most distinctly would be the sequence where Jessie explains her back story, and why she's so fearful of belonging to another kid again. I truly believe this movie is part of the reason I was such a pack rat as a child. I would watch that scene and cry, but it didn't make me hate the movie, in fact, it did just the opposite. Even when I was younger, I loved a story that could bring my emotions to the surface, whether it made me scared or sad, I liked being treated like I was a viewer with a brain that didn't just have to be shown comedy after comedy, time and again. This quality is something that is easily found in Toy Story 2, as well as numerous other Pixar films. When I watched this movie, I could get the jokes made by the toys, but they were clever ones, that made me feel smarter. Of all the Pixar movies that were released when I was the target viewing age, this was certainly the one I watched the most.

As I've been rewatching the entire Pixar catalogue, it's been quite fascinating to see the animation evolve over time. Though there were only two films prior to this one, the drastic improvement in animation is incredibly clear, and there's no scene where that is more evident than the one where Woody is getting repaired. The texture on the fabric of his jeans and the strokes of the paint brush all look incredibly real, and when you consider the year that Toy Story 2 was released, the level of skill in the animation is really remarkable. To me, it seems like the first Toy Story was a passion project that had had a lot of love and time put into it, A Bug's Life was a quick second release with a similar level of animated technology but perhaps less wit, but then with Toy Story 2 the company found their sweet spot and that carried them through the next two decades of filmmaking and continues to do so.

When I decided to rewatch all of the Pixar movies, this was high on my list of the ones I was most excited to get to. It's hard to say for sure what my overall favorite film from the company is, but I know for a fact that Toy Story 2 is way up in the top five. I know my opinion that it is better than the first one may be unpopular, but it's an opinion I will stand by for as long as I am able to view movies.

Rating: 3.75/5

Though not Pixar's best effort, A Bug's Life is still a decent movie with plenty of charm.

On a small island, members of an ant colony are working hard to collect food before the rainy season, but the provisions they are gathering are not just for their colony. Every year they must give a large amount of their food to the tyrannical Hopper and his group of grasshoppers.

Everything appears to be going to plan, that is until the colony outcast, Flik (Dave Foley), while testing out his latest invention, accidentally tips over the leaf with all the food, causing it to be ruined. In order to appease Hopper and save the colony, Flik sets out to the city to try and find warrior bugs to save the day.

In all honesty, when I decided to go back and watch through all of the Pixar catalogue, A Bug's Life was one of the few that I wasn't overly excited to revisit. It's not a bad movie by any means, it's just not as memorable as some of the other offerings by the famed animation company. It's predecessor, Toy Story, was groundbreaking in many ways, and because of that, A Bug's Life had a lot to live up to. It's animation, though now coming off as a little choppy by today's standards, is still very impressive, especially when you take into account the year that this film was released.

I think what makes me less inclined to love this film compared to some other Pixar movies, is that it doesn't seem to exhibit as many of the trademark elements that make these movies so beloved by all ages, which is something a large portion of their other films do. It didn't really seem like the company had yet found its stride when they made A Bug's Life. Most Pixar movies are filled to the brim with humor for all ages and immense background detail, but this one is a little more one note. The setting doesn't change very often, though they are bugs, so there's not a whole lot that could have been added. The sequence where Flik goes to the "city" is still great, but it just doesn't give an incredibly strong impact. It's also very quick, and therefore not able to have as much lasting detail as you might find in some other Pixar films. Humor wise, A Bug's Life definitely has its comedic moments. They are mostly in the form of puns, but I love a good pun, so that will almost always win for me.

Even though this is one of my lesser favorite Pixar movies, I still love the voice casting it provided. The choices that were made were brilliant, and definitely matched the persona of the type of bug they were connected to. I personally enjoyed the sarcasm David Hyde Pierce gave to the character Slim, who was a stick bug. That particular brand of humor definitely strikes me funny, and the delivery Pierce brought to it was excellent. I don't think when I watched this movie as a kid that his character was my favorite, but as an adult, he most definitely is.

A Bug's Life is by no means not worth viewing, it certainly has many moments that make it worth a watch. It isn't one of Pixar's movies that I tend to revisit very often, but I am glad that I have recently given it another go around. I was able to find new pieces to it that I had never caught before and still found many of the jokes I laughed at as a kid to be funny today. All around, an honorable attempt by Pixar.

Rating: 5/5

Perhaps not as great a film to some, Fever Pitch it still one of my favorites.

Ben Wrightman (Jimmy Fallon) is a high school math teacher. One day, he takes some of his students to a big company to get some real world experience and meets Lyndsey Meeks (Drew Barrymore). They begin a relationship, but Ben is nervous to tell her the truth about part of his life. Ben is a die hard fan of the Boston Red Sox, and it influences every decision he makes

Fever Pitch is a film where my rating reflects more my love for its content rather than its actual quality. I know, without a doubt, there are better made movies out there, but as a New Englander and Red Sox fan myself, I can't help but love it. This is a story that I would imagine must have a very niche fanbase. I wouldn't expect that viewers in California would be as interested or invested in this story as people from say, Massachusetts and the surrounding states. It is a film made for the ride or die Red Sox fans who know all too well the heartache that could be found when you let your hopes get too high only to have them crushed towards the end of the baseball season. So if you are someone who didn't fall into that grouping and watched Fever Pitch and weren't overly impressed by it, I would find it very understandable.

Fever Pitch brings an overwhelming sense of nostalgia to me. I was still a fairly young baseball fan when the Red Sox broke the curse and won the World Series in 2004, but I still can clearly remember some of the the devastating losses that preceded that momentous day in October, and the pandemonium of celebration that followed. This movie captures perfectly what it was like to live through that time in history, and every time I watch it, I am transported back to being in 6th grade and given permission to be late for school the next day due to being out late with my family celebrating the World Series win for Boston. It makes me exceedingly happy every time I watch Fever Pitch, and it's also very commonly shown on bus trips to Fenway, so it has those memories attached to it for me as well.

What I find truly fascinating about Fever Pitch, is that they started making this film before the Red Sox won that World Series. The original ending for this movie was going to be Jimmy Fallon's character dealing with yet another gut wrenching loss by his beloved team. It's just another bizarre factor in the stars aligning for Boston to take home the win that year. I absolutely adore that they were able to get real footage of Fallon and Barrymore at the World Series, and though neither of them are natives to Red Sox Nation, when you see them celebrating on the field, you can't help but believe that their immense excitement is 100% real. I don't see how anyone could be immersed in Sox culture for so long and then witness such an amazing event and not get swept up in the love for the team.

Fever Pitch captures such an iconic time in sports history, and it does it beautifully well. I revisit this film at least once a year, and it never fails to instill in me a greater love for the sport and the team. Whether it's the footage of Fenway, the characters' dedication to Boston, or just how recognizable and relatable it all is for me, in my eyes, Fever Pitch will always be a home run.

Rating: 5+/5

The wit and heartwarming charm continues with Paddington 2.

Paddington (Ben Whishaw) has been living with the Browns for awhile now, and has truly become part of the family. His Aunt Lucy's birthday is coming up, and Paddington wants to get her the perfect present. He goes to the local antique store and finds a beautiful popup book of London, and knows he has found her the best gift ever; only trouble is it is too expensive for him to buy.

In order to purchase the book, Paddington decides to get a job, but before he can earn enough money, the book is stolen and Paddington becomes the number one suspect. It will be up to Paddington's perseverance and the Brown's detective skills to find the true thief and save Aunt Lucy's birthday.

When watching Paddington 2, it is near to impossible to find a flaw within. It is basically perfection wrapped up in an adorable, marmalade filled package. As mentioned in my review for this film's predecessor, I took far too long to get around to watching the Paddington movies, but as soon as I finished the first one, I immediately couldn't wait to start the second. I had heard great things about the first, but even better about its sequel. Off the top of my head, I cannot think of many movies intended for young audiences that are as wonderful as Paddington 1 and 2. They are effortlessly enchanting and I feel could make even the most reluctant of viewers fall in love with its content.

In Paddington 2, it does something almost unheard of in the world of sequels, and that is it doesn't repeat its previous content and patterns from start to finish. There are countless films that fall into that trap, but this particular movie is certainly not one of them. Paddington does find himself in many precarious situations, as he did in the first film, but with being placed in an entirely new setting and adding a heist into the mix, it makes for a completely new and refreshing story. Paddington 2, like the first, has scenes with truly unique and wondrous visuals, but once again does them in a way that doesn't come off as repetitive. The original Paddington stunned me with the style of its scenes and I couldn't even think at how the sequel could improve upon it, but I was excited to find out. Not only does Paddington 2 have some perfectly timed and placed shots, it also has those moments where its storytelling fully turns into an artistic masterpiece.

For me, the mark of a great children's film is that it has to appeal to all ages. Though I did not watch this movie with any kids around, I would hazard a guess that I maybe enjoyed it more than many viewers of its target audiences did. I found myself filled to the brim with emotion when all Paddington wanted was to be reunited with his family, laughing out loud at the numerous predicaments the title bear found himself in, and believe me, I am not one to laugh out loud very often during a movie, and rooting for justice to be served in the final scenes of the story. I can't remember a recent film viewing where I have been as invested with a movie as much was with this one.

Paddington 2 is brilliant from soup to nuts, and I really mean that. The end credit scene is joyously hilarious and is one of my favorite moments of the whole film. I watched this movie two days in a row, and I am still eager to go back and watch it all over again.

Rating 5/5

One of my absolute favorite fairy tale retellings, Ever After has been a beloved film of mine for many, many years.

Danielle (Drew Barrymore) lost her mother at a young age, but idolized her father. When she heard of his remarrying, she was excited because not only was she going to get a new mother, she would be gaining two new sisters as well. Her excitement quickly faded with her father's sudden death, and her new step-mother's (Anjelica Huston) real personality revealing itself.

I could not tell you how many times I've seen Ever After, but it is definitely more than what I could count on two hands. It's a movie that I always gravitate to when I'm in need of something comforting or nostalgic, and it is without a doubt one of the major contributors to my lifelong fondness for fairy tales. What I love about these classic stories, is that they can be retold time and time again, and still not get boring, because every new version takes its own spin on a familiar tale. Cinderella is one such story that has probably been redone the most, and this particular version is maybe my favorite.

Unlike many other adaptations of Cinderella, Ever After is devoid of magic, but is definitely not lacking in enchantment. It follows the patterns found in other retellings of the classic fairytale, but instead of a Fairy Godmother, you have Leonardo Da Vinci, a magical figure in his own way who uses his brilliance in place of a wand. By Ever After adding this to its story, the Godmother archetype has a much stronger presence in the plot. Not only are they there to help the Cinderella character find true love and happiness, but they are also there to teach the Prince the error in his ways, and make him a much more well rounded character compared to other versions that had come before it. On that note, the character Danielle is also much more adept than her glass slipper wearing predecessors in many ways. She can fend for herself, and doesn't need a prince to save her. In fact, she teaches the prince a thing or two about decency and how he can improve the kingdom. Now, I am not usually someone who is overly preachy about how princess movies can give the wrong message, but Ever After does offer a nice change of pace.

Ever After is unique for numerous reasons, many of which are stated above, but another great alteration this movie brings to the famous tale is the way it presents the stepmother and stepsisters. Before this and many times after, those characters have been portrayed as heartless ghouls who have no motivation in their lives other than to make Cinderella's life as miserable as possible; for Ever After, this is not the case. Yes, Angelica Huston's character is incredibly vile throughout the film, but there are brief moments here and there where you get too see beyond her icy exterior, and really get a sense of why she is so cruel to Danielle. Her daughter Marguerite on the other hand, well, that's a completely different story. Marguerite is ruthless, and there is a scene in this film where that ferocity really comes to fruition, where I still to this day can remember my reaction to it when I first saw this film many years ago. Marguerite's sister, Jacqueline is really a welcome surprise in this film. She does not fit the stepsister stereotype that is to be expected, and adds some much needed comic relief and gentility to the plot.

I don't think I will ever find a time in my life where I will not watch Ever After and be completely charmed by it. Whether it be for the music, the characters, or the performances, I just adore it all. I have an absolute love for all things fairytales, so I'm always on board for any story beginning with "Once upon a time".

Rating: 5/5

Paddington, what a wonderful, lovely, and charming film.

Paddington (Ben Whishaw) is a bear from Peru. He lives with his aunt and uncle, and the three of them go happily through their lives living in the trees of the jungle and eating as much marmalade as they can. Their world is completed turned upside down when a massive earthquake destroys their jungle, causing Paddington to have to go to London and find a new home.

Paddington is a movie that I've been meaning to see for years, but for one reason or another, never got around to it. To be perfectly honest, I remember seeing a trailer for it long ago and thinking it didn't look that great; how utterly and completely wrong I was. I don't know if I can think of a time in recent history where I was as enchanted by a movie as I was with this. Paddington is perfectly simple and enormously heartwarming. There were times while watching it where I found myself almost tearing up, not because the film was sad, but because it was just so profoundly wonderful and kind.

For me, I am not normally someone who finds amusement when characters repeatedly get themselves into one foolish dilemma after another, because it usually involves a lot of physical comedy that I just don't personally find funny. In Paddington, the lovable bear finds himself in numerous quandaries as he adapts to human life, but this movie knows how to make these scenes of action and pandemonium not feel overly silly. Somehow, they make them just as appealing as the quieter and more easygoing portions of the film. For me, I see this as a real feat, considering they made me practically love the type of scene that has a pretty strong history making me dislike a movie.

Paddington is not only a brilliant children's film, but it is also extraordinarily clever and creative. In my mind, I have a list of scenes from various films that have stood out to me over time as some of my favorite cinema moments I've ever seen, and Paddington has now made that list, not once, but twice. The first is a very small detail that can be found in the lights at Paddington station. The moment is so subtle, but massively effective. It is this moment where I instantly knew that I was going to adore this movie. The second comes later on and is when Paddington learns more about the history of his species. The animation in this sequence is truly spectacular.

Why I did I wait so long to see Paddington? I wish I could go back in time and tell myself to go to the theaters and see this, because I'm sure the big screen could only enhance it. If you are like me and prevented seeing this movie for far too long, do yourselves a favor and watch it. It is absolutely marvelous.

Rating: 4.75/5

Onward is a film that is absolutely stunning to look at, and like many Pixar films before it, has the capability to pull at your heart strings.

Teenage elf, Ian Lightfoot (Tom Holland) is about to turn 16 years old. He lives in a world full of mythical creatures and beings, but it seems most of the enchantment has been lost over time and replaced by technology and gadgetry that makes life "simpler". This concept doesn't seem to particularly bother Ian, but his brother Barley (Chris Pratt), dreams and fantasizes of living in the old times filled with wizardry and magic.

On his birthday, Ian is too nervous and shy to ask any of his friends from school to come to his party, so when he gets home, it's just his brother and his mother Laurel (Julia Louis-Dreyfus) who he will be celebrating with. Thinking he is going to have a fairly low-key birthday, Ian is surprised and confused when his mom tells him there's a special present for him from his father, who passed away before he was born. When Ian and Barley open the mystery parcel, they discover their father left them a wizard's staff and a spell capable of bringing him back for one day. When Ian attempts the enchantment, things go haywire; the phoenix gem that activates the staff shatters and the spell only worked long enough to bring back the lower half of their dad's body. Suddenly, Ian and Barley are faced with a quest to find another gem and complete the spell.

I am someone who has always been very drawn to stories involving fantastical realms and the magical beings within it, so when I heard Pixar was going to be making a movie centered in that type of world, I was instantly on board. Pixar brings emotion and magic with every film they make, so I knew this one was going to be great. After seeing it, I know Onward will be a movie that I will watching many, many times over, not just because of how good it is, but also because I really want to observe all the background details this film has to offer. Like Zootopia, Onward has so many visual puns and witty elements to be found in it if you look beyond the characters in the scene. When I saw this, I realized I was missing some of the actual story because I was focusing so much on trying to see the things in the back, that I had to remind myself to stay focused on the plot. I absolutely love it when films take the time to add so much to the world they've built. It makes it come to life and seem very real, even if the main characters are elves and centaurs.

Pixar has a reputation for being very universal, meaning that, though their films are made for kids, they have the ability to reach all audiences. Most of their movies discuss difficult topics and include humor that almost anyone would find comical and clever. Onward without a doubt tackles the concept of grief and loss head on, and does it brilliantly. They show how life goes on after the death of a loved one, but also that the pain of that loss can never fully go away, but memories and family can definitely ease it. The serious tones are perfectly presented in Onward, but I felt the humor was a little less accessible to a wider range of viewers. I found it to still be quite funny, but some of the sequences appeared a tad more juvenile than what you'd expect from a Pixar movie; of course it is a kid's movie, so the sillier humor does make sense, and given the difficult subject matter, it does add some levity to the film's tone.

Other than the colors and setting of Onward, without a doubt my one of my most favorite elements to it was its score. I had a feeling it was going to be great, given the subject of the movie, but I didn't expect it to be as fantastic as it was. Film scores are something I always take note of when watching a movie, and sometimes, when that score is really great, I can't help but smile, because seeing the connection between the imagery on the screen and the music surrounding it is just too wonderful for me to watch and not grin from ear to ear. This has happened to me numerous times while watching movies, specifically in the theaters where the sound is greater than in my living room, and it most certainly happened numerous times while I was watching Onward. I cannot say which exact scene gave me this reaction without spoiling the film, so all I can say is that the blend of medieval fantasy music and the fictional metal the character Barley listens to, is pretty great. It was one of those times where once I left the theater, I immediately found the soundtrack and started listening to it.

Onward is a film that I cannot wait to see again. It is a movie that proves once again how Pixar has an uncanny ability to activate people's tear ducts through their storytelling and brilliant animation. Sadly, I will likely not be able to see this in the theater before it is gone, so all I can do now is listen to it's wonderful score and wait so I can watch it again at home.

Rating: 5/5

Honey Boy is at times, very hard to watch, but is a brilliant exhibition of the talents of the people who make up its cast.

Otis Lord (Lucas Hedges) is an actor who has been court ordered to go to a rehab facility for his alcoholism and violent behavior. At first, he is extremely resistant to the therapy he is being given, but when he speaks with his counselor, she asks him to recount the events of his unusual childhood so she can better understand what has lead him down the path he is currently on.

Thinking back to the mid nineties, Otis (Noah Jupe) was working on a children's show and living in a motel with his father James (Shia LaBeouf), who's a recovering addict, and not exactly stable. Though he is very young, Otis is his family's provider, and he knows it, but also knows it is an incredibly dangerous thing to bring up to his father. Everyday, Otis has to wonder what his dad will be like, whether he'll be carefree and joking, or violent and frightening. As the adult Otis recalls the painful memories of his past to his counselor, he begins to gain an understanding of the man who plagued his youth, and get a better sense of himself in the process.

Honey Boy is a movie that sadly seemed to fly under the radar compared to some other more prominently "main stream" films of 2019, and it is a real shame. This movie deserves every ounce of attention and praise it received upon its release. It is very unique, and certainly doesn't attempt to pull any punches for the audience's comfort, making it a very raw, occasionally uncomfortable, but impressive viewing experience. There are numerous aspects to Honey Boy that almost makes you feel embarrassed or invasive watching it, as if you are peering so deeply into someone's personal life, that you shouldn't be seeing it at all. That is how realistic the performances in this film portrayed the story.

Before seeing Honey Boy, I knew very little about it other than the fact that Shia LaBeouf was in it. I had no idea that it was semi-autobiographical, and once I learned that, my desire to see it was incredibly high. I had always felt that LaBeouf was a fantastic actor, ever since Even Stevens and Holes days, so I was very curious, and perhaps even eager, to see the story this movie told. I wanted to see what type of light they put the world of child acting in, though even before watching the movie, I had a feeling it wouldn't exactly be a positive one, and I was right. However true to LaBeouf's life this film is, which from what I can gather it seems to be very close to the real life story, Honey Boy allowed for the world to see another side of the sometimes infamous and misunderstood actor. It brought to light the pressures and challenges a child performer can face, and how it could be a factor in sending someone's life down a dangerous and heartbreaking path. Of course, the character Otis had countless battles he had to fight as he grew up, but being an actor, though he was an incredibly talented one, without a doubt put an added strain on his life.

Going back to a movie previously mentioned in this review, I remember being quite young and watching Holes for the first time. I was a massive fan of the book, so I went into the movie with incredibly high expectations, and knew I would've been fiercely disappointed had the film not met my hopes. I left the theater that day being immensely impressed with the movie in general, but specifically in Shia LaBeouf's performance. In that film, it was clear that his acting skill was far beyond anyone his age, and you could see he was just going to get better and better. In Honey Boy, his prowess as an actor is undeniable. His character James, who is inspired by LaBeouf's real life father, is far from likable, yet LaBeouf is able to make him not completely unredeemable. James is deeply troubled, and for the most part, does try to find moments where he is a good father, but can't seem to prevent his anger and intense emotions from getting the better of him and his relationship with his son. You'd think a character such as this would be incredibly hard to feel any sympathy towards, but there's one scene in particular, where you can't help but feel as if you understand his motivations just enough to care about the character more than you ever thought you could. That type of audience reaction is 100% attributed to Shia LaBeouf's performance as well as his excellent writing of the film's screenplay.

Honey Boy is not a movie that I can say I will readily be watching a second time around, but it is one that I am most certainly glad I took the time to see. It's truly a work of art in the way it weaves its story throughout its runtime and the way it unfolds its plot. It is a film that I have thought about many times since viewing it and I cannot recommend it enough to anyone who has even the slightest interest in it. Check it out, because it's well worth your time.

Rating: 4.75/5

A colorful knock out, Birds of Prey is full of energy, excitement, and is an overall enjoyable time.

Harley Quinn (Margot Robbie) is reeling from her breakup with the Joker, whom she affectionally called Mr.J. Before, when she and Mr.J were a couple, she caused a lot of chaos and put herself on numerous people's bad sides all throughout Gotham City. Now that she no longer has the protection of the Joker, it seems to be open season on Harley Quinn, and everyone she's ever wronged appears to want a piece.

As Harley spends her time avoiding all the people who want to kill her, she finds herself in the middle of Roman Sionis' (Ewan McGregor) search for the Bertinelli Diamond. Sionis has been terrorizing Gotham in his quest for the infamous jewel, and soon a young girl named Cassandra Cain (Ella Jay Basco), becomes his primary target. Through an unexpected chain of events, it is quickly up to Harley and four other wronged women from the city, to stop him Sionis before he harms Cass and takes possession of the diamond.

Before seeing Birds of Prey, I wasn't really sure what to expect. I had only seen the briefest of teaser trailers, and in all honesty, I never saw Suicide Squad, so I wasn't sure if this film was going to be a continuation of that and whether or not I was going to be confused because I was missing important plot elements. Luckily, I did have a fair amount of knowledge about Harley Quinn and her involvement in DC beforehand, so I wasn't going into the movie completely in the dark. After seeing Birds of Prey, I can genuinely say that I am really glad I didn't know too much about the story beforehand. I had no idea what to expect, and that made all the twists, turns, action, and nonlinear plot-line, all the more exciting.

I loved that the set up of this movie seemed to care as much about being chronological, as Harley Quinn appeared to care for the general well-being of others. It throws caution to the wind and does exactly what it wants, just like it's main character. I've rarely seen a movie who's style and tone reflects its namesake so well. If Harley Quinn were a real person, there'd be no doubt that if she were to make a film, it would like and feel exactly like this one. It's 100% over the top at times, but it thrives on that wildness and vitality. When you watch this movie, it's incredibly clear that the primary creative team was headed by women, and it's not just because the story focuses on a group of female vigilantes. It's the smaller and more subtle comments made by the characters that make it so obvious; the things that would very likely not have existed in the movie had it been written or directed by a man, such as the offering of a hair tie before a major fight. Those minor additions to the story make the whole film feel a lot more authentic, genuine and realistic, which couldn't have been an easy task to do, when presented with an outrageous comic book movie based around a character like Harley Quinn.

Though there are many, many things to love about Birds of Prey, what I really enjoyed the most about it was the physicality of it. I'm not one to usually take a major notice to stunts in movies, as I feel they have a tendency to blend together over time, but the action sequences of Birds of Prey really caught my attention. For one, they looked more raw and real compared to some of the glossy fight sequences that can be found in similarly themed films. Yes, of course this movie used stunt doubles, but there were many scenes where you could see the actresses that made up the cast really performing these insane and dangerous feats, and I found that very impressive and intriguing to watch. Most notably for me, was Mary Elizabeth Winstead, who played The Huntress. Her character was both humorous and powerful and was my personal favorite of the women that made up the Birds of Prey.

Birds of Prey is a movie that some people may not like, whether it be for it's vividness or devil-may-care attitude, but I for one really liked it, and honestly a lot more than I had anticipated I would. It's great when you go into a theater not fully knowing what to expect, and walk out of it being full of energy and adrenaline because you enjoyed what you just saw so much, and Birds of Prey was definitely one of those times for me.

Rating: 5/5

Here it is, the film that ends the saga, and a what a wonderful job Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2 does at closing out this beloved magical journey.

Harry (Daniel Radcliffe), Ron (Rupert Grint), and Hermione (Emma Watson) have found themselves at Shell Cottage. It is here they must plan the next steps on their quest to find horcruxes and bring an end to Lord Voldemort (Ralph Fiennes). Not even close to hunting down all the objects embedded with pieces of Voldemort's soul that they seek, the famous trio have already learned all too well of the loss and heartache that is to come along with their mission. Every decision they make seems to come with a price.

Once they leave the serenity of the cottage, Harry, Ron, and Hermione have to do their best to narrow down their search to try to end it as quickly as possible and prevent the loss of anymore lives. They know they'll ultimately find their way back to Hogwarts before their journey ends, but there's no way they can predict the battle that is to come.

Seeing the trailer for Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2 when it was first released, is one of my most vivid movie memories. I remember being in my kitchen and hearing those familiar cords that signified Harry Potter, and running into the living room to get my first glimpse at the finale to my favorite book series brought to life. I remember being so unbelievably excited that I began to shake from the inability to keep my anticipation under control. Then after what felt like a lifetime, I was finally in line to see the midnight premiere. Now, almost ten years later, I still find myself feeling the same way whenever I sit on my couch and watch Harry's journey conclude. That is the power of the writing behind the story and the brilliance behind the filmmaking.

Where the Deathly Hallows Part One was all the build up and exposition, Part Two is primarily the Battle of Hogwarts. Easily over half of the film's runtime is the based around the attack on the famous castle, and the fights taking place within it. We see the the students and teachers defending their school against Voldemort and his Death Eaters, the destruction of their magical home, and the deaths of beloved characters. The moments leading up to the battle are filled with intensity and anticipation. You know what's about to happen, as do the characters, and as they prepare to fight, the adrenaline is practically pulsating off the screen. By splitting the book into two films, it allowed for the movie to give just about every ounce of time and dedication this momentous part of the story deserved. It wasn't rushed and therefore it was able to have the strong impact it was meant to have.

You'd think having one long battle be the primary focus of a film would make a movie appear tiresome or redundant, but for this movie, it doesn't whatsoever. There are so many different elements involved that intertwine themselves between the scenes of action, that it is impossible to pull your eyes away from the screen. To me, the most influential and important moment of this part of The Deathly Hallows, involves Severus Snape, his memories, and how they are connected to Harry's life. This scene is without a doubt my favorite moment from all seven books, and I remember being incredibly curious about how they were going to portray it in the film. Just as in the book, the sequence in the film packs the same profound emotional punch, and what I truly love about it, is that it really seems to cater to the fans of the books rather than just the viewers who've only seen the films but have never turned a page in a Harry Potter novel. What I mean by this is that it didn't prolong this scene to try and give any extra explanation, it just lets the content speak for itself. That combined with Alan Rickman's masterful and heartbreaking performance, makes this part, in my opinion, the best set of scenes in the entire Harry Potter film franchise.

Whenever I finish watching Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part Two, I find myself being overcome with a feeling of sadness as I watch the credits roll. Every time it ends, I know there will never be another story that will follow the one I just completed. Yes, there are prequels and additions to Rowling's Wizarding World, but nothing feels the same to me. The added continuations lack the momentum and magic that I find in the original Harry Potter stories. There's a reason I revisit the books and films every year, and it is because it gives me a chance to go back to the world and characters that I have loved for over two decades of my life. The Deathly Hallows Part Two is the perfect end to the saga that has helped to create my love for books, films, and the art of storytelling.

Rating: 4.75/5

The beginning to the end, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part One brilliantly sets the scene for epic conclusion that follows.

Harry (Daniel Radcliffe) has been set a special mission by Professor Dumbledore (Michael Gambon), and that is to hunt down the remaining horcruxes, pieces of Lord Voldemort's (Ralph Fiennes) soul that must be destroyed in order to bring an end to the Dark Lord's rise to power. Of course, with a quest this dangerous, Harry cannot go it alone, no matter who much he wishes he could. Endangering anyone's life but his own for the sake of his journey seems out of the question to Harry, but his two best friends Ron (Rupert Grint) and Hermione (Emma Watson) refuse to let him go it alone.

The trio have been planning for weeks, making sure they will have everything they could possibly need to find the ever elusive horcruxes. After the wedding of Ron's brother, Bill (Domhnall Gleeson), their quest gets a jump start when Death Eaters attack, causing Harry, Ron and Hermione to flee and begin their dangerous mission. They don't even know where each day will take them, but they know they have to do something that will weaken, and hopefully destroy, Lord Voldemort.

Years ago, when it was first announced that they were going to split the final Harry Potter film into two parts, I remember being a little frustrated that I was going to have to wait an extended amount of time to see the momentous conclusion to my most beloved book series hit the screen, but that thought was momentary. It didn't take me long to realize how great the decision to divide the book in two was. It allowed for much more of the source material's content to make it into the film's final cut. Had they tried to fit everything from the last book into one film, the concept of the horcrux hunting would likely have been very muddled, and even by splitting the two films up, there were some aspects to the plot that I could see as being confusing for someone who was only watching the movie and had never read the book, such as who exactly Grindelwald was and how he fit into the Deathly Hallows, so it was a very smart decision to not try and overly jam pack the one movie. I'm sure there was a definite financial reason behind the division, but overall, I feel it made the hardcore Harry Potter fans happy too.

Though I love the fact that Deathly Hallows is split in two, the only major drawback is that the first film is going to be primarily exposition. Personally, I don't have an issue with this, but I can see how some people may find this first half to be a tad boring until the last half hour or so. To me, I think the first Deathly Hallows movie really gives the audience a chance to see how the skills of each actor portraying the famous trio have grown since their first appearances in The Sorcerer's Stone. The challenges Harry, Ron, and Hermione battled their first year at Hogwarts seemed minute compared to what was ahead of them in The Deathly Hallows, and therefore the performances had to match the seriousness of the journey the characters faced. Of the three of them, the person who impressed me the most in this film was Emma Watson. Hermione has had many moments to show her skills in both magic and books many times before in the series, but the Deathly Hallows was really her time to shine. In this film, Emma Watson's character is presented with numerous occasions to display her abilities in magical combat, but she also faces many new frightening and intense emotional endeavors. Watson brings justice to the literary heroine, and makes her for me, the standout role of Part One.

If I could draw one negative from Deathly Hallows Part One, and that's not easy to do, it would have to be something left from the narrative at the beginning of the film. I fully understand that it is virtually impossible to include every moment from a book when translating it to the screen, but sometimes, there are scenes that are too important to cut. There's a moment in the book where Harry finds some form of peace with the Dursleys before he embarks on his quest. It is in this scene that we, as dedicated fans and onlookers of Harry's journey, not only get some closure to that part of his life at Privet Drive, but also get to see another side to his Aunt Petunia. We get to further understand her character, and maybe really see why she's been so hard on Harry for all these years, and though it may have been previously thought impossible to do so, start to sympathize with her. It is a great and powerful moment for all the characters involved, and it is a real travesty that the scenes, that would likely only have added an extra three to five minutes at the most to a film already over two hours long, were chosen to be excluded.

Though I always watch Deathly Hallows Part One and Part Two back to back, they are technically two separate films, so I must review and judge them accordingly. Missing scenes aside, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part One is a brilliant penultimate movie to bring a close to the film saga of the Boy Who Lived. It ends in the perfect spot, making it nearly impossible to not watch Part Two immediately after.

Rating: 5/5

Full of enchantment and adventure, 2003's Peter Pan is without a doubt my favorite cinematic telling of this classic tale.

Wendy Darling (Rachel Hurd-Wood) and her brothers John (Harry Newell) and Michael (Freddie Popplewell) are content to play in their nursery. Wendy tells them stories of many escapades involving pirates, mermaids, fairies, and much more. One night, she begins to tell one of her tales to her family, when it is discovered by her aunt that Wendy is starting to become a woman. This is a huge surprise to her and her brothers and matters get even more complicated when she is told she must leave the nursery and start training to become a proper lady.

That night, Wendy and her brothers retire to the nursery, fearful of the concept of growing up. Their parents are out for the night, and while the children fall asleep, a young boy named Peter Pan (Jeremy Sumpter) flies in through the window of the nursery in search of his shadow and a story. Soon, the children are swept away on a magical journey, not knowing when they'll return again.

Peter Pan (2003) is one of the movies I most fondly remember watching from when I was younger. I always had a proclivity for fairytales and fantasy, but had never been fully drawn to Disney's animated Peter Pan. I had seen it, but it never really captivated me. I remember watching the trailer for the 2003 film when it was first coming out, and just based on the looks of it, finding myself more intrigued by this version of the story than others, but I sadly never saw it in the theaters, which I greatly regret. This particular adaption of J.M Barrie's classic novel is for one, quite faithful to its source material, but also seems to fill the screen and the viewer's hearts with a sense of magic and adventure. Through its colors, music, and general atmosphere, you can't help but feel as if you are being transported directly into Neverland the second the children arrive. I can honestly say, with all the Disney live-action remakes that are happening now, I really hope they don't attempt to make one for Peter Pan, because I don't think they'll ever be able to come even close to the perfection this film reaches.

One of my favorite aspects to this movie are the performances. Jason Isaacs is absolutely brilliant as both Mr.Darling and Captain Hook. The two characters he plays are vastly different from one another, but they are alike in that both are desperate to be in charge. Mr.Darling struggles with wanting to be authoritative, but being too nervous at times to do so. Hook on the other hand has no problems with commanding his crew, but he never feels like he is the leader he greatly wants to be, especially because he is always being bested by a foolhardy boy who can fly. Jason Isaacs's performances bring a wonderful element of humanity to each character. Though one is more villainous than the other, you still can't help but feel a little bad for Hook as he so desperately tries to prove his ferocity to his crew and to Peter Pan, but seems doomed to fail.

Another set of performances well worth mentioning are that of Jeremy Sumpter's take on Peter Pan and Rachel-Hurd Wood's Wendy. Peter Pan is a bit of a conundrum, in that he is technically the hero of the story, but his conceit can be a tad off putting. Sumpter makes Pan become endearingly arrogant. He brings more to the character, showing that his bravado and cheek may once have been all he was made of, but after he meets Wendy, his emotions and humility begin to show themselves. Rachel-Hurd Wood is the perfect match to the Sumpter's Pan. Together, they find the balance of two characters who are reveling in a life of fantasy and adventure, both knowing that it can't last for an eternity, therefore they must enjoy every moment to its fullest. The two share a relationship that almost forces Peter to question his choice to stay a boy forever, but even though he fills the minds of the Lost Boys with his stories of bravery, he is still too afraid to ever grow old. Sumpter and Wood bring performances that are skilled well beyond their years in Peter Pan, and they are a perfect complement to the charming, heartwarming, and highly comical Lost Boys.

I have always loved the word "story", because I feel like for such a small word it contains endless possibilities of worlds to be explored and characters to be introduced. Peter Pan (2003) is the epitome of that concept. Whenever that word is said in this movie, it takes me back to the days of bedtime stories and books filled with fairytales where anything could happen. It is this word that ties the entire plot of Peter Pan together. Wendy loves to tell her tales to her brothers, and that is exactly why Peter and the Lost Boys enjoy having her around so much. Peter Pan shows the power of imagination and how so many of us have desperately wished we could back to the time in our lives where our primary worries were centered around pirates, princesses, and once upon a time.

Rating: 5+/5

1917 is the definition of the word epic put to screen.

In April, 1917, two soldiers, Lance Corporals Tom Blake (Dean-Charles Chapman) and Lance Corporal Will Schofield (George MacKay), have been tasked with the mission to deliver a letter to the Devonshire Regiment to warn them to stop their planned attack against the Germans, because it is a trap. If they fail their mission, an estimated 1,600 men will perish in the fight, one of them being the brother of Corporal Blake.

The first task of their mission is to leave the safety of trenches and head for the imminent danger of the front line. They know that the moment they climb out, there's a very good and terrifying chance the Germans will open fire. Also weighing on their fears is the concept that even if they do make it beyond the front line, in order to complete their orders, they will still have to face the grueling and fiercely dangerous journey ahead.

War epics and westerns have always been an area of cinema history where I feel I have the most catching up to do. If memory serves, before seeing 1917, I don't believe I had ever seen any major war films in theaters before then. Whether that concept impacted my overall opinion on the film, I can't know for sure, but all I know is that after the movie ended I was walking out of the theater with my adrenaline fully pumping. Practically every moment of 1917 seemed to drip with anticipation, intensity, emotion, or a combination of all three. Because of the filming style of 1917, being that it was designed to look like one continuous take, there was no time for the viewer's nerves to rest. Even when the soldiers on the screen sat down to catch their breath, you never felt like they were safe. You were always waiting for something to catch them off guard, or something to happen that would force them to abandon their brief moment of respite. The unpredictability of the film makes it an almost exhaustive viewing experience, but one well worth the watch.

The score for a movie, especially one such as this, is critically important in conveying the tone of a scene. The direction and cinematography of 1917 is astounding on its own, but when you add in the breathtaking score, it is almost to brilliant too behold. In one sequence of high intensity, I found myself smiling, not because the images on the screen were ones to evoke feelings of happiness, quite the contrary actually, but it was because I was so entirely swept up in the music and visuals presented before me, that the film lover in me couldn't help but feel overjoyed. The scene was so masterfully done, I couldn't help but feel the corners of my mouth tugging into an elated grin. I was absolutely blown away by the excellence from every moment that the scene presented. That specific scene involved a lot of energy and intensity, but that's not the only type of sequence this film can master. One of the few tranquil pieces of the film is equally as effective. A soldier, at a moment of extreme exhaustion and desperation, hears the whisper of a song through the trees, leading him further on his journey. It was another time where 1917 had the ability to completely captivate and enthrall me in its story.

1917 is proof of how film can also be dubbed "the art of storytelling". There is very little dialogue in it, with the majority of the film being made up of action and travel sequences. It is almost reminiscent of the days of silent film in a way. It relies on the physicality of its actors as well as the power of its score to tell the story, and it works incredibly well. I am honestly glad the movie didn't use a lot of dialogue, because I think it would have detracted from its overall impact. Because of the lack of talking, you are forced to observe the surroundings the soldiers are trekking through, and it allows you to become more invested in the story. You see the vast landscapes in which they walk, and you fear what might appear and what could pose a threat to the soldiers. You don't know exactly who the two main soldiers are, and they don't even seem to fully be acquainted with each other, but they both know they have a mission to complete, and that nothing will stop them from achieving their goal.

I have read many reviews of 1917 that have said they didn't like it because they felt the one shot tracking aspect of it seemed to "gimmicky". Personally, I found that to be one of the best parts of the movie, but I think I respond to "gimmicks" better than some reviewers, because I just love seeing the power of movies and what creative techniques people can come up with. Before seeing 1917, I was fully pulling for Once Upon a Time in Hollywood to win Best Picture at the Academy Awards, but now, I have to say I'm quite conflicted in which film I hope will win. If only they could award two winners, because to pick which of the two films is better, seems to me, a very difficult decision to make.

Rating: 4.95/5

One of my most anxiously awaited movies from 2019, Parasite is riveting and worth the accolades it's received.

The Kim family has been living in squalor since Kim Ki-taek (Song Kang-ho) and Chung-sook (Chang Hyae-jin) have lost their steady employment, and can only sustain their livelihood with temporary employment that barely pays enough to feed their family of four. Their son Ki-woo (Choi Woo-shik) is very intelligent and dreams of going to university, but knows there's no way his family could afford the tuition, so instead he stays home and helps his parents complete their temporary work, trying to add what little money he can to the family's finances. Ki-woo's sister, Kim Ki-jeong (Park So-dam) is a gifted artist, but also must spend her time helping the family make ends meet.

Their financial struggles may have a bright spot when Ki-woo is told by his friend that if he pretended to be a college student, he could get a job tutoring the daughter of a wealthy family. Ki-woo gets the job and quickly discovers there's more ways he can help his family with his new position other than just bringing home a paycheck, but it will require a lot of espionage and trickery.

Parasite seems to be one of the most talked about movies of 2019. Whenever I looked at reviews of critics talking about their favorite movies of the year, Parasite was always in the top five, if not at the number one spot. Now that I have watched it, I can fully understand why. This movie is a perfect example as to why movie goers shouldn't let subtitles stop them from watching a film. If having to read the dialogue is a deterrent for someone from watching Parasite, they would be missing out on a truly unique, vivid, and intense piece of cinema. You don't even have to read the subtitles to be able to appreciate the movie, though they of course help in fully understanding the story. The visuals alone are enough to captivate anyone who has even the slightest interest in film.

What struck me the most about Parasite was how lasting its imagery was. The movie itself didn't seem to me as if it were supposed to be once specific genre, as the story dabbled around in humor, drama, and suspense, but the more horror based moments were what crept into my imagination as I tried to fall asleep after watching it. I just couldn't seem to get out of my mind, the scenes where characters disappeared, or suddenly reappeared, into or from the pitch black of the room beyond the kitchen. For me, what frightens me more than anything is what I can't see, because the mind can create far more terrifying things in your imagination than what someone can physically create on screen, and Parasite plays on the concept impeccably well. Eventually you do discover where the room passed the kitchen leads and what secrets it possesses, but it still doesn't remove the unsettled feeling you get by looking at it. This movie has so many twists and turns in it, even thinking you know what's going to happen doesn't ease your nerves, because you're never fully certain your assumptions about how the plot will unfold are actually correct.

Bong Joon-ho first crossed my radar when I watched Snowpiercer earlier this year. I was incredibly impressed by the direction and originality of that movie, so when I heard about Parasite coming out and being directed by the same visionary, I was incredibly eager to see it. Though I have now only seen two of Bong Joon-ho's films, both have discussed the warfare between the social classes. In Snowpiercer, it is presented more as a literal, physical battle whereas in Parasite it is primarily more emotionally and mentally oriented. They are equally fantastic films, and they do a wonderful job at displaying the brilliance of Bong Joon-ho's direction, in that he's able to have two films with semi-similar themes, but present them in vastly different ways. After I saw Snowpiercer, I told myself I needed to see more of Bong Joon-ho's work, but sadly never got around to it until finally seeing Parasite. Now that I have seen his most recent movie, I am once again telling myself that I absolutely need to go back and look at some of his previous films, because I can't imagine they are anything less than spectacular.

If there was anything negative I could possibly say about Parasite, it would be against the critics and not the film itself. This movie was so heavily built up by reviews, that I went into watching it with sky high expectations, so it would have been virtually impossible for any movie to meet them, no matter how brilliant it was. Parasite came remarkably close to hitting those unattainable expectations for me, and I will be absolutely shocked if this doesn't win numerous titles at this year's Academy Awards.

Rating: 5+/5

One of, if not, the best films of 2019, Once Upon a Time in Hollywood demands multiple viewings despite its lengthy run time.

In the late 60s, aging actor Rick Dalton (Leonardo DiCaprio) is only getting guest spots on television shows, and is fearing he is becoming a has-been. His long time friend and stunt double, Cliff Booth (Brad Pitt), convinces him his career is far from over and assures him he will be by his side every step of the way. After driving back to Rick's home, the two men spot Sharon Tate (Margot Robbie) and her husband Roman Polanski (Rafał Zawierucha), who live next door to Dalton.

Once day, while Rick is off shooting an episode of a television western, Cliff picks up a young female hitchhiker that he's been seeing around town. He takes her to her home at Spahn Ranch, where Cliff immediately gets an unsettled feeling by the state of the former filming location and the people who are now inhabiting it. Putting the bizarre day's events out of his mind, Cliff goes back to pick up Rick and the two carry on with their lives, completely unaware what sinister things are being planned in Hollywood.

Though I have a strong love for film, I have a pretty gaping hole in my watch history where Quentin Tarantino is concerned. It's not for lack of wanting to see his movies, because I most certainly do, it's just they tend to be very long, so they're not exactly the first thing that comes to my mind when I sit down at night to watch a movie. With Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, that whole thought process fully disappears. With a runtime just shy of three hours, I have watched this movie twice within a roughly two week span, and even though I just saw it a few days ago, I could easily sit down and view it all over again. This movie uses every moment of its lengthy duration, making the time seem to fly by. When watching this movie the second time around, I found myself eagerly awaiting certain scenes' arrivals. It almost came as a shock to me when the film's climax started to be set up, because I couldn't believe I had already sat through over two hours of the movie. Once Upon a Time in Hollywood is as quick witted as it is paced. Every second of it is worth watching.

When I had heard that Tarantino was going to be making a movie about filmmaking with the Manson Family as part of the backdrop, I was conflicted about whether or not I was going to see it in the theaters. You see, I absolutely love films that focus on the older days of Hollywood, they are some of my favorite types of cinema, but I have never been someone who is overly drawn to information about the Manson Murders. In fact, I have actually tried to steer clear of seeing, reading, or hearing too much about that horrific day in history, because it bothers me too much. So for that reason, I waited until it came out for home viewing to finally watch it. Thankfully, Tarantino has never been one to focus on full historical accuracy, and tends to write history the way he wants. This film shows his absolute love for filmmaking and the decade in which Once Upon a Time in Hollywood was set, and I do regret not getting a chance to see it in theaters, because it is a movie that I know would have made for an amazing theater experience.

Other than the masterful script and equally clever cinematography, what really sold this movie for me was the superb performances by its cast. Though I am sure my opinion is a very unpopular one, I have never been the biggest fan of Leonardo DiCaprio or Brad Pitt. I don't think they are bad actors or anything, I've just never been as over the moon about them as others can be. For this movie though, my previous opinions on them entirely go out the window. This movie is without a doubt the best thing I have seen either actor in. Brad Pitt's take on Cliff Booth may actually be one of my favorite male performances I've seen in a long time. His performance seems so effortless and natural, and can also deliver some brilliant comedic moments. The same can be said for DiCaprio. His character is a bit more over the top, but that makes sense considering he is the movie star of the fictional duo. He is absolutely fantastic in this role, and his chemistry with Pitt is completely undeniable. Margot Robbie's take on Sharon Tate is also 100% worth every ounce of praise it receives. Though she's not in the film nearly as much as the Brad or Leo, her scenes leave a lasting memory in your mind as the movie comes to a close. It also makes you deeply wish that Tarantino did in fact have the ability to rewrite history.

I've tried incredibly hard this year to see as many films that I could that were predicted to be Oscar nominees, and Once Upon a Time in Hollywood is one that I am definitely going to be puling for at the Academy Awards. It may not be able to win everything it will be nominated for, but I'm really hoping that it can at least get best supporting actor for Brad Pitt as well as best original screenplay . There are few times that a filmmaker can capture the love for cinema in the way that Tarantino did with Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, making it the dream film to watch for anyone who finds movies to be a major part of their lives.

Rating: 0.75/5

With very little good to say about it, Cats is only worth seeing if you have time to kill, there's literally nothing better to watch, and you can't suppress your sense of curiosity to see for yourself what all the fuss is about.

Victoria (Francesca Hayward) is a cat that has been abandoned, and is immediately taken in by the street cats and taught their jellicle ways. She learns that there's a way to get a new life, but there are many others competing for this honor. In one night, she meets every cat who will be performing for Old Deuteronomy (Judi Dench), to try and be the one chosen to be sent to the Heaviside Layer and receive their fresh start. However, performing isn't the only challenge facing these cats. The sinister Macavity (Idris Elba) will stop at nothing to make sure he will be the chosen one.

Cats, really, where do I begin? There's not a whole lot that I can say about the atrocities of this movie that haven't already been said by others, so I'll do my best not to be exceedingly redundant. For starters, let me state that I am a big fan of musicals, both in theater and on film, but Cats has never been one that I have ever been overly enthused by. "Memory" is without a doubt one of Andrew Lloyd Webber's best musical compositions, but the rest of the songs are either too bizarre to understand what they're about, or have music that's just too mundane to really care about. Most musicals need to start off with a bang, a song that instantly pulls the audience into the story so they know the tone of the music they'll be hearing for the next couple hours and become enthusiastic about the show they're about to see. With Cats, the show just sort of begins, and then each number blurs together with the next, in a frenzied haze of cats introducing themselves via song and dance, for what seems like an excessively long time. Perhaps hearing it live would make the difference, but the bulk of the music in the movie just didn't seem to pack the musical punch it had intended.

With music that's not particularly exciting, what made the stage production impressive and legendary were the costumes and sets, and with the film adaptation, all that goes away. Instead of being shown a great exhibition of the talent makeup artists and set designers can possess, we are instead given what looks like a fever dream where someone couldn't decide what species its characters should be. The animation was so distracting at times, that it was all I could focus on until some other out of left field peculiarity made its way into a scene. What truly bothered my about the animation wasn't so much the utter absurdity of it, but it was the inconsistency of it. There were times where the cats looked way too small, where they were dancing on a railroad track and looked to be the size of mice, but then other times where they were roughly the size of a golden retriever and could cover the entire windshield of a car. If you can't make the physical appearance of the cats look realistic, at least make them stay the same size for the duration of the movie.

Alright, so I've gone on and on with a lot of negatives towards this movie, and believe me I could fill numerous pages more on the topic, but with every bad film, I try to find some positive from it, so here it goes. What I enjoyed, well let me rephrase that, what made the movie tolerable, was the dancing skills of the lesser known cast members and Jennifer Hudson's take on "Memory". I found that the actors who were dancers rather than big celebrity names to draw people to the theater, were slightly less unsettling to look at animation wise. My best guess for the reason to that is they were likely trying to make the stars be easily recognizable, leaving them with more human facial features, but the other not so famous dancing felines could look more catlike. I found I actually liked a lot of what Laurie Davidson did as Mr.Mistoffelees and Francesca Hayward's dancing and singing was equally as impressive. Jennifer Hudson's scene where she sings the show's most famous tune was easily the best portion of the movie. Here, the music appeared stronger and yet it was the most toned down moment of the entire film. There wasn't excessive choreography or background effects, it was just the music telling the story and therefore it was the easiest scene to understand. Though I'd never see this movie again, I am glad I got to see that part in the theater so I could hear the music all around me.

If Cats had been done using practical means would it have been any better? The scale would probably be more accurate, but it's hard to know for sure, because the plot to Cats is so non-existent and ludicrous as it is, that it would likely have still been a box office failure, but perhaps not to such a high degree. But hey, who am I to judge? If you enjoy seeing a fuzzy feline version of Idris Elba that uncomfortably shows all the contours of his human muscles, or celebrity-cat hybrids eating a conga line of human cockroaches, then this is the perfect movie for you.

Rating: 4.85/5

Greta Gerwig's Little Women is a near masterpiece, full of impeccable performances and cinematography, and should not be missed.

In the years following the Civil War, the unconventionally outspoken and spirited Jo March (Saoirse Ronan), is desperately trying to make it as a published novelist, but is struggling with finding publishers who will take her work seriously. She knows being a writer is what she is meant to do, but living in New York, so far away from home, she finds herself missing her sisters, Meg (Emma Watson), Beth (Eliza Scanlen) and Amy (Florence Pugh).

When an unexpected letter arrives, she rushes home to be with her family. As she takes the journey back to Plumfield, she begins to reminisce about the lives of her and her sisters. Thinking back to the time during the war, and of all the struggles, loss, and love that happened along the way.

When I first heard they were going to be remaking Little Women, I definitely had reservations, because the version that came out in the '90s is without a doubt one of my most beloved films of all time. However, when I saw the first trailer for this film, my curiosity was definitely peaked. As the opening scenes of Little Women (2019) began to unfold, I had to forcibly stop myself from making comparisons. I didn't want my love for the Winona Ryder adaption to cloud my judgement of this version, so I did my best to clear my mind and look at the 2019 film with a fresh perspective. Within ten minutes, not only was I able to prevent myself from juxtaposing the two films, but I was able to take in the endless beauty that came from Greta Gerwig's Little Women.

One of the many things I loved was how the storyline refrained from being completely linear. This allowed for the movie to be its own entity, and show there are so many ways to tell a classic tale, but still be respectful and true to its cherished source material. The only drawback to this would be, if you were unfamiliar with the plot of Little Women, the jumping around of the timeline could make the story a little difficult to follow, but considering I have lost count on how many times I have relived this tale, I found no trouble in getting completely wrapped into the lives of the March family. Greta Gerwig was able to capture this timeless story, but perhaps make it more accessible to a newer audience, one who may not gravitate towards the slower pacing found in many classic literature adaptations.

Jo March is one of my absolute favorite story heroines, and to be honest, before seeing this film, I couldn't think of anyone embodying this character as wonderfully well as Winona Ryder did, but then I saw Saoirse Ronan take on the role. She may not completely surpass Ryder's performance, but she comes tantalizingly close. Ronan may be one of the finest actresses to grace the big screen within the past decade or more, and if she is not nominated for an Academy Award for this film, then I really don't know what it takes to be considered for an Oscar. Seldom have I seen a performance as transformative as Ronan's take on Jo March. She is able to bring forth the tenacity and strength that is needed for the character, but still, show the well of emotions that live just beneath the surface of her fearless exterior. If Ronan is to receive the nomination, which I am most certain she will, I will be waiting with bated breath as they tear the envelope open on awards night, hoping to hear her name get called for the Best Actress win.

Little Women (2019) is one of those films where I am anxiously awaiting to go back to the theater, not just to watch the movie in its entirety again, but also to be able to once again see the small moments in it that stuck with me after the credits rolled. I can't wait to see Jo and Laurie, played by Timothee Chalamet, dance on the porch outside or to watch Jo run through the streets of New York with the excitement of selling a story. It is these brilliantly done cinematic sequences that help to make this film one of the best movies I have seen all year. If I could find fault with it, which is hard to do, the only thing I would have to say is that in the flashback scenes, I had a hard time believing Amy to be as young as she was supposed to be, but other than that, this film was practically perfect.

Though I don't think Greta Gerwig's Little Women will ever replace the love I have in my heart for its '90s predecessor, it has certainly cemented its spot in my mind as one of the most beautifully made films I have seen over the past few years. I will without a doubt be seeing this in the theater again and without question be watching it countless times for many years to come.

Rating: 3.75/5

Though not nearly as witty as its predecessor, Jumanji: The Next Level is an entertaining time with impressive visuals along the way.

It has been three years since Spencer (Alex Wolff), Fridge (Ser'Darius Blain), Martha (Morgan Turner) and Bethany (Madison Iseman) were sucked inside a video game called "Jumanji". They're original shared ordeal had made them an incredibly close band of friends, but now that they have all gone to different colleges around the globe, they've drifted apart, but are looking forward to their reunion they have planned while they're all home for holiday break.

Once Spencer arrives home, he sees that his Grandpa Eddie (Danny DeVito), has moved in while he recovers from hip surgery. Eddie's former business partner, Milo Walker (Danny Glover) has also shown up for a visit. Feeling very out of place at home, and not connected to his friends, Spencer longs to return back to Jumanji so he can once again inhabit the body of Dr. Smolder Bravestone (Dwayne Johnson) and feel as powerful as he did then. So that's exactly what he does. Spencer returns to Jumanji and when his friends find out, they decide they must go in to save him, but as soon as they find themselves back in the dangerous, action filled game, they realize nothing is going to happen in they way they think.

When I first saw the trailer for Jumanji: The Next Level, I was incredibly excited to see what this adventure had in store. I think it is because of that heightened level of anticipation that I didn't enjoy this movie as much as I had hoped I would. Don't get me wrong, it's not bad, just not as great as I thought it was going to be. Next Level does a good job at revisiting the humor of Welcome to the Jungle in order to recapture some of the same laughs, but doesn't fill the entire runtime with rehashed comedy. It fairly successfully came up with new material and by adding in some new characters, revitalized the story enough to make it worth watching and not feel like you're watching an exact repeat of what you've already seen before. If you want an example of a film that doesn't adapt its sequel very well and pulls the same stunts and gags as its predecessor, just watch Home Alone 2. Thankfully, Jumanji: The Next Level was nowhere near as bad as that. There were definitely times where I found myself laughing or giggling in the theater, but not to the extent of how much I did when I first watched Welcome to the Jungle. I think that could be a big reason to why this movie didn't wow me as much as I had hoped. When I first saw the Welcome to the Jungle, I really didn't expect the movie to be as great as it turned out to be, and because of that, I put too much hope into The Next Level.

What Jumanji: The Next Level really has going for it are its cast and visuals. It is such a fantastic mishmash of expected and unexpected action and comedy stars, and they play wonderfully well off each other. This movie really highlights each actors adaptability and strengths, showing that they are basically up for anything, because The Next Level certainly sends each character on a wild ride. With that being said and without spoiling too much of the movie's plot, I would definitely say its second act was far superior to its first. The Next Level seemed to have too much build up to the primary plot, which is surprising considering it is a sequel and that most people viewing the movie should already be familiar with the general concept. It almost seemed as if that could possibly have been one of the main motivations to create Danny DeVito and Danny Glover's characters. It was a way to restate the previous film's plot and remind the audience, but attempt to do it with a comedic twist.

Something that stayed the same between Welcome to the Jungle and The Next Level is that they both look absolutely fantastic. They brilliantly embody the layout and style of a video game, but have very impressive animation as well. I have seen numerous movies like this that have let the believability of their visuals fall to the wayside, but both Jumanji films certainly are not guilty of that. In fact, Next Level actually looks even better. Of course, some time has passed between the two release dates, so animation has no doubt improved since then, but Next Level expands the world of Jumanji, giving the audience a larger variety of landscapes to behold. Where the first one stuck only to the jungle, the sequel brings deserts and mountains into the mix. Though I know the bulk of it had to be green screen work, I was completely convinced in the moment of the realism and believability of the world created for the movie.

Jumanji: The Next Level is a movie I definitely want to watch again, preferably in the theaters before it leaves. Now knowing what it's like, I feel I may actually like it even more the second time around. My expectations won't be so high and I'll just be able to take it in it for what it is; a somewhat silly action/comedy, that is a perfectly enjoyable way to spend an afternoon at the movies.

Rating: 4.5/5

Marriage Story is deeply poignant and emotional from beginning to end, and worth watching just for the performances alone.

Charlie (Adam Driver) and Nicole (Scarlett Johansson) were once a seemingly perfect and happy married couple, but now their relationship has fallen apart and are filing for divorce. At first, they want to do it as civilly as possible, not even attempting to hire lawyers and trying to manage the arrangements on their own. When Nicole moves out to Los Angeles for a job, that all changes.

Their divorce has now gotten very complicated, putting Charlie in danger of losing custody of their son. Both of them now have lawyers that are adding an immense amount of stress and drama to the case, causing their already rocky relationship to completely fly off the handle. Nicole and Charlie deeply care about their son, so they know they must try and pull it together for his sake, but the proceedings don't make it easy.

Marriage Story is a fairly slow paced film, and because of this it may not be for everyone. Because this movie takes its time, it is really able to show how arduous and painstaking the process of divorce can be. It doesn't gloss over anything and instead decides to spend a lengthy amount of screen time on the perhaps not so fascinating and more seemingly realistic details. There are numerous scenes in Marriage Story that are very uncomfortable to watch, because you almost feel as if you shouldn't be witnessing such a personal moment. It's almost like you have invaded someone's privacy and are watching the worst experiences of their lives unfold before your eyes. Marriage Story paints such a heavily realistic picture, that you can't help but be completely pulled into the character's lives, hoping for some kind of respite to be found for their misery.

Adam Driver is very quickly becoming one of my more favorite actors and it is his performance that really stole the show for me in this film. Before seeing this, I had held the opinion that Joaquin Phoenix was going to be a shoo in for the Best Actor win at the Oscars for playing the Joker, but now I'm not so sure. Driver's character is vastly different from Phoenix's, but both have the ability to embody every facet of their characters' personalities, making them fully come to life. The role Driver plays is likely to be viewed as a more realistic character, but is definitely not any less challenging. I have often felt that playing "normal" has to be harder than playing a character who has gone mad. There's more wiggle room with insanity, but when portraying an everyday kind of character, you must stick within the guidelines of what is expected of the average human being, or risk the performance being viewed as over the top or underwhelming. Adam Driver is able to stay within those boundaries, but push them just enough to make his character Charlie be incredibly memorable, unique, and impactful.

Marriage Story is one of the most well rounded films I have seen this year. Its narrative goes back and forth between Nicole's and Charlie's points of view as they navigate through their messy divorce, but the separate character plot lines never appear to be muddied or confusing. The opening ten minutes tells you everything you need to know about these people and their lives, as well as gets the viewer wrapped up into the emotion that surrounds the two characters' stories. Marriage Story is one of those movies that almost makes you forget moments that had happened previously in its plot, because there's so much content included, but then its finale brings everything to a head, and you suddenly remember all the steps that lead the characters to where they are now. As the credits roll, you're just in awe of how well thought out the movie you just watched was.

I'm not sure how quickly I will go back to view Marriage Story again, because it is definitely at times not an easy film to watch, but I know I will be seeing it again sometime in the not so distant future. If not for the movie itself, but just to watch the brilliant performances within it once more.

Rating: 5/5

Incredibly sharp and witty, Knives Out somewhat modernizes the old whodunnit but keeps it classy, suspenseful, and lusciously mysterious.

Harlan Thrombey (Christopher Plummer) is an incredibly wealthy and famous crime novelist, who has just had his 85th birthday. The day after his party, his maid goes up to his study and discovers his body, and it appears he has been brutally murdered. Suddenly, everyone who was at the party is now a suspect in Harlan's untimely death.

Private detective Benoit Blanc (Daniel Craig) has been brought on the job and now he must interview the family left behind by Harlan. Each member claims to be fully innocent and heartbroken by the death of their beloved family patriarch, but Blanc is not swayed by their sob stories. Blanc must use his heightened suspicions about the privileged and entitled Thrombey family as well as his keen intuition as his guide to discovering who the real culprit is so he can solve the case.

Knives Out was one of my most highly awaited films of the year. I am a sucker for a good mystery, and when I saw the trailer and the cast, I was practically giddy with anticipation waiting to see it. Thankfully, Knives Out was fully worth the wait. It was a lot slower than I had expected, especially given the speed in which its previews portrayed it, but honestly I am glad that it chose to go at the pace it did. By doing this, you were able to get the needed information to try and solve the mystery on your own, just like any good whodunnit should do. Each family member and suspect gets a chance to tell their version of their story of the night of Harlan's party, and as each person relays their tale, the inaccuracies and plot holes begin to reveal themselves. You can practically see the ideas and theories sprouting in Blanc's eyes as he begins to uncover the truth that is shrouded behind the lies.

With a cast such as the one that makes up Knives Out, it is almost impossible to pick out a stand out member of the bunch. Each actor brings their own flourish and skill to their characters, turning them into the types of roles you'd expect to see in an entertaining murder mystery. Almost all of the suspects are terrible people, each with very few facets to their personalities. They are very much what you see on the surface with not a lot remorse or compassion underneath. Yet, with all that being said, they are incredibly fun to watch. They embody their roles so well, that you just can't wait to see one of them get taken down by Benoit Blanc. Speaking of Blanc, watching Daniel Craig in this film was easily my favorite aspect of the entire movie. Though the film is set in present day, his character seemed to be pulled right out of a murder mystery set in the old Savannah. Both his appearance and demeanor clash with the modern ideals of some of the suspects, making him a great focal point and protagonist for this wonderful spin on the classic whodunnit genre.

Whenever I watch or read a story that involves a mystery, I always invest a lot of time and effort to try and solve it before the end of the story. As Knives Out was beginning, I was paying very close attention to each detail of the characters' alibis, hoping I'd be able to crack the case before the credits rolled. Now, I am someone who has loved puzzles and mysteries for as long as I can remember, and not to boast about myself, but I have had a pretty good track record at figuring out the the solution to mysteries in the past. With Knives Out, about thirty-five minutes or so into the movie, I was pretty positive I had figured out who the culprit was, but the film did such a wonderful job at distracting me from my theories, that I had actually forgotten about who I thought the killer was until the big reveal was made at the end. I was right, but I loved that Knives Out was able to throw me off track. It kept the plot incredibly intriguing and entertaining, with twists and turns every step of the way.

Knives Out is a film that as I was leaving the theater, I knew I had absolutely loved what I had just seen, but I actually ended up liking it even more in the days that followed. The more I thought about it, the more I really digested how clever, well written, and impeccably made it was. Even though I already know who did it, I cannot wait to watch it again, just so I can try to pick up on clues I may have missed before, and to be able to once again witness a near perfect movie.

Rating: 4.85/5

Though incredibly different from what I anticipated, A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood is highly original and well worth the watch.

Lloyd Vogel (Matthew Rhys) is a journalist for a magazine that's doing an issue on American heroes, and Lloyd has been asked to interview the one and only Mr. Rogers (Tom Hanks). Being a very cynical reporter by trade, Vogel doesn't feel he is the right man for the job, and Mr. Rogers' staff even advise him against going through with the interview, but Vogel is forced to pursue the job and Rogers ignores the warnings and agrees to do it.

When Vogel arrives on the set of Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood, he is very skeptical or Rogers, questioning whether he is as genuinely gracious and gentle as his show portrays, but it is not long before he discovers that Rogers is exactly what he appears, both on screen and off. Being that they have vastly differing personalities, Vogel struggles to find the right angle for his article, but soon learns he must trust in the instincts of Mr. Rogers, and allow himself to begin a quest for discovery, forgiveness, and kindness.

When I sat down in the theater to watch A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood, I didn't know much about the movie other than what I had seen in the trailers, so I was very surprised when the film unfolded in the way that it did. I had gone in with the idea that it was going to be another run of the mill biopic about a cherished historical figure, but was instead, met with a highly creative and ingenious story, not about Mr.Rogers and his life, but about the impact he made to every person who either met him in person or watched him on TV. Mr.Rogers himself may not have been in the bulk of the film, but his essence was. This movie was practically a love letter to the memory of Mr. Rogers and the lasting impression he made on children as they grew. It also shows that the messages he told through his show were not only meant for young viewers, and could have an equally powerful effect on adults, especially ones in need of a little compassion and guidance in their lives.

When it comes to movies based on real events, I understand that unless it is a documentary, a film can't be 100% accurate, but I am a bit of a stickler when it comes to a movie at least attempting to stay true to the facts and portrayals. It can go without saying that Tom Hanks is a brilliant actor, and one who long ago cemented his legacy as an American treasure. Though he was obviously not able to change the pitch of his iconic voice, he was able to match the patterns and pace of Mr.Rogers' famously slow way of talking. Hanks is someone who is likely one of the most recognizable actors in the nation, but he does a fantastic job at transforming into the beloved TV legend. That being said, I was a little irritated to discover there were parts of the story that were quite fabricated, mainly a lot of the drama involved with Vogel's story. For me, if changing the facts of history in a film majorly impacts the narrative, it makes me have a harder time loving the movie in its entirety. Now, A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood was so cleverly and impeccably made, that it could almost allow me to look passed the inaccuracies of the information presented in the movie, just not entirely.

The character of Lloyd Vogel was based on real life journalist, Tom Junod, who did write the article that Vogel is seen working on in the film. Even though Vogel's character did not technically exist, he does represent the anger and frustration that so many people experience in their adult lives. His character's general level of pessimism is faced with a hefty challenge when tasked with having to endure Mr.Rogers and his almost overbearing optimism. At first, the film almost portrays Rogers' heightened level positivity as more of an annoyance rather than a gift, but it is because this film is told through the eyes of someone who is lacking the love and acceptance in his life that Rogers exudes. It is about Vogel's journey and how Mr.Rogers helped change his life for the better. It is because of this, that A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood may be able to speak to so many adult viewers who take the time to watch it.

Though fact and fiction were overlapped and blended in this movie, what cannot be denied is the stellar portrayal of the type of person Mr. Rogers was. There's so much love that surrounds Rogers and the legacy he left behind, that you'd think we wouldn't need for it to be recalled over time, but it never hurts to be shown again and again how far a little kindness, patience, and humanity can go. This is something Mr.Rogers knew for sure and taught children about for decades, but when we get movies like this one, it's nice to once again get that reminder and hope that it can help guide people onto a better path, one that is influenced by everything Mr.Rogers stood for.

Rating: 5+/5

Frozen II is full of magic, spirit, and emotion and was most certainly worth the wait and anticipation.

After her coronation and her kingdom's discovery of her ice powers, Elsa (Idina Menzel) is settling back into her life fairly well. She and her sister Anna (Kristen Bell) are closer than ever, and their lives in the castle seem practically perfect. That all begins to change when Elsa starts to notice a mysterious voice singing through the wind, that only she can hear. At first, she doesn't say anything, but soon it appears the spirits will stop at nothing to try and get her attention, forcing her to go into the unknown and to learn not only why this voice is calling her, but about herself and her family's past as well.

Seeing Frozen II was a brilliant theater experience that I doubt I’ll ever be able to replicate. When you go to a children’s film, especially on its opening weekend, you expect the audience to be filled with young viewers, but when it’s a princess movie, it gets amped up to a whole other level. As I was sitting in my seat, waiting for the movie to start, girls of varying ages filtered in with their princess gowns, complete with tiaras and wands. They were so eager to see the film, they could barely contain their joy, and though I may not have been clad as the queen of Arendelle myself, I can say my feelings concurred with theirs. As soon as the opening music began, I actually felt my heart flit with excitement as the restless chatter of the children slowly quieted down, and everyone’s attention was focused only on the absolutely stunning animation that was starting to unfold on the screen.

I have been long awaiting this movie’s release ever since the first trailer debuted, but I was weary about allowing my expeditions to be too high, as sequels are always facing an uphill battle, especially one that follows the resounding triumph of the original Frozen. As the first set of critic reviews began to trickle onto the web, I found them to be quite mixed, some saying it was wonderful, others saying it was good, but couldn’t live up to the greatness of its predecessor. Personally, I could not disagree with the latter more. As a great surprise to myself, I loved this movie even more than the original, which I didn’t think could be possible. Frozen II boasts a much darker storyline, and therefore the music is designed to match that more mystical atmosphere. I am naturally much more drawn to stories and music of that nature, but it was also they way in which it was presented that really won me over. The use of cinematography and animation combined with the powerful and at times, beautifully haunting vocals, created a film that almost seemed tailor made for my enjoyment. When I walked out of the theater, I immediately began to listen to the soundtrack, desperate to once again hear the melodies that were woven in and out through the film. As soon as I left, I felt as if I could easily have turned my car around and bought a ticket for the next showing.

As I was watching this movie, I kept thinking of how much it reminded me of films like Pocahontas and Mulan, which just so happen to me my two favorite Disney films. Both those movies and Frozen II aren’t afraid to present plots that tackle more difficult and sorrowful topics such as fear and loss. They do it with grace and impeccable style, knowing when to add in needed jokes from the trusty sidekicks in order to stray away from any grief being too overwhelming for it's young fans. I have always admired movies that have the ability to do this, because it seems they treat their audience with more respect and believe they are intelligent enough to handle a plot that isn’t just slapstick humor from beginning to end. Frozen II has rapidly found a spot in my top three most beloved Disney films, and it is majorly for its ability to do just that.

I could rave on and on about how much I loved Frozen II, but I’m an adult, and not the target audience. That being said, I can tell you with absolute certainty that every child in the theater fell in love with this movie. If their laughter that filled the theater wasn’t convincing enough, the sound of their cheers and applause at the end of the movie should absolutely tell you how wonderful this it was. There’s nothing like a theater full of children in princess gowns, setting their wands down just long enough to clap for a movie, to make you realize you’ve just witnessed something truly special.

Rating: 5/5

Though it may not be a movie designed for the masses, I for one found Jojo Rabbit to be highly original and capable of evoking a wide array of emotions.

Ten year old Jojo Betzler (Roman Griffin Davis) is living in Nazi Germany during the end of World War II. Jojo loves his country and wants nothing more than to be one of the people who devote their lives to saving it. On the weekend of his first day at the camp training him to be a member of the Hitler Youth, Jojo is very nervous, and needs guidance and assurance from his imaginary friend, Adolf Hitler (Taika Waititi). With a boost of confidence from Hitler, Jojo is invigorated and ready to take on the weekend.

When Jojo arrives at camp, it is nothing like he anticipated. He is bullied and pressured by the older members of the Hitler Youth to do terrible things, making Jojo slightly question his dedication to the cause, but not enough to make him think of abandoning it. In a series of unexpected events, Jojo finds himself working on the sidelines for the Hitler Youth, meaning he is spending a lot more time at home and with his mother, Rosie (Scarlett Johansson). At first, Jojo is furious by this outcome, but it's not long before he realizes there is more going on at home than what he expected, causing doubts to start filling his mind about his patriotic devotion to the Nazi Party and the dictator he idolizes so much.

Jojo Rabbit is without a doubt one of the most unique and unusual films I have ever seen. It takes a horrific and devastating topic like the Holocaust, and somehow turns it into a laugh out loud comedy, without being blatantly offensive. It is a very daring and bold feat to say the least. When I first saw the trailer, I really questioned how Jojo Rabbit would be able to pull off its concept without coming off as distasteful, but it piqued my interest enough that I had to check it out. What really struck me as the most bizarre, was Jojo's imaginary friend being Adolf Hitler. I couldn't even begin to comprehend how the movie was going to tackle this idea and make it tangible and not overly ridiculous or objectionable. That being said, it wasn't long into the film that the outlandish concept began to make sense to me, and I started to fully buy into why a young boy would choose such a heinous human being as their imaginary friend. Without divulging too much of the plot, all I can write is that it says a lot about Jojo's initial beliefs and the journey he takes throughout the story. It also taps into the truths of the ideals and fantasies we all have about our childhood idols, whomever they may be.

This film has a star studded cast, some veterans of the comic world and others who have spent more time focused on dramatic roles, and they all come together to bring fantastic performances, but for me, none of them could top the stunning debuts of the children who filled the cast. With every line and every emotion, Roman Griffin Davis had me completely transfixed to the screen. He was able to deliver his scenes, both of humor and heartbreak, with astounding comedic timing and poignancy. The same can be said for Archie Yates, who played Jojo's best friend Yorki. Yates doesn't have near the amount of screen time as Davis, but every moment he's in the film is hilarious, adorable, but also tense, as you fear for his character's well being as he is being put into cruel and dangerous circumstances involving the war, that are well beyond his years. This film really hit the jackpot with its young performers, and I truly don't think the film would have landed as well as it did without them.

Being in the theater watching Jojo Rabbit, was certainly one of the more bizarre experiences I've had. There were times where the audience, myself included, filled the theater with uproarious laughter, but then mere seconds later, it would be eerily quiet, as we were all taking in the chilling scenes from the Holocaust and witnesses the recreations of the violent and vile acts committed by the Nazis. It was a film where, by the end of it, you felt drained, because you had run the gamut of all your body's capable emotions. Though Jojo Rabbit doesn't fully push the envelope too far, it does have it's moments where you are baffled at how you could be laughing while watching a film centered around Nazi Germany. It is also hard to ignore the appalling truth that can be found behind the comedy, but I believe that was the movie's full intention. No amount of humor can mask the travesties that occurred during the Holocaust, and I don't believe Jojo Rabbit was trying to hide it. More than anything, it was an effort to exploit the harmful effects of hatred and bigotry, and show the power of acceptance and kindness.

I'm sure there are many people out there who have watched this film and have been highly offended by it. There were countless times throughout the movie where I could pinpoint the exact moments where people would have stormed out of the theater in an exasperated rage. Jojo Rabbit certainly isn't going to be for everyone's taste, but it is a film that sends an immensely important message and does it with flare and style.

Rating: 4.25/5

Politically charged and quick witted, Late Night is certainly worth taking the time to watch.

Fierce and abrasive, Katherine Newbury (Emma Thompson) has spent decades being known as the first female late night talk show host. She is glad to continue her seemingly endless reign, but she begins to hear musings that her show is no longer considered funny or relevant. It becomes known to her that the ratings have dropped and that she may even be replaced.

Desperate to keep her post, Katherine asks her assistant Brad (Denis O'Hare) to meet with her writing team to try and solve the problem of their dying show. At first, her all male group of writers cannot seem to come up with any potential solutions, but when Molly Patel (Mindy Kaling), an aspiring comedian and chemical plant worker, gets unexpectedly hired, a major shift goes through the writing staff. She is not well received and even brushed off by Katherine, who specifically asked for a female writer, but Molly won't let that stop her from her dreams. She becomes intently focused on not only achieving those dreams, but on hopefully impressing Katherine and saving her show along the way.

When I first watched the trailer for Late Night, what originally intrigued me was the creative concept and the casting of Emma Thompson as one of the leads. For years I have been a massive fan of Thompson's work, and I will usually see just about anything she takes the time to do, because no matter how great the film is or isn't, I always know that Thompson will bring a brilliant sense of class and skill to it, no matter the genre. All that stands true for her performance in Late Night. Her character has multiple facets, appearing inspiring and legendary on her nightly show, cold and unsympathetic to her staff when the cameras stop rolling, yet fragile and insecure behind closed doors. With the way her persona comes off while she's in the room with her writers, you'd think it'd be very hard to empathize with her in any way, but when you see her icy exterior slowly start to melt away, you begin to understand why she is the way she is. Such a character could have been very hard to portray by many lesser actors, but Emma Thompson embodied every facet of the role through and through.

Late Night reminded me very much of the Devil Wears Prada - but the talk show edition. The only major difference is that I found I liked the majority of the characters in this film more than I did in Prada. Now, don't get me wrong, I absolutely love the Devil Wears Prada, but I have always found the characters to be quite hard to connect with. The parallels between the two stories can be found in their central focus of a short haired viper woman who is a mogul in their industry, and who's tested by the beliefs of a young and ambitious new hire. Where Late Night really differs, is that Mindy Kaling's character Molly, truly wants her job, whereas Andy in Prada is only at Runway, hoping for it to be another rung on the ladder to success. It is because of that that I found I was fully rooting for Kaling's character to persevere through the challenges she faced, and empathized with her when things appeared to be falling apart. Her character, though a bit eccentric at times, was very believable and easy to relate to, even if one's employment struggles don't exactly match the same scenarios Kaling's character endured.

It was very clear, straight from the trailer, that Late Night had a political message it was intending to tell, and tell it did. If subtly was what it was going for, it most definitely failed, but I get the feeling it didn't exactly want the audience to have to read between the lines to understand the important causes the story was expressing. This film was stressing the need for diversity and acceptance, as well as showcasing some of the many trials a woman can face in a mostly male work environment. All things that have been discussed before on film, but I'm not sure if I have ever seen it quite done like this. Though I am sure some may have been irritated or even offended by the straightforward nature of the film's political concepts, I for one found it refreshing to see a movie take on so many deeply important causes, but tell it in a lighthearted and accessible way.

Late Night offers the viewer a chance to look behind the curtain of our favorite midnight talk show hosts, and makes you wonder what truly happens on these real life shows before the cameras turn on. It is creative, very well written, and a film that I will be sure to be watching again in the not too distant future.

Rating: 3.75/5

Though heavily cheesy by today's standards, the Lizzie McGuire Movie is still enjoyable to watch if you loved it when you were younger.

Famously clumsy and accident prone Lizzie McGuire (Hilary Duff) is about to graduate from 8th grade when her teacher informs her at the last minute she needs to deliver the speech at the ceremony. Terrified of speaking in front of so many people, she tries to flee the stage, only to take all the decorations down with her. Humiliated, all she wants to do is leave the country; fortunately her 8th grade class trip to Rome is just around the corner.

Once arriving in the Eternal City, Lizzie and her best friend Gordo (Adam Lamberg) are eager to explore all that Rome has to offer, but their trip of a lifetime gets an unexpected detour. Out of the blue, Lizzie is being surrounded by Italians that think she is a famous pop singer named Isabella, who was part of a duo with a man named Paulo (Yani Gellman). In a very unexpected turn of events, Lizzie is asked by Paulo to pretend to be Isabella for the upcoming music awards, and she accepts. Suddenly Lizzie and Gordo's time in Rome is taken over by sneaking out and secret trips throughout the city, but how long can Lizzie keep the facade going without being caught?

Watching the Lizzie McGuire Movie as an adult is one of those experiences where I watch, knowingly aware of how silly and implausible the entire film is, but I'm just too blinded by youthful memories and nostalgia to care. As soon as the opening credits begin to roll, I'm taken back to a time where one of my most pressing concerns was whether Lizzie and Gordo were going to get together, or wondering if they were going to turn any other Disney Channel original show into a full length feature film. That's what so great about watching movies you loved as a kid, it practically erases any stress you may have from your mind, and all you have to do is sit back and enjoy.

When discussing the acting on a movie that is a continuation of a Disney Channel show, it's difficult to really judge it, as the majority of the cast had never been anywhere remotely close to the big screen before. Hilary Duff was a fairly well seasoned actress before Lizzie McGuire, but many of the others were very green, and that definitely comes through in the movie. They certainly give it their all, but they just almost seem out of place in a film designed to be seen in a theater. That being said, that concept definitely doesn't apply to Alex Borstein, who plays the kids' future high school principal. Her comedy is as well timed as ever and she is responsible for the bulk of what I still find funny when watching this film today.

Could the Lizzie McGuire Movie be enjoyed by kids experiencing it for the first time nowadays? I really don't know. I almost feel like you had to be enchanted by the original series to really be able to look past some of the movie's goofier aspects, but then again, many of the live action films being released into the children's genre these days, aren't exactly garnering numerous accolades. This movie has all your typical Disney troupes; montages, love triangles, and an over the top musical number, but that's part of what makes it so fun. You know exactly what you're going to get from it, and there's something very comforting in that concept.

Though this movie is intended for a much younger audience than myself, I don't think I'll ever lose the desire to watch the Lizzie McGuire Movie on occasion. Watching movies for the purposes of sentimentality rarely loses its luster, so I know somewhere in the not so distant future, I will find myself wanting to watch Lizzie's escapades through Rome once more.

Rating: 4.5/5

Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince is the precursor to the finale, and brilliantly sets up the continuing plot for the dangers that Harry and his friends will soon be facing.

Entering into his 6th year at Hogwarts, Harry (Daniel Radcliffe) is reeling over the loss of his godfather and trying to ignore the constant remarks in the Daily Prophet calling him "the Chosen One". He is convinced that his longtime nemesis, Draco Malfoy (Tom Felton), is up to something far more sinister than pranking first years, but no one seems to believe him. To add to the strangeness of his second to last year at the school, Professor Snape (Alan Rickman) is no longer the potions master, and has been appointed the position of Defense Against the Dark Arts instructor, leaving his old position to a former teacher named Horace Slughorn (Jim Broadbent).

In addition to having to deal with the unexpected staff changes, Harry has been asked by Professor Dumbledore (Michael Gambon) to have private lessons with him, but the reasoning behind them is, at first, a mystery. Soon Harry discovers he is to learn more about the life of Tom Riddle, the boy who would become Lord Voldemort, leading Harry to believe he will, in time, be sent on a mission to find the dark wizard who has terrorized the world, both magic and muggle, and destroy him for good.

The sixth Harry Potter film is widely considered one of the weaker installments into the franchise, but I'd have to say, for the most part, I would disagree. I do feel my opinion is very likely biased, considering my love for Harry Potter, but also because the sixth book just so happens to be my favorite. It is in this story that we learn an immense amount of history about Lord Voldemort, and if I am talking strictly about the book, this part is truly fascinating. The amount of detail J.K. Rowling was able to include about Tom Riddle's past is staggering, but sadly it was not added into the film in its entirety. It is definitely there, because it is utterly crucial to the plot that it be included, but there were many details that were unfortunately omitted. Whether I am correct in my thinking or not, it is my opinion that the filmmakers feared the heavy amount of information this book entailed and the lack of action that it contained, would bore the audience. So they chose to take certain aspects away in lieu of adding in more intense scenes and battles not included in the novel, to appease the non-book focused viewers. Though this definitely does bother me, it still isn't enough for me to say this film was the weakest link of the series.

What never ceases to amaze me is how spectacular the casting is for the Harry Potter films, especially when it comes to the adults who play the professors. I distinctly remember reading this book when I was younger, and having an incredibly strong visual as to what Professor Slughorn was supposed to look like. Though Jim Broadbent may not be as rotund as I had envisioned, the way he embodies the character's personality is spot on. Slughorn is supposed to exude confidence, but behind his jovial facade is insecurity covered up only by the legendary students he considers to be his trophies. A complicated character for sure, but Broadbent effortlessly turns into Slughorn with every line of dialogue he delivers.

The end of the Harry Potter franchise is bleak, intense, and full of unexpected twists and turns, so in order for that type of epic ending to pan out, it's penultimate story must set the tone and get the audience ready for what will follow. The Half-Blood Prince does this really well in this respect for both its book and film. In the movie, the coloring of the scenes is much darker and more sepia toned than the rest, giving the viewer the instant sensation that Harry's year at Hogwarts will not be without danger and dark magic. As previously mentioned, the book does a have a significantly larger amount of information and peril for the characters, and it's unfortunate that the film didn't choose to show it, but what it did show, it did quite well.

Where the Half-Blood Prince is my favorite book in the series, I was practically guaranteed to love this movie, as long as it stayed true to the novel in which it was based. Though the film at times strays too far from the page in my opinion, I still love it. I just can't help but be entranced by the world of Harry Potter and all its wonders.

Rating: 4.5/5

Just as charming as the seven years of the show that came before it, Downton Abbey is a wonderful way to be reunited with old friends.

Not many years have passed since we left the Crawley Family, and life at the grand estate seems to be carrying on as usual, except for maybe a few new modern trinkets here and there. The routine day to day life of both the family and their employees gets turned upside down when they receive a letter from Buckingham Palace, stating that the King and Queen will be spending a few days at Downton Abbey.

At first, everyone is overjoyed at the prospect of being honored by such a visit, but once they meet the numerous servants who work for the royal family, their feeling of happiness is quickly deflated and replaced by agitation and offense. With both the upstairs and downstairs tirelessly preparing for the big day, it seems they'll have no time for their own personal dramas and needs, but with it being Downton Abbey, that can never be the case.

The Downton Abbey movie is a unique experience, where if you were a fan of the show, you're practically guaranteed to love it, because you are already so familiar with the concept and characters that feature in the story. If you have never seen any moment of the famous series, than your liking of the movie could potentially be more fickle and not as easily won. Unlike many films that have been based on television shows, Downton Abbey doesn't spend hardly any time reintroducing the characters. The film is specifically catered to preexisting fans, and as one of those long term watchers of the show, I rather enjoyed the fact that the movie wasn't explaining to me plots and characters that I had already known so well. On the other side of that, it does make it tricky for those who are unfamiliar with it, but honestly, I strongly doubt many of those who journeyed to the theater to see went without already knowing the Crawley family and the other lovable people that feature in their lives.

So, with a movie that is essentially just an extended episode of the series, what makes it so special? Two words: Maggie Smith. I don't care what the movie or show is, Maggie Smith just always makes it better. There is no one who is capable of delivering an insult with such class and posh ferocity as she. Whether as Professor McGonagall in Harry Potter, or as her beloved character in this franchise, Violet Crawley, there is nobody who can match her priceless wit and delivery. The only person in this film that comes close is Imelda Staunton, who plays the Queen's Lady in Waiting. The two women battled it out as fierce enemies in Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, and I for one was immensely glad to be able to see the their verbal sparring take to the screen once more.

Besides its reliable cast, what really makes this movie worth seeing is the grandeur of the estate itself. When watching Downton Abbey at home, you get a sense of the vast beauty of the title home and the land in which it is located, but seeing it in a theater on such a large scale really hones in on how spectacular it really is. It almost seems silly to me now, that anyone could think such a remarkable dwelling could be worthy of the small screen, because it most certainly deserves to be given the full cinematic treatment. When I sat in my theater seat and I heard that familiar Downton Abbey tune, I found I got very excited, but when that music combined with the sweeping view of the castle; instant chills.

Downton Abbey certainly has its moments of forced humor or silliness in an attempt to bring out the most lovable aspects of each of its characters, but for the most part, I found it delightful rather than obnoxious. There's nothing overly serious about the film continuation of the series, and honestly that's a bit of a relief considering some of the events the fans endured throughout its original run. Downton Abbey is lovely and sweet, and a perfect way to spend a relaxing afternoon at the movies.

Rating: 4.75/5

Brittany Runs a Marathon is a wonderfully simple comedy with a fantastic performance by its' lead to add to its greatness.

28 year old Brittany Forglar (Jillian Bell) lives in New York City, and has been working at the same theater job for years. She and her roommate don't lead the healthiest of lifestyles, partying all weekend and even on some weekdays, but even so, she is surprised by the news she gets when she goes to the doctor. He tells her that her health is anything but great, and that she not only needs to change her daily habits, but needs to lose a a fairly significant amount of weight as well.

At first, Brittany is put off by her doctor's diagnosis, but soon decides to take a chance at modifying her life. Inspired by Catherine (Michaela Watkins), a woman in her building, Brittany decides to take up running as a way of getting back in shape. At first, running around the block is an extreme struggle, but with the support of her new running friends, Brittany decides to tackle training for the New York City Marathon. Once she gets the hang of it, it appears that getting her life back in order may not be as tricky as anticipated, but she learns all too quickly that life's unpredictability can change everything in an instant.

I truly loved Brittany Runs a Marathon for a myriad of reasons, but primarily because of its central premise of someone becoming a runner and having it alter their life. I myself have had my own personal experience of going from not being able to run more than 60 seconds straight to becoming a long distance runner, and I can tell you that this movie was spot on with many of the transformations and challenges that one might face when taking a step into this form of athleticism. From a detail as small as Brittany going from wearing a pair of shorts and a t-shirt to specifically designed sweat wicking clothes, to the physical strain running can put on your body, Brittany Runs a Marathon had me reminiscent of my early days of running, and I admired and appreciated how accurate and realistic the film was.

Brittany Runs a Marathon is a comedy unlike many others, because it doesn't follow the typical pattern someone might expect to find in a story such as this. So many comedies focus on physical or overly crass humor in order to find its laughs, but this movie has none of that. The comedy is more subtle, situational and timing based. There's nothing that's obvious or overdone about it, it just is was it is, and honestly it's not all jokes all the time. Brittany's life goes through many major changes throughout the film, and with that comes more somber moments than what you'd see in a movie that is labeled as a comedy. It is incredibly genuine, almost making it seem as if the curtain is being pulled back into someone's real life, and not a movie at all.

Jillian Bell is an actress, that since watching this movie, I will be certain to be keeping an eye out for. It was her delivery and performance that made me 100% buy into every moment of the story. When her character was struggling with the ups and downs that come with trying to transform your life, I felt I was with her each step of the way. I was pulling for her to succeed in her journey, and if Brittany faltered in anyway, it was almost as if I was just as disappointed as her character felt. For me, she is what made this movie more than just a comedy and turned it into a lovely and surprisingly moving film about the power of perseverance and friendship.

Living where I live, getting to see Brittany Runs a Marathon was quite a struggle, as our local theaters don't usually get some of the lesser mainstream movies, so being able to finally watch it was a real privilege, and I am so glad I got the chance to view it at last. There's nothing overly flashy about it, and it's all the better for it. Brittany Runs a Marathon is just a great movie and that's all there is to it.

Rating: 4/5

Judy is a well made biopic that should give Renee Zellweger a yellow brick road straight to the Academy Awards.

In 1969, Judy Garland (Renee Zellweger) is struggling to make ends meet while she tries to raise her two youngest children. Though her star power is undeniable, she cannot seem to attract the crowds or book the shows like she used to. Desperate for anyway to support her family, Judy agrees to go to London and perform in a show that is predicted to sell out.

On the opening night of her new London venture, Judy is so nervous and incoherent from pills and alcohol that she doesn't seem fit to perform, but the moment she takes the stage, the star in her takes over and she wows the crowd. At first, it seems as if her stay in England will prove highly successful, but a lifetime of substance abuse and bad memories appear to be a hurdle she may not be able to overcome.

When I first saw the trailers for Judy, I wasn't exactly overwhelmed with the urge to go out and see it, but I assumed I would get around to watching it eventually. I actually surprised myself with the fact that I wasn't initially overly excited about seeing the movie, because films based around the time of classic Hollywood is usually something I am over the moon about, but at the time, I feared Judy was doomed to be just another biopic that followed the same patterns as all the rest. Though it does on occasion mimic the ideas and concepts of past films of its kind, Judy perseveres to be a strong and emotional film about one of cinema's most greatest treasures and all that she had to go through in her short and tortured life.

Initially, what semi turned me away from being excited about Judy was the casting of Renee Zellweger as Judy Garland. I have nothing against Zellweger and I think she's a very talented actress and singer, but I just didn't think she looked very much like Garland. Upon seeing the film in its entirety, my opinion on that no longer holds true whatsoever. As soon as Zellweger began to speak, there was a change in her eyes, one that showed the years of putting on a show for the cameras and studios and all the hidden anguish Judy Garland had to endure, and it seemed to literally turn her into the screen legend, especially if the shot was angled towards her left profile. The concept of her looking most like her character from the left must have been something the filmmakers noticed very early on, because it appeared that in the most crucial moments of the film, where it was vitally important that Renee Zellweger not just resemble Judy, but be transformed into her, she would only be shot from the left side. It was in those moments where I had to keep reminding myself that Zellweger was not in fact Judy Garland, because the resemblance appeared to be so uncanny.

When it comes to biopics, there's always fiction that is weaved into the facts the story is trying to tell, and whether or not Judy was more fabrication than reality, I could not tell you, but what I can say is if the majority of story they portrayed is true, it definitely has taken some of the sparkle away from Tinseltown. I love the world of classic film, but in the many books I've read and the documentaries I've watched, I know that there were some pretty horrendous acts that occurred when the cameras stopped rolling. Judy shines a huge spotlight on some of those travesties, and paints a vividly clear picture as to why Judy Garland struggled so much in her later years with pills and alcohol. In doing so, it makes the audience feel an immense amount of sympathy towards Garland. I found myself unexpectedly a little teary eyed as I sat in my seat at the theater, watching her desperately try to make a contented life out of the tremendous hardships she faced as a young girl.

Judy does a wonderful job at paying tribute to Garland. Even though I am quite sure one of the major scenes, dedicated to showing Judy the love and honor she deserves, is all made up, I find I don't fully care, because it brings some well earned joy and respect to the troubled star's life and legacy.

Rating: 5/5

One of the finest exhibitions of acting talent I have seen in my lifetime, Joker is a movie not to be missed.

In the early '80s in the city of Gotham, Arthur Fleck (Joaquin Phoenix) works for company called Ha-Ha's where he is hired as a clown for various businesses. He desperately needs this job so he can support his invalid mother Penny (Frances Conroy) and carry on the lifestyle they have grown accustomed to, no matter how grim or poverty filled it may be.

Arthur loves his job, but he suffers from a condition where he spontaneously and uncontrollably laughs at the worst possible times. It gets in the way of his daily activities, but he tries to do his best to persevere, however, happiness just doesn't seem to be in the cards for him. All he has ever wanted to do is make people smile and laugh, but the world seems to be against him every step of the way.

Before going to see Joker, I had already heard rave reviews about not specifically the movie, but Joaquin Phoenix's performance. Because of this and my previous knowledge of Phoenix's acting talent, I had very high expectations as I was walking into the film. My expectations were more than met, in fact they exceeded anything I could have imagined. I have been an avid film fanatic for as long as I can remember, but I don't think I have truly understood the concept of acting being such an art form until this movie. Yes, there have been hundreds of performances I have seen and loved and been immensely impressed by, but I don't think I've ever seen an actor disappear into a character, especially a fictional one, like Joaquin Phoenix did as Arthur "Joker" Fleck. There were times throughout the film where I literally forgot that the character wasn't in fact a real person, but an embodiment of a comic book villain brought to life by Phoenix. Each step, breath, and movement emanated a complete and wildly different person than the man who played the character.

There are few movies I have seen that bring the level of intensity that can be found in Joker. Part way through the movie, I came to the realization I had had my hands in the exact same position resting in my theater snacks for at least twenty minutes. I was so laser focused on the performances and story that was being laid out before me, that I hadn't given a second thought to anything else in the room. It was then that I noticed I was not alone in my response to the images on the screen. Many other audience members had also stopped reaching for their food and drinks, too enthralled with the film and its energy to pull their eyes away. Part of what amped up the movie's acute feeling of anxiety, was not just Phoenix's performance, though that was a massive part of it, but the music in the background. The score predominantly used cellos to lead its music, and the ominous sounds of the strings almost always indicated a moment where Arthur's mind was going to become further unhinged. I know that for me personally, every time I heard the sound of the cello, my heart rate began to increase with the uncertainty I knew they would bring.

Joker is a really unusual installment into the world of comic book based films, because you are on the side of its protagonist, if you can call him that, but you know what he is doing is wrong. You see the anguish in his eyes for the first act of the film, and all you want is for him to feel some glimmer of joy, no matter what could bring that to the character. When you see Arthur in his full Joker makeup, he looks so gleeful and healthy, that I actually thought to myself, "Wow, he looks so much better and happier!". Not exactly the reaction I expected to have towards such an infamous villain. Even though I knew that once he made his official transformation that would be needed to complete his origin story, he would commit a number of heinous and violent acts, I still found myself sympathetic towards his character. Perhaps that is the power of a once in a lifetime performance. It can make you connect to a character that you would thought yourself never able to relate to in almost any other circumstance.

I can honestly say, that if I were member of the crew on this film, I think I would have been frightened of Joaquin Phoenix by the end of it. His work on Joker is so chilling and convincing, that even when watching interviews of him afterwards, I find it hard to believe it is the same man who was the Joker I saw on screen. I know there has been plenty of talk about Oscar Buzz for him and this film, and I for one am one fan that will be in an outrage if he doesn't win.

Rating: 5+/5

When Harry Met Sally... is easily one of the most beloved romantic comedies of all time and one watch through is proof positive as to why.

In the year 1977, Harry (Billy Crystal) is moving to New York City and is getting a ride with his girlfriend's friend Sally (Meg Ryan), who is also moving to the Big Apple. Meer minutes into the trip, the two realize they share a lot in common, but have vastly different opinions on many subjects. Once in New York, the two think they will never see each other again, and both seem to be content with that concept.

Years later, Harry and Sally bump into each other again, and are still indifferent to one another, but slowly and surely, a friendship begins to grow. Soon they are each other's closest confidants, talking about anything and everything. However, the two appear to be unlucky in love, and no matter how much they put themselves into the dating world, no one seems to be good enough, and neither of them seem to understand why.

When Harry Met Sally is the perfect romantic comedy. It ticks off all the necessary boxes needed to achieve romcom greatness. Romance-check. Comedy, double check. Creative filming style, check. Realistic and well timed dialogue, triple check. I am not sure why in God’s name it took me so long to finally watch this movie, given my fondness for the genre, but I can honestly say that When Harry Met Sally is the film all other romantic comedies should aspire to.

What I love about this film, is though the concept of romance seems to evade its main characters, the movie gets its romantic fill not through the linear story, but through small interviews of long-time relationships from the most adorable couples to be put on screen. Their stories exude joy and contentment, and are a most wonderful backdrop for the main plot being told. It is truly such a clever idea, and is one that other movies have attempted to replicate, but have only come off as cheap imitations. Other tries at this concept somehow lack the charm and affection that comes from those small moments in When Harry Met Sally. Though I loved everything about this film, it was those short scenes where I couldn’t help but feel myself smiling with ease at the love portrayed on the screen.

Billy Crystal may be one of my favorite actors of all time. I have yet to see something of his that I truly disliked, and almost everything I’ve seen him in I’ve loved. Whether it be as the voice of Calcifer the fire demon in Howl's Moving Castle, or Miracle Max in The Princess Bride, Billy Crystal just seems to know how to do it all. He has an effortless warmth about him, and putting him in a role like this was a stroke of pure genius. His character at first comes off as slightly abrasive and crass, but you can’t help but love him. His costar, Meg Ryan, is romantic comedy gold. There’s a reason she was in so many films of this genre, but this movie has to be considered her standout performance. She’s had a chance to be adorable in so many other films like this, but in When Harry Met Sally, she really gets a chance to show more than ever that she has the acting chops to back up her screen allure. Together, the two have a flawless chemistry that is most certainly what has made this movie a timeless classic.

After watching When Harry Met Sally, I was quite mad with myself that it took me so long to finally get around to watching it. It is a movie that I really and truly wish I had had in my life long before now, and will be guaranteed to be one that I will watch countless times over. There's just no way this movie could lose any of its appeal and enchantment with multiple viewings; it's just too fantastic.

Rating: 5+/5

Snowpiercer is a highly original movie that makes practically all other dystopian films seem like amateur hour.

When the planet has warmed to the point of being uninhabitable, a chemical is released into the atmosphere to try and cool it down, but it goes too far, freezing everything on Earth. The few who didn't die from the sudden ice age were transported onto a self sustaining train that is segmented into different cars by a class system.

At the very back of the train, Curtis Everett (Chris Evans) is somewhat a leader to the people considered "scum" by the elites at the front. He, and everyone else living there, are sick of being treated like dirt, being covered in filth, and only having bricks of protein to sustain their diets. Knowing things need a desperate change, Curtis and many other brave souls from the back decide to begin a revolt against the system, taking down anyone who stands in their way.

I can honestly say that I have never seen a movie like Snowpiercer. It is unconventional in all the best ways possible. After watching it, you can try and pinpoint the specific genre or category it belongs in, but I find that it is very hard to pick just one. In many ways, it is an action film, but it has much more heart and intelligence than the average blockbuster. It could essentially be a horror movie, with the upper class of society being the monsters and the lower class the victims. Could it be designated as science-fiction? Thriller? Unlike so many other mainstream movies, you just can't label it as one genre and not being able to put Snowpiercer into any specific corner is really what makes up its beauty. It can be interpreted in many different ways, but is without a doubt a breath of fresh air to whichever film category someone may decide to place it.

When first watching Snowpiercer, what immediately stands out are the striking visuals that progress from the back of the train to the front. Every car is vastly different from the next, each having its own film style and color scheme to go along with it. One train cabin could be grim and lifeless, and the next one, blindingly luminescent and colorful. Because of this, there is no two segments of the film the are alike, and therefore the viewer has absolutely no way of guessing what is going to befall the characters next on their quest to the engine room. With all the movies I have seen in my life, I always do my best to try and predict future outcomes in the story, but with Snowpiercer, I had absolutely no idea what was to happen next, and was ready for anything and everything.

Even though the villains in a story are supposed to be the one the viewer despises, there are many cases where we end up liking them despite their horrific actions. For me, this was the case of Tilda Swinton's character in Snowpiercer. Swinton played Minister Mason, a faithful and devoted employee of Wilford (the man who created the train). Her character is vile and heartless, but Swinton's performance was so sublime, that I couldn't help but find myself thoroughly enjoying what she brought to the character. I hated what she did, but I found the highly animated style of Swinton's portrayal to be endlessly entertaining. On the protagonist side of the plot, Chris Evans really impressed me as the lead in the film. Until Snowpiercer, I had mostly only seen Evans as the shield-wielding Captain America, or in a handful of romantic comedies from the early 2000s. I knew that he was a great actor from seeing him in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, but I really wasn't aware of how far his talent could go until I watched this movie. He proved that his skill was more than sufficient to be able to go head to head with legends like Tilda Swinton, and has made me really excited to see what else he will bring to his film career.

It is really a travesty that films like Snowpiercer don't get appreciated by the Academy Award system, when it is just as, if not more, qualified to be receiving recognition as any of the past nominees and winners. Director Bong Joon Ho is a true artist, and I for one will be making a vow to see much more of the work he has already put out, as well as anything else he does in the future.

Rating: 3.25/5

Playing By Heart is a film that could not have been more a product of its time it tried, but is generally enjoyable from beginning to end.

Paul (Sean Connery) and Hannah (Gena Rowlands) have been married for decades but are still struggling with moving on from their past problems. Joan (Angelina Jolie) has just broken up with her boyfriend, but is already trying to gain the attention of a guy named Keenan (Ryan Phillipe), who appears he'd rather be alone.

Meanwhile, Meredith (Gillian Anderson) has vowed to swear off relationships and focus on her career, but an architect named Trent (Jon Stewart) is doing his best to work his way into her heart. Gracie (Madeleine Stowe) is having an affair, and Mark (Jay Mohr) is reconnecting with his estranged mother Mildred (Ellen Burstyn). Numerous people are all trying to navigate their relationships, whether romantic or familial, all realizing that love is a tricky game.

Playing By Heart is an episodic movie, akin to films like Love Actually or Crash, where there are a handful of characters and situations that are seemingly unrelated except for the time or place in which the film is set, but as the movie unravels you begin to unearth the connections between each character. I have always been intrigued by these types of stories, because I usually find myself curious to see how the plot will unfold as well as deciding which sub-plot is my personal favorite. In the essence of full disclosure, it must be stated that I am a huge X-Files fan and I only initially watched Playing By Heart because I wanted to see what Gillian Anderson was like playing a character other than Dana Scully. With that being said, her story was my favorite, but that is likely to be a very biased opinion. If I had to pick a second favorite, it would be storyline that starred Ellen Burstyn and Jay Mohr. Their part of the film is centered around a mother and son trying to reconnect in a very short period of time, and to me, it was the one that seemed to be the most realistic. This is highly due to Burstyn's impeccable acting talent, and was really the only plot in the movie that had any emotional impact on me whatsoever.

It can go without saying that a script can either make or break a film. Most of the run of the mill romantic comedies don't try and push the boundaries with its dialogue and instead will stick to your basic romantic banter. Playing By Heart didn't do this, but I am not so sure that it's such a great thing. Some movies thrive on their unusual and quirky screenplays, Juno being a prime example, but what is necessary to sell the heavily stylized way of speaking, is for the actors to fully commit to it. As much as the cast of Playing By Heart tried, it appeared to me that you could tell the actors weren't convinced of the offbeat, and at times, very cheesy dialogue they were presented with. They gave it their best shot, but I personally felt that you could see the vague sense of doubt in the actors performances as they delivered their occasionally bizarre monologues. This doesn't go for the entire script, just more than one would expect from a film such as this.

There are some movies that are iconic for their decade and are able to age fairly well as the years go on, still continuing their legacy no matter how much time has passed. John Hughes has been able to prove this particular theory many times over. Playing By Heart is not a bad film, but it doesn't seem to have the staying power that other movies of its genre seem to have. Personally, the extreme '90s-ness about it doesn't bother me, but I can see how someone who was not either an adult in that decade or at least growing up in it, could be a little lost with all the references and clothing choices. What I do like about this film is that it unapologetically used everything the late '90s had to offer and put it on screen. It is like a 120 minute time capsule, giving you a look at a decade where even though it was not that long ago, seems to be an incredible distance away from what the world is like now.

When I watch Playing By Heart, I know that its not fantastic, but I still find myself enjoying it. I like its peculiarities and general tone. I do discover more and more corniness to it every time I watch it, but that's part of the fun in rewatching movies, you always find something new to observe.

Rating: 5/5

Gone Girl is a film full of intensity, twists and turns, where even when you know the story, it is easy to be compelled to watch it again and again.

On the surface, Nick Dunne (Ben Affleck) and his wife Amy (Rosamund Pike) appear to have the perfect relationship. They complement each other in every possible way. The pristine image of their life as a couple gets shattered when Amy goes missing and Nick becomes the primary suspect in her disappearance.

The majority of the mainstream films in existence are told in a very linear way. There may be the occasional use of flashback here and there, but for the most part, the plot goes through a straightforward sequence starting with the beginning of the character's story and following it to its conclusion. Gone Girl in no way follows this pattern. At the root of the film there is a linear story that can be followed, but avoids being forced into normalcy by having flashbacks, red herrings, and point of view shifts intertwined throughout the entirety of the film's runtime. This thriller keeps you on your toes more than most, because if you watch it without any previous knowledge of the plot, you will likely be unable to figure out what could happen next, because the direction style and characters are so unpredictable.

Unlike many viewers, I had not had a chance to read the book by Gillian Flynn before seeing the film, so I had very little information on what the story was about. I knew the general premise, but beyond that I was very uninformed. Honestly, and I rarely, if ever, say this about movies based on novels, I am really glad that I hadn't read the book beforehand. Whenever you watch a film based on a book you've read, especially if it is one you loved, you are inevitably going to be comparing the two mediums for the film's duration. When I first watched Gone Girl my ignorance to the plot allowed me to get fully absorbed in it, and fall for every trick and surprise the story had to offer. I found myself being filled with an eagerness and desperation to know how this very tangled plotline was finally going to unravel. This is of course majorly due to the brilliant story that was pulled from the mind of the book's author, but also because of David Fincher's direction and Rosamund Pike's performance.

David Fincher was able to master a very challenging feat, of making Gone Girl's ever changing trajectory be accessible and understandable to the general audience. He had to be able to prevent the viewers from figuring out the film's second act, but also make it so they wouldn't be so confused or frustrated that they would lose interest. Such a battle may not have been won by a lesser director, but Fincher was able to flawlessly pull it off. Rosamund Pike's character, Amy, is one where you are never sure what to expect from her or how you are supposed to feel about her. She is a character with multiple facets to her personality, and an abundant amount of intellect to go along with it, making her very hard to fully figure out. Pike is able to emanate those qualities, and is a major reason that Gone Girl is such an unusual, sharp, and gripping film.

I have seen Gone Girl many times now since its original release, and every time I watch it, I think the same thing, I wish that I were able to erase my memory so I could watch it again for the very first time. There's such a special quality that film can have, where it creates an experience that leaves a substantial and impactful mark in your memory. If the film is really sublime, you are able to recall the moment when you saw it and exactly how you felt watching it for that very first time. For me, Gone Girl is most certainly one of those films.

Rating: 4.25

An impressive effort given the extensive amount of content provided, Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix may not be the best in the film franchise, but its certainly not the worst.

Harry Potter (Daniel Radcliffe) has had to spend the suffocatingly hot months of summer trapped in the home of his muggle relatives, the Dursleys. He is alone and isolated from his friends and since witnessing the death of a fellow student, has been anxiously awaiting news on the return of Lord Voldemort (Ralph Fiennes). Harry has been unable to hear anything about what's going on in the world of magic, but when an unforeseeable event takes place, causing Harry to use his wand in the presence of his muggle cousin, he is finally taken away from the Dursleys and brought back to the Wizarding World.

Once back at school, Harry is being plagued by dreams of mysterious hallways and doors, the Ministry of Magic is calling him a liar, and his vile new Defense Against the Dark Arts teacher, Dolores Umbridge (Imelda Staunton), appears to have it out for him. With so much going against them, it appears that Harry and his mates are going to be hard pressed to find themselves having a normal year at Hogwarts.

With each installment of the Harry Potter films that were released after the Chamber of Secrets, the movies appeared to became less and less faithful to the books. For the most part, this wasn't done because extra content was added in, but because there was so much information in the books that they were unable to include everything and keep the film at a reasonable length. No Harry Potter movie faced that particular challenge as much as Order of the Phoenix did. The fifth book in the series is the longest one, and therefore has the most information packed in. I believe that the movie tried its best to show what it could, but even with excluding numerous chapters worth of important plot points, Order of the Phoenix came off as being very rushed in parts, especially in the beginning. I fully understand the struggle the filmmakers must have faced in deciding what to keep and what to exclude from the book, and that by removing some aspects, the timeline for the story had to be modified for it to make sense, but there are definitely some scenes that only occurred in the book that I would really have loved to see make it to the big screen.

Lord Voldemort is the primary villain of the entire series, but there are few characters as horrific as Dolores Umbridge. From her dainty maniacal giggle to her ability to make your skin crawl with her every word, Imelda Staunton is superb in every aspect of her performance. What's so unique about Umbridge, is that from the outside, she would appear to be a petite and cheerful human being, making her almost more dangerous than some of the more obvious and malicious evil doers. She can seemingly get away with her crimes due to her physical appearance and fabricated personality. Only those who have been privy to seeing the essence of her true soul are fully aware of the horrific deeds she is capable of doing. That type of character is not an easy one to pull off, because it wouldn't take much to have her villainy go too far and lose the essence of the character, thus turning her into a more expected antagonist. As nefarious as Umbridge may be, Imelda Staunton was one of my favorite parts of the film, because of how brilliantly she portrayed the character and stayed so true to the novel.

What never ceases to impress me is the quality of the special effects in the Harry Potter films. When you look back at The Sorcerer's Stone, the computerized visuals may not exactly be impressive by today's standards, but they are still pretty good for its time. The Order of the Phoenix however has aged remarkably well. Yes, as of right now this movie is only twelve years old, but a lot has changed in the world of CGI since then. It is because of the immense amount of time and detail that went into the visuals, both computerized and practical, that the movie has been able to hold up so well. Unlike the newer Fantastic Beasts series, the original Harry Potter movies clearly spent an incalculable amount of time making sure that the Wizarding World appeared as magical, marvelous, and immersive as possible. When you watch the movies, or read the books for that matter, you are supposed to want to be transported into that universe, and thanks to the design and set up of each of the sets and special effects, you can't help but wish more than anything that the magic being shown was real. When Harry enters the Ministry of Magic for the first time in this film, you are just as much in awe of what you are seeing as Harry appears to be.

There are many people who view The Order of the Phoenix as the worst film in the Harry Potter franchise, but I'd have to say that I disagree. This movie faced an uphill battle from the very start and I applaud its efforts at trying to fit in as much book content as it could. However overly fast paced it may be, it is still a Harry Potter story, so it will always hold a very special place in my heart.

Rating: 4.25/5

More than just a basic survival film, The Grey brings style and substance to an otherwise fairly repetitive genre.

Liam Neeson plays John Ottway, a man who is clearly running from his past, and has found himself working for an Alaskan oil company. His job is to use his skills as a sharpshooter and hunt the wolves that get too close to the base. However, Ottway appears to take pity on the animals he's had to kill, and seemingly respects the beautiful predators.

When the team working for the oil company have completed their job, they all board a plane to head back to Anchorage. While in the air, the nerves and tension of the men are high, as the plane seems to be experiencing a heavy amount of turbulence. Unable to remain in the air due to the storm, the plane and all its passengers plummet down into the icy Alaskan mountains. When Ottway wakes up, he realizes he is one of a handful of people to have survived the crash, and must take action to ensure his, and everyone else's chances of staying alive.

A small plane crashes into an undisclosed icy tundra. A story that has been told many times before, but what makes The Grey stand out from the others that came before it, and a few that have come after, is the strength in Liam Neeson's performance, and the added intensity of basic survival not being the only threat to the characters. I have seen many survival thrillers, and they are almost all focused around the concept of Mother Nature being enough of an endangerment to life that all other fear tactics are deemed unnecessary. In some films, like 2018's Arctic , this premise works, but it is not the same type of movie as The Grey. Both are very impressive and intense films, but portray that intensity in very different ways. The Grey doesn't disregard the power weather and nature has on the human body, but it doesn't make it the primary focus either. The addition of the wolves adds an element of danger that creates more scenes that are likely to increase your heart rate, and put you on the edge of your seat.

The wolf effects for The Grey are quite impressive overall. However, the scenes where the wolves are seen in the distance, or just implied to be there, are much better than any of the up close action or visuals. There's a scene in particular, where just the breath from the mouth of a howling wolf is seen, and to me, that is far more frightening than any of the sequences where you actually see the wolf full on. Seeing that breath hit the night air, and then be joined by the rest of the howling pack, is a piece of cinema that is effortlessly chill inducing. You can fully imagine the amount of fear that would be coursing through your veins if you were to be in that moment with those characters, and it makes you really appreciate the fact that you are watching the film from the comfort of your own home or movie theater.

Survival movies with a famous lead actor can at times be quite predictable, because you can almost guarantee that the big star attached to the title won't meet a violent end before the film's runtime has completed. With The Grey, I wasn't so sure of this particular theory. I was fairly convinced that all the plane crash survivors weren't going to make it out of the mountains alive, but I wasn't sure as to how or when they were going to die. There's so much uncertainty with a film like this. You can't just worry about wolves being the central problem, you also have the environment to consider as well. You have to think of both foes being likely sources for any of the character's demise, which is a tactic that keeps you on your toes for almost the entirety of the film.

Now, there are some people who strongly dislike The Grey, because it places a target on wolves, similar to what Jaws did for sharks. People worry the movie makes wolves seem like mindless killers, only focused on the hunt. There is a bit of truth in that statement, but only for some of the characters. If anything, The Grey brings out the already existing fears we all have about what we would do in a survival situation, and adds an unexpected amount of heart and compassion along the way.

Rating: 4.25/5

The Lion King (2019), though a bit redundant at times, is a visionary marvel that is most certainly worth a viewing.

King and queen of the Pride Lands, Mufasa (James Earl Jones) and Sarabi (Alfre Woodard), are proud to show off their new son and future king. As the years go on little Simba (JD McCrary) and his friend Nala (Shahadi Wright Joseph) fantasize about the day when they won't be under the paws of their parents and have to do what they are told.

One day, in order to prove they aren't little cubs anymore, Simba and Nala venture away from the safety of the Pride Lands in search of an Elephant Graveyard Simba's Uncle Scar (Chiwetel Ejiofor) told him about. It is there they encounter a pack of ravenous hyenas who are ready to ensure the death of the Pride Lands' future king. Saved by his father, Simba realizes there is much more to being king than false bravery, and begins to understand the responsibility that comes with the immense power, and that it will be a long time before he feels ready to take over the throne. However, little does Simba know that it is not just the hyenas that want him gone, and there is a far more sinister plan in the works.

With the release of the new Lion King, there has been much debate over whether or not the film is actually good. Some people are saying it is an unnecessary remake, others are saying it is a beautifully new rendition of a beloved tale. Personally, I find my opinions lie somewhere in the middle. I can see the validity to both sides of the debate, but I do lean more towards the opinions that are in favor for the film. The biggest complaint seems to be that viewers and critics alike are irritated with the shot for shot aspect of the film, saying that it brought nothing new to the story. While this is true, The Lion King was in a damned if you do, damned if you don't kind of situation. Unlike the numerous other Disney films, remake or otherwise, The Lion King didn't have as much untapped material to work with. If you compare it to a story like Cinderella, which has been retold and redone so many times that every version can practically have a brand new spin on it, The Lion King was really in a tough spot. If they had changed too much, people would have been irate, but apparently by changing hardly anything at all, viewers were unhappy as well, so they were facing an uphill battle straight from the start when they decided to remake such a legendary film. For me personally, I don't mind the shot for shot concept, because I think the breathtaking animation was really phenomenal to look at, and I rather enjoyed it.

The animation for this film is so realistic, that you have to keep reminding yourself it is not in fact an actual "live-action" film. The detail in the fur looks remarkably real, but it is the eyes in every animal that I found to be the most incredible. They look like the eyes you would see on these animals in the wild, but are given just enough of a glint of personality and soul behind them, that you are able to believe these animals have the ability to talk and have full personalities. I would say the only drawback to having the animation look so lifelike, is that the story begins to veer away from being "child friendly". I knew going into this film that the deaths and tragedies of the original Lion King had had a major effect on me as a child, and I was actually a little worried about how sad or emotional those same scenes would be in a more realistic light; my worries were definitely justified. More than just the heartbreaking material, some of the fights between the animals are so believable, that I can definitely see how they could be frightening to a very young viewer. The animation in itself is an unbelievable achievement, but may end up inadvertently upsetting some of its smaller audience members.

When the trailers for this film first hit the internet, everyone was marveling at the look of it, and there was great talk about the actors chosen to voice the iconic characters. Of course the vast majority were overjoyed at the casting of Beyonce as adult Nala, but it was the voices of Scar, Timon and Pumba that intrigued me most. When I was younger, the more villainous songs were the ones that I was drawn to, because they had a darker aspect to them musically that I really loved, which is why I was utterly disappointed by what was done in the remake for the song "Be Prepared". Whether it was changed because the voice of scar wasn't comfortable singing or because they wanted to stylistically change the arrangement, I couldn't tell you, but all I know is that I doubt I am the only one who felt more than a little cheated when that song, if you can even call it that, began to play in the film. On a more positive note, Billy Eichner, who voiced Timon, and Seth Rogen, who was Pumba, were a welcome breath of fresh air for the film's second act. With the drama being so heightened by the realism of the animation, their comic relief was needed more than ever, and they delivered it with ease and hilarity. Their lines, especially Eichner's, were without a doubt my favorite parts of the movie.

So, is the new Lion King a bad movie? I guess that's for the viewer to decide, but I also think it depends on the mindset you have before going into the theater. I went into it excited to watch it, regardless of what the critics had been saying, so my viewpoint was more focused on the positive rather than the negative. If you sit down to watch it already assuming you're not going to like it, than that will most certainly impact your viewing experience. My best suggestion, go into it with an open mind, bring your inner child to the surface, and sit back and enjoy.

Rating: 4.25/5

Yesterday; a feel good film that brought much more enjoyment than anticipated.

Jack Malik (Himesh Patel) is a former teacher who changed his career path in order to try and make it as a serious musician, but so far his attempts have been futile. His longtime friend and manager Ellie (Lily James) has been pushing Jack not to give up on his dreams, and believes she has the solution when she is able to book him a spot at a big upcoming music festival. At first, Jack is ecstatic about being able to play a real gig, but when attendance for his spot in the festival is painfully low, Jack makes the decision to quit his music endeavors for good.

On his way home, Jack is riding his bike when a sudden blackout takes over the city. Being swallowed by darkness, Jack is hit by a bus and thrown from his bike. While waking up in the hospital, he discovers that the blackout didn't just happen in London, but all over the world. After leaving the hospital, he is all set to head back to teaching, that is until he discovers he is the only person alive who remembers The Beatles. With decades of suddenly unknown hits at his fingertips, Jack has to decide if he will let this opportunity pass him by, or use it to his advantage.

My view on The Beatles is most certainly an unpopular one, as I have never been someone who would call themselves a huge fan. I really enjoy their earlier songs and definitely respect the genius and talent they have as musicians, but they've never been a group that I have spent copious amounts of time listening to. That being said, when I heard of the premise for Yesterday, I was most certainly intrigued. I honestly didn't know what to expect going into it. I knew the basic idea, but had no clue as to how it was going to be executed. After watching it, I can honestly say that, as a whole, Yesterday is a very solid and fully entertaining movie. It may have its predictable quirks here and there, but it was still able to pull off some surprises throughout its runtime, and kept me interested and tapping my toes to the music from beginning to end.

Yesterday is not technically a musical, rather a film that has music as its central focus. Even though I am not a huge Beatles fan, I did have some worries about how the creators were going to do the musical arrangements for the film. The Beatles songs are so iconic, I knew that if I were to find any issues with them, the major fanatics would be irate about them. In a way, I was almost an ideal candidate to like this movie, because I didn't have the same emotional attachments to the songs as others did. That being said, I believe that all viewers and listeners, big fans or not, will be able to enjoy Yesterday, and appreciate the respect that is clearly being brought to the music. Yes, the arrangements are slightly different, as the main character faces the struggle of trying to bring songs that were written with a '60s sound into the 21st century, but the familiar melodies and harmonies are still there and are essentially unchanged.

Even with the premise of a blackout removing prominent pop culture icons from the world, the general story of Yesterday was fairly straightforward; a musician's struggle with a romantic element intertwined. It has a simplicity and gentleness at its core, which was definitely enhanced by Himesh Patel's performance. His character is facing a moral struggle, knowing that he is using someone else's work to enhance his success, but feeling sympathy for him when he becomes overwhelmed by his sudden fame is very easy to do. Patel is able to take a story that is far out of the realm of possibility, and make the audience somehow believe it to be true. His reactions make you really wonder what life would be like without some of our most famous idols, and question what we would do if we were to be in his shoes.

It is clear to see how Yesterday is a love letter to The Beatles. As I left the theater, I began to question my outlook on the later years of the classic band, and have vowed to give the songs another go, and see what I have been missing. It is a film that can create new fans, no matter the age, and hopefully appease those who have loved John, Paul, George, and Ringo since the day they heard the first note of a Beatles song.

Rating: 4.5/5

Patriot's Day is a film with a palpable intensity and stellar performances from beginning to end.

In 2013, one of the biggest events in Boston, Massachusetts is about to begin; the Boston Marathon. Sergeant Tommy Saunders (Mark Wahlberg) has been assigned to work the finish line, though he is very unhappy about it. Looking around, there are thousands of people who have gathered to cheer on the athletes running in the famous event, and the energy of the crowd is high. The Marathon appears to be running smoothly, until two blasts go off by the finish line, causing mass chaos and multiple casualties.

As soon as Tommy is able to collect his bearings, he and his fellow Boston officers go into crisis mode, attempting to help as many injured athletes and spectators as possible. Once the scene is clear, it is up to the local law enforcement and the FBI to fight the race against time to track down and capture the two men responsible for the bombings.

When creating a film about a true event in history, there's always the risk of offending people who think the story was inaccurately portrayed, or that it was glorifying a tragedy. In my personal opinion, I felt that Patriot's Day was able to tackle the difficult task of relaying the events of such a recent incident, and do it in a mostly respectful way. Instead of making the main focus of the film be action and fear, which it could easily have done, it makes its theme focused around the unbelievable strength and resilience a city or a person can have. As the final credits roll, instead of wondering why someone felt the need for making a film such as this, I found myself with an unexpected feeling of pride and patriotism swelling in my chest. Now, I have lived in Maine my whole life, so the sensation I felt at the end of Patriot's Day could definitely be attributed to how close to home its story was for me, but I also think it is majorly due to the way in which the movie unfolded; starting with small snippets of information on each person involved, then culminating them into one collective band of people fighting for their home.

Given that the Boston Marathon Bombings happened only five years ago, many people can distinctly remember when it happened and what they were doing when they were watching the news, desperately seeking updates on the massive man-hunt that took place in the hours after the bombings. Patriot's Day uses a combination of created and archived footage to tell the story. By using some of the real surveillance and news videos from the actual event, it adds a level of realism to the film that could easily have been otherwise lost. The only piece of Patriot's Day that detracts from the genuine feel of the film, is the fact that Mark Wahlberg's character did not actually exist. His character wasn't completely fabricated, as it was a culmination of three Boston police officers who worked the case of the Boston Marathon Bombings. I understand the need to create a character, so that their lead role is able to be molded to fit the needed events of the plot, but even so, it does add a small dent to the overall solid armor that makes up the film.

In a movie like Patriot's Day, there's always going to be an incredibly large number of actors that make up the cast. Some leads, others supporting, but all essential in telling the story to the best of its ability. Now, it is clear that Wahlberg's character is supposed to be the central focus of the film, but in my opinion, he wasn't what I would consider to be the standout role. Though his part is quite small, J.K. Simmons' additions to the movie were what impressed me the most. Simmons plays Sergeant Jeffrey Pugliese, who heads the Watertown Police Department. Simmons was able to bring a special quality to his character, making him a very stoic and humble individual. There's no need to try and make him into an action hero, the air of strength and determination he gives off is enough to make him an incredibly memorable addition to the film.

When I first heard they were making Patriot's Day, I must say I had my doubts about how they were going to portray the events of the Boston Marathon Bombings. I did have some scruples about whether or not it was going to seem like a film studio making money off of other's misery, but that is in no way what this movie does. It is a film full of strength and power that leaves a mark on your mind for days after viewing.

Rating: 4.25/5

Ralph Breaks the Internet was a genuine surprise of a movie for me and an enjoyable one at that.

Since their unexpected meeting six years ago, Wreck-It-Ralph (John C. Reilly) and Vanellope von Schweetz (Sarah Silverman) have been inseparable best friends. When they're both not busy working in their prospective arcade games, they spend their free time hopping from machine to machine and having a good time while doing so.

One day, Venellope expresses her boredom with her game Sugar Rush, stating that she has all the race tracks memorized by heart, and wishes something exciting would happen for once. Attempting to help Venellope, Ralph goes into Sugar Rush and creates a new track, but in doing so, causes a human player to accidentally break the steering wheel as a result of attempting to control Venellope in the game. With the steering wheel broken, it appears that Sugar Rush will have to be unplugged forever; but when Ralph and Venellope hear there's a replacement part being sold on eBay, the decide to jump into the arcade's newly connected Wi-Fi, hunt down the replacement part, and hopefully save Sugar Rush for the foreseeable future.

For me, Ralph Breaks the Internet was a major improvement upon the first Wreck It Ralph. To be honest, I was not a fan of the initial installment, and when I saw they were making a sequel, I had pretty much decided that I wasn't going to waste my time in watching it. However, when I started hearing musings of the sequel's premise, my interest was definitely peaked. What really deserves the credit for getting me to watch this film is Netflix. As I was scanning through new titles, I saw the little clip of Vanellope at OhmyDisney.com, and I was instantly hooked. Now after watching it, I can say that this segment of the film was without a doubt my favorite part. For one, it was so full of imagery, jokes, and nods to all things Disney, that I actually rewatched those scenes several times in an attempt to see all the incredible thought and detail that was put in. Secondly, I was just blown away by the cleverness of this whole part. Even though there's a very small amount of screen time dedicated to the Disney portion of the film, it is obvious that an immense amount of time and effort went into making sure this segment had a big impact, which it definitely did. The fact that they were able to get all the original voices for the princesses was fabulous enough by itself, but then, adding the less-fairytale focused Disney franchises into the mix, just knocked it out of the park.

What had originally turned me away from the first Wreck It Ralph, was the idea that it boasted a concept solely centered around classic arcade games, but them spent the majority of its time focused on fictional ones. I know that in the interest of creating new characters and not having to pay an arm and a leg for creative legal rights, that this decision was likely the most sensible one, but I still found it a little disappointing. However, the same cannot be said for Ralph Breaks the Internet. Just like it would suggest in the title, this film takes its two main characters into the wide world of the web, and many of the gags and scenarios presented in the film are visually funny and colorful for the younger viewers, but verbally and intellectually humorous for the adults. I suppose if you are an audience member who doesn't spend a lot of their time online, many of the jokes made throughout the film will be lost on you, but for those of us who spend more time than we probably should surfing the web, this movie will without a doubt tickle your funny bone.

The odd quality that Ralph Breaks the Internet has, is that I found myself really enjoying this movie, but not for the original characters or even a lot of the major plot line. I really only loved the portions that were the homages and inventive nods towards the infinite number of websites that exist on the internet. Whenever the movie transitioned into a scene where a new villain or challenge faced Ralph or Venellope, I found my eyes starting to glaze over a bit, as I waited for the next ingenious joke or sequence that involved some sort of internet satire. Not saying that this makes this a bad film in any way, just a little strange that for me, the use of preexisting material slightly outweighed any of the original ones.

Even with the minor issues I had with the created characters for the film, I have still found myself thinking about Ralph Breaks the Internet days after first watching it. It is a film with a definite message about the way females have been portrayed in past animated films, as well as one that shows the vast nature of the internet itself. There's so much involved in Ralph Breaks the Internet, that there's really something for everyone to like, and that ability is something Disney has always been able to excel at.

Rating: 4.75/5

Hearts Beat Loud is a charming and sincere film that is deserving of more recognition than it currently has.

Frank Fisher (Nick Offerman) is a single father who is struggling to make ends meet for the record store he owns. His daughter Sam (Kiersey Clemons) will be going to college in the fall, but is struggling with her decision to move out west when her budding relationship begins to grow with a girl she met at an art gallery.

Frank and Sam both love music, and have being doing weekly "jam-sessions" since Sam was a little girl, and one night, though she is desperately trying to study, Frank convinces her to partake in one of their typical song filled evenings. They create a song titled "Hearts Beat Loud" and when Frank puts it on Spotify, it begins to garner a bit of recognition in the indie-music community. Thinking they have a potential hit on their hands, Frank starts to fantasize about the possibility of he and Sam forming a band, but she is steadfast on her decision to become a doctor. Together they must decide what the future holds for them, and how their music will fall into the mix.

Hearts Beat Loud slipped by my movie radar upon its initial release, and I wasn't even aware of its existence until I saw it being played on a bus I was traveling on. I could tell, even without sound, that it was a film I was going to like, so I waited until I was home to give it the proper attention I assumed it was going to deserve; I assumed correctly. Hearts Beat Loud is a film centered around the love for music, so it definitely needs to be watched with the volume up as loud as one can handle, and by viewers who are just as fascinated by the layers involved in creating a melody as the characters are. For as long as I can remember, I have had a strong passion for music, especially when it is worked into film, so it wasn't very long into the movie's runtime for me to realize that I was going to thoroughly enjoy it.

Years ago, I used to work in a record store, so movies with such a place as one of its main settings always have a special place in my heart. I love the lackluster look of the environment, with its scattered vinyl bins and album posters along the walls; it truly reminds me of the home away from home where I used to spend so much of my time. Such memories could have impacted my viewing, making me like Hearts Beat Loud more than the average audience, but I doubt it. There is so much to love about this film aside from one of its central locations. The record store is just one of the many genuine and heartfelt additions that were included in Hearts Beat Loud. Given the strong importance of music in the story, the songs created by Frank and Sam had to not only be catchy, but make sense for their characters. I can honestly say that since watching this movie for the first time, I found myself not only listening to the songs from the soundtrack, but having them stick in my head for some time after playing it. Proof positive that Hearts Beat Loud more than succeeded with the songs they created for the film.

What truly makes Hearts Beat Loud so wonderful, is the relationship portrayed between Frank and Sam. I have seen very few movies that have made a father-daughter relationship appear so realistic, genuine, and earnest. What I really love about it, is the film clearly implies that there's been conflict as well as emotional events and discussions in the lives of both characters, but it spends very little screen time showing the before-mentioned plot elements. By only implying such aspects to the characters' lives, their relationship is more believable. So many films have wasted time by having a child make a big proclamation to their parent, in order to add drama to the story, but by doing so, it makes the viewer wonder why that character waited until that exact moment to vocalize whatever life-changing piece of information they decided to say. Hearts Beat Loud pushes all that fabricated drama aside, and focuses more on making their characters appear as real as possible, and in fact makes their story feel so normal and ordinary, that you are able to just watch and enjoy, rather than question any of their decisions. The love and history between the two characters is powerfully evident, and is what truly sells the emotional vulnerability and love required to tell the story.

Nick Offerman is someone where if I see he has the lead in a film, I will generally make sure I take the time to watch it, and Hearts Beat Loud is absolutely no exception. Even if you aren't heavily into music, it would be near to impossible for anyone to dislike this film. It's leisurely pace and dedicated performances are enough to make any viewer happy. Plus, as a bonus, I would imagine almost any viewer won't be able to resist the temptation of tapping their feet to the music from beginning to end.

Rating: 4.75/5

As history has shown us, the people behind the Marvel Cinematic Universe rarely put out a bad film, and Spider-Man: Far From Home is proof of this continuing trend.

After battling Thanos, Peter Parker (Tom Holland) is in desperate need of a vacation. He wants nothing more than to go on his class trip to Europe with his friends, and to tell his crush M.J. (Zendaya), that he likes her. Unfortunately for him, Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson) has other plans in mind.

Just when humanity thought they were safe from an out of this world attack, a new threat called "the Elementals" begins to take over. Strange and violent entities made from fire, water, or air are starting to attack major cities around the world. When Peter and his class are in Venice, the Water Elemental preys upon the people of the streets. Without his suit, Peter can only fight the monster from the shadows, but when a new hero, Quentin Beck (Jake Gyllenhaal), who is quickly named Mysterio, appears on the scene, it seems to Peter that he may not have to fight this battle, or any future ones, alone.

With Spider-Man: Far From Home being one of at least seven feature films about the web-slinging hero, there's always debates going on about which actor has been the best Spider-Man. Each performer has their merits, but in my opinion, Tom Holland takes the prize. For one, he looks the most like a high-school student compared to the previous casting choices, but it is his ability to go from one scene, where he is comedically naive and charming, to another, where he is breaking your heart with the sincerity of his emotions, that makes him so perfect for the role. In this film, as well as any of the other MCU installments that feature Spider-Man, Holland has been able to wrap himself around the audience's heartstrings with his performances. He has an uncanny quality about him that makes him instantly likable, but it is his incredible talent for acting that makes him the greatest live-action version of Spider-Man we've been given thus far.

Spider-Man: Far From Home had the incredibly difficult task of being the next film in the Marvel franchise to follow the ground-breaking success of Avengers: Endgame. Being in the immense shadow of a movie with that unparalleled level of fame and hype, must have been nerve-wracking to say the least. Far From Home of course doesn't have the epic grandeur of Endgame, but it doesn't need it. Visually, it is one of the more innovative installations into the MCU, and that's not just focusing on the battle sequences. For one, it had to use many of the beautiful cities in Europe for its backdrop, which of course aided in making the overall look of the movie as brilliant as it was. What truly made the Far From Home be so stunning was the creativity behind the story and the villains. There's little that can be said without spoiling major content from the plot, so all I will say is that there's more than just swinging from building to building that makes Spider-Man: Far From Home really phenomenal to look at.

Marvel has always reveled in its ability to flawlessly blend comedy and drama into their stories, making your laugh out loud at one moment, and be on the verge of tears the next. Far From Home definitely has its' heartfelt scenes, but it definitely takes a lot of screen time to utilize the comedic potential that is present with Peter's character and Tom Holland's skill. With Peter Parker being so much younger than the other Avengers or any of the recurring characters, many of the jokes that are made are by zeroing in on how little Peter knows about pop-culture that it is outside his generation. Now, this attempt at comedy could easily have fallen flat, and even be viewed as too obvious or easy, but Far From Home makes it too delightful and endearing for the humor to fail. The writers also know how to quit when they're ahead, and that way their jokes remain fresh and not overworked by the end of the film.

With Endgame practically being guaranteed to be the last of the original phases of Marvel films, I definitely had my doubts as to where the the franchise would go, and how invested I would feel towards them if the staple characters were no longer involved. After viewing Far From Home, my worries and reservations have dissolved. Marvel has made sure to demonstrate how talented they are with their craft, and if any of the upcoming films being added to the MCU are as entertaining as this one, then sign me up to watch whatever comes next.

Rating: 3.75/5

She's the Man is a movie I watch more for its nostalgia factor rather than its skill, and if you watch it with that mindset, it can be a really good time.

Viola Hastings (Amanda Bynes) is the star player on her school's soccer team, but she gets a major shock when she is told that her team is being cut from the school's athletic program. Desperate to play, she approaches the boy's team coach and asks to try out, but is told that girls can't play as well as boys and is denied an opportunity to play.

Thinking that her soccer season is doomed to be over, Viola returns home to wallow, but discovers her twin brother Sebastian (James Kirk) escaping out the window and getting ready to head to London with his band, rather than go to his new prep school, Illyria. In a spur of the moment decision, Viola decides to impersonate her brother, go to Illyria, try out for the boy's team, beat her old school in the first match of the season, and prove that girls can play soccer just as well as boys, if not better.

So for starters, let me just say that I'm not kidding myself when it comes to She's the Man, I know this movie is far from being a cinematic masterpiece, but I truly do love it nonetheless. When this movie first came out, I was the exact age for being its target audience. I was a young teenaged girl who truly loved film, but didn't watch every movie looking for its' brilliance, imagery, or cinematography; I was mostly just looking to have fun at the movie theater. If you focus on that description alone, She's the Man most certainly fit the bill. The premise to the movie is inevitably going to be humorous, but also forces the viewer to suspend their focus on reality, and assume that people would actually believe Viola to not only be a boy, but convince people who knew her brother, that she is in fact him. Would this facade be truly possible? Of course not, but with a movie like this it doesn't matter. You watch it for its silliness and entertainment value, and nothing more.

What She's the Man does have going for it, is Amanda Bynes' comedic skill. Ever since she graced the small screen on Nickelodeon's All That, it was clear that Bynes was no slouch when it came to being humorous, and that's a major reason why she really dominated a lot of the teen comedy genre in the early to mid 2000's. Even though the plot of She's the Man stretches quite a ways out of the realm of believability, seeing Bynes' character attempt to pretend to be a man is still just as funny to me now as it was when I first watched it over a decade ago. She is fearless in her humor, and her timing is always flawless. Regardless of what others may think of this film, I will always look back on She's the Man and fondly remember the lovable, spunky, and hilarious qualities that Amanda Bynes brought to her role.

The only true negative I could honestly say towards She's the Man is something that I feel I could add as a comment to any of the cliche teen films that have been made over the years, and that is the unnecessary need to add frivolous fight scenes into the plot. I can honestly not think of one film of this genre that has not included a scene like this, and given the time period in which I grew up, I saw a lot of them. Sadly, She's the Man did not dodge this bullet. The fight scenes at least had a bit of importance to the plot, but for the most part, they just felt like an unneeded attempt to add some adrenaline to an otherwise low-key film. I am not saying that movies shouldn't have fight scenes, because there are countless films that have benefited from including them, but for a story like this, it really just cheapens it.

Even though I am well beyond the intended viewing age for She's the Man, I don't think I will ever come to a point in my life where I don't find it a fun movie to watch. It is an instance where the time in which you first saw a movie will forever impact how you feel about it for any future viewings. Had I watched it for the very first time as an adult, I may not experience the same affection towards it as I do now, but even so, I think that anyone who's initial viewing of it comes in adulthood, they could still enjoy it, because it is a cute little movie that succeeds in its goal to entertain.

Rating: 5+/5

Just when you think Pixar can't possibly make the Toy Story franchise any better, they prove their immense skill by coming out with the fourth installment.

Woody (Tom Hanks) and his gang are enjoying their lives at their new home with Bonnie. However, Woody does feel a little under-appreciated, as he was so used to running the show when they were all Andy's toys. When Bonnie is about to go to her kindergarten orientation, Woody sees an opportunity to make his move and show his knowledge and worth.

At orientation, Bonnie is feeling very scared and lonely, and Woody, being the experienced toy he is, takes notice. He helps her out by sneaking craft supplies and a little trash to her so she can create something. The end result is Bonnie's new favorite toy Forky (Tony Hale). When Forky goes home with Bonnie, he has a major struggle understanding that he is a toy and not trash. When Bonnie and her family go on an end of the summer road trip, Forky makes a break for it, and Woody must go on an adventure to get him back and make sure he is returned back home to Bonnie.

When Toy Story 4 began, what struck me right off the bat, was how unbelievably impressive the animation was. With this being the fourth Toy Story film, the characters themselves were not new, but the way they were presented absolutely was. Something that had been not as defined in the previous movies was the difference in texture and sheen between the plastic or porcelain toys. The original Toy Story was groundbreaking with its' animation, but it doesn't even hold a candle to the detail put into Toy Story 4. The scenes within the antique shop were where I really noticed this concept the most. The dust on the baseboards, the lifelike quality of the cat's fur, or the light reflecting off of Bo-Peep's (Annie Potts) cheeks were all immensely astounding to behold.

It is no secret or surprise when someone says that a Pixar film made them cry, as they have a strong tendency to evoke tears from their viewers, however I honestly didn't expect it from Toy Story 4. Going into the movie, I was more than a little unsure about what my opinion was going to be, because I felt the third film had a wonderful sense of finality to it, and originally I had anticipated the fourth movie to be a little unnecessary. None of that rings true now. I found myself enjoying Toy Story 4 more than 3, and maybe even more than 2, which had always been my favorite in the franchise up until now. This particular Toy Story movie used music to bring bring forth the emotion it was trying to convey, along with its' brilliant storyline and animation. I don't think I remember the music being such a prominent element in the other films in the way that it was in this one, and that is what really made the tears come to my eyes; especially in the final act.

You'd think that with there being so many children's movies in existence now, that there can be only so many stories to tell, and after awhile they'd all grow a bit repetitive, but Pixar has always been able to dodge that bullet. Toy Story 4 brought some more frightening aspects to their plot, as well as some unexpected hilarity and oddities. It is without a doubt one of the stranger additions to the franchise, and that could perhaps be why I loved it so much. I really admired the bravery behind the story, and how the writers knew that they needed to bring something new to the table, and were able to deliver that creativity in spades. Pixar has never failed to make me crack a smile, but Toy Story 4 definitely made me laugh out loud more than their average film had. It was one of those memorable movie theater experiences where there were times when just the adults were laughing, then sometimes just the kids, and then the blissful moments where the laughter from the entire audience almost muffled the volume of the actual film. Pure movie magic.

As much as I loved Toy Story 4, I really do hope this is the last one Pixar decides to do. This one ended on such a wonderful high note, that I would hate to see the franchise get cheapened with an unnecessary fifth installment. Although, I had initially thought this one was going to feel unnecessary, so who knows. Pixar obviously knows what they're doing, and they clearly felt the world needed more Woody and Buzz in their lives, and boy were they right.

Rating: 2.5/5

This Is Where I Leave You is as equally predictable as it is disappointing, with just enough scattered high notes throughout to keep you watching.

After the death of their father, four estranged siblings have to return home to sit shiva and mourn their shared loss. The problem with this arrangement is that only two of the siblings, Judd (Jason Bateman) and Wendy (Tina Fey), get along with each other. The other two brothers, Paul (Corey Stoll) and Philip (Adam Driver) are complete opposites, making for a lot of friction throughout the family's short reunion.

My general dislike for This Is Where I Leave You was quite unexpected. I figured with a cast consisting of Adam Driver, Jason Bateman, and Tina Fey, that the end results had to be good, but sadly I was mistaken. This Is Where I Leave You, I feel, is what happens when a movie tries too hard to be different, and ultimately falls into the same jokes and patterns of your typical indie drama-comedy. Just like other similar films in its genre, you can find sometimes unnecessarily and out of place inappropriate sexual content, a constant sense of uncomfortable awkwardness, and the attempt to find the humor in emotional despair. I know by that previous description, it seems like I would be someone who strongly dislikes indie dramedies, but on the contrary, I would actually classify them as one of my more liked film genres; as long as they are made well enough to be worth watching. Just watch Little Miss Sunshine if you want to see a brilliant example of this style of movie done right.

One of the constant happenings in This Is Where I Leave You that really got on my nerves, was the fighting between the characters. Not just arguing, but actual face punching, throw your sibling across the room fighting. Now, given the concept of the movie, I figured there would be one or two scenes of this nature present in the film, but this tactic definitely outstays its' welcome. It felt like there was almost half an hour of the movie just dedicated to the physical fights alone, and when you add that in with the verbal sparring, the idea of how much the siblings dislike each other becomes too obvious and very old, very fast.

Now, you might be wondering based on what I've written so far, why would I give this movie as high a rating as I did? Well, that would be thanks to the sheer skill in both Jason Bateman and Tina Fey's performances. They were clearly supposed to be the two characters that the audience were meant to be focused on, and even though the movie they were in was subpar at best, they definitely made it worth watching all the way through. Any of the scenes that were focused on just the two of them, were the ones that felt the least forced and where the chemistry between the characters on screen appeared the most natural. It is a testament to the talent of both actors, that together, they were basically able to save the film.

There are very few times where I watch a movie, and when the credits roll, I know I will likely never watch it again. I can probably count on one hand the number of films I've seen and thought this. With all that being said, I am not completely writing This Is Where I Leave You off, but it is one where I have my definite doubts on whether or not a rewatch will ever occur in the future.

Rating: 4.5/5

Miss Congeniality is a movie that was doomed to fail with the critics, but was almost guaranteed to be loved by its audience.

Gracie Hart (Sandra Bullock) is a tough as nails FBI agent, who prides herself on her less than feminine nature. When an undercover operation goes wrong, Gracie finds herself in trouble with her director, and that quite a few of her fellow agents have lost some of their faith in her. When the FBI receives another letter by the unknown criminal who goes by the name "the Citizen", all agents are on a mission to decipher the cryptic message to see where the next attack will be.

It is not long before Gracie and a few others at the FBI figure out that the Citizen's next target is the Miss United States Pageant. Knowing that they will need someone on the inside to prevent the attack, Gracie's coworker and friend Eric Matthews (Benjamin Bratt) suggests that she be the agent they send to be undercover. Though completely appalled at first by the idea, Gracie, her newly hired beauty pageant consultant Victor (Michael Caine), and the director of the pageant, Kathy Morningside (Candice Bergen) agree to give it a go.

Miss Congeniality is without a doubt one of my more watched films, not because it is a cinematic masterpiece, but because it is a lot of fun; which if I had to take a guess, is exactly what the creators of the movie were going for. Miss Congeniality doesn't reinvent the wheel as far as the typical pattern of a romantic-comedy goes, but it boasts a superb cast with an equally entertaining storyline to go along with it. Even though I have seen this particular film enough times that I can recite portions of the dialogue, I still can't help but love it just as much as I did the first time around. Even if the premise is a bit out there, and the end results are predictable, I just don't care. I have a genuinely good time watching it, and that's all you can ask for from a movie like this.

Performances in any film are crucial to the audience's ability to accept the storyline, and sometimes that concept is even more important for a comedy. If the characters are too over the top or beyond the point of belief, then the quality of the comedic attempts or drastically lowered; at least that's the way I see it. For Miss Congeniality, one of the reasons the movie works so well is that each actor knew how to fit their role without crossing over the boundary into ridiculousness. Sandra Bullock's portrayal of Gracie was no surprise, as she had been cast as a member of law enforcement as well as a tomboy before, but Michael Caine's was a slightly different story. Caine appears to rarely say no to a role, and sometimes that can be a detriment to an actor's career, but Caine always seems to put his best effort into his performance, no matter the role. So many actors could have easily made the role of Victor into your stereotypical effeminate stylist that can be found in countless rom-coms (not dissimilar to a role in Miss Congeniality's sequel) but Caine played it in a fairly refreshing way. It is clear what character archetype Victor is supposed to belong to, but instead of going overboard with it, Caine takes a milder approach to the role, which in turn adds a subtle and sarcastic humor to the character that could have been otherwise lost if the role had gone to another actor.

I have been a self titled "film fanatic" for as long as I can remember, but I think I will always be a hard person to satisfy when it comes to the comedy genre. I have never been a one for immature jokes or overly raunchy comedic material, so it is usually a fairly big deal for me if I enjoy a comedy. One of the many reasons I love Miss Congeniality is that there's no painful moments of forced humor, such as making someone trip or have gastrointestinal issues in order to get a laugh. They let the material speak for itself, and trust in their story and cast to make their writing funny, and it works. The movie knows when to stop a bit before it grows old or irritating, allowing for the film to reach its full potential and entertainment level.

When it comes to Miss Congeniality, I am not kidding myself, I know it's not a perfect movie by any stretch of the imagination, but sometimes movies are made just to be enjoyed, not to be marveled at. I occasionally tire of the concept that in order for a film to get a good review, it needs to be innovative or artsy. Miss Congeniality is a film that's made to watch and have fun with, and that is exactly what makes it great.

Rating: 5/5

A truly one of a kind children's film, Surf's Up is one of my personal favorite animated movies.

16 year old Cody Maverick (Shia LaBeouf) is a penguin living in Antarctica, who dreams of becoming a professional surfer. Unfortunately for him, it doesn't appear his goal can become a reality. However, when a camera crew making a documentary about the upcoming Big Z Memorial Surfing Competition arrives in Antarctica looking for surfing competitors, Cody finally sees his hopes for a career as a surfer potentially becoming a reality.

When Cody arrives at Pengu Island, he is completely overwhelmed and excited about the prospect of participating in a real surfing competition. When Cody meets the top competitor Tank (Diedrich Bader), he quickly realizes that he is not nearly as skilled in the sport of surfing as he once thought. With the help of local lifeguard Lani (Zooey Deschanel) and fellow surfing contestant Chicken Joe (Jon Heder), Cody will do his best to redeem himself in the eyes of the competition.

Surf's Up is without a doubt one of the most unique children's films made by a big name studio. For one, the concept of it being a documentary is brilliantly executed, but it is also truly creative and its jokes rarely, if ever, fall flat. I can honestly say that I there are very few films intended for children that have made me laugh as much as Surf's Up has. It is a movie that is more than enjoyable for any age, and I have yet to find an adult who doesn't love this film as much as I do. There are even times in Surf's Up where I found myself laughing at jokes that if they were made in any other movie, I most likely wouldn't have found it nearly as humorous.

What I really admire the most about Surf's Up is how accurate their portrayal of a documentary is. The way the "interviews" are conducted are spot on, and how they show past events that influenced the documentaries are exactly how I have seen them in the real life films of the genre Surf's Up is emulating. It is so wonderfully well done, that if you look passed the talking penguins, it is quite easy to forget that you are watching an animated film, and not a legitimate documentary.

Surf's Up is one of the best exhibitions of the importance behind good casting for voice acting. Shia LaBeouf doesn't necessarily have a distinctive or unique voice, but his acting skills effortlessly come through his cartoon character. Zooey Deschanel has one of the more recognizable voices in the film, and her soft, quirky tone is a great blend alongside Jon Heder's slow drawl, and the gravelly vocals of Jeff Bridges. There is a wide assortment of characters assembled for the cast, and I don't know if you would ever find a live action film where you'd see all the actors together, but put their voices to animation and it miraculously works.

Surf's Up may not be as popular as the majority of the animated films put out by Disney and Pixar, but it deserves just as much recognition. It is quick witted, innovative, and in my opinion, a must see film for viewers of all ages.

Rating: 5/5

One of my all time favorite summer movies, Chef is a film that never seems to get old.

Carl Casper (Jon Favreau) is a highly-renowned chef, on the verge of celebrity status. The only thing holding him back is the man who owns the restaurant he works for. Carl wants nothing more than to experiment with the menu he serves, but is being forced to create the same dishes day in and day out. Even though he is making the same mundane meals every day, Carl cannot seem to find any time in his week to devote to his son Percy (Emjay Anthony).

When a major food critic dines at the restaurant where Carl works, he is just as disappointed in the food as Carl has been. Unaware of how social media works, Carl blasts the critic on Twitter, not knowing that he has just started a viral online war. After an outburst towards the critic who trashed his menu, Carl must find a way to rectify his mistakes both inside the kitchen and within his family.

Chef is a film, that oddly enough, I didn't overly love the first time I watched it, but that particular opinion didn't last long at all. After my initial viewing, I had this nagging feeling of wanting to give the movie another shot, and I am so glad that I did. Chef has now become one of my favorite movies to kick off the summer with. When I watch it, I easily feel as if I could start it all over again, and not tire of it at all. There's a very unusual tone with this film, and it's hard to pinpoint exactly what makes it so unique. I believe that part of it is that it is effortlessly enjoyable, without any hint of pretension whatsoever. The actors fall naturally into their performances, and it is impossible to even tell that they're acting, and not actually the people represented on the screen.

Like many other movies made in the 2010s, Chef utilizes the world of social media to help move its plot forward. There are films where this particular tactic falls flat, but for Chef it is a major asset. It doesn't use it as strongly as a movie like Searching does, but by including the Twitter aspect to the film, it not only gives a driving force to the story, but adds a sentimental element to the movie that may have been missing otherwise. The great thing about the way Chef uses this particular form of social media is that you don't have to be overly proficient with how Twitter works in order to see the beneficial impact it has on the overall film. This movie speaks to multiple generations, and is immensely enjoyable because of it.

Jon Favreau is a director and actor that I have put on my radar to keep a watch out for his work. I have yet to see a film directed by him that I didn't at least like, and his take on the Jungle Book is a piece of cinema to truly marvel at. Chef is proof that Favreau is a Jack of all trades in the film world. He can go from animation to action and not lose any of his skill along the way. Chef is definitely what I would consider to be a low key movie in his collection of work, but it is just as entertaining as his more epic films. Favreau's performance is incredibly subtle in Chef, and not requiring any over the top actions or gestures. There is one moment where his character's emotions boil over, but even then, Favreau doesn't allow the performance to get carried away. This goes for every other actor in the film as well. Nobody has a scene where it could be considered, the greatest or most dramatic moment in a movie, but that's part of what makes the film thrive. There's almost a calming sensation that can be found by watching Chef, and it is majorly thanks to the excellent chemistry and portrayals given off by the cast.

I feel as if Chef is a movie that isn't overly well known, but for those who have seen it, they have fallen in love with it. You can see the immense amount of culinary training done by the actors playing the chefs, as well as the heart, and soul that was put into the film by entirety of the cast. I have rarely seen a film that has made food look as irresistibly appetizing as this, and my one major recommendation to any new viewer would be to not watch it on an empty stomach.

Rating: 4.75/5

Brilliantly directed and acted, Cape Fear is a thriller that packs a serious punch.

Convicted rapist Max Cady (Robert De Niro) has just been released from prison after over a decade of incarceration. Upon his reentry into the free world, the only thing on Cady's mind is revenge against the lawyer who defended him, Sam Bowden (Nick Nolte).

Meanwhile, Bowden, his wife Leigh (Jessica Lange), and daughter Danny (Juliette Lewis) are unaware of Cady's release, let alone his thoughts of vengeance. They are trying to enjoy their summer, but when Max sets his plan into motion, there appears to be nothing they can do to stop his reign of terror.

Cape Fear is one of the few classic film remakes that attempts to pay homage to its roots, but is still able to modernize it to the time in which it was filmed. This particular remake is definitely more violent and upsetting than what one would normally find in a film from the classic era, but it pays tribute to that time with its use of score and shadows. Given that the music in this film was originally an unused film track composed by Bernard Herrmann, it is clear as to why this movie hits so many Hitchcockian notes throughout its suspenseful runtime. This is a movie where the tension rarely ceases, and it is strongly due to Scorsese’s vision and the combination of the editing and the music.

Robert De Niro is famous for his committed performances, and his portrayal of Max Cady is certainly no exception. His character is filled with rage, and an unyielding willpower, which put together creates one intensely frightening role. The other actors have to basically build their characters off of whatever off the wall and psychotic decision De Niro chooses to do as Max Cady, and therefore Cape Fear has very believable reactions portrayed by its cast. You can tell they are almost as terrified to see what Cady/De Niro will do next, and have no way to plan their performance, but instead have to rely on instinct. Jessica Lange and Juliette Lewis are great examples of this in Cape Fear. Both have scenes in the film where their characters are being pushed to their emotional limit, and the end result is two performances that feel remarkably raw and genuine.

For Cape Fear, Scorsese clearly traded style and symbolism for reality, but it worked for the overall tone of the movie. There are aspects to the film, especially to De Niro's character, that would be very unlikely to be possible, but I don’t believe possibility is what Scorsese was going for. To me, it felt like turning this movie into a work of art instead of your run of the mill thriller was his goal, and he certainly succeeded. If this movie had been put into the hands of another creative team, the results would have been very different, and most certainly not as impressive or impactful. It would most likely have been another addition to the ever growing collection of thrillers that are fun to watch at the time, but forgettable as the credits begin to roll.

Cape Fear is a movie that I usually only watch once or twice a year, and it’s definitely not due to it being poorly made. I actually have to psyche myself up to watch it because there are scenes that make me immensely uncomfortable or stressed. However unsettling this movie may be at times, it’s 100% worth the viewing, because the performances and creativity are too good to be missed.

Rating: 4/5

In a romantic comedy full of charm, The Proposal is a movie that boasts a great cast and is incredibly easy to enjoy.

Margaret Tate (Sandra Bullock) is a fierce and feared editor for a publishing company in New York City. Andrew Paxton (Ryan Reynolds) spends every waking moment as Margaret's assistant. He despises her, but knows that if wants to become a book editor, he needs to meet her every demand.

When Margaret learns that she has violated the terms of her immigration, she is told she must go back to Canada unless she has proof that she shouldn't be deported. Panicked and desperate for a solution to keep her in the states, Margaret lies and says she and Andrew are going to be married. In order to sell their scheme to the immigration officer, Andrew and Margaret must prove their "relationship", and to do so, they must go to visit Andrew's family for his grandmother's 90th birthday in Sitka, Alaska.

One of the issues with looking at reviews for any rom-com, is that they are almost guaranteed to be negative. The critics always gripe about the lack of originality in the plot or that it follows a pattern. Well, here's my thoughts on that. Romantic comedies aren't supposed to be groundbreaking works of cinema. There should be a sense of comfort and ease while watching a film from this genre. You know there will be a moment where the water gets choppy for the couple around the second act of the film, yet you know it will all work itself out in the end. Not earth-shattering by any means, but enjoyable nonetheless. The Proposal is a great example of this concept. Yes, it does follow your typical rom-com formula, but it does so with excellent performances, and comedy that isn't too silly or over the top.

The Proposal is without a doubt one of my favorite romantic-comedies, and it easily in part to its' excellent casting, and that isn't just for the two leads. Every member of Andrew's family is made up actors and actresses who almost always make a film better, even the most mundane or ordinary ones. I for one feel that Mary Steenburgen, who plays Andrew's mom, is an actress who adds instant warmth and heart to a film, and she is without a doubt one of the best additions to the movie. Andrew's grandmother, played by Betty White, is quirky and a little crazy, but lovable all the same, and no one could do this as well as the incomparable Betty White.

As far as its' two leads go, I had already been a Sandra Bullock fan before this film, so I knew that I would like the female lead, but I wasn't completely sold on Ryan Reynolds yet; the Proposal changed all that. I actually found myself laughing more at the lines delivered by Reynolds than anyone else in the movie. He delivers his comedy with subtlety and effortless wit, and is just another example how great the casting for this film is. Though their is a noticeable age difference between the two, Reynolds' and Bullock's chemistry throughout the Proposal is both humorous and adorable.

The Proposal is a romantic-comedy that may have one of the biggest critic to audience review discrepancies I've seen. For audiences who enjoy rom-coms, they love it, but for critics who don't, they aren't very kind to it. This movie definitely has its' moments where the comedy might be overly goofy or strained, but for the most part, it is fun, delightful, and an all around good time.