shadowyx12 Reviews

The Accountant (2016)

"The Accountant" is a messy action thriller that's solidly directed and acted.

[7/10 · 26 October 2016]

"The Accountant" tells the tale of Christian Wolff, an autistic accountant (with a special set of skills), who becomes embroiled in a financial conspiracy involving a robotics company. He quickly discovers that he and Dana - the company's junior accountant - are in danger and decides to hunt down those who want them dead.

"The Accountant" is a film that requires more attention than your average action thriller. It should be noted that there are four narratives happening concurrently - the main one with Christian Wolff, another one recalling key events of Wolff's past, another focusing on a couple of Treasury agents trying to identify Wolff, and the final one follows an assassin trying to kill Wolff and Dana. There is a lot of exposition in this film, and it isn't always delivered subtly. Prepare for exposition dumps - there are a few of them and they make the film feel a lot longer than it is. The pacing isn't perfect either, but the film never gets too confusing. Outside of the excessive financial jargon, an average viewer with an engaged thought process should be able to follow what's going on.

Unfortunately, the film slogs quite a bit during the second act, so it may be difficult to keep engaged. However, the film does deliver moments of humour during the most unexpected of times (like at the end of this one action sequence); it was these moments that kept me from leaving early.

Most of the cast is pretty good. Ben Affleck is the obvious standout; his portrayal of an autistic man is not over the top nor clichéd but meticulously restrained and even empathetic. The filmmakers went to great lengths trying to keep every portrayal of autism as accurate as possible. Anna Kendrick, to me, feels miscast. She doesn't do a bad job of playing a fish-out-of-water character, but I feel like her temperament doesn't fit that of her character's. I think a better decision would have been to cast an unknown instead, or an actress who has done horror movies in the past.

J.K. Simmons, Jon Bernthal, Cynthia Addai-Robinson, and John Lithgow round out the rest of the main cast - and are decent with the less- than-decent material handed to them.

I also found the film to be solidly directed. The action sequences are satisfying beyond belief as they not only have so much build-up behind them but are also well-choreographed and visually creative - expect a mixture of gunplay with plenty hand-to-hand combat. The cinematography and editing are well adjusted and perfectly compliment the story.

Overall, I enjoyed "The Accountant" as I am a fan of films with complex plots and characters. I did lose track of what was happening at one point, but I still had a fair idea of who was doing what. Not the best film I've seen this year, but certainly not the worst - and far from being bad.

Snowden (2016)

Oliver Stone paints a thrilling and realistic portrait of one of our generation's most controversial figures.

[7/10 · 18 September 2016]

"Snowden" recounts the many events leading up to Edward Snowden's decision to expose several NSA secrets to the world, and the aftermath of that exposure.

The film is essentially a drama/conspiracy thriller with a core focus on the protagonist's relationship with his love interest. In many ways, "Snowden" reminds me a lot of "JFK" - another Stone film. Although I don't think this film compares to "JFK" in terms of excitement nor gravitas (nor being as technically jaw-dropping), I still enjoyed "Snowden".

Joseph Gordon Levitt is nearly perfect as Snowden. He not only has his voice and manner of speaking down but he also explains complicated technical jargon as if it was second nature. Throughout Levitt's brilliant performance, we see the hardships of Snowden's life gradually subtly take a toll on his character. Simply put, I felt sympathy for Snowden.

Shailene Woodley gives a powerhouse of a performance as Lindsay Mills, Snowden's girlfriend. She's introduced as a fun-loving, relatively carefree photographer in the beginning but becomes increasingly estranged as the years go by and her boyfriend constantly leaves her in a shroud of secrecy. She acts as the perfect foil to Levitt's slightly awkward/consistently conflicted Snowden. This is by far one of Woodley's best roles.

The rest of the ensemble cast isn't nearly as memorable as the film's two leads, but they give believable performances. I do want to give an honorable mention to those who play the team assembled by Snowden to leak his information - Melissa Leo, Zachary Quinto, and Tom Wilkinson. Their realistic portrayals of Poitras, Greenwald, and MacAskill act as a driving force in elevating the film's dramatic tension.

The story jumps back and forth from Snowden's past to Snowden conspiring with his team in a Hong Kong hotel room. The structure is easy enough to follow for just about anyone but the pace may be insufferably slow for most viewers. The film takes its time to explore the different time periods of Snowden's employment within the CIA and NSA. We see him learn (and in turn, we learn) about the different programs used by the NSA and just how invasive and threatening they can actually be.

The emotional core lies in the increasingly shaky relationship between Snowden and Mills. JGL and Woodley have fantastic chemistry, but the film goes a little too far in drawing out their characters' relationship problems. At some point, their ups and downs repeat and slow the film down to a crawl a result.

"Snowden" couldn't have been released at a better time. In a time of strong political turmoil, Stone's film reminds viewers to reevaluate Snowden's actions, mass surveillance, and your right to privacy. The film serves as a counter to how the government and mainstream media wants you to perceive Snowden.

"Snowden" is far from being one of Oliver Stone's bests (the main problems being its uneven focus, pacing, and duration) but is a well-made film that's visually compelling and thoroughly researched. It won't be able to hook everyone in but it will certainly make them shudder.

Suicide Squad (2016)

"Suicide Squad" is fun but will probably leave you with a headache

[5/10 · 28 August 2016]

Following the devastating events in "Batman V. Superman", top government agent Amanda Waller presents the idea to form 'Task Force X' - a combat team composed of the most dangerous villains within the United States' prison system. The squad's main goal will be to counter otherworldly threats that would otherwise be too difficult for the military to handle. In exchange for successfully completing their missions, members receive a ten-year reduction off their sentences. After a new, supernatural terror arises, the team is forced to band together and work under the supervision of Colonel Rick Flag and his squad.

The greatest strength of "Suicide Squad" is its cast. Margot Robbie shows her true acting chops as the delightfully devilish Harley Quinn; her performance of that iconic character is reminiscent to how she's portrayed in the "Batman: The Animated Series". She perfectly captures her unpredictable, goofy nature as well as her emotional/romantic side (there is one scene that particularly highlights this aspect). Her chemistry with the rest of the cast is palpable but especially strong with Will Smith's character, Deadshot.

Will Smith rocks it as Deadshot, being both a hardened, no-nonsense assassin and an all-around good guy with a concept of honor and respect. Unfortunately, Smith seems too comfortable in this role and, as a result fails to completely merge with his character. Most of the time he's on-screen, I don't feel like I'm seeing Deadshot, but just Will Smith being himself in an awesome-looking costume.

The rest of the cast doesn't compare to these two, but they still made an impression on me. Jared Leto proves he is worthy of playing the clown prince of crime; Jai Courtney is surprisingly absorbed into the role of Captain Boomerang (I didn't even recognize him); even Joel Kinnaman manages to bring some levity to the movie despite playing the hardened Colonel Flag (but his performance is bone dry). Viola Davis ties this stellar cast with a cold and menacing performance as Amanda Waller. Ayer does his best to salvage what he can from a script that probably received a million notes from Warner execs; the strongest aspect of his direction (for this movie) lies in his ability to create chemistry between the characters. However, aside from that, David Ayer has directed far better films in the past.

The script lies on the other end of the spectrum – it is riddled with plot holes, contrivances, sentimentality, and predictable moments. On the other hand, it suffers from a lack of meaningful moments, character development, and, of course, the Joker. The villain in this movie (Enchantress) is forgettable and is only evil because the story requires her to be. However, despite these story sins, I still had a fun time watching "Suicide Squad". All I had to do was turn off my brain and remind myself that I was about to watch a popcorn flick that had no intention of taking anything seriously.

Another thing about this movie that could easily irk people is its musical selection. Almost every major song that pops up in a "Suicide Squad" trailers also appears in the movie itself. Most of the songs are poorly utilized, but there are scenes that work really well with the musical selections (e.g. during each character's introduction).

"Suicide Squad" works well if you're a casual fan of DC's comic books. The cast is fantastic, the script could have been far better, and everything else – the VFX, the editing, the cinematography, etc. – is mostly hit and miss. I had a fun time watching "Suicide Squad" but will probably skip it should I run into it again.

Jason Bourne (I) (2016)

It's good as a stand-alone popcorn flick, but fails to live up to the original trilogy.

[6/10 · 12 August 2016]

10 years after the events of "The Bourne Ultimatum", ex-CIA agent Nicky Parsons (Stiles) uncovers new information on the now-defunct 'Treadstone' program. This information is significant enough to cause her to seek out Jason Bourne (Damon), who currently lives off the grid and makes a living off of illegal fights. The two set out to find who really masterminded the CIA's original black-ops program – and why. Along the way, they encounter fierce opposition from the Director of the CIA (Jones) and an assassin (Cassel) who's out for Bourne's blood.

I entered this film with high expectations – and came out only slightly disappointed. "Jason Bourne" is by no means a bad film but is overshadowed by the films in the original trilogy.

Matt Damon still rocks as Jason Bourne; Paul Greengrass' direction is as intense and exciting as ever, and the action setpieces are top- notch (even if they do get too confusing at times). The final climax may feel over-the-top (yes, even more over the top than the final climaxes of the previous Bourne films), but it will have you rocking in your seat!

The script is the weakest link here. "Jason Bourne", for some reason, lacks the sense of urgency and relentless forward momentum that made the previous installments so gripping. The addition of the new characters failed to generate my interest. The story is predictable (Greengrass missed the opportunity to write something truly original) and the pacing ultimately takes away from the viewer's attention. There are also multiple scenes that feel out of place and act as boring roadblocks for the main plot.

For a franchise that's famous for dealing with the topics of government surveillance and privacy, you would really think that 'Jason Bourne' would push the envelope on that issue. It doesn't. The film takes a heavy approach to those themes and ends up with a rather convoluted subplot that doesn't fit with the tone of the film.

The ensemble cast isn't given much to work with. Vincent Cassel gives a menacing and cold-blooded performance as 'the asset' but co- stars Tommy Lee Jones and Alicia Vikander fail to stand out (but they do have their moments of brilliance). Julia Stiles nearly took me out of the movie with her less than convincing performance – yes, she's that terrible. I don't know if it's because she was never a good actress in the first place or if she just doesn't care anymore, but my god, she gave one of the worst on-screen performances I have seen this year.

Although this is far from being Greengrass' best movie (or anyone's for that matter), "Jason Bourne" is a decent action-thriller that suffers from a clichéd script with too many snail-paced scenes. Expect the film to feel a lot longer than its two-hour runtime.

Finding Dory (2016)

A sequel that does justice to the original.

[7/10 · 25 July 2016]

Dory now lives with Nemo and Marlin. From time to time, she even tags along with Nemo's class on field trips. On one of these trips, Dory gets knocked out while witnessing a mass stingray migration - and reawakens her childhood memories. After recalling that she was separated from her parents at a young age, she sets out on a journey to California with Nemo and Marlin to find them.

"Finding Nemo" was lightning in a bottle - not only does it contain a wholly original concept but it also managed to shift many of our perceived attitudes on the art of animation. It was a perfectly contained story - one immune from getting the franchise treatment. Before this year, I honestly believed that making a sequel or prequel to this brilliant film would have been a bad move on Pixar's part.

Thankfully, Pixar proved me wrong. Although I still believe that no sequel/prequel to "Finding Nemo" can stand up to the original film, I wholeheartedly welcome "Finding Dory" with open arms.

The film is directed and co-written by Andrew Stanton - the mastermind behind the original "Finding Nemo". For "Finding Dory", Stanton and his team bring their A-game: the animation is wonderful (as always), the voice-acting is top-notch, the euphonic score by Thomas Newman is Oscar-worthy, and the cinematography (lighting, camera angles, etc.) is breathtaking beyond words.

Unfortunately, the story is overshadowed by those elements (as well as the original film). Dory's plight still tugged at my heartstrings and her journey made me laugh multiple times; however, I can't help but think that Stanton and his writing team may have squandered the story's full potential. The story is written rather haphazardly, but still comprehensible. Some viewers may be disoriented/annoyed by the film's constant cutting among the separated characters and time periods, as well as the sudden shifts in mood.

"Finding Dory" also introduces an entirely new cast of characters – and they're just as entertaining and enjoyable to watch as Dory herself. The additions of Hank the Octopus, Destiny the Whale Shark, and Bailey the Beluga are outstanding. Not only do all three of these sea creatures have their own unique personalities (leading to some hilarious situations), but they each have their own distinct character arcs!

On a final note, the last quarter of this film was without a doubt the single most exciting thing I've seen in theatres in a long time.

"Finding Dory" is a gorgeous film filled with suspense, laughs, heart-wrenching moments, and thought-provoking sentiments. The story is a bit of a mess, but that shouldn't keep someone from enjoying this film.

The Nice Guys (2016)

Shane Black kicks back to his signature style with flair and reverence.

[8/10 · 1 June 2016]

In the era of disco and cheesy moustaches, enforcer Jackson Healy (Crowe) teams up with detective Holland March (Gosling) to track down a young woman last seen acting in a porn film. As the hilariously uncompromising duo gets closer to finding their target, they accidentally stumble upon a much larger conspiracy...

If you enjoyed "Lethal Weapon" or "Kiss Kiss Bang Bang", then you should feel right at home with this mystery-comedy directed and co-written by Shane Black. The film is bolstered by a tightly-knit script as well as strong performances from most, if not all, of the cast. The chemistry between Gosling and Crowe is explosive; not only is the duo's comedic timing on point, but both serve as strong foils to each other's personalities. A genuine connection can be felt in their relationship throughout the film.

Another actor who deserves a special mention is 15-year-old Angourie Rice (who plays Holland's quick-witted and observant daughter). In my eyes, she is the true star of this film. Rice not only infuses her character with a rich energy that few child actors possess but also has no problems keeping up with her enormously talented co-stars. There is not a single scene where she gives a weak performance – Rice was by far the best casting choice Black and his team could have made for the role of Holly March.

The production design, costume design, and cinematography also deserve a special mention. The film is so seventies in the way it is designed and lit, it actually feels like it was made in the seventies. The filmmakers also hid plenty of little nods toward the culture and political climate of that period throughout the film (which makes a second viewing all the more fun). Additionally, the film's musical selections and soundtrack will have you settled in immediately.

At its core, "The Nice Guys" is a genuinely funny and sometimes shocking film. It features a convoluted story that's big on laughs, heartfelt redemption, and flashy action scenes. Realistically speaking, the only problem that I have with this film (and see others having) is exactly that: the film's convoluted and seemingly senseless plot. Nevertheless, for those looking to get away from this month's stale slate of sequels and adaptations, but still want to see something entertaining and well-made, this is the film for you.

The Jungle Book (2016)

It exceeded all my expectations.

[8/10 · 20 April 2016]

When I first saw the trailer for Jon Favreau's "The Jungle Book", I groaned. Up 'til that point, I found every single one of Disney's live-action adaptations to be disappointing; their screenplays were boring and lacking substance.

However, I was surprised when the film received staggering box- office numbers and glowing reviews. I decided to give the film a chance - and found myself blown away. Not only is this Disney's best live-action adaptation to date, but one of the best live-action adaptations of a classic children's tale - period.

"The Jungle Book" is a visual spectacle that boasts top-notch animation (unsurprisingly) and convincing CGI. The script is fantastic in that it improves on the original premise of the animated classic by mixing it with a thrilling sense of drama and adventure. The story focuses less on musical numbers and more on Mowgli's journey and the conflicts that arise among the animals over the protagonist's true identity. Most importantly, in my opinion, is that Justin Marks (writer) made a smart decision to present Mowgli as a smart and resourceful kid who can act on his own rather than a clueless troublemaker. Marks could have made this film a painful experience to sit through if he decided on the latter but luckily, he didn't.

The plot is also a lot darker than that of the original's - there are a couple of twists in there that really caught me off-guard. Luckily, the film is balanced with a number of lighthearted sequences that recalls fond memories of the original animated film.

The cast is superb. Newcomer Neel Sethi captures the essence of Mowgli with reverence and heft - he receives top marks for both his sadder scenes with his wolf clan and his joyful scenes with Baloo; he also does his action set pieces with solid determination. Additionally, all of the voice actors do a great job with their respective characters - but Idris Elba and Bill Murray are the standouts. Elba delivers a spine-chilling and brutish performance as Shere Khan while Murray is hilarious as the relaxed and lovable Baloo.

If Disney allowed their filmmakers more time to elevate their future live-action adaptations to the same level of quality as "The Jungle Book", I would be more than happy to see Disney continue making these kinds of films.

Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016)

A mediocre popcorn flick that ultimately failed to engage me

[5/10 · 30 March 2016]

Is "Batman vs. Superman" the worst superhero movie ever made? No. Is it the worse superhero movie ever made by Warner Bros? No (I'm looking at you, "Batman and Robin").

Putting aside the majority's hatred of this movie for a minute, "Batman vs. Superman" does have some truly wonderful scenes that have to be witnessed on the big screen; this is especially true for the last forty minutes. The fight scenes - which are shot and edited with surprising clarity - are well-choreographed and set to an adrenaline-pumping score by Hans Zimmer. Snyder's rambunctious visual style adds a dramatic heft not seen in any "Batman" nor "Superman" fight scene before.

However, that being said... there really isn't that much left that's GOOD about this movie. The whole battle between Bat and Supes lasts only FIVE MINUTES - and it's nowhere close to being as impressive as the battle with Doomsday.

The writing, pacing, and character development are serious lacking; even Terrio's rewrites couldn't have salvaged the messy, rushed plot the studio tried to force on this movie. Instead of focusing solely on the main characters, the movie jumps around quite a bit from main characters to supporting characters that only hardcore fans would care about. At any given time, there would be at least 3-5 different story lines going on concurrently. Not only are these story lines difficult to keep track of (because of the horrid pacing), but they're also incredibly BORING (and some of them are irrelevant). The first 2/3 of "Batman vs. Superman" is like this - minimal action with a tonne of plot-building and exposition.

I also found myself struggling to connect with any of the characters. It has nothing to do with the fact that I'm familiar with them - the writers just didn't put in any reasons as to why I should care about them or what they're fighting for. Batman's reason for wanting to fight Superman is misguided; Luthor's desire to get rid of Superman is never properly justified; and Superman's reason for fighting Batman could have easily been resolved in another way.

The acting is okay - even Jesse Eisenberg does an okay job playing Lex Luthor. The only thing that's truly regrettable about his character is the way he was written and directed. I mean, what was everyone thinking when they thought, "Yeah, let's turn Lex into this annoying young brat who stammers a lot and has ridiculous hair"!? With the movie being as dark and serious as it is, it was a poor decision to make Lex have that kind of a personality (and even if the filmmakers intended him to be the comic-relief, they too failed on that front). I would have much preferred it if Snyder went with the 'bald-headed, power-hungry' version of Lex.

To summarize, "Batman vs. Superman" is a poorly-written movie with decent performances and even better fight sequences. Unfortunately, a majority of this movie is sluggish, uneven, and not very captivating. I personally disliked this movie and will probably never watch it again.

Kung Fu Panda 3 (2016)

What it lacks in dramatic heft, it makes up for with visual splendor.

[8/10 · 2 February 2016]

If I wasn't such a fan of the 'Kung Fu Panda' franchise, I would only give its third installment a 7/10. Anyone who has enjoyed the past films will feel right at home with this one.

After being Dragon Warrior for quite some time now, Po learns that he must take the next step of his journey by becoming a teacher. However, he quickly gets sidetracked as both his biological father, Li, and a new supervillain, Kai, appear in his life. Now Po must find a way to not only become a teacher but also reconnect with his father and overcome his new foe.

'KFP 3' offers much of the same in terms of story when compared to its predecessors. Although it is refreshing to see a shift in tone and pace (when compared to the much darker 'KFP 2'), the film itself doesn't feel as dramatic or fulfilling as it should be. There are, of course, darker moments in this film, but they end up blocking character development rather than adding to it.

The villain in this film, Kai, is absolutely fantastic - the opening scene says it all (IMHO, the opening scene is worth the price of admission alone). J.K. Simmons was cast perfectly in the role. In addition to capturing the ferocity of his character, Simmons also gets his sarcastic attitude down to a tee.

The technicals of this film (the voice-acting, the animation, the sound effects, the music) are outstanding. It's worth noting that 'Kung Fu Panda' is one DreamWorks Animation's crown jewels, so it only makes sense that the company would put their best foot forward for this film.

Overall, 'KFP 3' offers a more lighthearted, action-packed adventure that has some truly shocking moments. I personally think that the film may have contained too many jokes, but I can't deny that I had some genuine bursts of laughter while watching it.

The Hateful Eight (2015)

Quentin Tarantino returns to form with his latest film.

[9/10 · 1 January 2016]

I'll admit - Tarantino was one of the very first filmmakers to inspire me to start taking movies a little more seriously. I've enjoyed almost everything that he has worked on. I have seen every film that he has directed - and 'The Hateful Eight' is the latest one.

However, putting my fandom aside, I will try to review Tarantino's latest film with as little bias as possible. Before I dive in, I have to say that this film is not as action-oriented as 'Inglorious Basterds' or 'Django Unchained', nor as game-changing as 'Pulp Fiction'; if anything, 'The Hateful Eight' falls more in line with Tarantino's first film, 'Reservoir Dogs'.

Although this is by far my favourite film of the year, I do not consider it to be the best.

All the main actors are delightfully despicable. They are the main reason why I stuck around for the entire 2 hrs. and 48 mins. of this film's runtime. Not only do they bring a great deal of enthusiasm and energy to their characters (trust me, every actor seemed like they had fun with his/her role), but they also managed to create this undeniable chemistry for them. There are no interactions that feel awkward or forced - everyone just kind of works naturally off of each other. Jennifer Jason Leigh is the standout here; without giving away too much, her performance as Daisy Domergue will more than likely make your skin crawl - she is scary good in the role. Samuel L. Jackson also gives his best performance in recent years. There are scenes where his delivery can either get a crowd cheering or laughing their guts out (all because of how unexpected he can be).

The score by Ennio Morricone might possibly be the most memorable of this year's. It's a dark and creepy vibe mixed with Morricone's signature western vibe - and it sets the mood perfectly for what's to come.

The story is unlike anything I've seen on the big screen before. This isn't a traditional story of good guys vs. bad guys - it's a story about morally ambiguous characters who couldn't trust each other less. It is both suspenseful and unpredictable - something that a lot of films these days aren't. I personally had a lot of fun trying to figure out what would happen next based on the clues left by Tarantino. Yes, the film does feel incredibly slow at times (especially during the middle), but Tarantino makes up for it by making each payoff more shocking and rewarding than the previous one. The final climax is a fantastic surprise - perhaps one of Tarantino's finest.

The cinematography is breathtakingly beautiful. Every time there's a wide shot of the stagecoach galloping across the snowy terrain, my eyes can't help but go wide. Unfortunately, most of the film takes place inside, so there aren't that many shots of the surrounding natural environment. However, that's not to say that the indoor shots aren't also great to feast your eyes upon. Even though the film is shot with 65mm film (and projected to 70mm), Tarantino and Richardson (D.P.) still managed to make the most of showing off the film's wonderfully designed haberdashery.

Tarantino's daring direction and bold decisions not only make 'The Hateful Eight' one of this year's most unique cinematic experiences but also one of this year's more problematic films. As mentioned, the film is LONG - and one can really feel it drag on at certain points. The pacing will throw off those expecting a lot more violence (don't worry, there's some good bloody violence in this film as well). Finally, a lot of what happens in this film doesn't contribute to the main plot, but to character development instead (and to great effect).

In reality, if I weren't a fan of Tarantino, I would give 'The Hateful Eight' a 7/10. For an average viewer, the film will seem like a long and boring journey. For a true film fan, it won't be something you'll want to miss.

Star Wars: Episode VII - The Force Awakens (2015)

'Star Wars' is finally restored to its former glory.

[7/10 · 21 December 2015]

For those of you who have doubts about the ratings that are being given to this film - keep doubting them. Let the fanboys give their 10/10s, and let the haters give their 1/10s. But let me say this - having rewatched all the episodes, 'The Force Awakens' stands as the third best 'Star Wars' film in the franchise - just behind the original 1977 'Star Wars' and 'The Empire Strikes Back'.

There are a lot of similarities between this film and the Original Trilogy - both in terms of characters and plot points. I'm not going to go into much detail about it, but all I can say is that I was reminded a lot of what took place in that trilogy. I personally love the fact that Abrams and Kasdan took the story in a familiar direction, yet also added just enough new elements to keep the film from going stale. It's been a long time since we've seen a PROPER 'Star Wars' film, so anything that felt too new might have just have been harder to accept.

Once I got over my hype of seeing this film, I also realized that the story contains quite a few of problems - mainly plot conveniences. Some of the major events that propel the plot forward just kind of 'happen'. In addition, I felt that the plot reveals certain details a little too early - thus killing the suspense of some of the more dramatic parts of the film. I also had some issues with the pacing of the action sequences (especially during the dogfights); the editing jumps to different characters more times than necessary. It's not disorienting, but those scenes certainly could have been tightened up a bit more.

Every actor tries their best to bring life to their characters - and the overall effect is amazing. This is, by far, the best acted 'Star Wars' film since 'Episode V'. Many of the major players in the new cast - including Ridley, Boyega, and Issac - are not only convincing in their roles, but have rightfully earned their places in the existing pantheon of 'Star Wars' actors. I am sure that their characters will eventually be as famous as Luke Skywalker, Han Solo, and Princess Leia.

All of the technical factors in this film are done to near perfection. Both the VFX and SFX departments deserve to be commended as usual (possibly with Oscars). The cinematography is reminiscent to that of the Original trilogy (with plenty of awe-inspiring wide shots thrown into the mix). The editing is consistent and helps this epic adventure feel more accessible. And the score by John Williams is... what more do I have to say about this godly composer!?

In my opinion, Disney could not have picked a better director than J.J. Abrams (okay, maybe Ridley Scott) to bring us 'The Force Awakens'. Everything he did with this film just felt 'right'. Sure, he made some mistakes here and there, but the experience that he crafted for all of us to enjoy just drowns those mistakes out.

I personally had a great experience watching 'The Force Awakens' (and I'm not that big of a fan either), and I'm sure anyone who even remotely likes 'Star Wars' can have a great experience watching this epic film.

The Hunger Games: Mockingjay - Part 2 (2015)

An ultimately unfulfilling finale.

[7/10 · 29 November 2015]

What else could one have expected from what is considerably the worst book in the trilogy? The second part of "Mockingjay" is pretty faithful to its source - and suffers because of it. Although longtime fans will be pleased, most regular viewers will be left to wonder why this movie feels so unsatisfying.

Lionsgate's decision to split the finale may have led to a short- term boost in their profit margins, but it was an ill-fated decision for both the franchise and the audience. Instead of having ONE what- could-have-been great conclusion to a good franchise, we're left with two movies that are both, quite frankly, boring.

Do not expect this final installment to be a non-stop ride full of action and final showdowns. Worst yet, the whole thing just kind of cuts abruptly at a certain part (you'll know it when you see it). You don't even get to see the immediate aftermath of the 'war'.

Another thing that made me slightly confused was the ending. The film makes very little effort in letting us know what happen to the other (important) supporting characters. Here was a chance for the filmmakers to really expand the world - and they didn't even bother to. While some of you may be fine with that (I still remember the problem with the multiple endings in 'The Return of the King'), many of us will feel cheated and left in the dust because of this.

Aside from the major story flaws, there isn't much else that is wrong with this 'Mockingjay Part 2'. It captures the spirit and tone of its predecessors (albeit in a much darker and dreadful mood) and doesn't deviate too much from any of the franchise's preestablished elements (e.g. Katniss's love triangle). The cast is good as always (but no one stood out), the direction is good, the editing is even better (save for one fight scene), and the visual effects look better than ever.

Make no mistake - a small part of me still regrets buying a ticket to see the final installment of 'The Hunger Games' franchise. It's just that, compared to the other films that are out now ('Creed', 'Spotlight') this one ranks somewhere at the bottom.

Steve Jobs (2015)

Do not let the scope and structure mislead you; 'Steve Jobs' is simply superb.

[8/10 · 14 November 2015]

'Steve Jobs' is unlike any biopic made before. Instead of dramatizing the key moments of Jobs' life, screenwriter Aaron Sorkin splits the film into three sections; each section takes place an hour before a product launch. Each product launch takes place in a different year: 1984 (Mac), 1988 (NeXT), and 1998 (iMac). Before each product launch, we see Jobs (Fassbender) interact with the various people involved in his life; this includes marketing executive Joanna Hoffman (Winslet), Steve Wozniak (Rogen), then-CEO of Apple John Sculley (Daniels), and his daughter, Lisa Brennan-Jobs (3 different actresses).

The story structure is closer to what you would see in a stage play rather than a screenplay, but Danny Boyle does a fantastic job in making it as cinematic as possible. Every conversation and argument in this film commands your attention; it's unlikely that you're going to fall asleep while watching this film. Each exchange builds in tension rapidly, yet makes the time to let everything sink in for the audience and the characters.

There are a few flashbacks in the film; each one is masterfully edited to coincide with its conversation. They do not interrupt the pacing of the film; instead, they serve as short little insights that tremendously impact the story and the characters.

Although Michael Fassbender doesn't look like Steve Jobs, he certainly channels his personality, quick wit, and determination. In addition to doing a brilliant job of playing Steve Jobs as a great innovator (as the media presents him as), he does an equally brilliant job of playing Steve Jobs as a deeply-flawed individual, both in his personal and professional life. His chemistry with the rest of the cast is wonderful; there wasn't a single moment that I wasn't absorbed with his character. Fassbender's portrayal of one of the world's most accomplished people is by far one of the best performances that I have seen this year.

The rest of the ensemble cast is just as fantastic as Fassbender; Kate Winslet and Jeff Daniels rank as my personal stand-outs. Winslet is convincing both as a professional marketing executive (spouting off statistics at a rapid pace), and as a strong foil to Jobs. Her presence dominates when it comes to running the product launches, yet also possesses an emotional vulnerability when it comes to running her difficult boss. Jeff Daniels, similar to Winslet, is quite believable as a CEO of a big corporation. He acts as a sort-of father figure to Jobs, but also knows when he needs to let go. The reason he stood out to me has to do with this one scene between him and Jobs in the second section. If you watch the film, you would realize just how perfectly constructed it is. It just might be the best scene in that film.

The music by Daniel Pemberton also deserves a mention. The soundtrack may not be full of big booming orchestral pieces, but complements the film well and even raises it to another level. Simply put, the film would have been a lot less effective if it wasn't for its subtle, yet amazing score (much like 'The Social Network').

'Steve Jobs' is by no means a perfect film (because I don't think anyone can make a perfect Steve Jobs film), but it is the closest that we have gotten to making one. This review is just the tip of the iceberg; there are so many more great aspects about this film that I left out (e.g. Jobs' relationship with his daughter). The entire experience is both emotional and exhilarating - it is a shame that not more people are going to see it in theatres.

Crimson Peak (2015)

Emphasizes 'style over substance', but still stunningly original.

[7/10 · 18 October 2015]

Having been a fan of Guillermo Del Toro for some time now, I had expected 'Crimson Peak' to be his next great masterpiece. Although the film didn't meet my expectations, I can't say that it disappointed them either.

Near the end of the 18th century, aspiring author Edith Cushing (Wasikowska) meets a struggling inventor by the name of Thomas Sharpe (Hiddleston). The two quickly fall in love and move into Sharpe's dilapidating mansion - which is also inhabited by Thomas' sister, Lucille (Chastain). Once there, Edith slowly realizes that not everything is what it seems and decides to dig deeper, in spite of the growing dangers.

First, 'Crimson Peak' is not a horror film; it is a 'gothic romance' (with some horror elements thrown into the mix). The genre hasn't been visited upon for decades, yet Del Toro does a fine job of offering his own take on it. The film also contains plenty of blood and gore - so if you don't have a stomach for that kind of stuff, your chances of finishing this film are nil (for there are far more disturbing aspects).

The story constantly switches in tone. I get that its a 'gothic romance' (two genres that can't be any further apart from each other), but it can get confusing for some people very quickly. One scene might seem like it was from a romantic period film while the next might seem like something out of a thriller! I think Del Toro and Robbins did a fine job of balancing the pacing, but they could have certainly tweaked a few things and cut the runtime down by an extra ten or fifteen minutes.

That being said, the plot is pretty straightforward - up until the last third of the film. Again, there are some disturbing details that both Edith and the audience discover. It took me some time to connect certain things, but I eventually figured out the bigger picture. Nevertheless, the very nature of this film will undoubtedly shock you - and will do it in a way that no other film released this year has.

Both Wasikowska and Hiddleston give good performances, but Chastain is the standout. Her role as a cold-hearted, manipulative aristocrat is done with sheer excellence; you can't help but suspect of her something. She allures your attention with her mysterious persona, yet you can't help but hate her for who she truly is.

Just like in any other Del Toro film, the visuals in this film are amazing. This time, instead of the visual effects (like in 'Pacific Rim'), the main focus is on the production design and costume design. Every set, prop, and article of clothing not only have their own unique design but are also very telling of a scene's or character's given mood (now that's some good attention to detail). I would honestly be shocked if this film wasn't nominated for Best Prod. Design nor Best Costume (although I also wouldn't be surprised as the Academy usually forgets about films like these).

Despite its narrative problems, 'Crimson Peak' is a grand visual experience that needs to be seen on the big screen (notwithstanding the blood and gore). Del Toro's directing has not faltered one bit, and he truly has come up with an original concept that we haven't seen in a very long time. And although I didn't completely fall in love with this film, I will say I'm glad I watched it in theatres.

My actual rating for this film is 7.5/10

Anomalisa (2015)

Poignant, poetic, and heartfelt.

[8/10 · 10 October 2015]

"Anomalisa" is in my opinion one of this year's most important films. The film centres on Michael Stone, a depressed customer service guru who struggles to connect with others, finally meeting someone he can truly connect with - a woman named Lisa.

Anyone familiar with Kaufman's work knows that he has a tendency to write incredibly deep and complex stories embedded with a plethora of themes. "Anomalisa" might just be the one exception (or anomaly) to that fact. The story is surprisingly simple; most of it takes place over the course of 24 hours. The messages behind it, fortunately, will still require multiple viewings and further analysis in order to be fully grasped. The final synthesis is elegantly woven to near perfection and is at times humorous and even thrilling. Running at only 90 minutes, the film never feels slow nor bloated. I believe "Anomalisa" is a good starting point for those just starting to get into Kaufman's filmography.

The stop-motion animation is some of the best that I have ever seen on the big screen. For a project that was funded on Kickstarter, I have to say that the quality of the animation is the equivalent to what you would see in an Aardman Animations or Laika production - if not better. There were certain shots that made me stop and really appreciate the efforts that the team went through just to make all of their characters' movements flow realistically. Kudos to them!

The reasons why I think "Anomalisa" is one of this year's most important films not only have to do with the way the film was financed and produced, but that it also opens up a dialogue on isolation and social disillusionment - they are usually seen as flaws inherent only within the individual, despite the fact that everyone plays some part in furthering it.

"Anomalisa" is a true work of art on many levels. It is a simple story that touches on a wide range of emotions, riddled with the complexities of our perceptions on relationships. Do not be surprised if this film makes you laugh more than cry. Do not be surprised if this film makes you cry more than laugh - for that is the true beauty of this anomaly of a film.

Black Mass (2015)

It was a decent film, but there could have been so much more to it.

[7/10 · 23 September 2015]

Aside from the brilliant performance given by Johnny Depp, I actually expected many more aspects of this film to be just as excellent. Scott Cooper and his team of screenwriters knew they could have done anything they wanted with the material at hand, but their efforts can only be described as 'decent' at best. Half the time, I felt like I was watching separate segments of a miniseries edited together than a movie with a naturally flowing narrative. Each time a sequence - which is equal to an important event within Whitey Bulger's life - fades to black, the film jumps across a considerable amount of time (usually years) before focusing on the next important event in his life. This same structure can be also found in the film 'Goodfellas', but the only difference is, that film is better paced, and as a result, has a story that feels more coherent and whole.

I also felt that most of the ensemble cast was wasted. Many of the supporting actors are fantastic in their roles, but their screen- time is limited to such a degree that they barely leave any sort of impression on you. It may be easy to say that Depp's performance overshadowed everyone else's, but that doesn't explain why the film cycles through most of its characters without going into much (or any) detail of their lives.

Yet for some reason, the film still feels like it tries to squeeze too much into its runtime. There were times I had trouble trying to follow the plot all because I couldn't keep track of the sheer number of cardboard characters that were seemingly appearing from out of nowhere. That said, 'Black Mass' would have worked much better if had been adapted as a ten-part miniseries than a two-hour film. At least that way, the book would have received the justice it truly deserved.

Straight Outta Compton (2015)

A film with a message that will transcend generations

[9/10 · 23 August 2015]

When it comes to biopics, I can proudly say that 'Straight Outta Compton' now ranks as one of my favourites. Ever since seeing the trailer, I just knew that it was going to be something that mainstream audiences had yet to experience. The film holds no punches when showing the rise and fall of N.W.A – it introduces a level of intensity rarely seen in biopics. F. Gary Gray and his crew did a wonderful job in recreating some - if not most - of the rap group's defining experiences (with all the violence, racism, and betrayal any N.W.A fan would come to expect). The film also dives deep into each of the rapper's personal lives (or at least that of Eazy-E's, Dr. Dre's, and Ice Cube's) – displaying a sense of compassion and togetherness that's just as hard to forget as the brutality and grittiness.

The three lead actors - O'Shea Jackson, Jr. (Ice Cube), Corey Hawkins (Dr. Dre), and Jason Mitchell (Eazy-E) - all give great performances. However, if I had to choose one actor who particularly stood out, I would have to pick Jason Mitchell. His performance as the late rapper Eazy-E is gold. Despite not having any guidance from his counterpart like his co-stars, I felt as if Mitchell essentially made the role all on his own. From his character's rough beginnings as a drug dealer all the way to his depressing battle with HIV, Mitchell owns almost every scene he's in (it also doesn't hurt that his story-arc is the most dynamic of all the other characters'). I wouldn't be surprised if the cast of 'Straight Outta Compton' was nominated for some 'Best Ensemble' or 'Best Cast' awards.

The script is amazingly well-written. This is probably the only biopic that I have watched where I wasn't checking the time on my phone at certain parts; there wasn't a moment when I lose interest while watching ''Straight Outta Compton'. Simply said, there is never a dull moment. The pacing works. The structuring isn't confusing. All the emotional moments hit at the right time. And although it doesn't seem like there's a clear external goal for the characters to achieve (actually, there are several goals), this film works brilliantly as a character study.

SIDENOTE: I'm well aware of the release date for this film and certain events that have preceded it. However, for all intents and purposes, I will not be commenting on the socio-political aspects of this film. Aside from the fact that I like to keep focus of my reviews on the film itself rather than divulge into reality, I also believe that this film speaks with a strong, uncompromising voice that's hard to ignore. I don't believe the producers could have picked a better time to release this film.

I am adamant that 'Straight Outta Compton' will be remembered throughout generations. It is easily one of the best films I've seen in theatres this year and one that will make its way into many top ten lists by the end of this year. Everything – from the acting to the direction, to the production value – is top-notch. If you can somehow stomach the tough reality that these young men had to go through, then you'll find yourself watching a truly complex and profound masterpiece.

Mission: Impossible - Rogue Nation (2015)

Christopher McQuarrie makes this the best entry in the series yet!

[9/10 · 1 August 2015]

Having seen the previous four 'Mission Impossible' films, I have to admit that none of them impressed me to the degree that I had hoped. I guess my expectations for action thrillers centering on secret agents were set too high because I saw the 'Bourne' trilogy and Daniel Craig's James Bond films first. The first three 'MI' films all seemed a little too slow, cheesy or convoluted on my first viewing. The fourth one was pretty good, even if the story does feel a little forgettable

So, where does that bring me for the fifth entry of the franchise? My expectations were set at average around this time, despite all the good word-of-mouth I've been hearing. However, it wouldn't have mattered if my expectations were set around the same level for the latest 'Bourne' or James Bond film (very high) – 'MI:5' blew everything I'd expected from it and then some!

Where to begin? The film possible contains the biggest, and possibly best, story out if all the other installments. It is fascinatingly complex and dynamic – moving from country to country, dealing with characters who have questionable allegiances – all on top of Ethan Hunt trying to outrun the CIA while trying to get to the bottom of what the Syndicate really wants. It may seem like a lot, but the script is really well structured and paced. Even though the film does take a few liberties with how some of its characters will ultimately act in the end, the plot isn't nearly as predictable as one would make it out to be. Writer/director Christopher McQuarrie also manages to squeeze in some surprisingly silly moments at the most random of moments.

The action scenes in this film are also some of the best in this franchise. Soon after showing Ethan Hunt take off on the side of an airbus, the film kicks it into overdrive and delivers an adrenaline rush packed with REALLY well done car chases, okay hand-to-hand combat scenes (they're kind of choppy), and ONE very suspenseful, pulse-pounding scene involving multiple snipers. McQuarrie's direction over the editing of these sequences is incredibly nuanced – so much so that I found myself repeatedly leaning over the edge of my seat with excitement.

People who weren't fans of the cheese factor (forced romances, convenient gadgets, and the overuse of face masks) of the previous films would be glad to know that it's been done away with in this film. And for people fearing that this is a film that takes itself too seriously, let me be one of the first to say: it doesn't. One may draw parallels between the events that have happened in this film to some of the recent events in our world, but I see it as a clever way for the franchise to keep up with our times.

'Mission Impossible: Rogue Nation' is without a doubt one of the most exciting films I've had the pleasure of experiencing this year. It completely took me by surprise with how well-done it was, and should just about take anyone else to the same conclusion.

Ant-Man (2015)

'Ant-Man' is proof that Marvel Studios still know how to tell a good origin story.

[7/10 · 20 July 2015]

Former burglar Scott Lang is enlisted by former SHIELD scientist, Dr. Hank Pym, to help steal a shrinkable battle suit developed by his former company. Desperate to win back his daughter, Lang breaks his vow to never steal again and accepts his offer. In the process, he takes on the role of Ant-Man – a role once held by Pym himself.

And for those of you who want to know, 'Ant-Man' contains TWO end- credits scenes.

Despite it not being as epic or memorable as some of the other MCU origin tales (Iron Man, Guardians of the Galaxy), Ant-Man is still a wildly entertaining film in its own right. It is funny, touching, and packed with pulse-pounding action scenes never before seen in the superhero genre.

Paul Rudd proves that he is more-than-capable in portraying the miniature protagonist. Much like Chris Pratt and Robert Downey Jr., Rudd bursts out onto the scene with his own unique style and likable personality. Even during his more serious moments (and action scenes), Rudd manages to keep his performance consistent. There was not a moment in this film where I wasn't cheering for his character to succeed.

Both Michael Douglas and Evangeline Lilly both give strong supporting performances as Dr. Hank Pym and Hope van Dyne, respectively – and should only strengthen the incredible cast of characters already in this universe. The film's villain, Darren Cross, is unfortunately wasted as he comes across as one-dimensional and just plain forgettable. Despite Corey Stoll's best efforts, his character just wasn't given enough development.

The script by Edgar Wright and his team speaks volumes to how much effort they actually put in giving a proper introduction to one of Marvel's more obscure heroes. Unlike some of the studio's other ham- fisted efforts, Ant-Man is perfectly balanced with its drama and humour; there are very few times in the film when moments would be ruined because one side crossed the other at an inappropriate time. The story is also fairly straightforward and tightly focused – no need to worry about Infinity Stones or anything else that doesn't have to do with Scott Lang becoming Ant-Man. The film also contains a number of unexpected instances that will have you and the audience burst out laughing, especially during the action scenes.

I only wonder how this film would have turned out if Wright had directed it instead.

Although I don't exactly consider Ant-Man to be one of the MCU's 'A- class' titles, I can safely say that it ranks far above a majority of its predecessors. Ant-Man truly is a film that almost anyone can enjoy.

Minions (2015)

Yeah, sure - it's... it's good (ish).

[5/10 · 17 July 2015]

(There are spoilers for 'Despicable Me' and its sequel).

MOST kids will love this movie - there is no doubt about that in my mind. 'Minions' will provide them with plenty of cuteness, laughs, and a wacky adventure. You'd be doing your children a huge favour by taking them to this movie. The only kids who won't like this movie will be the ones who have gotten sick and tired of seeing the yellow critters everywhere.

Adults/teenagers who have fallen in love with the main characters will most likely enjoy this movie.

Now that I've gotten the obvious out of the way, I beg the question: Why do I (along with many others) think that this is by far the worst movie in the 'Despicable Me' franchise?

The answer is simple (at least, for me): this movie lacks heart - something that even its predecessors had. In 'Despicable Me', we see Gru and his three adopted daughters grow fonder of each other - up to the point where they accept each other as family. This relationship dynamic was what made the film so funny and memorable. In 'Despicable Me 2', Gru finds himself falling for Lucy Wilde and admits his feelings after a daring rescue attempt. It addresses the problem of the girls not having a mother, Gru being afraid of rejection and also lead to some pretty hilarious situations. In 'Minions', we have... the Minions constantly trying to fulfill their purpose in this world?

Although I will admit that I had my fair share of laughs while watching 'Minions', I just didn't have the same experience of watching the 'Despicable Me' films. Don't get me wrong - there are some great new characters introduced here (especially Scarlett Overkill), but they didn't seem that well-developed either.

While I can find myself watching both 'Despicable Me' films over and over again, I just won't be doing the same for 'Minions'. Besides, it's not a film to be taken THAT seriously, anyways.

Terminator Genisys (2015)

They should have just left it alone.

[5/10 · 14 July 2015]

In short, 'Terminator Genisys' not only fails to live up to the first two films in the franchise but completely retcons them. Now normally, this wouldn't have been such a huge problem for me if the script was given a decent story (preferably, one that would trump the stories of the first two films). Unfortunately, the Ellison siblings (the producers) picked two of what could be known as Hollywood's worst screenwriters to be in charge of the script (I checked their credits).

However, I still have to give them credit for taking a huge risk and overhauling the existing timeline - it just didn't work out as well as I hoped. The whole ride just felt bloated, convoluted, and at many times, too convenient. The characters aren't all that engaging either. Both Sarah Connor's and this version of the T-800's past lives could have been made a little more exciting. Aside from the few bouts of excitement I received from watching this movie, I honestly didn't feel all that much else.

Speaking of characters, I also felt that both Emilia Clarke and Jai Courtney (especially) were miscast in their respective roles as Sarah Connor and Kyle Reese. For me, I found Clarke's portrayal of Sarah to be too snarky and sarcastic. When it came down to her more emotional moments, I felt like she lacked a certain intensity when revealing her painful childhood memories.

Courtney came off just as snarky and annoying as Clarke. On top of having no chemistry with her, it seems that he doesn't have chemistry with any of the characters of the film. Unlike the Kyle Reese of the first film, this Kyle Reese feels like a cartoon character rather than an actual person - something that doesn't really help out Mr. Courtney.

Arnold was good as always - even if he does come off as really cheesy in certain moments.

The VFX... still look as good as they did twenty-one years ago (well, as the least the liquid metal for the T-1000 does).

And don't worry - the score from this movie won't be replacing the good old original 'Terminator' theme anytime soon.

'Terminator Genysis' will certainly be one of those 'love it or hate it' films. Some people might love this movie because they've seen the third and fourth movies and thought they were terrible. For me personally, 'Terminator Genysis' ultimately boils down to nothing more than a generic sci-fi action film that comes off as trying too hard to impress fans while stroking its own ego. In other words, it feels like another weak installment in the franchise.

They should have just left it alone.

Ted 2 (2015)

Just another shameless cash grab from Universal Studios.

[5/10 · 7 July 2015]

The original 'Ted' was the equivalent of lightning in a bottle - at the time, it seemed like something nobody had ever seen before. Only Seth MacFarlane could have come up with a hilarious and bizarre story about an average Joe and his magical talking teddy-bear (who remained his only friend since childhood). The movie became a huge success for both Universal and MacFarlane (making over half-a-billion at the global box-office), and both fell in love with the idea of fast-tracking its sequel.

SO now we have 'Ted 2'... and how does it hold up? The reason why the first one did so well was because of its novelty. As I've already mentioned, most people had never seen such a thing before - and were probably hungering for original comedies.

Unfortunately, now that the novelty has worn off (at least for me), 'Ted 2' failed to charm me. The overall experience just wasn't the same for me whilst watching the first 'Ted' (and just before this movie too). I'll admit though - there were still plenty of moments when I laughed with the audience.

The reason why a lot of the jokes failed for me was because they were just nonsensical. If anyone is familiar with MacFarlane's sense of humour (or 'Ted' or 'Family Guy'), then they'll most likely be in my position of knowing what to expect. Another reason why the jokes failed was because they replicated the cutaway segments seen in 'Family Guy'. The first few are pretty funny, but they eventually get annoying and even start to distract from the main plot.

Jokes aside, I have to say that I also really like the direction MacFarlane and his writing partners took the story. Even though there are points in this movie that play out the same way as the first movie, the overall plot is different in both style and theme. While the first movie explores what it means to be you in front of others you love and care for, this movie explores current issues with human rights. These themes, at the very least, actually gives these movies some much needed-depth.

The love story between John and and Samantha feels really forced. I'll be honest - even though I'm disappointed (yes, disappointed) that Mila Kunis is gone, I still have to say that Amanda Seyfried did an okay job playing the romantic interest of our newly divorcée... she just does a much better job playing a lawyer.

Despite these positive points, 'Ted 2' still pales in comparison with other comedies that have come out this year (namely, Spy). It'll make for a great rainy-day watch.

Inside Out (I) (2015)

Don't turn your back on Pixar just yet.

[8/10 · 21 June 2015]

THE SHORT OF IT: While watching 'Inside Out', I came to the realization that the film contains common plot elements seen in past Pixar films (especially Docter's previous two films). If you've seen 'Monsters Inc.' and 'Up', then you'll eventually see that this film is just a rehash of those two films combined. However, some people say that Pixar's latest offering stole its concept from an obscure '90s sitcom called 'Herman's Head'. And some even say that this film is a complete rip-off of the 2009 Japanese manga 'Nounai Poison Berry' (and its live-action adaptation that also came out this year).

For those people (and to myself), I just want to say one thing: deal with it. Like Picasso said, "Good artists copy, great artists steal."

And Pixar did a great job stealing this idea and making it their own.

With that being said, 'Inside Out' is still wildly original, universally relatable, and incredibly moving. The animation is beautiful as always, the story is well paced, and there are very few moments where the humour feels strange and off-putting (there's also a joke for you 'Chinatown' fans out there). Don't feel like you need to bring a little kid with you just to see this film – Pixar has proved time and time again in the past that they are some of Hollywood's best storytellers… and has done so yet again with 'Inside Out'.

This truly stands as one of the BEST 'coming-of-age (or puberty)' films that has been released in the past five years.

P.S. Those with kids younger than nine should probably be warned that this film does get pretty dark (for a kid's movie) at the 2/3rd mark.

Kung Fury (2015)

My brain just exploded...

[9/10 · 14 June 2015]

...from the sheer awesomeness that this short radiated into my eyes.

After raising over $630,000 for his project, first time writer/director/actor David Sandberg bursts out into the filmmaking game with a little short called 'Kung Fury'. The short is what I would consider the ultimate culmination of all things 80s - ridiculous action-movies, over-the-top cop shows, retro video games, and synth/techno music. Oh, and there's also kung-fu, dinosaurs, hot viking chicks, a Nordic God, Nazis... (and so, so much more). Yeah, the whole thing may seem like an insane ride created by a madman who was drunk and high on acid - but it was created by a madman who was always in control and knew what he was doing.

And by god, is the final product beautiful! 'Kung Fury' is self- aware and doesn't take it self too seriously. I was either smiling or laughing throughout the entirety it. It's an overall fun romp that I would have no problem watching again.

This is going be one of those films that one would either really love or really hate (think 'Sharknado'). I don't think there is a middle-ground, to be honest. If my description of the short hasn't convinced you to watch the film yet (or makes you cringe), then you're most likely going to hate 'Kung Fury'. But if my description even fancies your curiosity in the slightest bit, then I suggest you check it out - and maybe even check it out with some friends (who are also willing to see it).

Jurassic World (2015)

Finally! A 'Jurassic Park' movie that finally hearkens back to the original film.

[6/10 · 13 June 2015]

'Jurassic World' takes place 22 years after the events of 'Jurassic Park'. In this movie, we see that a fully functional and hugely popular dinosaur-themed park has replaced Hammond's failed theme park. However, since the park is suffering from a decline in visitors, the scientists at Jurassic World are tasked to create a brand new dinosaur (Indominus Rex) to help bring up numbers. Of course, things go wrong once again - and a group of employees are forced to stop the newly created dinosaur.

To me, 'Jurassic World' feels like a retread of 'Jurassic Park' - only with higher stakes. That being said, there are elements in the script (from the characters, to the plot, and even certain moments and scenes) that don't feel all that fresh. Aside from Chris Pratt's character, Owen Grady, none of the other human characters were all that memorable. I also found myself caring very little about the family conflict that the two Mitchell Brothers were going through (which the movie itself paid very little attention to). If the human characters were actual people instead of reused stereotypes, then maybe I would have cared a little more about the movie.

Actually, now that I think about it... the script also contains PLENTY of plot points that the movie never bothers to mention again! Maybe they'll be addressed in the sequel?

Who cares! Because...

DINOSAURS! ...Which don't look all that believable when compared to what Spielberg and his team accomplished 22 years ago. Seriously, I'm not saying that the visual effects are bad (they're oftentimes quite believable), but I wish that Trevorrow didn't rely solely on CGI to bring to life the beloved beasts. Even today, the animatronic/CGI dinosaurs we see in 'Jurassic Park' still hold up! I can only imagine how much better the dinosaurs would look if the same method was applied for this movie!

'Jurassic World' delivers heavily on the suspense, action, and thrills one would typically expect from a 'Jurassic Park' movie. Although there are a lot more intense fight sequences this time around (and not just between dinosaur and dinosaur), I never once got exhausted by what I was seeing. The movie is well-paced and the screenwriters knew just when to deliver the movie's WOW moments.

Despite its lacklustre script, 'Jurassic World' is certainly a spectacle that demands to be seen on the big screen. The story may seem predictable and even trite at times, but if you're a fan of dinosaurs, mayhem, or giant monster fights, then check out 'Jurassic World'.