anyanimeotoho

It could have been a neat surprise!

I thought it was just fine. I didn't expect Alisha Weir to stand out so much against such a stacked cast. I'd attribute this to the writing, which seems unable to effectively juggle the full cast and properly utilise their talents. Despite the cheesy and predictable set up, the film's second half offers nonstop action and some decent plot twists that make it quite entertaining. The titular character is a delight to watch and - if you're into this sort of thing - there's a generous amount of gore. Even though I came away from "Abigail" feeling a bit underwhelmed, I was entertained!

I'm glad Rudy Mancuso was able to accomplish this. I've been keeping up with his YouTube content from afar for some time, and it's clear to me that he's brimming with creativity. I always knew he was capable of bringing a full-length production to life.

"Música" is a pretty enjoyable passion project. The set designs are so imaginative and immersive. The music is very animated and lively. The script has a comical undertone that just sucks you into the mind of the main character, and it mostly works. It makes for an entertaining film. However, the movie's shortcomings are a bit apparent in its inability to thoroughly flesh out the story. It offers fragments that hint at a complete narrative, yet lacks the depth needed for a fully rounded tale. While the story has a complete "arc", it doesn't necessarily convey the depth of the various elements in this story. It often feels like we're passive observers, seldom actively engaging in this character's journey.

But, by all means, see this movie. It's a unique, colourful experience with a couple of fresh ideas and enjoyable performances. It has a ton of funny moments too.

Ridiculously ripped Jake Gyllenhaal knocking some heads? Sign me up. The stylishly shot action sequences are entertaining enough due to their over-the-top nature. The dialogue may be cheesy at times, but its few bright moments trigger a few laughs and add fair amounts of depth to certain characters in a sea of caricatures -- the biggest one being "Knox" played by McGregor. Between the hideous acting and the obnoxious characterisation, he's the most tedious aspect of the whole production. There's a lot of noise, but the movie does what it sets out to do, more or less.

No, I haven't seen the original.

No. This movie is just soulless. Between the robotic script, the confusing cinematography, the weak rapport among the main characters and the melodramatic pacing, this is a slow-burn dumpster fire. Over a runtime of nearly two hours, we're fed the origin story of a group of characters who never manage to connect to the audience. They're stereotyped to comic extents without ever managing to be relatable or elicit empathy with their carefully -- or carelessly, depending on how you see it -- constructed backstories. "Madame Web" spends so much time constructing its narrative around a boring villain who sometimes sounds like he's struggling to be intelligible. The movie then presents the most in-your-face epilogue montage indicating the promise of a sequel, after succeeding at giving none of its main characters any identity beyond a shared trauma. Despite all the curiously bad choices made in the execution of this film, it still manages to be boring in moments. Appallingly written, poorly shot, and generally poorly executed in many aspects. How do you greenlight this? WHAT WAS THE VISION? I can't tell.

In a good way. The writing presents the story from multiple angles and perspectives, integrating various tones and themes to craft a largely cohesive narrative. While some plot devices may be familiar, overall, the execution is solid, offering an engaging experience. The pacing is largely slow (don't expect back-to-back hard-core ninja hijinks), and even though the tension never really matches the scope of the threat proposed, the story plays out organically. The characters, along with the solid action choreography, are among the most captivating aspects of the show. They are very multifaceted and bounce off each other pretty well; the brightest among them add a quirky humour to the show that is very appreciated. The casting is stellar. The camera work is sleek and the peculiar use of music works for me. Ultimately, the show has a unique aesthetic that does a fine job of immersing you. Good stuff. I hope it gets renewed.

"Five Nights at Freddy's" starts alright, with a fairly unsettling atmosphere and a curious plot. The movie changes tonally after the first plot reveal about how the animatronics operate, but it still keeps its momentum and the plot still has the potential to entertain, since we're well past the horror at this point. However, the film just devolves into a mess after this, trying to tie its set-to-fail subplot involving the main character (i.e. Mike's brother) with several others (the missing children, Abby, Vanessa and her father) in a non-cohesive way. Each subsequent reveal just feels like an attempt to connect different parts of the larger story with more twists and turns, but it's very lazily done. It's not like the plot feels rushed at any point, some of these bits are actually too drawn out for their good. The second half of the movie is either boring or nonsensical at any given moment, and I'm left with more questions than answers at the end of the movie. The whole thing just feels contrived and not well thought-out; the story ultimately doesn't flow well. Couple the cliche-ridden writing with some wobbly acting and a very anticlimactic end, and I found myself staring at the rolling credits in disbelief as an annoying tune played in the background. The only consistent thing this movie has going for it is the visuals. I learnt that there are tons of easter eggs for fans to pick up, so... that's something. However, if you're not a fan of the games, do yourself a favour and skip this.

I like the way "Fair Play" builds tension and organically raises the stakes for the characters involved and for the audience. The film refuses to hold back, pushing its characters to their limits and testing their endurance. It's undeniably thrilling to watch. I thought the film handled its overarching theme -- the strain insecurity and envy can put on a relationship -- quite well. However, I couldn't shake the feeling that the film encourages us to assess the situation from a certain perspective, causing its credibility to sway ever so slightly. At the end of the day, the movie provides a compelling examination of characters who are flawed but distinctly human, and it proves to be a fairly gratifying experience. I didn't like how the film gets intentionally graphic/vulgar -- sometimes without any evident payoff or relevance to the plot -- but it doesn't detract from the experience too much. The actors deliver stunning performances. Phoebe Dynevor, whom I've never seen display such range even though I've only caught her in one or two other productions, is particularly noteworthy. I liked the direction for the most part; the film has a sleek and fittingly dreary look to it. I think "Fair Play" is worth a watch, as it delivers on its promise of drama and suspenseful thrills.

It's impressive how well this film commits to its absurdity. It's melodramatic, raunchy, graphic; just absolutely bonkers. In a good way, of course. "Bottoms" takes huge risks and largely benefits from them. The film is very sure of what it wants to be and sticks to it. It plays on some familiar teen movie tropes in such a fun way. The characters are loud and eccentric and have tons of personality. The pacing is pretty good, as the movie builds on its quirky premise ever so steadily until it reaches a beautifully chaotic climax. All the while, it remains highly unpredictable -- save for a few inconsequential cliches -- delivering a satisfyingly offbeat and unique experience for viewers. Did I mention that it's genuinely funny? It doesn't always hit the mark, but the good far outweighs the bad. A solid and fresh addition to its genre(s), "Bottoms" is one of the better movies you'll see this year. Absolutely recommend, if you can stomach it.

I don't have a lot to say about this movie. It was quite enjoyable, but not very memorable for me. The subject piqued my interest so I was quite invested. It's always nice to be entertained by a slice of history, complete with intriguing details you likely hadn't encountered before. "Air" documents a literal turning point for the sports world, but the screenplay doesn't seem to exude the grandeur of its subject. It's a rather mellow movie; more interested in presenting its message and honouring its inspiration than being flashy or impressive. This mostly works in its favour, perhaps only being hindered by a slow first act. I also appreciate the relatively light tone of the film; there are some genuinely funny moments. It's impressive how almost 2 hours just breeze by. Ultimately, "Air" is equally as entertaining as it is enlightening, but nothing too remarkable.

Citadel really captivated me with the trailers. I felt even more excited after watching the title sequence for the first time. The production value of this show is high, and it tells in many ways. The direction is stylish and has that sense of grandiosity you might appreciate in a spy thriller. The costumes, locations, set pieces and gadgets on display -- thanks in part to impressive CGI -- are all very high-end. The soundtrack is equally striking and majestic. Just Google the budget for this thing. However, the writing drags this down badly.

The pacing of the series is decent, perhaps the best part of the screenplay. Sure, there are great action scenes and some interesting pieces of dialogue, but they make up an insignificant portion of the entire ordeal. The show is filled with boring and clichéd characters. There are so many tropes, it's insulting. The script seems to do a lot of explaining, and not enough showing. When it tries to be clever, the result is just awkward. Rehashing details that the audience might have picked up on their own makes watching it way more tedious than it should be. The action scenes might look good, but there's barely any tension surrounding them or the preceding events. I couldn't care much about the stakes.

The acting isn't even compelling enough. Performances range from decent to shaky, but fortunately nothing bad enough that it becomes distracting. It's just another attempt at seriousness that doesn't match the quality.

I took far too long to watch a series that barely totals 4 hours. There's hardly anything original here, and after watching it, you're going to wonder what the goal of this project was.

The premise of the film is quite interesting. There was a potentially good film hidden somewhere in there. I like how the movie convinces us to root for the supposed protagonist, only for him to turn out to be the "villain." It becomes predictable after a while because the execution is careless, but it's a decent idea in the context of this story. Perhaps the only decent idea in the whole film.

The first half of the movie drags, and unfortunately, that's the better half in terms of cohesion. The "reveal" is messy, and the buildup is equally messy because of plot holes and general incoherence. The characters are so flat and uninteresting that the actors try hard to make you want to connect with them. Their performances are indeed good -- Schnapp's and Hedlund's -- but not even they could save the tacky screenplay, whose every turn just came off as try-hard because almost nothing seemed to work as it should.

I haven't even mentioned the obnoxious movie score, which I couldn't seem to ignore. The music doesn't blend well into its scenes. It often feels misplaced; used wrongly for dramatic effect and leaving scenes that are supposed to build tension dull. It just feels so out of place and it's incredibly distracting.

"The Tutor" is a disappointment for me. It's incredibly boring for a stalker thriller, and too focused on setting up an uneasy atmosphere to build a credible story.

I kind of liked it?

Look, I can't fathom why the writers thought it was a brilliant idea to insert a wave of new characters and storylines into the final lap of the show. I'll admit that it wasn't fun to have our attention removed from the main characters in service of other characters whose stories felt hardly relevant in comparison. I thought some of them were written quite well, but I wasn't too invested. They've neither been around long enough to connect to the audience nor are they as compelling as the characters that came before them. I do appreciate that there isn't too much focus on these characters except, of course, when the show tries to address a social issue. It seems to do a lot of that this season. The over-the-top nature of the new school setting also didn't sit perfectly well with me. It sets up some interesting side plots, but they're basically fun minute details that don't contribute substantially to the story and the whole thing was just sort of distracting. Furthermore, Otis and Maeve get the most bittersweet ending. It's not the ending we want, but there's no denying its plausibility.

That said, I'd rate Season 4 8/10. I love the character development (of several characters) in this season. I feel like it's not acknowledged enough. Mr. Groff, Adam, Eric, Aimee, and Isaac all have beautiful arcs this season in the form of growth and/or closure. Even Maeve and Ruby get fitting -- albeit underwhelming -- arcs. There are a lot of heartfelt moments too. The writing in this season shines, even though it goes in questionable directions sometimes. There's still brilliant, insightful dialogues and solid comedy.

Even though in the end it feels like there's more to tell on many fronts, Season 4 tries to tie up those ends tolerably. It's not the final season I hoped for but it makes me appreciate the rest of the show so much more, and not just because it diminishes in comparison to the other seasons. It's thoroughly enjoyable if you don't get worked up over what could've been and appreciate what is. It doesn't change the fact that Sex Education is one of the best coming-of-age shows out there now and it will be sorely missed.

"Talk to Me" didn't impress me much. It's a decent movie, but I don't feel satisfied after going in with the expectations that all the positive reviews gave me. At least it was engaging.

The plot is fairly intriguing; it puts a unique spin on a familiar concept in the horror genre. The ending is quite clever as well. The acting is pretty solid all round. The lead actress does a splendid job here; I'm glad to see her getting more roles. The cinematography is also quite impressive. There are a couple of graphic, gory sequences that really enhance the experience. The tension is *there* in this movie. On the surface, "Talk to Me" has a lot working in its favour.

However, I wasn't on board with some of the writing decisions taken. We're given characters who aren't so easy to root for. They might be teenagers, who naturally tend to be messy, but it's kind of dissatisfying watching them make certain decisions and being forced to deal with the consequences. While the ensuing events could be entertaining, it could equally get tiring. Fortunately, you can recognize some instances where the situation is out of the character's control. You're able to sympathize with them in those few moments. The movie is not a largely irritating endeavour - not at all - but I was missing that sense of chaos unfolding naturally. It's just more rewarding for me.

I'm not entirely convinced that this is the refreshing take on horror that everyone claims it is, but it is a solid movie. Don't hesitate to check it out if you're looking for an entertaining creepy flick.

So I causally joined my cousins to watch Scream VI a while back because I had nothing better to do and I finally wanted to see what the "Scream" craze was about (yes, this is my second Scream movie and I haven't seen the original trilogy). And I really enjoyed it. It had a fast-moving pace, some engaging slasher action, as well as some clever plot twists and meta-commentary. I expected this to be on par, or even better, than its sequel. I was quite disappointed. First of all, the characters are too clumsy about the whole ordeal. This movie amps up the horror-movie-characters-making-silly-decisions-to-drive-the-plot trope way too much. It wallows too deep in purposeful stupidity, and then the film becomes more irritating than entertaining. This film is not parodying horror cliches; it would have done so cleverly. It is endorsing them. The characters are either careless, obnoxious or both. The jump scares are predictable and rarely work. The final reveal scene is chaotic and I was too exhausted at that point to even care. With everything else going on, it feels like the movie tries to make up for the shoddy storytelling with gore. Genuinely felt like a waste of time.

I will say from the jump that I've never been interested in the Twilight franchise. I just don't find the ideas or storylines surrounding this piece of fiction appealing. I'm watching it because of persuasion from a friend, and I have to say, I'm not enjoying it very much.

However, there are some positives. I appreciate the camera work. I like the initiative taken with a lot of the shots. The action sequences are stylish too. I also like the use of colour in the film. The dark colour-grading really captures the air of mystique and melancholy that I suppose the filmmakers were going for. I believe it's a recurring element in the movies.

Frankly, I don't really care for most of the actual movie though. I think the runtime is excessive. The movie is too dragged out for its good. Thus the dialogue is extremely dull more often than not, and laughably unrealistic sometimes. The plot progression is not very impressive either because a whole cumulative hour of the movie doesn't really say anything. There are too many scenes that practically don't add anything to the plot. Not to mention the distasteful narrative quirks that I was having fun counting on both hands.

I'm two movies in now, and I keep looking for elements in the story that granted it such an influential status in pop culture, but most of it is underwhelming or just plain mediocre. While I could easily blame my reception on the fact that I'm perhaps not the target audience, I'm generally not impressed by the quality of the films. However, I'm interested in the direction Twilight takes from here to warrant three more films, though I suppose new material isn't difficult to conjure given what I've seen.

I think Bird Box is a justifiably polarizing movie, and you should take each review with a pinch of salt. I wouldn't consider this film underwhelming because it effectively builds tension and suspense, and I think those are key elements to successfully delivering a horror flick. It may also not rank as one of the finest movies due to its ineffective structure and the shortcomings in its narrative credibility.

The movie is unlike a lot of its horror counterparts because it doesn't rely on a tangible threat to drive its story. This makes it harder to put ourselves in the characters' shoes and thoroughly assess the situations they're thrust in. It also feeds the uneasiness that the movie so badly wants you to feel. You might argue that it also allows the writers to get away with certain loopholes. To that, I say not everything requires laid-out answers.

You could also tell that the film isn't very invested in the logistics of things. It's more concerned with painting a portrait of humanity in the face of a world-ending event. Admittedly, other productions have done a better job, but those efforts aren't fruitless here. I was completely entertained.

Bird Box is an entertaining take on sci-fi horror with its interesting premise, unsettling atmosphere and wonderful performances from its cast.

Blue Beetle does little to impress as far as superhero movies go. Now, we might decide to "not take it seriously" and just enjoy the film as a feel-good super-powered adventure, but we've gotten better movies of that nature.

For example, DC's very own "Shazam!" Interestingly, both films make family a prominent theme in their plot and it proves to be a bankable choice once again. There is a beautiful family dynamic on display here that is hard to deny.

The movie falls back on the protagonist's family for most of its comedic content too. However, more often than not, the jokes unfortunately don't land for me. They might come in the form of harmless antics and cheesy lines, but I don't think they really cater to a more mature audience due to their simplicity and lack of originality.

The events in the film are equally unimpressive to me because of how recycled everything feels. We've seen too many elements of this story in other superhero movies, and so Blue Beetle's character starts to lose his uniqueness besides the suit (which we learn too little about). It makes me begin to question the point of telling this story.

Thankfully, the visual and special effects in this film are one of its positives. The suits and tech on display are deliciously detailed and the fight scenes are choreographed quite well. It makes the action scenes really engaging.

Summarily, I think Blue Beetle had the potential to be better. I don't know what the vision for the film was, but what we get is a bit underwhelming.

"Don't Breathe" is pretty terrifying. Uniquely, this movie doesn't need jump scares, made-up monsters or visual effects to send a chill down its viewer's spine. But it delivers a masterclass on the art of suspense.

The premise is pretty tame. It doesn't get much more than a bunch of friends robbing a blind guy. However, the plot takes an interesting turn when one bad decision ends with a man down. A sense of urgency envelops everyone when an otherwise in-and-out operation turns into a deadly game of cat and mouse.

The movie concocts some of the most disturbing ideas and situations to thrust at its characters, leaving you constantly at the edge of your seat with little to no idea what could happen next. Even when we're dealt main characters that make it difficult to root for them - be it by their carelessness or dullness - the horrors they endure leave you no choice but to empathize with them. By the end of the movie, you're both releasing your breath and scratching your head because it leaves you with some questions that don't necessarily require answers.

With its dull colours, enthralling camera work, suspenseful action and gripping score, this film right here is such an interesting ride.

It feels weird saying that about a movie that terrified me to no end years ago (You know what's even weirder? I probably would have been less terrified if my CD wasn't compromised and I was able to watch the whole thing back in the day. I just caught it on Netflix and I remember nothing of the last 30 or so minutes). I have to acknowledge the writing in this because the movie is both unnerving and effortlessly funny. I appreciate how the characters are simple yet intriguing, with their thoughts and actions easily recognizable after just a few lines. The premise of the movie is also very simple, but the style with which the movie expands upon it is commendable. The animation is utilized very well in this regard. We get a lot of creepy close-up shots, exaggerated scares and some scenery antics that you'll miss if you blink. The narrative comes together seamlessly, leaving me to wonder what it was like to witness the film in cinemas. Furthermore, nothing could have prepared me for the plot twist. I was torn between feeling pitiful and terrified. The writers went all out on this one, and I can't believe this movie has a PG rating because there are some messed-up ideas here. Some of it should go over children's heads, and I suppose this qualifies the film to be enjoyable for all audiences. I'm rather late to the party, but this movie is so worth the watch because of the risks taken with storytelling that set it aside from so many animated movies out there. Thumbs up.

I'm pretty sure this review will echo what a lot of others have said about this movie. The first act of "Cobwebs" is the best part of the film, where we're treated to spectacular cinematography, wonderful performances from the actors, and a decent plot build-up - some of which persist throughout the film but are not enough to save it. The second act is a little shaky, but it doesn't prepare you for what comes next. I mean, you wouldn't expect the third act to tank so hard. The movie just devolves into a mess at this point, with characters making dumb decisions, plot conveniences popping up here and there, and we couldn't even be graced with an acceptable ending. That final monologue is so lazy. It's as if the movie refuses to take responsibility for/acknowledge the preceding events. Despite having strong visuals that do the genre justice, the movie fails to deliver a well-written script.

Well, this is a delightful surprise. The movie takes certain assumptions/impressions you might have about a movie titled "You Are So Not Invited To My Bat Mitzvah" and tosses them out the window. It's honestly a refreshing coming-of-age movie, not because it does anything new or exciting, but because it executes all the familiar tropes well.

The writing shines in this movie. It's appropriate for a film of its kind, and it creates unique characters and draws believable connections between them. It also avoids a healthy amount of cliches and stereotypes (well, as far as I can tell, given my *very* limited knowledge of Jewish tradition). It's funny, warm, cheesy in a sweet way and... kind of relatable for anyone who's been a messy teenager. The movie ends on a very predictable note, but it leaves a good taste in my mouth. The difference between this movie and its similarly patterned counterparts is that, by the end of it, you wouldn't have rolled your eyes ten times and cringed in your seat.

If you need further persuasion to give it a chance, it's worth mentioning that Adam Sandler showcases his comedic expertise in the film. Sunny Sandler, who takes the lead role, absolutely steals the show. Altogether, this movie was quite a fun time for me, with a decent message to boot. I like it.

This live-action remake of "The Little Mermaid" is just fine. It doesn't exactly inspire me to rewatch it with excitement, but it also isn't bad enough to discard it as another Disney misfire. It's actually enjoyable.

The cast is one of the things this film does right. Even though I noticed some hints of unnatural acting - thankfully not in the scenes that mattered - the actors encapsulate the essence of the characters to the best of their ability and deliver some noteworthy performances; including but not exclusively the star of the show, Halle Bailey. She is believable as a curious, wide-eyed, strong-willed mermaid who wonders what life is like above water. Not to mention her vocal performances are such a delight.

However, I thought the screenplay could have been constructed better. For a family movie, I agree that the movie's pacing is a bit cumbersome. In the two hours that the film spans, it doesn't add much to the original story as far as I can tell. The few musical numbers and extra details added to the story aren't entirely serviceable to the movie's audience. I wouldn't go so far as to call them unnecessary, but they mostly provide momentary enjoyment and don't significantly enhance the film experience. Perhaps a fresh perspective is required, but who can provide it? I don't reckon that the young ones would care for this sort of thing.

I also don't mind the CGI work on the film. Well, most of it. It seems Disney still hasn't quite figured out how to make life-like talking animals look good. But the ocean view is beautiful, even though it doesn't quite capture the magical essence of a fantasy film. The underwater musical numbers are beautifully choreographed too, so that's a plus.

For me, this movie is just a cute little pastime. I wouldn't consider it very memorable, but nothing about it warrants all the controversy that followed it. It's a decent adaptation and honestly not a bad way to revamp the story for younger generations.

I won't waste my time searching for adjectives to eulogize this movie with because I don't know if I can come up with enough to justify how much I enjoyed it. I will say that I didn't expect it to be this good. Frankly, I was a bit worried because how do you top a movie like "Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse" with a sequel? Answer: This movie is how you do it. Plot-wise, the film is on a grander scale than the first. The stakes are higher, I think the action is more intense, and the setting is broader -- still the multiverse, but we go more in-depth into how they're connected in this movie. The film introduces more characters and makes it work so well without ever feeling overstuffed. We're given a glimpse into these characters' lives; just enough to keep us invested without distracting from the movie's main conflict. The pacing of this movie is freaking spectacular, as it just keeps getting better and better. Cliffhangers are never fun for me, but this one did not leave me anxious or confused. I anticipated it because the film built the plot steadily without resorting to cramming a reserved segment with too much information. The climax was saved for the end, and it paid off well. The writing just slaps at every turn, balancing out the film with the right amount of humour, heart and wit. The soundtrack sounds so good in the context of the movie and honestly elevates the experience. The animation is still as fun, vibrant and innovative as ever. I initially thought the art style used to portray Gwen Stacy's universe was a bit distracting, but the use of colour is brilliant and almost makes me forgive the elusiveness. This is just all-around perfection, and it's refreshing to see a superhero flick still deliver this level of quality, much less a sequel. I am only excited for the next one, and "excited" is a modest choice of words.

For me, this movie is a warm, bittersweet and overall harmless ordeal that didn't quite live up to my expectations. For once, I've fallen into the tired category of the unsatisfied audience that considers the movie adaptation to not have done the book justice and it SUCKS because I was so ready to fall in love with this story all over again.

For the first third of "Red, White & Royal Blue", I was so elated to see everything come alive on-screen. I love most of the cast and the fact that we get a proper re-introduction to the characters in the same quippy, humour-filled fashion that permeates the novel. Despite being 2 hours long, this film just breezes by, thanks to the great chemistry between the actors. The production and cinematography are excellent, poised to leave an impression on the viewer. What's not to like?

But as the movie unravels, so do its narrative flaws become more apparent, being a film adaptation of a richer, more nuanced text. The movie feels slightly fast-paced, glossing over events that carry much more significance in the story than the film acknowledges. Some characters are also somewhat watered-down and not as vibrant or unique as their literary counterparts, and not even the protagonists are exempt from this. Alex's character seems to suffer from this the most, and while I respect the decision to not have him be a mouthy, insufferable go-getter, his portrayal here gives a different impression of the character in a way that impacts his arc and relationship with Henry, and not for the better, in my opinion. It's impossible to ignore these shortcomings, and I wish it didn't affect the way I received the movie. Though, I suppose this works fine from the perspective of a fresh viewer.

I'm still glad this movie happened. It's great that the story is being shared with new audiences, and more people get to appreciate it for the breath of fresh air that it is as both a rom-com and a queer romance story. I just wish my experience wasn't affected by being privy to a source material that objectively did it better. I kind of agree with the sentiment that this could have worked better as a mini-series.

I'm not sure if I've encountered anything quite like Barbie before, which I find rather rewarding, particularly considering I haven't felt this excited about any other release this year. So what did I think of it?

For starters, I really admire the production of this movie. Gorgeous does not begin to describe the sets, and it's commendable how well they highlight the surrealism of Barbieland. I had seen a YouTube video exploring Barbie's Dreamhouse set and already concluded that it was pretty great, but seeing it in the context of the film just made it better. The costumes are great too.

Furthermore, the acting is solid! Huge props to Margot Robbie. The movie blends humour and angst with some other tonal elements, which means that it demands more from the actors than you would initially assume. The ensemble cast was obviously up to the task; vibrant and memorable performances all around. As a side note, something in their performances caught my attention. I vaguely recall Gerwig discussing in an interview the challenge of contemplating the technical aspects of a typical Barbie doll's movements. You can notice several points in the movie where the actors mimic the stiff and rigid movements of dolls but, in other less significant moments, they move with the fluidity and flexibility of living beings while in Barbieland. It is an interesting detail whose mild inconsistency could be slightly distracting, but the film utilised this for comedic effect. Ultimately, it was a nice touch.

While there are more things I like than dislike about this movie, I feel like the execution leaves something to be desired. The first act of the movie is everything I'd hoped it would be; campy, funny, and exceedingly pink. I appreciate how even the subsequent scenes in Barbieland maintain this quirkiness, regardless of the heightened tension of the advancing plot. However, the transition from Barbie and Co's everyday shenanigans to her journey of awareness and self-discovery felt a bit... sudden? While it aptly gives focus to the main conflict of the movie, I feel like the heavy marketing of the movie had already given away too many glimpses of Barbieland before I saw the film. It took away the element of wonder and left the superficial part of me a little disappointed. Also, a huge chunk of movie's the second and third acts is just shy of overstimulating. I must say that the expression of women empowerment ideals in the film isn't done tastefully and generally comes off as forced and lacking nuance, as evident in the infamous monologue bit in the climax. The sharp tonal change preceding this highlighted segment of the third act doesn't help. The exploration of switched gender roles from Barbieland to the real world was another clever idea whose execution lacked finesse in some areas. Ryan Gosling's Ken is written rather obnoxiously for this bit; he saved the performance with his charisma and intuitive comic timing. And even though I found the ending pleasantly surprising - that scene with the Billie Eilish number is genuinely breathtaking - I was unfortunately distracted by the screenplay's unnuanced approach to the preceding events, regardless of how funny or thought-provoking they might have been. Perhaps I would appreciate it better with a second watch.

So yeah, immerse yourself in the vibrant and engaging experience that is "Barbie" and linger for the meaningful, relatable messages. Just keep in mind that there may be occasional rough patches along the journey.