TedStixonAKAMaximumMadness Reviews (626)

Velma (2023– )

"Velma"- Neither as bad as the review-bombers say, nor as good supporters claim. A thoroughly mediocre experience.

[4/10 · 18 January 2023]

As is often the case with controversial releases, the new animated series "Velma" has been the subject of blatant and unobjective review-bombing, so I suggest you take the current 1.3 out of 10 user-average with more than a few grains of salt. It's definitely not a 1.3 out of 10 show. But at the same time, I also have to admit that sadly... it ain't great, either.

Mindy Kaling leads an excellent voice-cast in this adult-oriented reimagining of the Scooby-Doo franchise that sees our favorite characters as younger, modern teens. Now, I'm sure the concept alone will repulse certain people, but I actually was pretty into it. I thought the idea had a certain charm, and the concept of a Scooby-Doo reboot aimed at older audiences is fun. (I still wish we could see James Gunn's original vision for the live-action film.)

Unfortunately in execution, the series is thus-far all over the place. There's far too much reliance on tired sex-gags and weird visual jokes that come out of nowhere. (A sequence involving a baby kicking in a pregnant woman's stomach being a prime example of a joke that just doesn't work.) And the non-stop fourth-wall breaking meta-humor can become quite aggravating at times. Meta-humor is something you have to nail, or else it comes across as shallow. You can't just have the characters make the same "If this was a TV show, this is the part where XXX!" joke every two minutes and expect audiences to laugh every time.

Additionally, even as a proud liberal who firmly believes that diversity and representation is very important... this show goes about it in the worst way possible. It just clumsily beats you over the head with it, then tries to cover for its sloppiness with more meta-humor. There's absolutely no problem with Velma being Indian American in this show, but rather than leave well-enough alone, it's treated as some sort-of grandiose reveal, and they actually have a character give a fourth-wall speech about how it's totally okay. Which just kind of makes it feel... icky.

That being said, there are some good things here, and if the show does move forward with a second season, I'm hoping it can improve. The cast does very well with what they have to work with, and the voices fit perfectly. Character designs are typically solid and the animation is decent. (Some lip-synching issues notwithstanding.) And I even think the central storyline has some promise.

But as it stands now, "Velma" is dragged down by its flaws. Will it improve in the future? Who knows. All I know is that at this point in time, after two episodes, I can only give it a slightly below average 4 out of 10. Not the worst thing ever, and some people might enjoy it. But very mediocre.

Buffy the Vampire Slayer: Unaired Pilot (2002) Season 1, Episode 0

The unaired pilot is a fun little piece of "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" history that's worth seeing at least once.

[7/10 · 19 July 2021]

The original unaired pilot is an interesting little piece of "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" history. Made in 1996 to pitch the series, this testing ground is essentially the genesis of the long-running and much beloved show. Though it has not been released in any official capacity, it's easy enough to find bootlegs floating about online with a simple search. And while creator Joss Whedon might not want you to see it, I do think it has enough historical value in the context of the franchise to be worth a one-time watch. Especially for hardcore fans.

Buffy Summers (Sarah Michelle Gellar) has just transferred to Berryman High School and is attending her first day of class. After meeting classmates Xander (Nicholas Brendon) and Willow (Riff Regan), Buffy is confronted by the truth-- the school librarian (Anthony Stewart Head) knows about her calling as "The Slayer," a chosen one destined to battle vampires, demons and the forces of darkness. And soon enough, a group of vampires arrive and threaten Buffy and her new friends...

The most interesting thing about this unaired episode are the differences between this early iteration and the final version of the pilot that eventually aired. Perhaps the most notable being that a different actress played Willow. While Alyson Hannigan was obviously the right choice when the show was finally given the greenlight, I will say that I do feel a little bad for Riff Regan. She surprisingly does a very good job as the prototype Willow and is a very solid actress. I could definitely see what they were going for by casting her. It's a shame she left the entertainment industry just a few short years after this pilot was produced.

Also notable is the difference in length. Compared to the final show, this episode seems made to fit a half-hour format, running only about 25 minutes. And for the most part, it works. It more-or-less is able to tell a cohesive story in its short length, and the pace is nice and brisk. Though obviously I do far prefer the hour-long format the final show went with.

On the whole, the unaired pilot does have enough entertainment value to keep you hooked. It's a real shame that this has never been given any sort-of official release, because it's nowhere near as bad as you might think. Sure, it's obviously inferior to the show that it helped spawn, but I can see why this would get networks interested in the series. It's a fun half-hour of "Buffy" history.

I'm giving it a solid 7 out of 10.

May (2002)

"May"- A fabulous, forgotten thriller from yesteryear that deserves a bigger audience. Sad, funny and diabolically eerie!

[8/10 · 23 May 2021]

May (Angela Bettis) is a socially awkward misfit who is self-conscious about her lazy eye, and whose only real friend is an eerie doll her mother gave her as a child. Obsessed with "perfect" body-parts, she tries to forge a romantic connection with a slightly scummy mechanic (Jeremy Sisto) and later her lesbian co-worker (Anna Faris), but both fail miserably in no small part due to her complete inability to grasp interpersonal relationships. Left damaged and pushed beyond her breaking point, May decides that if she can't find a real friend, she will create the perfect one... by any means necessary.

Deftly mixing a battery of tones and emotions, writer/director Lucky McKee's "May" runs the gamut between dark comedy, tragedy and pure gothic horror, and it juggles these genres with a sense of style and wit that you don't see too much in mainstream horror. It's a very cool, calculated, confident film that might just be one of the great underrated thrillers of recent memory, along the same lines as overlooked cult-classics like "Ginger Snaps" and "Behind the Mask: The Rise of Leslie Vernon."

McKee's script it tight and concise, with characters that are clearly defined and have a sense of depth. The pacing is excellent, with the film having a sense of deliberation that builds and builds towards the final act. And McKee's direction is top-notch. The film is beautifully told, with quirky visual touches and solid visual storytelling. It's a very competently made film, and it made me want to seek out McKee's other work.

Star Bettis commands the screen in a remarkable turn as our devilish and yet deeply sympathetic lead. She plays May pitch perfect-- you will be repulsed and disgusted by her actions, and yet there's a deep sense of humanity to her. She's absolutely crazy, but it's not her fault. She's just as much a victim as, well... her victims. I was also quite taken with Faris, who is perhaps best known for her roles in dopey comedies such as "Scary Movie" and the popular sitcom "Mom." I've always liked Faris despite not being a fan of much of her work, and she's a ton of fun as May's very unsubtle (and very randy) co-worker with a crush. And Sisto to his credit puts in a memorable turn as the first target of May's affection. He's an odd character, and isn't very likeable, but Sisto makes the most of the part.

At the end of the day, it's a bit of a tragedy that this film is so overlooked. Even as a major enthusiast of the horror genre, I wasn't aware of the film's existence until it was recommended to me by someone... and they only knew about it because it was recommended to them by someone else. It seems very much to be a word-of-mouth movie that's slowly been spreading over the last twenty years. But it's a film that deserves so much more-- it's clever, sharp and extremely well-executed, and its lead is endlessly endearing despite her actions. Here's to hoping that as time continues to move on, more and more people will discover this hidden gem.

I'm giving "May" an excellent 9 out of 10.

Tom & Jerry (II) (2021)

"Tom & Jerry"- I'd have loved this when I was a kid. People need to settle down.

[7/10 · 7 March 2021]

We can be pretentious, cynical adults and pick apart "Tom & Jerry's" flaws all day long... but the fact is I work at a theater, and I've seen plenty of happy kids coming out of the movie. (And even a few happy adults.) So I decided to give it a whirl on HBO Max. And you know what? At the end of the day, I can tell you that when I was a kid, I'd have also loved this movie. And that's gotta count for something.

After bluffing her way into a job at a prestigious New York City hotel, a young woman named Kayla (Chloe Grace Moretz) learns that there's one tiny problem- a mouse named Jerry has recently moved in, and is causing havoc with a high-profile wedding that's scheduled in only a few days' time. And so, Kayla hatches a plan, and hires a cat named Tom to take care of the problem... and as expected, chaos ensues.

Directed by Tim Story, "Tom & Jerry" is at its best when our titular furry duo are able to let loose and spend their time fighting in increasingly hilarious situations. There are some genuinely inspired sequences and gags, and if you grew up watching the original cartoons, you'll definitely get a kick out of their antics. I also enjoyed the way the film combines CGI and live-action, with all animals in this world being animated. It's a cute idea. Where the film falls a little flat is the human storyline. While the actors are uniformly solid, especially the likeable Moretz, it just isn't that interesting and all feels very stock. And it does drag the movie down at times.

Still, as I've observed, the movie seems to be a hit with kids, and that's what's important. And I'm willing to bet there will be a decent number of adults who grew up with the original cartoons will find it mildly entertaining as well. I know it managed to get a few decent laughs out of me, and I'm not even all that nostalgic for the characters.

I'm giving "Tom & Jerry" a very watchable 7 out of 10. I'd definitely recommend it if you're looking for something to watch for a family movie night. The kids will love it and the adults will probably get a few decent laughs too.

Dark Phoenix (2019)

"Dark Phoenix"- An interesting but divisive conclusion to the 'X-Men' movie franchise.

[6/10 · 13 January 2021]

The peculiar thing about "Dark Phoenix" is how it's grown on me increasingly with each viewing. When I first watched the film, I felt cold. Hollow. I just didn't much like it, and I found myself in agreement with a majority of the bad reviews. And yet, there was something about it that made me want to give it a second chance. And on a second viewing, I actually began to find little things about it that I liked. Nothing massive... just little moments and ideas here and there that appealed to me in their own ways. And on a third watch-through... I found even more about it that I liked. More character beats I enjoyed and more bits and pieces that caught me off guard. And this trend has only continued with my most recent visit to the film.

I don't think there will ever be an "ah-ha!" moment where I suddenly view "Dark Phoneix" as a particularly good film... but after having sat through it four times, I honestly have to say, I think it's perfectly watchable. And in a way, even enjoyable despite its faults. Though it suffers a dull pace for much of its first half and feels a bit clunky in its execution, I genuinely think the third act is pretty darned fantastic, and there are enough flashes of brilliance to make it worth at least a one-time watch for longtime fans of the 20th Century Fox "X-Men" series. Just go in knowing it's a bit of a bumpy ride.

After she is exposed to a mysterious storm in outer space, Jean Grey's latent powers begin to manifest in new and terrifying ways, threatening to destroy both the X-Men and the delicate balance of power between the humans and the mutants. At the same time, members of an alien race arrive on earth, seeking out Jean for their own dark purposes.

Written and directed by series veteran Simon Kinberg in his feature directorial debut, the film is certainly an odd beast all things considered. The story goes that this particular retelling of the Dark Phoenix saga was meant to be an epic two part film, only for the studio to cave in and force Kinberg to combine the scripts into one single movie. And I think you can kind of tell watching it- at times the movie feels like an abridged version of a much larger story, with some plotlines and character beats feeling rushed. A big casualty of this is Jessica Chastain's character, who sometimes feels like an afterthought despite being a major player. And yet, the movie also sort-of meanders, which is its greatest flaw. I think a lot of it has to do with the fact that this is Kinberg's first film as a director... he doesn't quite understand how to properly pace scenes visually and sometimes he gets a little lost in the proceedings. This is especially evident in the first half of the film, which can drag quite a bit. And I think that's honestly where the movie loses people- the fact that the story is severely cut down and the pacing being a bit wonky early on. That was certainly my experience the first time I watched the film- it lost me in the first act. And it really does drag the whole film down a few pegs.

But as I said, something just compelled me to give the film another chance... and once I did, I began to discover quite a few things I liked about the film. As is always the case with the "X-Men" franchise, the performances are generally top notch. James McAvoy and Michael Fassbender light up the screen once again as Charles Xavier and Megneto, and put in excellent work. I felt McAvoy especially shined, as the movie took some big risks with his character that I enjoyed- this is a different Xavier than we've seen before. And despite splitting audiences, I genuinely liked Sophie Turner as Jean... I felt she did an admirable job showing the character's transformation. Jessica Chastain, Nicholas Hoult and Tye Sheridan also put in some very good work as our supporting players despite sometimes being lost in the shuffle of the story. And heck, say what you will about Jennifer Lawrence and how she phones in her performance in a few scenes... with her somewhat reduced role and the film's greater focus on the ensemble, I actually didn't mind her too much.

I also felt that there were quite a few genuinely great scenes peppered throughout the film that kept my interest on re-watches. In particular, I have to commend the film for a thrilling climax that may be one of the series best- a prolonged sequence set on a moving train in which our heroes all get a moment to shine, and their powers are used in clever ways. It may feel smaller in scope than other scenes in the franchise, but I actually kind of appreciated that. This is a more intimate story, so a more intimate final battle felt appropriate. I also really enjoyed an early scene where the X-Men have to save a group of astronauts... it was fun seeing the X-Men going on an actual "adventure," and the scene felt very "comic-booky" in a way the movies generally have not. And I genuinely liked how the movie handled some of the characters. Particularly Xavier, who is a bit more ambiguous and dubious, having grown a little too prideful and arrogant after so many great successes. It was a fun way to take a character and give him a new character arc to contend with.

In the end, I just can't say that I hate the film anymore. I don't want to appear contrarian just for the sake of it-- that's just the way I feel. It does enough interesting things that it holds my interest. And I've found I enjoy it a little more every time I watch it.

I'm giving "Dark Phoenix" a middle-of-the-road but totally watchable 6 out of 10. I'd honestly suggest leaving any preconceived notions you may have about the film at the door and giving the film a fair shot. And if you've already seen it? Well I'd say give it another chance like I did.

Tremors: Shrieker Island (2020 Video)

"Tremors: Shrieker Island"- The most ferociously fun and entertaining 'Tremors' since 'Aftershocks!'

[8/10 · 23 October 2020]

I've pretty much been a "Tremors" fan for as long as I can remember. I grew up watching the first two movies over and over again every time they aired on cable. I remember practically leaping through the roof when I saw "Tremors 3: Back to Perfection" one day in the new release section of my old Hollywood Video store. And I remember the excited anticipation when I heard "Tremors 5: Bloodlines" was finally coming out after over a decade of waiting. Suffice to say... I'll always have a soft spot for these films.

So it's with a great deal of personal satisfaction when I say that the seventh and latest installment, "Tremors: Shrieker Island," is easily the best entry in the series since the stellar second chapter, "Aftershocks." Boasting solid production value, fun creature thrills and another winning turn from series star Michael Gross, "Shrieker Island" is pure fun from start to finish.

A self-centered playboy (Richard Brake) has turned a tropical island getaway into the ultimate hunting ground by illegally populating the land with genetically-engineered super-graboids for the rich and elite to kill for sport. However, when the hunt gets out of hand, it's up to graboid-expert Burt Gummer (Gross) and a new group of allies (Jon Heder, Jackie Cruz, Caroline Langrishe) to save the day.

Helmed by returning director/co-writer Don Michael Paul, I was surprised by just how strong "Shrieker Island" ended up being. This is the seventh film in the franchise and the sixth to go direct-to-video. By now the law of diminishing returns should be in full gear. And yet the film ended up being easily one of the best of the franchise. The visual direction is sharp and slick, and despite obviously having a low budget, the effects are top-notch. It looks like a movie that could have been on the big-screen. I've had my issues with Paul's other installments, but he really knocks it out of the park here. The production value is excellent for a film of this caliber.

I also immensely enjoyed the creature thrills and the balance between action and humor. It's a lot of fun seeing the return of the shriekers after a multi-film absence, and I loved their revamped design. I also really appreciated the fact that they gave the monsters some new abilities thanks to the genetic enhancements. The evolution of the monsters has always been a big part of the appeal of the "Tremors" sequels, and it's good to see something new being done with them. Especially after the conspicuous absence of any new developments in the sixth film. The way the film juggles the monster-fueled action set-pieces with humor is also pretty darned solid. I think they took the lessons they learned with the last two movies and were able to craft a better balance this time around. The humor never goes too far over the top, and the action is suitably stepped-up.

And then there's the cast, who honestly surprised me quite a bit. The last few entries have been a bit weak when it comes to the supporting players, but I think pretty much everyone did a good job here. I was concerned when I heard Heder was one of the main characters. As much as I liked "Napoleon Dynamite," I just didn't know if I could see him in a "Tremors" movie. But he does surprisingly well and comes off as incredibly likable. Jackie Cruz is an adorable spitfire who gives quite a bit of heart to the proceedings. Caroline Langrishe plays very well off of series star Michael Gross as his estranged ex. And Richard Brake makes for a very fun "love-to-hate-'em" antagonist. But of course, the real star here is Gross, and he is as excellent as ever. The film surprisingly gives him a lot of introspective moments this time around, in addition to the general humor of the character, and Gross completely owns the part. "Shrieker Island" is definitely one of Burt's best outings as a character.

If you really twisted my arm and made me point out any weaknesses in the film, I will definitely say the movie is strictly made for the fans. "Shrieker Island" is pretty much inaccessible to casual audiences, which may limit its appeal. And I will say that at times the writing can be a little shaky. There's some sloppy exposition dumps here and there, and some unnatural dialogue at times. But even saying that, I still had a pretty great time with the film.

As a lifelong fan of the "Tremors" series, I was completely satisfied with "Shrieker Island." While it certainly won't win over new audiences, if you've followed "Tremors" from the beginning, you owe it to yourself to see this movie. It's one of the best of the series and as a hardcore fan, it earns an 8 out of 10 from me.

Angel (1999–2004)

"Angel"- The thrills continue in this slick, suspenseful "Buffyverse" spin-off!

[9/10 · 5 October 2020]

Spin-off shows are always a bit of a risk when it comes to television. For every resounding success, there's a failure. For every "Daria" or "Better Call Saul," there's a "Joey" or a "That 80's Show." They're a gamble at best, and a guaranteed failure at worst. But every once in a while, you'll get a good one. A great one even. A new series that not only honors the show from which it branched off, but also expands the universe and is able to succeed on its own merits.

And it should come as no surprise that co-creator Joss Whedon was able to deliver just such a series with the "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" spin-off "Angel." Running for five seasons on the now defunct WB, the series places its focus on the titular Angel, a vampire with a soul who uses his powers and enhanced abilities to hunt bad-guys and save the day. And thanks to a remarkable cast, a fantastically dark tone and some excellent writing, it succeeds as one of the best spin-offs in recent memory-- a wonderful show that both compliments and contrasts with the original.

David Boreanaz stars as Angel, whom has just relocated to Los Angeles and spends his nights protecting random citizens from various supernatural threats. After a series of events leads to his reunion with former Sunnydale resident Cordelia Chase (Charisma Carpenter), along with meeting several new allies, "Angel Investigations" is created- a supernatural detective agency that seeks to protect mankind and help the helpless. And standing in their way is an increasingly dangerous assortment of demons and adversaries... many with ties to a mysterious law firm known as Wolfram & Hart.

Though Joss Whedon has become a bit of a pariah as of late due to seemingly unending personal controversies, he fellow co-creator David Greenwalt really struck gold when it came to this series. While Angel certainly had his place in "Buffy the Vampire Slayer," the fact is the character was ripe for expansion. And this series served as the perfect platform to do so.

David Boreanaz leads the series with a strong, brooding performance that sets the tone for the overall show. He gives the character so much pathos and humanity, though also wisely shows a sense of humor in just the right places. He's just sublime. Carpenter is a joy as the returning character Cordelia. She started as an archetypical queen-bee mean-girl on "Buffy," but she absolutely shines in this series, as the character is given much more depth and a greater focus. And then there's the various supporting cast members, who are all phenomenal in their own way. Perhaps of greatest note are Alexis Denisof as the returning character Wesley Wyndam-Pryce and the late Andy Hallett as a delightful demonic ally known as Lorne. Denisof's Wesley has a magnificent character arc over the show's five seasons, while Hallett brings such a warmth to the series. I also very much enjoyed J. August Richards and Amy Acker as newcomers who join the Angel Investiations during the course of the series. Both bring a lot to their characters. And a special note goes out to the late Glenn Quinn, Julie Benz, Mercedes McNab, James Marsters and Christian Kane, who pad out the cast in supporting roles, and each give very good performances.

The tone of the series is also very important, and is one of the key factors to its success. While "Buffy" deftly mixed drama with a near constant sense of humor, and often felt much more light-hearted with the exception of key episodes, "Angel" is by contrast a much grittier, inkier series throughout. It still has a sense of humor, but it makes no qualms about what it is-- this show is incredibly dark at times, and deals with heavy themes. And it works very well. This feels like a more grown-up series than its predecessor, and is just as rewarding, but in different ways.

And this is aided by the typically expert writing. Whedon's shows are often praised for their witty dialogue and clever storylines, and that is very much the case with "Angel." While some seasons may be stronger than others, it consistently feels nuanced and mature, and tackles stories that will leave you feeling quite uncomfortable and questioning what you would do in the same situation. And these stories make it a very engaging watch.

That praise being said, this series is not without its faults. There are some minor-- and occasionally moderate-- issues that hold it just shy of perfection in my eyes. The chief offender of which is the show's notorious fourth season, which unfortunately just doesn't measure up in comparison to the other, much more rewarding years. While I won't spoil anything, I will say that the fourth season really damages some of the characters. Almost irreparably. And it makes it a rough sit. I also feel that on the whole, the show has a somewhat greater ratio of misses-to-hits than "Buffy" ever did. Several of the monster-of-the-week storylines fall flat on their face, while certain storylines often feel needlessly drawn out and over-complicated. And it does impact my overall feelings about the series.

But those complaints aside, "Angel" is a series that I'd still heartily recommend. Despite a weak fourth season and a fistful of bad episodes, the majority of the show succeeds wonderfully thanks to the excellent cast, sharp writing and deliciously grim tone. And it easily earns an excellent 9 out of 10 from me. It's one of the best spin-offs in recent memory, and is still worth checking out twenty years later.

Night of the Demons (1988)

"Night of the Demons"- Stupid, trashy, sub-standard schlock... I love it!

[5/10 · 28 September 2020]

I can't in good conscience sit here and give director Kevin Tenney's 1988 opus "Night of the Demons" great praise or my highest recommendation. I can't tell you it's a must-see film or that it's an expertly crafted thrill-ride. Nor can I say it was well-acted and breathlessly paced. Because the honest truth is... it's a complete mess. It's dumber than a box or rocks, trashier than an episode of "Maury," and the execution is patchy and sub-standard at best.

But you know what? Those are the reasons why I love it!

Yes, the one thing I can say is that if you're a fan of B-movie schlock and sleazy exploitation like I am, you're definitely going to get your money's worth here. Its faults are also the source of its charm, and it's chock-full of everything you'd want out of a dumb 80's horror flick. There are bared-breasts aplenty, and enough gooey gore to keep you glued to the screen. It's stupid... oh, it's stupid. But it's stupid in the right kinds of ways.

It's Halloween night and a group of teens have decided to hold a party at the infamous Hull House- an abandoned mortuary with a troubled past. Among them are the adorkable Judy (Cathy Podewell) and the wild social outcast Angela. (Amelia Kinkade) However, things take a dark turn when the party-goers decide to hold a séance... unwittingly unleashing demonic spirits that begin to possess and pick-off the teenagers one-by-one! Now, Judy and the others must fight for their lives as they try to survive the night of the demons!

To the film's credit, I will say that there are some pretty good things going for it. As silly as it can be, I found the bulk of the visual effects to be really well-executed. Particularly of note was a hilariously insane sequence involving a woman's nipple and a tube of lipstick that was wonderfully disgusting. And the demons were all suitably frightening. I also really enjoyed the bulk of the cast, even if they weren't the strongest actors. Podewell makes for an enjoyable and likeable protagonist, and Kinkade is a ton of fun as the weird, gothy Angela, who is quickly possessed by the demons and becomes the main adversary. She's just a blast in the role. And of course, we have a great turn from scream queen Linnea Quigley in a small part... Quigley is one of those actors that's not very good... but she's always really entertaining to watch as she chews the scenery.

Where the film falls flat is in its execution. While I'm not too familiar with his work, director Tenney seems over-his-head with the material. Many shots and sequences feel oddly paced, and some of the choices in camera angles and compositions are really wonky. The editing can also feel patchy and inconsistent, with the earlier scenes in particular dragging. And then there's the script by Joe Augustyn. And it's... not great. It feels really trashy at times, the dialogue is laughably on-the-nose and the general tone is all over the place. Quite frankly, it's just plain stupid.

But like I said... that's kind of the fun of the film. It's not a very good movie. But I don't think it's trying to be. It's just trying to be dumb fun. And in that respect, it succeeds. I can go alone with the silly plot and the badly written characters because they exist to get us to good stuff- the boobs and blood! And I can live with the poor editing and direction because that's not really the point. The movie exists to entertain. And entertain it does. At least provided you like this sort of silly movie. And it gives a lot of the films faults a certain perverted charm.

This is one of those cases where it's hard to give the film any sort-of numerical score. If I were to judge it based on its actual quality, this is at best a 3 out of 10. As a movie, it just isn't very good. But if I were to judge it by its entertainment value, it's easily a very solid 7, because it has enough nifty effects and bouncing bosoms to make it a fun watch. You know what? I think I'll go ahead and just average those out, bringing us to a sloppy but very watchable 5 out of 10. If you like a good-bad horror movie, you'll almost certainly get a kick out of "Night of the Demons."

Critters Attack! (2019 TV Movie)

"Critters Attack!"- Typical SyFy channel schlock. Completely disposable, but good for a few laughs.

[4/10 · 20 September 2020]

I have a certain affinity for the "Critters" franchise. Sure, they were never high art, but they were a good bit of fun back in the day, and hold up as mildly engaging little creature-features. They're the perfect sorts of films to pop on during a slow, rainy day thanks to their excellent old-school puppet effects and a few goofy jokes thrown in for good measure.

2019's "Critters Attack!" is the long awaited fifth installment, coming nearly thirty years after the release of the previous film. Primarily produced for a direct-to-video and cable release, the film is a low budget affair that feels very typical of your general SyFy channel level schlock. Cheaply thrown together and ultimately disposable... but good for a few fleeting laughs thanks to some nifty creature effects and a couple clever moments sprinkled in.

Tashiana Washington stars as Drea, a 20-something sushi delivery girl with big dreams of going away to college. However, things soon start to turn deadly in her sleepy little town when a certain race of rolly-polly aliens invade. That's right, the krites are back and badder than ever! Now, Drea must team up with her younger brother (Jaeden Noel), two kids she's babysitting (Ava Preston, Jack Fulton), and a mysterious and seemingly "good" Krite nicknamed Bianca, in order to stay alive and save the day. At the same time, a woman named "Aunt Dee" (Dee Wallace) sets out to hunt the invading monsters...

Perhaps the most peculiar thing about "Critters Attack!" is the fact that from a basic scripting level... it's actually not that badly written. Screenwriter Scott Lobdell, perhaps best known for his work in the field of comics and for writing the delightful slasher-comedy "Happy Death Day," does a pretty good job establishing characters, setting up an interesting story, and injecting some fun and subversive little sequences. And there is definitely some fun to be had with the film thanks to this. I particularly enjoyed the subplot involving Bianca, the "good krite."

And to give credit where it is due, the creature effects are also typically very well-made. We all know the real reason you watch a "Critters" film is to see some monster-infused mayhem, and the movie doesn't disappoint in that regard. The krites are as deliciously vile as ever, and the puppetry is pretty darned solid all around. It definitely holds up to the effects of the previous films, and even exceeds them at times. I also will admit that the kills are appropriately gooey and gory, which is good fun for horror fans.

Unfortunately, the film often falls flat due to an obvious low budget and a shaky execution from director Bobby Miller. It's very clear that the production wasn't exactly inundated with money, and it leaves the movie feeling very cheap, patchy and thrown together. And that sort of thing is becoming harder and harder to accept as filmmaking technology continues to evolve and costs continue to fall. The fact I've seen zero-budget student films that look better than this professional production is a real problem.

And that's primarily the fault of the direction, which is sub-par at best. I'm sure Miller tried his hardest, but that doesn't change the fact that the pacing is inconsistent, the set-ups are basic and amateurish, the tone is all over the map and the general feel is very... blah. This same script in more experienced hands could have worked quite well. Unfortunately, that just wasn't the case here.

But at the end of the day, I can't say I absolutely hated the film. As someone who enjoys a bad B-movie now and then, there was still some entertainment value to be had thanks to the nifty creature effects, gory kills and a relatively solid screenplay. And if you similarly enjoy low-budget schlock like me, I'd probably give this movie a very mild recommendation. It'd be worth seeing once if you should happen to catch it on cable, or see a cheap copy buried in a bargain-bin somewhere.

I'm giving "Critters Attack!" a sub-par but watchable 4 out of 10. It's patchy and poorly executed, but has enough fun little moments that fans of crappy B-movies might enjoy it.

Buffy the Vampire Slayer (1997–2003)

"Buffy the Vampire Slayer"- The iconic series still manages to thrill and enthrall over twenty years later!

[10/10 · 18 September 2020]

Despite having been born in the late 80's and having grown up a true 90's kid, I must admit that I was never particularly aware of the cultural phenomenon that was Joss Whedon's beloved series "Buffy the Vampire Slayer." I mean sure, I knew the show existed, and I had watched the original movie with my older sister a few times. But that was about it. I think I was just a little too young at the time to really grasp just how massive and important the show was, and how much it appealed to audiences of all ages. But as I grew older, I found myself gradually becoming more and more interested in the series, though I never quite had the time to finally hunker down and watch it from start to finish, outside of having seen most of the first three seasons while I was in college.

However, like many others this year during the current global pandemic, I opted to use my spare time while I was furloughed from work to catch up on movies and series that I've been meaning to watch. And "Buffy" was right at the top of my list. Over the course of four months, I gradually watched through the series in its entirety for the first time, along with its popular spin-off "Angel."

And how was it? It was as outstanding as I ever could have hoped it would be! While it may be a bit dated at times, and while some seasons are stronger than others, I was shocked by just how well it held up, how relevant many of its themes still are, and just how darned entertaining the show is. This is one iconic series that still manages to thrill and enthrall even decades later!

Sarah Michelle Gellar stars as Buffy Summers, who is seemingly just your ordinary teenage girl, worried about things like boys and homework. Except she's not just your ordinary girl-- she is "the Slayer," a chosen one gifted with superhuman strength and agility, who is destined to do battle with vampires, demons and the forces of darkness! And together with her best friends Xander (Nicholas Brendon) and Willow (Alyson Hannigan), along with her "Watcher" Giles (Anthony Stewart Head), she must face non-stop adventure as her little town of Sunnydale is invaded by creatures and monsters over and over again.

While his credibility and star-power has faded over the last few years due to a slew of admittedly icky personal controversies, creator Joss Whedon and his crew of writers and directors crafted a wonderful and addictive series in "Buffy." Deftly mixing creepiness with campiness, and drama with comedy, the show is a unique blend that is deeply satisfying to watch. Especially once you get passed the bumpy, lower-budget first season and into the much more refined remainder of the show. The series tackles timeless themes that many people face as they grow and age, and does it with a refreshing sense of wit and style. And it's just plain darned fun to watch thanks to the endlessly likable characters and sharp humor. Whedon is well-known for his stylized dialogue and for injecting clever gags into his works, and it's just splendid here. The show is absolutely hilarious, which helps even out the darker moments.

The cast is absolutely fantastic. Gellar makes for a compelling lead in Buffy, and it's a lot of fun to see how the character evolves over the seven seasons as she grows and changes. Gellar really knocks it out of the park-- there's a reason she's still beloved in this role. Brendon and Hannigan are absolutely phenomenal in their roles as Buffy's friends and allies in the war against darkness, and they add a lot of heart and humor to the show. Heck, at times they even overshadow Buffy- especially Hannigan. Anthony Stewart Head adds a sense of class to the proceedings and is a great deal of fun as Buffy's long-suffering teacher and advisor Giles. And a revolving door of supporting players add quite a bit to the series. Particularly notable are an excellent David Boreanez, a brilliant James Marsters, an adorable Emma Caulfield, a very likable Amber Benson, a hilarious Seth Green and a very solid Michelle Trachtenberg as various allies of our heroes who come and sometimes go over the seasons.

I also have to mention the general production of the series. While the effects are dated, and there is a definite sense of the early seasons being "super 90's," the show is typically very well put together. The cinematography is quite excellent for its time, with later seasons still holding up quite well. The music is awesomely moody and sets the tone exceptionally well. And the production and creature design is usually top notch stuff.

Now before I wrap this up, I feel I should address one other thing. There seems to be almost a mandatory and prerequisite need to discuss the various seasons in these sorts of reviews. Because everyone has their opinions over what the "best" and "worst" seasons are. And I have to admit... I do have my own opinions. But the most important thing I have to say is, I don't think there are really any "bad" seasons of "Buffy." Sure, some seasons are stronger than others, but I really enjoyed all seven for the most part, and see them all as vitally important pieces of the puzzle. So I wouldn't recommend skipping any of them, or stopping at a certain point. It's all worth seeing.

"Buffy the Vampire Slayer" is a magnificent series that still stands tall decades after its initial release. Its themes are still relevant, its characters are still likable, and it's still a blast and a half to watch. And it easily earns a perfect 10 out of 10! Now if only we could get a proper HD remaster that maintained the original 4:3 aspect ratio and stuck closer to the original color-correction...

Happy Death Day 2U (2019)

"Happy Death Day 2U"- Delightfully dopey and endlessly entertaining! It's a ton of fun!

[8/10 · 12 September 2020]

If there's one thing that director Christopher Landon's two "Happy Death Day" films have in spades, it's charm. Yes, the stories may be silly as can be, and I'm sure you could poke a million holes in the logic... but frankly, I don't care. Because the original film, and indeed this slick and ridiculously entertaining sequel, are just too darned enjoyable for me to mind their flaws.

Jessica Rothe is back as the long-suffering "Tree" Gelbman, and once again, she finds herself at the center of a brand new adventure. After learning that her original time-loop was caused by an on-campus quantum experiment by fellow student Ryan (Phi Vu), Tree is inadvertently sent hurtling through time and space, landing in another time loop... in another dimension. Now, Tree must work with this dimension's versions of Ryan and her boyfriend Carter (Israel Broussard) in order to try and find a way home. But things obviously aren't that easy. Not only is there a new killer on the loose in this dimension... but Tree also learns that her desperately missed deceased mother (Missy Yager) is still very much alive, putting her into a moral dilemma.

While the original "Happy Death Day" focused primarily on a horror-comedy approach by adding a dash of humor and a wonderful time-loop gimmick to a classic slasher-film formula, "Happy Death Day 2U" is much more of an overt sci-fi comedy. It plays down the slasher-horror element quite a bit and instead just has fun with the concept. It's quite a bit more slap-sticky and overtly humorous in its approach, and I think it works fabulously. It gave me fond memories of films like "Evil Dead II" and "Bride of Chucky"-- movies that took their respective series into more satirical directions.

As before the cast is just wonderful. Jessica Rothe once again leads the film with an engaging and fearless performance. She's also give some surprisingly meaty dramatic scenes to sink her teeth into, and she does an amazing job. Suffice to say, these films have definitely made me a fan of hers. Vu, Broussard and other returns actors including Rachel Matthews and Ruby Modine are as excellent as ever. Especially Modine, who gets a chance to completely reinterpret her character thanks to the dimension-hopping angle of the story. Newcomers such as Suraj Sharma and Sarah Yarkin are just a blast and add a lot to the proceedings. And Yager is wonderful as Tree's mother in a small supporting role. We knew she was important from the first film, and it's a delight to actually meet the character.

Writer/Director Christopher Landon is also at the top of his game. The movie is extremely well put together, with a sharp sense of style. And it's clear Landon is having the time of his life behind the camera, with some wild comedic set-pieces and some really entertaining and experimental little scenes. A sequence in which Tree hilariously kills herself over and over stands out as one of the film's best. His script is also very tight and absolutely packed with humor and heart. He really does a fabulous job at handling the characters and their arcs, and I can't wait to see what he cooks up next.

And just like the first movie, the beating heart of the film is the emotional journey that Tree is forced to endure. And I think that's what sets these films apart. The strong character development, which is uncommon in many modern horror and genre films. Especially mainstream releases. The first film focused on Tree's journey into becoming a better person. This film expands on that, and has some great themes, including making peace with your past and learning to embrace your future. And it just... makes you feel good seeing such a great character learning these lessons.

If I had to point out any real flaws to the film, well... I definitely think this sequel will have a slightly more limited appeal than its predecessor. It's a bit more "extreme" in its approach, and I do think it might turn some audiences off. Especially if they were hoping for a more straight-forward sequel. I also think the mystery of the new killer was a little forced. I honestly would have been totally fine if there wasn't a killer in this movie, because it almost feels like an afterthought, and if anything, it kinda kills the pacing in the third act for a few minutes.

But those are just minor squabbles in an otherwise incredibly enjoyable film. Is it an award-worthy piece of art? No. Definitely not. But I don't think it was trying to be. It's trying to just be a fun movie. And I think it succeeds wonderfully.

I'm giving "Happy Death Day 2U" a very good 8 out of 10. For my money, it's just as enjoyable as the first film.

Happy Death Day (2017)

"Happy Death Day"- A clever horror-comedy that makes the most of its time-loop gimmick!

[8/10 · 10 September 2020]

Wow, there has certainly been a deluge of time-loop stories lately, hasn't there? From quickly forgotten films like "Before I Fall," to quirky mainstream comedies like "Palm Springs," to popular television series like "Russian Doll," audiences can't seem to get enough of these types of projects. And possibly the best of the trend is 2017's delightfully twisted and wonderfully hammy horror-comedy "Happy Death Day!"

Jessica Rothe stars as "Tree," a troubled and sometimes selfish sorority girl who gets her kicks from things like ignoring others and having illicit affairs with her college professors. But things quickly change when she is murdered one night by a masked assailant... only to wake up and relive the same day over again... and then die yet again at the hands of the masked figure. With the help of a charming fellow student named Carter (Israel Broussard), Tree is able to surmise that she is stuck inside of a time-loop, destined to relive the day again and again until she can solve the mystery of her own murder and keep herself alive. And along the way, she'll also learn to confront her inner demons and maybe become a better person for it.

Directed by Christopher Landon from a script by Scott Lobdell, "Happy Death Day" works extremely well thanks to the wonderful cast, a good blend of humor and thrills that make the most out of the time-loop gimmick, and some top-notch character development. It's a resounding success all around, and is arguably one of the best horror-comedies in recent memory.

I absolutely adore the cast. Rothe, a relative newcomer, knocks it out of the park as our lead. I've only seen her once or twice in the past, but she absolutely commands the film. She gives Tree a good sense of depth, and is also just as entertaining as you could want her to be. Absolutely fabulous performance. Broussard is endlessly likable as Tree's main ally in the film, and potential romantic interest Carter. He helps ground the movie, and is a lot of fun in his part. I also absolutely loved Rachel Matthews as the school's resident queen-bee mean-girl Danielle. It's a small part, but Matthews makes quite the impression. And of course there's a small turn from Ruby Modine as Tree's long-suffering roommate Lori. She's quite good in the film and has some juicy scenes to sink her teeth into.

The film's execution is also top-notch stuff. Lobdell's script skillfully mixes classic slasher-film scares with a keen sense of humor, creating a pretty ideal blend that keeps the audience at the edge of their seats while also piling on the laughs. The script also makes the most of the time-loop narrative in clever and subversive ways. There are so many fun little moments showing Tree's journey, and her just... having fun with the fact she keeps reliving the same day over and over again. And director Landon's execution of the material is pitch perfect. I've been a fan of Landon for a while now thanks to his other projects, and he's just the right fit. His sense of pacing and composition is fantastic, and he's able to execute the laughs and the thrills to perfection. In a lot of ways, he very pleasantly reminded me of early Sam Raimi in how he handles the material. And that's a very good thing.

And then there's the character development, which is really the beating heart of the film. In a lot of ways, Tree's growth is more important than the story. And it is just perfect. The film does a remarkably good job at establishing Tree as a very flawed and often unlikable person at the start... but then cleverly begins to dole out little bits of information suggesting it's not really her fault, and that she has a lot of pain beneath the surface. And the story goes on, Tree eventually begins to reevaluate her life in pretty fantastic ways. It may be a bit simplistic at times, but I really appreciate it when a movie is able to take us on a journey like this. Especially a horror film, which don't always have the best track records when it comes to character development.

If I absolutely had to point out any weaknesses to the film, I would say that the story perhaps takes a little too long to get going. The first few days in the time-loop can kinda drag a bit. A little tightening to "trim the fat" would have been appreciated. I also do think some of the twists and turns are a little... "convenient." But then again, the film is so much fun, I can forgive that for the most part.

I absolutely adore "Happy Death Day." It takes a simple premise-- "What if 'Groundhog Day' was a slasher movie?"-- and spins it into pure gold. It's arguably the best "time loop" story in recent memory, and it's just a blast-and-a-half to watch. I'm giving it a very good 8 out of 10. Definitely worth seeing.... again and again.

Bill & Ted Face the Music (2020)

"Bill & Ted Face the Music"- A charming, nostalgic trip down memory lane. Most excellent!

[8/10 · 29 August 2020]

It's been nearly thirty years since we last heard from Bill and Ted. But they're back, baby! And their latest adventure is a very charming and wonderfully nostalgic trip down memory lane that should please longtime fans of the beloved series. It certainly is most excellent!

Years after their last adventure, Bill (Alex Winter) and Ted (Keanu Reeves) have not yet fulfilled their destinies to create the song that united the world, and both their band and their personal lives have hit some major hang-ups. With the Wyld Stallyns now stuck doing cheesy gigs and wedding receptions, they soon begin to question whether or not they really will ever write their legendary tune. However, they are soon visited by the daughter (Kristen Schaal) of their old friend Rufus, who brings them to the future where they learn the troubling truth-- they have but only a little more than an hours' time to write their song, or else all time and space will implode. And thus, they set off on a daring new adventure to steal the song from their future selves. At the same time, the pair's equally air-headed daughters Thea (Samara Weaving) and Billie (Brigette Lundy-Paine) set out on a quest through time of their own in order to build a most legendary band to back their dads.

When it's at its best, "Bill & Ted Face the Music" is pure, unadulterated fun. Is it a bit patchy? Sure. Do its ambitions sometimes outreach its obvious lower budget? Yes, here and there. But that doesn't change the fact that it's an endlessly entertaining and endearing return for two of our favorite cinematic characters.

Reeves and Winter slip right back into the shoes of their iconic characters, and are both just a blast-and-a-half to watch. It's like they never went away. Especially Winter, who is a joy to behold. I also absolutely adored Weaving and Lundy-Paine, who add a lot to the proceedings. In many ways, their story and the relationship their characters have with their fathers is the beating heart of the film. Schaal is as fun as ever in this new role. Jayma Mays and Erinn Hayes are a good bit of fun as the titular duo's long-suffering Princess brides. I absolutely loved Anthony Carrigan as a neurotic, robotic villain from the future. And returning actors including William Sadler as the Grim Reaper and Amy Stoch as Missy help tie the entire series together. (Just wait till you get a load of what Missy has been up to in the ensuing years!)

Series co-creators Ed Solomon and Chris Matheson once again write, and they have a lot of fun with the concepts and subplots and characters. The movie has all of the humor you've come to expect from a Bill and Ted story, plus some genuinely touching moments thrown in for good measure. Directorial duties are handled by Dean Parisot of "Galaxy Quest" fame, and he does reasonably well with the material. It's typically well shot, and scenes are competently composed. I definitely got a bit of a "Galaxy Quest" vibe at times from the visuals, which was a welcome addition. And I absolutely loved the musical score by famed composer Mark Isham.

And most importantly... this is just a fun movie to watch. It's a wonderful little reunion, and it just feels good to have these characters back.

If you really twisted my arm and forced me to be critical of the film, I would definitely say that the pacing is suspect at times. The middle act does drag a bit, while the third act feels a teeny-bit rushed. The visual direction is solid, but a few scenes suffer from the somewhat lower-budget. And I'd be lying if I said there wasn't the occasional joke that falls a little flat.

But dear lord, I just really enjoyed this film. It was a most excellent adventure all around, and it's exactly the sort-of movie we need now in these troubled times.

I'm giving "Bill & Ted Face the Music" a very good 8 out of 10. Party on!

Sonic the Hedgehog (2020)

"Sonic the Hedgehog"- A silly, fun flick for the whole family, and another step in the right direction for video-game-to-film adaptations!

[7/10 · 1 June 2020]

Hey! Hollywood appears to be on a roll lately! After last year's "Pokémon: Detective Pikachu" proved to be one of the most faithful and engaging video-game movies yet, a certain blue hedgehog with a speedy superpower has arrived to continue the trend!

2020's "Sonic the Hedgehog" is based on the famous Sega mascot, and comes to us from first-time feature director Jeff Fowler. Featuring a fairly impressive cast including comedic mastermind Jim Carrey and the delightful Ben Schwartz as the voice of our titular hero, the film is by and large a success thanks to its solid cast, infectious humor and some very creative sequences. And although it may be a slave to formula and at times can come off as generic and quaint, it's another step in the right direction for video-game-to-film adaptations!

Sonic (Schwartz) is an anthropomorphic hedgehog hailing from a distant alien world. Sought after for his powers of super-speed, he was forced to flee to the planet Earth as a child, and has been hiding out in the small town of Green Hills, Montana ever since. However, when he inadvertently catches the eyes of the US government, he is forced to team up with local Sheriff Tom (James Marsden) to find a way off of Earth. At the same time, an evil and unhinged genius called Dr. Robotnik (Carrey) is assigned to the case, and becomes obsessed with catching our speedy hero!

The cast is a great deal of fun. I've always really enjoyed Schwartz as a performer, and he really fits the role of Sonic. His enthusiasm is infectious, and he makes the character endlessly likable. Marsden is quite solid as Sonic's human friend Sherriff Tom. He's a really good foil to the hedgehog and they have great chemistry. I also really enjoyed the adorable Tika Sumpter in a supporting role as Tom's wife Maddie. She doesn't have a huge part, be she's always a pleasure when she's onscreen. And then there's Jim Carrey, whose clearly channeling his work from the 90's in an endlessly over-the-top performance. Your mileage may vary, but I found him... decent. I would have preferred a little more restraint on his part, and his jokes didn't always land for me. But I still liked him for the most part.

The film is also generally very well put together. Director Fowler has a sharp eye for visuals and composition, and the movie is very well-shot. It's bright and colorful and crisp. Exactly what you'd want out of a "Sonic" movie. There's also some fantastic little sequences that display Sonic's powers in interesting ways. A scene set in a baseball field where Sonic plays a game against himself is a lot of fun, as are two scenes that utilize a "frozen time" gimmick similar to those used in the 20th Century Fox "X-Men" films. You really get a sense of Sonic's speed and powers here. It's also very fun and engaging. I laughed quite a few times throughout, and it kept me invested from start-to-finish. And I absolutely have to commend the film for all the brilliant little references and callbacks to the games. There are dozens upon dozens of Easter Eggs for major Sonic fans. If you're like me and grew up on the original games, you'll have a ton of fun looking for them.

I feel I should also address the pink elephant in the room-- that being the original design. Everyone knows that the first trailer features a radically different rendition of Sonic that was changed for the final release after immense backlash. And I think it was the right move. The movie is so fun and so playful, the original much-more realistic design just wouldn't have worked. And the studio definitely earned some serious brownie points from me for listening to the fans.

If I were to point out any major flaws, however, it would be that the film is at times a little too reliant on clichés and formula. While writers Pat Casey and John Miller do a good job at writing characters and snappy dialogue, the story itself is... kind of bland and predictable. It really is just another movie where a fantasy character ends up in the "real world," and it uses all the tropes you'd expect. If you've seen movies like "Masters of the Universe" or "Enchanted," or heck... even "The Smurfs," you'll know what you're in for. The pacing is also a little suspect at times. It's kind of slow to start, and the ending feels rather abrupt.

But that one major flaw aside... I can't help but give "Sonic the Hedgehog" a hearty recommendation. Thanks to its great cast and impressive execution, I was able to (mostly) forgive its flaws. This is one seriously fun flick! And it's easily one of the better video-game movies.

I'm giving "Sonic the Hedgehog" a pretty good 7 out of 10. While it may not be a particularly groundbreaking film, it's a perfectly enjoyable romp that should appeal equally to both franchise fans and families.

Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt: Kimmy vs the Reverend (2020 TV Movie)

"Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt: Kimmy VS The Reverend"- A mildly entertaining plus-sized episode elevated by its unique interactive gimmick.

[8/10 · 13 May 2020]

You thought you had heard the last of Kimmy Schmidt? Well, think again! Tina Fey's beloved cult-comedy hit is back with a new interactive special-"Kimmy VS The Reverend!"

Picking up some time after the series finale, the new special finds Kimmy (Ellie Kemper) quickly approaching her wedding day with British Prince Frederick, played by a fantastically cast Daniel Radcliffe. However, Kimmy soon comes to learn that the nefarious Reverend Richard Wayne Gary Wayne (Jon Hamm) has had a second, secret bunker all along, and that there is another group of captive "mole women" out there, waiting to be rescued. And so, Kimmy must set out to save the day along with her best friend Titus! (Tituss Burgess) At the same time, Titus' manager Jacqueline (Jane Krakowski) tries to keep him secured in a role in an upcoming action picture, while Lillian (Carol Kane) opts to throw a bachelorette party for the absent Kimmy with hilarious results.

"Kimmy VS The Reverend" is a delightful little coda to the series, thanks in large part to its implementation of the interactive gimmick. Every so often, the viewer will be given a choice between two or more options, which will have an impact on the narrative in some way. Some are small and merely create minor cosmetic differences in specific scenes, while other decisions are larger in scope, and can entirely effect the outcome of the story. If you're familiar with choose-your-own-adventure books, you'll feel right at home, because the special very much plays out like one. And be sure to keep your eyes peeled for easter-eggs! While I won't spoil any, there are some very clever hidden scenes to unlock if you make the correct choices. I've been wondering for quite some time why Netflix hasn't been exploiting their potential for interactive entertainment more than it has. It seems like a complete no-brainer. So it's nice to see the format applied to one of the site's most unique sitcoms.

The writing is generally quite solid, even though I would argue that it's lacking in the big laughs that typically defined the original series. The special made me grin on several occasions and got a few decent chuckles out of me... but I never really got any of the big belly-laughs I had come to expect from "Kimmy Schmidt." It's more charming than amusing, I'd say. But I could forgive that, because it makes up for it with the interactive gimmick, which kept me thoroughly invested.

And as always, the cast is a complete delight. Kemper slips right back into Kimmy's shoes like no time had passed at all, and Burgess is excellent as always. But the biggest surprise was Radcliffe in his guest-role as Kimmy's fiancé Frederick. He fits right in with the rest of the cast, and has a great chemistry with virtually everyone. It's a shame this was his only appearance in the series, because I'd love to see more of his character.

"Kimmy VS The Reverend" may not be the best, nor the funniest episode of "Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt." But it's certainly one of the most memorable thanks to its interactivity and branching storyline. If you're a fan of the series, this is definitely something to check out! I'm giving it an 8 out of 10! As Kimmy would say, it's "hashbrown, awesome!"

Community: Asian Population Studies (2011) Season 2, Episode 12

In honor of "Community"- a review of every episode. (S2;E12- "Asian Population Studies")

[7/10 · 3 March 2020]

(This is the thirty-seventh installment in an ongoing series. I am in the process of writing brief reviews of each and every episode of creator Dan Harmon's beloved cult-comedy series "Community"- my favorite sitcom. As this is a hobby, updates will come incrementally and it may take some time for me to complete this task.)

"Asian Population Studies" is something of an odd episode when it comes to "Community." It's important for a number of reasons. Primarily because it serves as a catching up point for several major sub-plots running throughout the series. It also introduces (and re-introduces) characters who have made a wave in one way or another in the past. And yet... on its own, it actually has a fairly simplistic and, if I may be so bold, "patchy" story tying it all together.

It's a frequently funny episode that's just... well, a bit messy.

The recent sobriety of Professor Duncan (John Oliver) has made the study group realize they may need to expand with a new member. And Annie (Alison Brie) is hoping that her crush Rich (Greg Cromer) might fit the bill, much to the chagrin of Jeff. (Joel McHale) At the same time, Troy (Donald Glover) reveals to Pierce (Chevy Chase) that Shirley (Yvette Nicole Brown) had sex with Chang (Ken Jeong) at the Halloween party... a development complicated by the arrival of Shirley's ex-husband (Malcolm-Jamal Warner) and the revelation that Shirley is eight-weeks pregnant. Who's the father? Who will be the newest member of the study-group? And will Jeff and Rich ever squash their rivalry?

At its best moments, "Asian Population Studies" works thanks to the increasingly bizarre developments of its multiple storylines. Malcolm-Jamal Warner makes for a welcome addition to the cast in his supporting role, and Shirley's storyline is easily the stand-out of the episode. It's also nice having Cromer back in some capacity. He's one of the more interesting guest characters the show has had to this point, and he lends a lot to the proceedings. It's just a shame that like so many other wonderful guests, he doesn't make too many appearances overall in the series. But that's episodic television for you.

Unfortunately, the greatest strength of the episode is also its greatest weakness. Because for all intent and purpose, this episode really is just a writhing collection of sub-plots that are loosely spun together. It feels a little less cohesive than the average episode, and even a bit unfocused at times. It's just a little too hard to connect with it as a result. It still mostly works. But it's one of the typically excellent second season's weakest offerings.

I'm giving "Asian Population Studies" a solid 7 out of 10. It's charming and funny when it counts. But it's unfortunately a bit of a step-down after the previous few episodes.

The Fifth Element (1997)

"The Fifth Element"- Inventive and entertaining start-to-finish!

[10/10 · 23 February 2020]

Good old popcorn movies. They never go out of style! They're the perfect remedy to pop on after a long week at work or on a boring rainy afternoon. Something to sit back, relax and enjoy. And director Luc Besson's 1997 sci-fi action/comedy epic "The Fifth Element" may just be one of the all-time greats! A film that is endlessly inventive and entertaining from the first frame to the last.

In the distant future of 2263, a dark and mysterious force emerges that threatens to destroy all life as we know it. And the only thing that can stop it is an ancient weapon that combines the elements of fire, wind, water and earth with a living being- a "fifth element"- to channel them. And that fifth element? A peculiar and beautiful alien clone called "Leeloo" (Milla Jovovich), who must team up with a special-forces-agent-turned-cab-driver (Bruce Willis), a sagely monk (Ian Holm) and a fast-talking talk-show host (Christ Tucker) to save the universe!

It's hard to believe that "The Fifth Element" will soon be going on twenty-five years old. Because for all intents and purpose... it's as refreshing and fun as it ever has been. The film benefits from a wonderful cast, a great tone and a deliciously over-the-top style that sets it apart from others that came both before and after.

While Bruce Willis is definitely the headliner in the cast, there isn't enough that can be said about how wonderful Milla Jovovich is in the part of Leeloo. She is the beating heart of the film. She is fearless and charming, and can also kick some serious butt when needed. This is the film that made her a star, and she's just fabulous. Not that it takes anything away from the rest of the cast, though. Because they're just as good. Willis is a blast as usual, with his smart-alec nature and penchant for action, and he lends a lot to the proceedings. Holm brings a sense of class and dignity, and even gets some sharp comedic moments to sink his teeth into. And I know he's divisive in this film... but I friggin' love Chris Tucker as the obnoxious and hilarious Ruby Rhod. He's just a ton of fun. Special props also go to the always-reliable Gary Oldman as Zorg, one of the film's main villains. He's great in the part and brings a lot of life to the proceedings.

I also really love the tone Besson establishes in the film. There's a lot of big, archetypal ideas at play, and in lesser hands, it could have turned out much more dour. But Besson wisely injects the film with some wonderful humor and a light, breezy quality. In a way, I would almost favorably compare it to a cartoon. Albeit, a cartoon for grown-ups. It never takes itself too seriously, and has a massive fun-factor. It's just such a joy to watch this movie.

And then there's the style. And that's where the film really turns itself up to eleven! This is such a strange and unique film. There are so many wonderful details, eye-popping designs, wild costumes... you haven't seen anything quite like it! It's bold and vibrant and wondrous. Even sexy at times. This film is widely known for its insane visuals, and it's for a good reason. From the strange and otherworldly aliens to the hilariously revealing clothing to the vibrant pastel colors... Besson and his design team bring their A-game to the visuals. It's stunning.

The only place where the film sometimes falters is in the pacing. The movie moves quite fast, and as a result, you do get the odd bit of tonal whiplash. Silly scenes don't always flow well into the more serious plot-driven moments. But I'd be lying if I said that this was a major problem. It's just a minor flaw in an otherwise excellent package.

"The Fifth Element" is one of the definitive popcorn movies. It's loud. It's vibrant. And it's a ton of fun! This is not only one of best popcorn flicks of the 90's. It's one of the best popcorn flicks ever made. Period. It's hard to be objective in a case such as this, but there's no other way around it. I gotta give "The Fifth Element" a 10. Is it a perfect film? No. But it is perfect fun? Yes. Most certainly, yes.

Community: Abed's Uncontrollable Christmas (2010) Season 2, Episode 11

In honor of "Community"- a review of every episode. (S2;E11- "Abed's Uncontrollable Christmas")

[10/10 · 19 February 2020]

(This is the thirty-sixth installment in an ongoing series. I am in the process of writing brief reviews of each and every episode of creator Dan Harmon's beloved cult-comedy series "Community." This project was originally conceived as a response to NBC's cancellation of the series before it was renewed for a sixth and final season on Yahoo. As this is a hobby, updates will come incrementally and it may take some time for me to complete this.)

Ah, Christmas. That beautiful time that comes but once a year. A season of giving. A season of appreciation. And, in the case of "Community"... a season for delightful holiday specials!

"Abed's Uncontrollable Christmas" quickly became a personal favorite on its original air-date in 2010. Boasting a delightful throwback style, wonderfully quirky tunes and a surprisingly emotional climax, it's arguably one of the best sitcom holiday specials... well, of all time as far as I'm concerned. And it's another fine example of this series' rampant creativity!

Abed (Danny Pudi) finds himself in a strange situation when he begins to see the world as though it was an old-fashioned Rankin-Bass stop-motion TV special. And he quickly deduces that it's his mission to find the true meaning of Christmas. Concerned, the rest of the study group, under the supervision of Professor Duncan (John Oliver), agree to play along as they "enter" a fictional world in their shared imagination. But they will quickly learn that all is not what it seems, and there's a devastating truth to why Abed's worldview has changed so much...

While it's not overly complex in its story, the true magic of "Abed's Uncontrollable Christmas" lay in its execution. The entire episode is accomplished through stop-motion animation, and it's just gorgeous to look at. All of the characters are delightfully designed, and the "Christmas World" they enter is a wonder to behold. The cast all excel in voice-over roles. Particularly Pudi and co-stars Chevy Chase and Gillian Jacobs, who are both given quite a bit of meat to work with. I also loved the musical numbers. Yes, this is a musical episode, and it's as fiendishly funny as you could hope.

"Abed's Uncontrollable Christmas" is without doubt my personal favorite holiday themed episode of "Community," and in a grander sense, one of my favorite holiday episodes of any show or sitcom. It's whimsical and wonderful, and easily earns a perfect 10 out of 10!

In Search of Darkness (2019)

"In Search of Darkness"- An exhilarating and nostalgic examination of 80's horror. A must-see for genre fans!

[9/10 · 10 February 2020]

(SEPTEMBER 2020 DISCLAIMER: At the time this review was written in February, 2020, all indications were that the film would never be available to stream online, and would only be limited to a single brief release window on DVD and Blu-Ray. This was based on information provided by the creators at the time it was written. However, the film has since been re-released for a second printing, and there are plans to re-release it yet again to coincide with the release of the sequel, "In Search of Darkness Part II." Additionally, the film is also available to stream through the SHUDDER streaming platform. Thus, the review will contain some inaccurate information in regards to the availability of the documentary-- it is now readily available for viewers. I do not plan on editing the review itself beyond this disclaimer, as most of my points still stand.)

The great tragedy of director David A. Weiner's delightful "In Search of Darkness" is that sadly, many won't be able to see it. Produced for only a limited window of time, it is unfortunately no longer available for purchase. While I don't know if an official reason was ever given, it's not a stretch to guess that this short period of availability is presumably due to rights and licensing agreements. Especially given this was a lower-budget documentary produced primarily through crowd-funding. So at least for the foreseeable future, it will remain the ultimate cult film in a strange way. A movie that truly belongs to a small, dedicated crowd.

But for those who were able to purchase a copy, it is most certainly a dream-come-true. A remarkable little documentary that showcases and examines dozens of films released in the decade of the 1980's. All while featuring numerous interviews with a wide and varied range of subjects.

If you are a horror hound like I am, "In Search of Darkness" is most certainly a must-see film.

The format is relatively simple. The documentary goes through the decade year-by-year, discussing a number of films for each year. Each film is given a window typically lasting between 1-5 minutes, as our interview subjects discuss the movies' plots and productions, along with interesting bits of trivia and factoids. We are also occasionally treated to specialized segments discussing various topics of the decade, including the re-emergence of 3D cinema, and the phenomena of the "final girl."

And as for our subjects, we have everything from actors like Tom Atkins and Doug Bradley... to directors like John Carpenter and Stuart Gordon... to cult figures like Joe Bob Briggs and "Darcy the Mail Girl"... to modern internet entertainers like James "The Angry Video Game Nerd" Rolfe. It's a varied and eclectic group that all add much to the proceedings.

If I were to point out any weakness in the film, it would be that I do feel the movie could have been longer. That might sound shocking given its immense length at over four hours... but some of the more obscure films discussed only get very brief lip-service, and it would have been nice to have seen them discussed in greater detail. Especially with major franchise films like "Friday the 13th" getting a greater focus.

But this is only a very small complaint in an otherwise excellent production. It successfully highlights numerous movies, is thorough and informative, and is just a joy to watch. Not only did I learn more about some of my favorite films, but it also introduced me to many new movies that I now plan to seek out and enjoy.

I'm giving "In Search of Darkness" an excellent 9 out of 10. If you are a horror fanatic and have the opportunity to check it out, do so. It's a gift to audiences and a fine film filled to burst with love and respect to the genre.

Jay and Silent Bob Reboot (2019)

"Jay and Silent Bob Reboot"- A very messy but frequently funny tribute to the View Askewniverse.

[7/10 · 25 January 2020]

Well. Look at all these morose bad reviews right here. Smells like someone crapped in their cereal.

It's fascinating to look at the reception to Kevin Smith's latest film, "Jay and Silent Bob Reboot," the long-awaited seventh chapter in the twenty-five year old franchise known as the "View Askewniverse." The movie was met with predominately solid reviews from critics on release and garnered a predictably warm reception from longtime fans. At first, it seemed very much like Smith hit a homerun. And yet, just a few months later, audiences have seemingly turned completely against it, with the movie being slammed over and over in user-reviews and in comments sections all over the internet.

And where do I find myself in all of this? Well, I'm... kind of in the middle if I'm to be honest. On one hand, yeah. I can kinda see where the negativity is coming from. "Jay and Silent Bob Reboot" is often messy, at times unfocused and at its worst... even occasionally nonsensical. It's less a movie and more a string of skits tied together with the flimsiest of plots. But on the other hand... I actually had a really good time watching this film. I laughed quite a bit, was won over by the heart of what story there was, and had a wonderfully warm feeling of nostalgia throughout. On an objective level, I'd be lying if I said I didn't enjoy the heck out of the experience. It's just unfortunately a bumpy ride at times.

Jay and Silent Bob (Jason Mewes, Kevin Smith) must set out to Hollywood once again when they discover a new film is being made out of the old comic-book "Bluntman and Chronic," which of course was based around them. Along the way they get into various misadventures, as Jay meets his long-lost daughter (Harley Quinn Smith) and her multi-cultural group of friends, they get into a tangle with the Ku Klux Klan, and discover they must infiltrate a massive fan-convention where a key scene from the film is being shot. Oh, and there's cameos galore as many familiar faces from the "View Askewniverse" make appearances, often in very surprising ways.

Part of the great appeal of the film is having one more chance to catch up with the characters we love, and it is a genuine pleasure to see them again. Despite having aged quite a bit since their last outing, Mewes and Smith slip right back into the shoes of their stoner alter-egos and are as entertaining as ever. I also really enjoyed Harley Quinn Smith in a role that actually made her stretch her chops as an actress. And appearances from frequent Smith collaborators including Jason Lee, Brian O'Halloran and even Ben Affleck are welcome and help tie the film- and the series- together. I was particularly taken with Affleck's scene, as it has quite a bit of weight given his past appearances in the View Askew universe. It all gives the film a lovely sense of nostalgia that I found quite appealing.

And while it may be subjective, I did laugh quite a bit throughout the movie. It's definitely not one of Smith's better-made films and it obviously suffers a low-budget, but there are some genuinely clever scenes at play. Particularly during the protracted climax set in the "Bluntman and Chronic" fan convention. I won't spoil anything, but be prepared to laugh if you're a longtime fan of Smith's work, both on-screen and off. I was also really impressed by the heart of the film- Jay's realization that he has a long-lost daughter that he wants to reconnect with. It gave the film a little extra emotional "oomph," so-to-speak, even if it's not always the main focus.

Unfortunately, the trade-off to this is the quality of the writing and the general execution, which is where the film loses a few points for me. For all the film does right in the nostalgia department and in the humor, it's just not all that well made. You can tell they had a lower budget this time around, and Smith doesn't always make the most of it. It's often very flat looking, and doesn't really have a sense of scope. For a road-trip movie... it feels like it was all shot on studio-backlots and sets. And the writing is about as flimsy as it could be. While the emotional storyline of Jay and his daughter "Milly" is genuinely well-executed, the rest of the script is really patchy and uneven. Like I said above, it's more a collection of skits than an actual film. I also had some minor issues with the pacing, as some scenes did go on a bit too long, and some of the cameos felt kind of stretched out. A far superior film could have been made if they just trimmed about ten or so minutes of "fat" from the story. And my god... I really didn't understand a bizarre running joke about "Hater Tots," and wish that whole "subplot" had been cut out entirely.

But as it stands, I can't help but give the movie a mild recommendation to longtime fans of Smith and his work. As wonky as the execution may be, the charming cast and good humor made the experience a worthwhile one for me. I laughed at the jokes. I enjoyed the film's more emotional scenes. And I really dug the nostalgic throwbacks to the earlier films. "Jay and Silent Bob Reboot" might not really be a good film. But it is good fun. And while your mileage may vary, that was enough for me.

Strictly as a Kevin Smith fan, I'm giving "Jay and Silent Bob" reboot a solid 7 out of 10.

Pokémon: Detective Pikachu (2019)

"Pokémon: Detective Pikachu"- The beloved franchise's first foray into live-action is a charming and nostalgic success that should please longtime fans.

[8/10 · 29 July 2019]

Whelp, it looks like the dark age of mediocre-at-best video-game movies may finally be at an end... and thank goodness! And all it took was a bit of creativity, respect for the source material and a delightful electric mouse to do it!

"Pokémon: Detective Pikachu" is the first live-action film to stem from the beloved and long-running franchise created by Satoshi Tajiri. Directed by Rob Letterman of "Goosebumps" fame, the film succeeds largely thanks of its clever use of nostalgic appeal, phenomenal world-building and another fantastic performance from Ryan Reynolds, who provides the voice of the titular crime-solver. And after twenty-six years of almost universally sub-par adaptations, I think it's safe to say... it is the best video-game movie yet!

Tim Goodman (Justice Smith) is a 21-year-old insurance salesman and former Pokémon trainer whose life isn't going very well. Especially when he learns that his police detective father Harry has been killed in the line of duty at the idyllic Ryme City. However, not everything is as it seems... and soon enough Tim encounters his father's former partner, a Pikachu (Reynolds) who he somehow has the ability to understand, and who believes Harry is still alive. Setting off to learn what really happened, they eventually join forces with a wannabe reporter (Kathryn Newton) and her Psyduck pal, and discover that the mystery goes far deeper than they could have ever imagined...

As someone who grew up in the heyday of "Pokémon Fever" in the late 90's and early 2000's, I was something of a franchise fan back in the day. I played through the original North American releases of Red, Blue and Yellow, I watched the early "Indigo League" episodes of the long-running anime series, and of course I collected the first few expansions of the trading card game. And though I drifted from the series around the time Ruby and Sapphire came out, suffice to say, I do have a certain nostalgic attachment to the overall beast that is "Pokémon."

And "Detective Pikachu" is exactly the sort-of film it needed to be to appeal to that child inside me. It pays nonstop tribute to the franchise through fun winks and nods, and comes across as a complete love-letter to the fans with clever references abound. (I won't spoil anything specific, but fans of the anime series will surely get a kick out of a certain storyline that ties almost directly into events from one of the animated feature-films.) As a former fan myself, I couldn't help but grin ear-to-ear from the opening scene through the end credits. If you grew up on "Pokémon," I really can't help but imagine that you'll fall in love with the film immediately.

But perhaps the best aspect of the film is its immense and extremely well-executed world-building. From its first moments, "Detective Pikachu" plunges you into the world of Pokémon, and it is exquisitely handled. Director Letterman guides us through the film in such a way that it is both accessible for newcomers while also feeling familiar to fans. He gives us just enough information to bring us in... and lets us piece the rest of it together ourselves. Never over-explaining or under-explaining any part of the experience, and often using clever and subtle means to enhance the film... like faint things that are barely visible in the background, or street-signs you barely notice as they pass by the camera. It makes the world feel real and lived-in. Like you could walk right in through the screen. A lesser filmmaker would have likely ground the film to a halt and over-indulged in the proceedings. But Letterman is clever to avoid this pitfall. And I really appreciated it.

I also really enjoyed the cast, and they give the film much of its immense charm. Particularly Ryan Reynolds as the voice of Pikachu. While there is the inevitable comparison to be made to Reynolds' trademark character "Deadpool," I actually think he makes Pikachu his own character. He knows when to ham it up with a good, dumb joke and when to play it straight. I also really enjoyed Smith and Newton as our key human characters. While Newton does play her part a bit broad, it worked for the light-hearted tone the film set, and I thought she was absolutely adorable. I also quite enjoyed the iconic Bill Nighy as the enigmatic benefactor of Ryme City, and a small but fun turn from the always-reliable Ken Watanabe as a police detective Tim encounters several times throughout the story. That add a bit of class to the proceedings.

If I were to pinpoint any place where the film falls flat, I would say that the movie can often play it a bit too "safe." I think it was a necessary evil in this case, as you don't want to overwhelm the average filmgoer who may not be familiar with Pokémon, but the story and the various arcs the characters go through are a tad-bit... stock. You can pretty much guess the twists and turns the story is going to take, and there's only a few real surprises to be had if you're at all familiar with basic story-structure. Still, I do think it was better to play it safe now to bring in an audience, and that a potential sequel could later take more risks.

"Pokémon: Detective Pikachu" was an absolute blast for this former fan of the series. While its writing is a bit predictable, the fabulous world-building, nostalgic appeal and top-notch cast make it a very fun film that the whole family can enjoy. And I can't wait to see where a follow-up may take us next! I'm giving it a very good 8 out of 10.

Child's Play (2019)

Sorry Jack... This Chucky's bland! 2019's toothless "Child's Play" reboot lacks the fun (and frights) of the riskier, creepier original.

[4/10 · 10 July 2019]

So there's a scene in 2019's questionable "Child's Play" reboot where a group of kids watch Tobe Hooper's camp-classic "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2," while the new techno-gadget Chucky ominously watches them in the background. It's supposed to be a tense scene, as Chucky begins to malfunction and emulate the violence on-screen. And yet... the only thing I could notice was that the clips they showed from "Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2" were dreadfully out of order. I didn't care about the creepy doll watching in the distance, ready to strike. And I didn't fear for the safety of the children. I just kept noticing how badly they botched the editing.

...and that should sufficiently sum up how invested I found myself in director Lars Klevberg's new film. I cared more about a movie-within-the-movie than I did about the movie itself.

Yes, after a somewhat tumultuous production that was wrought with drama, the remake of the classic killer-doll film is finally here. And as is all too often the case with retreads of classic materials... it ended up amounting to a whole 'lotta nothing. 2019's "Child's Play" is just another toothless, mediocre redo that will likely be forgotten the instant it leaves theaters. It's never as fun, nor as frightening as the franchise that inspired it. And whenever it tries to do something to set itself apart, it just never really comes together.

Andy Barclay (Gabriel Bateman) is a 13-year-old boy whose having a bit of a rough time. He's having trouble fitting in and finding friends, and his mother Karen (Aubrey Plaza) is always working or spending time with her skeevy boyfriend. (David Lewis) But everything is about to change when Andy meets his new best friend... a high-tech "smart doll" named "Chucky" (voice of Mark Hamill) that his mother oh-so-ironically gives him as a gift one night. But soon enough, Andy will learn that there something is very wrong with Chucky... something devious... and something deadly...

Now despite my somewhat dismissive opening, I will admit that there are indeed a fistful of things about "Child's Play" that almost make it worth a watch. Almost. Not the least of which being the new origin for the beloved killer doll. I actually enjoyed the concept of Chucky being an artificially-intelligent gadget that is corrupted and gradually turns evil. It takes a familiar concept and gives it a new spit-and-polish. I also quite enjoyed the bulk of the cast, including Plaza's likable turn as a struggling mother and Brian Tyree Henry in a supporting role as the Barclay's detective neighbor. They're just so enjoyable in their parts.

So it's a shame that they are to the service of a slap-dash story that just doesn't really do much with them. It's hard not to notice how disjointed and how poorly developed the film is. So many ideas and storylines are brought up and then never paid off. So many characters are introduced and then never given an ounce of development. It feels like a film that never went past its first draft. Case in point being the fact that our new Andy is established as being handicapped by way of hearing loss. The movie goes out of its way to bring this up repeatedly throughout its first half... but it never pays off. Sure, Chucky talks to him through his hearing aid for about five seconds... but what's the point? It doesn't add anything to the character. Or Andy's new friends Pugg and Falyn, who he meets about halfway through... the movie introduces them, and they pal around with him... but we never learn anything about them, and thus we never care about them. It's just frustrating how little development the film gives to any of its concepts. All the previous films- even the lesser entries like "Child's Play 3"- at least tried to work with their concepts. But not this one. It just feels lazy.

I also took some serious issue with the direction and the general presentation of the film. I will say that director Klevberg's general guidance of the film is mostly slick and solid. It's reasonably well-shot and there's a few nifty kill scene to satisfy your inner gore-hound. But, much like the story... it feels really disjointed. Some of the visual and tonal choices felt contrary to one-another, with scenes feeling like they were ripped from different films. It kinda took me out of the experience and made it hard for me to connect with the film. There's also a few head-scratching scenes where glaring errors were left in. While I won't say anything specific as to avoid spoilers, if you really pay attention, there's some really sloppy work in a few key scenes. Again... it just lends to it feeling lazy.

And then there's the design and execution of Chucky. Oh, boy... As much as I enjoyed the techno-doll angle, the biggest fault of the film is the way they handle Chucky himself. I'm sorry... but it was a really mixed bag. And it can be incredibly distracting. It was the one thing they needed to get just right, and they failed pretty hard at times. I cannot fathom how the doll looks, moves and "acts" worse in this film than it did in the original. Not only is he just ugly to look at, which makes it impossible to buy the idea he's some hot-selling item... but the puppetry is very mixed. There's plenty of scenes where it looks great. But at other times, you can just feel the puppeteers off-camera. And there are also some moments where Chucky is replaced by a CG model... and it's always really obvious and immediately removes you from the film, because the CG model doesn't really move like the puppet. It's just... wonky as heck.

I know this film has its fans. And I respect that they found something to like about it. But I'm sorry... as a life-long "Chucky" fan, this reboot just did nothing for me. I was intrigued by it and gave it a fair chance... but it ended up leaving a very bad taste in my mouth when the credits rolled. And I'm certainly far more interested in further sequels to the original franchise than I am for any potential sequels to this film. 2019's "Child's Play" gets a sub-par 4 out of 10 from me. Sorry Jack... but this Chucky's just kinda bland.

Hellboy (2019)

"Hellboy (2019)"- What have they done to you, Hellboy?!

[2/10 · 19 April 2019]

It's always a delight when a film inspires such a visceral negative reaction in me, that I have to pause and ponder hard on the proper words to describe it. And that's definitely the case with 2019's ill-advised and utterly unnecessary reboot "Hellboy," based of course on the comics created by Mike Mignola. It isn't enough to call this film simple phrases like "poor" or "bad." No, this movie almost necessitates the use of more colorful language. Words like "cockamamie" and "nonsensical" come to mind. As do words like "asinine" and "abhorrent." And most definitely "abominable."

But, to keep it simple and put it in more tangible terms, yeah... it was pretty darned dreadful. Suffering an aimless narrative, a sloppy execution and a complete lack of the charm and artistry that defined the comics and prior film adaptations, this new take on the classic cult-character is a fundamentally broken mess of frustration and failed potential. And it can go straight to... well, you know where.

Hellboy (David Harbour), a demon that was raised by humans to help fight supernatural threats, is called into action when the ancient and deadly Blood Queen Vivian Nimue (Milla Jovovich) is resurrected. Along with his surrogate father (Ian McShane), a woman from his past named Alice (Sasha Lane), and shape-shifting fellow agent Daimio (Daniel Dae Kim), Hellboy must stop the vile mistress from bringing about the end of the world. Along the way... a bunch of random, inconsequential stuff happens involving grouchy giants, vengeful pig-men, multiple secret organizations, a Mexican wrestling ring and a rather randy witch who evidently has a hairy tongue. But none of it really contributes much to the proceedings.

Part of the great tragedy of this new take on the source material is that it had so much potential. Yes, we all know about the quite excellent prior film adaptations by cinematic maestro Guillermo del Toro. And everyone of course knows that the long-proposed third film was dropped in favor of this new adaptation. (And to this day, I will admit I am still a bit heartbroken over this.) But I was willing to give this movie a fair chance, because I love the character. And on the surface, the elements are all there. Director Neil Marshall has a great track record when it comes to the strange and the bizarre. The cast is oft-electrifying. And the visuals are frequently interesting. But it just does not work as a coherent film, to the point it becomes frustrating to watch. Everything about this movie just feels misjudged and mishandled.

The writing is one of the chief offenders. There's no clear goal or logical flow to the story or characters. It's a slapdash amalgamation of disconnected and disparate components that don't fit together at all. A writhing mass of seemingly random subplots lazily peppered in around a "central story" that really only takes up about thirty minutes of the two-hour runtime. At times, it almost feels like multiple different scripts were somehow mixed together accidentally. Characters are often established, then immediately written out, leaving them pointless. Plotlines come and go on a whim. And the movie frequently writes itself into ridiculous corners that it quickly and lazily solves with contrived deus-ex-machinas, giving little satisfaction. And as a result of this aimless structure, even important facets of the story like the main villain (played well by the incredibly likable Jovovich) feel completely disconnected from the narrative! I'm sorry, but the writing is just nonsensical and it does not work.

Adding to that is a general feeling of unease in the production. As I said before, the visuals are frequently quite fascinating to look at thanks to the wild world established by Mignola's comics. But that's not enough to save what is otherwise an incredibly shaky execution. It almost feels like director Marshall didn't know what to do with the material from day to day. It all feels very patchy and inconsistent. Some scenes are rushed to the point they become hard to follow and you miss out on key exposition, while others grind the story to a screeching and jarring halt, giving you a strange sort-of whiplash effect. At times the camerawork is wild and creative- see an early sequence involving Hellboy fighting off three giants which is arguably the film's best sequence... while other scenes are really amateurish and basic with poor framing and lazy setups. Much like the script felt like multiple screenplays that had been mixed together, the visual direction feels at times like it was handled by different people with very different styles. And combined with patchy editing and mixed-bag visual effects, this strangely inconsistent execution makes it hard to keep yourself invested.

And to top off the trinity of troubles with this new "Hellboy"... the movie just isn't anywhere near as creative or as charming as it ought be. The cast is great- particularly David Harbour, who makes the character of Hellboy his own. But the character isn't likable or interesting this time around. He's just a brash guy who occasionally makes bad one-liners. The same can be said for the other characters- nobody stands out, as everyone is just a bland, broad archetype. And despite the visual flourishes no doubt crafted by dozens (if not hundreds) of designers and technicians... it all just begins to look ugly and uninspired after a while. Gone are the beautiful minimalistic visuals of the comic. Gone are the exquisite and intricate designs of del Toro's films. This new "Hellboy" is just bland and ugly... inside and out.

"Hellboy" barely claws its way to a miserable 2 out of 10. It's a messy, unlikable slog. If you want to spend some quality time with the character, do yourself a favor and either pick up a few issues of the comic or revisit the excellent prior films instead. Because take it from this "Hellboy" fan... this movie is one hell of a disappointment.

Life Is Strange: Before the Storm (2017 Video Game)

"Life is Strange: Before the Storm"- A poignant prequel that enhances the story and enriches the characters despite some minor faults.

[8/10 · 24 November 2018]

Perhaps one of the most popular sleeper hits in recent memory was the 2015 video-game "Life is Strange." A sort-of interactive movie, that original game found an audience quickly and took hold of them with a beautiful tale of friendship and loss, topped off with a unique supernatural twist. And while the story seemed to be done and over with by the time its (multiple) endings rolled around, something about the game lingered in the hearts and minds of the fans. We wanted more. More of the characters we had grown to love and more of the world that Dontnod Entertainment so wonderfully crafted.

And that wish was granted with 2017's spin-off prequel "Life is Strange: Before the Storm." Developed by Deck Nine and distributed by Square-Enix, "Before the Storm" continues the tale began in the original in a unique and exciting way, while also wonderfully delving more into the backstory of characters deeply important to the series mythos. And though it's not without its faults, and though it lacks the inherent freshness that so defined its award-winning predecessor, the fact remains that it is a unique and engrossing new chapter in the growing saga of the "Life is Strange" universe.

Set a few years before the events of "Life is Strange," "Before the Storm" follows the whirlwind friendship between Chloe Price and Rachel Amber, as they experience the high and low-points of life in their adolescence, while also getting pulled into a complex and emotionally devastating personal journey.

Much like the original, a soft, sensitive and oft-startling relationship forms the backbone of "Before the Storm." In this case, the growing connection between Chloe Price and Rachel Amber. It's every bit as sweet as the companionship between Chloe and Max was in the first game, and it's a delight to see their blossoming feelings towards one-another, even if we know it won't end well. (Which is no spoiler, as we know just this from "Life is Strange.") It's a powerhouse of emotions, and really invests you as a player, especially if you're already familiar with the series. And if you're one to really put yourself into a story, definitely go in with tissues, because there are quite a few tear-jerker moments to be had throughout the three main chapters.

In terms of production, the game is equal to what came before in virtually every sense. While the graphics have been altered slightly, they still boast that same wonderfully stylish palate that fans will expect, and the controls feel like they've been tightened considerably- they're much more concise and responsive. In order to make up for the loss of the original's time-travel mechanic, we also get a new gameplay element here that's actually a lot of fun to tinker with, even if it is shallow... that being timed branching conversation options that allow Chloe to get into verbal sparring and insult matches with NPC's. Think of it like a "snotty teenage backtalk simulator," and you should know what I mean.

The vocal performances are also quite good, though you do definitely get a sense of bewilderment throughout the early chapters in the game with the new voice-over artists. Due to an actor's strike, many of the voice-actors from the first game could not take part in this follow-up, and it can be jarring at first. But once you get used to the new actors, all is quickly forgiven. Special props go to Rhianna DeVries, who does an excellent job taking over the role of Chloe. Although don't worry, as original Chloe actress Ashly Burch does make an appearance in the bonus fourth chapter available in the deluxe release of the game.

Speaking of, this is a game I'd highly recommend picking up in its deluxe format. Not only is there a bit of extra content in the three main chapters, but there's also an absolutely wonderful and incredibly emotional fourth bonus chapter that I will not spoil... but will surely bring a smile to the faces of fans.

Where this game loses a few points though is in its general structure. The pacing feels a bit off at times. Particularly early on. As tender and loving as the growing friendship of Chloe and Rachel is, it feels a bit rushed, and the general plot sort-of comes out of nowhere. And as I said, I also do think that the new gameplay mechanics are shallow, and aren't quite a perfect replacement for the time-travel elements of the original. You just... lose a little something without them there.

But that being said, I still cannot help but whole-heartedly recommend "Before the Storm" to all fans of the original. While it falters at times, it's still remarkable in many ways, and the poignant narrative and emotionally involved writing make it one of the more complex story-driven games to come out... well, since the first "Life is Strange."

And for that, I give "Before the Storm" a very good 8 out of 10. To quote Chloe Price... it's hella awesome.

The Grinch (2018)

"The Grinch"- A review in Seuss-esque poem form.

[6/10 · 13 November 2018]

So I just saw the new "Grinch." It was something for me to do. And now it's done and over. The experience is all through.

The storyline was pleasant enough. The performances are nice and mild. The animation was just wonderful. It was crisp, vivid and wild.

But saying all that praise, there's still something eating inside. Something that's wrong with this new movie... It's a fault I cannot hide.

It's a concept that's alluring, For a film that's not too long. But stretching it to feature length... was a decision that felt wrong.

There's a brilliant thirty minutes, of story here to tell. But certainly not for eighty six. It makes it a hard sell.

But at least it was better than the Jim Carrey version, which is a film too over-hyped. It was unpleasant and tedious and overstayed it's welcome. One might call it some plain-old tripe.

But let's get back to the animated endeavor, and how I'd rate this new remix. Looking at it from an objective opinion... my rating would be an average six.