Change Your Image
Upload An Image
Crop And Save
The Best Episode In A Very Bad Season
Wow, so where to begin. If you have not seen my reviews of the episodes of Season 10 on YouTube, to make a long story short, I absolutely HATE this season. I believe the Demon Dean plot line was wasted opportunity, they bring back characters that we don't care about, the whole show is being taken as a joke, Charlie sucks, Rowena sucks, etc. You get the point.
With any plot related episode, however, I see the promos and get super excited for it, only to be let down when it airs. I thought the same thing would be the case with "The Executioner's Song," but that was not the case. Turns out, this is the best episode of the season.
There are flaws though. With me believing that Rowena is a terrible character and a waste of space who tries to prove that she is more powerful than Crowley, that is shown greatly in this episode. I don't like her story line. She's only here to talk and persuade Crowley to see her side of things. in this episode she tries to get Crowley to kill the witch of a Grand Coven. 1). Why witches? Why are they in this show now playing a prominent role? 2). She tells Crowley that he is no longer the King of Hell. Gimme a break. Whether or not that is real or just a metaphor since he helps the Winchesters is dumb. If it's real, he's not the King of Hell now because he won't listen to your stupid wish to kill some stupid witch that no one cares about?
However, the Cain plot in really good. This is the first time in a long time an episode has been heavy on emotion, content, and drama. No jokes in this episode. That was a sigh of relief. Cain and Dean's fight was the best part of the episode and added a spark that the show hasn't had recently, and I actually cared about the characters for the first time in a long time. The sense of fear that Dean had while fighting Cain was a welcome sign. Now hopefully, this can be a good three episode arc like we had last season with Holy Terror, Road Trip, and First Born.
In a bad season where it's wasted plot lines and the writers can't seem to get themselves on track because they're bowing to the vicious fan girls, this episode is (hopefully) a sign of things to come. Definitely the best of season 10 so far.
The Amazing Spider-Man (2012)
The Amazing Spider-Man was not amazing
This movie was so unnecessary. I understand that sometime down the line somebody is going to come long and reboot the Spider-Man trilogy (which, besides Spider-Man 3, the first two movies were good), which I'm okay with. But when the reboot happens 5 years after the original trilogy ended it's definitely just a way to make money.
The sad part is this movie made money. And it was awful. So where did things go wrong?
1. The fact Spider-Man had web shooters instead of the power to shoot webs was stupid. But of course, comic book purists like the way it was in the comics and automatically bash Raimi for giving him the power to shoot webs, WHEN IT MAKES MORE SENSE! I honestly don't care how much of a science geek and how smart Peter Parker. But there is no chance in hell that a high school student is THAT SMART (unless you're Sheldon Cooper) to make web shooters out of highly classified materials, or anything at all. I'm surprised the government didn't get on Peter's ass for taking all that stuff from Oscorp.
2. Peter is a ladies man. Gwen Stacy plays so easy to get. he's a geek. He's not supposed to be a ladies man, which leads me into my next point
3. Andrew Garfield. Bad actor who never stares straight and only down at the floor, and who acts like he's the "man." Tobey Maguire pulled it off far better.
4. Flash Thompson. Honestly, not a bully. Just a pretty boy that looks like he belonged in Twilight. He wasn't a bully. "Oh I'm so cool because I push people into lockers." Yeah. Sure. Keep dreaming pal.
5. The plot. Despite the things listed above, I could tolerate the movie until we found out what Lizard's overall plan was: create lizard people by shooting a toxin through the clouds. Are you serious??? 5 year olds can right better stuff. That is so unoriginal. And while we are talking about the Lizard
6. the Lizard himself. Not only was his plan stupid, but the visual effects and CGI done to make Curt Connors the Lizard was absurd. He didn't even look like a lizard. There was no detail done to him to make him look like the lizard.
I knew this was going to be a bad movie going in but I was keeping my hopes up until the dropped the Lizard's plan on you. Now, the sequel looks even worse. Elctro falls into a tank of electric eels and turns into something that looks like the Avatar version of Emperor Palpatine. Rhino is a rip-off of Pacific Rim and Transformers. Harry is the Green Goblin (WHYYY?????). Not to mention poor casting choices.
I have lost all hope in future Spider-Man movies. But I guess that's why I can enjoy the first two Raimi films, and parts of the 3rd one. The sequel looks predictable (it's obvious Gwen is gonna die), so I will not be seeing it
A Good Day to Die Hard (2013)
Dumb and stupid. Not Die Hard
Thanks to Skip Woods (writer of Swordfish, Hit-man and X-Men Origins: Wolverine) this series has totally died hard. The franchise is now dead with the mess of this movie and here's why.
This whole movie stars Bruce Willis, like all the other Die Hard movies, but John McClane, the character he plays for those who are new to the Die Hard franchise, is nowhere to be found. I was hoping he would show up, seeing that he arrived in Russia and was really confused about what was going on, so I said to myself "Alright, he's a little lost on what's going on with his son, maybe the real John McClane will show up." Nope. Instead we got Bruce Willis playing Bruce Willis in a movie with Bruce Willis that has the DIE HARD title slapped onto it just to make money.
The plot is very thin, and the villain isn't memorable. if you held a gun to my head and asked me to recite the plot for this movie, I wouldn't be able to do it. It sucks too much.
The Die Hard franchise just did really die hard. But I wish it wasn't that hard.
Man of Steel (2013)
I'll tell you what. If you're a true Superman fan and you watch this you'll see that THIS IS NOT SUPERMAN!
Watching this movie, it had all the potential in the world. The first 20 minutes of the movie on Krypton with Jor-El trying to put Kal in the spaceship and the destruction of Krypton were really amazing and it was the best part of the movie. After that, quite frankly, the movie goes downhill, and becomes more of a random crime fighting alien movie rather than a Superman movie.
Michael Shannon is such a TERRIBLE actor. He was so wooden as Zod. When he delivers every line in EXACTLY the same tone of voice for the ENTIRE movie, you definitely know that he is not a good actor.
Amy Adams was TERRIBLY miscast as Lois Lane and Lois Lane WAS NOT LOIS LANE. Lois was not spunky and was not snarky. To me the only reason why Lois was in this movie was to be used as a plot device. (Like, how all of a sudden is she randomly at the army base?)
The Fortress of Solitude is not a big ice palace like it should be. Instead IT'S A FREAKIN SPACESHIP! In which Lois discovers who Clark really is, and Clark really doesn't seem to care one bit.
Speaking of Clark, he had what, like 2 lines THE WHOLE MOVIE? Who is he? Ryan Gosling? With what Henry Cavill was given, he did a good job, but he wasn't given much. With all the flashbacks in the movie, (which really copied Batman Begins IMO and did a terrible job with it as well), I feel like I still don't know who Clark Kent really is after watching this. Another point, WHAT IS THE POINT OF THE GLASSES AT THE END??? Lois already knows who you are! the whole point of the glasses was to hide your identity not just from everyone else, but her as well. But throughout the whole movie Lois knows who he really is??? WTF?? That is not Lois Lane or Clark Kent.
Jonathan Kent is supposed to die from a heart attack, and NOT GET SWALLOWED BY A TORNADO! (yeah, poor acting job Costner. You Cost us a good Superman movie). They tried so hard to make Superman all edgy and dark and tragic, which Superman isn't supposed to be. The made him exactly like . guess who Batman.
The final act of the film is definitely NOT Superman. The Superman I know would not allow himself to be punched through thousands of skyscrapers or fly through the middle of a truck while letting it blow up when it crashes through a building. Superman is responsible for the deaths of millions in this movie, whereas in the comics, he kills what, 2 people, and then vows to never kill again. All's Superman had to do throughout that fight, was bring Zod to an isolated area LIKE THE REAL SUPERMAN WOULD and fight him where millions of people would not get hurt. Instead, they have a pissing contest and punch each other through thousands of skyscrapers killing millions. In other words, Superman is a mass murderer. And snapping Zod's neck was the movie's way of saying "he had no choice." Well he DID have a choice. BRING THE DAMN FIGHT SOMEHWHERE ELSE OR PUT YOUR HAND OVER HIS EYES! Seriously.
I wanted to like it, and actually did in my first viewing, but the second time I watched it, I realized just how atrocious this movie really is and does not live up to the Superman origins at all. PS message to Christopher Nolan: I know you did not direct the movie, but you produced it and wrote the story. What a terrible story! Just because you know Batman does not mean you know Superman.
I will not being watching Batman vs. Superman because this movie was so bad and for the fact that Ben Affleck is Batman and we all know he cannot play a superhero. This WAS NOT a Superman movie.
Spring Breakers (2012)
Fairly enjoyable up until the end
Four words to describe this movie, the 4 B's: Booze, boobs, bongs, and booties.
Now for my actual review.
The film kinda treads along the lines of being stylistic. It makes you wanna see former Disney stars in bikinis doing drugs and having sex. It shows you a breakout performance by James Franco. It has a thin, simple, but fairly OK/good plot up until the end.
***if you have not seen the movie, and would like to see what the final 10 minutes of the film are like for yourself, then read no further***
The end of the film is what drags the whole thing down.
We see Alien, Brit, and Candy go to a gangster named Big Arch's estate, where Alien plans to kill him for shooting one of the girls who left the film earlier in the movie. We see him, Brit, and Candy get out of his boat, the girls have masks on and are armed with machine guns. Alien is in front of them, and we see someone off in the distance shoot, and BOOM! James Franco goes down just like that.The girls then proceed to kill everyone without taking a single bullet, and somehow kill all the gangsters with perfect aim despite never firing a gun before. This was my biggest complaint of the movie.
I only went to see this because I had heard Vanessa Hudgens was involved in a threesome, and i wanted to see that. But i thought it was very enjoyable up until the end that i just described in the paragraph above. And it was shot as if it was a 300/Boondock Saints ripoff
Gangster Squad (2013)
A Solid January Flick, But Far From Being Amazing
"Say hello to Santy Claus!!" Probably the worst line you will ever hear Sean Penn utter in any film he is in. And, sadly, it happened in "Gangster Squad." Gangster Squad isn't a bad film. It was very enjoyable on many levels, and kept me entertained for a good two hours. I thought the cast was perfect. Josh Brolin is a good actor and I am starting to become a fan of Ryan Gosling's gangster/thriller movies. I saw him in "Drive" and thought he did a good job in that as well as in "The Ides of March." Nick Nolte does a good job, though he isn't in it very much. I like the gritty setting and it kinda reminded me of the video game "LA Noire."
BUT... there are things I did not like about the movie.
1. Too much action. It seemed like almost every scene was action filled. There was a little bit of a layoff on the action after the beginning, but after that, it just seemed non stop and didn't really make the movie better.
2. Too cliché, just like any other movie at this time of year.
3. Nick Nolte... 2 scenes. WTF???
4. Emma Stone. Kinda unnecessary in this.
5. The script coulda been better. Why hire a rookie writer to write a script with as many good actors like this, and have it be mediocre or decent at best? This is the same guy who will be writing the Justice League movie, and that makes me a little worried.
But overall, a solid, decent January flick that kept me entertained for two hours. Just don't expect anything Oscar worthy.
007 Reporting For Duty With Style In What Quite Possibly Be His Finest Hour
Don't listen to the stupid negative reviews of dumb fans about this movie. This is Bond at his best. Sure, Bond may not be trying to stop a villain from taking over the world, but hey, he didn't stop a villain from taking over the world in Licence To Kill, so where's the backlash for that? (Another good Bond movie as well).
"There's a young Q. Worst Bond ever!" STFU it makes more sense that Q is younger.
"Bond is Bisexual." No he's not, Silva was making him uncomfortable.
"The final action scene was like Home Alone." Sure, they set up booby traps, but it felt a LOT less like Home Alone than I was expecting.
The positives from this movie come from Craig's performance as Bond, which, in my honest opinion (and fans may hate me for saying this) but I think Daniel Craig has equaled or either surpassed Sean Connery. The return of the "Goldfinger" car was classic. The performance of Javier Bardem.... CLASSIC VILLAIN. Played the part so well. They made him feel like a classic villain because he has a deformity, which I shall not reveal.
My only complaints were the fact Bond heard M give the order to take the shot, and Bond did NOTHING to get out of the way. And to me, as surprising and fitting the final scene was, with Eve it was a big like WTF moment. Other than that, everything was good.
Pure Bond here. He is reporting for duty, with some swag and style, in what is Bond's finest hour yet.
Supernatural: Bitten (2012)
One of the worst episodes in the series
The fact that Sam and Dean had like a total of no more than 10 mins of screen time is just absurd. It was a terrible episode all the way around. The writer for this episode should be fired, seeing that he wrote a couple of other mediocre to bad episodes as well. But this one was by far the worst.
The fact that it was filmed with a hand-held camera was surprising. The only other time the show did this was Season 3, but it worked really well that time. This time, it felt like a ripoff of Cloverfield, and a carbon copy of Paranormal Activity, which is what the episode is trying to make itself look like.
It was just a terrible all around episode. This is probably my least favorite from the series so far. I can't believe they would hire s**t writers like this guy to write episodes. Lame execution and poor excuse. Oh well at least Benny the vamp is back next week
Safe House (2012)
Too much shaky camera and poorly edited action scenes, but Denzel and Ryan Reynolds save it from disaster
We get a new director for a Denzel Washington movie, not the usual Tony Scott-Denzel pairing. In comes newbee Daniel Espinosa, who needs to learn how to tell the editor how edit a damn movie. The action was good in this flick, but half the time, I couldn't tell what the hell was going on, because the editing was atrocious. More often than not though, it is the shaky camera's fault. in almost every action scene, the camera was wicked shaky. I don't understand why so much hand-held was used on this. Picture this, for all you James Bond fans out there (and those that didn't like Quantum of Solace), imagine the shaky cam in Quantum of Solace car chase but throughout the ENTIRE movie and not just one part. I feel like the camera work was trying to copy Bourne's style of filming.
With that being said, Washington and Reynolds really save the movie, and this is one of the very few "all action-no plot" movies that i find entertaining. Sure, their performances aren't Oscar worthy, and I've seen Denzel in this type of role before, so he treads familiar ground, but they actually made the movie entertaining.
Oh this has nothing to do with the movie (well, sorta does), but (SPOLIER ALERT) when Vera Farmiga's character is killed, the dude sitting in the seat behind me just yelled, "Well, she deserved that." And, to be honest she did.
Not the greatest Mark Wahlberg movie, but it wasn't bad
I would say that "Contraband" definitely isn't one of best Wahlberg movies. The beginning was bit too cliché, the shaky camera kinda got annoying after awhile, and Giovanni Ribisi's voice just gets to a point where it can't be tolerated.
With that being said, however, it is a fairly decent movie, and better than most flicks that we see at this time of the year. It was entertaining..
The plot at times may be a bit convoluted, but the action and edge of your seat scenes are what keep the movie going.
So overall, i liked the movie, mostly just because Mark Wahlberg is one of my favorite actors and the other known actors in the movie are pretty good too. But if you have really high hopes, don't expect something beyond Wahlberg's comfort zone, because there is now way this ranks up there with "The Departed" or "The Fighter"