Change Your Image
Upload An Image
Crop And Save
Sausage Party (2016)
Why did I see this?
My brothers wanted to see this Friday. I thought the trailer was ridiculous, but had no intention to see this. Brother offered to pay, so I figured why not?
This movie was so stupid. Food that is alive and tell crude jokes and then revolt when they discover that humans eat them alive without care or remorse.
So stupid. Seriously, why does Seth Rogen still get work? He's not funny.
The appeal of this movie, I assume, is that people find humor in the fact that it looks like the standard CGI kids movie pumped out by Dreamworks or Pixar, but then has crude, adult humor. That's the only draw I see to this movie.
And 83% on Rotten Tomatoes. For real?
And they gave Suicide Squad a 26%?
Why do people trust critics anymore?
I'd say "don't see this movie", but I'm someone who believes that someone else's opinion (especially cynical paid critics) shouldn't matter to you when it comes to movies.I didn't enjoy it, but maybe you will.
The only funny thing about this movie to me was that some uninformed parent in the theater I was in brought their four small children to see it. Because when the baby carrots starting crying for their Mommy the mother had to get her four screaming kids out of the theater. Highlight of the movie.
You want to know how bad this movie really was? I'll tell you. I got more enjoyment out of Ghostbusters 2016 than I did this movie. Just let that one sink in for a minute.
Suicide Squad (2016)
This movie was a lot of fun. The characters were great and they gave each one a backstory so they were more than just criminals forced to do a job by Amanda Waller.
Batman made two appearances in flashbacks, first when he captured Deadshot in Deadshot's backstory of how he ended up in Belle Reve. Then we saw him capture Harley Quinn.
We got to see Harley Quinn as a psychiatrist who was manipulated by the Joker, we see him hit her with electroshock therapy which led to her being crazy. We got to see her in that classic costume from the animated series, which was awesome.
We saw Deadshot with his kid, and that he willingly turned himself in to Batman (who left him for the cops) because his daughter told him he could be better.
The rest of them had their backstories too, but probably the most interesting one was Captain Boomerang. Not because it was interesting (he was just robbing a bank and then got caught), but the fact that we got our first appearance of Ezra Miller as The Flash in full costume. It was a very brief cameo, but it was awesome.
We saw Enchantress' backstory and her ties to Rick Flagg, and then everyone else's stories, but outside of El Diablo they weren't as good as Harley and Deadshot's.
The movie is about Enchantress reviving her ancient brother to help her wipe mankind off the face of the Earth because they betrayed her and no longer worship her as they did in the old days. The Squad is put together (forced into it with chips in their necks that will be detonated if they try to leave or kill any of Waller's people) to retrieve Waller from Midway City and put a stop to Enchantress.
Joker and Harley were the best part of the whole movie (besides Batman and Flash making an appearance). Margot Robbie was great as Harley Quinn. She had the look and she pulled off the quirky, crazy personality of Harley. Jared Leto's Joker was pretty creepy. He was so possessive of Harley, killing a man in a flashback for disrespecting her, and going to great lengths to get her back. He's not in the movie much, but what he is in the movie, he steals the show. I can only hope with Joker busting Harley out of prison at the end of the film that we get to see more of them together in the future in a Batman movie.
The action was great, it had some humor (which seems to be the only thing most people care about in comic movies these days with whiny "where's the humor?" if a movie is darker than an episode of Spongebob Squarepants).
The characters were all interesting, except Slipknot, but I'll get to him later.
My biggest beef with the movie was that overly long slow-mo sequence at the end when they beat Enchantress. It went on so long I practically yelled "Just get on with it!!"
There was a nice nod to the comics between Captain Boomerang and Slipknot. Captain Boomerang, unsure if the bombs in their necks are legit or just a way to keep them in line, tricks Slipknot into believing it's mind games and convinces him to make a run for it with him. Slipknot starts to escape, and is immediately killed by Flagg who blows his head off remotely. They did that gag in an earlier issue from the 80s or 90s (can't remember which). Where the bombs were on their wrists and Slipknot got his arm blown off so Boomerang could see if the threat was real or not. I enjoyed the reference.
I personally don't see why the movie has a 26% on Rotten Tomatoes. Just because it's not part of the MCU with it's already tired formula of McGuffins, quip after quip after quip even from serious characters, 1-dimensional villains, and actors who phone it in more and more with each movie doesn't mean it's a bad movie.
See it for yourself and form your own opinion. That's what I did. Ignoring reviews from paid stooges who would praise a bad movie just for an agenda (Ghostbusters 2016) or ignore gaping problems in a Marvel movie just to go with the bandwagon (Captain America: Civil War's gaping plot holes) is how you can think for yourself. Too many people make what some critic says "their opinion" before a movie is even out. I know a lot of people who decide they hate a movie or love a movie before it's even released based on "professional critics." See it for yourself and judge it for yourself.
9/10. Lots of fun, but that slow-mo scene was so annoying.
P.S. Mid-credit scene has Bruce Wayne and sets up Justice League
Insulting, And Hypocritical
Went and saw this movie Thursday even though I swore I'd never watch a reboot of Ghostbusters or Back to the Future (hopefully they never make one)
This movie is complete garbage. I saw all of the positive reviews, and those "critics' are either A) Bought off by Sony B) Idiots C) SJW shills or D) Too scared of panning it for fear of being labeled sexist. Because if you read some of those reviews even some of the more positive ones talk as if the movie wasn't that good, but because women are in it they praised it. Some "professional critics" only focused on the gender of the cast, which tells me they know the movie is a stinker but the feminist agenda has to be pushed, so they'll ignore it being terrible to push the agenda. And people wonder why I think it's stupid for people to base their decision to see a movie on whether or not some paid stooge says to see it or not.
The effects are horrible. Look at the ghosts in the original two movie, most of those ghosts in the original films looked creepy. But this movie? It looks like the ghosts from that crappy Haunted Mansion movie Disney crapped onto the screens a decade or so ago. The final battle was horrible, with them obviously being in front of a green screen.
The movie breaks it's own rules. One minute they can't kill ghosts with their proton packs, the next minute they can? Why? For convenience of course. And sheer laziness.
Patty was a racial stereotype, which was kind of funny since this movie was made solely to be SJW pandering. Guess SJWs are fine with racism as long as they are the ones doing it. I've seen SJWs try to defend Patty being a stereotype by claiming Winston was just a "token" in the original. Which is pretty racist of them to say. Because anyone who has actually seen the original Ghostbusters knows that Winston was the everyman who just needed stable employment and found himself thrust into the crazy world of the Ghostbusters. He was the most relateable of the crew, because when you as a viewer didn't understand the scientific/paranormal jargon Winston usually said out loud on screen what you were thinking in your head. And some of his lines were the best. "Ray, if someone asks you if you're a god, you say YES!!!" Classic. The only time Winston's race was brought up was by him when talking to the mayor he says, "I've seen S**t that would turn you white."
The whole cast has horrible chemistry, and the jokes weren't funny at all. The acting was pretty much what you'd expect from a horrible comedy made this century. They think you'll laugh your butt off, but instead you think "is that supposed to be funny?"
The original movie was funny because it was made like a serious paranormal movie but the line delivery of the cast is what got the laughs. Like the scene where they meet with the mayor and Venkman calmly tells the mayor about what Peck is lacking.
Now, where the movie is hypocritical. All men in this movie are depicted in a negative light. Either idiots or jerks or both. Now, imagine if the roles were reversed, the same people praising this movie would be protesting outside the studio and whining about the lack of positive women roles in the film. But since it's men being treated that way? No issue from SJWs. Chris Hemsworth character is an idiot only hired for his looks. Which is another double standard. It's okay for women to ogle attractive men but when the roles are reversed those same women cry about how evil men's standards of beauty are.
They beat the main villain by shooting him in the crotch. It's obvious this was to flip the finger at all men in general, because this whole movie was just "Ra Ra Feminism Ra Ra Down with Men!!!" Imagine if this reboot had starred Adam Sandler and his crew of unfunny friends. Beating the villain by shooting him in the crotch would have had everyone bashing the movie. The movie would have been critically panned just for that scene. But since it's women? Praise. Pathetic.
Don't waste your time. It's a lame attempt to cash in on nostalgia, but they spit in the face of the fans by labeling them all as sexist and Sony's horrible marketing which was just an attempt to call anyone who didn't want a reboot a sexist was insulting.
I remember when I first heard about this movie being made. I was on my favorite movie/comic/TV news site and the second I saw the headline "Sony Pictures Announces Ghostbusters Reboot", I immediately went to the comments and said that without the original cast making a true Ghostbusters sequel I wasn't interested. I didn't even read the article. But suddenly I was flooded with "You just hate women!!!!!!" comments in response. So I didn't even know the movie was going to have an all female cast until after I had already declared my intention to not see it. So why would any man want to see this movie when men are depicted as moronic jerks in the film and Sony and the cast and crew have done nothing but insult us every step of the way?
I have a hard time believing anyone genuinely likes this. The people giving this high scores either didn't see it, or are only rating it high because it's a feminist agenda movie. I literally saw someone's review say "I gave it a 10 to counteract the negative reviews."
1 out of 10. Only because they don't let you give half stars or zero stars.
X-Men: Apocalypse (2016)
Not An MCU Movie, Needs to be Negatively Reviewed!
People mocked those who claimed there was a conspiracy to negatively lampoon any comic book movie that wasn't a Marvel Cinematic Universe movie after all of the negative reviews of Batman vs Superman (which I haven't seen anyone give me their own opinion they didn't just parrot from some big "professional" film critic and a movie that I only saw pacing problems with in the first hour).
But this movie is the proof that there is some kind of attempt to crush anything that isn't the MCU.
Civil War relied on a gaping plot hole at the beginning to make the plot work, and no one had any issue with it.
I can't help but think that if The Dark Knight came out this year it would have insanely negative reviews and a low score on Rotten Tomatoes with negative reactions to Heath Ledger's Joker. You know, since it wasn't the MCU.
X-men: Apocalypse was a great movie. I'd write a more in depth review, but I don't have a lot of time and I just got back from seeing the movie and have to leave for work soon.
But I guess since it's "Not the MCU" you're considered "not a true fan of cinema" if you liked this movie. Considering how if you say anything negative about the MCU you have to watch all of your friends bring up Rotten Tomatoes or Meta Critic so they can read out loud what their favorite critic had to say to "disprove" what I said about those movies.
I know someone will see this and get upset that I am implying there is an attempt to crush anything not part of the MCU, but you think it's impossible?
Disney has the money to pay off critics. Especially since the figure that if they can crush the competition (DC) and crush the Fox X-men movies, they figure they can get the rights back to those movies.
Because Marvel Studios NEEDS The X-men. Time is running out and while Marvel is going to be losing their big names, DC will be giving us classic characters on the big screen who have never gotten their own movie.
So I say Disney has paid critics to crush anything Non-MCU. Non-MCU Marvel movies so they can get the rights back to them so their universe isn't carried solely by Spider-man and a bunch of D- listers. And crush DC to keep the competition at bay while they get their ducks in a row about how to keep their shared universe afloat after they lose all of the characters that built it.
And let me address the "plot holes" I've seen mentioned in this movie. Most of the plot holes aren't plot holes. Because you have to remember, this movie takes place in a new timeline after Logan changed history in "Days of Future Past." So "Why is Nightcrawler an X-man at the end, they didn't meet him until X-2 in the 2000s." Well, this is a new timeline, so now they met him earlier.
"Why was Mystique an X-man at the end? She's always been their enemy, look at the first 3 movies!!" Well, new timeline, she never became the killer she was in the original trilogy, so this new Mystique is an X-man and is an Anti-Hero.
"Why did Angel have metal wings? He didn't have them in X-men: The Last Stand?" Because NEW TIME LINE.
"Why didn't we see Jean and Scott in X-men: Origins Wolverine if she was the one who freed him?" Did you not hear the NEW TIMELINE PART?
Seriously, this movie has been picked apart and picked apart and all of the issues people have are only there because they ignore that the last movie altered the timeline so now the events of the first 3 movies and all of their spin-offs NEVER HAPPENED.
Seriously, maybe people should show a little more scrutiny to the MCU. Because if you take the "Critics love it, I gotta love it too" goggles off and pay attention you'll see that every one of those movies is full of huge problems.
Captain America: Civil War (2016)
Holy Plot Holes
I loved the movie when I first saw it. And went to see it again, when I noticed something that just ruined the movie for me.
Where was Vision at the beginning of the movie? It's not like he had a personal life or something more important to do. All Vision really has is being an Avenger, and when the Avengers are on a mission to prevent a terrorist from gaining access to a chemical weapon, shouldn't it be ALL HANDS ON DECK? But nope, no Vision. And you know why? If Vision had been there he would have clocked that bomb vest from the get go and he would have gotten Crossbones far from civilians. No casualties at all.
Which means no movie. This ENTIRE movie relied on the massive plot hole required at the start of the movie. You fill in that plot hole by having Vision present at the beginning, and the rest of the movie just falls apart. So even though I liked aspects of the movie, I can't call it a good movie or give it a good score when the movie can't function without plot holes.
There's another plot hole the movie needed to make it work. All of the Avengers forgot about to mention to Ross that they saved New York from a nuke launched by the US GOVERNMENT. They also refused to speak up and point out that had they done nothing in the other instances he whined about, there would be no humans on Earth because Ultron would have KILLED THEM ALL.
And suddenly there were mass casualties in Sokovia? Really? Because I remember Age of Ultron made a point of showing the Avengers getting all of the civilians onto the hellicarrier. Now, for the sake of this movie's plot to make the Avengers look dangerous, they suddenly had a lot of dead civilians to blame on the Avengers. PLOT HOLE.
And here comes the second biggest plot hole of the movie. How did Zemo know Tony was just going to suddenly figure out Cap had been right the whole time and how did he know that Tony would show up in Russia to aide Steve, giving Zemo the chance to show the camera footage of Bucky killing Tony's parents to further cement the rift in their friendship? And I also love how convenient it was that there just so happened to be a security camera right there in such a perfect spot to catch the alleged expert assassin Winter Soldier (didn't pop the camera before you walked in front of it?) as he killed Tony's parents. He even made a point to pose in front of the camera, looking right into it like everyone watching was supposed to freak out and squeal with delight and shock. I mean, I thought Bucky was going to hold up a sign at the camera that said, "Check it out Tony, I totally killed your parents and hopefully Steve doesn't keep that knowledge from you because that'd be totes awkward at the Avengers hang out, amirite?"
I loved Spider-man in it. Well, not his completely CGI costume. But character wise he was just like the comics.
The action was great. So 1 star for action, 1 star for Spider-man. 8 stars off for the movie not being able to function without the massive plot holes.
I love how so-called "Professional Critics" have looked over all of these plot holes. I also love how many comic fanboys ignore them as well. It's like, 'Let's pick apart anything made by DC while celebrating Marvel for the same things we claim to hate DC movies for and let's write off X-men because it's totes not fair they won't let Marvel Studios have those characters back for their plot hole, McGuffin riddled movies.
This movie has a high score on Rotten Tomatoes and IMDb. And it just shows that when people say they hate plot holes, it just means as long as it's not a Marvel Movie will they hate plot holes. All of the plot holes people have whined about in Batman v. Superman are all either not plot holes or just nitpicking. Like the "Why are their Moms both SUDDENLY named Martha? It's like, sure they've had those names in the comics for decades and were named by different writers, but we need something to complain about!!!"
Marvel Studios suck nowadays. They all need McGuffins (Bucky was this film's McGuffin), they all follow the same exact formula, there are always plot holes needed to make these movies work to keep the shared universe working.
I know some people will read this and want my head on a pike. But if it's okay to criticize one studios movies, then it's fair to do the same to Marvel. Especially when everyone is just being willfully blind to this so-called "Perfect" movie's problems.
10 Cloverfield Lane (2016)
Why is this movie so critically acclaimed?
It's your typical horror/thriller. Except this time they're stuck in a bunker with a nutcase who shoots a guy then gets blown up.
Aliens don't show up until the end and Mary Sue, that's what she is not her name, blows their ship up with a molotov cocktail.
Overrated trash, just like the original Cloverfield. People love it based on name and the insane amounts of viral adverting the series loves to exploit.
If this movie had been called anything else, it would not only been a flop, but the same people praising it would be the most critical.
Natural Born Pranksters (2016)
Why Does This Exist?
Why did these fake prank channels on Youtube get a movie? Seriously, that stuff isn't funny on the internet, so it's safe to say it'd be terrible outside the internet.
I can imagine when they were coming up with the idea of doing a movie they probably thought they could be the next Jackass or the next Borat.
They were mistaken.
I got dragged into seeing this garbage, and now someone owes me a massive favor.
Don't bother with this movie. It's a waste of time, it's a waste of money, and it makes you take a hit in your pride because you are just so ashamed walking out of the theater and you see people you know noticing what movie you are walking out of.
The pranks aren't funny. One of the guys admitted they were fake. The only people who will enjoy this are kids who don't know better. Or stoners.
Better Call Saul (2015)
I loved Breaking Bad. I have watched the full series on Netflix three times and have enjoyed it just as much as when I watched them brand new on AMC.
So when I heard of this show, I got excited. Then I watched it. It's okay, it's nice to see some familiar faces again. But the fact that it's a prequel series kind of sucks. I would have liked to see Saul trying to pull things together after his exit from Breaking Bad. Maybe even show what happened to Jesse after he escaped captivity after Walt saved him.
But no, it's just a prequel. It's pretty good. But it's like eating Steak with Breaking Bad one meal, then being served up hamburger the next meal and being told it's just as tasty. It's not. And it's insulting to be told otherwise.
Great to see another Star Wars movie. Great to see Han, Luke, and Leia again. Great to see R-2 and C-3PO again, even though you can't recognize him with the red arm (lame joke), I find this movie to be the worst of the 7 films.
And that is because so many things in this movie were ripped off from A New Hope. Starkiller base was ripped off from the Death Star, they flew X-Wings through trenches while being chased by Tie Fighters while trying to destroy it. Bad guys blow up planet with base to get to Leia like in A New Hope. Mentor character killed while trying to shut down shield generator by red lightsaber wielding helmeted bad guy like Kenobi in A New Hope. A captured Rebel member being saved by new ally in a Stormtrooper costume. Force sensitive youth on a desert planet dreaming of bigger things and being pulled into an epic struggle for freedom throughout the galaxy.
Sure, there were some original things, but just how much they ripped off from the original really ruined this movie for me. I was enjoying it but when I saw the X-Wing's flying through the trench I thought, "Wait a second! I've already seen this movie!!!!"
It was crazy they killed Han Solo. Harrison Ford wanted it for so long. It must have been what they had to offer him to get him to come back.
Hopefully Episode 8 doesn't rip off Empire Strikes Back. If it opens with the Rebels living on an Icy Planet like Hoth from Empire I swear I'll walk right out of the theater.
Smosh: The Movie (2015)
Stick to Youtube
This movie is proof that no matter how many subscribers you have on Youtube, it doesn't mean you can actually act or actually make a decent movie.
Two losers go into Youtube to change one of the guy's humiliating video because he wants to impress a girl he hasn't seen in years who probably doesn't remember him. "Hilarity" ensues.
I've watched plenty of Smosh's videos in the past. And I've never taken into account if they could act or not. I just accepted they are Youtubers making ridiculous videos and I could see the appeal.
So when this hit Netflix and I didn't have anything to do, I figured, why not?
Why did I watch this? Why did they make this? Please, someone tell me why Youtubers think they are legitimate filmmakers?