Reviews

833 ReviewsOrdered By: Date
Pussy Kills (2017)
6/10
In fact, Pussy Thrills.
23 December 2017
Not bad, not bad at all. Proven that a low budget film can also be made very well, and also proving that you don't have to take your clothes off in order to tantalize the viewers (Maybe I shouldn't put that idea into any other film makers heads), Pussy kills is a rape/revenge scenario , in which a really hot police woman goes over the line in looking for the drug dealers who killed her parents only to be raped and almost murdered by them. The event literally turns her into the Punisher, but wearing Catwoman's outfit (The Halle Berry version of Catwoman in the god awful 2004 film).

It has arousing scenes that don't show any nudity yet get the job done, thanks to how round and brown the protagonist of the film is. I loved how in the beginning of the film they show scenes of her working out with sit ups and squats and the camera angled just right to see it perfectly. The camera is always angled just right too. Weather she be putting on her paints (one jiggle at a time) or strangling pushers to death, the camera is always were it needs to be to the point where I could not even tell you how pretty that ass's face is.

They don't cheapen the violence though. That's good. It's nice and slow how this Pussy seeks out the men who have now done her entire family wrong (Even beating the crap out of her husband). One by one, the killings are not gory but graphic enough to point out how good vengeance can be (And like I said, the camera makes it so that when she kills a man she does it as sexy as possible)

So seriously, Amazon Prime seems to have a large collection of rubbing pennies together films with a decent soundtrack running through it (mostly metal,mostly horror), but this Hip Hop laced rape revenge movie that is Pussy Kills really stands out among them for it's stellar production, that includes knowing precisely what the audience wants and giving them only what they need, in pretty cool visuals with the camera that sells the sex and great sound effects that sell the violence. Plus the acting is....not stale. amazing effort!

Worth wild watch!!
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Bright (I) (2017)
7/10
Best flick Netflix has produced so far.
23 December 2017
Will Smith does an original movie for Netflix. I'm not sure if that means Will fell off or Netflix is that big. I'm going for the latter.

David Ayer who directed Smith in the ill conceived Suicide Squad gets an attempt at redemption in the film Bright. It looks like a sequel to Alien Nation, but instead of Aliens moving to LA, Bright takes place in a world where Orcs and Elves are not myth or fantasy and they coincide with the rest of the human race, in a uniquely style fantasy film.

The mythical creatures literally become the new black, as the story is about the first of the orcs, who are considered as low as animals by humans, Jakoby, becoming a cop and nobody on the force wanting him there. Will Smith plays Ward who is force to be Jakoby's partner on the streets. He feels the same hatred but has some reasoning as Jakoby is a rookie who almost got him killed, and now he has to rely on this orc as they run for there lives on the streets of LA in this strange buddy cop feature.

Bright delivers an interesting realm. It's not like Lord of the Rings, the world of fantasy comes into the reality of the streets of LA. A world with mystical creatures is a world with Magic and a world where everybody from all the races are willing to do very bad things in order to get magic. In this case the magic comes in the form of a wound that only a select few called Brights can wield without it blowing them up.

Love David Ayer's style of using songs as composed music for certain sequences, especially in this movie. He can be overkill at times but it does work In Blight far better. Taking Suicide Squad out of the picture, if you are a fan of End of Watch and Sabotage, Than you'll like Bright as that's the Ayer style being fitted for this film.

Will Smith brings his amazing personality to the Netflix original, but possibly more impressive is Joel Edgerton who has to bring all his personality and project it with all that make up on.

It's a good action thriller and a good police drama (With a fantasy element), you'll like it far better if you are a fan of gritty crime stories set in LA.

One of Netflix's best.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
8/10
It's a fun popcorn eater to watch with the most electrifying cast.
22 December 2017
I've seen the original movie once or twice as a kid but don't recall it well enough to do a comparison.

I do love the update of Junmanji adapting itself to a video game over a board game (but I do know lots of kids who still play board games).

This was the second time Dwayne Johnson and Kevin Hart teamed up in a movie together. The first being Central Intelligence, though you can't go wrong with a little Hart and one big Johnson, Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle was a better fit for them than Central Intelligence, even without Hart and Johnson's help from some star power like Jack Black, Karen Gillan, and Nick Jonas.

So just like with the original film, a few kids find some old game and begin to play it, only to get sucked into the game they are playing. Keeping with the video game tone the kids become the avatars they select. So this kid name Spencer, who in real life is a little nerd, gets to become The Rock, who plays Dr. Smolder Bravestone, not much of a doctor of anything but he's got strength, speed, and no weaknesses, so like I said, he becomes the Rock, and what kid does not want to become the Rock, right? (hell I'm a grown man and I want to become The Rock)

Not all the other kids are as lucky with the avatars they randomly selected. 6 feet tall high school football star, becomes 5'3" Kevin Hart, who plays Moose Finbar, and acts as Bravestone's weapons holder. Not that being Kevin Hart, who is funny and rich would not be cool, but not really something I've dreamed about, but it could be worse, you could be Bethany, a cute and shallow teenage girl who picks the avatar Shelly Oberon, who happens to be a fat middle age man. Some of the best laughs of the movie do come from Black playing a girl discovering the advantages and disadvantages of being a dude.

Then we have Karen Gillan, as the avatar Ruby Roundhouse, a total jab at the female stereotypes in video games, a hot chick who can kick butt, but is not wearing enough clothing, which makes the user Martha uncomfortable.

The movie is all about what it would be like to truly live out the game as the characters treat each adventure like a level in the video game and have to overcome these adventures without loosing the three lives they are given.

It does not make for much character development. Each person comes into the game with with certain issues that seem to be what the film was going to focus on, but the whole thing went by too fast to be of any substance.

This new Jumanji works on the pure star power it has as we watch The Rock, Kevin Hart and Jack Black interact with each other as they play the game. It's worth it for that and that alone

7 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
6/10
Everything I ever hoped for in a movie, actually!
17 December 2017
Beyond Skyline is a sequel to a movie I saw a long time ago just once in the movie theater. I remember it being OK, and being far more impressed after hearing what the filmmakers went through to get their movie into theaters. Skyline felt like a movie made by comic book fans for Playstation fans and that's great cause I'm a fan of both

Beyond Skyline dos not really go beyond Skyline ( Well, unless you take into account that the movie does not take place in a tall building which is where I think the title comes from). It more so extends what Skyline was doing (like a good Sequel should) adding things to the movie that they could not in the first. Skyline Beyond takes place almost immediately after the events of Skyline with Frank Grillo leading an ensemble cast as the aliens continue their invasion. A little more action focus than the first film, while Skyline has a From Dusk Till Dawn feel to it, starting out about two old friends reconnected at a party after years apart and turns into Independence Day, Beyond Skyline is all about the invasion. Some what like a Zombie movie, for the most part we learn about most of the characters as the people from all walks of life bond over the big problem they all face. Not limited to a building, Beyond Skyline also takes you from LA to the alien ship and even to Indonesia, and tells us more about the aliens and why they have come to Earth. Just a lot more to it.

A lot more. Influenced not only by video games, but the trend of blockbusters of recent times, Beyond Skyline tries to be Pacific Rim, the Transformers, and Star Wars all wrapped into one. I thought they did a great job putting all those elements into one film by having the characters in a situation that always escalates. Just when you think the movie reached it's top peak, that's when it gets bigger, but as it escalates it gets corny, It's not a problem if I was a little boy, but as an adult it can get a little ridiculous.

The only reason why I have a real problem with that is because of Iko Uwais and Yayan Ruhian, two Indonesian martial artist and actors who broke through the scene in The Raid in 2012. When I saw they were in the film it instantly got better, as the two battled against giant robot aliens, which has been something I wanted to see every since the two made a cameo in Star Wars: the Force Awakens. Be careful what you wish for, however, cause while it was a great fantasy in my head it is a good example of how the movie just kept getting bigger an cornier.

Well, bottom line, the movie is not for everyone. Once again I love the blood and sweat that went into making this. The visual effects were great, I like the story and they had a fantastic cast. Martial arts fighting battling robots can be cool and cheesy at the same time. I enjoined it cause I'm able to tap into my game loving younger self old who equally wants to play the movie as much as he wants to watch it, but I can see why this movie did not get a bigger release than it did. Too bad.

http://cinemagardens.com
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
8/10
Don't expect great, it's good, but Rogue One was great, not this.
15 December 2017
So I had to to see this twice to fully appreciate anything about it. When I first saw it on opening night in 3D (NOTE: don't bother with the 3D). I thought it was weak. Just like with The Force Awakens the hype is not lived up to. It's not great it's just good and I'm expecting it to be great. It starts off OK, but then the second act is too long and scattered. Your expecting Empire Strikes Back, because we know it's the second in the new trilogy. It tries to be episode five without trying to be episode five, and in the process, too many stories are developing at once (and it's too much). We need to concentrate on ex-storm trooper finn's buffoonery, as his attempts to run away like a coward from the first order leads him on a mission with a new character, Rose to a part of the Star Wars universe we don't see that much, the land of the rich and the powerful. While Poe and Leia Organa are having conflict on how to handle the first order when the rebels are out matched by a first order destroyer. Meanwhile we also have to focus on Rey trying to become a Jedi, by a Luke Skywalker who seems uninterested in the idea all together (Now I see what Mark Hamill is talking about how he did not like what they did to Luke, it was not the guy I was expecting at all). To top it off, how Kylo Ren is integrated into the Last Jedi part of the movie so much it makes it a story on it's own to have to concentrate on. Then the last part of the movie reminds me of Lord of the Rings: the Return of the King so much, that even though it's a great part of the movie , I could not wait till it was over. The second time I saw it, I did like it...Slightly better. The Disney version of Star Wars is a little too humorous, and that humor was annoying the first time I saw it, but more amusing the second time. Yet still, the humor fells like it was inserted into the film (possibly to insure a two billion dollar net like VII by appealing to international fans). You could have easily taken a lot of it out and still made a good movie that was not as long. This was a problem for the movie. We know it's not the end, we know we have another movie that will technically end the Disney Trilogy. Yet whenever you felt that it was time for the credits to roll the film kept going. It was like it was trying to over compensate for the lackluster ending in the greatest film of the Star Wars franchise, by having dozens of them. That's my long (unending) opinion. It's good, but it's not great. I don't want to see it a billion times , I'm happy to see it twice. I'm sure this will not stop anyone from going to see it, It's just a warning to keep your expectations down, and hope it will seem better than I'm making it out to be. So I'll just end this by saying, so far, Rogue One was the best of the Disney era star wars films.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
9/10
It's ironic how this movie is so good as it celebrates a movie so bad.
3 December 2017
Just like what Tim Burton did for Ed Wood when he made a movie about the filmmaker's attempt to make what will become known as (until the Room) the worse picture ever conceived, Plan 9 From Outer Space, James Franco takes his love of what The Room is and became interested enough about the man (or rather men) behind it to want to make a movie about it.

I've seen the Room, let me tell you, it does not seem that interesting. With acting so bad it makes the movie dry and bland to the point where you can't help but to laugh at how bizarre the whole thing is. When I saw it I did ask the question: "How the hell did this get made"?

James Franco gives us the answer (or as much of it as he can), as he directs himself as Tommy Wiseau and his bother Dave plays Greg Sestero in a inspiring story of a man with a lot of money who befriends a kindred spirit in a young actor, and they decide to lean on each other in order to follow the Hollywood dream, but when the dream becomes a nightmare they decide to go at it themselves by making a movie... that's a nightmare on it's on.

If The Room did not have a big enough cult stasis I can already see it increasing thanks to The Disaster Artist. How ever famous it was before Franco's well crafted journey into a the mind of a man who stands on the edge of genus and instability, is about to make it Infamous. It was indeed a great role for Franco as both director and actor. With the support of all his friends through small parts and cameos like Zac Efron, Hannibal Buress, Josh Hutcherson and of course, his hetero life mate, Seth Rogen.  I hear Oscar buzz in his future, which I get, his transformation into Wiseau is amazing, and if the academy can love a picture like LA LA Land than they should love The Disaster Artist, cause it's just such a pure story about two people who love the biz.

http://cinemagardens.com/
3 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Jigsaw (I) (2017)
6/10
I'm not as impressed with this one as I have been with the others.
30 November 2017
At first I was interested. It looked like they are trying to turn Jigsaw into something a little different than the Saw series. While all the elements seemed in play out well, it feels like they slightly changed the genre to lean more towards suspense than horror. Thought it was a good idea. Overall, their attempts are not as cool as the first round of films. It's strange to say this but Jigsaw is not as intelligent as the Saw series, and it really shows.

Basically, It feels like they stretched this film series far too much to the point that it doesn't work as well.

http://cinemagardens.com
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
7/10
Good laid out picture on what it's like to be the one who comes back in one piece
27 November 2017
The movie focuses particularity on those whose wounds are only in the inside. No physical trauma that anyone could see. Miles Teller's character particularly seem to be in good health, both in body and in the brain, but when you go through war like he did his head can't be in a good place and as hard as he tried to be normal, everyone noticed that he's not the same, especially his wife who tried her hardest to understand the change by trying to get him to talk about it.

Teller is on the poster in order to get those butts in the seats (Amy Schumer, in a rare dramatic role, could have done the same thing but her role was too small for that). He's the only real star in a movie which is about three marines. The other two are a Samoan who wants to go back to war but can't cause the doctors will not clear him because he's shell shocked. They have medicine that will help with his condition so he can be stable enough in his new role as a father, but the movie shows a focus on how hard it is for the troops coming back to get the medical and mental treatment they need.

That leads us to the last Marine, who basically comes home to nothing and not even his buddies were enough to help him through it.

Thank You for Your Service seems to be the type of movie used to empathize with the problem and get a better understanding of it. For that it's a good concept done well.

http://cinemagardens.com
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
7/10
It was a good idea but it made a terrible movie.
27 November 2017
I wanted to love it,  I really did, but I didn't. The concept of watching what creative influence got Charles Dickens to create the timeless masterpiece that change the way people celebrated the holiday season seemed like an inspiring tale. I was energetic to see it.

It reminds me of a TV movie from the 80s or 90s called The Dreamer of Oz  in which John Ritter played the dude who wrote the Wizard of Oz and we saw how he drew the fantastic story from  his everyday life.

It's the same deal with the Man who Invented Christmas. As we learn about the life of Charles Dickens and get insight of what type of man he was. We also see where the bits and pieces of  A Christmas Carol come from, and when we starts to write the book, he lets his imagination go wild as the characters from the book come to life and somewhat haunt him like ghost until he gets the story finished. All the while the movie makes a claim of how the book itself somewhat mimics Dickens own life.

All of this sounds good in theory but it was a god awful job putting it all together. Trying to be both surrealistic and a straight narrative seem to be a hard task for the filmmakers and it made for a badly done effort.

I hate to be so harsh on a movie, but for the most part it was not the worse to sit through but it was not the most interesting of films.

I think they're versions of a  Christmas Carol better suited to watch this Holiday season way better than the version about the man who wrote it.

http://cinemagardens.com
5 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Crash Pad (I) (2017)
5/10
Well, Domhnall Gleeson was really funny in it.
22 November 2017
Not as funny as I was hoping but still very entertaining. The whole premises was very interesting, but Thomas Haden Church could have done some better acting. He was a little stale. More importantly  Domhnall Gleeson, was historical. I think I've seen him do some comedy, but what he's doing here seems out of his element than what I'm use to seeing him do and he did it well. Interesting little movie about manhood and male bonding. Not the best film but I did laugh and enjoined it.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Coco (I) (2017)
10/10
Another rad animated movie from Pixar. We have another classic on our hands here.
22 November 2017
I should talk as much about the short film Olaf's Frozen Adventure, as much as I'm going to talk about Coco. I'm use to Disney and Pixar showing a short animated film before the feature to make the movie longer, but this is the first time the short actually made the animated feature two hours. It was almost like I watched a double feature here.

I'll try to stick to CoCo even though Frozen 1.5 as it should have been called was a spectacular picture on it's own.

CoCo, was amazing. It may not come to a surprise to anyone that Pixar has up the game yet again.

The story was fantastic. Darker than I would expect, but possibly because it of the content. It was about the Mexican culture's celebration of the day of the dead pretty much. It's very perfectly appropriate for children, however.

No Disney Princess on this one, it was a Prince named Miguel in a perfectly design (Modern day) fairy tale (of an original story based on a Mexican tradition) about a boy who comes from a long line of shoe makers because his great great great grandmother forbid music within the family, as it took her husband away from her, but Miguel's passion for song causes him to curse himself which takes him to the land of the dead, where he has until sundown to find the family that would give him the blessing to go back to the world of the living without giving up music.

Like every good Disney Prince(cess) Miguel's journey to the underworld is accompanied by Donte a stray hairless dog that's seems to resemble a spirit animal. It's a perfect Disney formula with a lot of cultural flavor to it that makes it special.

The animation was fantastic. Especially, the backgrounds that were beautiful and rich with the heritage that inspired it. It made the animation feel like a moving painting and that's the best type of animation.

Ironically, the one flaw in the film is that the music is not that memorable. Considering the story is about music. I should not complain as I'm not a fan of musicals, but I did notice that no songs playing got a hold of my soul. It does not hurt that Olaf's Frozen Adventure, which accompanies the film, is filled with musical numbers and is a semi-Sequel to a movie with a song that I herd little girls rock to on their headsets (Also want to point out that Disney (but not Pixar) had a cool catchy song in Moana, performed by Dwayne Johnson (but I'm biased cause I loved the Rock).

Despite this, as if you need me to tell you how great a movie by Pixar is, let me tell you anyway. This is a winner!

http://cinemagardens.com
3 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
5/10
Good for a few laughs but not as good as the original.
19 November 2017
Everything about it seems to scream doing it for the money. It does not have the same focus or gusto that the original movie had. Bad Moms was about something while Bad Moms Christmas was all fluff. You would think adding a new set of moms to it would create some a new depth of problems that need to be resolved with another don't give a crap revolution processing because of it, but that's not what happen. The revolution of moms taking back Christmas was weak and that's where the laughs come from in the Bad Moms franchise. Bad moms Christmas has a few laughs but not enough to rush out and see it.

It's too bad, because I really like what Bad Moms was doing and I wanted to see that continue in Bad Moms Christmas but it fall flat of being anything worth wild.

http://cinemagardens.com
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
7/10
I'm sorry I must have missed something while I was dozing off.
19 November 2017
While the performances of the actors were really good and the whole design of the picture went well for me, I saw a big hole int he plot I can not ignore.

Colin Farrell plays a heart surgery (cool opening scene of his character doing open heart surgery) whose being black mailed by a kid whose dad died on his operating table. How this kid was able to hold such a huge price that he felt was owed cause of his father's death I never fully understood.

Feel the movie thought too much of itself. Looks like the director who also director the Lobster with Colin Farrell got too big for his bridges.
1 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
6/10
Pretty good. Actually it was more OK
19 November 2017
The understanding of what may have been going through Jeffery Dahmer's head and made him what he is.

No sparks flew from the screen as I watched the film. At first its slow temple was interesting,but the movie got less interesting as time past. By the end I was dozing off like it lost me.

The life of Dahmer was petty normal if you really thing about it. I think that's the point of the movie and it made their point a little too clear.

I got to the point and nothing much more.

http://cinemagardens.com
0 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
7/10
It's a good movie that you will watch and then forget.
18 November 2017
This is bland. Not bad, but OK, and very unnecessary, which is probability the worse.  They made the movie back in 1974, based on this novel, The idea would be to bring something new to either the novel or the book. I saw neither of these two things happen.

Kenneth Branagh I am a fan of his as both an actor and a director (and a director who acts in his own movie). It was well shot and of course you can't beat the stellar ensemble cast, but it's forgettable. Nothing about it stands out too much to make it anything. 

http://cinemagardens.com
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
9/10
RagnaROKS!
12 November 2017
Ragnarok is a fun movie with a lot of cool stylized actions scenes. It's never boring, but it is very different in tone than the two previous films, thanks mostly to director Taika Waititi. I recognize his style of humor in movies like Boy and What we Do in Shadows, which he also directed.

It's really enjoyable, and the light tone helps for it to be entertaining. Although if you are following the Marvel Cinematic Universe, especially if you have seen the other two Thor movies, The whole purpose of Ragnarok is for Thor to stop his sister, the God of Death (played by Cate Blachett) form ending Asgard, and there are a lot of parts of the movie that I did feel should have been more serious but were disregarded for the lighter tone, but I must admit this is a minor flaw in a movie that was just so amazing.

It's like when film critics say, it's a thrill ride, they are totally talking about blockbusters like Thor: Ragnarok. It's a big adventure with a lot of things going on, done in this 80s Sci-fi and Fantasy style.

Chris Hemsworth was everything as Thor: an action hero, charming, dramatic, just perfect star power, and Tom Hiddleson once again kills it as his brother Loki, who takes more of a heroes journey having to help his brother save all the Realms form their newly discovered older sister Hella, the goddess of Death, played by Blachett, who does not normally do movies like this and after seeing her play a great marvel villain here, I hope she'll decide to do more. The cinematic Universe's first female villain (or rather lead antagonist), Blachett does beautiful and deadly all at the same time. She looked sooooo good in that costume, and she brought the right type of evil. It's a shame she did not get more screen time (Feel like it had something to do with the fact that she was a woman), but Blachett's time as a villain had to be shared with the other antagonist in the film, The Grnadmaster, played by the great Jeff Goldblum who also gave a stellar performance as a cosmic being who runs the contest of champions Thor ends up being force to participate in where he meets his old Avengers buddy, the Hulk (Making up for the fact that he was not in Captain America: Civil War). The movie also features Tessa Thompson who plays Valkyrie, and gave some pretty cool fight scenes.

Ragnarok is a huge story almost like a Star Wars film, it's got everything, and does everything and the humorous undertone does make it work better (Though I think I still prefer Empire Strikes back over return of the Jedi)

Ragnarok: rocks!

http://cinemagardens.com
1 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Stronger (I) (2017)
7/10
It's a good movie that should have been advertised more.
24 October 2017
Based on a true story (That was first turned into a book) Stronger almost feels like a section of the movie Patriot's Day which is also about the bombing at the Boston marathon in 2013 (And I feel got the same small amount of promotion for it). It's like Jeff Bauman (who Gyllenhaal plays) was a subplot in Patriot's Day and they decided to extended that subplot into a larger film that not only goes over his experience that day, but tells his story about his year after the bombing with him adjusting to the lost of his legs

I though the picture painted a realistic picture of what it's like not to have two legs. I have both my legs so it's hard to fully imagine what this man went through. Even less now as I see Gyllenhaal brilliantly showing us a life with no legs. It was a pretty good performance.

I'm still getting use to an age where something happens in recent history barely four years ago and we make a movie about it, but it is indeed a good movie. Just like Patriot's Day, I just wished both movies were promoted better so everyone could had went to the theater to see them.

http://cinemagardens.com/?p=1679
1 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Wheelman (2017)
7/10
A little picture that does a lot of stuff with style.
24 October 2017
Wheelman seems to be a lot of things at once. It's nothing I have not seen before but a great mixture of everything I love about car movies.

With most of the movie taking place in a car, Frank Grillo plays the Wheelman, a driver just trying to pay his dues for the people who looked out for him while he was in jail, but in the process of doing his "work" someone pulls a double cross on the job.

It's very weird how Wheel man reminds me of a lot of movies. From the 80s style found in the movie Drive, to the 1978 movie The Driver (In which Ryan O'Neal plays a Wheelman), to a Tom Hardy movie called Locke (Which completely takes place in a car), but despite what looks like on the surface as Wheelman coping the tone and style of a lot of films, It's saving grace is that it does a excellent job putting it all together. I don't know how hard or time consuming doing production in a car is, but I can see the filmmakers did a solid job with it, and good work Frank Grillo for keeping us interested in his character while in the car.

Sound is very important in this movie. It's interesting. instead of the usually burn rubber sounds we are use to, most of the car sounds come form inside the car. Crisp details from the backing up beep to the windshield wiper, puts us in the environment of the car. Netflix films and shows love to add background environment sounds, and this time it really makes the movie. Especially, at times when the Wheelman is on the cell phone communicating with actors who are not on screen.

So, not bad. I'm seeing a lot of different elements to a lot of different movies all warped up in one package and I like it a lot.

http://cinemagardens.com/?p=1749
11 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
5/10
A very typical sequel, but enjoyable laughs.
24 October 2017
So as far as sequels go, this is a very typical one. I went to see Boo 2 because though Tyler Perry movies are not really my thing, I actually enjoined the first Boo, so I took the chance that I would enjoy the second one.

I totally did, too. It's not as good as the original. As much as I found the original funny, it also had an attempt to show family values in it that was not lost on me. This time around their attempt (If there was one cause I did not see it) was literally taken out to make more room for laughs. In a lot of ways it made the film like the second episode of one of Perry's shows (Which I like more than his movies), as it seems nobody learned the lesson from the first Madea Halloween.

Case in point, like the original, Boo 2 is about Joe trying to discipline his entitled daughter, Tiffany. Once again she defies her overbearing father's wishes in order to go to a party at midnight in the woods at a camp where a bunch of people got murdered. Now I understand the natural urge for a teenager not to want to listen to her dad, but when your aunt is someone like Madea, you would think you would think twice about this woman coming to track you down, especially after what happen in the last movie.

Like the last film, Boo 2 focuses on Madea and her friends running into terror and danger while trying to get to Tiffany. The film likes to Parody current themes in horror like with influences of Korean horror and it also pokes a nod to old school Horror with the film taking place at a camp and the underage teens being hunted by a man with a mask and a chainsaw.

Overall, I much prefer the more light hearted Tyler Perry movies. Sometimes his stuff can be too over dramatic for me, but I seem to like it when he goes for straight up Sitcom style on us and that's Boo 2!

It's crazy and filled with laughs and no matter where it fails compare to the first one, we are there to laugh and that's what makes this sequel enjoyable.

http://cinemagardens.com/?p=1756
22 out of 44 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
7/10
I could watch it over and over again
17 October 2017
It's unique cause it feels like a Slasher film, but the slasher has only one victim. Her name is Tree, she's not the nicest chick at college and kinda deserves getting hit with a blunt object until her skull splits into two. So when it happens, you're like "good". Only problem is a freak electrical problem seem to give her the ability to relive her birthday over and over again, which means getting killed over and over again until she can figure out who hates her that much to do something violent about it.

It's a good movie simply for the fact that it's a bad one. The very fact that they point out that the film is the exact same plot as Groundhog Day (and the Netflix movie Naked with Marlon Wayans and the Tom Cruse movie Edge of Tomorrow which really reminds me of this flick), gives it the good excuse to be campy. 

Happy Death Day goes for the complete fun factor, completely focus on the homage to horror films rather just being one.

Overall, it's entertaining. I recommend.
3 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
7/10
The got me in the seats because of Wonder Woman, but I stayed because it was a unique movie about love.
17 October 2017
I had a feeling that the title was propaganda to get me into the seats. After all, Wonder Woman was one of 2017's best pictures, so I figure the title of this movie (as well as the well done poster) was a way to get butts into the seats. Not that I want my money back, cause it was an excellent movie. It was lots of fun and it made me chuckle a lot of times, but if your here because you want to learn more about Wonder Woman, the movie is not designed like that specifically.

What I knew about William Marston before was that he created Wonder Woman (right!), the same guy who created Wonder Woman created the lie detector test (But the movie does point out how much his wife contributed to this) and that the original Wonder Woman comics was filled with images of bonding and S&M (Which according to the movie visualized Marston's theories on human behavior) . What I did not know is that this guy was in a three way relationship with his wife and one of his students. This part of the movie seems to take center stage above anything else.

Once again ,I'm not complaining, cause it made for one of the most interesting love stories I've ever seen. Not really into romance movies, and you can make an argument that it's not, but what stands out for me in this film is a story about three people trying to be in a loving relationship with one another in a world that's still not really ready for what is going on here. So, it was a romance film done differently, under a mask of  the drama and the biography( How very Superhero-like of them).

http://cinemagardens.com/?p=1732
7 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Blood Money (IV) (2017)
6/10
Good lesson on how money corrupts
17 October 2017
Four people in the woods. One is trying to find the money he lost at any cost. The other three found that money and want to keep it...At any cost.

Very straight forward picture with a story that works, but it does not stick out as anything special.

The plot seems more like a thriller but once Cusack officially gets into the mix he's a very light hearted villain (He looks like a prettier Nick Cage in this). Not a blood trusty bad guy, just a man who wants to keep the hard earn money he stole. (and the overall reason for him being a lackluster villain does makes the picture more interesting) . The other three actors in where good as well (The kid from boyhood is in it, that's cool). I loved the realistic interaction of the three people whose friendship was coming apart anyway and how this money dismantled it even further.

It's actually a great plot, but it does fall on deth's ears for me. Just not clicking fully.
17 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
6/10
Not fully clicking
14 October 2017
Not the most exciting film, it's a horror mystery, that's more mystery than horror and the mystery was not that interesting. It was about a faithless journalist trying to prove God is not real by doing a story about a Priest in jail for murder because an exorcism went wrong. Sounds like a good story. The setting of the movie also seemed good as it takes place in Romania, during a holiday that, according to the film is similar to Halloween, and when I herd this at the beginning of the film I was jazzed to watch a Halloween picture during the season.  The Crucifixion shows a lot of elements of mystery and sexuality that makes if feel like a homage of Hammer Horror, but it falls a little short from become a classic of even a cult classic, real short.
7 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
The Foreigner (2017)
7/10
The Foreigner? Who doesn't know Jackie Chan (Still got it)?
14 October 2017
So, I'm not surprised that Jackie Chan has a dramatic side. I've seen shades of it in the latest installments of his hit Chinese franchise, Police Story. He also did a war movie in China, called Railroad Tigers that showed this off, but the Foreigner puts him on a new level. I don't think I've see Chan seek vengeance for a wrong doing like I've seen here.

Chan plays an old man. It's funny watching Jackie Chan have to slow it down knowing that even at 63 he is far more impressive than what he's doing in this film, but Chan is still bedazzling at half the pace. A group of terrorist kill his daughter and the old man is on the loose trying to find the names of the men who did it, of which his focus is mostly on the man he thinks has the names, the head of the IRA played by Pierce Brosnan, who's working once again with director Martin Campbell who directed him in Golden Eye.

With Brosnan on broad, you can feel a little pressure coming off of Jackie's overall performance in his first dramatic leading role in a western movie. Brosnan is the focus of a subplot about a once terrorist trying to keep his now good name. His support picks up all the slack in the film, and allows Jackie to say very little and let his actions speak louder, making him very entertaining

It's enough of the Jackie we know so it does not isolate us and enough of a different side of Chan we don't see, and he pulls it off.

http://cinemagardens.com/
0 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
6/10
Wow! another Chucky movie!!
8 October 2017
Loved how sick and psychotic this it started out. After the events of Curse of Chucky, you would have thought Andy, the kid from the original movie would have been done with his good guy doll ( I would have assumed it's been over with him since Bride of Chucky since he was not in it, but...). The problem is that he's still being hunted by the ghost of Charles Lee Ray.

But just like with the start of Bride, the Chucky era of this slasher film franchise puts Andy as a back story to Nica, played by Fiona Dourif (Who happens to be Brad Dourif's daughter (You know, the guy who plays the voice of Chucky in all the movies (That's got to be a record for slashers, right?). Nica who was in the last movie returns and was put in a insane asylum because everyone (including herself) believes that she made up the fact that a toy from the 80s was a killing machine, but of course we know the truth, especially when Chucky comes after her, and like with Bride of, he's not alone (Sort of)

One of the factors of not using the title Child's Play anymore and sticking with the Chucky titles is pointing out the sure camp that Chucky has become. No longer scary or met to be scary, the movies are fully fun to watch. Adding to the fun is the a fact that Chucky's doing his killing in a confined space like a loony bin filled with, what's on the surface, seems like helpless victims but deep inside are just as derange as the monster itself.

Cult of Chucky seems to focus on this factor a lot more. The actual killing is inventive but not as awesome as I would expect of a Slasher from the 80s (A bit of a mix of modern special effects with not so interesting characters). It's got a psychological thriller edge to it that makes it a better movie than any of the slasher horror parts, but Chucky can still horrify you in the most demented way possible. After all, it's a doll on a murderous rampage.

So not a bad entry in the Chucky titled era of the Child' Play film franchise. It's more for fans of the series which is great in this day of nostalgia, very trivial,  but a lot of fun.

http://cinemagardens.com/
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
loading
An error has occured. Please try again.