Change Your Image
Upload An Image
Crop And Save
ListsAn error has ocurred. Please try again
Jonah could have done better but he did good enough
The main problem I have with the movie is that Hill doesn't get what type of movie this is. It's supposed to be a character study and a coming of age story. He chose to focus on teaching the audience the point of some stuff rather than building the characters and using their actions to prove points Hill himself wants to make. Lucas Hedges in this movie is the most underused actor in any movie ever and he could have increased this movie's rating by 2 stars but hey.
I enjoyed the touching relatable moments and the performances but most characters are underwritten and I think the movie fails to realize what it should have focused on.
Absolutely everything one would want from an animated Spider-Man movie
This one is a complete home run. I'm pretty sure that the praise for this movie will be positively one-sided and for very good reason.
Quickly touching on the negative . Like there's only two things I didn't like about this movie. The first is the narrative cliche's found in every super hero movie ever so its not a big fault but it happens and it annoys me but only ever so slightly. The second is when a character learns a particular skill set just by deciding he wants to be good at it, its an unconvincing way to further the story and a pretty lazy one.
But all that is only about 5% of the whole movie. The rest is an absolute overload of the senses in a very very good way.
I don't want to mention the characters in this movie because some of them might surprise you so all of them worked and all of them were fantastic.
The movie is crazy funny, and its funny in a way that is actually refreshing in modern blockbusters. Its funny without being political. CONGRATULATIONS you didn't make any politically charged jokes that are one sided in a big budget Sony movie. I hope this new trend continues where jokes aren't politicized in movies.
The voice acting is spot on from everyone, don't want to mention names as some might be a surprise.
I find the story to be almost on par with everyones favorite Spider-Man stories (Rami) in terms of quality, mainly because all the central themes and character morality are there in the story. Power, responsibility and all that jazz. It isn't empty like in the Amazing Spider-Man .
The thing that surprised me most about this movie (aside from how genuinely funny it is) is how much emotion there is at it's core. Family, friends and sacrifice are a huge undertone of the movies core message.
The main thing I took away from the film is the visuals. Holy every god ever this movie is gorgeous as hell. The most gorgeous in recent memory, and certainly my personal favorite visuals in an animated movie ever.
First Man (2018)
The best Apollo movie by far
Damien has boldly gone where... to be honest quite a bit of people have gone before. But he brings such gravitas to the events that unfold prior to the part of the story that most filmmakers focus on, one could even say that First Man is the BEST Apollo mission movie ever made. Hurwitz hasn't outdone himself like with is effort in La La Land (which was perfect), but his droning score can take many light-hearted turns in unexpectedly tranquil situations... adding brevity to certain scenes. The little dialogue that there is in this film is performed by everyone very well, however Ryan Gostling sometimes feels detached from everything else. Almost as if he is about to leave world. There are some moments where I was saying to myself "there is no way Neil was this cold in this particular emotional situation in real life".His performance is brilliant but It felt too dramatic for me. But that is such a minor flaw that holds this film from pure greatness. The visuals are stunning, I only noticed one vfx shot even though I'm sure there were tons. The vfx complement the cinematography in a satisfying way, and the film grain effect gave an authentic feel about the time period. Damien is definitely one of the best directors working at the moment and at such a young age I am intensely eager to see more of his work.
Eighth Grade (2018)
I could not relate to the film in any way but it is decent
First of all I love Bo's stand up work very very much and now I am a fan of him as a director. Not so much as a writer.
I thought about it a bit and I'm pretty sure the reason why I didn't like this film is because I could not relate to it in any way. I am currently in College and I can safely say that I never had social anxiety, depression and in general I was never awkward. So maybe I'm not biased enough to like this movie, or maybe its just badly written.
Bo's directing is actually pretty good. The scene that opened my eyes and made me say "Boy Bo knows how to move a camera" was the close-up to wide pan scene involving a pool. He doesn't have his own style yet, his directing is more of a series of "directing tricks" to make people go "oh he's a good director" but hey, fooled me.
Elsie Fisher was actually the best part of this movie. She was given a tough role because of some pretty cringe-worthy scenes she needed to perform. The film would be pretty bad without her.
The writing. Ah the writing. I'm very sad to say that the writing is pretty bad. The way the scenes are written is fine, but the dialogue is very often full of clichés and suffers from the "teen movie dialogue" syndrome. Again, maybe it's just not targeted at people like me, who enjoyed school, but very little of the dialogue is believable. I know that some movies that try to convey messages don't need to or just shouldn't have super believable, real life, Manchester by the Sea dialogue, but if you're trying to make a movie about teens in school and want to convey a message about being yourself then the dialogue should be believable. 0.001% of teens in school have conversations like most of the ones that take place in the film. That doesn't mean that the things that happen in the movie aren't realistic, just the dialogue. Writers need to stop making montages of teens using social media. We get it. People are on social media too much. Whenever people watch a scene where characters who are obviously over using social media use social media they watch it thinking "Yea hahaha stupid movie character, you're stupid for using stupid social media you stupid person ahahah" and feel this huge moral pleasure for no reason because THEY ARE EXACTLY THE SAME. Almost everyone uses social media these days and most people do it way too much but WE GET IT. WE'VE SEEN 10000 OTHER MOVIES OR SKITS OR INFORMATIVE ANTI ADDICTION VIDEOS THAT SHOW US THE SAME THING. STOP ADDING MONTAGES OF PEOPLE USING SOCIAL MEDIA TOO MUCH AS A WAY OF CRITIQUING IT. Same thing with scenes of the main character talking to a character that is considered to be a "mean bit** character" but the mean character is looking constantly at his/her phone. Its so so overused.
Alright now the story. The main problem with the story I have is the journey the character takes from the beginning to the end. What I took from the conclusion is that even though people around her don't like her, its because they are bad and not her, oh yea and she should also be herself, also every man on the planet sucks. (What is up with the modern movie trend of making every male character in a movie an idiot, a perv, a creep, a weirdo or a hot stupid guy that is also a perv but the main character likes her type-character). I get that people should be themselves and that some people have a hard time doing it, but I didn't find this to be a satisfying story at all. She didn't have a real arc in the world that is written. She just had a introspective character arc by... I guess "accepting herself" or something. It's again, an overused narrative cliché and I thought Bo was better than this. Nothing about the story was new or exciting or fascinating in any way.
Bo tried really hard to make the audience cringe, and he succeeded. Not much to add there. I cringed. And everyone will. Why? Because it's cringy. BOOM 90 META-SCORE.... NO! You cannot just make characters say GUCCI and LIT and get praise because you are a genius at cringe comedy. Its not comedy. Its just cringy. Writing characters that say GUCCI and LIT frequently without any comedy is AS BAD as actually un-ironically saying Gucci and lit frequently. It doesn't serve as a plot device, it doesn't serve to show a character trait, it doesn't serve to do anything but make people cringe for no reason. The "cringe" in this movie is to comedy what cheap jump-scares are to horror movies.
On one hand this movie has a few things going for it but mostly its just a bunch of cliches and it makes me cringe for no particular reason. I expected more from Bo.
The Nun (2018)
Technically decent, narratively ridiculous and unconvincing
The Nun is another chapter in the marvel cin
... conjuring cinematic universe that for some reason keeps expanding.
The jumpscare plagued, unexplained and way too over the top plot is such a waste due to the fact that technically, this movie is the best in the conjuring universe.
The cgi, production design, cinematography and the haunting soundtrack are all very very decent. However none of this can make up for the nonsensical satanic mess that this movie turned out to be. Virtually completely non frightening, the Nun itself as a presence loses its ominousness very early into the second act. It is always shown in the same way as in the trailer. A creepy choir and a floating nun. It gets very boring after a while, and even when the atmosphere starts to seem somewhat decent, you get taken out of it even more when the misplaced and useless comic relief character opens his mouth.
The acting is mostly passable but the actors aren't given much to work with in the first place. Most of this film is just a continuous barrage of "scary", meaningless scenes that add up to nothing but cheap jumpscsres.
As a part of the conjuring universe it does NOT IN ANY WAY explain the origins of the Nun. The only thing it does for the universe is set up a sequel and another possible prequel.
Deadpool 2 (2018)
Littered with hilarious jokes and no fourth wall whatsoever
Making a good sequel is hard. Making a brilliant one is even harder. Making Deadpool 2 must have been insanely hard then because this movie is a home run in almost every aspect.
Since there is only one negative thing I have to say about this movie I'll get it right out of the way. A lot of the cgi was visibly very bad. Surprisingly bad actually. I have no idea if it was ironic or not but its really not that big of a flaw.
Ok so positive stuff: The movie was absolutely stomach-pain-inducingly funny. There are moments in this movie where the whole theater was screaming from laughter. I didn't notice a single joke that fell flat. Of course some are either low brow or just not as good but none of them were horribly cringy or in general bad. Ryan gives, yet again, another perfect portrayal of the merc with the mouth. Born for it , literally. Josh Brolin was a absolute blast as cable as well. Layered performance and actually well written character.
I think this movie works best with someone who watches lots of movies, follows pop culture (particularly marvel (and heck even some dc) movies). The references are at least 60% of the humor along with the hilarious slapstick and visual comedy.
All of the characters are great, the standout being Domino. Not because of the performance as much as just the brilliantness of the idea of a lucky superhero.
The movie is action packed with a lot of hilarious visual comedy as well as plenty of gore and limbs to satisfy the R rated hungry Deadpool fans.
The movie has some seriousness to it too, not only being 100% wacky like the first Deadpool. The writers actually injected some emotion and "family connection" into the movie and it all worked very well.
Please do yourself a favor and stay until the after credits (of which there are two, just don't miss them).
Fantastic sequel and probably the funniest movie I have seen in a while. 9.5/10
Ready Player One (2018)
I usually like reviewing but I'm going to keep it short because I don't want to talk about this garbage longer than I need to.
The only reason the movie isn't a 1 for me is because it had decent cgi in some sequences and there were some "cool" scenes involving a monkey and Kubrick.
Sheridan was horrible (so was the rest of the cast I just don't feel like googling their names). The story was absolutely horrible. So many deus ex machinas, so many illogical and forced plot points, overly prolonged run time, bad cgi, littered with cringe moments. If it was advertised as a kids movie it would be half decent but it isn't. The references didn't work at all and I myself play my fair share of games.
This movie is literally what it sounds like. A movie a bout video games made by a guy thats 70.
Skip it its really really bad.
Black Panther (2018)
Boring, over-political, tech fuzed mess
My god are superheroes becoming one sided and formulaic. Ryan Coogler seems to be good at recycling the most typical structure of a marvel superhero movie because he really missed a huge opportunity to make a good fun action packed flick. What we got instead was a boring, typical, overly technological and overly political deus ex machina fest of an attempt to make a marvel movie.
Boring characters plague this movie. The main character played by Boseman is really really boring and his "son of a king" arc can be found in any other similar character. Its really boring to see. Michael Jordan is the exaggerated villain who is bad cause being bad is bad and he is bad and revenge and badness. We really shouldn't judge a movie based on how much we agree with its politics. Any movie that should not be political that is lowers the quality of its own story by pandering to one particular mindset.
The cgi was at times too much and too bad for its own good. Technology is used very cheaply to get characters we are supposed to love out of sticky, impossible to survive situations and its really pathetic.
Typical, boring and overly political for a superhero movie 4/10
I, Tonya (2017)
An acting driven biopic with little else going for it
I, Tonya is quite a mixed bag. The subject matter is pretty difficult for any writer or director to take on so it isn't surprising that the film falls flat in every area except acting (mostly) because neither the writer or director have shown themselves to be capable of tackling such a difficult subject.
The movie isn't really bad it is just a very standard biopic with less than stellar writing and exceptional acting in most cases. Margot Robbie deserves to be mentioned as someone who is showing to be a very good leading lady in drama, however I didn't believe the character of Tonya Harding in the film and I thought she was written poorly. Margot's acting was fine considering what was written for her, but the character wasn't written as "white trash-charming" as she should have been.
Allison Janney is marvelous as the harsh and unforgiving mother of Tonya. Her performance was believable and her character was very well written so I guess you could say that she was the real star of this movie. She was the only character in the movie that fit perfectly.
Sebastian Stan was fine. I didn't hate his character and that's bad. His character wasn't written correctly at all but again, the actor did fine with what he was given.
The movie sometimes does not know what it wants to be, editing wise. It has some pretty weird choices that I was able to follow but really shouldn't have needed to. In the beginning it has an interview style, then it goes away, then comes back again, then goes away and so on. Its just annoying and it should have been written as a standard biopic. The second half of the movie that focuses on "the incident" is tedious and annoying and not what needs to be seen when talking about Tonya Harding. At no point in the movie except when Tonya said it , did I feel how important skating is for her.
This movie could have been way better and I blame the writer and director for its mediocrity. Margot and Allison did a wonderful job, Allison especially, and I'd consider both of them an awards contender. 5.4/10
Blade Runner 2049 (2017)
Sequel better than the original (short)
Denis Villeneuve's new film Blade Runner 2049 is nothing short of ... just downright amazing. Everything about this movie is practically perfectly executed from the gripping and fluid performances to the color infused cinematography to the powerful soundtrack and sound design the film practically never skips a beat. The only flaw that wasn't really even a flaw in my opinion was that some scenes dragged for quite a while but I believe that the slow camera work was intended.
The film has everything that made the philosophical original (final cut) a flawed masterpiece just it has everything the original was lacking.
Gostling fit perfectly for the role of 'K', being emotionless but so full of emotion. Sylvia Hoeks was someone very worthy of a mention, giving an effectively eerie performance. Jared Leto as always is intensively remarkable and glued my eyes to the screen in each and every scene. Harrison gave one of the best and most emotional performances I have seen in his career.
Now Hans Zimmer again blew me away completely. I got chills every 30 seconds when the cinematography and the score perfectly intertwined into an extraordinary absorbing symphony that makes the world of Blade Runner so real despite how unimaginable it actually is.
Terrifying and gross in the best possible way
I walked into this movie with a heavy fear of clowns. I was very hesitant to see it despite my huge love for horror movies. I can safely say that this is one of the best horror films of the 2000's.
First and foremost this movie is SCARY. It is very very scary. Bill Skarsgård was a perfect Pennywise. The cinematography, sound mixing, music, makeup and performances were spot on when it comes to a horror movie. The child actors are all highly commendable for their performances. Jump scares are present but masterfully utilized whenever they occur. On a technical level, as previously mentioned the cinematography and visuals all contribute to the overall terror of the movie and are very well executed. The dialogue between the kids is funny and believable. The tone of the film jumps a lot between horrifying, happy, sad, playful and just plain weird but nothing ever felt out of place. The story and the characters had a brilliant flow throughout the entire run time.
"It" is a horror movie from start to finish and it didn't have a single dull moment in my opinion because I was in constant fear and anticipation for the next time Pennywise or his other spawns will be on screen. 9/10
A short review with a longer explanation of why its OK that this movie didn't have any "characters"
Dunkirk is, in my opinion, yet another masterpiece from mastermind Christopher Nolan. Since everything that is brilliant about the film has already been said I will briefly write what I think of the film and also touch on a topic that some people are criticizing the movie for.
The fantastically directed film is told from 3 perspectives non chronologically. It superbly tackles the narrative and the non linear story doesn't at all pull you away from the intensity of the events happening on screen that don't stop from 00:00 to the last scene. Hans Zimmer most likely gives one of the most fitting scores for a war film ever. Sometimes there is only one note playing followed by heartbeat sounds and a ticking clock while other times a massive orchestra is interpreting what is going on on screen. The movie brilliantly projects the feeling of each and every soldier on the beach to the audience. Confusion, turmoil and fear. The cinematography was breathtaking and I felt anxious throughout most of the run time. There is no lead in this film and I can't really say anyone stuck out as giving a brilliant performance because it wasn't needed and I'll explain why.
The biggest criticisms of Dunkirk that I've heard of so far are that the characters are lacking in depth and that we aren't given anything to be invested in them. I feel like Nolan was trying (successfully) to make the audience care for each and every one of the men on the beach. He needed to have some form of "main characters" to be in the story so that we can see the events unfold from the direct perspective of all of the soldiers. Usually in war films (I'll use saving private Ryan as an example) the plot revolves around certain soldiers (like Cpt. Miller and Ryan) being in a war and doing things in the war but its still about THEM not THE WAR as much. In my opinion Dunkirk is a telling the STORY OF DUNKIRK. Not of Harry Style's character or Tom Hardy's character but of Dunkirk. What any of the "main characters" felt, every other soldier felt. Nolan resorted more to film-making techniques to tell the story rather than dialogue and that is why some people might have had a problem with the lack of character depth but realistically this type of terrible event wouldn't be a place for someone to "develop" as a character but rather a event where MEN WANTED ONLY SURVIVAL, and Nolan showed that perfectly. As for what the top review of Dunkirk on IMDb says about 'lack of emotion' in the film, I believe this to be a completely incorrect statement. Maybe he was referring to the lack of 'brotherhood amongst men' or the feeling of moral or something epic like that. Again the longing for the 'Saving Private Ryan' format of war films. What the reviewer fails to see is that realistically there was NO emotion on that beach besides fear and confusion. And I can safely say that Nolan and Zimmer and the DP all successfully gave us those feelings.
Wonder Woman (2017)
Pretty good DC movie, pretty average movie
I didn't have expectations for this movie walking into it. I did see the 96% score on RT but it didn't make a difference because I was fairly sure it was the whole "feminism" thing that propelled the score. There is no way this movie was going to be better than movies like Shawshank or La La Land or any high rated Marvel movie. In short it isn't but its a fairly competent movie. My biggest problem with the movie is the "formulaicness" of it. It seems like it is just following the superhero movie formula. Especially the way the third act was realized. My second biggest problem is the huge miscast of the villain (not the general but the other one). The actor that plays him (who I will not mention cause it's a spoiler) is great in general but he didn't fit this role at all. Some jokes that are completely directed towards men are a bit forced. Some are pretty funny though. Some of the action scenes were overflowing with slow motion which is epic and grand for the first 10 seconds but then it becomes too much and it stops being a film technique and starts being a gimmick. There are quite a few action scenes that felt a bit wonky in the choreography area and cgi area. There are moments in this movie that I can only describe as cheesy. I hate the word when it comes to film but it really works here. In general the flaws make this movie a flick and it would be a bad one if it weren't for the good qualities. Gal Gadot is great. I liked her portrayal even though she is in no way revolutionary, she can fall flat sometimes in the film when it comes to facial expressions and conveying emotion. In my opinion Chris Pine steals the show when it comes to character arc and acting. His character was the funniest and most charming in the film and maybe in all of dc's films. There is a decision that the writers decided to make for Pines character at the very end of the movie that delighted me because it doesn't usually happen in these types of superhero movies. Or even movies in general as a matter of fact. Good on them. Bremner, Taghmaoui and Rock play sidekicks to Pine's character and all of them did their job well. The main villain was fine and so was the other one. The story was fine, the action was mostly fine, the cinematography was a bit more than fine, the effects were mostly fine and the acting was great. There are more fines than greats in this movie so that's why I'm giving it a lower rating than others. Mainly because this film is just competent. Not brilliant.
I do not know what these people are writing, this movie is terrible
Pirates of the Caribbean, Dead men tell no tales or Salazar's revenge apparently, is a terrible fifth installment to the already declining in quality franchise that should return to its roots before it kills itself.
The main character, Jack Sparrow, has been reduced to a series of cheap slapstick and sexual innuendos. What bothered me most is that he isn't clever anymore. His wits, or as they say in the movie, his "luck" has run out. In previous installments Jack got out of tough situations using skills and cleverly planned out (or spontaneous) methods of escape that involve his surroundings. Now it is all just random dumb slapstick luck. His "jokes" are cringe worthy and very hard to listen to with exceptions that are very scarce.
The two new characters that are designed to replace Elisabeth and Will aren't as likable and don't really have any arcs. That's literally all I can say about them.
The first out of two things that the movie has going for it is Javier Bardem's character. Not his story or his arc but his acting and appearance.
The plot is full of holes relating to the previous movies and it has some really weird decisions throughout. In general it is very cheesy.
The second and final thing that the movie has that is redeemable are the effects. They are spectacular in some scenes. That's it. The rest of this movie is quite bad. Maybe enjoyable for children.
Alien: Covenant (2017)
Very divided opinion on whether this movie is good or not
Alien: Covenant has many good qualities, a few brilliant qualities and quite a few very bad qualities.
I'll start with the good qualities.
This film fully succeeds in being a horror movie in most cases even though sometimes the movie is tonally unsure if it wants to be an eerie atmospheric sci/fi horror or an action movie. Some scenes in the movie are visually disgusting (which I thoroughly enjoyed) and quite scary, containing a lot of suspense and thrills. The "chase" and action scenes have all of the above qualities. The Alien(s) in general are utilized enjoyably.
Atmosphere is most of the time achieved quite spectacularly. Particularly in the (no spoilers) first encounters, as well as later stages in the movie where suspense should be the primary focus.*(I will insert some bad qualities into this section later)*
Michael Fassbender's character(s) are phenomenally portrayed and he steals the show with each scene. Particularly the ones involving (no spoilers) a flute.
And finally, like almost every one of Scott's movies, the film is beautiful.
Now the bad qualities *(Continuing the suspense topic as well as the tonal confusion)* In the parts where the movie is, as previously mentioned, tonally confused, the movie takes a turn from being a horror movie to an action movie which posts a glaring problem to the story structure of the film as well as the previously mentioned atmospheric qualities.
It makes me sad that most of the characters in this film are as bad as in Prometheus (which I personally found to be a garbage film). The only standout is Fassbender and in some cases Katherine Waterston (only sometimes) even though I really didn't like that the films try to make Daniels Ripley 2.0 because it miserably fails at that.
The rest of the characters are obviously expandable and utterly boring. The only thing that was fun about them was watching them die.
Some things in the story make absolutely NO sense. Like in Prometheus but that film as a whole made no sense. A lot of questions I had about Prometheus are left unanswered, and yes I know "MORE SEQUELS ARE ON THE WAY".
Not only are questions left unanswered but some of the characters in the movie are really just plain stupid. It baffles me that "Professional scientists" go onto an uncharted planet without any form of body protection. There are at least 50 of these types of stupid and un explainable decisions that the characters make. (Splitting up in a unfamiliar place, peeking where peeking shouldn't occur, not isolating what or who should be isolated etc.)
In general the film is a big mess even though I can safely say that I was entertained during a good chunk of the run time .
La La Land (2016)
It's very obvious that this movie is made with the utmost passion for both films and music. I found this movie to be enthralling and perfect. I cannot specify how much I loved this movie. Did I mention that I loved this movie... well I do. Unlike a lot of people I talk to I have no problems with musicals and I quite like them. I'm going to make this short and sweet and try to list all the perfect things about this movie.
Since it's a musical I feel I should mention that the songs, singing and dancing were absolutely flawless in execution. I especially adored "Fools who dream".
I am a huge fan of both leads and in my opinion this was a career best performance by the gorgeous Emma Stone and another brilliant performance by Gostling. Their chemistry was 100% believable and they were very "cute" together.
The plot itself focuses a lot on passion and dedication to that passion. It tries to make people want to achieve their goals and follow their dreams in an active way.
Directing and cinematography were absolutely beautiful. I was born in L.A. so this movie made me very nostalgic and it showed the sort of "artistic" side of L.A. and I loved it.
It is a gripping experience but I would recommend watching this with a significant other. 11/10
Rogue One (2016)
Disappointing but fun
So why disappointed and why fun. I'll start with fun. The action is thrilling and well executed, the effects are near perfect if not perfect. The fan pleasing was on point.
Disappointing because those are the best part of the movie.
I thought the script was a bit lackluster and that the characters were a bit dull. With exceptions of course (K2-SO the funny droid).
I did like Felicitie's character too but I do dislike the whole "forcing female characters" that Disney seems to be doing. The first and part of the second act is basically "Hey here is a character, hey here is a character, hey here is a location..." and they were cool at times but I did find some of them to be useless and dull.
Some Deus Ex Machinas were a bit annoying as well. I feel like this movie was entirely avoidable but nonetheless I think the average movie goer and non hardcore star wars fans will have a blast but the rest I'm afraid might find it a bit disappointing. Still enjoyable and I do recommend watching it. 6.3
Not for everyone
I'm not going to try to explain the movie but I will warn people who plan on watching it.
I did NOT understand the movie fully upon watching it the first time and very few people will. I know people say "a movie isn't good if you can't understand it while watching it" but I disagree. I watched many explanation videos and after watching I realized how brilliant this psychological drama is.
I appreciate slow paced movies even but people who don't might find this movie tedious.
I recommend watching the movie, watching an explanation video or reading an article and finally re-watch the movie.
We Are Your Friends (2015)
Short review (awful)
The movie is horrible ... It is an insult to producers and people who like movies. (I can say from experience as a producer). DO NOT WATCH THIS MOVIE. It is completely useless and it just shows things that do not need to be shown. The acting is less than stellar (horrible), the plot is horrible, the "DJing" is NOT DJing and the only reason you should watch this is if you are younger than Zac Efron and consider him attractive. If you like DJ's or EDM in any way DO NOT WATCH THIS because it gives an inaccurate view of what DJ's do. Cole (the main character) says that all you need to be a DJ is a laptop, A LITTLE BIT OF TALENT, and a track and you are done. Completely untrue and poorly written. I guess it could be attractive to people who don't know anything about EDM or DJ's. Poorly written, executed, poor acting, poor knowledge from the producers and writers about THE MOVIES TOPIC and all around not watchable . The movie is also filed with bad clichés and soooo much product placement. F-----