My Take on Film Criticism

the seven tips to becoming the greatest teen movie critic, in my opinion

---

By: Keaton Marcus

How to critique and view a film has been a hotly debated topic for a long, long time and I’m not the first to cover the subject. From objectivity and subjectivity, whether to throw ratings on your reviews, whether to write or speak, to the debacle of respecting other people’s opinions. Our modern society throws tomatoes at films they don’t understand and calls them pretentious, and some people value their own takes as facts instead of the opinions that they are. It’s also been said that YouTube critics shouldn’t be considered “real reviewers”, and then we have the dilemma on whether aggregator websites should exist, such as Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic. There’s so much to cover in just one article, and I hope readers will find some sort of point that relates personally to them without getting lost in this hot mess of a piece. I am simply praying that anyone can find some sort of relevance or meaning in it, and I also desire that they respect whatever I put out there, no matter how nonsensical it could seem to them.

---

1. Opinions and Facts

Perhaps the best place to start this thing off is to clarify the differences between opinion and fact, which also relates to the slew of social media trolls looking to curb-stomp any sequel trilogy lover. Next month I’ll have articles galore defending that Star Wars trilogy, but let’s stay on topic. In our wonderful little world, folks think that their opinions mean absolute fact, and that anyone who disagrees with them shall be murdered in cold blood. Whether someone doesn’t hate a film as much as they do, or doesn’t enjoy a movie as much as they do, this person is automatically wrong. The thing is, that simply cannot be true. Just because you value something dearly does not mean someone else is obliged to. Reverting back to the sequel trilogy, the Star Wars fanbase have really shown their true colors in the past few years, especially when The Last Jedi hit theaters. I’ll save most of my thoughts for next month on this, but I do want to clarify that other people can have their own opinions. The detest and disgust that Rian Johnson, Kelly Marie Tran and even Daisy Ridley have received sickens me even though I am able to respect people that absolutely despise this film. This is called respectfully disagreeing, which is a term that everyone who has any sort of relationship with cinema should know. As a film lover, you’re completely encouraged to disagree and start a friendly debate with people who have opposite opinions, but it doesn’t mean you’ve got to get hateful or resentful.

2. subjectivity and objectivity

This leads me right along to my next argument on subjectivity and objectivity in cinema, and why it’s important to see the stark contrasts between the two terms. Principally, subjectivity means creating an opinion on something based on personal feelings and interpretations (Hobbs & Shaw is the greatest film ever made). On the other hand, objectivity relates to the concept of not letting those very thoughts get in the way of putting down a rating or simply writing some thoughts down. In my opinion, I believe that a critic cannot have too much objectivity in their reviews, and cannot allow an overload of subjectivity either. Why? Well, I do believe that subjectivity should be somewhat present because you’re the one writing about this film, and you want to let readers know what you think without any bias. However, if personal opinions get too prominent, it can cause issues similar to the ones in the previous paragraph. Your opinion can become a little too passionate (Brad Pitt should have won Best Actor for Ad Astra). It also can make your reviews seem solely based on the enjoyment factor rather than actual quality filmmaking. For example, am I entertained by Mission: Impossible? Yes. Is it better cinema than Portrait of a Lady on Fire? Absolutely not. For different people this take could be utter blasphemy, but just remember, it’s my personal opinion. In direct contrast to this, letting too much objectivity in reviews can lead to writing thoughts down for the love of cinema feel like chores. I always love to praise movies for having fantastic action sequences that entertain, and it gives me more enjoyment while writing essay-length reviews. If I solely graded cinema based on if the performances were Oscar-worthy, or the cinematography was mind-blowing, or the direction was groundbreaking, I simply can’t have any fun. I definitely do take in to consideration if these factors are present in the movie I’m watching, but I also know how to grade a high-octane action movie on its own merits without hammering it with invalid criticisms. Again, this is my take.

3. the duty of grading

Additionally, then there is always the task of putting paragraphs upon paragraphs of potentially detailed thoughts, and chucking them under a few digits. While it is absolutely essential to have a grading scale, whether it’s from A+ to F, 100-0, 10-o, or fresh tomato to rotten splat, you’ve got to have it. The real troubles arrive when you’ve come to realize that you grade mindless fun such as Extraction on the same scale as a cinematic masterpiece like Blade Runner 2049 or The Godfather Part II. It maddens you that Chris Hemsworth drivel could even be on the same level as a Denis Villeneuve Oscar-winner, and I completely understand what you’re thinking. In terms of solutions, you could always literally make up different grading scales for the many different types of movies, but that may get a little convoluted and irritating for the core audience. Instead, I recommend getting on with it, and maybe putting a little note if necessary on how you’re grading the film. Furthermore, we simply can’t grade a comedy differently to a serious drama just because of the type of genre that it lands in. Borat Subsequent Moviefilm is a masterpiece of the genre despite not being a flawless film in itself. Ex Machina is a masterclass in cinema, on the other hand. All of this can sound confusing and overly intricate as well, but I essentially do not agree with the fact that we have to give genres their own rating scale only based on the fact that if they make you laugh, cry or think. This is a flawed system undoubtedly, but one that is ultimately crucial to reviews.

Why is this? Because it creates some sort of connection between the critic and the reader. Audiences get an overall picture into the opinions of their favorite movie reviewer. Our website uses the grading scale out of 100 with no specific reason behind it, just because we like the look of it. But one thing we do have a reason for is actually giving it a score. Tedious and undeniably flawed as it may be, it accomplishes these simple goals…Exchanging opinions between the two. Also, for people who hate reading 1000 words may find it useful to get an overall gist of the movie by glancing at a rating right at the top. It may be a bit of a put-down to realize that some folks just want a numerical score rather than spend 25 minutes or so reading your work, but if you want a big audience, you’ve got to take every possibility into consideration. Remember, the customer is always right.

4. should you listen to rotten tomatoes?

Websites that have been dubbed “review aggregators” have been around for decades. This all started with Rotten Tomatoes, a site that grades movies based on the collective reviews of critics. Their staff basically looks for different reviews on the web from sites like The New York Times or The Hollywood Reporter, and slaps them under a rating from 0-100 paired with a symbol that’s either Rotten or Fresh. This is shown either with a fresh tomato or a green splat, indicating the quality of the movie. Remember back to the potential scenario I explained when a person could be perfectly content with simply reading a rating? This website is flawlessly designed for those people. On the other hand, it seems pre-mature to classify potentially hundreds of detailed reviews under one score. It can be a solid tool to see the consensus of the critics if you want to see an acclaimed movie, but I personally prefer to read individual reviews from sources I trust. I follow this process because the most trustworthy aspect of Rotten Tomatoes is its average rating, which actually calculates the overall score of the reviews collected instead of just basing a score on how many positive and negative reviews it has received. However, this system is a fundamental failure in another way…Not all critics throw a score on their articles. In fact, a lot of them don’t, which makes it far less trustworthy and poorly conceived. So, in my opinion, it depends on the type of film enthusiast whether to trust review aggregator websites. The best thing to do perhaps is to go into watching a film with an open mind, and I’ll get into that next.

The only thing I prefer more to reading individual reviews is heading into the cinema without any information. Especially with the biggest movies like Avengers: Endgame, I refrain from even glancing at the Rotten Tomatoes score. I watch all the trailers and formulate my level of excitement. Pretend Endgame received a 25% “Rotten” score on the website, and you looked at the results immediately after the embargo lifts. Your spirit and excitement for the film would obviously drop substantially, right? Of course it would. Basically every MCU fan was absolutely pumped for the movie. It would also negatively affect the box office results. Unfortunately, to really head in with a clear mind, you’ve got to resist the temptation to look at reviews and go with the flow. Then, upon viewing it, you can form your own opinion. This, for me, is the most beautiful thing about being a critic or a film lover.

5. smart or pretentious?

I will also do the duty of covering the word pretentious, which is a word many have grown to love putting in their reviews because of a film’s self-indulgence. The actual word pretentious in cinema means attempting to impress audiences that you have greater talent than is actually possessed. Basically, it’s a filmmaker showing off their stuff when it isn’t all that impressive while thinking it really is. You could call it bragging in a way, and I’m not going to deny that there are films that do it. However, labeling a film this just because of its complexity shouldn’t be considered alright, especially if the director actually has some talent. Remember, there isn’t anything wrong with showing off if you’ve got serious skill. For example, Charlie Kaufman’s I’m Thinking of Ending Things was praised by many critics, but it split audiences because of its unconventional approach to studying the human mind, and that bothered them. I lauded it as the best film this year, and it has landed in my top 20 films of all-time, but general moviegoers didn’t seem to buy in. For the most part, this was due to them thinking that the film was nothing more than self-indulgent, irritatingly convoluted nonsense with no point to make. However, Kaufman is a legitimately excellent filmmaker, and the craft on display with this movie is too clear to deny. From the top-notch technical aspects such as cinematography and score, to the easily ramped up tension in scenes that normally would have none, and the delicate approach to covering a troubled man’s deepest desires all hooked me in. Again, I completely understand why some folks could think all the dazzling camera work was just to distract from the lack of substance or relatable characters, but I highly disagree.

On the other hand, I also had the burden of watching Luc Besson’s Lucy, which got by with decent reviews and massive box office numbers. The 90-minute action thriller about a woman, portrayed by Scarlett Johansson who finds her true brain potential and basically turns into a superhero marketed itself as a breakthrough in cinema. On the outside, Besson was telling audiences he was a genius and created the best science fiction film of all-time. On the surface it sure looked like that, but as you dug deeper and peeled the onion a little more, there was absolutely no substance underneath. It was a slick action thriller with solid performances, but nothing extra, nothing special. That’s what I would call pretentious, and it deeply infuriated me that anyone could think of this as a masterpiece of any sorts. Everything in it was simply ok, and there weren’t truly any stand-out aspects that I was in awe at. The difference between this, and say…Midsommar is that Ari Aster has clever ideas and good characters as well as a little self-indulgence. The thing is, the film itself deserves this little pat-on-the-back because it’s so damn good. Lucy, however, congratulates itself after Besson put in absolutely zero effort to make it any more than what the movie actually is: mindless fun. It’s almost like if the kid who got the participation medal was put on a higher pedestal than another person who won first place. Putting yourself higher than others with no skill is wrong, and that is a fact. But we can’t call every movie pretentious only because we don’t really understand it.

6. To write or to speak

For some obnoxious reason, people have put YouTube movie critics at a lower standard than ones that write their reviews. As a person who loves to jot down my thoughts, I’m here to tell you today that there is no right or wrong when it comes to the format. First of all, it needs to fit you as a person, and you have got to be comfortable while reviewing. I am an introvert, and I find it far more relaxing behind a screen instead of talking on YouTube, so I have created a website. Other people who love to interact, or are extroverted, might have the complete opposite view of things. This could lead them to wanting to start their own channel instead of writing on social media or on the web as I do. There are loopholes, however. You don’t have to show your face while recording a review, and can simply put clips or different visuals from the film instead of the alternative. Truly, our modern world has made it possible to do whatever the hell you want in creating content, and don’t let me lecture anyone or coerce anybody into doing something they’re not ok with.

Another aspect to cover about this is the literal limitations of writing a review instead of recording one. Sometimes, people really want to express feelings about a movie, and whether positive or negative, this can be extremely difficult to do using writing. If you’re more this type, it may feel constricting with the barriers of formality and complex language stopping you from getting truly personal. On the other hand, someone like me always strives to be as personal and intimate as possible while writing reviews, which has become somewhat of a rarity these days. The important thing is, both types of formats are equally fantastic as long as they support your needs as a film critic, and if they don’t, it’s really best to change as fast as possible. You’ve got to love sharing content just as much as you love cinema, and that’s final.

7. Judging a Movie on its own merits

This almost directly relates to my grading scale argument on whether you should have different criteria for the many genres out there, whether it’s comedy or drama. This more applies to noticing the overall strengths of the movie rather than tearing it piece-by-piece right after watching. For example, you wouldn’t judge Tropic Thunder on whether it has complex characters. That would apply to something like Nicolas Winding Refn’s Drive, a film that strives to create conflicts and intricacies within its protagonist. You would, however, critique the former on the laugh-out-loud factor. Was it hilarious or not? Were you consistently entertained? Judging a movie on its own merits is severely important to writing or recording a trustworthy review. Would I criticize a masterpiece of human madness such as Joker if it wasn’t lighthearted? Come on! No! It’s the exact same with something fun and comforting. Would I nail the lack of compelling drama in Pitch Perfect. Nah. See what I’m getting at here? Look at what touched you in the experience, whether it was funny, visually dazzling, tear-jerking or whatever. Then, of course, there’s the film with no merits: The Emoji Movie, but to hell with that, right?

In conclusion…

Now to bring these scattered thoughts to a close is the real challenge of writing this. I would say my main message in all of this is to be true to yourself while accepting other people’s opinions. Learn to balance objectivity and subjectivity in your criticism, and formulate your own opinions before looking at the Rotten Tomatoes reviews. Additionally, there is the cruciality of putting rating in reviews, judging a movie on its own strengths, and whether a film is smart or just plain pretentious. This may not be the most focused article, but I do think that each section somewhat has a connection with the previous ( I hope these seven key factors in becoming a generally well-rounded, respectful critic have helped you. And remember, this is only my take.

Drive: An Overlooked and Misjudged Movie That Polarized Audiences

Why Did this superbly-acted, technical Achievement ultimately fail with general audiences?

---

By: Keaton Marcus

Nicolas Winding Refn, a Danish director who made his bones with Bronson and Valhalla Rising, had his breakout movie when he made Drive in 2011. Starring Ryan Gosling and about a stunt driver being pulled into the aftermath of a heist gone wrong, critics absolutely loved the film, and it currently holds a 92% Rotten Tomatoes rating. In contrast to this, audiences took a more careful approach, with CinemaScore reporting a mediocre C- rating at the time of its release. After finally viewing it, I’m here to give my honest opinion of a film that was hammered by mis-marketing to the average moviegoer.

Right from the brilliantly shot and edited opening sequence, we’re introduced to “The Driver”, portrayed flawlessly by Gosling, who takes a slow ride down the especially dazzling backdrop of Los Angeles. This setting is used in many films, but the beauty of these popular cities are really taken for granted, and Refn makes full usage of it to set the scene. We quickly learn that he is a stunt driver for Hollywood, and lives a seemingly quiet and innocent life. However, he then meets Irene (Carrey Mulligan) and her son Benecio. Immediately, his facial expression changes from generally blank and uninterested to a heartwarming, childish smile. We learn that Irene’s husband, Standard (Oscar Isaac), is in jail and will get out in the meantime. He slowly gets more and more comfortable around Irene and Benecio, and the three characters grow an almost unbreakable friendship. Standard is then released, and introduced to Gosling’s character in an uncomfortable sequence. Immediately we know that these two can’t live in the same world because of the Driver’s newfound love for his wife. As our protagonist finds out that Standard owes crime lords Nino (Ron Perlman) and Bernie (Albert Rose) money, he’s pulled into a heist, motivated by keeping Irene and Benecio safe from harm.

Refn crafts this character gorgeously with his smart script, and Newton Thomas Sigel’s brilliant cinematography. From the subtle facial expressions from a perfectly cast Gosling, to the scorpion symbol on his jacket that expertly foreshadows to the end, and the rocky road to redemption, I was invested in every moment he was in. This is a deeply troubled man, and as he’s pulled deeper and deeper into committing brutal murders to save himself along with others, we see the slight changes in Gosling’s face indicating that he’s realized the extent of brutality. Although audiences don’t see him as a role model of any kind, he clearly desires redemption from his past sins, and wants to live a better life, perhaps with Irene. This is a character that has easily recognizable flaws as well as evoking sympathy from viewers, which is a rare achievement. In terms of other performances, Bryan Cranston is fantastic as usual portraying Shannon (Bryan Cranston), who’s The Driver’s boss. He’s a clear coward who basically ruins Gosling’s chances with Irene after telling Perlman’s character about her and Benecio, and although I despised him, I also kept in mind that this was due to Refn’s superb direction. Ron Perlman, Oscar Isaac and Albert Rose are all very solid in their supporting roles, and even the bad guys get some much-needed character development.

There’s great performances, the cinematography is top-notch, and all other technical aspects were absolutely immaculate, so what went wrong with the average ticket buyer? Trailers marketed this movie as an action-packed thrill ride recalling Fast & Furious with lots of fast cars, chases, and the attractive Ryan Gosling leading the thing. However, this is definitely not the type of film for someone who can’t appreciate anything else but big explosions. When the violence hits, it really goes all-out, and the action is still expertly crafted. The thing is, there are only about three of them, unlike what the general public were expecting. People who could see beyond fulfilling their constant action-heavy needs just stared in awe at the masterpiece that this was, but unfortunately, this isn’t the majority. That’s a major issue with action films and marketing today. The studio tried to make this a mainstream film, and that just didn’t work because it’s much more than that. It may seem tedious, pretentious and flat-out boring to the average filmgoer, but to me, that criticism isn’t really valid. Why? Because it is an experience that makes viewers think about more than excitement, riddled with hidden meanings that make for perfect analysis fuel. It’s arthouse cinema with touches of action at its utter finest, complete with several Oscar-worthy elements that were sadly snubbed, and if you can’t live with that, don’t see it.

Watching Arrival Again: The Complete Analysis of One of the Greatest in the Genre

Denis Villeneuve’s first sci-fi masterpiece is a master of foreshadowing, atmosphere, and melancholic beauty

---

By: Keaton Marcus

Although it’s actually Denis Villeneuve’s highest grossing movie to-date, I feel like Arrival is still far too under-appreciated for its own good. Readers will think I’m crazy, but upon re-watching it yesterday, I found it to be even better than in theaters, and in some moments greater than Blade Runner 2049, which is my number one favorite movie of all-time. Not overall, but in parts, this definitely could have taken that slot. From the beautiful and delicate treatment to grief and loss, to the immaculate cinematography, and a virtually perfect musical score, it’s quite difficult to find a single issue with it. That is why I’ve come here today to write an analysis on the film, basically explaining all the big plot points and judging them based on quality, or any hidden meanings that they may have.

In the beginning, Villeneuve hits us with a tragedy that’s so darn heart wrenching, and surprisingly, quite important to later in the movie. We see Louise, played by Amy Adams, living her life as a single mother with her one daughter, Hannah in a brief period of different montages. Eventually, we learn that Hannah has been diagnosed with cancer, and no treatment will help. While this powerful sequence could be considered a tad glossed over, as it runs for about one minute or two, it’s an undeniable emotional trigger without delving into the nitty gritty of it. The fact is, Villeneuve proves to us his versatility as a director. He makes slow-burn movies such as Incendies and Prisoners before plunging audiences in a fast paced adventure like Sicario, and then completely mixing the two with 2049, and ultimately, this. There’s an excellent mix of more reflective storytelling and exciting, suspenseful and thrilling sequences in this movie.

After the tragic death of Louise’s daughter, we fast forward into the future as she becomes a college professor. Again, the director wastes no time here, and tells audiences that there have been 12 “alien pods” that have landed in random parts of the world. Following an empty classroom the next day, she’s approached by Colonel Webber (Forrest Whitaker), who wants her to try and communicate with the aliens, see what their purpose is on Earth considering she’s an expert in communication. Naturally, she’s quite reluctant, but is eventually convinced. The next morning, she suits up to head to the base. Here, we get some of the most beautiful imagery I’ve ever witnessed in a science fiction film, and we’re not even at the most dazzling part. Instead of using the common UFO like in Close Encounters with the Third Kind, or even ET, Arrival uses something refreshingly unconventional for the alien spaceship. The transport has a “pod-like” shape of sorts, and it creates a far more ominous atmosphere in what could have been a generic shot.

What shot am I referencing? The first wide of the entire base, and the craft floating in mid-air slightly above the ground, which gave me such chills that it was almost ethereal. Not only that, but this is coupled with ghostly fog slowly encroaching upon the base, deepening the otherworldly feel of it all, and giving an unsettling sense of dread to what’s to come in the future. Take that Steven Spielberg flashy lights. We also get introduced to the other main character, Ian, portrayed by MCU actor Jeremy Renner. Immediately, due to the clever writing, audiences know what type of person he is from the get-go. He’s got a master in physics and isn’t afraid to show it as we get a sharp dialogue between the two that effortlessly uses contrast and juxtaposition to differentiate the two characters. Adams’ character believes that language is the cornerstone of all society, and Renner’s thinks science is. With almost no time at all, we get to know the new character, and how he feels with Louise’s opinions based on his background.

Then, she finds out that the entire decision on whether to be peaceful or not with the aliens rests on her, which gives a delightful sense of urgency and high stakes to the previously quiet movie. Basically, the two have a matter of days to find out their purpose on Earth before the US follows other countries such as China and Russia and go on the offensive side. An example of not fully appreciating the movie when first seeing it in theaters was failing to realize how brilliant the photography is in one of the next sequences. It’s when Louise and Ian finally enter the ship, and the props really go to cinematographer Bradford Young in the scene, because I truly haven’t seen shots like this in a long time. So, the two, along with some soldiers, head up using a moving platform before finding out that the entire entrance is zero gravity. The craft here is damn near impeccable, and my jaw physically dropped when watching. Honestly, my brain was in complete awe at Young’s ability.

After some thrilling imagery when our heroes float up to see these creatures, they’ve made it to the platform, and all the two can do is stare in awe. The contrast of the black coloring of the aliens, who are almost squid-like, have excellent results against the white, grey and bleak backdrop that they are in. Louise doesn’t get much information about the key question, but she names the aliens Abbott and Costello. Another thing that I forgot to mention is the fact that Young has mastered the haunting beauty of bleakness, which may not look like much at first, but you really grow to appreciate it. Everything looks very gritty and dirty, with color palette usage of blues, browns, grays, and milky blacks to create intimacy and realism in the atmosphere, a cinematographer who knows how to work with natural lighting. Despite Webber nagging Louise to speed up the process, she assures him that we must teach them what a question actually is, followed by personal pronouns.

The difficulty of this scenario piled on with the recent death of her daughter really weighs on Louise’s shoulders as we get several melancholy flashbacks into her tragic past. Ignoring of all of this, Louise does actually learn a thing or two about their new foreign friends: They communicate with different types of circles made out of palindrome phrases and inky symbols. Yes, kind of like an intelligent squid. In the next visit, Louise is able to establish some sufficient vocabulary with Abbott and Costello, they answer with the phrase: “offer weapon”. Obviously, this completely unhinges China, who interprets this as “use weapon” before immediately getting ready to attack. Again, the moment ups the stakes on Louise and Ian as well. Louise, however, argues that all of this can be referred to the “means” or “tools”, and not something violent, but many other nations disagree strongly and prepare for battle like China.

Due to the recent update, several soldiers have turned rogue and have planted a bomb in the pod. Not knowing of this, Louise and Ian enter it again before receiving an extremely complex message almost impossible to figure out. We get yet another fully practical sequence fueled by superb set design, cinematography, editing, and practically every top-notch technical aspect in the film. The scene easily creates tension when cutting back in forth from Louise walking into the abyss and the bomb’s timer nearly ready to go off. The zero gravity saves the two, however, and they are both left floating in the entrance. When they re-awaken following their unconsciousness, the military is preparing to evacuate the base, and the craft has flown just out of reach. Ian proves himself to be a truly capable character when he figures out the little clues that the aliens left behind in their intricate message. He explains that the writing occupies one twelfth of the 3D map in which it’s projected on, meaning that the aliens want all nations to share their knowledge. This suggests that the full message is split among the twelve craft.

China’s General Shang, on the other hand, issues an ultimatum with the craft, sending out a message demanding that it leave the country in less than 24 hours. Russia, Pakistan, and Sudan follow his lead. As a worldwide panic sets in, international communications between the base and foreign countries have been stopped. Louise, more curious than afraid, walks back up to the unreachable craft, which sends down a smaller pod, making it possible for her to head back up. This is when Villeneuve drops some major twists on us, and proves once again that he’s a filmmaker truly capable of foreshadowing genius. Due to the explosion, Abbott is near death, and Costello reveals that the term “weapon” referred to Earth’s language. This changes humanity’s perception of linear time, and allows them to experience “memories” of future events. All of the supposed flashbacks to Louise’s life with her daughter is finally resolved when she realizes that Hannah won’t be born until sometime in the future. This was another thing that I’ve grown to appreciate four years after first seeing this, actually partially understanding the insane ending.

This revelation also confirms something called the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, which suggests that a language shapes the fundamental brain cognition of those who speak it. In this case, it means that humans who mastered the alien’s language can perceive the future and the past. Louise then has a premonition, not a flashback, of the United Nations celebrating unity after the aliens left. General Shang even congratulates her for persuading him not to attack by calling his private number. This then leads Louise in the present to steal Agent Halpern’s (Michael Stuhlbarg) phone and calls Shang’s telephone number to recite the words: “War doesn’t make winners, only widows,” which is what he said to him in the premonition. The Chinese then suddenly announce that they would be standing down, and the other countries follow suit before the twelve craft depart. All of it closes out so satisfyingly when Ian finally confesses his love for her, and they discuss a possible future together. Banks, with her premonitions of the future, already knows that she will agree to have a child despite knowing that she will die from an incurable disease, and that Ian will leave them when she does so. It’s such a tragic conclusion as we find out that the visions of her daughter dying is all that’s to come later on, and Villeneuve broke my heart with it.

The Rock's Action Thriller Will Release on Netflix in 2021

The rock reveals the rare artifact that everyone’s searching for on new set photo

---

By: Keaton Marcus

Dwayne Johnson, who’s currently filming action thriller Red Notice directed by Rawson Marshall Thurber (Skyscraper), also stars Gal Gadot and Ryan Reynolds. He recently released an image of him in the movie on his social media, while also announcing that it will skip theaters, and hit Netflix sometime in 2021. The film is about a skilled INTERPOL agent who has been tasked in hunting the world’s most wanted art thief, played by Gadot. Reynolds stars as the world’s greatest conman who helps Johnson’s character with the hunt.

Red Notice will no doubt be one of, or the most expensive projects for Netflix to date. 6 Underground, which also stars Ryan Reynolds, cost a whopping 150 million dollars, breaking that record. However, The Rock’s newest effort may break that, and easily so. The movie only just resumed filming under some strict COVID-19 protocols, and in the meantime, there’s been constant updates on the premise, characters, and plotlines. Reynolds, on his Instagram, confirmed that he wrapped up filming, and also teased some interesting shooting locations, including a tropical set and war-torn interiors.

During this weekend, Johnson revealed a picture of him standing in front of the artifact that Gadot’s character is looking for. It’s an exquisite golden egg that once belonged to Cleopatra herself. The post reads: “I give you one of the rare and true priceless artifacts to ever exist - Cleopatra’s Egg. Are you sure you want to steal it on my watch? The FBI profiler. The World’s Most Wanted Art Thief. And the greatest conman the world has ever seen. Excited for you to see this movie in 2021 - only on Netflix. Here’s the actual post down below…

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by therock (@therock)

So that’s it folks…Catch Red Notice on Netflix next year. When? We don’t know for sure, but guessing sometime in the summer, which is where most big blockbusters release.

Thoughts on Her: A Science-Fiction Masterpiece

How Spike Jonze’s realistic take on tech and the future is one of the best sci-fi movies ever

---

By: Keaton Marcus

What if you didn’t need another person to be in a relationship with? What if in the not-so distant future, a robot could be your wife? These are the questions that Spike Jonze’s Her asks, a science fiction masterpiece that transcends its genre trappings with special combinations of humor, drama and interesting ideas. I’ve been trying to occasionally watch acclaimed movies on Netflix that I missed recently, and just happened to come upon this after viewing Ex Machina (which was a life-changing experience), and thankfully so. This is a brilliant film, and despite all the warm reception it received back in 2013, it still feels overlooked and underrated, like it went under so many people’s radars. This is why I’d like to share my personal thoughts on the movie.

The acting, for starters, is truly a gorgeous thing to witness. Her stars a pretty talented cast, including Joaquin Phoenix, Scarlett Johansson, and Amy Adams, in which all of them give sensational performances, especially Johansson. Phoenix headlines the film, however, and he’s absolutely great as this man who’s in a bit of a mental dilemma with himself. We see his character, Theodore, call this woman on a futuristic “dating app” for cyber sex, and we can see that he’s clearly looking for some sort of sexual connection, but he can’t seem to sign the divorce papers with his ex-wife (Catherine, played by Rooney Mara). This creates juicy, tangible conflict for the character, and further deepens him as someone who looks to the future, but cannot forget the past. Now, for the star of the show, let’s talk about Scarlett Johansson.

The actress plays Samantha, who’s the main love interest for Theodore. Don’t get ahead of yourselves, she’s not actually human. In fact, she’s a computer with a consciousness inside a phone-like device he carries around. Basically, Theodore’s crush is simply a voice. Nonetheless, this gives a true challenge to Johansson, to voice her entire character while conveying such sheer human emotion. This doesn’t seem to be an issue for her, and she kills every single line. Samantha isn’t just the paint-by-the-numbers robot, she’s nearly human. This is how Johansson becomes the standout of the film, with her character not being physically there at all. This is what separates the movie from, say, Ava in Ex Machina. Alicia Vikander does a superb job, but her character is has a womanly figure, which isn’t as much of a difficulty.

The cinematography is where Her brings home the medals. From master cinematographer Hoyte Van Hoytema, who’s the mastermind behind the camera for films like Interstellar and Ad Astra, has stunned me once again with his work. The color palette is so delicately chosen, seamlessly making viewers feel a certain calm while watching. Not only this, but it conveys the tragic loneliness of our main character as well. With the usage of bright colors for the most part, the film truly succeeds when audiences can bear witness to the craft on display here. Of course, the film has its other merits, as it should, but who doesn’t want some good old eye candy. Every shot is composed for relaxation, to put you in a trance, perhaps…And it works. Oh, does it work. This is partly thanks to the careful usage of yellow, burgundy, beige, and more tranquil coloration to bring the feeling to life.

It’s painfully difficult to think of any true flaws I had with the experience. The only complaint that I could come up with is that the start of the first act isn’t as engaging as the rest of the movie, especially the last one. Besides these beginning 25 minutes or so, I was perplexed on how perfect it was. Directer Spike Jonze, you’ve stolen my heart, and Joaquin Phoenix, you needed a damn Oscar for this. From the occasionally laugh-out-loud humor, tear-jerking ending, and a clever tampering of the boundaries of love, Her deserves our recognition.

The Most Meaningful Cinematic Experiences I've Had

five films that will have a lasting impact on myself

---

By: Keaton Marcus

1. ex machina (2015)

I saw the magnificent Ex Machina a couple days ago and it was a beautiful experience. It’s about AI and two coders attempting to perfect a certain robot called Ava, to make her as human as possible. Not only did the cerebral effect make me feel a certain calm and placidity, but Alex Garland also notches up the tension whenever he needs it. Oscar Isaac and Alicia Vikander were undoubtedly the standouts, and both of their performances were ultimately Oscar worthy. Although it’s slow, the film is so engaging, deep and thought-provoking. Garland has shown himself to be a venerable sci-fi director, and he is a true expert behind the camera. Props to cinematographer Rob Hardy, who uses distinct color palettes and haunting imagery to mash beauty and horror into one fabulous whole. Overall, I was so invested in the characters, and especially the plot, that this movie actually got inside my heart and touched it profoundly. Then, it became clear that this would make it to the list.

2. blade runner 2049 (2017)

Another science fiction masterpiece, the intricate, beautiful Blade Runner 2049 comes from one of my all-time favorite directors: Denis Villeneuve. His work, which includes Sicario, Arrival and more, peaked with this flawless achievement. Through Roger Deakins’ untouchably cinematic camera work, gorgeously crafted action sequences, and some of the greatest acting I’ve ever witnessed, of course I was easily pulled right into the experience. This was another time where I felt something different, something unique to the paint-by-the-numbers film. I haven’t even brought up the transfixing score by the one and only master: Hans Zimmer. He has truly done it again, packing in intense music for the violence, and wondrous soundtracks for the unmistakable imagery. Ryan Gosling and Harrison Ford also have excellent chemistry, blending humor, drama, and one beautifully-realized fight scene between them.

3. star wars: the last jedi (2017)

Sure, The Force Awakens is a perfectly good movie, but JJ Abrams didn’t make it imaginative enough, without the risks and detours that Rian Johnson took with The Last Jedi. Although fans were divided on this one, TLJ was no doubt a special experience for me. I’m always a sucker for beautiful cinematography, but Steve Yedlin finally did me in with this one. Unquestionably the most stunning Star Wars film, and packed with entertaining action, powerful acting, and most likely one of the most memorably choreographed battles in the entire franchise, I have absolutely no words to describe it. Although it was ruined from perfection by a decidedly mediocre subplot, Kylo Ren and Rey have definitely found their way into my heart as some of the most beloved characters I’ve witnessed. Luke Skywalker was portrayed controversially here, but I loved every second of Mark Hamill’s more focused, real, and dramatic performances of his career. This is not a flawless movie on any account, but it easily makes it on to this list because of how many times I rewatch it, think about it, and watch videos of it. It’s number three on the most meaningful cinematic experiences I’ve had because I will never get tired of the film.

4. portrait of a lady on fire (2019)

Earlier this year, I had barely touched the foreign film genre, so I was obviously procrastinating on watching Portrait of a Lady on Fire, which was hailed as one of last year’s best movies. So on one fateful summer day, I decided to finally view it, still skeptical about reading all those subtitles. Nonetheless, this has made it into my top ten list of all-time, and would rank number two in terms of 2019 films. This movie is a touching, heartwarming romantic drama with a tragic, yet so satisfying conclusion that was the perfect cherry on top for me. From the gorgeous seaside landscapes to Celine Sciamma’s assured hand at the camera, and the virtual perfection in the performances, I couldn’t find any problems, or even nitpicks about this thing. Don’t worry about it being in French, because you’ll be too transfixed by what’s happening on screen.

5. The godfather: part II (1974)

It sure is a long one, but a damn good one. At around 3 hours long, The Godfather: Part II may sound like a pain to get through, but after viewing the first film, I had no issue getting around to it. One of Robert De Niro’s earliest, and surprisingly best performances, my mind was completely and utterly blown away by his acting props. Coupled with that was Al Pacino, another legend in cinematic history, and the two of them worked in tandem to create the rare sequel that actually improves on the already immaculate original. Francis Ford Coppola’s peak in his career was no doubt this film, and this epic experience has found its way on to my favorite’s list. Perhaps the most shocking thing was that I was entertained despite the running time, and this is the result of great writing, iconic performances, and ultimately the work of a master in filmmaking.

A Disgraceful Decision: WB Has Johnny Depp Drop out of the Wizarding World

after unsubstantiated court ruling on libel case, depp is forced to resign from the harry potter universe

---

By: Keaton Marcus

Johnny Depp, who rose to fame as Jack Sparrow in the Pirates of the Caribbean franchise, has recently found another potential list of hits to his career: JK Rowling’s Wizarding World. However, WB has just asked Depp to resign from his role of Grindelwald, who he portrayed in the first two Fantastic Beasts movies. This is because of the recent court case that pitted Depp face-to-face with his ex-wife, Amber Heard, in a libel case against UK newspaper The Sun.

The actor had substantial evidence to support his claims, and from what we can see, Heard had absolutely nothing to defend herself. Nonetheless, judge Andrew Nicol ruled against his case, suggesting that the newspaper’s claims had been “substantially true.” After the ruling, WB released the statement: “Johnny Depp will depart from the Fantastic Beasts franchise. We thank Johnny for his work on the films to date. Fantastic Beasts 3 is currently in production, and the role of Gellert Grindelwald will be recast. The film will debut in theaters worldwide in the summer of 2022.”

From the information, we now know that the third installment has been delayed about half a year from its original date on November 12, 2021. What really gets me ticked off is the fact that none of us know for a fact that Depp actually did anything Heard or the Sun claims he did, but we do know that Heard has clearly abused him. It also brings to mind how much of a disaster the spin-off series has been, from Rowling’s increasingly transphobic comments on social media, to the box office disappointment of the second film, and now this. While WB has plans for a five-film franchise, if this one fails as hard as its immediate predecessor with the critics and audiences, three will be the last.

In terms of Depp’s role, I’m deeply disappointed that the studio straight-up fired him, but this could also be an opportunity for some really great upcoming movies. He may not be in the Harry Potter universe any more, but what about Oscar possibilities? What about chances for real acting? To be frank, the reception to his performance as Grindelwald wasn’t all that positive anyway, so it’s a mixed bag of feelings for me. I do remember when this series was magical, concluded with a satisfying ending that was nothing less than epic, but the two latest efforts have come off as more cash grabs than actual cinema.

For any Fantastic Beasts fans out there, you heard me, the next movie will open summer 2022, and hopefully this gives Depp the chance to further deepen his career. I’m with you.

---

IN THIS ARTICLE:

Scary Without Horror Tropes: A Look Into How "The Witch" Terrified You

robert eggers’ morbidly beautiful new england folk tale is one of the scariest movies ever, and it isn’t a horror film

---

By: Keaton Marcus

I know we’ve just passed Halloween night, and it’s a bit off-topic to be writing about horror movies, but I viewed Robert Eggers’ directorial debut, The Witch, yesterday and was absolutely blown away by the craft put into this. I had already seen his second movie, The Lighthouse, another slow-burn movie that was fantastic, but not quite the masterpiece his predecessor was. This film is genuinely unsettling, and intensely disturbing without throwing jump scares or glaringly loud music at you, as many movies in the genre do these days. From the gorgeous filming, to the haunting music, and the dreadfully tragic ending that will make jaws drop as well as tears stream down faces, there are no flaws to this experience. I plan to do a deep dive into this smart, horrifying movie, and how Eggers still managed to terrify audiences without movie tropes and cliches.

Starting this whole charade off is the way that the plot is so meticulously crafted for the film’s benefit. Audiences will have issues with not quite knowing which direction a movie is going from the very beginning, but this is one of the several ways The Witch succeeds. The entire first act is mostly family drama, with our main characters being banished from their village, isolated to their secluded farm and without much food left. We don’t get reason to believe that there is a threat to these people until we’ve watched 30 minutes, and I think that is absolutely brilliant. Although it’s definitely a slow start to a total blast, the performances, and cinematography will keep viewers looking for true horror on board. But I’m missing something, aren’t I? The dread is the third component into making the first bit of the experience easier to view, and it’s there alright. There’s an intrusive sense that something’s going to go very sideways from the get go, and that is through the technical aspects. The musical score, composed by Mark Korven, who also did The Lighthouse, is almost its own character. Despite no real visuals that can trigger us into being scared in any way, the unnerving soundtrack is enough to make us shiver in our seats in its own right.

Again, the entire first act relies on this feeling, this pulsing sense of dread that so effectively chills people to the bone without any masked villains or monsters. Then, of course, it’s time for the suspicion to rise that there is, in fact, something sinister living around the farm. The thing is, Eggers is a good enough director to still keep his very subtle yet disconcerting tone to bring fear into our hearts. This comes through one of the many highlight scenes during the 1 hour and 30 minutes, the kidnap. It all begins with an uncommonly cheerful bit where Anya Taylor Joy’s Thomasin is playing an innocent game of peek-a-boo with her baby brother, but each time she proclaims “Boo!”, the tension begins to rise. Finally, on the final scream, her brother suddenly disappears without a trace. It’s so simple, but completely alarming, and perturbing. This scene is coupled with effective music that truly brings it home without a scratch. Forget Michael Myers, this film is where it’s at.

The next moment is likely the most disturbing experience I’ve ever witnessed while watching a movie, and it finally gives us our first showcase of what this creature, or “Witch”, looks like. It isn’t quite clear at first, but as the sequence goes on, audiences will notice how scarring it is. The villain has taken the form of a senile woman in the moment, completely naked, mashing up a child. I wonder what this could mean? Yeah, we just got our answer to the very mysterious disappearance that still haunts the family. Speaking of the main characters, after that petrifying experience, we come back to the little farm, and things are starting to go wrong. The next morning, Caleb (the middle child) is attempting to shoot some game for the family without permission, but Thomasin wakes up and convinces the reluctant Caleb that she will be joining. What ends up happening is a wild chase to shoot down an animal, but after Thomasin falls, she’s completely disoriented. Caleb, determined, keeps running through the woods, only to come upon a strange hut in the middle. As if grounding babies wasn’t enough, a seductive form of this “Witch” exits the hut and straight up makes out with the young boy, and I couldn’t believe my eyes. Once again, Eggers creates searing dread and uncertainty in a moment as in-complex as a kiss.

Obviously, with Caleb gone and Thomasin returning to the farm, the suspect meter continues to be leaning towards herself, and this is one the film switches tones magnificently into a masterclass of family trauma. The movie’s plot is almost like the butterfly effect, one event affects the next, and it’s done so with such craft that everything works. Robert Eggers is a genre filmmaker who knows and believes in his vision, and is not afraid to go beyond the barriers of what audiences can actually take. Reverting back to the actual series of events, Katherine (the mother), played by Kate Dickie, is particularly unhinged by two of her sons suddenly going missing, and the next scene further knocks her off the rails. In an earlier scene, Thomasin threatens Mercy and Jonas that she knows of black magic and witchcraft. Despite it only being a harmless joke, it contributes majorly to what happens in the turning point of the film.

Caleb is now back at the farm peculiarly, but not without his scars. There’s something lodged in his stomach, most likely a result of the witchcraft he faced, and this is also when actor Harvey Scrimshaw truly gets to show his acting skills. The child is clearly possessed by some dark force, and it brings pain and ugliness into your heart when audiences see this kid fight and tragically lose against whatever is haunting the family. He unfortunately dies in an intense, brutal scene, but it’s not till after his death that this terror truly begins to tear the characters apart. Mercy and Jonas, remembering the threats that Thomasin made, tell them to their mother and chaos ensues. Thankfully, Thomasin, who’s truly the life of this story, gets her way out of the metaphorical pit and convinces her father (William, portrayed excellently by Ralph Ineson) and mother that she isn’t the threat.

I haven’t talked much about Joy’s actual performance, and that is truly the shame of this analysis. I cannot express enough how magnificent she is in the movie, easily the standout and totally worthy for an Oscar nomination. It’s through her perspective in which we see the foundations that hold this family together crumble with her siblings. This brings me to another point: The Witch is more of a family drama than a horror movie, with the scary moments only fueling the familial disaster even further. To be honest, it terrifies me more because everything seems so real, and not just the supernatural aspect, but what these characters endure. Like other A24 masterpieces such as Hereditary and Midsommar, these movies are at their very best when focusing on the character-driven part of the story, and not creepy imagery. This is what makes films like these on another level, perhaps almost otherworldly to even the best of the jump scare regime like A Quiet Place and Insidious.

The true icon of this film, of course, is Black Phillip. Who is that, you make ask? It’s the fantabulous goat living with the family on the farm that’s somehow famed (Mercy and Jonas string up an adorable tune about him). Turns out, he’s the fucking devil, and will literally kill you if he gets any chance. That’s how Mercy, Jonas and William meet their doom when Phillip crushes them with stone. Anyway, they’re dead now, and the only two left are Katherine and Thomasin. That isn’t a good match-up, and immediately Katherine wrestles her daughter to the ground and attempts to kill her. At the last second Thomasin picks up a knife and stabs her through the neck, finally killing her. For Christ’s sake this film is so gloriously messed up. Joy’s character is now completely corrupted by the overwhelming darkness, and gives in to Black Phillip’s next form: the one and only Satan. She makes a deal with the devil, and walks into the woods for one of the most insane conclusions I’ve ever seen. “Would you like to live…Deliciously?”, Phillip grotesquely asks. Joy completely strips butt-naked, walks dramatically into the woods, and meets up with a bunch of other naked women flying in the goddamn air. The final shot will give you any nightmare fuel viewers may have been missing as her character completes her dive into madness. That, folks, is cinema at its finest.

The Best Classic Horror Movies to Watch

michael myers, jack torrance and xenomorphs are perfect nightmare fuel for halloween night

---

By: Keaton Marcus

Before the era of jump-scares, easy profit, and Hollywood spitting crap at our faces, the late 1900s was truly a goldmine for movies. In particular, horror films were even booming. Michael Myers, Jason Vorhees, Freddy Krueger and more haunted moviegoers. No, I’m not talking about the unimaginative, terror-less reboots that followed, I am referencing the grand originals that truly brought fear into our hearts.

1. Jaws (1975), directed by: Steven Spielberg

What’s it about: When a young woman is killed by a shark while skinny-dipping near the New England tourist town of Amity Island, police chief Martin Brody (Roy Scheider) wants to close the beaches, but mayor Larry Vaughn (Murray Hamilton) overrules him, fearing that the loss of tourist revenue will cripple the town. Ichthyologist Matt Hooper (Richard Dreyfuss) and grizzled ship captain Quint (Robert Shaw) offer to help Brody capture the killer beast, and the trio engage in an epic battle of man vs. nature.

Why you should watch it: Number one on this list, in no particular quality order, is Steven Spielberg’s classic, Jaws. People may prefer Spielberg’s Jurassic Park because of the updated special effects, but if you really think about the work that went into prosthetic effects for the shark, the 1975 shark flick ends up more impressive. Don’t get me wrong, Park is still a very good movie, but it still doesn’t reach the heights of his original creature feature. Crafted with a compelling story, a sense of dread, characters audiences want to root for, and a terrifying opening, Jaws is not only the perfect summer blockbuster, but it’s also a choice for Halloween night.

2. Scream (1996), Directed By: Wes Craven

What’s it about: The sleepy little town of Woodsboro just woke up screaming. There’s a killer in their midst who’s seen a few too many scary movies. Suddenly nobody is safe, as the psychopath stalks victims, taunts them with trivia questions, then rips them into bloody shreds. It could be anybody…

Why you should watch it: Wes Craven’s Scream is a subversive, uncannily witty and smart slasher movie with bits and pieces of humor to make it lighthearted. If you want something that’ll both send chills down your spine, but is also fitfully funny, this deconstruction of horror movies is the creepy satire on your list this Halloween. Neve Campbell is one of the most classic scream queens, and this film went on to spawn three other profitable sequels. Do you like scary movies?

3. halloween (1978), Directed By: John Carpenter

What’s it about: On a cold Halloween night in 1963, six year old Michael Myers brutally murdered his 17-year-old sister, Judith. He was sentenced and locked away for 15 years. But on October 30, 1978, while being transferred for a court date, a 21-year-old Michael Myers steals a car and escapes Smith's Grove. He returns to his quiet hometown of Haddonfield, Illinois, where he looks for his next victims.

Why you should watch it: Possibly the most iconic of slasher films, Halloween is known for its viscerally thrilling camerawork, Jamie Lee Curtis’ performance, and one of the most recognizable villains of all-time: Michael Myers. This one movie spawned countless sequels and reboots because of the sheer popularity, and is still known today as one of the greatest films to watch on Spooky Season.

4. alien (1979), Directed By: Ridley scott

What’s it about: In deep space, the crew of the commercial starship Nostromo is awakened from their cryo-sleep capsules halfway through their journey home to investigate a distress call from an alien vessel. The terror begins when the crew encounters a nest of eggs inside the alien ship. An organism from inside an egg leaps out and attaches itself to one of the crew, causing him to fall into a coma.

Why you should watch it: A slow-burn of horror, Ridley Scott made his bones as a director with the 1979 sci-fi horror Alien. Although folks who admire more fast-paced movies will appreciate it less, audiences will be impressed by the dazzling practical effects, Sigourney Weaver’s game performance and its classic villains. It also blends some much-needed heart, and bleak poetry into the mix, crafting a brilliant movie with a solid sense of dread at its core.

5. the shining (1980), Directed By: Stanley Kubrick

What’s it about: Jack Torrance (Jack Nicholson) becomes winter caretaker at the isolated Overlook Hotel in Colorado, hoping to cure his writer's block. He settles in along with his wife, Wendy (Shelley Duvall), and his son, Danny (Danny Lloyd), who is plagued by psychic premonitions. As Jack's writing goes nowhere and Danny's visions become more disturbing, Jack discovers the hotel's dark secrets and begins to unravel into a homicidal maniac hell-bent on terrorizing his family.

Why you should watch it: Kubrick’s The Shining is one of the most terrorizing experiences I’ve ever had. One of the best, if not the best horror movie, this was game-changing for me. Between Jack Nicholson’s ferociously horrifying performance, the artful cinematography, and impending sense of doom, the film is such a classic. There’s no jump scares or masked villains, just a man, his family, and a hotel. This dive into madness and despair inspired generations of movies in the genre, and it’ll have you checking your pants by the end of it.

Tom Holland's New Video-Game Adaptation Gets Its First Look

is holland still too young to play drake? or has the Adaptation nailed the look?

After being previously announced to star as Nathan Drake in an Uncharted adaptation, Tom Holland has shared his first look in the film. Despite all the criticism announced before Holland even gave us the sneak peak, fans of the game have given generally positive reception.

Mostly, the doubt in Holland’s capability was gauged at his innocence, and lack of maturity, confidence and just overall toughness. Most moviegoers know him from Jon Watts’ two box office smasher Spider-Man remakes, Homecoming and Far From Home, which have both been great successes with the critics as well. After making his bones as the cheerful Peter Parker, he starred in this year’s The Devil All the Time, in which he proved all of his haters wrong. Holland served his never-before-seen versatility on a big old silver platter.

Now, he has Uncharted and Chaos Walking coming up, and no one can doubt that he’s a true rising star. He may look a little too young, but in terms of roguishness, I think his first look payed of. The actor has also reportedly finished filming the movie, meaning that the inevitable trailer will be releasing soon. I do not actually play video games, but after viewing some images of Drake (his character) online, this looks right. Some people have described it as glorified cosplay, but for the most part, reactions have been ecstatic. The tweet reads: “It’s nice to meet you, I’m Nate. #uncharted”

It’s nice to meet you, I’m Nate. #uncharted pic.twitter.com/v79Mvy26iH

— Tom Holland (@TomHolland1996) October 22, 2020

Ruben Fleischer (Zombieland, Venom) will be taking on the role of directing the anticipated adaptation. In terms of a director, I mostly respect his work, especially Zombieland, but he failed to make a convincing superhero blockbuster with 2018’s Venom, although it made a whole lotta cash. His action sequences are mostly chaotic and bombastic, but hopefully his direction will pay off, because a lot of people are counting on this one to change the slew of subpar video game adaptations.

Uncharted is set to release in theaters on July 16, 2021 if all goes well.

---

IN THIS ARTICLE:

The 2010s: An Analysis in Horror Movies

From Garbage to Greatness: did horror movies save themselves in the past decade?

---

By: Keaton Marcus

It’s Spooky Season and I’ve forgotten to do the most critical thing: write about horror films! For the years since I could start watching them, the genre has been a magical, albeit flawed experience. There’s plenty of cash-grabbing, cheaply-made garbage out there, and my job today is to tell readers if the 2010s is really the best decade for horror. Many argue that horror began as one of the worst genres in cinema, and has climbed its way back out of the hole to become the best it could be in the 2010s. There were plenty of good frights in the decade, such as The Witch, Hereditary, Midsommar, and more A24 hits. We even got a surprisingly fantastic The Invisible Man reboot this year, which made a whole lot of profit as well. However, it wasn’t all glory as The Conjuring franchise took a dive while focusing on their iconic creepy doll, and we got countless of boring flicks full of stupid twists, characters and the dreadful jump scares.

We head back to the year 2010, who brought us the first fright of the decade with Daybreakers, a modern-day vampire movie that scored mixed-to-positive reviews and grossed 51.4 million on a 20M cost. Not bad for a January horror movie, huh? Don’t worry, I won’t go through every film each month, just the highlights. Moving on, February brought us a reboot of The Wolfman, which was a huge bomb, failing with the critics and earning 139.7 million globally on a massive budget of 150M. We didn’t get our next one until the end of April with the tired remake of A Nightmare on Elm Street, which holds a scathing 15% on Rotten Tomatoes. However, it was a hit in the box office, grossing over 115 million on a relatively cheap cost. If you want to consider it apart of the genre, Predators released on July 9th to the tune of 64% on RT, and it ended with some decent profit, amassing over 127.2 million dollars. At the end of Summer, Piranha 3D released to shockingly positive reception, earning 83.1 million on a 24M budget. So far, 2010 doesn’t have a bad track record. There’s been nothing incredible, but the year gave us a few hits at least.

Wait, never mind, Hollywood needs to keep milking some found-footage money started from the classic Blair Witch Project with The Last Exorcism. But the year surprises us once more, giving us a solidly-crafted, atmospheric thrill ride that made 69x its budget. Ah shucks, we still need to sit through Resident Evil: Afterlife, a painfully edited film that made over 300 million bucks somehow. What is wrong with the world? We’ll skip along till nearly Halloween, which is when Paranormal Activity 2 took the box office by storm despite receiving mixed reviews, grossing 177 million on the minuscule budget of 3 million. As if we didn’t have enough sequels trying to steal our money, the Saw series closed out with a whimper, releasing The Final Chapter to lukewarm reception and less cash than its predecessors. Now I won’t go into as much detail as I did there for 2010, but overall, it was a pretty successful year for the genre, especially box office wise. With the critics, it wasn’t especially horrible either, and the average rating for the biggest ones ended at 48%. Mediocre, but not necessarily terrible as some folks might think.

In 2011, there were plenty of terrible ones, such as The Rite, The Roommate, Sanctum, Scream 4, Priest, Final Destination 5, a Don’t Be Afraid of the Dark remake, Shark Night 3D, Apollo 18 and many more that made a profit at the box office despite being pieces of absolute trash. There’s a trend of unnecessary reboots, sequels, and standalone that just want to take your money. The terrifying thing is, we keep seeing these god-awful movies, and Hollywood keeps making them. It’s simple, skip them! There were also a few fun rides like Insidious, Fright Night and Contagion before you have to make it through a deeply disappointing, and unnecessary The Thing reboot that luckily bombed because of its expensive budget. Hollywood continued to shove crap in our faces, surprised us with a solid third Paranormal Activity flick, James Wan’s claim to fame, and a half-decent remake of a classic, and gave us a mixed bag of a year for the genre. There were filmmakers that actually tried to give audiences some spine-tingling chills, and others who wanted profit. Unfortunately, you’re going to see a slew of those throughout the rest of the decade.

2012 milks us some more right at the beginning with The Devil Inside, which tried to make some more cash from the found-footage empire, and despite being a total shitshow, it somehow made more than 100 million dollars. Why did you make this ugly, scare-less, poorly-acted crap and dump it on us? Why? There were plenty of others at similar quality that made a whole lot of money, like Underworld Awakening, Silent House, Chernobyl Diaries, Possession, RE: Retribution, House of the End of the Street, and Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter (what?). Then, below all of those, was the PG-13, sanitized, fake, jump-scare laden The Apparition, which thankfully bombed. There were also a few hidden gems such as the delightfully hilarious and bloody The Cabin in the Woods, the ambitious and mature animated film ParaNorman and the earned, visually-impressive Prometheus. Putting the year on a platter, it looks similar, a couple nice breaks in something chock-full of clogged shit.

After the disaster that was 2012, we hope to start a nice, fresh new year with 2013. Alas, the Texas Chainsaw reboot is here to haunt us, a disastrous remake that, of course, made 47 million dollars. As if this wasn’t a wobbly start, 2013 also gave us A Haunted House, Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters, Dark Skies, The Last Exorcism 2, Scary Movie V, Insidious: Chapter 2, and Carrie. Readers may think this year was just more of the same, but we also received the excellent and terrifying The Conjuring, World War Z, the hidden gem You’re Next, the highly-underrated, uncommonly creepy The Purge, and a respectable Evil Dead remake. The decade is slightly improving by the year, but it’s still in the dog house in terms of garbage that shouldn’t be making this much profit.

Go away, found-footage movies. Huh, I guess my message didn’t get out clear enough, because Paranormal Activity: The Marked Ones was released. It still makes Paramount some extra cash because of its small budget, but the sequels keep making less and less. Hurray, I guess. 2014 also plagued us with Devil’s Due, I, Frankenstein (yep, that’s a thing), A Haunted House 2, The Quiet Ones, Deliver Us from Evil, and the disappointingly generic, soul-sucking The Purge: Anarchy. If that wasn’t enough, Annabelle gave us the money-sucking prequel to The Conjuring and made over a quarter of one billion dollars. It was one of the most frustrating, boring, dumb movies of the year with a distinct lack of actual scares. Oh, a Ouija movie actually happened as well. Sure, we got Oculus, but 2014 was a huge step back for the genre as we head into the halfway mark.

January strikes again with The Woman in Black 2: Angel of Death, a visually impressive, but dull, tension-less ride that somehow tricked us into seeing it. The Boy Next Door was an awful film as well, and starred Jennifer Lopez as an English teacher. How does that casting choice even happen? The Lazarus Effect gave us more watered-down PG-13 scares, and shoved some cheap jumps in our faces, we received a tired, shopworn Poltergeist update, and the Insidious franchise ditched James Wan and gave us another mediocre sequel. 2015 was another sheer disappointment in terms of horror, and its only redemptions in the genre lied with a decent M. Night Shyamalan flick called The Visit, a fun and mindless Goosebumps adaptation, and a so-so Krampus film. Those three weren’t even “good”, per-say, just a bit of relief in the waves of madness.

2016 began with a whimper, kicking off with the Natalie Dormer-starring The Forest, which squandered her dual roles in a supernatural borefest that came off as a bit exploitative, to be frank. The creepy-doll genre produced The Boy as well, which was middling at best, providing a few effective scares. It also gave audiences a pedestrian plot coupled with an unsatisfying twist ending. Of course, what follows is The Darkness, a lazily written, tension free ghost story that somehow had Kevin Bacon star in it. Fear not, however, because we also received three horror masterpieces. First, the original, slow-burning, tension-filled The Witch, which gave us a promising directorial debut for Robert Eggers. Secondly, 10 Cloverfield Lane gave us the rare sequel that expanded on the story while staying faithful to its excellent predecessor, and improving on it. Thirdly, and lastly, The Conjuring 2 ended one of the best films of the entire year, packed with superb performances, compelling family drama and above all: horrifying scares. James Wan, you’re my savior.

Otherwise in the tumultuous year, The Purge: Election Year confirmed that the studio wasn’t actually trying to make a good franchise, more focused on stealing cash. The Shallows was a surprisingly solid fright fest, despite being constricted by its PG-13 limits. Lights Out was another delightful summer stunner, full of atmospheric tension-building, and uncommonly effective jump scares. Perhaps finalizing this year as the greatest one in my analysis at the moment was Don’t Breathe, a total sleeper hit that smashed open the box office in its opening weekend on top. For the remainder, the Blair Witch reboot was a reasonably fun yarn with a gratifying final ten minutes, Ouija: Origin of Evil astonished us all who watched its ill-fated predecessor fail in mediocrity, and delivered a perfectly enjoyable ride. Shut In went mostly unnoticed, fortunately, but was still an utter disaster to those who saw it, and Incarnate was another late-year bellyflop. Overall, though, horror started to become a genre recognized as real to cinephiles, and studios began to make a higher percentage of worthy installments.

We’re actually coming close to ending this analysis, and at least from my perspective, the genre is getting better by the sentence. If you want to consider it a horror movie, 2017 spits its first one out with Underworld: Blood Wars, a lowest common denominator action fantasy ride with little to no thrills. Back to back with that was The Bye-Bye Man, another terrible addition to a non-existent franchise that I like to call the Bullshit Horror for Toddlers saga. Who knew M. Night Shyamalan would have another massive comeback with Split, which provided thrills, chills, and a total showcase for James McAvoy to show off his acting skills. What both comes as bad and good news is Resident Evil: The Final Chapter. No, the movie still sucked, but at least it’s “The Final Chapter”. Who comes up with these names? The Rings reboot, and A Cure for Wellness both shat the bed in terms of quality, but then something magnificent occurred. Jordan Peele’s Get Out was released, and to this day it’s one of my favorite horror movies, and one of my most prized films in general. An emotionally resonant social commentary as well as a hilarious, frightening ride that keeps you hooked from start to finish. Way to go, 2017!

Ignoring The Belko Experiment, and the Alien rip-off Life ,and Phoenix Forgotten, something I actually want to write about comes along: Alien: Covenant. The two newest franchise installments, Prometheus, and this, have gotten plenty of hate over the years. However, both of them, especially Covenant, provide more than enough close-quarters space terror, and another round of dazzling visual effects. It Comes at Night continued this little hot streak, and gave us a criminally underrated, eerily realistic creature feature. Disregarding Wish Upon, Annabelle: Creation was an stunningly worthy follow-up to one of the biggest let-downs of 2014, a decent, entertaining 2 hours. Lightning then struck, something incredible happened: IT was released. Grossing over 700 million dollars at the box office, and absolutely defying expectations after the cringe-worthy 90s adaptation of the masterful novel, this is why I still review movies. Gorgeously-filmed, well-acted by its cast of child actors (and, of course, Pennywise), and nearly heartbreaking emotionally, this provides both the terrors and beauty of adolescence, overcoming its lack of concrete CGI.

Mother! was considered terrible my some audiences, and a masterpiece by others, a movie that divided moviegoers around the world. It bombed at the box office despite receiving a Fresh score on Rotten Tomatoes, but it wasn’t a bad time. On the contrary, it was a brutally-realized horror/thriller/drama hybrid with fine performances led by Jennifer Lawrence. If you can get Friend Request and the pointless, embarrassing Flatliners remake, Happy Death Day was a sleeper hit that gave us a refreshing blend of horror and comedy while poking fun at the Bill Murray classic Groundhog Day. Of course Tyler Perry had to ruin that bit of fresh air with Boo! 2 (who was asking for that?). Additionally, The Snowman then butchered an acclaimed novel, and a talented cast. Jigsaw closed out the year for the genre by trying to bring the Saw franchise back together (and failed miserably.

Is it me or did Stephen King and a first-time director save 2017? Anyway, moving on, studios throw out some meaningless flicks in the beginning of 2018. Insidious: The Last Key wearily attempted to breathe fresh air into a tired series by bringing back Lin Shaye, and just screwed up everything instead, and Winchester squandered a few talented actors in a meaningless “based on a true story” marketing ploy. Then February gave us some uncommon relief with Annihilation, further establishing Natalie Portman as the queen of acting, and Alex Garland as the king of slow sci-fi movies with a touch of horror. The Strangers: Prey at Night might be trying to get some more cash out of us, but it was still quite the ride, providing us with enough thrills to earn its place. Unsane was a box office flop, but a darn good one, making smart use of its intriguing, terrifying premise, and John Krasinski’s A Quiet Place was a fantastic movie with some expected logic issues.

After Avengers: Infinity War broke some records for being another mediocre comic-book movie, Ari Aster shook the world with his controversial horror flick Hereditary, which sparked outrage after Toni Collette wasn’t recognized by voters as an Oscar-worthy performance. The First Purge then further brought the once smart, creepy and well-acted franchise down the drain by butchering its one solid landing. Of course Unfriended was considered a minor hit, so we got The Dark Web, a PG-13 horror movie disguised as an R-rated one, but failing to put on its big boy pants. Moreover, some genius thought it was a nice idea to make a Slender Man feature-length movie, exploiting a tragedy for profits. The once proud Conjuring universe then spat out another jump-scare filled, flat-out snooze fest of an affair: The Nun. This villain was an excellent addition to The Conjuring 2, and should have made a banging origin story, but she was more of a glorified cameo. Hollywood being the absolute jerk-offs they are decided to reboot The Predator, ending up losing cash, and most of the fanbase while they were at it.

Hell Fest was trying to be another Happy Death Day-type success, and instead puttered out in a film jam-packed with cheap scares and stupid teen characters. Can we even bring Goosebumps 2: Haunted Halloween into the picture? Let’s ignore that one, and for good reason, because you won’t regret what comes next. I went into watching 2018’s Halloween remake with relatively low expectations due to the slew of awful sequels, but it blew any previously conceived worries away. Jamie Lee Curtis is back and better than ever, Michael Myers is actually a worthy villain again, and it’s a gleefully violent, well-acted slasher movie overall. Furthermore, The Possession of Hannah Grace finally closed out the year at an all-time low.

It’s time for the final year: 2019. The last 365 days before the dumpster fire 2020 was, the finale of the cherished decade, and my analysis here today. Hilariously, January gave us the rare mediocre horror movie with Escape Room, which had enough creative elements and puzzles to it, keeping the film from being a total failure. Perhaps most frustratingly, Shyamalan closed out his trilogy with Glass, which gave us standout performances from Samuel L. Jackson and James McAvoy, but ultimately failed to hand viewers a satisfying conclusion. The Prodigy tried to be another one of those “disguised as an R-rated” movies, and worked as a reasonable entry to the “creepy kid” genre, but didn’t try anything special. Happy Death Day 2U was middling at its best, not nearly as good as its surprisingly clever predecessor, disappointing at the box office for good reason.

I’ll admit it, 2019 was definitely a mixed bag for the genre. Hollywood still hasn’t quite stopped throwing jump-scare laden, low-budget horror movies in our faces for some blood money, but they’ve also improved a great deal. Us was supposedly a terrifying sequel from Jordan Peele with an Oscar-worthy, dual performance from Lupita Nyong’o, Stephen King’s Pet Semetary wasn’t too bad, Brightburn was an uncommonly original film with a fantastic premise, Child’s Play was remade successfully, and Annabelle Comes Home is still better than the first movie. Nevertheless, the real masterpiece of the year was Ari Aster’s second movie, Midsommar.

It’s a film that has such subtle tension and scares that it blends so well as a relationship drama with admittedly horrifying elements. Aster continues to exploit what makes audiences tick, and does so effectively with plenty of disturbing imagery and gore. The filming locations, cinematography and cast are all fantastic, coupled with characters that feel relatable from the start. Florence Pugh gives her career-best performance in a stunning, star-making turn that feels raw, and the scares are all deserved. Midsommar is easily my favorite film of the decade, and in my top five of all time. Speaking of A24 movies, Robert Eggers blessed us with his sophomore movie, The Lighthouse. His movie brilliantly tells a simple tale of two men going completely bonkers in a lighthouse overtime with a black and white, powerfully-acted film that greatly benefits from the chemistry of its two leads. Still, no Oscar nominations. Oh, that’s right…The Academy Awards have forgotten about the genre.

In conclusion, I haven’t covered absolutely everything, but definitely the highlights of good and bad for each year leading up to 2020. My research has proven that while horror is still far from the greatest genre, it continuously gets better with every year with some setbacks. Eventually, Hollywood will realize their wrongdoings (hopefully), and scary movie fans will get consistent hits for them to enjoy. In a future where no Bullshit Horror for Toddlers exists, I’ll know why I put myself through hours upon hours of garbage.

The Pandemic Takes Its Toll Again as "No Time to Die" is Delayed Till 2021

2020 strikes again, pushing back the final bond movie

---

By: Keaton Marcus

Fuck off, Coronavirus. Daniel Craig’s final James Bond movie, No Time to Die, has been announced to be delayed till April 2, 2021, vacating its November 20 release date. I guess we’ll have to wait till Easter weekend, folks.

The odd thing is, this is a horrible business decision. The April 2 release date next year puts the movie on the same weekend as Universal’s F9, the next Fast & Furious installment. Both are heavyweight, highly-anticipated blockbusters, and putting one on the same release date as the other may not be so good for the box office. If both movies keep these dates, which I don’t think they will, it’ll be an all-out battle for the number one slot. Also, no matter what happens, the fight will chop the movie’s receipts in half. Universal decided to provide no comment for the release change, but I’ll bet they’re pissed as hell.

“MGM, Universal and Bond producers, Michael G Wilson and Barbara Broccoli, today announced the release of No Time To Die, the 25th film in the James Bond series, will be delayed until 2 April in order to be seen by a worldwide theatrical audience.  We understand the delay will be disappointing to our fans but we now look forward to sharing No Time To Die next year,” said the studio in their official statement.

We all knew this was coming. The decision was made at a time when the pandemic holds New York theaters, LA cinemas, and many more across the US, in its clutches. Christopher Nolan’s most-recent film, Tenet, was supposed to be the savior of theater chains, and its halt at the domestic box office humbled and surprised studios. Three major blockbusters have moved their dates (again) since the second weekend of Nolan’s movie: Black Widow, WW 1984, and now this.

One thing is for sure: next year will be packed with big movies. From Godzilla vs. Kong, to plenty of superhero sequels, and anticipated indies, it’ll be a wet dream for moviegoers. But for the remainder of 2020, Dune only stands, with a date set at the end of this year. The thing is, that’ll probably be delayed as well.

---

IN THIS ARTICLE:

Jamie Foxx's Electro Joining the MCU Brings Multi-Verse Possiblities

can andrew garfield and tobey maguire join the mCU along with jamie foxx?

---

By: Keaton Marcus

Jamie Foxx recently confirmed that he would be returning as Electro in MCU’s third Spider-Man movie with Tom Holland. While nothing is fully trustworthy, the Multi-Verse possibilities that fans have been asking for may become a reality.

Foxx’s portrayal of Electro showed up in 2014’s The Amazing Spider-Man 2, which due to the disappointing box office and reviews, ended that attempt at a big new superhero franchise. Andrew Garfield played that incarnation of Peter Parker, and it does bring thoughts about whether he will join Holland’s counterpart. The two newest installments in the Spider-Man universe are Homecoming and Far from Home, both of which here big successes (the former earned 880 million, the latter grossed over 1.1 billion), and became critical darlings. Could a potential third installment featuring not only Foxx, but Garfield as well save those two characters from embarrassment?

But there’s more. Remember Sam Raimi’s Spider-Man trilogy? The classic ones, which ran from 2002-2007, started out gracefully. Maguire had his debut in the first movie, which holds a 90% “Certified Fresh” on Rotten Tomatoes, and made over 825 million dollars. The direct sequel made plenty of profit as well, amassing to 788 million, a smaller, but still very solid number. It was also a critical success, and remains the highest-rated Spidey flick, holding at 93%. But all good things must come to an end. The third, and final movie of the trilogy then came along. Highly anticipated, it ended up a bloated, over-produced mess with only fine performances and some entertaining action to barely save it from complete disaster. In terms of ticket sales, it was a monster hit, earning about 895 million dollars, but its mixed reviews from audiences and critics ended the franchise.

Enough with the numbers. Foxx joining the MCU brings so many possibilities. Raimi’s Doc-Oc could have a nice role, so can Green Goblin, and many more iconic characters from the character’s films. If you stuff in too much, however, it could end up like the garbage that Amazing Spider-Man 2 or Spider-Man 3 was. Hold your horses, though. Sony’s Into the Spider-Verse managed to combine many different characters from other universes, and ended a huge success with critics and audiences. It didn’t make a huge splash at the box office, though. But despite making only 375 million worldwide, it does have a sequel on the way, and some potential TV spin-offs.

In terms of the release date, the third movie in MCU’s Spidey franchise should open December, 2021 if Covid doesn’t mess everything up.

Samuel L. Jackson Get's His Own Nick Fury Series at Disney+

Motherfucker! It’s time for a nick fury series

As if Disney+ couldn’t get enough hype with their upcoming series, Samuel L. Jackson himself is set to return for a Nick Fury spin-off. It may not be a sequel to Snakes on a Plane, but it’s the closest thing we’ll get to absolute legendary greatness.

The plot has been kept under wraps, and the production is in very early stages, but we have heard some more good news. Kyle Bradstreet, the up-and-coming director of the acclaimed Mr. Robot series, will helm it. If Disney and Marvel actually go through with this, it will be Jackson’s first series regular television role.

Jackson has been in plenty of movies, however. He signed up for a nine-film contract in the MCU to star as Fury. His first appearance was in the Iron Man trilogy alongside Robert Downey Jr. and Scarlett Johansson, and since then he’s appeared in Spider-Man: Far from Home, Captain Marvel, the Avengers movies etc. He’s also been in ABC’s Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.

My opinion on the announcement is fairly positive. With both WandaVision and The Mandalorian season two to be excited about, Disney Plus is quickly becoming one of the most prolific streaming services out there since its launch last year. Bradstreet has proven himself to be a talented director, and Jackson is nothing less than flawless in the role. So, overall, I do look forward to watching the show if it ever happens.

M. Night Shyamalan Reveals Title Poster for His Newest Film

“Old”, a new trip from m. night shyamalan, coming next summer

Although M. Night Shyamalan may have lost some of his approval from critics on his latest works, such as Glass, he is still finding ways to continue his up-and-down career. The divisive director has just revealed the poster for the film Old, and I’ll get into the plot later.

His newest thriller has an ensemble cast that includes Vicky Krieps, Alex Wolff, Thomasin McKenzie, Eliza Scanlen, Rufus Sewell, Embeth Davidtz, Aaron Pierre, Abbey Lee, Nikki Amuka-Bird, Emun Elliot, and Ken Leung. That’s a large list of people, and I am reasonably excited what he will do with such a big group of actors. Still, I definitely won’t go in as hyped as I could be considering some of his weaker movies like The Village, After Earth and The Lady in the Water.

The movie’s poster depicts an hourglass, with people falling instead of sand. The artwork’s tagline reads: “It’s only a matter of time”, which I suppose teases a sort of race against time aspect. The announcement tweet says: “Feels like a miracle that I am standing here shooting the first shot my film. It’s called Old. You can see the tweet below.

Feels like a miracle that I am standing here shooting the first shot of my new film. It's called Old. #OldMovie @OldTheMovie pic.twitter.com/hth8jUum8K

— M. Night Shyamalan (@MNightShyamalan) September 26, 2020

Shyamalan is announced to direct, write and produce his new movie. The plot details are very meager at the moment, but it’s confirmed that the film is based off the French graphic novel Sandcastle by Pierre Oscar Levy. The premise sets motion when a dead body is found on the beach, signaling some unnatural happenings. Marc Bienstock will also produce, and Steven Schneider will serve as executive producer.

The movie is debuting in theaters on July 23, 2021…If it’s not delayed.

---

IN THIS ARTICLE:

Marvel Moves "Black Widow", "Shang-Chi" and "Eternals" To Next Year

Phase 4 get’s a trio of major pushbacks…again

---

By: Keaton Marcus

In a year full of delays amidst the Coronavirus pandemic, we thought the bad news would eventually slow down, but after this much, Marvel just moved three of their highly-anticipated Phase 4 movies. Black Widow, Shang-Chi and Eternals have all been pushed back a meaty amount of time.

After Phase 3, I wasn’t as hyped for the upcoming MCU films. I’m surely going to watch all of them in the theaters, but not with the same expectations as something like Avengers: Endgame. Black Widow is the only one I’ll be going into with gusto. First of all, the trailers reminded me of the last two Captain America movies, two of my favorites in the franchise. Second of all, Scarlett Johansson has proven herself to be a capable action hero, and Florence Pugh also stars, a terrific rising actress that I’d love to see in a big blockbuster. With the other three, I haven’t seen any clips yet, and I don’t know much about their characters, so truly, it’s just too hard to tell whether they’ll be good.

I do trust that Kevin Feige will provide us with a satisfying continuation, and perhaps a new team of Avengers after the thrilling, 3-hour finale. Anyway, the new release dates are in order: Black Widow will now debut on May 7, 2021, Shang-Chi in July 9 the same year, and Eternals later on in November 5. That’s a long way from now, but Marvel fans will get something to chew on this year with Disney+’s Wandavision, which just dropped its full teaser during the Emmys. Overall, however, it’s a sad day for us fanboys, especially for Scar Jo’s upcoming prequel, which has now been pushed a year after its original release date. All before Covid completely changed the film industry forever.

In terms of other Marvel movies, Doctor Strange and the Multiverse of Madness is set to release on March 25, 2022, and since Chadwick Boseman sadly passed, Black Panther II was pushed to May 6, 2022 with a possible new leader of Wakanda.

---

IN THIS ARTICLE:

"Mulan" Remake Fizzles in Anticipated Chinese Opening Weekend

what made the surefire hit bomb in the chinese box office?

---

By: Keaton Marcus

Disney released their live-action update on the 1998 animated classic Mulan, one of their many remakes to the studio’s Golden Age. The movie was received reasonably well by critics, not common for most reboots, scoring a 75% on Rotten Tomatoes and with us. However, it didn’t rank as high with the fans, or in the Chinese box office, where it was expected to be a huge hit.

All this controversy started when the film’s star, Yifei Liu, allegedly supporting Hong Kong police brutality, and it recently became more intense, with reports explaining that the movie’s battle sequence was shot in a location where Muslims are under severe repression. That received global backlash, and another nit-pick specifically the Chinese had was the fact that all characters speak English, which made the film feel a bit odd, especially since this was supposed to be a more grounded remake.

“The movie is a waste of Mulan’s innocent name; it really is heartbreaking,” Qiu Tian, 30, a psychology teacher at a Beijing university who recently saw the movie, said in an interview. “The director completely misunderstood Mulan and stubbornly twisted her character into this role as an extreme feminist and hero.” This esteemed man clearly knows his stuff about the legend, and his criticism hits hard. Although I still enjoyed the movie quite a lot, I will admit that there were some serious flaws in both the film, production locations and the overall marketing.

From when it received its PG-13 MPAA rating, to when we saw the trailer, audiences were expecting a more grounded, realistic take on the legend with some real battle sequences. What really drove us away from that while watching is the fact that there’s actual magic involved, both in the title character, who’s said to have powerful Chi in her, making the once normal woman a total Jedi. Otherwise, there’s a witch of sorts, played by Gong Li, who can shape shift into a falcon…She’s one of the main villains. True, the movie did get some stuff right, like not including actual tunes during the experience, no talking dragon played by Eddie Murphy, or a cricket for good luck, but it’s very half-assed in that respect.

In terms of the actual movie, disregarding its realism attempts, makes it the best Disney remake of all-time. That isn’t a high bar to hit, to be frank, but it’s still a fairly good film. First of all, Yifei Liu, no matter what type of person she is, is a complete badass, especially in the action sequences, including the rest of the cast. Secondly, the cinematography and the battles are absolutely stunning visually, complete with some gorgeous set pieces and beautiful filming locations. Thirdly, it’s kind of a blessing not to have any of the tunes in the original, truly separating itself from it. This makes Mulan 2020 pole-vault over other remakes like The Lion King, a shot-for-shot, soulless attempt with updated visual effects.

Not only did audiences all over the world pan the film, pummeling Rotten Tomatoes’ audience score to a divided 51%, but China wasn’t warm to it either in the box office. Expected to have very good sales in the country, Mulan went into its foreign weekend with high hopes. Despite Disney claiming they’re very “pleased” with the viewership on Disney+ Premier Access (you had to pay 30 bucks), it had tepid sales in the country.

With an opening of only 23 million, it was enough to top the Chinese box office (without any major competition), but far from what executives were predicting. Other movies that recently debuted there fared far better, including Tenet, which raked a solid 29.6 million, and especially China’s war epic The Eight Hundred, which opened to the tune of 75.7 million, bringing its total to 391 million. Now those, ladies and gentlemen, are some strong numbers. So why did Mulan fizzle in a marketplace where it should flourish?

I’ve already explained it, to be honest. It was a conjunction of the mixed audience reception, global backlash over many controversial instances, and just an overall marketing failure. For the most part, it wasn’t even due to the quality of the thing, more to the expectations of it all. In my opinion, this film is a step in the right direction for a new wave that hasn’t fully been realized, but should be on the horizon. A line-up of more serious, different remakes…Or even just films. Although we’re living in a post-creativity era, so don’t expect too much.

---

iN THIS ARTICLE:

Netflix Acquires "Malcolm & Marie", a Film Shot During Quarantine

“malcolm & Marie”, zendaya and John david washington’s secret romantic drama, will premiere on netflix

---

By: Keaton Marcus

The movie that was shot during quarantine, Malcolm & Marie, just got some major news on the type of its release. It was announced that Netflix would acquire the romantic drama starring John David Washington and Zendaya. The two have worked together in the past in HBO’s Euphoria, which recently shut down production due to the pandemic. Guys, this streaming service is getting everything…At the movie theater’s expense.

The platform picked up the movie for a hefty 30 million dollars, according to The Wrap. The film was written by Sam Levinson, who also stands as director and producer. His credits include The Wizard of Lies and Assassination Nation most recently, both positively received films. Washington plays a filmmaker who’s headed home from a movie premiere with his girlfriend, portrayed by Zendaya. However, once they get home, the two begin to examine their relationship, and things go south from there.

Our two leads have quite the buzz lately. Washington (he’s Denzel’s son) rose to fame for his captivating performance in BlacKkKlansman as the Ron Stallworth, but arguably his most popular credit is currently Christopher Nolan’s Tenet, released in theaters a couple weeks ago. Both of his performances have been praised unequivocally, and he’s certainly a talented actor. Zendaya is another rising star with a truly stunning career. From her breakout role in the MCU’s Spider-Man: Homecoming as MJ, musical The Greatest Showman, DreamWorks animated film Smallfoot, returning for Spider-Man: Far from Home, and in the future: Denis Villeneuve’s highly-anticipated sci-fi adaptation Dune.

Considering the cast, and decent talent in the director, this should be pretty great, especially since it’s already been compared to Marriage Story. That was Noah Baumbach’s Oscar-winning 2019 film, and arguably one of the best during the year, about a couple going through divorce, a complicated one. In fact, not only the two stars, but the actual filmmaker has worked with these two in Euphoria, he created the series. Since that was so well-received by critics, it’s only obvious to expect this one will be too.

It is a little disappointing that we won’t be seeing this one in theaters, but we got MS on Netflix as well, and that wasn’t too much of an issue. Overall, the film is definitely in my most-anticipated of the year list, and I will surely watch it no matter the reviews.

---

IN THIS ARTICLE:

Beautiful, Terrifying Orange Skies Haunt San Francisco, and Bring Back Memories of Masterpiece "Blade Runner 2049"

What’s up with the san francisco-2049 comparisons lately?

As if 2020 couldn’t get any worse, wild fires have continued to rage across San Francisco, CA, and, lately, the sky has gotten a little bit of a makeover. What do I mean? Well, the sky has turned, umm…Orange. Remember those hazy, hauntingly beautiful shots in Blade Runner 2049, they’re a bit similar to SF at the moment.

That’s right, Denis Villeneuve’s masterpiece of a dystopian film is actually coming to life in our troubled world. 2049 has these scenes when Ryan Gosling’s character K enters the high radiation zones, this time, it’s because of the fires absolutely ravaging the state of California. So, on social media, many accounts, including myself, have come together to compare these incredible, yet terrifying real-life photos with Roger Deakins’ stunning cinematography. Deakins’ work compared to the terrifying, ethereal glow is horrifyingly similar. And hey, an orange president, and a sky of similar color, why are we surprised? Oh man, I should be happy that San Fran’s skies are looking like my favorite movie of all-time, but at the same time, I’m not.

It could be amazing for a photograph, nonetheless, my heart goes out to any families and firefighters suffering in these awful conditions. Still, what’s really creeping me out is the fact that Villeneuve’s achievement of a film is also set in a apocalyptic California. Coincidence? I think not. No, just kidding, but it does make you wonder if we’re really living in a dystopian world.

In some ways, we are. We’ve got a pandemic on our hands: the Coronavirus, and these orange skies aren’t helping. So, arguably, our world could be considered apocalyptic, just not as obvious as some of the Hollywood blockbusters make it. We may not have zombies like Resident Evil, the Games in The Hunger Games, or the Blackout in 2049, it’s just a more subtle threat, not overplayed like it is in the movies. Though it can be darn cool to realize you’re living in an environment mildly similar to some of your favorite films, these are issues we really have to address and be serious about.

In Washington, where I reside, we’re about to get some major sand storms, so it’ll be more like Interstellar for us north of Cali. We still have the smoke, though, so it’s a bit of a double helping of trouble. Seriously, though, can 2020 really get any worse?

---

IN THIS ARTICLE:

John Boyega Says 'All the Nuance" was Given to Daisy Ridley and Adam Driver

“Star Wars” actor slams disney for their treatment of diverse characters in the blockbuster franchise

---

By: Keaton Marcus

John Boyega, who portrays Finn in the Star Wars sequel trilogy, explained to British GQ that he felt misrepresented among other colored cast members by Disney for the now extremely controversial franchise.

“What I would say to Disney is do not bring out a Black character, market them to be much more important in the franchise than they are and then have them pushed to the side,” he said in the interview published Wednesday. He’s referring to Finn, a former stormtrooper that turned out as one of the biggest characters of Episode VII, The Force Awakens, which was the first installment to this new trilogy.

The criticism hits so hard because of the clear decline of screen time that Finn got during the span of three movies. He started out as a well-written, intriguing character in the first, and one of the main heroes. In The Last Jedi, director JJ Abrams stepped down for Rian Johnson (Looper, Knives Out) to replace him. This sequel focused much more on Daisy Ridley’s Rey and Adam Driver’s Kylo Ren, throwing Finn aside to an underwhelming subplot with another disappointing colored character, Rose.

In the final installment, The Rise of Skywalker, it was a mixed bag of thrilling action sequences, powerful lead performances, and a messy story/script. Finn was one of the main issues. After The Last Jedi received backlash from the fanbase, Disney put back JJ Abrams in the director’s chair, who’s talents were mostly squandered on course-correcting the previous movie. Amidst all the ripping and tearing of Mr. Johnson’s subversion of expectations, Finn was sidelined as one of the background characters, not leaving Boyega much to do despite his undeniably committed performance.

This does not just refer to Boyega. By characters of color he meant both Kelly Marie Tran’s Rose Tico and Oscar Isaac’s Poe Dameron. Both potentially great characters being mostly sidelined to the advantage of Ridley and Driver. “Like, you guys knew what to do with Daisy Ridley, you knew what to do with Adam Driver,” he added. “You knew what to do with these other people, but when it came to Kelly Marie Tran, when it came to John Boyega, you know f..k all. So what do you want me to say.”

Boyega also told the publication, “What they want you to say is, ‘I enjoyed being a part of it. It was an amazing experience.’ Nah, nah, nah. I’ll take that deal when it’s an amazing experience. They gave all the nuance to Adam Driver, all the nuance to Daisy Ridley. Let’s be honest, Daisy knows this. Adam knows this. Everybody knows. I’m not exposing anything.”

Daisy Ridley and Adam Driver both gave passionate performances as their two respective characters, but that was at the expense of the others. It didn’t have to be, though. For a trilogy focused on creating a more diverse part of the SW cinematic universe, it was especially disappointing to see the films’ three colored characters go downhill in terms of screen time and quality each movie.

I do not hate the sequel trilogy AT ALL. Many do, and because of that, the franchise as a whole has become one of the most debated topics in the film industry. In my personal opinion, The Force Awakens and The Last Jedi were both close to excellent…Action-packed, beautifully filmed and very well-acted. The Rise of Skywalker was just as entertaining, but it failed to wrap up the trilogy in cohesive fashion, filled with plot holes and lazy writing. A very mixed bag for me.

In terms of Boyega coming out after the whole thing ended with a bit of a thud, I’m happy for the guy. He’s a very promising actor with lot’s of potential in future projects. The most unpleasant factor to all of this was the treatment by Disney, completely unacceptable.

---

IN THIS ARTICLE: