Thoughts on The Crow (1994)

Image courtesy of getwallpapers.com

Hello, everyone. Long time, no see. I realize that, again, I haven’t been posting much this year, but I’ve been trying my best to make up for that. I had several ideas for what to come back with, but I decided that with the holiday featured here, I figured, “Why not come back with this?”, and so I am. I also figured it’d be the perfect time to do it, since it’d not only be around the holiday itself, but also since this year marks the 25th Anniversary of the movie. Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you my review of one of the best comic book movies out there (and one that isn’t from Marvel nor DC, I should add), and that is… The Crow.

The story follows Eric Draven, a rock star who was supposed to get married on Halloween. Unfortunately, the night before, known as Devil’s Night (an infamous occasion in Detroit), a gang broke into their apartment and trashed the place, resulting in both he and his fiancée Shelly Webster dead, with Shelly having also been beaten and raped.

However, legend has it that if the conditions of your death are bad enough to where your soul can’t be at peace, a crow will bring your soul back to right the wrongs. One year after he and Shelly were killed, a crow taps on Eric’s grave, bringing him back. Upon revival, Eric goes after all of the gang members, picking them off one by one to reach the boss responsible for everything that happened.

What Worked: The acting across the board is fantastic. Brandon Lee (Bruce’s son), who tragically passed away during filming as a result of an accident on set, gives a phenomenal performance as Eric Draven. You feel his pain to where you’re rooting for him immediately to take the gang down, and every time he goes after one of the members, it’s satisfying to see them get what’s coming to them.

Brandon Lee has some great, and quite emotional, scenes with Rochelle Davis, who plays Sarah, a friend of Eric and Shelly. Sarah provides narration that bookends the movie, and the moment her opening narration ends, you’re in for a gratifying experience.

Despite the dark tone and the Gothic look for Detroit, the movie does have some humorous moments with Sergeant Albrecht, played by Ernie Hudson of Ghostbusters fame. He has a snarky personality, but the humor mainly comes from banter in scenes with Sarah or Eric, and, on at least one occasion, both. There are two scenes where it’s particularly funny. One is where Eric pops in and Albrecht still has his hat on, which Eric notices almost immediately. The other is basically where there’s a Batman-Gordon dynamic between Eric and Albrecht, where Albrecht turns around and Eric is gone, similar to how Batman does it after he’s done speaking with Commissioner Gordon.

Speaking of which, there are several times where you can tell this likely influenced The Dark Knight. There’s that dynamic, a scene where Eric disappears and Albrecht turns to Sarah, telling her, “He does that a lot.” (similar to how Batman did it with Gordon and Harvey Dent, to which Gordon tells Dent, “He does that.”), and perhaps the most famous one is a scene involving a meeting.

This movie also has some of the most despicable villains you’ll ever see. The gang members (Tin-Tin, Funboy, T-Bird, and Skank) may be psychotic, but the most evil of them all is their boss Top Dollar, played by Michael Wincott (Treasure Planet*). He is just insane, and his voice is menacing. Then you get to his henchman, Grange, played by Tony Todd (Final Destination), whose voice is deep enough to intimidate anyone. Every time I see him, he’s awesome, and it holds true here.

Everyone else is really good, even if they’re not in it that much, aside from maybe David Patrick Kelly (Sully from Commando) as T-Bird and Angel David as Skank, who get the most screentime of the four gang members.

In addition to the performances, especially that of Brandon Lee, where this movie really stands out is the visual style, along with the surprising amount of emotion for a revenge movie. It may be grim and gritty, but it also has some excellent cinematography from Dariusz Wolski, who would go on to shoot the first four installments of the Pirates of the Caribbean franchise, as well as a few of Sir Ridley Scott’s more recent projects like Prometheus, The Martian, and Alien: Covenant. It accompanies Alex Proyas’s direction perfectly, which I will cover momentarily.

As if certain scenes between Eric and Sarah weren’t emotional enough, the score from Graeme Revell (known for scoring the Riddick franchise, Daredevil, and Sin City, among numerous others) really brings it home, namely the theme. Aside from Daredevil, this has probably his best theme. I will say this, though: Something else that the two movies share is that the soundtrack is awesome, featuring songs from Rage Against the Machine, The Cure, and even Nine Inch Nails.

When it’s not emotional, the movie delivers great action sequences. The best ones are Eric’s fight with Tin-Tin, the aforementioned meeting scene, and the finale.

The excitement and emotion are very well-balanced through the direction of Alex Proyas, who brings a clear sense of bleakness to his style, which is evident in the look of his follow-up, Dark City, the disaster-centric plot of Knowing, and to an extent, the tone of I, Robot. However, I still think this is his best movie.

The premise of this movie is also great, and it has some of the best story structure you can see. From the first frame, you know how dark the setting is, you’re instantly engaged in the story, and you care about the characters. You want to root for the hero throughout, and you can’t wait for the villains to be taken down. It may be fast-paced, but not once does it feel rushed. It flows very naturally, and as a result, the ending and all of the emotional and exciting story beats building up to it are earned.

Overall: The Crow is not only a great comic book movie, but it’s a great movie period that needs to be seen at least once, even if the dark and gritty approach isn’t your thing overall. While it does have a dark appearance, it’s not overly dark, as it does have its share of humor. It has just the right amount of emotional depth for both the story and characters mixed in with some fantastic action. It’s very well shot, well directed, and especially well acted. It makes it all the more sad that a star died doing what he loved while making this, because Brandon Lee really could have had his big break here, and gone on to have many more defining roles for years to come, establishing a legacy of his own like his father did. Because of what happened, it’s nothing short of a miracle that they were able to finish it and release it, but because they did, everyone was better for it, being able to experience something awesome. Although its star didn’t really get to have a legacy, the movie itself certainly has, becoming a huge hit and a cult classic, and for good reason: It rightfully earned it.

I remembered really liking this movie the last time I saw it, but having seen it again, both for myself and for this review, it ended up being even better than I remembered. Words cannot describe how much I love this movie.

If you haven’t seen it, be prepared for some heavy stuff, but once you do see it, I guarantee that you’ll be glad you did.

*Criminally underrated animated movie, by the way, and I cannot wait to get to that, along with a couple other ones I feel similarly about (one of which was also scored by Graeme Revell).

Thoughts on Ready or Not (2019)

Image courtesy of wall.alphacoders.com

Since the summer is about to end with Labor Day Weekend, and the year’s offerings of horror movies are only about to get bigger with the release of It: Chapter Two, it was about time I reviewed another horror movie or thriller. As with Crawl a few weeks ago, with this one, the marketing also made it look at least okay… but then I started hearing the word of mouth for it was actually really good, and it was another one of the biggest surprises of the year. To start off the long weekend, I decided to check it out for myself, and everything I had heard was true. This really is one of the biggest surprises of the year.

So here I come… with my review for Ready or Not.

The story follows the Le Domas family, who are not only rich, but have a particular tradition. Any time someone in the family gets married, on the night of the wedding, they play a game. One of the sons, Alex, marries a young woman named Grace, thus allowing for the tradition to continue. When the clock strikes midnight, Grace learns how the tradition works: The newest addition to the family draws a card from a wooden box and whatever game was put on the card is the game they play. This time, the game is Hide and Seek. She has to hide, and the rest of the family has to find her. However, it turns out that there’s a catch to the game which is also part of the tradition: The family has to hunt down their newest member before dawn.

What Worked: The main thing that makes this movie so surprising is the tone. It may have been sold as just another horror movie with a ridiculous premise, but what wasn’t revealed well in advance is this: There’s a sense of self-awareness to it. It knows its premise is ridiculous, and just runs with it. As a result, it becomes more of a horror comedy*. I had heard a little bit about the self-awareness going in, but what really caught me off guard while watching it was how funny it was. When there’s either a witty line of dialogue, a kill that comes out of nowhere (the latter of which does happen a couple times), or even a moment of downtime, it’s hilarious, and sometimes it’s all three. Both the movie and the experience become that much more fun because of it.

The mix of horror and humor benefit from a clever script, as there are some intense moments here with some comedy thrown in. The biggest example for me was a scene set in the kitchen; for anyone interested in checking this movie out, look out for that.

All of this especially shows in the performances, particularly Samara Weaving as Grace. She’s fantastic in this movie. In fact, everyone is really good, even Henry Czerny as the father Tony, and Andie MacDowell as the mother Becky. They all play off of each other very well with their performances, which in turn shows in the interaction between the characters.

There are four other things that stand out here: The set design, the cinematography, the direction and the score. I mentioned the kitchen scene, but the set design throughout the whole movie is excellent. The same goes for the cinematography and the direction, because this movie is well shot throughout. It’s also moments like the kitchen scene and the ones that focus on scares**, regardless of whether or not they set up a comedic moment, where Brian Tyler’s score really shines.

One more thing that’s worth noting: It’s fast-paced. The movie is only a little over an hour and a half, and it does go by quickly, but not once does it feel like it’s going by too quickly.

What Didn’t Work: I do have a couple minor flaws. There are some questionable decisions, an example being how something is established with one of the women in the family, and yet one of the men gives her his weapon. The moment that happens, you just know it’s clearly going to go well. However, it does lead to a running gag and one of the funniest moments of the movie, which involves that character and weapon.

The reason why the family is trying to hunt Grace down is brought up several times, which makes the ending kind of predictable because of it. It does build up to an ultimately very satisfying payoff, though. What happens is predictable, but how it happens is not. I honestly thought it was going to happen in one of several different ways, and that was not the first one that came to mind for me. Plus, it’s so unexpected that it becomes another hilarious moment.

Otherwise, that’s really it.

Overall: Ready or Not is the latest example of taking a horror movie or thriller that at first glance sounds ridiculous, and then revealing that there’s more to it than you thought. As with Crawl, this is another case of “Looks can be deceiving” or “Don’t judge a book by its cover” (or rather a movie by its trailer; same difference), because you never really know what you might be in for until you see it for yourself. It’s also a movie that uses the absurdity of its story to its advantage by playing it silly rather than straight, and it’s much better for it.

With just the right balance of horrific and hilarious moments, a great score, smart writing, terrific set design, cinematography and direction, and fantastic acting featuring an excellent lead performance from Samara Weaving, Ready or Not is one of the biggest surprises of both the summer and of the whole year. If you’re looking for a movie to see before you start your Fall Movie Season off, be it with something like It: Chapter Two or even Rambo: Last Blood, I’d say give this one a shot, especially if you’re someone who feels horror movies are best experienced at night and with as big a crowd as possible. You might just end up having one of the most fun experiences you’ve had all year, as I did.

*Yes, horror comedy is an actual sub-genre of horror (Scream, need I say more).

**Including a scene involving a nail, which is so unsettling… even if it’s not quite as unsettling as the nail scene in A Quiet Place.

Thoughts on Crawl (2019)

Image courtesy of wallpapersden.com

As I mentioned in the intro of the Deep Blue Sea review, there is another movie that came out the same month of its Anniversary. It’s another creature feature, albeit a more recent one, but it does the same thing that made Deep Blue Sea so effective: Build up the scares, and have creatures that are scary enough already to encounter in real life just pop out when you least expect it in ways that actually work. With Deep Blue Sea, it was sharks. This time it’s alligators, in the best thriller of the year by far: Crawl.

The story follows a woman named Haley Keller who hasn’t heard from her father Dave for sometime. To make matters worse, a Category 5 hurricane hits Florida, so she goes to the family’s old house to try to find him and get him out. However, while she does manage to find him in the crawl space, the area is not only slowly flooding… vicious alligators have found their way in.

What Worked: The acting is really good, especially from Kaya Scodelario and Barry Pepper*. They have great chemistry as father and daughter, too, and there are also some moments that make you really feel for them. There’s that sense of dread and you want to see them make it out alive.

The creature effects are fantastic in this movie, particularly this one shot involving a close-up of a gator’s eye. Whenever the gators show up, they look great, and there’s one part that looks as excellent as the aforementioned eye shot. It involves one corner of the crawl space, which is as best I can put it without giving too much away. It also involves something else crawling on, rather than in, someone’s skin. It’s one of the most unsettling scenes here aside from the gator attacks and kills.

Also, Alexandre Aja ends up being the perfect choice to direct this movie, as he’s had experience with creature features before, and ones that embrace their crazy stories; for evidence of that, look at his version of Piranha.

Now let’s get to the meat of this movie (no pun intended). The gator attack scenes are so brutal, and I don’t just mean the kills. You see people get thrashed around like rag dolls, with Haley’s first gator encounter being the most intense one, as well as bone fractures.

If those don’t make you wince, the kills certainly will. Be on the lookout for one involving a cop… not the one in the trailer, but one shortly after that.

This leads me to another thing that Aja did so well with Piranha that he does again here: He knows how to do shock value, and especially gore, properly. Unlike most other horror directors who tend to put them in for the sake of having them in the movie, he builds them up, and then uses them when you least expect it. As a result, you’re constantly on edge.

He handles the scares in the same way. Yes, there are jump scares, but they all felt genuine to me. I did not spot a single false alarm** jump scare. Even the background scares will have you on edge, like one in the same scene with the goriest death in the movie.

The score and cinematography are also very good.

What Didn’t Work: Some of the scares you may see coming, where you can call who’s going to die in those scenes almost immediately. There are some stupid decisions here as well, but they’re minimal at best.

I also had a minor issue with how it ended. It was satisfying, but then it just cut to black when it did and the credits began rolling. I would have liked for it to go on for maybe another couple minutes or so. That’s really it in terms of flaws, though.

Overall: If you’re looking for something to see on Friday night, with as big an audience as possible, Crawl is the movie for you. It’s intense, it’s scary, it’s gory as can be, but it’s also a lot of fun. Besides, while you may see some of the scares coming… how they happen, you definitely won’t, and the characters are very resourceful for the most part. It’s easily one of the year’s biggest surprises, and it might be my pick for Best Thriller by the end of the year, unless another thriller somehow finds a way to top it.

*In a Maze Runner reunion, by the way.

**That’s the term used to describe cheap jump scares, the biggest example being whenever an animal (usually a cat) jumps out from the shadows and runs across the room.

Thoughts on Deep Blue Sea (1999)

Image courtesy of moviemania.io

It’s that time again, everyone: Another month, another Anniversary post… and coincidentally, right in the middle of Shark Week. That’s right, folks: This one is for a shark movie (no, not that one; that’s next year, although it is referenced here at least once, and the influence it had on this one is there to some extent). It’s a very intense thriller, and my personal favorite shark movie that isn’t Jaws. It’s very scary at points, but it does what would be done to equally great effect in the recently-released Crawl: Build up the scares, and have creatures that are scary enough already to encounter in real life just pop out when you least expect it in ways that actually work. That movie, ladies and gentlemen, is Deep Blue Sea.

The story follows a group of researchers conducting an experiment using sharks in the hopes of reactivating human brain cells, and ultimately, finding a cure for Alzheimer’s Disease. However, things go haywire when several genetically engineered sharks break free and flood the facility.

What Worked: The acting is overall very good. There were three standouts for me. The first one is Thomas Jane (The Punisher, and I even liked him in The Predator*), who plays Carter Blake, the team’s shark wrangler. Not only is he an awesome character, but it’s also pretty smart for them to have someone that can restrain the sharks when necessary. The decisions they make are more smart than stupid, but I’ll delve deeper into that in a moment.

The one cast member who’s probably the biggest name out of all of them was actually the second standout for me, and that is Samuel L. Jackson, who plays Russell Franklin, the executive sent to the facility after an incident in the beginning of the movie. When you have someone like him, you’re bound to get some great quotes and moments. You definitely get at least one of the two here.

The biggest standout for me is of course the best character in the movie: Sherman “Preacher” Dudley, the team’s cook, portrayed by LL Cool J. One could say he’s the comic relief, and to an extent, he is. He gets some of the best lines because his delivery is so hilarious.

Since I’m giving my thoughts on the performances, this leads to my point on the characters. I briefly mentioned how having a shark wrangler is a smart decision. A lot of the decisions made here are actually smart. Two examples come from Preacher; one is when he’s backed into a corner (so to speak), and the other is a “last resort” type thing, which is another great moment in this movie.

Even though the majority of her decisions are stupid rather than smart, Saffron Burrows’s character Dr. Susan McAlester does make at least one smart one. It’s in a scene where she has her own “backed into a corner” scenario, and it involves the best shot of a shark’s fin in the movie, and one of the better shark shots.

Whenever you see the sharks in more contained areas, like in that scene, or in close-up, they look really good. They used both animatronic sharks (as was famously done with Jaws) and computer-generated sharks for this movie, so the more close-up shots of the sharks look like they were animatronic. The effects there hold up very well 20 years later.

Trevor Rabin’s score is really good, particularly the theme; you get cues of it throughout the movie following the opening, and it’s so unsettling.

The score accompanies a great use of tension, which results in some very effective scares, including the one death scene that this movie is known for; even though I won’t spoil it, you probably already know what it is. Through his direction, Renny Harlin (Die Hard 2, Cliffhanger) manages to pull that off quite well. Aside from Cliffhanger, this might be his best movie. As a result, the movie is not only intense, but also very fast-paced.

There are some fantastic shots, a couple of which are aerial shots, so it has some excellent cinematography on display as well. What surprised me is that this was shot by Stephen F. Windon, who would go on to shoot most of the Fast and the Furious films, starting with Tokyo Drift**.

Then there’s the thing that stands out other than “that scene”: The soundtrack, which includes not one, but two songs from LL Cool J, one of which I find to be among the greatest songs for a movie to come out of the 90s… “Deepest Bluest (My Hat Is Like A Shark’s Fin)”.

What Didn’t Work: Even though there aren’t as many stupid decisions as one might expect, they need to be addressed regardless. There are two examples that really stand out. The first one involves Dr. Jim Whitlock, played by Stellan Skarsgård (Thor, Pirates of the Caribbean), who does still give a good performance despite being only in the movie for a few minutes. You’ll know when you see it. The other, more prominent example involves Susan, which is basically the reason why everything went wrong; in fact, it involved both her and Jim. It’s made very evident that everything is more or less her fault when Carter and Russell display some of the most rational thinking out of everyone by trying to talk some sense into her. At that point, it really shows that Susan has very noble intentions, but has been very misguided in going through with them. Aside from those two particular examples, these types of decisions are present, but don’t stand out nearly as much because they only happen occasionally.

While the moments with the animatronic sharks look really good, the effects are very noticeable for the most part whenever the sharks are out in the open. Even by 1999 standards, the CGI here hasn’t really aged well; plus, we had some phenomenal visual effects at the time, including one particular movie I reviewed earlier this year.

The somewhat dated appearance of the CGI doesn’t just apply to the sharks, because some of the deaths also have it. There’s even some fire and explosion effects that don’t really hold up, either. Now, granted, the CGI here is not laughably bad like the effects in the last 20 minutes of Species (which I need to review), but they’re still noticeable when you see them.

Overall: Deep Blue Sea is a shark movie that may not be as impactful as Jaws, but it doesn’t try to be, although I do appreciate the ways they honor it. It’s only trying to stand out as its own thing, and it really succeeds at that. It keeps you constantly on edge, and when the sharks come out, they really catch you off guard. Some of the deaths are pretty brutal to watch as a result, and while the scares are jump scares, they’re actually done right. The performances are really good, and despite most of their decisions being questionable at best, you still at one point or another feel invested in seeing as many of the characters survive as possible.

Even with the few flaws I have, I still love this movie. Plus, there’s something about them that makes them part of the fun. For example, you know they’re not all going to make the best choices, but sometimes, it helps move the story along, and you get to see how they play out either way.

Deep Blue Sea may not try to surpass Jaws as the better shark movie, but it does have one edge over it: You get to see more than one shark tear people apart in this movie. That, and you get an iconic 90s song in the credits.

*That reminds me… I have a lot of catching up to do, which will likely include quite a few movies that I’m in the minority on, and that is one of them (and once I’ve reviewed that, I might just be introducing a new editorial that I’ve had in mind for some time now, and let’s just say I’ve known the perfect way to start).

**I’ll be reviewing those very soon.

Thoughts on Independence Day (1996)

Image courtesy of moviemania.io

Since the 4th of July has arrived, I figured why not do another holiday review… by celebrating Independence Day with a review of Independence Day.

On July 2nd, 1996, a large mothership enters Earth’s orbit and launches a worldwide attack by sending saucers to major cities, three of which are ultimately decimated.

On July 3rd, world leaders begin attempting counterstrikes of their own, to no avail. However, the Americans do discover why they’re here. When July 4th hits, people around the world come together for what may be either a triumphant victory… or their last stand.

What Worked: The cast is really good. The standouts are Will Smith, Bill Pullman, and Jeff Goldblum, with some highlights also coming from Judd Hirsch, Randy Quaid, Brent Spiner, and to some extent, Harvey Fierstein and Harry Connick Jr. in what are basically extended cameos since both of them are only in the movie for a few minutes.

The script, written by Roland Emmerich himself alongside his producing partner Dean Devlin, is actually pretty good for a disaster movie. It does what a disaster movie should: take the absurdity of the story and embrace it. It shows that everyone involved had fun making it, and in turn it helps show that you are having fun watching it. It also provides some memorable and quotable lines, as well as one of the best speeches in a movie ever. Emmerich’s direction isn’t bad, either. In fact, this is probably his best movie.

When it comes to the effects, the first question that will likely be asked is: Do they hold up now over 20 years later? For the most part, yes… or at least the majority of them do (examples being the designs of the aliens, and how they move around; they looked very practical).

I don’t normally mention this, but it stood out to me here: I really liked the structure of the movie. It takes place over the course of three days: from July 2nd up until July 4th. This timeframe not only shows how the conflict escalates, but it also allows for progression of the narrative. July 2nd - the aliens arrive and three major cities are destroyed. July 3rd - the Americans discover the aliens’ motive. July 4th - you can probably figure out what happens from there. This means the clichés are there, and yet, that’s another result of the absurdity: it becomes more fun to watch because they’re there. It happened in a lot of movies in the 90s (especially in sci-fi and action movies), and this one is no exception, so it gets a pass because it acknowledges them. It may be a predictable pattern you may have seen done before and done better, but it’s still fun to see how it plays out here nonetheless.

Even if it’s more of a sci-fi action movie, it does have some moments that feel like a sci-fi horror movie that are pretty creepy, especially a lab scene, where nothing could possibly go wrong.

What Didn’t Work: Although the majority of the effects on display here still hold up, the rest don’t really stand out. For me, it was some laser effects and some of the fire and explosion effects. Though they are great for the time, the moment I saw the visuals in those scenes, I realized they did not hold up well at all. Also, speaking of the lab scene, while it is creepy, it is one of those scenes you can’t help but predict what’s going to happen.

Overall: Independence Day is a prime example of a blockbuster that accomplished what rarely happens now: get the moviegoing audience interested, and let the hype build up from there. It’s one of those movies where people were actually excited to go see it to the point that it became an event, and ultimately delivered on the hype. It also helped bring large-scale disaster movies back, leading to several being released throughout the rest of the 90s, and garner renewed interest in sci-fi as a whole.

On top of that, it serves as a prime example of what popcorn entertainment should be: fun. The movie in question may not be perfect and have some cheesy moments here and there. However, as long as it shows that it can be self-aware about it and just run with it, it’s done its job, because what’s most important is that the movie ends up being a lot of fun.

Independence Day does exactly that. Even if it’s not a perfect movie, it is still solid in the action, sci-fi, and especially disaster movie departments, and it does hold up really well today.

One thing it is perfect for, though, is your collection, as it’s definitely one to pop in for when you feel like making some noise. For those looking for a movie to watch this Fourth of July weekend, this is a good one to celebrate the occasion.

Thoughts on Tarzan (1999)

Image courtesy of wallpapercave.com

Following the revisiting of two sci-fi classics (including one of my favorite movies of all time), I figured why not do another Anniversary post where I cover something a little lighter, and something that also happens to be a childhood favorite of mine.

This month marks the 20th Anniversary of the movie that marked the end of the Disney Renaissance of the 90s, and one of two Disney movies I grew up with the most*, and that movie is Tarzan, one of numerous adaptations of the works of Edgar Rice Burroughs.

In this version, set in the 1890s, an English couple, along with their infant son, end up in a jungle off the coast of Africa after escaping a shipwreck. They use what they can gather from the wreckage to build a treehouse, but not long after, the couple is killed by a leopard named Sabor. The baby survives, and is later found by a female gorilla named Kala, who lost her own son to the leopard. She brings him back to her clan, where her mate (and the clan leader), Kerchak, allows her to keep the baby but will not call him his son. Kala names the baby Tarzan and begins raising him, and Tarzan in turn views the gorillas as his family. Upon encountering a group of explorers, however, Tarzan, now an adult, starts learning about his humanity, and only he can decide where he really belongs: with his own kind or with the one he grew up with.

What Worked: The animation is fantastic in this movie. It’s one of the best examples of 2D/hand-drawn animation I’ve ever seen that honestly, I feel is often overlooked compared to some that came before, yet are still classics in their own right**. Plus, it really brings the story and characters to life, which is further enhanced through the music and voice acting.

With the story, and this being an adaptation, changes have to be made in order to fit within the context of the narrative in question. This is a prime example of an adaptation where the changes are made in ways that make sense while still respecting the source material by keeping the majority of its key plot points intact. They allow you to be invested in the characters, and occasionally even feel for them. This version has some dark moments, some very emotional ones, and some action scenes, but also a few funny ones, because the humor works very well. They balance so perfectly that the tone remains consistent throughout, and as a result, so does the pace, especially in the action scenes involving Sabor and Clayton.

Now for what really makes this version stand out in addition to the animation: the music and the voice acting.

The music consists of both an excellent score by Mark Mancina (whose prior work included Speed, Bad Boys, Twister, and Con Air) and the iconic soundtrack from Phil Collins. The songs in particular suit crucial parts of the story, and give those scenes a greater impact, especially the more emotional moments. The song “You’ll Be In My Heart” alone is sad enough on its own, but just wait until you hear it in the movie. It’s so powerful that it won the Oscar for Best Original Song, and absolutely deserved it.

It shows in the scenes where Kala and Tarzan are bonding that feature that song, and the closing moments of the scene featuring my personal favorite song in the movie, “Strangers Like Me,” where Tarzan is learning human culture from Jane.

Even if it’s voice acting, Tony Goldwyn as Tarzan has great chemistry with both Glenn Close as Kala and Minnie Driver as Jane in those scenes. He even gets some heartfelt moments with Kerchak (voiced by Lance Henriksen of Aliens fame), as well as some humorous ones with his friends Terk (voiced by Rosie O’Donnell) and Tantor (an elephant voiced by Wayne Knight). There’s also some humor from Jane’s father, Professor Porter, voiced by Nigel Hawthorne.

Then there are the villains of this movie. The first is Sabor, who makes the action scenes she’s in even more intense just by her presence alone, particularly her fight with Tarzan in the middle of the movie. The other villain is Clayton, voiced by Brian Blessed, a hunter looking for the gorillas for his own agenda, unbeknownst to everyone else. He may seem just determined at first, but you know he’s up to something, which makes him not only such a great Disney villain, but also a great villain period.

Overall: Tarzan is an animated masterpiece, with the perfect balance of humor and heart, top-notch animation and voice acting, some of the best music an animated movie has to offer, and memorable characters, all of which come together into what I consider to be the definitive Tarzan movie, one of my personal favorite Disney movies, and one of my personal favorite animated movies in general.

To close this review out, I will say this: This movie will be in my heart, from this day on, now and forever more. It’ll be in my heart, no matter what they say. It’ll be here in my heart.

Always.

*Keep that in mind, folks. By this time next year (which is that movie’s 20th Anniversary), you’ll know the other one. I know it’s a long wait, but ultimately, it’ll be more than worth it.

**One such classic is even referenced here with an Easter Egg that’s pretty easy to spot.

Thoughts on Alien (1979)

Image courtesy of wall.alphacoders.com

Hello, everyone. For this review, we’re going from one anniversary to another. It’s still sci-fi, but whereas the last one was a sci-fi action classic, this one is a sci-fi horror classic. It elevated that genre to a new level, and this year marks the 40th Anniversary of such an achievement, and that is Alien.

The story follows a crew of seven aboard a vessel called the Nostromo, which is on its way back to Earth when they are awakened to a distress signal from a nearby planet. While investigating, one of the crew members, Kane, makes contact with an egg-like pod, which then opens up. The creature within jumps out and wraps around his face. He becomes the unfortunate host for a monstrous Alien, which upon bursting from his chest, begins picking off the rest of the crew one by one.

What Worked: The cast give great performances, and they play off of each other very well. It’s particularly evident in two scenes: their discussion over the situation at hand (being woken up to investigate a distress signal), and especially the mess hall scene. It’s most noticeable with the characters of Parker and Brett, played respectively by Yaphet Kotto (Live and Let Die) and Harry Dean Stanton, who was mostly cast in supporting roles throughout his career, examples being Escape From New York, Christine, and The Green Mile. You also see a little bit of it earlier on between Ellen Ripley, the main protagonist, and Veronica Cartwright’s character Lambert, the navigator, as they’re headed to the planet.

The standout, though, is of course Sigourney Weaver as Ellen Ripley herself in what would become her first major role in a movie*. Not only that, it’d become the role that would define her career, as before this movie, she wasn’t as big a name as people like Tom Skerritt, who plays Dallas (the Captain), or even John Hurt, who plays Kane.

The next positive is the production value that went into this. They use miniatures for the scale of the ship’s exterior, which had similarly been done two years prior with Star Wars, as well as matte paintings for the look of space. The matte paintings are fantastic at conveying how scary it can appear. Much like in Star Wars, the miniatures hold up really well even today.

This also applies to the set design, the effects, and the sound design. The sets, namely the look of the Derelict ship that sent the signal, the Space Jockey inside of it, and the interior of the Nostromo itself, hold up just as much.

The effects are where this movie really established its legacy both in horror and in sci-fi, from the Eggs to the Facehugger to the Chestburster to the Alien itself. The Chestburster scene alone is iconic for several reasons, and the fact that the effects still look as great as they do 40 years later is one of them. The practical effects on display here look excellent; for example, in scenes like that, they used puppets. It was a few years before CGI would start being used, so when not using puppets, creatures were still portrayed by people in suits, and this is no exception. In this case, it’s similar to Predator, where they got someone very tall to be in the suit, that being Nigerian visual artist Bolaji Badejo. Despite his height at 7’2”, he was still able to capture the movement of the Alien from within the suit, which is surprising when you consider the creature design. All of these achievements in visual effects proved worthy of an Oscar.

The sound design is so unnerving. When you hear the Egg open up, you know what’s about to happen, and the sound of the Facehugger popping out of it is even scarier. Then comes the Chestburster scene, and it only escalates from there.

The suspense is built up really well, and it has some very effective scares. Most of them may be jump scares, but they’re examples of when they’re done right. The highlights for me were actually background scares. One of them is where Brett is looking for Jonesy (the cat), and you think you see something behind him that might be just pipes… and then seconds later, you realize you were totally wrong. That’s the best scene where the Alien pops up in the movie. The other one is in the last few minutes. Be sure to look out for it.

Another terrifying scene takes place in the vents. When you see the Alien pop up there, that’s when you realize how big of a threat it really is. Plus, you get another great look at it, which also shows how eerie the atmosphere (no pun intended) is.

Even if you set the scares aside, this movie still has some very frightening scenes. The aforementioned Chestburster scene again comes to mind. It earns its status as one of the scariest scenes in horror and sci-fi history because of how suddenly it happens. Even though you know something’s about to go horribly wrong, and even if you’re at least familiar with this scene, you won’t see it coming. You’ll feel terrified at what you just witnessed, much like how the other crew members react. How I just worded that is coincidentally how it was when they did that: The cast members knew it would happen because it was in the script, but then their reactions came… and the characters’ reactions are also their own. As you watch that scene, watch their reactions. That is genuine fear you’re seeing from them. What’s even more impressive is that they managed to do all of that in one take.

The moment the Chestburster escapes, the only thing you know for sure is that it eventually becomes a fully-grown Alien. You’ll be constantly on edge, not knowing where the Alien could be, let alone when it’s going to show up. Why it’s so unpredictable is that it’s shown sparingly, much like the shark in Jaws**. You get teases of it, so you know it could be anywhere, and then it pops out when you least expect it. However, I’d say it works even better here, because it’s in a contained environment, the Alien uses every open space it can to its advantage, and its appearance allows it to hide in the shadows.

All of that is accompanied perfectly with Jerry Goldsmith’s score and Ridley Scott’s direction, where at first you get a sense of astonishment at what you’re seeing, and then it goes into very terrifying, very fast.

While the characters grow increasingly overwhelmed about their predicament, unlike most horror movies, the majority of them don’t let it get the better of them. Quite a few smart decisions are made here, which is something you don’t really see a lot of these days. For example, you have Dallas, who’s mostly laidback, which does lead to some questionable actions, but he comes to make more responsible decisions later.

As for someone like Lambert, she’s very nervous at points, which ultimately causes her to want to evacuate immediately. She becomes one of those characters in a horror movie who always makes stupid decisions, and in a movie full of smart ones, it does make sense to have that one character to balance things out.

The character who has the most rational thinking is Ripley herself, because her strictly “by-the-book” attitude kicks in when attempts are made to bring Kane back on board after he’s attacked. She knows the potential risks that come with that, and tries her best not to let them in. Of course, it wouldn’t be a movie if it actually worked, but it’s not her fault it happened anyway.

It also has a surprising twist that’s set up really well, involving Ian Holm’s character Ash, who gets some unsettling moments of his own, and a very satisfying (and even more surprising) ending. With the ending, it’s something that at the time wasn’t really seen all that often in horror movies. That’s the best way I can put it without going too much into it.

When it comes to problems, I would say that it’s a bit slow at first, but once they land on the planet, it really gets going and doesn’t let up. However, because it’s all about tension and building up its scares, it’s understandable that it would have a slow start, and so I’m willing to overlook that.

Overall: Alien is an important piece of sci-fi and horror cinema, with its legendary effects, an iconic creature design, a protagonist that would become one of the prime examples of a strong female character, and its excellent use of gradual buildup to produce scares that have a lasting impression on the viewer. Even with the legacy it’s garnered so many years later, spawning a franchise that’s also included comics, novels, games, and crossovers, it still works as a self-contained story. Whether you’re a sci-fi fan, a horror fan, or both, and especially if you love movies in general, this is something that you need to see at least once.

*No, I am not making that up.

**An approach also taken in another, albeit more recent, monster movie, yet not as effective… but that’s for another upcoming review.

Thoughts on The Matrix (1999)

Image courtesy of IMDb

Hello, everyone. For this review, I’m going to do something a little different. It marks the triumphant return of the retrospective review. This one will focus on what is easily one of my favorite movies of all time. It’s not just one of the best action movies for me (where something like Predator would be), but it really is one of the best movies period.

This year, this month, and today, in fact, marks the 20th Anniversary of a sci-fi classic, and that movie is known as The Matrix.

The story follows computer programmer Thomas A. Anderson, better known under his hacker persona, Neo, who discovers that the world he knows is not as real as it seems. Instead, it is part of the Matrix, a system created to resemble the world he’s familiar with. The question of “What is the Matrix?” leads him to meeting the man who has been searching for him his entire life: Morpheus, the leader of a human resistance waging a war against the machines*. Morpheus believes that Neo is “The One,” a savior that will free humanity and end the war once and for all.

What Worked: One thing that still hasn’t changed since the last time I did a retrospective review is that, with a few exceptions, the cast and performances are usually discussed first.

Keanu Reeves gives an excellent performance as Neo. His range as an actor really began to show throughout this movie alone. He goes from initially being soft-spoken and subdued to being in denial of the truth before then accepting and ultimately embracing it. That narrative arc is just one of many things here that are so satisfying.

Laurence Fishburne is great as Morpheus. He’s kind of like the “wise mentor” type of character, except only the “Zen” personality is all that’s needed with him. It’s evident in his voice and especially his dialogue. As a result, he gets some of the best lines in the movie because of how quotable, yet also insightful, they are.

Then we have Carrie-Anne Moss as the love interest, Trinity. This character basically made her career, and rightfully so, because she is awesome in this movie. The personality she gives Trinity makes her a great example of a strong female character in an action movie. She’s very committed to her cause, is very loyal to her fellow rebels, and will not let anything stand in her way. She will not hesitate to take people down, as shown in the opening scene. That along with her skills in combat earn Trinity the same iconic status in regards to strong movie heroines as Ellen Ripley in Aliens and Sarah Connor in Terminator 2: Judgment Day.

Next is the best villain of the 90s other than the T-1000: Hugo Weaving as Agent Smith. He’s among the Agent programs in the Matrix, who are designed to protect it from anything they deem a threat to the system. To say that Agent Smith is intimidating would be an understatement. He is unrelenting and ruthless, and although he does have backup, it’s the scenes that mainly focus on him where he stands out. Plus, he has a clear motivation, which is dedicated to a completely different agenda outside of his duties, and I thought that was clever because it fleshed him out as a character more. On top of all that, Hugo Weaving’s voice is so unsettling, and that might be what led him to become one of the “go-to” actors for villains, particularly the voice of Megatron in the first three Transformers movies and the Red Skull in Captain America: The First Avenger.

The supporting cast are really good as well, even if a majority of them don’t have much screentime. The biggest one to mention is Joe Pantoliano as Cypher, because he’s in the movie the most of all of them, going so far as getting the first line of dialogue. He’s similar to the character of Obadiah Stane in Iron Man, where you like him at first, and then something happens where you may end up feeling it was wrong to do so.

Although some of the cast have smaller roles, their characters certainly do leave an impact regardless. The highlights of the supporting characters for me were Tank (who’s probably my favorite), his brother Dozer, and Mouse. The other two, Apoc and Switch, are in it the least of the bunch, but they’re worth mentioning due to having a couple significant moments of their own. There’s one other character in this movie that’s part of a key plot point. However, since they’re present in the sequels as well, I’ll save mentioning them for those reviews for two reasons: 1: They’re more prominent in the sequels, particularly the third movie, and 2: Going into it now would be a bit of a spoiler.

This movie would not only make several actors more well known, but it would do the same for writers/directors The Wachowski Brothers**. Although they hadn’t done anything of this scale before, while watching it, you can’t really tell because of how amazing it looks. Despite not having more flashy and stylistic approaches to things such as cinematography or set design, within the context of the story, the bleak setting and occasional green tint make sense here. Their direction is great, but it’s the story and script that really shine. They managed to create a fascinating world to expand upon later, craft a very complex story around it, and incorporate equally thought-provoking themes.

Now here’s what really defines this movie. The visual effects are so outstanding and would prove to be legendary, especially by 1999 standards (and for good reason). It made such an impact on the entertainment industry as a whole that it became both a landmark on how far we had come with visual effects at that time and a turning point for how further we could take them in the future. The main thing in regards to the effects is called “bullet time,” where a particular scene is in slow motion, but the camera moves normally at the same time. For a movie that’s now 20 years old, the effects still hold up remarkably well. To put all of that into perspective, all of the effort that went into these effects earned all of the recognition it received. It was nominated for four Oscars, and won every single one, even Best Visual Effects.

The action is just as revolutionary even today, because it’s incredible how action sequences and effects as phenomenal as these, which you’d think by now we’d have just been able to perfect, we were somehow able to accomplish in 1999. There are so many action scenes that stand out, but there are two that this movie is mostly known for. There’s the rooftop scene with Neo and Trinity fighting off Agents, which includes that shot of Neo dodging the bullets that was famously used in the trailer and parodied numerous times since. Then there’s the most well known one, which is the lobby shootout sequence leading up to that. It’s easy to see why, because for one thing, the buildup to that is great: Neo and Trinity get “Guns. Lots of guns.”, arm themselves, and make their entrance. Then the scene really kicks into high gear when they both look at each other before facing their enemies, and the moment they do, Propellerheads’s “Spybreak!” starts playing. The song fits the scene really well, so the excitement you feel from watching it is enhanced even more. That, and it’s one of several awesome songs on the soundtrack.

Speaking of the soundtrack, you also get songs from artists such as Rammstein, Rob Zombie, The Prodigy, and Rob Dougan. It most notably features Rage Against the Machine and Marilyn Manson as well. Their songs might be the two best ones for me, although I do like the Propellerheads and Rob Dougan songs, too. This was during the time when it was common for certain movies to have popular artists featured on the soundtrack, but this is one of the best examples of a soundtrack being used to fit the scenes in question.

Don Davis’s score, however, accompanies the movie perfectly. The best track comes after Morpheus tells Neo, “Welcome to the real world.” Right after that, the track of the same name starts playing, and how it flows throughout the scene is fantastic. It’s also great in the action scenes, and especially by the end of the movie.

Overall: The Matrix is a sci-fi classic that came ahead of its time, yet at the right time. You’d think at first glance that it looks like something we’d be more easily capable of pulling off now, with the look, the effects, the action, and everything in between, and that the technology we had then was not advanced enough for that. Then you watch it, and you come to realize it also came at the time when we were starting to use our technology more. It’s the best of both worlds: Smart sci-fi and exciting action at their finest.

It’s an experience that will blow you away with everything that went into it. Even now, it’s still astounding how it was done. From the outside, no one knew the cultural phenomenon it would become, let alone the legacy it would have, until they saw it. Without this movie, we wouldn’t have this decade’s version in the form of Inception, nor would we have its version of a Keanu Reeves action franchise in the form of John Wick, or the underrated sci-fi action movie known as Equilibrium.

As Morpheus would say, “Unfortunately, no one can be told what the Matrix is. You have to see it for yourself.” Even the marketing was done right. They used the “What is the Matrix?” scene, and then concluded with that quote in the trailer, making it look like he’s speaking to the audience when he’s actually speaking to Neo, and that is brilliant. It garnered hype for the movie, people wanted to know what it was, they saw it, and it lived up to the hype by delivering an awesome movie where the overall experience is very satisfying from start to finish.

Not only is it a sci-fi classic, it’s also an action classic. However, as a movie in general, The Matrix is a cinematic masterpiece. Although I described what it is in the movie as vaguely as I could, this is something that you really do have to see for yourself.

For those that somehow still haven’t seen it, instead of saying “What are you doing? Go out and watch it!”, I’m going to do a different version of it for you:

You take the blue pill, you miss out on something incredible, unlike anything that you’ve ever seen before.

You take the red pill, you get to witness it, and I guarantee you’ll be glad you did.

Where we go from there… is a choice I leave to you.

*No, not that one. This is much different from that, and I’ll get to that franchise later.

**Yes, I know that they use a different directorial credit now compared to this Trilogy and everything associated with it, but I’m using it as listed in the credits for consistency purposes, and because the reason for the difference is complicated for me to go into, although it was important that I at least acknowledge it.

Thoughts on How to Train Your Dragon: The Hidden World (2019)

Image courtesy of hdqwalls.com

It’s all come to this. We have reached the end of a very special journey. Most trilogies cap off on a disappointing note, but this is a very rare case where not only does every installment end on a satisfying note, but so does the entire trilogy itself. It’s an equally rare occasion when said trilogy happens to also be animated, and now we have come to the moment of truth, the movie that might just have stuck the landing, and that is How to Train Your Dragon: The Hidden World.

The story picks up one year after the events of the second movie. Hiccup, Toothless and the gang have been rescuing dragons for some time to bring them back to Berk. However, there is an unfortunate consequence to this: It’s led to dragon overpopulation.

Hiccup then realizes that there is a solution. He remembers being told as a child by his father Stoick the Vast about the Hidden World, a place where dragons can live in peace and be safe from those hunting them.

During their quest, they encounter a white dragon, a female known as a Light Fury, and Toothless instantly falls for her.

In order to find the Hidden World, and ensure the dragons are safe, though, they have to stop a notorious dragon hunter known as Grimmel the Grisly, who has a particular interest in the two Furies.

What Worked: The voice acting is the first of many things that are the best the trilogy has to offer here.* By this point, you really feel that the cast have grown into these characters. The core cast members are excellent across the board.

There are two returning actors from the previous movie who also give great performances. The one I mentioned in that review was Kit Harington as Eret, and he’s still an awesome character whose part in the series makes him one of its most interesting by the end of this movie due to his backstory alone.

Now for the character I can mention in this review that I couldn’t in that one, and that is Valka, voiced by Cate Blanchett. The reason why I couldn’t mention her there is because of who she is. In the last movie, she was revealed to be Hiccup’s long-lost mother, and there was an emotional moment between the two of them and Stoick upon discovering his wife was still alive.

Her reveal in the previous movie was so impactful because it was built up so well. Hiccup encountered a mysterious dragon rider and it was intriguing to both him and the audience. Then she found him and revealed herself to him, and it turned out she was trying to do what Hiccup managed to do in her absence: convince Stoick and everyone else that they could live in peace with dragons. Her good-hearted demeanor and compassion towards the dragons came through perfectly in Cate Blanchett’s performance, and it carries over into this movie.

Then there’s the villain, Grimmel the Grisly. He’s the baddest dragon hunter there is, and how he earned that reputation makes him the best villain in the trilogy, both of which are even more well-realized in a fantastic performance by F. Murray Abraham.

What makes him a better villain than Djimon Hounsou’s character from the last movie, Drago Bludvist, is his motivation. Drago’s motivation was a little bit personal, but more out of madness. With Grimmel, it’s very much personal because he made a name for himself with his methods of dragon hunting, which involves an important plot point established in the first movie. I thought that was a nice touch, as I appreciate when trilogies or even franchises bring something full circle.

There are other references to the previous movies, and a few of them are part of the humor here. This movie is actually really funny at times, and might have some of the best jokes in the series.

At other times, the moments of downtime in between the action sequences can be outright charming. The scenes with Toothless trying to woo the Light Fury are genuinely sweet and his failed attempts are hilarious. The relationship between the two of them is a great addition to the story.

When the action does come in, it delivers on every level. Some of the sequences here are the most intense in the series. However, they’re not as dark as a few in the second one were, but for a story like this following that up, they don’t need to be. They have some of the intensity, but also more of the exciting feel of the ones from the first movie.

Where this movie really shines, though, is in the animation. It’s the best looking the series has ever been. It shows in the character designs as well. The characters have evolved over the course of all three movies, and their designs having gotten progressively better reflects that.

The animation is so outstanding and so gorgeous here that I would go so far as to say that this is the best animation DreamWorks has done this side of Pixar. The looks of the Hidden World and the Light Fury alone are worth the price of admission.

It’s all encompassed in the best type of story that could be given to something like this. For every exciting moment, there’s a calm one, and for every sweet or funny moment, there’s a moment that’s just gut wrenching. It hits all the right notes in terms of great storytelling, which is also evident in what is easily John Powell’s best score for the series.

One more thing before I close out this review: If you thought the second movie had emotional moments, just wait until you get to the ending of this movie. When all is said and done, it’ll probably go down as one of the best endings of the decade.

Overall: How to Train Your Dragon: The Hidden World is the perfect ending to DreamWorks’s franchise masterpiece. It makes the journey with all of these characters that you’ve come to know and love throughout these movies having been well worth taking. It ends the trilogy on an ultimately very satisfying note, bringing everything together and tying up any loose ends in the best way possible. This movie has stuck the landing, and with it, in terms of great trilogies, we have been given something truly special.

*It’s so flawless that there was a recasting in this movie, and I didn’t even notice it.

Thoughts on How to Train Your Dragon 2 (2014)

Image courtesy of hdqwalls.com

Continuing on with this latest trilogy, we get to the chapter where most usually peak. Will this follow suit? You’ll find out soon enough. It does have one thing in common with most other middle chapters in trilogies: This one does go bigger and darker, and so the stakes do get even higher. One thing it probably doesn’t: This one happens to also be animated, and that is How to Train Your Dragon 2.

The story picks up five years after the events of the first movie. Hiccup and his friends are now young adults, and all seems to be peaceful in their village of Berk ever since Hiccup brought the townsfolk and the dragons together.

That is, until they come across a group of dragon trappers working for a psychopathic warlord named Drago Bludvist, who seeks to use his army of dragons to conquer the world.

Along the way, they encounter another dragon rider, who may have ties to Hiccup’s past.

What Worked: The voice acting continues to be top notch here, with new cast members giving great performances and returning cast members expanding their characters’ developments from the first movie.

For example, Jay Baruchel’s performance as Hiccup transitions flawlessly from the awkward teenager in the first movie to a more mature young adult in this movie. He retains the good heart and determination to try to avoid violence whenever possible, but there are some moments this time around where it can only go so far, and others where taking the pacifist approach is either not enough to overcome the current predicament or just not an option. He really does begin to feel the pressure of having to make harder decisions in life.

Gerard Butler is still excellent as Stoick the Vast, Hiccup’s father, who wants his son to succeed him as the chieftain of Berk, even though he doesn’t feel ready for that level of responsibility.

Much like in the first movie, they have very heartfelt moments in this one and there’s one in particular in the second half that’s genuinely emotional for both of them.

This one does have humorous scenes in between the drama. Craig Ferguson is still hilarious as the voice of Gobber, Stoick’s lieutenant. He has great comedic timing, an example being during that emotional moment with Hiccup and Stoick.

Hiccup’s friends also provide enough humor to lighten the mood, and they have moments that stand out because they’re on their own, and they prove more than capable of handling themselves.

The one that stands out the most of all of them, and probably gets the most development, is of course Astrid, voiced again by America Ferrera. She has gone from being Hiccup’s crush who didn’t really like him at first but gradually came to respect him more over the course of the first movie to Hiccup’s girlfriend in this one. She remains a strong female character here, with the same traits from before (tough, determined, skilled in combat) carrying over, and loyalty can now be added to the list.

As with the first movie, the best character here is Toothless. His relationship with Hiccup has grown even more. Because Hiccup is more experienced in flying, he’s enhanced the gear for both of them, like a wingsuit that allows him the freedom to fly alongside Toothless rather than always having to be on him. However, there are some scenes with them that are among the most emotional ones in the movie.

There are three new additions to the cast, but I can really only talk about two of them in regards to their characters, as the third one, at this time in my coverage of the trilogy, may be considered a spoiler.

The first one I can talk about is Kit Harington (who a lot of people will know from Game of Thrones) as Eret, leader of the dragon trappers. He’s really good in this movie, and his character is awesome. Eret’s narrative arc is very satisfying, too.

The other one is Djimon Hounsou as Drago Bludvist. He plays a lot of villains, but while he’s really good at it, this might be his best one to date. He is very angry for something that happened in the past, and he is also very ruthless as a result of it. However, when you see what happened, you completely understand why. Unlike most of his other villain roles where anger is mainly part of the character’s personality to show that they mean business, it’s a key trait of the character. He really leaves an impact as a villain because aside from the rage that an actor like him can channel into their characters very well, there’s one thing that he brings to Drago that you don’t really see in those other villains: a sense of pain.

Speaking of pain, this movie has a lot of emotional moments, not just for the characters as mentioned earlier, but in terms of the story. The first movie had mostly heartfelt moments, but that was due to a more lighthearted tone. This one also has a few of them, but since the stakes are even higher this time around, the tone has to be even deeper for the emotional moments to be more impactful. It doesn’t just go deeper, but there are some scenes that are really dark.

The shift in tone makes sense, though, because it matches the progression of character development: They are now more mature, and so the tone has to be more serious. This is also evident in John Powell’s score, which is still fantastic. It conveys excitement or intensity depending on the tone during the action sequences, deepens when the story gets dark and somber, or softens for the lighthearted moments.

It’s not just the tone that gets bigger. Some of the dragons they add here are huge. The biggest one by far is known as the Bewilderbeast, also referred to as the Alpha. If you thought the Red Death from the first movie was big, that’s the dragon equivalent of a T-Rex by comparison. The Bewilderbeast, on the other hand, is so enormous it might be the dragon equivalent of Godzilla. There might even be a parallel or two to the King of the Monsters himself*.

I have two big positives with this one. The first is the animation. It’s been improved in every way from the already phenomenal animation in the first movie. You can especially tell in the new designs of the main characters and the looks of the dragons, like with the new flight gear that Hiccup uses to ride Toothless, as well as his friends and their dragons.

The other big positive is that the scale and the world building are both expanded upon here, which makes the story of the series very satisfying so far.

Overall: How to Train Your Dragon 2 is everything a sequel should be: bigger, better, and darker. The stakes are even higher, and there are some very emotional moments. It all culminates in a bittersweet ending to where you feel like what you just witnessed was rough to watch, and yet still glad that you got to see this story continue. Much like how the first movie left you wanting to see more, this movie leaves you wanting to see how it concludes.

*You’ll know them when you see them.

Thoughts on How to Train Your Dragon (2010)

Image courtesy of wallpapershdnow.com

After the Eastrail 177 Trilogy’s conclusion arrived with Glass, there was another trilogy about to receive its closing chapter shortly after it, and so I decided that would be perfect. It was something a bit more lighthearted, of course, but it’s one of those times where after seeing something as dark as those movies, you’d kind of need that*. This is a trilogy that would prove to be something special, especially in terms of family friendly movies and animation as a whole. In this review, I’ll be covering the first installment of one of the best trilogies of the decade, and the one that may stand out the most out of all of the franchises DreamWorks has made (yes, even more so than Shrek), and that is How to Train Your Dragon.

The story is set in Berk, a small Viking town on an island often targeted by dragons, where the Vikings have been at war with the dragons for a long time. A 15-year-old named Hiccup wants to help fight, but the chieftain (and his father), Stoick the Vast, believes he’s too young, so he works as an apprentice to the local blacksmith Gobber to make weapons. Though his inventions usually fail, he actually manages to shoot a dragon down. It’s not just any dragon, though: It’s a Night Fury, the most dangerous, but also rarest, type. Despite his claims, no one else believes him. Upon finding it, Hiccup has his chance to prove himself and finally be accepted by his tribe. However, he can’t bring himself to finish it off, so he frees and ultimately befriends it. He also learns through his own interactions with the Night Fury (which he names Toothless because of his ability to retract his teeth) that the dragons are harmless and sets out to show everyone else that there’s a better way to solve their dragon problem than violence.

What Worked: First of all, the voice acting is fantastic in this movie. Jay Baruchel is excellent as Hiccup, really bringing his own awkward personality into the character, and it works perfectly. You also genuinely feel Hiccup’s compassion through his performance in the more dramatic and heartfelt moments. He has great chemistry with everyone else, from his father to his friends and especially with Toothless himself.

Gerard Butler gives what might be his best performance that isn’t Leonidas as Stoick the Vast. His scenes with Hiccup are among the aforementioned dramatic and heartfelt moments, where in addition to Hiccup’s compassion, you also feel Stoick’s empathy, and occasionally pain, at the same time.

The movie has its share of humor. One example is the character of Gobber, voiced by Craig Ferguson. He’s hilarious in this. There’s some really good banter between the other characters, like Christopher Mintz-Plasse (McLovin from Superbad) as Fishlegs, Jonah Hill as Snotlout, and the Twins Ruffnut and Tuffnut, voiced respectively by Kristen Wiig and T.J. Miller (Weasel from Deadpool).

It’s not just moments with them that are hilarious. Quite a few scenes with Hiccup and Toothless have that, but they’re set up brilliantly with some charming development in their relationship.

Then there’s the best (human) character in the movie: Astrid, voiced by America Ferrera. She’s a great example of a strong female character: She’s tough, determined, and capable of handling herself in a fight. She also has an excellent relationship with Hiccup. Over the course of the movie, she gradually begins to see past his awkwardness, learning how kind-hearted he really is underneath, and starts to respect him more.

Now for the best character in the movie: Toothless. Not only does he look awesome, he’s just so lovable. He’s like if your dog or cat could fly and breathe fire. You’ll definitely feel as if his bond with Hiccup resembles your bond with your own pets at least once. I even saw some mannerisms of Stitch from Lilo & Stitch in him. When you take the fact that Chris Sanders, the voice actor for Stitch, also worked on this movie into consideration, it makes perfect sense.

The looks of each of the other dragons and their distinct capabilities are very interesting, and it makes the action even more fun to watch. The scale of the movie, particularly in the action sequences, really shows how gorgeous it all looks. The epic feel this type of story is expected to convey (it is a fantasy movie) is done wonderfully through John Powell’s score. It gives you that feeling of excitement you’d similarly get with something like the more triumphant beats of Howard Shore’s score for The Lord of the Rings.

There is some great world building in this, too, and a perfect story structure. The narrative is handled so brilliantly that it provides both a satisfying resolution for this story on its own and a well-earned feeling of wanting to see more.

Overall: How to Train Your Dragon is one of those animated movies that does everything right. It has the right balance of humor and heart with regards to both the story and the characters. It introduces a fascinating world and sets up very interesting character arcs that you’ll want to see be further developed, because the stakes they end up facing over the course of this movie alone are just the beginning. The same is true for the movie itself: It’s just the beginning of something special.

*That’s not to say that this trilogy doesn’t have its share of dark moments, it does, except those don’t really come into play until a little later. However, this movie still has a few of them, even with the overall lighthearted tone, but they’re just not as dark as what happens during the events following this movie.

Thoughts on Glass (2019)

Image courtesy of wallpapercave.com

Following my revisits of Unbreakable and Split, we now come to the movie that both of those have been building towards, and the review to accompany it where I hinted at something bigger to come in those reviews. Now, we get to that something bigger: The conclusion to the Eastrail 177 Trilogy, and that is Glass.

Three weeks after the events of Split, David Dunn has been tracking down Kevin Wendell Crumb (who had been dubbed “The Horde” by the media because of his multiple personalities). After their encounter, David and Kevin are sent to a facility run by a psychiatrist trying to convince them that they are regular people who merely claim to be superhuman. Not only that, but they happen to be in the same facility as David’s nemesis, Elijah Price, also known as “Mr. Glass.” David knows that Elijah has a plan to prove that people like them really do exist, and it may just involve him having some help. David has to stop them before they can do any real damage, but Elijah might just know something that ties all of them together...

What Worked: First of all, the cast is very good here, even if it’s mostly a reunion.

Reprising their roles from Unbreakable are Bruce Willis as David Dunn, Samuel L. Jackson as Elijah Price, Spencer Treat Clark as David’s now-adult son Joseph, and Charlayne Woodard as Elijah’s Mom.

Reprising their roles from Split are James McAvoy as Kevin Wendell Crumb and Anya Taylor-Joy as Casey Cooke (the “final girl”*, so to speak).

So the question is… does this crossover work? Yes. They’re all really good here, and they do work off of each other very well. The pre-established dynamics in their relationships (David’s relationships with Elijah and Joseph, Elijah’s relationship with his Mom, and Kevin’s relationship with Casey) are given a nice continuation here, and it feels like a natural narrative flow, even up to the resolution. The best one, though, is the one that sells the movie: Kevin and Elijah. When they finally meet, it’s both genuinely chilling and so much fun to watch. Jackson and McAvoy’s team-up is fantastic in this movie, and they have the best performances. You even get to see more personality (no pun intended) from Kevin.

M. Night Shyamalan himself does make a cameo. For those who remember from the Unbreakable review when I said to keep his cameo from that movie in mind for when you get to this one, you’ll realize it applied to Split as well once you discover the first of several shocking revelations that this movie has to offer, and that one is in the first few minutes.

Speaking of M. Night Shyamalan, his writing this time around is very good… for the most part. There were moments that I really liked where they’re in the facility, and it turns out they know what makes each of them tick. I thought that was very clever. There was also a twist in this movie (not the main one; there’s several leading up to it) that was very good. It’s one of those “full circle” type moments in a trilogy or franchise that ties back to a key moment from the first movie, which is another thing I appreciate when movies go the extra mile to do. This one caught me by surprise with how well done it was, and it ties all three men together in a way that I did not expect. I’ll just say this: Elijah is a mastermind for a reason. If you thought he was evil in Unbreakable, just wait until you see him in this movie.

M. Night Shyamalan’s direction here, while not quite as great as it was in Unbreakable, is still as solid as it was in Split. He even brings over a couple more collaborators from Split: Michael Gioulakis as the cinematographer and West Dylan Thordsen as the composer. Because of this, it’s just as well-shot, and the score is just as eerie, especially in the opening. However, the score is also really good in the dramatic scenes.

What Didn’t Work: The one issue I had character-wise is actually the new addition: Dr. Ellie Staple, the psychiatrist, played by Sarah Paulson. Her performance is good, but the character could have been written better.

The issues with the writing come mostly in the third act. As mentioned before, there are several twists in this movie. The first one was really good, and the main one was decent. The ones in between are okay, but they felt like they belonged in a different movie. Here, it’s just all over the place. They were interesting, but still excessive. If it stuck to those two twists, it would have flowed better.

While those are my main issues, there is something that is very divisive and I completely understand why: The finale. I personally thought it could have been better, but as it was, it was okay. The very end of the movie (the main twist) was fine, though.

Overall: Glass is a decent ending to a trilogy, and while it has a few cracks here and there, the movie doesn’t completely shatter because of them. It’s still very entertaining in spite of its flaws. It’s very well shot and has an excellent score to accompany it. It also has some great performances, especially from Samuel L. Jackson and James McAvoy, and a great resolution to the whole story that brought everyone together, thus bringing the Eastrail 177 Trilogy to a pretty satisfying close. It doesn’t quite stick the landing in terms of trilogies (the next one I’ll be covering excels at that), but as far as unconventional ones go, I’m ultimately glad that we have something like this.

*A trope commonly seen in horror movies, it applied to thrillers as well with Split.

Thoughts on Split (2017)

Image courtesy of hdwallsource.com

After revisiting Unbreakable, it was time to rewatch the second installment in the Eastrail 177 Trilogy. This one serves as a parallel to that, and when you get to the twist, you’ll know what it is*. However, prior to that, it also works as a self-contained thriller, in more ways than one, and that movie is Split.

Three teenage girls are kidnapped and wake up in an isolated area underground, with only a man named Kevin and 23 distinct personalities within him to keep them company. This proves the least of their problems, as another personality dubbed “The Beast” is emerging, just waiting to be let out.

What Worked: As with Unbreakable, and in fact the majority of these reviews, I’ll start with the cast, but not with who you expect. I’m saving the standout for last.

The first one to talk about here is the lead protagonist, Casey Cooke, played by Anya Taylor-Joy (The Witch, Morgan). As much as I liked Morgan (The Witch I did at first, but now I just think it’s okay), this is her best movie by far. Casey you might not like initially, but as the movie progresses, you understand why she’s so distant from everyone else. She shows that really well in her performance.

The same can be said for Haley Lu Richardson (The Edge of Seventeen) as Claire Benoit, who’s basically the voice of reason of the group, and the most likable because she tries to get through to Casey how serious their situation is. Not only that, but she’s also the smart one, showing a sense of rationality in figuring out ways to escape.

The other one is Claire’s friend Marcia, portrayed by Jessica Sula, who aside from this movie works mostly on TV. Her performance is good, despite not being in it as much. She serves as the scared one in the group to balance it out. You have the calm and reserved character with Casey, the rational one with Claire, and then the frightened one with Marcia. They all pull off their respective character traits very well.

The main supporting character to talk about is Dr. Karen Fletcher, Kevin’s psychologist. She’s played by Betty Buckley, an actress who’s worked with M. Night Shyamalan before with The Happening. Suffice it to say, she’s much better here, and you do understand her concerns with Kevin’s condition.

Last, but certainly not least, is the main character of this movie: James McAvoy as Kevin himself, and the other personalities that reside within him. He is fantastic in this. In a way, it’s a one-man show for him, and everyone else is watching. Although they don’t show all the personalities, the ones they do show have their own share of memorable moments, and it’s because of his performance in these scenes that really makes them stand out as much as they do.

Much like Unbreakable, the direction from M. Night Shyamalan I found very solid here… and yes, as with that movie, he does have a cameo here as well.

Unlike Unbreakable, for these next two movies, James Newton Howard does not return to compose the score. Instead, it’s West Dylan Thordson, who is best known for scoring Joy (starring Jennifer Lawrence) and Foxcatcher (starring Steve Carrell). His score for this, accompanied by excellent cinematography courtesy of Michael Gioulakis, best known for his work on a very good horror movie called It Follows, makes for a haunting combination. A highlight in that regard is the theme during the opening credits.

As I said in the intro of the review, this movie also works as a self-contained thriller. In addition to the eeriness of the score and the cinematography, it’s the aforementioned scenes with the various personalities within Kevin put on display here that really gives it a sense of paranoia, and a really effective one at that.

What Didn’t Work: While I did really like M. Night Shyamalan’s writing for Unbreakable, it’s not as strong this time around. There are some plot holes, and it also does kind of portray the condition Kevin has in a negative connotation, so for those who happen to have that while still being interested, this may be a major dealbreaker for you. Those are my only real flaws with this movie. Other than that, I really enjoyed this movie when I first saw it in theaters, and it surprised me just as much if not a little bit more upon rewatching it for this series of reviews.

Overall: Split shows that M. Night Shyamalan has still got it as a director after so many years of so many misfires (and one absolute disaster, but we’re getting ahead of ourselves… for now). He goes back to his roots in psychological thrillers, and in fact this movie feels like he never left the genre in which he made a name for himself.

While not perfect in the writing department, everything else just works so well for me that I can overlook it. With an excellent performance from James McAvoy, a solid supporting cast, a great score and cinematography, and good direction from M. Night Shyamalan, Split is an unconventional thriller in an already unconventional trilogy, and so it fits right in with the bookending movies in ways you wouldn’t expect. The icing on the cake comes with the twist, and a cameo a little bit into the credits which builds up to something bigger just makes the overall surprise of the movie itself that much sweeter to where you’ll want to see how it all comes together, which I will get into in the next review.

*I’ll say this: Take the underlying theme of the story from Unbreakable, and flip it. All will be revealed in the review for Movie #3, much like the Trilogy does with the movie itself.

Thoughts on Unbreakable (2000)

Image courtesy of wallpapercave.com

While working on my review of The Butterfly Effect, I was in the middle of visiting a rather unconventional trilogy, for which the final installment was recently released. Its nickname is the Eastrail 177 Trilogy, after the event that started it all in the movie that started it all, and that movie is known as Unbreakable.

Following a devastating train crash in which he is the sole survivor (and emerges unscathed), security guard David Dunn crosses paths with a comic book art dealer named Elijah Price, who has been suffering his whole life from a condition in which his bones are very fragile, and many fractures as a result. While in the hospital, he developed a theory based on the comics he read: He is the embodiment of human frailty, so there must be someone out there who’s the complete opposite (someone who’s “unbreakable,” so to speak). This leads him to David and his having recently survived the train crash… and a series of mind games as to whether or not Elijah’s theory is true.

What Worked: First of all, the cast is excellent in this. Bruce Willis is great as David Dunn, showing that he can embody the character’s vulnerability not just mentally, but physically as well, and both aspects are really put to the test in this movie, and they each have their share of shocking revelations. The most shocking one comes with the twist, and believe me, you won’t see it coming.

Then there’s Samuel L. Jackson as Elijah Price, who also goes by the nickname “Mr. Glass” because of his condition. Even though you don’t know it right off the bat as you would in any other superhero movie, he’s still more or less the villain here, and he makes for a really good villain at that. He’s the “charming on the outside, crazy on the inside” or the “methodical maniac” type of villain. He doesn’t play it over the top, he plays it straight, and that keeps with the movie’s “grounded in reality” feel. That’s just one of many examples of breaking convention (not the kind you’re probably thinking of) here.

There’s also Robin Wright (Wonder Woman) as David’s wife Audrey, and she’s really good here as well, having a smaller but still significant role in the story. Then there’s Spencer Treat Clark as their son Joseph, who believes his Dad is a superhero, and Charlayne Woodard as Elijah’s Mom. They, too, are the same way, but those two you’ll want to keep in mind for later.

It’s also worth noting that the director of the movie himself, M. Night Shyamalan, makes a cameo. You’ll definitely want to keep his character in mind in addition to them, as it might just go full circle by the time I get to Movie #3.

Speaking of M. Night Shyamalan, his direction is very good, and this was during the time when he was just getting started, because this was the movie he did following the enormous popularity of The Sixth Sense. His writing isn’t bad, either.

One more thing to mention: James Newton Howard’s score is fantastic, and there’s great cinematography on display here as well.

What Didn’t Work: There’s maybe some minor (and I mean very minor) pacing issues, but honestly, that’s really it.

Overall: Unbreakable is a great movie, and it’s often considered one of the best superhero movies of all time now, because of how it approaches the genre in such a unique way. As much as I really enjoyed the follow-ups to this one, I still think this is probably M. Night Shyamalan’s best movie*. Out of all superhero movies, it’s definitely among the more underrated ones. It has a fascinating premise, a great cast of both characters and actors, some very tense moments as well as some very emotional ones, and a twist that is still mindblowing even today. If you haven’t seen it yet, I highly recommend you do so, especially if you want to see how it all comes together in the end.

*His worst is kind of obvious for the vast majority, including myself… and the time will inevitably come where I end up having to cover it. Here’s the twist: I’ve seen it more times than The Butterfly Effect, yet that’ll ultimately feel less painful. That’s how bad his worst movie is (and I’m barely scratching the surface).

Thoughts on The Butterfly Effect (2004)

Image courtesy of moviemania.io

Hello, everyone. For those who read my schedule post, you may remember that while I was going through the plans I had for this year, I hinted at another special review towards the end… but not for the reasons you may think.

It’s a thriller, and while you could say it’s a sci-fi thriller, it is, but it’s more of a psychological one. I normally never really do this unless it relates to something like spoilers, but I need to do it this time because it’s important for something like this.

Before I continue on with the review, I need to forewarn anyone who’s interested upon reading it: If you’re squeamish, there are some moments in this movie that are startling (as in things like loud bang sounds and shocking events that are kind of “out there,” for lack of a better phrase), dark and at times depressing (like a tragic event in the main character’s childhood, and those who have seen the movie will know what I’m talking about; all I’ll say about it is that in the parts of this movie where it does happen, you don’t see it, but you do see the aftermath, and I can completely understand people being affected by it), and pretty deep at times, too (especially one line in the middle of the movie), and they’re all still pretty messed up either way. This goes for both Cuts: The Theatrical Cut and especially the Director’s Cut. Suffice it to say, if you’re hoping to be the same type of person when you finish watching it as you were when you started, I wish you the best of luck. You’ll know why I say that in the outro, but for now, and with the reader discretion having been strongly advised, on with this review.

The subject here is named for a concept in chaos theory where one small change under any circumstances can massively alter the outcome. In the case of time travel, any alteration to the past will impact the future.

This concept, and the movie named after it celebrating its 15th Anniversary this year, is best known as… The Butterfly Effect.

The story here follows college student Evan Treborn and his friends Lenny Kagan, Tommy Miller and his sister Kayleigh, who was also his childhood crush. They had numerous traumatic experiences growing up, and to make matters worse, they would often result in Evan having blackouts. Whenever Evan woke up, he would do something he didn’t remember, and so he was tasked with keeping a journal of everything that went on.

Seven years after his last blackout, Evan is in his dorm room when he discovers that by reading his journals, he can go back in time to certain parts of his past. He also discovers that the parts of his life where he blacked out were actually moments where his adult self took over his mind. However, he slowly comes to realize that the different choices he makes in the past have drastic consequences in the present.

What Worked: The first thing I’ll get into here is actually the plot. The concept itself is very fascinating, and as with any time travel movie (or show, the most recent example being NBC’s excellent series Timeless), it has to have something about it that makes it distinct from the rest, even if it doesn’t necessarily make sense. The thing about time travel is that whenever and wherever you see it, it provides some interesting “What If?” scenarios, regardless of plausibility. The way this movie puts it on display I think is very clever, and it actually shows how time travel both figuratively and literally can mess with your mind.

The aforementioned “What If?” scenarios here may not be relatable, but the main character certainly is. You do actually feel Evan’s pain at times, and for a comedic actor in a dramatic role, Ashton Kutcher gives a really good performance. He really committed to it, too; he even studied chaos theory itself, as well as psychology and mental disorders. It shows that he did his homework for this (no pun intended).

Everyone else is very good, too. Amy Smart provides the perfect counterbalance to Ashton Kutcher, and it feels like they do have genuine chemistry with each other. The close relationship between Kayleigh and Evan feels very believable because of it. It feels that much more tragic when you realize that while everyone else, such as Tommy and Lenny and even Evan’s mom Andrea, played by Melora Walters*, is certainly vulnerable because of what Evan has been doing, it’s an even bigger case between the two of them since they’ve been in love for so long. It also brings a sense of urgency for Evan to want to make everything right.

Although he’s not in it as much, William Lee Scott is still good as Tommy. He’s the character you hate for most of the movie, but at one point it pulls a 180 and you end up liking him, which is genuinely surprising for both the viewer and Evan in one line of dialogue there.

There’s also a small, but significant role in some of the events here, and that is Kayleigh and Tommy’s dad George, played by Eric Stoltz (Anaconda). It’s the same case with him: He’s good for the time he’s in it, even though you despise his character. He’s more despicable than Tommy because he’s responsible for the rough life that his children had, and basically how Tommy is in most of the movie. In fact, the two of them are each responsible for one of the dark, depressing, and pretty messed up moments mentioned earlier. I’ll leave it at that because seeing them is shocking enough as it is. Why I mention him here even with how his character is, aside from his performance, is that there’s a reason for it, which you come to realize close to the third act.

The best character in the movie is Lenny, because you really feel sorry for him the most, as he usually appears the most affected by Evan’s actions, and Elden Henson does a great job showing that in his performance. His experience here in playing the friend carrying the burden of having to deal with the main character’s actions is something that would carry over into a later role, and his best one by far: that of Matt Murdock’s best friend Foggy Nelson on Marvel’s Daredevil. He shows here that he can play that type of character really well, and it’s just as nice to see that he was able to perfect that later on.

The direction and script come from Eric Bress & J. Mackye Gruber, who previously wrote Final Destination 2. This has a similarly somewhat saturated look to it, and if that is any indication, they don’t hold back in terms of creating shocking moments. They had guts there with the kills (again, no pun intended), but here, they go even deeper, so why some scenes are as messed up as they are is understandable given that context. That applies to some of the dialogue as well.

The movie is also well-shot and paced in regards to both Cuts. The visuals are surprisingly really good for this type of movie, like the effects used for whenever Evan is reading his journals and whenever the timeline is altered and his memories along with them.

What Didn’t Work: Some moments may be a little too much for certain viewers (especially with the ending, regardless of which Cut you watch), although unlike other movies where it may be nothing but shock value, it actually makes sense. There are also plot holes here and there in the Theatrical Cut, but they are pretty much resolved in the Director’s Cut. However, the Director’s Cut becomes even more messed up with some of the events, particularly when you get to the ending. The dialogue is like that on occasion as well.

Overall: The Butterfly Effect is one of those movies where it’s so messed up to where you can’t take your eyes (and ultimately your mind) off of it. It’s not as deeply complex as, say, Inception or The Matrix, or even more recent sci-fi like Ex Machina or Annihilation, but one thing it does have in common with movies such as those is that it’s the kind of sci-fi that messes with your mind, mainly when it comes to the premise itself and how it’s presented on screen.

The thing that distinguishes it from those in terms of how exactly it plays with your mind is not necessarily through playing mind games or mind tricks. It’s much deeper, and perhaps more personal, than that, hence why I said I wish the best of luck to those hoping to be the same person when you finish it as you were when you started. Chances are you won’t be. Some of the moments that are tough to watch in particular will more than likely make you look back on the parts of your life that you felt could have been better and reflect on them because of how tough they are to watch**; you may end up thinking you probably didn’t have it as badly as the characters themselves do, or maybe even the other way around.

If it’s those moments that have made people end up not liking this movie (and there are many who don’t), then I completely understand. For me, though, I found more to like about this one than not, and for those who are interested, I’d say check it out, but keep the warning in the beginning of the review in mind if you do.

Also, if you are interested in checking it out, and you don’t already have a copy of it, it’s not hard to find elsewhere at the time of doing this review… and I don’t mean on TV, I’ll put it that way.

*She does still show up in a lot of movies, but when it comes to more mainstream ones, that’s more rare. The most recent example is something I’ll hint at until I get to the review for it: It’s based on a character who was previously played by an actor who co-starred on That 70’s Show with Ashton Kutcher.

**I would know.

2019 Review Schedule

Image courtesy of hipwallpaper.com

The preceding image is for use until I have a proper logo for non-review posts on the site, upon which it will be adjusted to that.

Hello, everyone. We are now in 2019, which means new movies and a new schedule for what the year has to offer.

Before I get started on what I have planned for 2019, there is something that needs to be addressed first: I am aware that I did not get to do a lot of the reviews I had on the schedule for 2018, and I do sincerely apologize for that. Most of them were franchises that received new installments, and while I do stand by my franchise rules*, at the same time, I realized that what’s more important is not that I’m able to cover them, but rather that I’m able to watch the movies themselves in decent enough time to ensure I can cover them as well as the new installments. I was able to do at least that, so I know I’m able to cover them.

As for what’s on the schedule…

First we have Glass about to come out, so the first new series of reviews will focus on M. Night Shyamalan’s superhero trilogy, which started with Unbreakable and continued with Split, and then I can cover Glass once I’ve seen it.

Then I’ll do the first of a few catch-up reviews I didn’t get to do when they first came out, but it’s only the two most recent movies in this franchise, so a “Mini-Marvel-thon,” if you will. That’s right, everyone: The Marvel Cinematic Universe has a new movie early on in the year (keyword on this one: Marvel). In other words, these reviews will be leading up to Captain Marvel, and those are Avengers: Infinity War and Ant-Man and the Wasp.

Then there’s Marvel’s rival, DC, with the DC Extended Universe (as they call it). Around the same time, they have a new movie as well, focusing on a hero who also went by Captain Marvel at one point, and that is Shazam!. Leading up to that, I’ll be covering what came before: Man of Steel, Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice, Suicide Squad, Wonder Woman, Justice League, and Aquaman, the latter of which I at least did the marathon in time for.

The next franchise planned for this year is likely a conclusion to a trilogy of some of the best action movies the decade has had to offer: John Wick.

Following that is probably one of the only other successful Cinematic Universes out there aside from Marvel: The MonsterVerse. I’ll be covering Godzilla and Kong: Skull Island for Godzilla: King of the Monsters.

Then there’s another carryover from last year: The X-Men franchise for Dark Phoenix and The New Mutants. Then there’s Men in Black, followed by Spider-Man (possibly), the Fast and the Furious franchise, Terminator, Star Wars (another carryover from last year), and Rambo, among others.

Anniversary posts that can be expected for this year are The Matrix (20th Anniversary of the original, but I’ll cover all of them since technically it’s also the 20th Anniversary of the franchise), the 20th Anniversaries of Tarzan, a childhood favorite of mine, and the best shark movie other than Jaws and The Shallows: Deep Blue Sea. 2019 also marks the 30th Anniversary of Tim Burton’s Batman and the 80th Anniversary of the character himself, so every live-action Batman movie from then until The Dark Knight Trilogy will be covered there.

Then there’s the 40th Anniversary** of Alien, so I’ll be covering at least that and Aliens, but I might as well throw in Alien 3 and Alien: Resurrection, and possibly the crossovers, since the original AVP celebrates its 15th Anniversary this year as well.

I’ll likely also be doing the 10th Anniversary of J.J. Abrams’s Star Trek, so I’m including those movies as well, but as a strong possibility for now.

There is also a very special one, but not for the reasons you may think. All I’ll say for now is this: It’s coming very soon, so stay tuned for that.

There are tons of other possibilities for those, so I’ll see what I can do.

One more thing I’m considering doing for this year: A new editorial called Fixin’ Flix, where I take a franchise and evaluate where it has gone wrong in the past before giving some ideas on how to improve it from there. Regardless of when I decide to introduce it, I know of the perfect one to start with.

The other reviews I didn’t get to do last year I’m sure I’ll be able to fit in there in some capacity.

Those are the main ones I have planned for this year, along with plenty of others, so I’ll see you soon with either the first new series, that special Anniversary post, or something else.

With that being said, I look forward to bringing new reviews, and Happy New Year, everyone!

*For those who are unfamiliar, here are my rules when it comes to covering franchises:

1. If a new installment is coming out, I feel it’s only fair to have covered the previous ones first so those eager to hear what I have to say about the new one will already know my thoughts on them.

2. If the new movie in question happens to be a prequel or a reboot, then that’s an exception, and I will go ahead and cover that.

3. If it’s set in a new continuity, like for example, it’s a direct sequel to the original that ignores everything else in between (like most recently with Halloween), then that is also okay because I don’t have to deal with any potential inconsistencies or plot holes.

4. If the franchise itself has an Anniversary, then I cover at least the first movie regardless, like I did with Predator, and most recently Die Hard and Blade.

**There is another 40th Anniversary, which would be for Mad Max, but that’s a possibility at the moment.

Thoughts on Blade (1998)

Image courtesy of moviemania.io

Hello, everyone. I realize this may be very last-minute, but I wanted to get both this and the Die Hard review out before the end of the year so they would still count as Anniversary posts.

With that out of the way, on to the review.

Like how Die Hard celebrated its 30th Anniversary this year, this one celebrated its 20th Anniversary. This is also a particularly special movie: It showed that superhero movies could actually be serious and still work, specifically ones centered around Marvel characters. It did what franchises like the Marvel Cinematic Universe would occasionally do (like with Guardians of the Galaxy and Ant-Man) and make lesser-known characters popular. It was the first Marvel movie to feature an African-American protagonist*. Basically, without this movie, you wouldn’t have X-Men, Spider-Man, and you especially wouldn’t have the MCU (meaning we wouldn’t have gotten Black Panther). It is this movie that paved the way for the superhero genre as we know it today.

20 years ago, superhero movie history was made… with Blade.

The story begins in 1967, where a pregnant woman named Vanessa Brooks is in childbirth when she is attacked by a vampire and later dies, although her baby, Eric, survives the ordeal.

It then picks up 30 years later, and Eric now goes by the name Blade, hunting the creatures that killed his mother, despite being half-vampire himself. Even with the thirst for blood, he’s well-known in the vampire community as “The Daywalker,” because he ended up gaining all of their strengths, but none of their weaknesses. He’s been using that to his advantage ever since, incorporating their weaknesses into weapons built by his friend Abraham Whistler.

When a group of younger vampires led by Deacon Frost intend to rule the world by summoning the vampire blood god known as La Magra, Blade will need more than just his weapons.

What Worked: The performances are (for the most part) really good. With this movie, Wesley Snipes becomes the first of many perfect castings for Marvel characters. He makes the character of Blade his own, bringing a sense of charisma to him. He also shows a sense of vulnerability at points, especially in two scenes in the second half of the movie, one of which is a twist. Without spoiling it, it gives you a definite reason to root for him, and you will be after that.

Kris Kristofferson is great as Whistler, and he and Wesley Snipes work off of each other really well. They have some genuine chemistry, and they feel like they’re old friends who have been on a mission for a long time. Whistler also gets a few great moments.

There is another character named Dr. Karen Jenson, played by N’Bushe Wright. She is a hematologist who gets caught in the crossfire (so to speak) following the opening action scene and taken in by Blade. Like I mentioned in the Die Hard review, this movie also has a smart female character. The main difference here is that she is actually able to help the heroes out because of her line of work: She’s a doctor who specializes in studying blood. She also gives a solid performance, and she even gets in on the action at one point, and it is pretty satisfying.

Now for the villain in this movie: Deacon Frost, played by Stephen Dorff. I mentioned that he leads a group of younger vampires, but for those wondering, this movie was still at a time when vampire movies were awesome because vampires could actually be taken seriously, so they still had some dignity. Therefore, no, Frost is not even remotely like the one that set vampires back to the Stone Age for five years. His group of vampires make for really good villains, and Frost himself is a great main antagonist. I did also like Donal Logue’s character Quinn, who’s basically Frost’s right-hand man (no pun intended, for those who have seen the movie). He’s the crazy one, but he’s the “fun and hyper” kind of crazy, and he does get a few funny lines.

There’s some interesting world-building here. As mentioned earlier, Blade uses weapons that incorporate vampire weaknesses, but the thing is that doesn’t apply to all of them. For example, this movie establishes that crosses and holy water are not effective, but wooden stakes, silver and sunlight are. He even uses garlic for good measure. He also states that they can only be killed if you hit the head or the heart.

In regards to the vampires themselves, they have slaves called “Familiars,” which are humans who side with them and in return gain wealth, protection, and the potential to be turned should they prove their worth. A small tattoo on their body of a vampire symbol (usually on their neck or wrist) is an indication to humans and a warning to rival vampires. However, they prefer to expand their influence more carefully in order to blend into society, a belief that ends up conflicting with those of Frost and his group.

The action is great**. It opens with a scene set in a vampire rave, and the moment Blade shows up, you know something’s about to go down. It’s one of the best entrances in superhero movies, and for good reason: He doesn’t just make an entrance, he makes an impact. The action just gets crazier from there, especially in the final fight between Blade and Frost.

The vast majority of the effects still hold up 20 years later. A lot of them are very practical, and they still look really good. There’s some CGI, but it’s mostly in the third act, which I will get to in a moment.

There’s a lot of memorable moments and quotable lines. Aside from the action scenes, some of the highlights come with the kills in this movie. There are also some scares on occasion, because while this movie may be centered around a Marvel superhero, it’s centered around one of their more supernatural-themed ones. For a movie like this, though, it does make sense for the darkness of the tone.

The soundtrack is also really good, especially the track in the opening. The songs in the credits are pretty solid, too. However, it’s just the beginning in terms of this series having awesome music. The best is yet to come.

What Didn’t Work: There are some predictable moments here and there. For those who have seen a lot of superhero movies and/or action movies in general, chances are you’ve seen those types of moments before.

Although I did say the performances are really good, the reason why I say for the most part is because there is one that stands out… and not in a good way. The character of Mercury, Deacon Frost’s lover, is played by Spanish model-turned-actress Arly Jover in her American debut. This is one of those times where it’s their first movie, but it shows in their acting.

The biggest issue here, though, is some of the effects you can tell are dated. Those are great for the time, but watching them now, they do not hold up at all. However, those are mainly in the third act.

Overall: Blade is significant for the superhero genre. It was the first time Marvel had a successful movie, and ironically, it was the one based on a lesser-known character that actually worked. It does the character of Blade justice, and it shows both that writer David S. Goyer (who would go on to write The Dark Knight Trilogy) knows the character and that Wesley Snipes himself embodies him. If it weren’t for this movie, and had it failed, we wouldn’t have had so many more iconic characters, both good and evil, brought to life. We wouldn’t have had the big superhero movie boom that we have today. This laid the groundwork for it, and it didn’t take long for Marvel to improve upon it, let alone for DC and other comic book companies to take notice. You can also thank this movie for showing that R-rated superhero movies can work, because that superhero movie boom also led to us getting Deadpool and especially Logan. In the grand scheme of things, though, Blade I think is actually a pretty underrated superhero movie.

Aside from being an essential superhero movie to watch for those who want to get into them (and to an extent, a good choice to show that there was a time when vampire movies could actually be good), Blade is a fun action movie, too. For those who aren’t fans of them, yes, there are some corny lines and cartoonish sound effects in here, but those didn’t just make 80s and 90s action movies so much fun to watch… they defined them.

Now, as a movie in and of itself, Blade is not perfect. It has effects that don’t completely hold up well, not the best acting or dialogue at times, etc. However, it seems like they were aware of that, and just wanted to make an entertaining movie for fans and audiences alike, and on that level, it works. It has an interesting world and rules established within it, a lead protagonist that’s perfectly cast and that you can get behind, a good choice of antagonist to go up against him, a strong female character, great action, very good music, and a story that works in establishing Blade himself as a character. On top of that, it’s paced really well: It’s 2 hours, but it goes by pretty quickly.

While not one of my absolute favorites, Blade is still something I suggest that anyone starting to get into superheroes and want to start getting into the movies should have among the first ones to watch.

For those accustomed to hearing whether these movies have them or not, this is one of the few Marvel movies to not have a Stan Lee cameo. He did have one, but it was cut. There is also no mid-credits scene nor post-credits scene, because it wasn’t really a thing yet to have either or both of them.

R.I.P. Stan Lee

(1922-2018)

Everyone, I hope you enjoyed these reviews, and plenty more (mostly catch-ups I didn’t get to do as planned) are near.

I hope you all had a Merry Christmas, and I’ll see you shortly next year!

*Prior to this, when superhero movies hadn’t quite been perfected yet, we got not one, but two African-American superhero movies in the same year, neither of which focused on Marvel characters: Steel, starring Shaquille O’Neal (no, I am not making that up; it’s basically DC trying to do their version of Iron Man) and Spawn, the latter of which is getting a reboot. It’s also the year that brought us Batman & Robin, but we’re getting ahead of ourselves… for now.

**Speaking of action, here’s an interesting fact for you: One of the members of the stunt crew is David Leitch, who would go on to collaborate with Keanu Reeves on The Matrix and John Wick, and most recently directed Atomic Blonde and Deadpool 2.

Thoughts on Die Hard (1988)

Image courtesy of wall.alphacoders.com

Hello, everyone. I’m back with another holiday themed movie review. It’s for the most wonderful time of the year: Christmas. This year also marks the 30th Anniversary of an action classic, and one of, if not the definitive Christmas movie. It comes from John McTiernan, the director of another iconic 80s action movie, Predator (which celebrated its 30th Anniversary last year, and I in turn honored it with my review).

As I alluded to in my review of that movie, we go from one action classic to another… with Die Hard.

On Christmas Eve, New York police detective John McClane has come to see his estranged wife Holly in Los Angeles in the hopes of reconnecting with her during the Christmas party at the Nakatomi Plaza where she works. However, the celebration is cut short when a group of German terrorists storm the building and take everyone in the room hostage… except for one: John himself. The terrorists want $640 million from the vault, and they will do whatever they can to get it. John has only his wits to rely on if he has a chance of stopping them and freeing the hostages.

What Worked: The premise is timeless, and has inspired countless knockoffs for a reason, including two this year; some of them are still fun to watch, while others are just flat-out great movies in their own right. I mean, this decade has two prime examples, both of which also came out in the same year: The Raid and Dredd.

The cast is fantastic, particularly Bruce Willis as John McClane and Alan Rickman (in his first movie) as Hans Gruber. Their performances alone make this movie, because they bring an iconic hero and an equally iconic villain to life. John McClane is more than just a cop and a family man; he’s a good person who just wants to help, but ends up in the wrong place at the wrong time, something he’d end up having a knack for. As for Hans Gruber, he has a clear motivation and will not let anything, or anyone, get in his way.

The supporting cast are really good as well, with Bonnie Bedelia as John’s wife Holly, and Reginald VelJohnson as Sgt. Al Powell, an LAPD officer sent to investigate the situation. The relationship between John and Holly feels genuine, and on top of that, Bonnie Bedelia doesn’t portray Holly as a damsel-in-distress, but as a smart character. She knows the type of person her husband is, and rather than intervene, she lets him do his thing while she stays put.

As for Powell, he’s the perfect counterpart to John McClane. He, too, is a cop who wants to help. He doesn’t know what the situation is at first because he’s on the outside, so he uses the necessary police procedures. John, being on the inside and knowing the terrorists’ plan, has to improvise on the spot if he has a chance of beating them. Despite that, Powell does gradually get to know who John is and that they’re on the same side, and he ends up having proven a worthy ally by the end of the movie. They also have some good banter with each other.

The movie is full of tension, and you’re constantly wondering how John is going to be able to outsmart Hans and his gang. Michael Kamen’s score also adds to the tension at points, and it’s actually even more effective because of it.

You’re also constantly on the edge of your seat, because the action is so relentless here. It shows why John McTiernan became a go-to action director during that time, especially after this. If Predator wasn’t evidence enough of that, this certainly is.

Much like in Predator, this also has some quotable lines aside from John McClane’s signature catchphrase. There’s some humor as well, which provides a nice little break in the tension before going right back into it. In addition to the aforementioned banter between McClane and Powell, the humor mostly comes from the limo driver Argyle, who is the best character in the movie.

What Didn’t Work: There’s one minor character named Harry Ellis (one of Holly’s co-workers) who’s not only cocky and sleazy, but he makes some of the stupidest decisions to where it’s not long before you want him out of the movie. What makes it worse is that he’s in the movie for a good portion of it.

However, everything else is so good that by the time it’s over, you barely remember he was in it.

Overall: Die Hard is an action classic on so many levels. It defines what make action movies in general so enjoyable to watch: memorable characters, quotable lines (including one of the most iconic catchphrases in cinematic history), constantly building tension, and yes, great sequences filled with gunfire, explosions (before they became mostly associated with Michael Bay), property damage, and a rising body count galore. Having a great story and the right amount of humor to balance it out also helps. When you have those as well, you know you’re in for something special, a gift that keeps on giving, if you will.

So yes, contrary to what Bruce Willis himself may tell you, Die Hard is, in fact, a Christmas movie. If it’s set around Christmas and has Christmas references throughout the movie, it counts. There’s plenty of other evidence aside from that, including people making it a holiday tradition by having it among the movies they watch for Christmas.

Thoughts on Halloween (2018)

Image courtesy of hdqwalls.com

Hello, everyone. This is the second of two special holiday-themed reviews, so if you haven’t read the first, go ahead and do so, and then come back. Before I get started here, I’ll need to clear a few things up surrounding the subject of this review.

Even though it has the same title as the previous one, it is not a remake, but a sequel. Those who are at least familiar with the Halloween franchise may be wondering why I am jumping right to covering this movie when there are so many others in between, and therefore think I am breaking my franchise rule*. That’s because this new movie is a direct sequel to the original that ignores everything else, meaning the timeline of events is easier to follow and any inconsistencies or plot holes from those previous movies are now gone. In fact, the most you’ll get here regarding any of those are references. Other than that, story-wise, it’s just the first one and this one.

Now, on to the review.

Upon barely surviving her first encounter with Michael Myers, Laurie Strode believed he was dead, only to discover that Michael’s body had disappeared. His psychiatrist, Dr. Loomis, would then reveal to her that she essentially was dealing with The Boogeyman the whole time, despite not having been convinced otherwise prior.

It has now been 40 years since the ordeal. Dr. Loomis has since passed away, but Michael has been locked back up. Meanwhile, Laurie, knowing Michael’s return is inevitable, has been preparing for him during that time. However, that first encounter took a huge psychological toll on her to where it’s been affecting her family. When history starts to repeat itself, Laurie now has her chance to finish Michael once and for all.

What Worked: First of all, the performances are excellent. Jamie Lee Curtis really sells how Laurie’s trauma has affected her, as well as her dedication to conquering the source of that trauma. She is fantastic in this movie. For those who remember from the previous review, I compared her to Linda Hamilton’s original portrayal of Sarah Connor in The Terminator, and hinted at another parallel, which is in this movie. Like Sarah in between the first two movies of that franchise, Laurie Strode is basically the same way here. She also goes from being a reluctant protagonist who doesn’t realize that what they’re up against isn’t human into a strong female character with a survival instinct preparing for the event that the threat comes back.

In addition to Jamie Lee Curtis, they also brought back Nick Castle to portray Michael Myers again, which I felt was another nice touch in keeping with continuity (it’s more than just him, though; I’ll get to that in a moment).

There is another one, but it’s more of a cameo. It’s also not in the way you would usually expect when I mention cameos. I’ll say where to look for it: After Laurie is reintroduced here, a couple scenes later, listen closely. They also do something similar in the movie to reference Loomis in a way that pays tribute to both him and Donald Pleasence, the actor who played him.

As for the new characters, there’s Judy Greer as Laurie’s daughter Karen, who has had a rough relationship with her, but tried her best to move on from it. Although she has played these types of characters in the past (Ant-Man, Jurassic World), the "strained relationship” aspect was not as significant. Then you get to this movie, where it goes much deeper, being part of both the main narrative arc and the characters’ own personal ones. Because of its importance here, you not only see and understand how well their family dynamic works, but there are times where you may actually feel it.

I also really liked Allyson, Karen’s daughter, played by newcomer Andi Matichak. Whereas Karen thinks Laurie is just paranoid, Allyson is the kind of family member that is a bit more compassionate. She recognizes that her grandmother has been through a lot, but focuses on her own problems more. All three of them have great chemistry with each other, and you do feel like they’re a genuine family (maybe slightly dysfunctional at points, but a family). What’s even more impressive with her is that (as the original was for Jamie Lee Curtis) this is her first movie, and she’s still great.

I enjoyed the friend characters more this time around, too. While Laurie’s friends Annie and Lynda were good performance-wise, character-wise, they were okay, but not entirely likable. Here, Allyson’s friends are more likable because they feel more charismatic, and some of them are actually funny.

The other new addition worth mentioning is Will Patton as Frank Hawkins, who, as it turns out, is the deputy who recaptured Michael following the events of the original. He isn’t in it that much, but he is good for the time he is in it. He does have several interesting scenes, including some great banter with Laurie.

Now to get back to Michael himself. The reason why he’s kind of a gray area here is while they did bring back Nick Castle, there are only a few scenes where it actually is him under the mask again. For the most part, though, it’s an actor and stuntman by the name of James Jude Courtney. However, he manages to emulate the way Nick Castle’s original Michael would move to where it still feels like it’s him.

They also brought a particular crew member back: John Carpenter himself. Now, he didn’t write nor direct this one, but he did come back to do the score for it. Of course, it has been updated somewhat, but it is more or less the score everyone knows and loves, including the theme.

As for the director and the writer, it’s a case of "the last people you’d expect to make this type of movie work somehow actually did": The director is David Gordon Green, and he co-wrote it with Danny McBride (whose previous association with horror was Alien: Covenant, which was among the first reviews I ever did). The surprising part is that they’re doing a horror movie, and a new installment in a franchise, no less. However, they’re mostly known for comedies, the best known of which is probably Pineapple Express. How did it turn out? Shockingly, they knocked it out of the park. They happen to be huge fans of the original, and the amount of effort put forth into getting it right shows in the movie. On top of that, they do have humor, but it's just the right amount needed if you’re going to use it in a horror movie that isn’t also comedic.

What Didn’t Work: I would have liked to have seen a bit more of Will Patton’s character Hawkins. To me, he ended up being an interesting character with a very clever connection to the ending of the original. My main issue, though, is with the character who’s replacing Loomis. I liked the character and the performance, and I also liked where they were going with him… at first. My issue with him is where his part in the story ended up going. He’s supposed to be a replacement for Loomis, and he does have an obsession with Michael to about the same degree that he did. Without giving too much away, he ends up being the complete opposite, mainly by doing things that Loomis would never do (there is something else, but it’d likely be a spoiler).

Overall: This Halloween isn’t just a solid sequel in general, it’s one that treats the original with the utmost respect while bringing something new to the table. It also reflects how times have changed since then in regards to how violent you could get with a horror movie. For those who wanted the kills in the original to be more bloody and gory, this more than makes up for that. The best way I can put it is this: you’re going to see some crazy stuff go down in this movie, especially with one kill near the end. It is balanced out by having some welcomed humor, including one particular moment in the middle.

Even looking at it on its own, it’s still entertaining. Those who haven’t seen the original, but are interested in this one, it’s understandable if you’re wanting to have this be your first time seeing a Halloween movie. You’ll just be wanting to have a fun time, and you’ll definitely get it with this. In fact, you might have so much fun, you’ll want to watch the original as well.

I would say see the original first, and then as soon as you can afterwards, see this one. It helps even more if you go at night (which is what I usually do for horror movies), and since it’s been out for a couple weeks, although you may not get as packed an audience now, just hope it’s close enough to that, and that you get an audience who knows what they’re in for.

One thing worth mentioning: There is something at the very end of the credits (but like with cameos, not what you usually expect when I bring this up). All I’ll say is this: keep a significant moment in mind when it gets to what I am alluding to.

*For those who are new here, one of my rules for reviewing new releases is this: if it’s part of an established franchise, having already covered the previous installments is the best way for me to review the latest one properly. The original exceptions were for prequels or reboots that have franchises of their own, but now, I can add “direct sequels to the original that negate everything that came in between.”

This is probably a big reason for my absence these past few months: so many franchises receiving new installments this year that I may have been able to marathon them, but not immediately get to covering those newer movies, although it’s more important that I was able to ensure that I could.

Thoughts on Halloween (1978)

Image courtesy of wall.alphacoders.com

Hello, everyone. Guess who’s back… I may not have been able to do a holiday-themed review for Independence Day with Independence Day, but since the chance will come again, I figured to make up for that (and since it’d been a long time without any reviews), I would come back with not one, but two holiday-themed reviews. With said holiday upon us, I figured what better time to come back than with these?

So, without further ado, here’s the first of the two… the slasher classic known as Halloween.

On Halloween night in 1963, in the town of Haddonfield, Illinois, a six-year-old Michael Myers, wearing a clown costume, picks up a kitchen knife and stabs his older sister Judith to death, after which he is locked up in Smith’s Grove Sanitarium.

Fifteen years pass, but on October 30, 1978, Dr. Sam Loomis, the psychiatrist assigned to Michael, has come with Nurse Marion Chambers to take him to court. However, it turns out that Michael escaped as he proceeds to then take their car and head back home to Haddonfield, with Loomis in pursuit. Loomis tries to warn the police about Michael’s arrival and that they have to be prepared for him.

The following day, Halloween has arrived once again… and so has Michael. His target is Laurie Strode, who he spotted outside his old home. She sees that he’s stalking her, although her friends Lynda and Annie don’t believe her. When Loomis arrives, he realizes that Michael is just getting started, and even with the help of Sheriff Leigh Brackett, he can only hope he’s not too late to stop him.

What Worked: The performances are really good, with the standouts being Nick Castle as Michael Myers (or “The Shape,” as listed in the credits), Donald Pleasence as Dr. Loomis, and of course Jamie Lee Curtis as Laurie Strode. Nick Castle really leaves an impact with how menacingly he portrays Michael Myers. You know he could be anywhere, but you don’t know when he’ll show up. With Donald Pleasence and Jamie Lee Curtis, their performances make their characters just as iconic.

Loomis’s determination to stopping Michael really comes across in Donald Pleasence’s performance to where it not only brings a sense of urgency to his character and therefore the movie, but also to where it leads to one of the highlights of the movie. There’s a pivotal scene when he has to explain to Sheriff Brackett that what they’re dealing with is the embodiment of pure evil that has a constant desire to kill, and, despite having been locked up for fifteen years, can never truly be contained.

Then there’s Jamie Lee Curtis, who gives an equally great performance as Laurie Strode in what was actually her first movie, which makes it even more impressive. It’s her first movie, and she still does a really good job. In a way, it’s kind of like how Linda Hamilton portrayed Sarah Connor in the original Terminator: the reluctant protagonist who doesn’t realize that what they’re up against isn’t human*.

Charles Cyphers, who plays Sheriff Leigh Brackett, is also really good here, as he does come to have a very significant part by the end of the movie. He also proves to be a good foil for Loomis, where Loomis is really the only one who knows what Michael’s capable of, and Brackett is the one who takes his word for it and hopes he’s right, even in deciding to help.

The supporting cast (like P.J. Soles as Lynda, Nancy Kyes (or “Nancy Loomis,” as listed in the credits) as Annie, and Nancy Stephens as Nurse Marion Chambers), while they aren’t in it that much, still give good performances, and some of those characters do have more significance within the story than others. For example, there are certain scenes with Lynda and Annie that would become a common trope in horror movies, even going so far as being parodied in Scream. Not only that, but there’s a scene towards the end with another character that would ultimately become a common trope as well.

However, it’s more than just the performances here that stand out. Everything that went into making them work stands out just as much. One such example is through the multiple contributions from John Carpenter. In addition to directing the movie, he co-wrote the script and composed the score. His direction definitely shows that he had a clear vision for how he wanted to bring this story to life.

That approach is also evident within the script. Since both go hand-in-hand, the result is a movie with an unsettling atmosphere, unpredictability of when the villain will appear from being hidden in the shadows (which also shows with its utilization of lighting and a distinct visual style), and a sense of ambiguity with Michael’s motives and his backstory. It’s all accompanied through excellent cinematography by Dean Cundey, who went on to do it for Jurassic Park.

As for John Carpenter’s score, it may sound simple, particularly with the theme, but it is effective when used in the movie, often whenever Michael shows up, which leads to yet another trope: the killer having their own theme. Its use in his appearances works since it’s not used for shock value from cheap jump scares such as loud noises or cats jumping out, but rather to make his sudden appearance a jump scare. Aside from not really having any jump scares, there’s actually very little blood and gore here. This proves that not all horror movies need to rely on blood, gore or jump scares to get a reaction from an audience, and that sometimes, it’s better to build up the tension and suspense and then surprise them because it’s that style that leaves much more of an impact.

There aren’t really any legitimate issues here, because for every detail that could be considered a problem, there’s actually a purpose to each of them. While it is slow at first, when it does get going, it doesn’t let up (it’s really fast-paced from that point on, and it goes by quick). There are some questionable decisions, but they either are for the purpose of building up to something later on or lead to what would become common horror movie tropes. While the score may sound simple, it still leaves an impact when heard in the movie.

Overall: While everything within Halloween would become iconic in its own right, it’s the impact the movie itself had on the horror genre as a whole that really gave Halloween its legacy. It was a huge influence for what made slasher movies so popular in the 80s, including the clichés that they would use, like a theme that would prove as iconic as the villain it’s associated with. Those movies would also gain their popularity by using Halloween as a template for how to make an effective horror movie, and just followed that.

If it weren’t for Halloween’s success, we wouldn’t have gotten equally popular horror movies (let alone franchises) like Friday the 13th and A Nightmare on Elm Street. In other words, without Michael Myers, we wouldn’t have Jason Voorhees or Freddy Krueger. We also wouldn’t have gotten Scream to spoof them because it wouldn’t have had the material to work with. Even if you’re not much of a horror fan, but you’re aware of the tropes, you should still experience it for yourself at least once. You’ll discover a lot of them originated here while you’re watching it, perhaps without realizing it, which is just one of many reasons why Halloween is the classic it is.

*There’s another parallel, but that’s a different story… for now.