Reviews

Well this episode has some interesting film set ups and shots, but more or less I was surprised that they took such an intimate take from Desiree's side to the point of showing said rape. If it was bias or not comes down to more or less where they got their info but I can see how it can move the episode along to the next episode as being justified against a court ruling (lawsuits etc) It also seemed somewhat one sided being that she has accused others of raping her in the past and other plot holes but no one knows what really happened or what what said so the episode seemed somewhat undignified especially with the acting choices and writing such as tyson and his defense smiling towards her in court etc. Overall the series seems more cartoonish as it goes along especially with that corny ongoing talking to the camera schtick. And to top it off with a sexual assault number at the end very agenda driven.

The visual story telling is amazing using backdrops and on locations scenes in NYC. The beginning of the series adds a thin layer to what was already known about mike and what can be found in his book by taking keywords and dramatizing it but doesnt over do it. The kid that plays teen Tyson is amazing and looks just like him which is really suprising Otherwise I would aliken this series to another Pam and Tommy I feel like Hulu is trying to bank off. It gets saltier knowing that mike tyson didnt back this at all and seems like a money grab before the actual film by Scorsese does him justice. Although just being a carbon copy with less emphasis on actual boxing I like how they fill in the gaps in history by making well shot and put together scenes that add to the legacy, but we will see if it gets better or worse. Granted how much I already know about Mike's bio I find myself more interested in the fabled or made up scenes and imagery then the actual story.

Granted this movie doesn't follow the most obvious plot points of a terrible remake or reboot it starts to unfold into those schemes three quarters in. I personally think the cinematography is great, the set design and costumes are AMAZING but this movie lacks a lot of charm. Akeem doesnt seem as wholesome as before and the buddy concept to Simi was thrown out which is disappointing. Akeem's bastard son is not likable in the slightest and overall for a comedy I laughed at like three jokes. But I dont think the script is awful it just is very singular minded no real twists or arches but just one big issue. I appreciate they used basically all the original cast but the movie didn't have the soul that made the first one good, but I guess you cant make a fish out of water story twice.

After watching Lucy (2003) I can safely say that Rachel York and Danny Pino killed it as Desi and Lucy very believable in mannerisms and portrayal.. although the story was a bit over exposed making Desi to be worst than he probably was it had archs of drama. Coming from that to this and considering the bigger production value I was puzzled and horrified. Javier who plays Desi has zero charm, his accent to me is a muddle of Spanish (Spain) and Ecuadorian not even close to a Cuban accent, it is horrid... really hard to watch him even talk let alone act in this. Lucy is done some justice but for me personally it was hard to get around how uptight and callous they made her. The chemistry between Lucy and Desi is obscure and not believable to say the least... it's like someone took the facts and just streamlined them into a subtle plot with no emotion, you're not really rallying behind anyone nor have a reason to be. It is like someone is forcing you this story down your throat and it comes off very awkward.

Evil Dead has been a number of things and the series jumps through genres from classic horror to quirky comedy. Bruce Campbell really makes this show come back alive with comedic timing and staying true to his character which is half old man fonzie and half demon slayer. The cinematography is great and the direction is well done with a moving plot almost playing out like chapters to a graphic novel. The show intros and outros play off of graphic gore and cliff hangers leaving you wanting more. Besides having the budget now to do intense gore there are many sub plots and useless characters coming in and out, I have seen all of the first season and some of the second and I am still intrigued, the only issue I have is that I hate the character Pablo and am just waiting for him to get killed or worse I really cant stand him as a character and dont think he is needed besides being filler but to lesser degree than Kelly. Otherwise the plot is ongoing which can be somewhat tiresome after 10 episodes, although Lucy Lawless is great in this and there are many small details that an avid fan would like.

This movie was beyond disappointing, it was almost like no effort was put into this project at all. The first 20 minutes was so much useless backstory it really dissolved the feel of the movie and even an hour into the movie I was still bored out of my mind. I would say there was two short awkward laughs in this movie but nothing to build from. I can't find the motivation behind the writing, it was like a kindergartener had a typewriter and each scene was played out with no substance. Kristen Schaal's performance was just awful, at least the girls that play Bill and Ted's daughters at least tried and stayed uniform to their image but there is not a single breakthrough performance in the mix. Nothing about this movie seems thought out, the historical characters had no essence and I found myself wondering towards the end of the movie what this movie was actually about. Even the song at the end was complete garbage, for a Bill and Ted movie I didn't expect much but this movie was just mindless with no heart. Huge fail.

Shot Caller is one of those movies that makes you think about your own moral code and personal sacrifices for survival. How far is a man willing to go to survive inside prison and how far is he willing to go to turn up clean on the otherside. I felt strokes of breaking bad but in truth this movie gets more interesting as it goes on and the character development and portrayal is well played by the leading role. My only objections are the beginning story premise and the epicness at certain parts how those things were pieced together was a bit of plot seaming otherwise after the first half hour you can respect the dialogue and the tone of the movie. It definitely deserves an engaging watch and maybe you will pick up on more subtleties on the second viewing if you dont like prison gang violence, or intense strategical thrillers then watch it when you do.

I was very hesitant to watch this movie considering well its a sequel to an already great movie with ad lib style humor. But I must say reading some of these reviews... I was so happy with how the movie came out. I was laughing throughout the movie, the first movie is all good times for sure and beer chasers but this ones a whole other level of mind expanding humor. Even with a shorten cast and the addition of a new person in the team of time travelers, I honestly think this movie was better than the first and memorable on its on.

On paper this movie should be as boring as the day is long but there is something about it that makes it a classical piece of art and cinematic genius. From the cinematography to the music the overall visage of this movie engulfs you in its atmosphere. Each character is important and not important at all, my friend likened it to seeing a staged play I'm all its glory. The sounds and compositions, the elegy of the story and the symbolic nature of the craft of acting and showmanship. Daniel Day Lewis puts on a well deserved oscar performance. The film stands on it's own and shows us the madness of greed and revival. This movie is an achievement of modern day cinema.

This movie was a genuine thriller the name though had me very confused and I was torn with the Thorton movie ideology. Otherwise this film will keep you speculating the truth and then it flips it on you. Bateman plays the straight man well almost sociopathic acting at parts sways towards the end but good performance. Hall with her short hair I dont care for reminded me a bit of Theron in devil's advocate plays a bit of the role of the audience and non the wiser. What works amazingly well is the indie style filming of obscure close ups and aguemented cut a ways. The tension builds through out the film more and more which is why thrillers are my favorite genre and this is a good one! Of course the downfall is that it is a one perhaps two shot kill I cant see watching it again and again since knowing the end makes you feel dirty needing a bath. Lies and truths this movie has a plenty, otherwise the last 10 mins or so seem horror movie like a bit over done climatic but it wraps the gift up very intrinsically and you have the aha moment. Disturbing but somewhat far fetched premise but otherwise an better than good thriller mystery worth the time, watch with friends or your significant other.

So, I watched this movie out of sequence on Netflix not realizing there was a movie before this one. Honestly I did not think this movie was half bad, I did find Hardin's characterization to be a little hard to take seriously but I believe the actress who played Tessa did a brilliant job and that the chemistry between her and Hardin's character was very good. In all honesty seeing the movie out of sequence somehow made it better I thought I wasn't watching it out of sequence and just thought there was just a lot of call backs being made in the other movie After so it explained a lot of things for me. I do find the film to be a little overtly sexual and romantic novel-ish at times but I suppose it appeals to the target audience. In total retrospect not a bad film if you like that twilight like romance bad boy good girl younger drama but there is some comedic charm as well so not all is lost, watch it on Netflix and if you read the book maybe that would have been enough. I see that with this movie you are going to either love it or hate it but watch it in entirely then make up your mind, or do what I did and watch it on a whim and then watch After after it.

I give this title an 8.8 out of 10 stars that score might drop to the lowest of 8.2 on a rewatch perhaps but is unseen. Scorsese is one of the only directors that I can trust for quality films. This one had all the trademark moves: establishing steady cam rolling opening shot with fantastic score, the way he can jump from narration to cut scenes and bring it all back, starting from the middle and explaining the past while uncovering the plot; he has the formula down. The movie itself is an epic 3 hours and 30 minutes which puts it up there with Lord of the Rings and Benhur for runtime (not boredom) by hour 2 to 2.5 I was hooked into watching the rest of the film that is where the apex of the film lies. Pesci from out of retirement is brilliant it is like he never left, not as vulgar and over-the-top as previous films but he is still very daunting in character and subtle delivery. At first glance you don't really understand what the movie is about, especially since the way they advertised it to me was a focus on an ex-hitman and his relationship with his daughter which in reality is about 3 percent of the movie, so I will have to discredit that portion; it might have been the motivation in writing the book but not the movie. The story really boils down to the relationship between these 3 guys one of which is Jimmy Hoffa played by Al Pacino who is unstoppable in mindset (I could see some of that Scarface flare in there as well). The movie is also about history in the making and looking back at life through duty and loyalty in the broadest sense of the word, in that regard De Niro is more muted and is instead more of a tool of bringing that history to screen than an actual person to an extent. I can't leave a review without talking about the misses and negatives because I would say watch it on your own to know what is good, but knowing any Scorsese film you get the build up and the conclusion. Not to be understated I really want him to direct a movie that isn't mob related, I know it's his bread and butter but I wonder if he could put as much detail into something else because I honestly think he can do it, (the little things: explaining why the hotdogs were the best, how to make pancakes all that detail in narration that is irrelevant but doesn't seem story book like Quentin.) Other than that; there are some character development that goes nowhere like the wives at the beginning, and I think about 10 mins of the first act could have been shelved; there is no need for it. Uncharacteristic of Scorsese is that the beginning doesn't have the feel of the rest of the film but the formula is the same with his running plot style (quick cuts, change in character arc, etc). In part you might be disappointed if you thought this film was going to be a fiction mob movie where De Niro plays the monster and his daughter revives their relationship though story-telling because its not that at all. If anything the movie is part Americana, part aging-mob with historical accuracy being more of a shade than a color. I'll end on saying that this film was start to finish about one person but it was not about that person at all, it was about people living in an era and the inevitable outcomes riding the tide of life. If it will be a classic is not likely per-say but Martin always comes through, just a little lame that Netflix had buy him out to do this but it is still very much quality. He should retire the mob films though and make Tyson or a different genre at this point instead of playing it safe.

I give this show an 8.5. It's a mix of drama, comedy, and sci-fi which is pretty hard to pull off. To start off with, I have a really hard time watching new series, to me newer sitcoms or series are really hard to get into, this is no exception. The first episode or two you have to suspend your disbelief a little whereas I always catch myself saying I wouldn't have done that myself. Either way Pual Rudd is amazing in this you can really see his acting talent! Apart from the fact he is acting against himself he plays two significantly different characters who are the same but aren't... sort of speak. It is still crazy to me that i can tell the two characters apart so easily, which is subtle magic that they can look and act so differently but be basically the same. Secondly, Aisley Bea is a great actress as well; she is so convincing, likable and in the end relatable. She is everything you would want in this character and I really hope they work on more arches for her because she's just fantastic, lovely accent as well. I personally think her and Rudd should be married in real life because the chemistry is superb and very believable. What I like about this show primarily is that it keeps you interested without playing off your stupidity or lack there of, for instance the show does use a lot of flashback/flash forward scenes as well as reworking of scenes from a different perspective or timeline which doesn't make or break the plot. Unlike a show like let's say Breaking Bad that uses a flash forward as a subdued clickbait: once you know what it means it loses value rather than emphasizes it like this show does. The subplots are beautifully written in not only as a piece of history in a spinning timeline but also as motivation for character development which i love. But I can not wholeheartedly sign off on this show without detailing a little bit of the mudane or mediocre. Being this is just the first season; the entirety of the first season did just feel like one long pilot which to me fits the mold of the Netflix for Netflix series category, its like one long indie film project and by the end is a trailer basically for season 2. The sad part of these Netflix shows is that they only get picked up or continued because of plot twists and controversy: which is an insult to real art. Falling into that pigeon hole a little on how the first season ended i can't imagine how they can pull it off a second on, but I do have hope.... (and am still waiting for more Master of None!! jerks) To continue somewhat on that point towards the end of the first season other Rudd (let's call him) becomes a little robotic to me, which is odd considering where it ends on and a little bit on the rest of the show. Blending that sci-fi element with drama can be a hard line to cross for a Frankenstein... What I am unsure about is whether the show might become too homagey and will break apart too much, it works with the comedic elements for sure and that's why I love Paul Rudd's humour but I would hate for this show to go into the super-suspend your disbelief cateorgy or the unrealistic pitfall of the other crap on Netflix. I did catch some instances on this show that had homages or shots that made me think of scenes from popular film but it was subtle which I liked but it didn't effect or became the plot, so there is that.. In conclusion, it was a little hard to get passed the first episode or so but it's a minor adjustment. I am thankful It wasn't as stupid of a plot as I thought It was going to be, in my head i thought it was gonna be about... well Paul Rudd and Paul Rudd the fsct that he can pull that off well is already a success to be honest! The sad facts are that this show did make me hate myself more thab usual, and hate the unfairness of life and it's devices as it pertains to love, achievement, and fulfillment. I am still not sure if that's what makes it great or not or makes it real and compelling, but it's up for the viewer to decide. It would be refreshing to see in the second season the negation of the acceptance of those intangible qualities that make up human life, as a conflict structure, but who knows. You won't be content though watching this expecting happy endings. As a comedic drama thumbs up as a dark indie reel sideways thumb of nihilistic torture. Beware and Enjoy the ride for what it is to you.

I gave this movie a 6.6 out of 10.

It wasn't bad and it wasn't altogether good. I'll start with the good.

Kevin Smith's daughter gives a great performance and Jay holds his own.

Harley Smith fit perfectly in this movie which is odd and to go further with that that oddness is what makes cult movies like this good; that you are seeing something not mainstream or one dimensional in a character so it feels so props to that.

The movie within the movie is basically the premise that was reused from the first one. I personally hate when there is any movie that has to go to Hollywood to get a movie stopped or a movie within a movie so going in I knew it was gonna be a moving plot. The idea that this movie is just a reboot for the first one is quirky and SOMEWHAT works, but it mostly doesn't towards the end and I feel was a way for Kevin Smith to cover his nuts with the poor execution of a story that was probably written while stoned.

With that said, the ugly: the plot barely holds on its on not the premise the premise works but it was basically written with no production in mind at all on how to go from one scene to another, it was clown shoes. Jokes were reused some work some don't (jay makes most work) When it is over the top on how they get things done it's funny, comical, stoner making things work while forgetting; otherwise it is a big bag of fuuck flakes.

I personally did not like that Kevin Smith was pretty much a lead in this I mean he is a side kick if not less I get you almost died and this is basically your legacy but damn I do not find him interesting at all. For the most part emphasis on family and growing up was thrown in there like a dissected horse, and not for nothing but damn some of these actors are looking their age.

I am a big fan of the show; my five year old son got me into it, it was one of those shows that he hasn't grown out of yet not as into as he first started but if I put it on we are both entertained by the comedy that is funny for a kid with some adult humor here and there.

The movie itself followed that annoying pattern that we see with a familiar show or characters that first get a movie; a movie within a movie: Robin is trying to get his own movie in Hollywood. I find that story to be very overdone and we get it it's a movie about the Teen Titans but couldn't you focus the story on something else instead of basically outlining the whole thing based on the typical movie pattern. Characters want to have their own movie, gets rejected, fights main bad guy, gets deceived, proves themselves, final battle, ending etc. Just seemed kind of cliche' for a show as unique as Teen Titans Go!

There was some good elements though, it didn't drag too much or wasn't like 3 episodes glued together (even though I would have preferred that), it had a stand alone quality and wasn't too over the top, it wasn't a bad movie per say but it was just kind of bland.

I think what they could have done better was not to repeat the same jokes as much and rely more on the absurd and visual comedy that made them great. I wanted more crude or unusual jokes like the show, bad enough that I overlooked the 6.8 rating and went to see it (I usually only see movies in the theater with an IMDB rating of about 7.7 and higher) I don't think my son was super entertained either but there were some funny parts but all in all the story focused around Robin too much I mean all the characters have their own comedy elements and that dynamic was definitely lost.

All in all I would suggest true fans to pass on this movie or rent it, for me it really doesn't hold up to the series and I mean movie prices alone really leave something to be valued. Not the worst but definitely not what I expected.

I give this movie a 6.7, for me personally there wasn't enough story or behind the scenes moments that made me feel like it was something special, although the acting does work and Franco does a great job as Tommy I was left feeling like I was watching a parody movie. Being that; my biggest problem was not James Franco's performance of Tommy but that Tommy wasn't playing Tommy, to me no one can play Tommy but Tommy. All those scenes that showed Tommy's life; I just kept thinking to myself wow I would just most rather see Tommy do it to see him live it! Otherwise there wasn't any real big surprises in the movie, and in the end I would have preferred to have read the book instead. When the primary movie is over they do a side by side of scenes from the Room and scenes they shot with actors portraying the scenes from the Room that were done to be exactly the same; and to me that's how the movie felt, I know its a biography style movie but when you are already familiar with the 'real' actors you get a kind of knock-off feel throughout. In the end this is probably one of those instances where people who have read the book (me not being one of them, but I am currently more interested in doing so) would probably say the book is better. There wasn't any serious arches in the movie but it was still enjoyable to see, but probably not as much fun as seeing the Room in theaters with a large crowd, it was basically an ad for the Room where I would have preferred seeing the Room in a sold out theater instead. The movie moves along though not to be entirely negative it keeps a calm straight line with the audience but for me it was definitely a watch it once and probably not again, I don't think it has much "re-watchability" and I ultimately was hoping for more back story or candid moments to come to light. 6.7.

I enjoyed the first installment of this series so I was willing to give this movie a try with an open mind considering it was a lazy Sunday and I know the format of most action movies. The first 30 minutes of this movie was enjoyable but somewhere after Tom Cruise met with Cobie Smulder's character it turned into the typical cliché chase movie. I found myself telling my friend who walked in half way though the movie that in many parts of this movie there was many moments where you have to suspend your disbelief. Such that, a lot of the plot and the tying in of major points were just ways for the story to continue, at first I just assumed that Cruises training would come into play which is entertaining but later on it was just a masquerade of plot devices that were used to explain or not explain how they boarded a plane or sought refuge here or escaped or what not. The most unbelievable is Cruise hiding behind a shelf in the kitchen... um hello he's right there in plain view almost laughable. The dialogue became weak as well: "I'm going to break your legs, then your arms, then your neck" geez what else. The whole young girl that they have to protect I also found cliché', I wish what they did right in the first quarter of the movie would continue, but no the enemy was the typical 'bad guy' Ill do anything to finish off Reacher and he couldn't be stopped until the cliché again final fight scene. It was a little disappointing because the things that did work well in the first one such as plot development, well thought out fight scenes, and more plausible death defying action sequences wasn't the key focus in this movie. But what I do learn from both movies is: if you need to escape a crime scene or in desperation jump on a bus.

Aziz Ansari has amazing comedic timing which for me is what really makes this show great along with the dry and awkward dialogue. The character development and stories are also entertaining without being forced or trying to attempt to wrap everything in a neat package. He uses common relationships and everyday life experiences to drive his stories which is hard to do but seems to work well for the show. Although not necessarily plot driven or in the vein of a Curb Your Enthusiasm; this show offers situational comedy that isn't entirely make or break per episode which is refreshing.

My only complaints are the actors Eric Wareheim who plays his tall bearded friend with glasses and the woman who plays his mother. I will give the woman that plays his mother a pass because it is in fact Ansari's mother even though her acting is expressionless and her timing is probably the worst I've seen but at least I know she isn't actually a trained actress. On the other hand Eric Wareheim is a terrible character and actor on the show, relentlessly dumb and unentertaining, his acting is just plain awful, at this point I wonder why they didn't just go with Brian Posehn if they just wanted someone big and ogre- ish. His performances are stale and for me he is just annoying to look at, but that's just me.

Some of the episodes such as the first two are slow going but the cinematography was quite good so I stuck with it, and one or two other episodes didn't really go anywhere but what really makes this show good is Ansari's genuine-ness and a great supporting cast that keeps changing, I was very impressed with Claire Danes acting on the episode The Other Man. I am excited to see what Season 2 and forward will have in store and if the show's freshness will be able to remain or time.

Going into this I was expecting bad animation or a lagging/annoying story but to my surprise I was very entertained . I went with my 3 year old son and considering the last two movies we saw at the theater (which ill mention later) this one definitely blew them out of the water. The animation was very crisp, the story although somewhat predictable did not follow the VERY predictable format that I have seen in most other children movies. From the start the movie was unique and wasn't trying to be over the top funny. The main characters are very likable and stay true to their nature. There is something for everyone in this movie, for me personally it was the scene where Tulips character almost falls out of the plane and when the two are trying to get the baby to sleep which any parent can relate to. Sure it wasn't Toy Story but the animation was wonderful and the characters were solid and I really liked the main character Junior voiced by Adam Sandberg a person who I don't really like haha, I could of given it an 8 but I gave it extra pointage because I was genuinely locked into what was going to happen and as an adult that is impressive. Granted the last two movies I saw Life of Pets which i would give a 6 and The Good Dinosaur I would give a 1, this one actual got me a little teary eyed at the end and I didn't necessarily want to get up to refill my soda because I didn't want to miss anything. The only negative I would say is that there wasn't really a true back end story or fill story to this and that there wasn't any true closure to the movie or to the side story of the family involved, but there was definitely enough charm to look past that. To sound corny: it definitely delivered!

I been to many bad movies of course: this one was one for obvious reasons 1. poorly thought out story/dialogue 2. character development that didn't climb/arch or was relevant at all. Those things can happen in any bad movie of course, but this movie pushed the boundary of a bad movie in the case that it was the first movie my nearly 3 year old son saw with me at theaters; which ultimately made me harbor resentment towards the writers and story directors for a number of reasons. I am nearly 30 and my son nearly 3 and I don't find myself to be an overly protective parent when it comes to what he views (of course I am against unnecessary violence, the poor treatment of others, and things that would unnerve myself if I was a child things ANY parent would more than likely agree on) with that being stated this movie was completely inappropriate for kids. Firstly the Hindu story at the beginning was an interesting after thought in completion but the fact that the kid is trapped to fight some horrible monster immediately scared my son who isn't usually scared of monsters or situations in other movies, so immediately I felt it went a bit far and shouldn't have even been a part of the movie in the first place. Given that I gave it a pass as just being an unnecessary story about surpassing fears and embracing peace a concept I don't think a 2-3 year old would grasp I now move onto the movie itself... Surpassing fears is one thing but exposing my son to a dinosaur movie that circled around the killing of other animals in a malicious manner, a supposed drug trip scene, scene after scene about feeling helpless and showing that you have to fight others in order not to be victimized are basic values that I would never teach my son. The scenes were not endearing or funny, it showed struggle and plight, a dinosaur being knocked out, his leg being hurt when told to be strong in stalking and killing his enemy a human child... and being teased by siblings while later having a pet human who doesn't speak.. but rather that bites everyone are not reliable or enjoyable things to show to a child. Or a story that an older dinosaur told about drowning a crocodile in his own blood? I wouldn't want to expose my son to fear in this sense of the word, yes dinosaurs are scary but the overall frame of this movie was not about surpassing fear it was about dealing with it as a necessary evil and I do not believe in that, i relate it to telling my son a scary story and turning off the lights saying deal with it. Granted he wasn't scared during the movie but more so bored, I WAS DISMAYED that I had to expose him to 3 pterodactyl animals tearing apart an animal as entertaining when it was revolting, or a father who is teaching his son how to be a strong man by killing someone who is trying to eat to survive. This movie was a failure in my book for all parties. All he could say towards the end was "watch pandas" as he saw a poster for another movie earlier. I feel bad that this had to be his first movie experience and that he had to feel fear or a lack of entertainment just because the writers and story editors couldn't grasp what are good values or depictions of characters should be. I also feel bad for all the other parents who had a similar experience that in the hopes that your child likes dinosaurs so much that you had to pay the markers of this movie money based on that marketing scheme just to find out that you were paying for something you would not want to expose to your child. Finally, As a viewer and not a parent I can say that a dinosaur getting lost for an hour just to end up where he started is not a movie and seeing the characters victimize each other only to learn NOTHING in nature or life besides you have to fight/you have to fend for yourself falls extremely flat under these circumstances.. THAT IS NOT COURAGE THAT IS NOT A LIFE OF A DINOSAUR, THAT IS PLIGHT.

good movie, i feel that people who like one type of scary movie and doesn't except more interpretive kinds of 'ghostology' wont get why this movie works on a variety of levels without being too overbearing. The only negative about this movie is that it also fits well into the low budget trendy new horror movie genre as well. If you don't focus too much on the acting per say (which isn't all bad) you can see how this movie has a good build and plot that succeeds away from the cliché. Even though I thought the closing scenes were a bit cheesy it still is a good overall movie. Yet, considering i haven't seen chapter 2, i cant whole-heartedly fully validate this movie. 7 out of 10 rent it in succession if you're bored.