Reviews

The writing in this movie is wonderful, and everyone involved all knew how this film should be portrayed. Dora never takes itself too serious, and it's extremely enjoyable to watch. Isabela Moner is a delight to watch, she portrays a high school Dora perfectly. Her enthusiasm shines, and her energy carries the movie. All of her fellow actors also bring some level of fun to the film, despite their lack of development. Notable performances were Madeleine Madden as Sammy and Nicholas Coombe as Randy. The humor was excellent, still family friendly, and many fourth wall breaks. The theater erupted in laughter at many of the jokes, and the film was able to make fun of itself, which for a Dora movie, was most definitely necessary. The story was fairly fast-paced (although more high school drama with Dora would have been funny), and the fun never stops. The musical score was also reminiscent of a 90's movie with themes for each character and more. Enjoy the film for what it is, have fun with your family and friends, and do yourself a favor- see what is probably the best comedy this year.

Truly an outstanding film on all levels. Leonardo DiCaprio shows off his acting chops in every scene, reflecting how versatile and dynamic he is; his passion shines through. Brad Pitt is also wonderful in the film, portraying DiCaprio's loyal friend and companion. Every scene has been carefully crafted, every word carefully written, every detail has been filmed with fidelity. Tarantino personifies his love for film making in an amazing love letter to the old days of Hollywood.

Reflecting on Tarantino's previous works, one can see how he arrived at this destination, and why Once Upon a Time in Hollywood is a culmination of his life work. There are elements from all of his films such as Pulp Fiction, Jackie Brown (especially this one), and even Kill Bill. His ability to raise tension through dialogue is paramount to his film's successes, and has become a staple.

The film organically builds the two friend's relationship and characters, bringing a delight to behold on screen; there are so many other characters Tarantino is able to bring to life as well, with some of them having very little dialogue at all. He leaves the audience wanting to know more about these characters, without having to develop them. Margot Robbie steals every scene she is in, and brings about a warm innocence to her character.

Overall this film is a must-see, in a time when theaters are full of remakes, reboots, and sequels; this one stands out for its originality, and a golden era of Hollywood films, much of which is forgotten today. Tarantino's love and passion for his work truly shows here, and what we receive as his audience is a masterpiece to behold, and a 2 hour 41 minute film we wish could keep on going.

Spider-Man: Far from Home is a fantastic followup to Avengers: End Game. Tom Holland is at the top of his game here, allowing Peter Parker to exhibit the trials and tribulations of a teenage boy. The best parts of the film are the "hangout' and exposition moments, where the kids have screen time to be themselves- having fun on a field trip in another part of the world. Seeing this side of Peter Parker's life is similar to a teenage drama, but done very well. The movie benefits from having great scenes between Peter and his friends, and especially the budding relationship between him and MJ (a true highlight of the film).

The film is shot beautifully, and takes its time in unfolding its story. Jake Gyllenhaal steals every scene he is in, and is wonderful as new character Mysterio. Zendaya is given a lot more meat this time around to show off her acting chops, and develop her character. It was very nice to see Jon Favreau have a larger part in this film as Happy Hogan. Overall this film did a great job developing its characters and allowing them to have fun with their parts. There was never a time where the script felt "stifled" and it carried the audience along for the ride.

The film was extremely entertaining, and creative, allowing the characters freedom and connection. Spider-Man faced a threat he has never faced before, and the audience can feel that fear and unpredictability. There is also a nice surprise addition near the end of the film which was fantastic to see. Expect a great time at the theater with this film, and money well spent.

The best part about this film was the overall fun- this film doesn't hold anything back. The film is, at times, truly frightening, and extremely entertaining. Most of the scares never happen the way one would expect, which is a strength of the film; most horror films rely on cheap jump scares and predictability. This film decided to go against the grain on some of the scares, and think outside the box, bringing a creative spin into the mix, such as the television screen inside the Warren's locked room. The atmosphere is great, there is some investment in the characters, so the audience is invested in what happens to them, and there is an overall sense of fun. Overall a must-see for those invested in the Conjuring universe, and a recommendation for horror fans in general. Have fun with it!

Detective Pikachu certainly built up a ton of hype, as it looked to be the best video game to screen adaptation ever. Enlisting Ryan Reynolds as the voice of Pikachu was a smart move, and brought in many fans to see the film. The film as a whole... disappointing. The biggest issue with the film is its lack of character development. Certainly no ones goes to a Pokemon movie to see what the humans are up to, everyone is more worried about the little pocket monsters and what they look like on the live-action big screen. The curiosity and wonder about them, however, quickly wears off, leaving only the main characters to continue carrying the film. Justice Smith as Tim Goodman was a great choice, and holds his own throughout the film, although he could have been given more to chew on- the only focus is on his missing/dead father. Ryan Reynolds as Pikachu, is of course wonderful, and every scene with him is entertaining. The largest missing development, and a very criminal one at that, is Kathryn Newton's Lucy Stevens. Her character seems so energetic, so full of life and inquisitive- it is a travesty she was not developed more. There are no real motivations behind her actions aside from her wishing to become a full reporter- who is she, where does she come from, why did she want to become a reporter? In fact, by the end of the movie, I could not recall what her character's name was. As there is a severe lack of character development, and even chemistry, the script falls flat a bit, and there is no investment in the story. The story in and of itself is not very good and the film ends up becoming too predictable. Aside from these flaws, fans of the Pokemon series will no doubt be entertained through the whole film. A few years from now, however, most will have forgotten about this film and it will not be on the "must see again" list.

And that's not saying much. The overall premise is wonderful, and an age old legend used to scare kids to go to bed. The beginning sets the audience up for something truly sinister and creepy, and the atmosphere in the film is fairly decent. The acting from everyone involved is good, and direction is for the most part, good. The film falls apart on many levels, however, when they try to do too much at once. Jump scares are old and tired, and no one is asking for these any longer in horror films, which hurts the film. The director sets up a nice creepy buildup, only to have it end with a jump scare instead of something truly remarkable and innovative. While the film has some awesome atmosphere, the director seems to forget his own setup and doesn't know how to utilize it. One of the more spine-chilling moments is when the family surrounds themselves with candles and you can see a shadow in the darkness, and can't quite see the full apparition- this is true suspense and mystery, when not all is revealed; director please take notes from Hitchcock and his use of shadows in Vertigo. CGI hurts the film as well- instead of a creepy looking La Llorona, we get a CGI ghost face that doesn't look much better than something from Stay Alive (2006). There is also a severe lack of character development, absent from most horror films in general. The only character the audience possibly cares about is Linda Cardellini's Anna Tate-Garcia; the kids might garner some emotion from the audience. Raymond Cruz's Rafael Olvera is just a cool fun character, and honestly could have used more screen time. Had the writers developed these characters more, the more the audience cares what is happening to them, and become increasingly more worried for their well-being. Overall the film suffers from many maladies, not being able to follow through with the setup. The director does an excellent job with the setup, not necessarily the execution. Still, the film does deliver some creepy scares and is worth a watch if already invested in the Conjuring universe. Otherwise, check out the new Pet Sematary, it is more effective as a horror movie overall.

Alita is a wonderful film full of vibrant colors and gorgeous scenery; the world Rodriguez created here is a marvel. Those who have seen the anime the film is based on will no doubt be disappointed as the critical thinking and ethical questions are now gone. The film has been dumbed down so that all audiences may now enjoy it. This is both a curse and a blessing- the film benefits from the fast pace and action driven story, and falls short of greatness as it lacks some character development. The issue is Alita was developed fairly well, as the audience can connect and feel emotions for this girl, even though she is not entirely human. The other characters, unfortunately, do not get the same treatment. Since there is no emotional investment in the other characters, the audience does not care who lives or dies; even though the film is wonderful, it is not truly magnificent due to these reasons. Go see it for a fun night out, just don't expect something like the anime.

I have the seen the original too many times to count, and it's hard to review this movie objectively. The director does a great job of creating a creepy and engaging atmosphere/tone for the film; a sense of overwhelming dread or doom. This feeling hangs over most of the film, which is great for tension and suspense. The characters are not developed all that well, leaving much to be desired- the whole family could have used a great deal more exposition. The film could have used more screen time to hash out the budding relationship of Louis and Jud. If there had been more to invest in, there would have been more "skin in the game" for the third act. The film is not bad at all, it is still extremely entertaining and at times very creepy. Fans of the original or those new to the story will at least feel their ticket was well paid for.

I, like many others, grew up with the old cartoon, so needless to say, I am a fan! The first thirty minutes of this film were truly good, although it mainly followed the story of the original. Once Michael Keaton shows up, the film starts to fall apart (no fault of Keaton's acting abilities). The villain is extremely one-dimensional, and all emotional connections to the children, and even Farrell's characters, fall to the wayside. Farrell was completely wasted here, and his character poorly written; there was little to no development with any of the characters. The two children were good actors, however, there lacked emotional depth to the exposition. Once the third act comes around, there is little investment to continue on as everything becomes lazy and predictable. One of the positives is Burton's terrific visuals as he certainly knows how to bedazzle. Aside from this, the film falls victim to the same plagues as Alice in Wonderland.

Where do I start with this one? Based on the trailers alone, it seemed genuinely creepy and I was already excited after the amazing Get Out. I went in expecting this new Peele entry to be extremely sadistic, frightening, and tense. I received most all of these feelings; the film was innovative and mostly fresh. Peele has a talent for drawing in his audience through exposition and character development; we are genuinely interested in Adelaide Wilson (Lupita Nyong'o) and the traumatic experience she went through as a child. The film starts out extremely creepy with a sense of foreboding doom; this draws the audience in completely. It almost begins to fold out as a psychological drama about trauma and its impact on individuals and their families. While this would have been an interesting idea to explore, the film quickly moves on to the infamous Doppelgangers and their animosity towards our protagonists. I feel at this point, aside from the bloody violence, the film is no longer really horror and ceases to be truly scary. While I was initially disappointed, the film continues to be so well filmed, acted, and crafted, I was willing to continue the journey. While the third act is not as compelling as the rest of the film, it certainly ties in many of the film's central themes and delivers an expected, but effective climax. I am thrilled to see what Peele has in store for us in the future.

I watched this solely because of Sumpter as I want to see him in more roles as I feel his only memorable one is still Peter Pan. I feel that him and Elizabeth were the only decent actors but the movie falls flat. The story was cliché and not engaging. There were virtually no scary parts at all and the gore was minimal. I was hoping for some good creepy atmosphere or if that was absent, at least some excessive gore but sadly the movie lacked both those elements. There was no character development and the writers clearly hated all their characters. I also do not mind when the story is not explained fully such as Night of the Living Dead; it leaves a certain amount of mystery to the movie. This movie, although it did not explain everything, was completely uninteresting to the point that I did not want to know and not knowing made the film even worse. Stay away.

I have never been into animation that much even since I was a young kid. I grew up hating animation like Rainbow Brite or Strawberry Shortcake. It wasn't horrible but it wasn't anything to write home about. Then my eyes were opened when the great Princess Mononoke was released in America. Some of my Japanese friends tried to get me to see it and like I've said before, I have never been that much into animation. I took a risk and was pleasantly surprised. The movie was short and sweet with witty dialogue and intense action. I considered it to be the best American animation I've ever seen. Then a year later my Japanese friends brought over Flight of Dragons and they told me it was better than Princess Mononoke. I didn't believe that statement until halfway through the movie. The movie was brilliant and I was speechless afterwards. Crisp and clean animation flow through Flight of Dragons like a winding mountain river. As soon as I saw the animation in that movie I began to fear that the dubbing might be horrible thus ruining the beauty of the animation. I was proven wrong again which helped me to realize I shouldn't make such assumptions because one never can tell when it comes to animation. John Ritter was amazing. I have never heard his voice so clean and solid as in Flight of Dragons. Ritter steals the show and you wind up in a trance watching to see where his "flight" will take him next. James Earl Jones was totally out of character. Jones has been in many great films but his voice sounded too much like Darth Vader and it was almost as though he was trying to show off which should not be done in an animated film. The voice actors obviously needed to take voice lessons from John Ritter, the master dubber himself. Other than these flaws the movie was perfect starting with an outstanding beginning and finishing with a solid clean end leaving a smile spread across my face. This will remain my favorite animated movie of all time so I only have one thing to say- Miyazaki, look out because Jules Bass is headed for the silver screen!!

When you think of star wars, you think of lightsabers, flashing lights, lasers blasters, Han Solo, Luke Skywalker, Deathstars, battleships and more! When you think of Knightriders, you think of motorcycles, jousting, knights, Ed Harris, King Arthur and more! People, the excitement is all here and it manages to capture the essence that Star Wars intended more than Star Wars actually does! First think of the rebellion. The idea that a bunch of people are struggling to survive on what little resources they have and the different battle techniques they use which may be primitive compared to the great Empire. Now think of Knightriders and how these motorcycle knights had to gang up together and use what little resources they had to manage to survive in a world larger than them. This reflects the empire and its many henchmen struggling to capture and destroy them. The deathstar represents the hard work the empire put together just to destroy the rebellion. Now think of Knightriders and the hard work the world put together just to put down these motorcycle knights who just wanted to joust for a living. What ended up happening was their group split up and the characters had to re-group towards the end. This is what happened in Star Wars when Han Solo left the rebellion in the first movie in pursuit of money to pay off Jabba the Hutt. The comparisons between the two movies is astonishing! Am I saying that Knightriders is a rip-off of Star Wars? Definitely no, because saying so would be completely absurd. Knightriders is just a beautifully rendered edition of it and Romero does what Lucas could not. He has created a world in which people can joust freely on motorcycles with the same feeling of the Force from Star Wars. Lucas, eat your heart out! Romero, here we come!

Dude Where's My Car is a captivating satire on what we like to call society. All of us Americans rely to heavily on materials to make us feel better or to make us forget things. This prevents us from learning the important things in life portrayed in Dude Where's My Car. Sean William Scott proves time and time again that a picture is worth a thousand words. Sean steals the movie as a torn teenager from a society filled with baby boomers refusing to leave the upper offices. Sean struggles hard to remember where the car is which is a huge symbol throughout the movie. The car is in fact their "want" to do the best they can in life and to forget all the bad times and build upon those to improve their lives. Searching for their car is half the journey towards individualism and speaking out for freedom. I know Americans would love to feel free to do what they want and Dude Where's My Car is trying to teach us that. Forget all the materials we possess because the after all it is not the materials that make us, we make ourselves. Thanks Dude Where's My Car, I'm looking forward to your thought-provoking sequel.

I had never read any of the books before, and had only heard about them before I went to see this movie. I wanted to see it because it looked very good, and the preview reminded me of one of my favorite Chris Columbus films Young Sherlock Holmes. YSH captures the essence of old Britain with the same magical style as Harry Potter. When I finally saw the movie, I was presently surprised at the brilliance and wit contributed by the writer, the director, and especially the actors. It surprised me because I never thought a children's book could become such an involved and magical subject. The child actors seemed more like adults, but enhanced the genius of the film. When you see child actors in movies such as Jake Lloyd, you watch them closely, as if they aren't as good as the other adults. These actors were remarkable, especially the three main characters. But I don't want to give these guys all the credit, let's not forget the excellent adult actors they have in the film. Richard Harris was especially remarkable as the headmaster of Hogwart's. Every time I saw him, I thought of a brilliant aged wizard, who knows all and has seen all. I was also impressed with Alan Rickman's Severus Snape who was a great character and am hoping they continue his presence in the other films. I have followed Rickman from different movies because I love his acting style, and he was perfect for this role. Everything seemed to come to life in its own magical way. Kids filled the theater with laughter and surprises. They were having so much fun with this, and I can only imagine how much better the movie might have been, had I read the book. A film of this magnitude produces so much hype, it might have turned out to be another dude. But I can say now that this movie is not just hype, it is entirely substance. This movie could have been brilliant without the hype. I completely forgot about the real world when I entered the world of Harry Potter. So forget everything, relax, and enjoy a film full of magic and adventures fulfilled only by the wonderful Harry Potter.

Tom Green never fails to surprise me, and this movie kept my laughs going the whole time. Forget all your morals, your brought up Christian beliefs and "everything else you've had beaten into your head since grade 1" and you're left with one hell of a movie. Those that do not like this movie are the people who have problems with immoral issues and sins, who I'm sure most of the reviewers are. If you are open to a lot, and have time to sit down for a great dark comedy, this is for you. I haven't seen this great of a comedy since Very Bad Things, which people also did not care for. This movie even made someone behind me vomit, which made me happy to know that I am one twisted individual who enjoys sick humor and demented acting. If you are one like me, then this movie is 100% for you. If you are not, don't even bother going to see it because you'll just end up like everyone else and hate it completely. To give one an example of the humor... I was the only one laughing in the entire theater. Tom Green is at his best with Freddy Got Fingered. 10/10 stars.

I went to this movie mainly because I love movies which are all about girls having power, mixed with a heavy load of cheese. Charlie's Angels had it, as does this. A well-mixed blend of comedy, cheese, and ingenuity.

The best performance in the whole movie had to have been Alan Cummings with his evil comedic persona. He exemplifies the qualities of a great movie villain, keeping the humor going as well as the evil. Along with Parker Posey, they took the movie, making me beg for the parts only they would come on. The Pussycats themselves were wonderful, particularly Melody, who is played by Tara Reid. She wasn't too stupid or annoying, and had this cute and charming quality to her. I was actually surprised at how well she pulled that part off, as I can see how easily other actresses would fall into the ditzy blonde category. Racheal also gave a great performance along with Rosario, making the Pussycats solid. The greatest part about the movie was the plot and focus points, making sure they mock our pop-culture and how we all love to get into the new trends. They reflect how stupid our culture seems, making fun of Virgin Records, Starbucks, and pretty much everything else you can think of. They must have had a thousand sponsors, being that they had so much product placement. It's great how they make fun of our boy-band groups that I so much despise in today's society, which Get Over It with Kirsten Dunst also pulled off nicely. Go to see this movie purely for fun and laugh at the intelligent humor spread out. The soundtrack kept the story rolling, and kept the audience dancing. Next time I go to see the movie, I think I'm going to count how many products there was actually shown, since that will only heighten my enjoyment of a great movie. 9 out of 10 stars.