Us

The Wilson family travels to their summer home, excited for the beach and ready to get their relaxing on. Little do they know, their summer isn't going to end as planned. When their doppelgangers show up late one night, their vacation turns from happy and fun, to a fight for survival.

Us is written and directed by Jordan Peele, who is the same person that wrote and directed Get Out. If you saw Get Out, you went into this movie ready for some serious mind-games. I have to say, I was extremely unprepared. I thought this movie was going to be a simple psychological thriller where the Wilson family has to fight their strange twins that show up out of nowhere, but that is only the beginning. I don't want to give the story away, but I will just say that the mind-games were crazy from start to finish.

You know a movie is good when you walk out and are unsure of what you just saw, but I can't decide whether I really enjoyed it or if I'm just questioning all of it still. I may need to see this one again to make sure I didn't miss anything. There's a lot that goes on and it's not a short movie. At some points I was questioning how this was going to end and when it was going to end. Regardless of that, Lupita Nyong'o gives a wonderful performance, and the kids do a great job as well. Shahadi Wright Joseph, who plays the daughter, has some crazy eyes when she's paying the doppleganger Umbrae. She runs a little strangely, but who am I to judge...I don't run. Ha!

If you're a scary movie fan, go see this one at least once. You'll probably leave feeling like you need to see it again as well. As for me, I'm thinking I'll wait for it to be on Netflix before I see it again, but you never know. Sometimes I just need a good movie to go see, and there's not been a lot of those so far this year.

IMDb:  7.6/10
Rotten Tomatoes:  69%
Hayley: hmmmm...6.5/10

Captain Marvel

Captain Marvel probably doesn't need much of an introduction. We've been wondering who this superhero really is ever since the last Avengers movie was released. Carol Danvers (Brie Larson) is one of the most powerful superheroes we've ever seen, and this solo film is our introduction to her story. She is Earth's only hope for survival when a galactic war breaks out between two alien races.

Before I get into the review, I feel I should apologize. I saw this movie the day it came out and I've been slacking on the reviews. I've been busy! I actually forgot to write a review for this movie, but I blame that on the lack of excitement after seeing it. That's not to say that this was a bad movie. I liked it, but I wasn't in love with it. It was just OK, and I think that is in part to blame because no one really cares about Captain Marvel. We all are waiting for the next Avengers. We want that crazy, explosive movie that will clear up all our questions! Instead, Marvel decided to make us wait with a less than explosive background film.

I enjoyed learning about Captain Marvel's story and seeing how she fits into the Marvel world. We see how she initially came to meet Fury (Samuel Jackson) and how he knew to call her when the world needs her. We learn about her past and how she could really be the answer the Avengers were looking for. My only complaint about the movie is that it has a lot of talking, and not a lot of action. This two hour long movie probably only has 30 - 45 minutes of action. I was hoping for a lot more.

That's about all I have to say about this one...IMDb critics give this a 7.2/10 and Rotten Tomatoes gives it a 62%. I'm actually surprised that IMDb has such a high score because when you read the reviews the majority of them are very negative. My main question, and this is for Marvel in general, is why did all the original Avengers survive the last movie, and how did Captain Marvel survive when she isn't an original? If it was supposed to be a 50/50 split of the universe, how then did every single original Avenger survive, while the new additions didn't? Is Captain Marvel supposed to be an original even though we never saw her before? I guess, in terms of timeline, she was there before the newer additions? All questions to be answered with the next Marvel film...

Bumblebee

Bumblebee is a prequel to Michael Bay's Transformers series. Set in 1987, Cybertron is under attack and Optimus Prime sends Bumblebee to Earth to find a safe place for the Autobot faction to recoup. When Bee arrives on Earth, however, he is attacked by humans and Decepticons, leaving him in dire need of recovery. It is then that Charlie (Hailee Steinfeld) finds this beat up VW Bug in a junkyard, and takes it home to return it to its original glory. What she finds instead is unlike anything she ever could have imagined.

Critics and moviegoers alike are raving that this is the best Transformers to date. They are thanking Travis Knight (the director) for returning Transformers to its original glory. Micheal Bay is out, Travis Knight is in...or is he? My opinion? It was good, but just good. I wouldn't go so far as to say it is the best one ever. I'm also not a Transformers franchise person. I've seen all the movies, but that is as far as my Transformers knowledge goes, and I did enjoy this movie. I just didn't love it.

I couldn't get past the fact that the Transformers looked really...sorry to say it...fake. When the movie starts, we are on Cybertron watching the battle take place. I felt like I was watching a cartoon. From there forward I couldn't stop seeing the unrealistic nature of all the Transformers. One thing Michael Bay did right was make the characters feel real. They weren't a cartoon character stuck into our world next to Hailee Steinfeld. When Optimus Prime picked up Shia Labeouf, he looked like he was picking up Shia Labeouf. He was real and he was there. Bumblebee was so opposite of that that it brought my whole experience down a couple notches.

 

Other than that, the movie was simply OK. I don't have any other major complaints. The story was good, and I was glad to learn about Bee's past. You see how he lost his voice and how he learned to live without it, and you see two beings learn how to be happy when they feel like all is lost. It is a beautiful story, I just don't see it continuing from there. Unless they remake the whole series, this one ends where the first one begins. I don't see Travis Knight making a sequel unless it has to do with other prequels. I guess, we will see?

IMDb rating:  7.3/10
RottenTomatoes:  79%
Hayley:  6-6.5/10, cute doesn't cut it for me these days, especially when I prefer Shia over Hailee...

Aquaman

The newest DC character to hit the screens: Aquaman. Arthur Curry (Aquaman, played by Jason Momoa) learns at a young age that he has a special connection to sea creatures. He soon comes to learn that he is the long-lost heir to the throne of Atlantis, and with an impending war between land and sea, his people need his help.

It's about time DC Comics figured out how to make a good movie! While this one isn't quite up to Marvel's levels of film-making, it is definitely an improvement. Character development for one is much better. We get to see Aquaman in the current time, but also how he came to learn about his family history through various flashbacks. I especially enjoyed the flashbacks because of the backstory they granted. I didn't know a lot about Aquaman, and when this movie started I was a little worried. It jumps right into the action and my immediate thought was, "Great, I'm going to be lost." This wasn't the case at all.

Aquaman is getting great ratings. IMDb has it at a 7.6/10, and Rotten Tomatoes is at an 80% audience rating. This movie has grossed over $222 million domestically thus far and over $846 million worldwide. That is a huge amount considering they only spent around $160 million to make the film. While it is receiving a lot of buzz right now, I have to wonder if it's really that good. I, of course, have some critiques.

First, some of the graphics really aren't that great. Obviously, people can't talk under water, but when they are swimming around a very obvious green screen, it's a little distracting. They move in a way that just feels wrong to me. Maybe I'm being picky with that, but they also used a green screen for the desert scenes. With a budget of $160 million I would hope you could at least find a real sand dune. If not, maybe add another couple thousand dollars to the budget. It's not like DC can't afford it.

My second minor complaint is the cheesy one-liners. Some of them are good, but some of them are just unnecessary and distracting. Aquaman doesn't have to be funny. There's nothing in the comics that says we need to lighten the mood with a cheesy joke right here. They were sometimes very strange and good for a small giggle, but each one just got more cringe-worthy. Jason Momoa makes for a fantastic Aquaman, but there's no reason to make him a comedian. Let's be honest here...this movie is making so much money because all the guys are like, "I'm going to see the movie," and their girlfriends' are like "Oh bring me!" The girls are only going to see a shirtless Momoa. They don't care if he's funny...they may not even be able to tear their eyes off his abs to care about what he's saying...(see pic below).

Finally, my last problem was with Kekoa Kekumano's performance. He plays the sixteen year-old Arthur in one of the flashbacks. I found his entire scene to be exceptionally cringe-worthy and I was hoping for it to end sooner than it did. The acting was not good at all. I've never seen him in any other roles, but I genuinely hope it was better than this performance. Sorry, Kekumano!

You should definitely see this one if you are a comic fan, but I wouldn't say it is the best of the best. Definitely the best of DC movies, and I hope this marks a future of improvements for DC Comic films. I'd rate this at a 7/10 probably, but you are welcome to make your own judgments! Let me know if you agree, and enjoy the beautiful picture of Jason (above) for as long as you need! 😉

Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald

The second Fantastic Beasts is finally here, but this time everything is a little more serious and a little darker. Grindelwald has escaped the American Ministry of Magic jail, and no one can find him. The British Ministry wants Newt's help, but Newt has other plans in mind. J.K. Rowling has done it again. She has created a world that people love, and a story that people love to hate. This film is full of secret messages and one heck of a cliffhanger that has left audiences in disbelief, but has she upset more people than she has pleased?

I will try not to give too much away in these first few paragraphs, and then I will go on to discuss my thoughts about the cliffhanger. If you have not seen the movie, I highly suggest you only read the beginning portion (until the bold words below that say stop) and come back later for the rest. I have now seen the movie twice and I have spent a few days in between both times to think about it all and come to terms with it. The first time I saw the movie, I was extremely confused. I didn't know what was going on or who was who and I left the theater with very few words. I didn't know what to say. So, I went home, and I watched the first movie again. Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them is super lighthearted and happy. Newt is running around collecting his beasts and taking them to safety, oh and by the way Newt there's an obscurial running around and no one knows who it is. The obscurial is not Newt's main concern however. Throughout the whole first movie, Newt rarely has anything to do with the obscurial until the end. The ministry is dealing with it, and we are even lead to believe that they kill it in the end. This turns out to be completely inaccurate.

Go back and watch the last few minutes of the first movie. Notice how Newt sees a small bit of the obscurial float away after the ministry aurors try to destroy it. The only way anything could be floating away is if Credence survived. Surprise! He's alive, and Grindelwald still wants him. I think this is where my main dislike comes in. The name of the movie is The Crimes of Grindelwald. So I'm thinking I'm going to see tons of crimes committed by Grindelwald in this movie...but I didn't. I saw some crimes, this is true, but Grindelwald doesn't do any of them. The only crime Grindelwald commits in this whole movie is escaping from prison. After that he is nothing but a glorified cult leader. He sits around in an apartment all day while his followers go out spreading his name and committing the crimes that Grindelwald can't commit himself. This man is supposed to be one of the evilest men alive, worse than Voldemort even will be (remember this is before Voldemort's time), and he never goes outside. He is nothing but a charismatic cult leader that promises everything he thinks people want to hear to gain their trust. I need more.

Some of my confusion in this series comes from the new faces and the story that I've never read. My love of Harry Potter came from the books that I could hold in my hands and that I could read and learn about the characters. Now, J.K. Rowling is introducing new people and new backstories that I don't like and I don't agree with. She always says she stands behind these stories, but I think she's become too politically correct (more on this below). One new face we meet is Leta Lestrange (Zoe Kravitz). We know from the first movie that Leta and Newt are old friends from school and they have a mysterious history that Newt doesn't like to talk about. In this sequel, we learn more about Leta and her family history. How is she messed up in all of this? How could she be so evil, but also be friends with Newt? I did like Leta's part in this movie. I like her story and I'm glad we were granted some clarifications.

Overall, I feel like I enjoyed the movie, but I'm not sure how I will like the rest. I don't see J.K.'s vision for this series and I don't know how she can connect all of this to the future story that we all know and love. I think she needs to tread carefully because she is upsetting more people than she is pleasing. Supposedly there will be three more movies (for a total of 5 in this series), and I am interested to see where she takes this. IMDb reviewers give this movie a 7/10 and Rotten Tomatoes gives it a 66%, but it is also rotten if you look at the critics reviews. I don't know where I stand. I so badly want to like it that I think I'd give it a 6/10, but at the same time, that could just be because I loved the last 15 minutes so freaking much. It was a huge build-up, full of confusion and little hints to the truth, that ended with a bang. I could watch the ending another ten times and it wouldn't get old, but is that enough to please the biggest Harry Potter fans, such as myself? I'm not sure.




 STOP IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN THE MOVIE! SPOILERS FOLLOW!




I think I made the above notice pretty clear, so if you're still reading, you better have already seen the movie. First, I'd like to discuss Rowling's politically correct-ness. 1.) The allusion to Dumbeldore being gay, 2.) Nagini is an Asian woman/maledictus. Do not get me wrong. I have nothing wrong with gay people or Asians, I just find it funny that in a world where people are complaining about not enough diversity or lack of fairness for minorities, that Rowling suddenly jumped on board. Harry Potter showed very little diversity. I'm pretty sure Cho Chang was one of very few Asians at Hogwarts. So why now? Why in this one movie do we throw two of the minorities in there? I don't like it. I do not like that Nagini is a woman at all. We have only known her to be a snake, which as a maledictus makes sense. Maledictus is able to transform from human to animal for their early lives, but they eventually get stuck in their animal form. Fine. I can accept that. I'm not a fan of change and seeing her as a human is not my favorite, but why is she in the circus? Does Nagini just love being under someone else's control? Doesn't look like it to me. You want me to believe that she leaves the circus to be free, just to end up working for Voldemort and his evilness? I don't see it.

Now Dumbledore being gay....with Grindelwald....are you serious? Have you looked at Grindelwald? He's creepy and not cute and I'm sorry, but Dumbledore is one of my favorites and I don't see it. Not once while reading the Harry Potter books did I think OMG he's gay! Why does J.K. do this to me now?! Why does he have to have any sexuality at all? Why can't he just be the bomb ass Dumbledore we know and love? The one that knows all and that is filled with so much wisdom he could make you sick with it. I just can't see him ever loving someone that is as evil and demented as Grindelwald is.

Now, that cliffhanger. I'm siding with Nagini and her last words to Credence. "He knows what you are, not who you are." As I mentioned earlier, Grindelwald is nothing but a cult leader willing to say or do whatever he needs to in order to succeed. Right now, we don't know Grindelwald's endgame. Why is he creating an army? Does he just want to be in control of the world? I think he just needs Credence for the same reason that Dumbledore needed Newt. The blood bond kept them from fighting each other, but Newt took that away from Grindelwald. I am positive that Dumbledore can break it. I know he will because he is going to get the elder wand from Grindelwald. (Which is also crazy because if Dumbledore loves Grindelwald, how can he kill him? Doesn't love conquer all? It did for Harry...end tangent.) Grindelwald thinks he needs Credence because he can't attack Dumbledore, and Credence is very special. Most obscurials die at a young age, but Credence hasn't. Why is that? Maybe that's part of Grindelwald's plan as well. To determine how Credence has survived so long? Don't know.

There is no possible way that Credence could actually be a Dumbledore. Albus's father was in Azkaban after attacking the muggles that attacked Ariana (Albus's sister) when she was doing magic. I'm pretty sure they don't allow visitors in Azkaban, and he didn't escape. Albus's mother was killed by Ariana when Ariana "exploded" one day. It is rumored that Ariana was also an obscurial, which occurred after her encounter with the muggles that tortured her. So, if both of the parents are dead, Dumbledore could not have another sibling, and Grindelwald specifically said brother. It is possible that Credence is Aberforth's son, making him Albus's nephew, but I don't believe this to be true either. How is it possible that Albus never knew about him? The man that knows everything, except that he didn't have a brother or nephew? Or did he know and just kept it a secret for years and years including through Harry's time at Hogwarts? I don't think it's possible, but I'm very excited to see where this all goes. I'd also love to hear other theories or debate mine, so please don't hold back! Fantastic Beasts 3 cannot come soon enough!

Overlord

True historical events meet the living dead in Overlord. The night before D-Day, American paratroopers drop into France to destroy a radio transmitter atop a fortified church. The task already seems impossible, but when they find what lies beneath the church, the mission goes from impossible to a death wish. With the help of a female villager, the remaining paratroopers fight for survival and face a nightmare they never thought possible.

So this review is coming out a bit late since I don't think you can still see Overlord in theaters, but you can use this for Netflix or if you think you might buy the DVD. I really enjoyed this movie. It is fast-paced and full of twists and turns. It starts a bit slow and you're not really sure where this movie is taking you, but J.J. Abrams does not let us down on this action, horror.

If you are big into zombies and historical films, this one is definitely for you. I liked the twist to the true events. American troops really did drop into Nazi-France the night before D-Day to take out radio towers. They didn't meet zombies along the way, but it is an interesting idea. Who ever thought to bring zombies into WWII?! Oh, and if you like gory films, this is definitely your movie. I was pretty grossed out, but I hate gore. I had to hide my eyes on more than one occasion.

At just under two hours, this is one of the longer zombie movies I can remember. I never felt like I was bored and needed it to end though. There's a lot going on at all times and I think it moved along pretty smoothly. Jovan Adepo that plays the lead (character named Boyce), does a great job at keeping you entertained. I think he did this role justice, and I hope we see more of him in other movies. (He does a lot of TV shows, not as many movies.) IMDb rates this one at a 7.1/10 and Rotten Tomatoes is at a 76% audience score, which is very good for both. I agree with the ratings, and I would see this one again.

Halloween

This is the eleventh and final (supposedly) installment of Michael Myers' reign of terror over Haddonfield, Illinois and Laurie Strode on Halloween night. Michael has been detained at Smith's Grove Sanitarium for four decades and hasn't spoken a word to anyone. He is set to be transferred to a new facility, but something goes horribly wrong. The bus ends up in a ditch, driver and transport crew all murdered, and Michael is on the loose. Laurie has been training and planning for this day to happen, and she won't stop until he's dead for good.

I'm not going to lie to you and say that I have watched all of the Halloween movies. I honestly don't think I ever watched any of them after the first one, and I'm not sure I even watched the first one in its entirety either. The first five movies came out before I was born so they were never on my must-see list. After seeing this new Halloween movie, however, I feel like I might go watch some of them. I enjoyed this movie. I wouldn't say I was drop-dead in love with it, but it was good. They even threw in some comedy, which I wasn't expecting to see in a horror film. Who knew I'd be laughing in a horror movie?!

I think that may be why I didn't love this one. It just wasn't super scary. I was creeped out for sure, but I only jumped one time. I've been to children's movies and jumped more times than that. I was looking for a dark, scary movie to get me in the Halloween spirit. I didn't get that. While I'm glad that this is the end of the Halloween franchise (eleven movies is far too many), I was expecting a bit more horror. 

The end was a little off-putting as well. I didn't feel satisfied with it. For forty years Michael didn't say a single word. No one knows why he murdered people or what made him so angry. Was it the mask? Was he just a messed up child? Did he really love Laurie but she wouldn't love him back? Who knows?! I liked the twist this movie had, but I was really hoping for some explanation or at least one word out of Michael.

One thing I really loved was Laurie's preparation and planning. She spent a lot of time training and building traps in order to protect herself and her family. The traps were brilliant and surprising to watch unfold. Jamie Lee Curtis did a fantastic job in this role. Andi Matichak, who played Laurie's granddaughter, Allyson, was good as well, but her character had a lot of "duh" moments. I guess the writers needed to keep that element of stupidity seen in all horror movies, and they decided she could pull them off brilliantly. Let's scream our head off in the middle of the street! Michael will never find us now...There were other characters that didn't seem to be completely relevant as well. Allyson's boyfriend for example. He's a big deal in the beginning, but then he just fades out and disappears. Did we need him? I don't think so.

IMDb says 7.3/10, Rotten Tomatoes says 76%, I'd say 6/10. Not bad, but not great either. Definitely kept to that classic 80's horror movie style, but in 2018 I'm expecting much more.