randy_orton_fan Reviews

Avengers: Infinity War (2018)

It's Fun If You Turn Off Your Brain

[26 April 2018]

Avengers: Infinity War is the culmination of everything the MCU has shown us since the first Iron Man. And it's a massive disappointment. The movie boasts more characters in a single comic movie than ever before, and that's where one of the biggest problems comes in. There are too many characters and it causes pacing issues, where they ramp through exposition as fast as possible to move on. Some characters barely do anything and are just there because they are supposed to be.

Thanos is an okay villain. Not "Vader X 10" like they told us. But it's not hard to be a better villain than we've seen before when the MCU has had lame villains for 10 years.

There are multiple character deaths in the movies. But the "Emotion" and "Drama" of seeing them die is artificial, since you know they aren't leaving these characters dead and their deaths will be retconned in Part 4 next year. Some of the characters who "Die" have movies on the release slate for the next few years, so Feige and the Russo Bros. promising the deaths would be permanent is a lie since we know that

*SPOILER ALERT*

Spider-man, Black Panther, Gamora, Bucky, Groot, Mantis, Drax, Black Panther, War Machine, and Falcon aren't going to stay dead.

The jokes are cringey as usual and it causes an inconsistent tone. They don't know what they want the movie to be. A comedy? A serious movie?

There is so much action in this movie, and it exposes the hypocrisy of critics. After years of hearing them whine about too much action in some of the DC movies the final 45 minutes to an hour of Infinity War is pretty much all action, which the positive reviews show they suddenly have no issues with.

The movie was a disappointment. And people attack DC movies while giving movies like this a pass. It's stupid. Justice League was a mess but let's be honest with ourselves. WB let Joss Whedon butcher that movie because they wanted to pander to the critics who love brainless quipfests like what the MCU puts out on a regular basis. We never got to see the real version of Justice League. So my question is, why are DC movies fair game but we're supposed to just pretend garbage like Infinity War are masterpieces?

The MCU is exhausted. They are out of ideas so this movie became a cheap gimmick to try to prove that it's not just basic parodies and they are desperate to prove how "deep" they can be and how much "risk" they're willing to take. But how much risk is there in doing things that you know will be undone in the very next movie? It renders the entire movie pointless when you know that it's just a set-up for the finale instead of standing on it's own.

The CGI was pretty subpar in some scenes. Showing off mid-2000s level CGI in some areas, which is just sad in a movie released in 2018. Say what you will about the effects in Justice League, but that movie underwent unnecessary reshoots and that caused the effects to not be as polished in some scenes. So what is Marvel's excuse for this, especially as massive as the budget for this movie was?

Some of the action was really good, but overall the movie was like when you go to a restaurant and you just happen to get the food that's dry and has been sitting out for a bit. It's okay but you walk out regretting spending the money on something that you know could have been more but the people who worked on it knew they didn't really have to try to still make money off you.

Had it's moments, but ultimately a let down. 3/10

Justice League (2017)

The Original Super Team Hits the Big Screen

[17 November 2017]

The movie is being slammed by critics. My guess is because it's not full of jokes and jokes and poop jokes and more jokes and isn't an insult to the intelligence like Thor: Ragnarok, which they hilariously have at over 90% on RT even though that movie was terrible.

The movie is about the world still grieving over the death of Superman, and as Steppenwolff arrives on Earth to collect the Mother Boxes, Batman and Wonder Woman are forced to recruit other people like them. Each one with their own unique personality and character (something Marvel isn't very good at, considering everyone in the MCU is "The Funny One)

The action was great. The characters were dynamic and interesting and there was actual chemistry between the cast. When they got into it arguing over whether or not to bring Superman back, it didn't feel forced and generic and an attempt to force chemistry like in the two Avengers movies.

Steppenwolff is being blasted by critics for not being interesting, but he had much more going for him as a character than the scrubs in the MCU. You actually felt like he was a real threat, one that would take a team of heroes to combat, unlike Loki who was just throwing a temper tantrum or Ultron who was just telling jokes and wanted to throw a rock at the Earth.

Everything with Superman was great, from seeing Lois coping with his death, to his resurrection, to him and Lois on the farm, and finally when he joins the final fight against Steppenwolff. They didn't have the John Williams Superman theme in the film, my guess is Whedon chopped it out because he was offended that Superman wasn't brought back by baseball cards or "Just Because" like when MCU characters come back.

The movie is being panned, but it just shows how out of touch the critics really are. They expect every movie to be a Mickey Mouse joke fest that focuses on humor over character and anything else.

It was refreshing to see the heroes actually fight the main villain for a change in a team-up movie. Unlike in The Avengers where the main villain was beaten very easily by one Avenger (Loki in a comedy sequence that ruined his character and Ultron by Scarlet Witch when she threw a fit about her brother being slower than bullets).

The Lasso of Truth scene with Aquaman was great. I laughed, and it was funny because it was actually funny, not just a forced joke like the MCU.

Flash stole the show, and was a highlight every scene he appeared in. He has a great scene with Superman in the mid-credits, which was a throw back to the classic story where Superman and Flash had a race to see who was faster, and it even did a slow-mo shot that was reminiscent of the cover to that issue. THe post-credit scene showed Lex Luthor and Deathstroke, teasing the Legion of Doom.

Wasn't an amazing movie. But I loved it. It was fun, the action was great, the characters actually had character and they each played their part in the finale unlike in the bloated Avengers movies where Thor did a few lighting shots but not much else.

Give it a chance. Put the biased critics who want everything to be pratfalls and anus jokes to the side and form your own opinion. If you see it for yourself and judge it for yourself, it was a good movie. Not great. But good. And I'm glad to see the original super team on the big screen, the team Stan Lee copied with the Avengers.

Hope when the BLu-ray comes out we can see the Snyder cut, to see all of the things Whedon obviously chopped out.

Thor: Ragnarok (2017)

So Bad

[4 November 2017]

In the comics, Ragnarok killed every Asgardian, including Thor, and he was gone for years from the comics. The darkest story in Thor's history.

So of course Marvel Studios makes it a comedy.

There is nothing to this movie but jokes. It's quips, pratfall, anus jokes, Hela's kind of lame, Hulk and Thor are a comedy duo. And Thor helps Loki bring Surtur to Asgard so he can destroy it. Let me repeat that in case I wasn't clear. THOR HELPS DESTROY ASGARD AT THE END.

It's just so bad.

Some of the action was really good, but the forced humor didn't work in this movie.

At least Marvel Studios has finally admitted that comedy is their main focus.

Getting stellar reviews, of course. Because critics love the MCU and will just pretend they're masterpieces when they're not. This movie was terrible.

Critics call it "FUUUUNNNN". But it was just lame.

I wish I would have saved my money, or burned it. At least if I burned it I still would have wasted money but I wouldn't have sat through this.

It sets the final stage for Infinity War, which is going to be a bloated mess.

It (I) (2017)

A Good Watch

[9 September 2017]

Great movie.

The performances from the young actors were great, Bill Saarsgard was amazing as Pennywise and managed to be silly and creepy at the same time.

The movie contained more from the book than the original miniseries, and it focused entirely on when The Loser Club were kids, which was the best part of the original to me because it was creepier when they were dealing with Pennywise as kids since he's a bigger threat to kids because he feeds on their fear.

I still love Tim Curry as Pennywise, but I have to give Bill Saarsgard the top billing here, because I thought he did a better job.

Go see the movie if you haven't already. It's easily the best horror movie I've seen in a very, very long time.

10 out of 10

Spider-Man: Homecoming (2017)

Below Average

[7 July 2017]

This is easily the worst Spider-man movie. Everyone's praising it, calling it "Spider-man done right." But no, it's not Spider-man done right. If anything, it goes out of it's way to do Spider-man wrong. From Tony making his suit, to Spider-man never throwing a punch, to Spider-man needing to check in with Happy to make sure he's doing what Stark wants him to, to Liz to Flash, to Betty Brant, to Ned. To him not having a Spider-Sense. I don't want to hear "Spider-man 3 was worse!!" Because let's be real, after 10 years of people trashing it, I've never gotten more out of anyone than "dancing Peter Parker" and "not enough Venom." And Amazing Spider-man 2 might have had issues, but it still got more right about Spider-man than this movie. The acting was better too.

Tom Holland was good as Spider-man. Don't get me wrong. I liked him. I liked Andrew Garfield too. But Holland, like Garfield, just left me really missing the days when Tobey Maguire was in the suit. Speaking of the suit, it looked like bad cosplay. The black parts looked like electric tape, and the spider on the back looked like it was made of felt and was hot-glued to the back.

The fight against Vulture was just bad. Vulture pretty much beat himself by destroying his own wings. Which raises another point. The entire movie made Spider-man look completely incompetent. From destroying private property over and over again while chasing Vulture's goons, to causing that deli to get destroyed. The best shot from the trailers, where he's holding the ship together was all to give Tony some more screen time and have him save the day after incompetent Peter screwed everything up. Which is the second time Peter had to be saved by Tony, after he incompetently got easily bested by Vulture in the sky and nearly drowned himself with a parachute built into his suit. That's another thing, why was there a parachute in his suit? In the comics, Peter Parker made mistakes. He wasn't perfect. That's one of the reasons he was such a great character, because he made mistakes and worked to make it right. You didn't get that in this movie. It was incompetent Peter screws up, someone else fixes it, or their wings blow themselves up.

Speaking of the Vulture. He is easily the best villain the MCU has given us so far. He had more going for him as a character than the rest of the 1-dimensional trash of the MCU (even Loki with his Daddy issues being his sole motivation). Vulture was an average joe working man who employed a lot of guys. The government screwed them over and pretty much took their way of earning a living away. So with tech they managed to hold onto, they build stuff to steal more and more, selling high-tech weapons to criminals for a hefty profit. And Vulture did it all to provide for his family.

The ending was stupid. Of course Zandaya was MJ. I told people who were pushing that the junior novelization revealed her as Toomes' daughter that junior novelizations have a history of altering things to prevent big moments from being spoiled. But Zandaya's character was so unlikeable the entire movie, that I was just angry when she called herself MJ. So it's not even Mary Jane Watson, it's Michelle whatever her last name is. Then Tony praising Peter and reminding him how incompetent he was just irked me. Like the guy who built Ultron has any room to talk about screwing up. The Iron Spider suit made me mad, because it's just another way to ram Tony Stark down our throats in some way. And Pepper's back? In Civil War they implied they had broken up, now they're back together? Well, that's the MCU for you, just do things in between movies. No one will bother to care, right? It's Marvel Studios and Kevin Feige, and they know no one will ask questions. Especially the critics.

Everyone busted out laughing when Aunt May caught Peter in the Spider-suit. Her getting cut off before saying the f-word was so stupid, but everyone around me thought it was so funny. Listening to a grown man giggling in front of me about "Oh my God!! They almost said the f-word in a Marvel Cinematic Universe Movie!! This studio just continues to break new ground" just really made me realize just how bad this franchise actually is.

The post-credit scenes were pointless. Just teasing other villains, and then spitting in the face of people stupid enough to sit through all of the credits.

They kept pushing that this was a "John Hughes style movie". But it wasn't. If this was anything like a John Hughes movie, I'd say it was closer to National Lampoon's Class Reunion than Breakfast Club or Pretty in Pink.

And let's talk about the stupid title of the movie. Spider-man: Homecoming. Stupid name for a movie. Everyone praised it because "It represents Spider-man coming home to where he belongs at Marvel!!" But let's be real. The final act of the movie is Peter going to his HOMECOMING DANCE.That's what the title represents.

Of course the movie has a high ranking on Rotten Tomatoes. But if you listen to the critics or read what they wrote, they all regurgitate the same talking points. "it's fun, it's funny, it's like a John Hughes movie!" Which is why more and more people accuse critics of being paid off. They sound like they're reading from a prepared statement or something, all saying the same things in the same way. It's ridiculous.

Wonder Woman (2017)

Great

[2 June 2017]

This movie was awesome.

Gal Gadot was a great choice to play Wonder Woman.

The movie had a lot of action and it treated you like an adult, not like other comic book movies (Guardians of the Galaxy vol. 2, I'm looking at you).

Wonder Woman had complexity to her character, something you won't see in the MCU. She was naive about man's world, feeling that saving the world would be easy. She believed that if she stopped Ares that there'd be peace in the world, even though it turns out there are just bad people out there, something she comes to accept. But she is also shown there are good people, like Steve Trevor and his friends.

I've seen people say this movie copied the first Captain America movie because it was set in the past during a major war. But the difference is Warner Bros. and DC had the guts to actually show the enemy soldiers and acknowledged who and what they were, unlike Marvel Studios who didn't want to depict evil American Captain America beating up Nazis. For whatever reason Marvel thought it'd be offensive to show Captain America fighting Nazis, so he fought generic soldiers of Hydra.

Ares was awesome, trying to sway Diana to help him by showing her that he didn't influence man, they do all of these horrible things on his own. But Diana won't be swayed and she has an epic confrontation with Ares. It's always refreshing to see the hero actually fight the villain, not just generic henchman (looking at you MCU) or having the hero turn into Pacman for a gag (I just keep throwing shade at Marvel, don't I. Completely unintentional, I swear).

People keep saying this is the best DC movie yet. But here's the thing, Batman v Superman and Man of Steel were great films, if you ignore what Marvel fanboy critics say with their "OMG, where are the jokes? Why is there so much action? Why is the story not easy to follow like the paint-by-number Marvel crap the MUC gives us?" This movie shows me that everyone just hates Zack Snyder for whatever reason. Patty Jenkins directed this movie, but the story was credited to Snyder and he and his wife produced it like the rest of the DCeU movies he directed.

But this movie didn't feel much different than the other DCeU movies to me. Had a serious tone with intense situations, and a hero having to stand against overwhelming odds.

People say "this is the only DC movie with any heart." But we all know what they mean. they just mean there was some humor in this movie. Critics and fanboys believe that for a movie to have "heart", you have to have gotten a few chuckles out of a movie. But that's nonsense.

The DCeU is underrated, and critics and fanboys have chosen the already tired MCU movie style of 1-dimensional plots, phoned in performances, quips, quips, quips, quips, quips, and quips with 1- dimensional villains to compare all comic book movies to. So if a movie doesn't fit what the critics and fanboys expect it to, if it's even remotely dark or lacks a certain number of jokes, it's considered bad.

I'm looking forward to Justice League, and I left the theater happy after seeing Wonder Woman. It's nice to have movies to look forward to, because frankly I don't feel like watching Iron-Man 3.5: Homecoming or Thor: Jokes and Gags.

See this movie if you haven't already, and go back and watch the previous movies of the DCeU with fresh eyes and not judging it based on what Kevin Feige tells you a comic book movie is supposed to be.

Every movie doesn't have to be a sitcom.

Baywatch (2017)

Forgettable

[28 May 2017]

TV show from the 90s being remade because I assume The Rock was bored.

There were some laughs, some of the action was pretty good. But otherwise the movie was just one of those "well, that killed some time" type of movies where you watch it for something to do but you'll probably eventually forget about and probably ten to fifteen years from now it'll come on TV and you'll be like "oh yeah, I remember that movie. I didn't like it."

Movie about lifeguards who think they have the authority to investigate crimes, told to back off by real cops, turns out that the people wanting them to back off are actually the bad guys. That's pretty much it.

Zac Efron is overshadowed by The Rock. Don't know if that means Efron just sucks or if he was just in this for a quick payday and didn't really care about the movie.

The Rock is The Rock. Don't know how else to put it. He's just playing the same character he's always playing. The Rock. That's it.

Had the stereotypical fat guy in a movie about fit lifeguards who run in slow motion. Wasn't funny. Wasn't necessary.

Having a hard time continuing this review, so I'll just end it with this: Don't bother. Wait for Red Box. Or borrow it from a friend dumb enough to buy it.

Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 (2017)

Worst the MCU Has Given Us Yet

[12 May 2017]

This is easily one of the worst comic book movies I've ever seen.

The humor is so forced and so cringey I could barely stomach it. There's a part where they're being chased by a bunch of ships and are still cracking jokes, with Rocket telling Quill he's going to put a turd in his pillow case, and that it'll be one of Drax's. Drax then starts bellowing like a goon and says, "I have famously huge turds." I almost walked out of the movie at that.

Baby Groot is so annoying. It just shows how stupid society has actually gotten that people love Baby Groot. He's essentially Jar Jar but instead of people rightly being angered by such a horrible character getting focused like in the 90s when Episode 1 first came out, now everyone loves Baby Groot. With my Marvel loving friend telling me I "obviously lacked a soul and heart" since I didn't like Baby Groot. The start of the movie has the giant monster from the trailer, and instead of showing the whole fight, it focuses on Baby Groot as he dances to music while the fight is blurry in the background.

The story is bland as usual with MCU movies. It's just Peter's Dad needs Peter to help him activate these seedlings so he can take over other planets. All with bountiful jokes.

Drax was the only part I enjoyed of the first Guardians. His deadpan humor made up for the forced humor of the others. He took everything literally in the first film and that's what made him funny. Like the "everything goes over his head" line which he replied, "nothing goes over my head, I'm too quick, I would catch it." But in this movie he's "AHAHAHAHAHAHA EVERYTHING I SAY IS A JOKE!! AHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHA WHY ARE YOU NOT LAUGHING? THIS IS WHAT MCU FANS LOVE!! AHAHAHAHAAHHA MEMES!!!!!" And he didn't do much in the way of "Destroying".

There's a part of the movie where Quill covers himself in rocks and turns into Pacman, which I immediately thought "oh, this movie is the comic version of Pixels!!!" Not a good thing.

I think the one scene I really enjoyed was the Ravager funeral for Yondu at the end of the film. That was it. The rest of the movie was just joke, joke, joke, reference to old songs, jokes, serious scenes that played out pretty nicely and then ruined by jokes, and more jokes.

Five post-credit scenes. None of which mattered.

Everyone's singing this movie's praise. Which doesn't surprise me. Everyone loves the MCU and always give these movies a pass on being terrible. They love the humor and don't care how basic the plot is. I honestly believe if Marvel Studios put out a two hour movie of a Marvel character sitting at a table and just sipping a cup of tea it'd get a 100% on Rotten Tomatoes and the Marvel fanboys would call it cinema at it's finest.

The movie is so bad it's cringe.

Don't waste your money, even though you no doubt already have.

Smiley (2012)

Awful. Just awful.

[16 April 2017]

A killer that kills people if someone on chatroulette types "I Did it For the Lulz" (couldn't have been an intelligent person who came up with that idea) 3 times.

The characters are stupid, the concept is stupid.

Shane Dawson has always wanted to be an actor. Well, he should have stuck to Youtube because this movie shows he just isn't cut out for acting. He's terrible, and the scene at the end when it's revealed he's involved in the killings to be the first "Viral Killer" shows just how bad his abilities as an actor are. I've seen better acting in porn.

I don't even know what else to say about this stupid movie. It's just horrible, and this along with the Smosh movie show that these Youtubers should just accept that e-fame that is slowly dying because Youtube's revenue is being choked by ad-boycotts is as good as it's going to get. Because you put them in a real movie or TV show and they just can't cut the mustard.

Don't waste your time. I feel stupid for even watching it. I had the chance to watch it, and I had never seen it so I figured "why not". Waste of time.

Power Rangers (2017)

A Lot of Fun

[9 April 2017]

I've seen MCU fanboys attack this movie for "lacking the character and drama of the Marvel Cinematic Universe."

But frankly, I believe it's outrage that once again something comes out that does what the MCU does but better. This movie has actual character development. We have these five teenagers who don't know each other go from chance encounters to best friends, to people willing to die for each other. You see them bond, and I think MCU fanboys are triggered by the fact that the Rangers in this film bonded and were able to finally morph organically and for better reasons than some bit character having baseball cards of one of the team member's in their locker (like Coulson's Cap baseball cards in Avengers spurring the team to finally get on the same page just because a character that most of them didn't know or didn't even like died).

For a low budget movie (for a movie like this to do what it did for $100 million is impressive to be honest), I thought the effects were great. Once you put aside the nostalgia goggles of what the suits and zords and Goldar are supposed to look like, everything looks great.

I love the characters in the movie. Each one has their own distinct personality and once you are given a chance to get to know them, are quite likable.

I've seen people outraged by Trini being revealed as gay. But not because she was gay. But because "there wasn't enough emphasis on it". Like the director was supposed to have a full blown make-out scene between Kimberley and Trini to make Trini as loud and proud as humanly possible. I'm glad it was just a reference to reveal that she is distant with her parents because they don't accept that she is gay, and I'm glad they didn't make her sexuality the only defining aspect of her character.

Billy is the stand out character of the movie. And the kind of person he is ultimately leads to an incident that makes the Rangers realize how much they actually mean to each other, and finally allows them to have a strong enough bond to morph.

I like some of the changes to the mythos in the film. I like the aspect of the Zeo Crystal. Because it gives a defining reason for why the Power Rangers exist and why they need to be stationed in Angel Grove.

Rita was creepy and I enjoyed Elizabeth Banks' performance.

I think the biggest drawback of the movie to me is that it's like a longer version of the show. The formula of the show was always "Rita is up to something, it shows the Rangers out of costume dealing with their own personal problems and their friendships with each other, threat is introduced, they morph, Megazord fight, the end. So in a 2 hour movie, they didn't actually morph until the final act of the film. I also had issue with their visors being opened to show their faces while in their Zords. We had seen plenty of their faces beforehand, it would have been nice to see more of their full Ranger helmets.

The movie is fun and I hope it does get a sequel. With a tease to the introduction of Tommy and the Green Ranger, there is a chance to see an even darker version of that story.

A lot of fun, and I'd rather sit through the worst parts of this on repeat for a week straight without a bathroom break than see the next MCU garbage that is being pumped out, which is Guardians 2 where they are upping the comedy cringe and are taking the only funny part of the first movie (Drax) and taking his dry humor and making him a "HAHAHAHAH Everything I say is a joke now!! Make me a meme!!!!"

Mass Effect: Andromeda (2017 Video Game)

Mess

[23 March 2017]

This is what happens when all of the people who made a game series great leave and are replaced by SJWs and people who aren't qualified to have the job they've been given. My understanding is that the lead face animator is a feminist cosplayer who was hired for the role. And boy, does it show she didn't have the qualifications or experience to do that job. And before anyone thinks it, no, it's not because she's a woman or even a feminist. It's because you can tell by the horrible face animations in the game that she didn't know what she was doing.

The game is a mess, with crazy animations and ugly characters models. The gameplay is tedious and the acting is terrible.

I borrowed this from my brother who bought it Tuesday morning, thought it was stupid and decided to trade it in to Gamestop, but let me borrow it before hand. I played it for 10 hours and want those 10 hours back.

The series should have stayed dead after the conclusion of the trilogy.

Logan (2017)

Fantastic

[17 March 2017]

The final movie to feature Hugh Jackman as Logan. After 17 years, Jackman finally sheathes his claws for the final time.

And what a movie it was.

This movie was just great. Logan is old and tired and sick, poisoned by the very Adamantium that laces his skeleton. His healing factor isn't what it used to be, so his own bones are essentially killing him. We find that Mutants are near extinct and the X-men are dead, later revealed to have been killed unintentionally by Charls Xavier and one of his seizures. Logan is just biding his time, waiting for Charles to die and then debating about whether to put an adamantium bullet in his brain and ending it all. When he ends up being tasked with getting a little girl to a place that is a safe-haven for Mutants called "Eden." She ends up being revealed to be a result of scientists using Mutant DNA to create their own mutants to use as soldiers, the girl in question, named Laura is revealed to have been created from Logan's genes. Thus effectively making her his daughter.

The emotion in this movie is heavy, as we see Logan dealing with his own mortality and the kind of man he is.

We see Charles Xavier die, murdered by a clone of Logan named X-24, a soulless killing machine that is everything Logan is, minus the heart.

Logan ultimately faces down his clone, protecting Laura and the other kids she was raised alongside in the lab as they try to make their way to the Canadian border, and Logan is mortally wounded, giving Laura enough time to load the adamantium bullet into a gun and taking off part of X-24's head.

Laura's scene with Logan as he lay dying made me choke up. I'm man enough to admit it. When he was telling her goodbye, she called him "Daddy". Made me get misty eyed, then Logan passed. Laura's friend helped her bury Logan, and as they walked off, leaving Laura behind, she turned the cross on it's side, making it into an X. Almost as if putting the stamp on the end of the era that Hugh Jackman helped start when the first X-men movie made comic book movies a success.

This movie was great, and it's easily the best thing with the Marvel logo attached to it that I've seen since Spider-man 2. It's everything I could have asked for. It was serious, and it gave Logan a proper send off.

Everyone is talking about who should play Logan next, and frankly, after this movie I believe they should wait a decade or two before even considering it. Because this movie, and Jackman's performance are going to be very hard to top. So don't taint it by trying too soon.

Well worth the price of admission.

La La Land (2016)

Just a Stupid Musical

[26 February 2017]

This is another movie that shows that just because critics and the Academy call a movie amazing and "one of the best picture of the year"doesn't mean the movie is actually worth paying money for or sitting through.

It's about a struggling actress who can't seem to get a gig and a struggling jazz musician who eventually gets a gig but Mia doesn't approve because it's "Sebastian giving up his Jazz dream" or some stupid nonsense like that. He accuses her of only liking him when he was unsuccessful and they go their separate ways. For whatever reason she gets a casting call and he has to go beg her to come back to do the audition. Cue lame musical scene #89 (that's an exaggeration) and he pats himself on the back for getting her a gig and they declare they will always love each other but don't get back together.

Cue a "FIVE YEARS LATER" time jump and she's married with a kid and finds he started his jazz club. Cue lame dream sequence where they imagine what life would be like had it worked out between them and movie ends.

This movie was so, so, so bad. I like Emma Stone and I've never had any issue with Ryan Gosling. But this movie was just terrible. Why is it so acclaimed? It's just a romance musical!

I'm glad I didn't pay for the ticket. I got invited to see it by a friend and she offered to pay because she didn't want to go by herself. Boy, am I glad my money didn't go towards the box office receipts of this stink fest. I'd feel personally offended if it did.

There are too many people out there who base what they think of a movie based on what the critics say or what awards they get nominated for, but frankly, those people need to start thinking for themselves. Because just because a movie is highly rated doesn't mean it's good. It just means that critics are pretentious and they think it makes them look "cultured" if they enjoy a musical like this.

Save yourself the time and energy.

Get Out (I) (2017)

All White People are Evil According to this Movie

[25 February 2017]

This movie has a 100% on Rotten Tomatoes. 100%.

This movie was hot garbage. On the surface, it's just your standard thriller that isn't very good and is usually the kind of movie that critics would bash.

But since it was made with a liberal agenda in mind, like Ghostbusters 2016, critics are praising it like it's the greatest movie ever made.

The movie beats you over the head with the message, "White people are evil, they secretly all want to put black people back in chains." It's race-baiting trash.

If you want to see a good thriller, this movie isn't for you. If you want to see a good movie, this movie isn't for you. If you want to be guilt-tripped for being an evil whitey, oh boy, is this movie for you!

This movie having a perfect score on Rotten Tomatoes is just more proof that anyone who bases their opinions on movies by the score on Rotten Tomatoes is a brainless sheep. Don't be a sheep. This movie sucks. I've had people tell me this was supposed to be a thriller/comedy. COMEDY? Where? There wasn't anything scary, creepy, or funny in this movie. It was just pure "whitey is the devil" BS.

Fifty Shades Darker (2017)

Ugh

[25 February 2017]

Got dragged to this crap by a lady friend. I watched this movie and tried to figure out why people loved this franchise. It kind of felt pointless to me. Did we really need another movie after the first one? The first one was horrible.

And this one somehow manages to be even worse. And then I find out there's another one coming? WHAT? WHY?

Save yourself the trouble.

The movie feels like a better acted (not by much mind you) Skinemax movie.

It's both stupid and pretentious.

Only got see this if your significant other really wants to see it. And make sure that you make the deal that if you sit through this crap they have to see one of your movies too. I went to see this with my lady friend and I made the deal with her that if I saw this with her, she had to see "Get Out" with me. So I got screwed both ways because I ended up seeing two crap movies in one weekend.

The Walking Dead: A New Frontier (2016 Video Game)

Disappointing

[26 December 2016]

I loved Telltale Games The Walking Dead season 1. It had a great story with interesting characters and you cared when someone from your group died. The ending of the game is still great to me, where Lee is dying and he gives one last bit of advice to young Clementine before she has to choose to put Lee out of his misery or leave him to turn into a Walker.

Season 2 was great as well, but lacked the punch of the first season. Great to see an older Clementine who you are put in control of. Where that season lacked was that from the introduction of the new group she becomes a part of, they all make you hate them from the get-go, so when they start dying you're almost glad to see them go just because of how they treated Clementine (an 11 year old girl) in Episode 1. There were multiple endings and we had to wait 2 years for a new season.

We finally got that season and the characters we came to know and love are killed in flashbacks or in Clementine's case demoted to bit character, taking a back seat to Javier, who is essentially Luke from season 2 except with actual relatives to watch out for. This season you play as Javier, and Clementine is just kind of there. You have to sit through flashbacks of Javier's family from the very beginning of the outbreak, and after 2 games of playing in a world where the zombie apocalypse has been going on for quite some time, it's almost insulting to have to sit through stuff from the beginning of the outbreak.

They do their best to make you care about Javier and his sister-in- law/love interest and his nephew and niece, but I can't help not caring at all because I'm so angry that the main character of the past 2 seasons is now just a supporting character who as of episode 2 is painted as this untrustworthy person that you end up handing off to the bad guys of the season.

I'm sure the season will probably pick up starting in episode 3, but I don't think I care enough to play anymore.

Waiting 2 years to see what happens next just for them to say, "you know what, who wants to really follow Clementine?" just makes me lose interest.

And Kenny, the fact that they just killed him in a flashback, or Jane depending on your choices in season 2 just irked me so bad. Kenny's supposed death in season 1 had a good sending off feel to it, where it looks like he died to keep Ben from suffering in his final moments, which was a redemption of his character after wanting Ben dead for causing Kenny's family to get killed. Finding him alive in well in season 2 was nice, and it gave Clementine someone familiar to be around as she continued to grow and live in a world where the life she knew was a thing of the past. Kenny deserved a better death than just being eaten by walkers after a car accident. He deserved something more. And the way they killed Jane off if she is who you ended up with? Complete cop out considering how she was as a person in season 2. Sheer laziness. It's like they wanted to brush off the past characters as fast as possible so they could put all focus on Javier.

And the game suffers for it.

Rogue One: A Star Wars Story (2016)

Couldn't Care Less

[18 December 2016]

Why did we need the story of how the Rebels got the plans to the Death Star? The important thing is what the original Star Wars showed us, which was how the plans were used.

Seeing more Darth Vader was really the only thing I cared about. Vader was awesome. Which isn't surprising, it's Darth freaking Vader.

What are they going to give us next? How Han got the Milennium Falcon? Or better yet, an entire movie dedicated to the Storm Troopers who burned Uncle Ben and Aunt Beru? Better yet, better yet. How about a movie about a janitor who cleans the Death Star and he watches as Luke fires the torpedoes and just before blowing up he breaks the fourth wall and says, "Gee whiz, and I was going to retire tomorrow too!"

Movie is only getting critical and commercial praise because of the Star Wars name. Take Star Wars characters like Vader, Tarkin, and Leia out of it and call it something else and no one would have liked it. It'd just be another generic futuristic action movie.

Content Cop (2015–2017)

Timeless Classic

[3 November 2016]

What can be said about Content Cop?

It's the story of a down on his luck cop facing off against the worst scum in the world. From cyberbullies who think they're lizards, to bucket-hat wearing thieves, to morbidly obese people who eat food in their cars and disgust everyone in the area around them, to people who use surprise eggs to kidnap small children and make them do things on camera that no child should ever have to suffer, not to mention his battle in the sewers with a racist garden gnome.

The Content Cop does his best, but sometimes your best isn't good enough. Corruption runs rampant, and when only one man stands against it, can one man really make a difference?

Compelling story, with a star-studded cast.

You'll laugh, you'll cry, you'll cheer.

Watch it, you won't be disappointed.

Doctor Strange (2016)

More of the Same

[3 November 2016]

Another MCU movie that the bandwagon is giving stellar reviews to even though it sucks.

The movie follows the same basic formula as all of the other MCU movies. There's quips, there's jokes, there's a McGuffin, there's a 1-dimensional villain.

Movie's sole purpose is another lead-up to the next Avengers. The mystical artifact Strange uses turns out to be an Infinity Stone. "Shocking". If I had a dollar for every time Marvel did something that took me by surprise, I'd be flat broke, because you can see this stuff coming from a mile away.

I swear, I almost walked out when I heard the wifi password joke. Not to mention the stupid cape being alive so they have more comedy in the movie. Comedy? My mistake, I meant cringe.

Marvel Movies have a tendency to love to have the hero getting betrayed by someone they thought an ally. Baron Mordo is a friend of Strange and his group in the movie. He's a villain in the comics. Anyone knows what is coming from a mile away. He doesn't go full bad guy in this one, but expect him to be full on evil in the sequel.

Another thing nearly every single MCU movie does is the fake-out death. A character will die and then in the next movie or even just in the post-credit scene of the movie they died in they'll pop up alive and well. Seriously, go back and look. Wong dies in this movie and Strange just reverses time and brings him back. The only character I think has stayed dead is Quicksilver. And there were rumors he was going to pop up alive and well somehow in the New Avengers scene at the end of Age of Ultron.

The warped city stuff isn't as revolutionary is people claim. Considering Inception did it 6 years ago and that horrible Devil May Cry reboot did something similar as well.

Movie is getting stellar reviews, which doesn't mean much. At this point Marvel Studios could just release a 2 hour movie that is just the main character sipping a glass of tea while sniffing a dog turd and it would still get critical acclaim.

You know why it's so freaking hard to enjoy Marvel movies these days? When everyone is on the bandwagon and everyone attacks you if you have a different opinion, and when the movies are praised for being "amazing" when in reality they're just actually "just okay" or only "halfway decent", it makes them movies feel worse to me because when they don't live up to what critics and the fanboys say it is.

Like Civil War this year. Everyone called it a "Masterpiece." Then I saw it and the whole movie only functioned because of the gaping plot holes. But if you point out said plot holes you get vilified.

I think this movie might be the last MCU movie I bother seeing. They all feel the same, follow the same formula, and the fanboys make going to see them insufferable. Maybe Spider-man: Homecoming could be good, but since they have Vulture, Shocker, and Tinkerer (3 1- dimensional villains) as the villains of the film, it looks like the movie is already setting up to be the same movie with different characters we've seen about 15 times now. Just watch, I bet that the plot ends up being Vulture trying to steal a priceless artifact and Spidey has to keep it from him, and then in the post-credit scene it's revealed to be an Infinity Stone so they can do another "Look, look, shared universe,everything tied together" moment that are tired at this point.

Why did I give it a 1? I'd have given it a five, but the over-hyped nonsense from critics and the Marvel fanboys just makes these movies feel worse than they actually are to me. A mediocre movie ends up feeling like complete trash when everyone is calling it one of the best movies ever and then you see it and it's just "kind of sort of okay" Especially when the only thing I thought was good in the movie was the special effects. I also enjoyed the special effects in the Transformers series, but as we all know, those movies suck, and no amount of great special effects will save a crap movie.

Movie also shows the problems the MCU will be facing soon. Dr. Strange is a D-list character at best. After they lose Iron Man, Cap, Hulk, Widow, Thor, Nick Fury, and the other characters that the MCU was built on, they'll only have Spider-man and a bunch of C and D-listers holding their shared universe together.

Sausage Party (2016)

Why did I see this?

[13 August 2016]

My brothers wanted to see this Friday. I thought the trailer was ridiculous, but had no intention to see this. Brother offered to pay, so I figured why not?

This movie was so stupid. Food that is alive and tell crude jokes and then revolt when they discover that humans eat them alive without care or remorse.

So stupid. Seriously, why does Seth Rogen still get work? He's not funny.

The appeal of this movie, I assume, is that people find humor in the fact that it looks like the standard CGI kids movie pumped out by Dreamworks or Pixar, but then has crude, adult humor. That's the only draw I see to this movie.

And 83% on Rotten Tomatoes. For real?

And they gave Suicide Squad a 26%?

Why do people trust critics anymore?

I'd say "don't see this movie", but I'm someone who believes that someone else's opinion (especially cynical paid critics) shouldn't matter to you when it comes to movies.I didn't enjoy it, but maybe you will.

The only funny thing about this movie to me was that some uninformed parent in the theater I was in brought their four small children to see it. Because when the baby carrots starting crying for their Mommy the mother had to get her four screaming kids out of the theater. Highlight of the movie.

You want to know how bad this movie really was? I'll tell you. I got more enjoyment out of Ghostbusters 2016 than I did this movie. Just let that one sink in for a minute.

Suicide Squad (2016)

Highly Recommended

[2 August 2016]

This movie was a lot of fun. The characters were great and they gave each one a backstory so they were more than just criminals forced to do a job by Amanda Waller.

Batman made two appearances in flashbacks, first when he captured Deadshot in Deadshot's backstory of how he ended up in Belle Reve. Then we saw him capture Harley Quinn.

We got to see Harley Quinn as a psychiatrist who was manipulated by the Joker, we see him hit her with electroshock therapy which led to her being crazy. We got to see her in that classic costume from the animated series, which was awesome.

We saw Deadshot with his kid, and that he willingly turned himself in to Batman (who left him for the cops) because his daughter told him he could be better.

The rest of them had their backstories too, but probably the most interesting one was Captain Boomerang. Not because it was interesting (he was just robbing a bank and then got caught), but the fact that we got our first appearance of Ezra Miller as The Flash in full costume. It was a very brief cameo, but it was awesome.

We saw Enchantress' backstory and her ties to Rick Flagg, and then everyone else's stories, but outside of El Diablo they weren't as good as Harley and Deadshot's.

The movie is about Enchantress reviving her ancient brother to help her wipe mankind off the face of the Earth because they betrayed her and no longer worship her as they did in the old days. The Squad is put together (forced into it with chips in their necks that will be detonated if they try to leave or kill any of Waller's people) to retrieve Waller from Midway City and put a stop to Enchantress.

Joker and Harley were the best part of the whole movie (besides Batman and Flash making an appearance). Margot Robbie was great as Harley Quinn. She had the look and she pulled off the quirky, crazy personality of Harley. Jared Leto's Joker was pretty creepy. He was so possessive of Harley, killing a man in a flashback for disrespecting her, and going to great lengths to get her back. He's not in the movie much, but what he is in the movie, he steals the show. I can only hope with Joker busting Harley out of prison at the end of the film that we get to see more of them together in the future in a Batman movie.

The action was great, it had some humor (which seems to be the only thing most people care about in comic movies these days with whiny "where's the humor?" if a movie is darker than an episode of Spongebob Squarepants).

The characters were all interesting, except Slipknot, but I'll get to him later.

My biggest beef with the movie was that overly long slow-mo sequence at the end when they beat Enchantress. It went on so long I practically yelled "Just get on with it!!"

There was a nice nod to the comics between Captain Boomerang and Slipknot. Captain Boomerang, unsure if the bombs in their necks are legit or just a way to keep them in line, tricks Slipknot into believing it's mind games and convinces him to make a run for it with him. Slipknot starts to escape, and is immediately killed by Flagg who blows his head off remotely. They did that gag in an earlier issue from the 80s or 90s (can't remember which). Where the bombs were on their wrists and Slipknot got his arm blown off so Boomerang could see if the threat was real or not. I enjoyed the reference.

I personally don't see why the movie has a 26% on Rotten Tomatoes. Just because it's not part of the MCU with it's already tired formula of McGuffins, quip after quip after quip even from serious characters, 1-dimensional villains, and actors who phone it in more and more with each movie doesn't mean it's a bad movie.

See it for yourself and form your own opinion. That's what I did. Ignoring reviews from paid stooges who would praise a bad movie just for an agenda (Ghostbusters 2016) or ignore gaping problems in a Marvel movie just to go with the bandwagon (Captain America: Civil War's gaping plot holes) is how you can think for yourself. Too many people make what some critic says "their opinion" before a movie is even out. I know a lot of people who decide they hate a movie or love a movie before it's even released based on "professional critics." See it for yourself and judge it for yourself.

9/10. Lots of fun, but that slow-mo scene was so annoying.

P.S. Mid-credit scene has Bruce Wayne and sets up Justice League

Ghostbusters: Answer the Call (2016)

Insulting, And Hypocritical

[14 July 2016]

Went and saw this movie Thursday even though I swore I'd never watch a reboot of Ghostbusters or Back to the Future (hopefully they never make one)

This movie is complete garbage. I saw all of the positive reviews, and those "critics' are either A) Bought off by Sony B) Idiots C) SJW shills or D) Too scared of panning it for fear of being labeled sexist. Because if you read some of those reviews even some of the more positive ones talk as if the movie wasn't that good, but because women are in it they praised it. Some "professional critics" only focused on the gender of the cast, which tells me they know the movie is a stinker but the feminist agenda has to be pushed, so they'll ignore it being terrible to push the agenda. And people wonder why I think it's stupid for people to base their decision to see a movie on whether or not some paid stooge says to see it or not.

The effects are horrible. Look at the ghosts in the original two movie, most of those ghosts in the original films looked creepy. But this movie? It looks like the ghosts from that crappy Haunted Mansion movie Disney crapped onto the screens a decade or so ago. The final battle was horrible, with them obviously being in front of a green screen.

The movie breaks it's own rules. One minute they can't kill ghosts with their proton packs, the next minute they can? Why? For convenience of course. And sheer laziness.

Patty was a racial stereotype, which was kind of funny since this movie was made solely to be SJW pandering. Guess SJWs are fine with racism as long as they are the ones doing it. I've seen SJWs try to defend Patty being a stereotype by claiming Winston was just a "token" in the original. Which is pretty racist of them to say. Because anyone who has actually seen the original Ghostbusters knows that Winston was the everyman who just needed stable employment and found himself thrust into the crazy world of the Ghostbusters. He was the most relateable of the crew, because when you as a viewer didn't understand the scientific/paranormal jargon Winston usually said out loud on screen what you were thinking in your head. And some of his lines were the best. "Ray, if someone asks you if you're a god, you say YES!!!" Classic. The only time Winston's race was brought up was by him when talking to the mayor he says, "I've seen S**t that would turn you white."

The whole cast has horrible chemistry, and the jokes weren't funny at all. The acting was pretty much what you'd expect from a horrible comedy made this century. They think you'll laugh your butt off, but instead you think "is that supposed to be funny?"

The original movie was funny because it was made like a serious paranormal movie but the line delivery of the cast is what got the laughs. Like the scene where they meet with the mayor and Venkman calmly tells the mayor about what Peck is lacking.

Now, where the movie is hypocritical. All men in this movie are depicted in a negative light. Either idiots or jerks or both. Now, imagine if the roles were reversed, the same people praising this movie would be protesting outside the studio and whining about the lack of positive women roles in the film. But since it's men being treated that way? No issue from SJWs. Chris Hemsworth character is an idiot only hired for his looks. Which is another double standard. It's okay for women to ogle attractive men but when the roles are reversed those same women cry about how evil men's standards of beauty are.

They beat the main villain by shooting him in the crotch. It's obvious this was to flip the finger at all men in general, because this whole movie was just "Ra Ra Feminism Ra Ra Down with Men!!!" Imagine if this reboot had starred Adam Sandler and his crew of unfunny friends. Beating the villain by shooting him in the crotch would have had everyone bashing the movie. The movie would have been critically panned just for that scene. But since it's women? Praise. Pathetic.

Don't waste your time. It's a lame attempt to cash in on nostalgia, but they spit in the face of the fans by labeling them all as sexist and Sony's horrible marketing which was just an attempt to call anyone who didn't want a reboot a sexist was insulting.

I remember when I first heard about this movie being made. I was on my favorite movie/comic/TV news site and the second I saw the headline "Sony Pictures Announces Ghostbusters Reboot", I immediately went to the comments and said that without the original cast making a true Ghostbusters sequel I wasn't interested. I didn't even read the article. But suddenly I was flooded with "You just hate women!!!!!!" comments in response. So I didn't even know the movie was going to have an all female cast until after I had already declared my intention to not see it. So why would any man want to see this movie when men are depicted as moronic jerks in the film and Sony and the cast and crew have done nothing but insult us every step of the way?

I have a hard time believing anyone genuinely likes this. The people giving this high scores either didn't see it, or are only rating it high because it's a feminist agenda movie. I literally saw someone's review say "I gave it a 10 to counteract the negative reviews."

1 out of 10. Only because they don't let you give half stars or zero stars.

X-Men: Apocalypse (2016)

Not An MCU Movie, Needs to be Negatively Reviewed!

[1 June 2016]

People mocked those who claimed there was a conspiracy to negatively lampoon any comic book movie that wasn't a Marvel Cinematic Universe movie after all of the negative reviews of Batman vs Superman (which I haven't seen anyone give me their own opinion they didn't just parrot from some big "professional" film critic and a movie that I only saw pacing problems with in the first hour).

But this movie is the proof that there is some kind of attempt to crush anything that isn't the MCU.

Civil War relied on a gaping plot hole at the beginning to make the plot work, and no one had any issue with it.

I can't help but think that if The Dark Knight came out this year it would have insanely negative reviews and a low score on Rotten Tomatoes with negative reactions to Heath Ledger's Joker. You know, since it wasn't the MCU.

X-men: Apocalypse was a great movie. I'd write a more in depth review, but I don't have a lot of time and I just got back from seeing the movie and have to leave for work soon.

But I guess since it's "Not the MCU" you're considered "not a true fan of cinema" if you liked this movie. Considering how if you say anything negative about the MCU you have to watch all of your friends bring up Rotten Tomatoes or Meta Critic so they can read out loud what their favorite critic had to say to "disprove" what I said about those movies.

I know someone will see this and get upset that I am implying there is an attempt to crush anything not part of the MCU, but you think it's impossible?

Disney has the money to pay off critics. Especially since the figure that if they can crush the competition (DC) and crush the Fox X-men movies, they figure they can get the rights back to those movies.

Because Marvel Studios NEEDS The X-men. Time is running out and while Marvel is going to be losing their big names, DC will be giving us classic characters on the big screen who have never gotten their own movie.

So I say Disney has paid critics to crush anything Non-MCU. Non-MCU Marvel movies so they can get the rights back to them so their universe isn't carried solely by Spider-man and a bunch of D- listers. And crush DC to keep the competition at bay while they get their ducks in a row about how to keep their shared universe afloat after they lose all of the characters that built it.

And let me address the "plot holes" I've seen mentioned in this movie. Most of the plot holes aren't plot holes. Because you have to remember, this movie takes place in a new timeline after Logan changed history in "Days of Future Past." So "Why is Nightcrawler an X-man at the end, they didn't meet him until X-2 in the 2000s." Well, this is a new timeline, so now they met him earlier.

"Why was Mystique an X-man at the end? She's always been their enemy, look at the first 3 movies!!" Well, new timeline, she never became the killer she was in the original trilogy, so this new Mystique is an X-man and is an Anti-Hero.

"Why did Angel have metal wings? He didn't have them in X-men: The Last Stand?" Because NEW TIME LINE.

"Why didn't we see Jean and Scott in X-men: Origins Wolverine if she was the one who freed him?" Did you not hear the NEW TIMELINE PART?

Seriously, this movie has been picked apart and picked apart and all of the issues people have are only there because they ignore that the last movie altered the timeline so now the events of the first 3 movies and all of their spin-offs NEVER HAPPENED.

Seriously, maybe people should show a little more scrutiny to the MCU. Because if you take the "Critics love it, I gotta love it too" goggles off and pay attention you'll see that every one of those movies is full of huge problems.

Captain America: Civil War (2016)

Holy Plot Holes

[6 May 2016]

I loved the movie when I first saw it. And went to see it again, when I noticed something that just ruined the movie for me.

Where was Vision at the beginning of the movie? It's not like he had a personal life or something more important to do. All Vision really has is being an Avenger, and when the Avengers are on a mission to prevent a terrorist from gaining access to a chemical weapon, shouldn't it be ALL HANDS ON DECK? But nope, no Vision. And you know why? If Vision had been there he would have clocked that bomb vest from the get go and he would have gotten Crossbones far from civilians. No casualties at all.

Which means no movie. This ENTIRE movie relied on the massive plot hole required at the start of the movie. You fill in that plot hole by having Vision present at the beginning, and the rest of the movie just falls apart. So even though I liked aspects of the movie, I can't call it a good movie or give it a good score when the movie can't function without plot holes.

There's another plot hole the movie needed to make it work. All of the Avengers forgot about to mention to Ross that they saved New York from a nuke launched by the US GOVERNMENT. They also refused to speak up and point out that had they done nothing in the other instances he whined about, there would be no humans on Earth because Ultron would have KILLED THEM ALL.

And suddenly there were mass casualties in Sokovia? Really? Because I remember Age of Ultron made a point of showing the Avengers getting all of the civilians onto the hellicarrier. Now, for the sake of this movie's plot to make the Avengers look dangerous, they suddenly had a lot of dead civilians to blame on the Avengers. PLOT HOLE.

And here comes the second biggest plot hole of the movie. How did Zemo know Tony was just going to suddenly figure out Cap had been right the whole time and how did he know that Tony would show up in Russia to aide Steve, giving Zemo the chance to show the camera footage of Bucky killing Tony's parents to further cement the rift in their friendship? And I also love how convenient it was that there just so happened to be a security camera right there in such a perfect spot to catch the alleged expert assassin Winter Soldier (didn't pop the camera before you walked in front of it?) as he killed Tony's parents. He even made a point to pose in front of the camera, looking right into it like everyone watching was supposed to freak out and squeal with delight and shock. I mean, I thought Bucky was going to hold up a sign at the camera that said, "Check it out Tony, I totally killed your parents and hopefully Steve doesn't keep that knowledge from you because that'd be totes awkward at the Avengers hang out, amirite?"

I loved Spider-man in it. Well, not his completely CGI costume. But character wise he was just like the comics.

The action was great. So 1 star for action, 1 star for Spider-man. 8 stars off for the movie not being able to function without the massive plot holes.

I love how so-called "Professional Critics" have looked over all of these plot holes. I also love how many comic fanboys ignore them as well. It's like, 'Let's pick apart anything made by DC while celebrating Marvel for the same things we claim to hate DC movies for and let's write off X-men because it's totes not fair they won't let Marvel Studios have those characters back for their plot hole, McGuffin riddled movies.

This movie has a high score on Rotten Tomatoes and IMDb. And it just shows that when people say they hate plot holes, it just means as long as it's not a Marvel Movie will they hate plot holes. All of the plot holes people have whined about in Batman v. Superman are all either not plot holes or just nitpicking. Like the "Why are their Moms both SUDDENLY named Martha? It's like, sure they've had those names in the comics for decades and were named by different writers, but we need something to complain about!!!"

Marvel Studios suck nowadays. They all need McGuffins (Bucky was this film's McGuffin), they all follow the same exact formula, there are always plot holes needed to make these movies work to keep the shared universe working.

I know some people will read this and want my head on a pike. But if it's okay to criticize one studios movies, then it's fair to do the same to Marvel. Especially when everyone is just being willfully blind to this so-called "Perfect" movie's problems.

10 Cloverfield Lane (2016)

Insanely Overrated

[1 May 2016]

Why is this movie so critically acclaimed?

It's your typical horror/thriller. Except this time they're stuck in a bunker with a nutcase who shoots a guy then gets blown up.

Aliens don't show up until the end and Mary Sue, that's what she is not her name, blows their ship up with a molotov cocktail.

Overrated trash, just like the original Cloverfield. People love it based on name and the insane amounts of viral adverting the series loves to exploit.

If this movie had been called anything else, it would not only been a flop, but the same people praising it would be the most critical.