That isn't to say that everyone in this show is rich, but the people behind it clearly had enough money to build at least eight public schools with the money they spent on useless technology and a whole entire building for this dumb concept.
Reviews
17 Reviews
Paddleton
(2019)
A concept so simple pulled off so elegantly
23 February 2019
If every scene's dialogue was improvised, as I have heard, this film owes itself entirely to the fantastic two leads. Without them, there would be no emotion, engagement, or perfect connection between the characters and the audience. Their relationship is at the heart of this film, finding just the perfect balance of awkwardness, humor, and discomfort in serious and upsetting subjects. Individual scenes and moments don't have payoffs, but the ending of this film is such an emotional roller coaster that I sincerely hope I don't forget this film so that I don't have to watch it again. Themes of death, loss, love, and friendship are explored so poignantly and touchingly. Netflix better promote this film right or else it will go unseen by far too many people, which is unfortunate because this film truly is for everyone.
Very Overrated Franchise, but Harmless for Kids
17 January 2019
Let's get the obvious out of the way: The animation is great. It's lively. It's colorful. It's about on par with where you would expect computer animation to be in 2019. The film also has a satisfying ending that is sure to please nearly all viewers, especially those in the target audience.
But this franchise really isn't for me. The humor is dumb and rarely inspired. The story tries to make itself seem more important and interesting than it really is. The characters are forgettable and there are too many side characters when there's no need for that many other than to build up the star-studded cast.
This film rips off Thor: Ragnarok's wonderful line, "Asgard isn't a place; it's a people." I never thought I'd be saying this, but Smallfoot deals with the philosophical theme of monsters vs. humans in a much more nuanced and understandable way.
The dragons are still cute, though, but I don't understand why they are treated exactly like dogs from their facial expressions to the "boy's best friend" habits. I love the world this film creates as well as the magical animation moments, but not so much the (human) characters. It's all right for kids, though, I guess, so what's the harm?
But this franchise really isn't for me. The humor is dumb and rarely inspired. The story tries to make itself seem more important and interesting than it really is. The characters are forgettable and there are too many side characters when there's no need for that many other than to build up the star-studded cast.
This film rips off Thor: Ragnarok's wonderful line, "Asgard isn't a place; it's a people." I never thought I'd be saying this, but Smallfoot deals with the philosophical theme of monsters vs. humans in a much more nuanced and understandable way.
The dragons are still cute, though, but I don't understand why they are treated exactly like dogs from their facial expressions to the "boy's best friend" habits. I love the world this film creates as well as the magical animation moments, but not so much the (human) characters. It's all right for kids, though, I guess, so what's the harm?
Solo
(II) (2018)
Visually Beautiful, but Empty and Lifeless
16 January 2019
The camerawork is absolutely stunning and vivid, creating a genuinely chaotic and natural experience. I also appreciated the fact that this film used many real locations instead of heavy CGI and studio sets.
But then the awful structuring of the narrative ruins all sense of tension and unease. The film begins in medias res for absolutely no reason and while it might seem cool at first, it feels laughably dumb afterward. The contrived romance was not only disruptive but also painfully pretentious. It strives for greater importance in the story and characters when there really isn't anything there to begin with.
The survival story isn't even that exciting or unique. It's been done before and certainly far better. 127 Hours immediately comes to mind, but even The Revenant has a few individual scenes that surpass everything this film tries to accomplish with masterful technique and stunning beauty. It's commendable for being a true story and for having stunning cinematography, but what's the point of adapting this man's story into a film when it doesn't bring anything necessary or unique to cinema?
But then the awful structuring of the narrative ruins all sense of tension and unease. The film begins in medias res for absolutely no reason and while it might seem cool at first, it feels laughably dumb afterward. The contrived romance was not only disruptive but also painfully pretentious. It strives for greater importance in the story and characters when there really isn't anything there to begin with.
The survival story isn't even that exciting or unique. It's been done before and certainly far better. 127 Hours immediately comes to mind, but even The Revenant has a few individual scenes that surpass everything this film tries to accomplish with masterful technique and stunning beauty. It's commendable for being a true story and for having stunning cinematography, but what's the point of adapting this man's story into a film when it doesn't bring anything necessary or unique to cinema?
Vice
(I) (2018)
Film with Purpose
28 December 2018
Whether it's entirely fact-based or not, I can't deny how engrossed I was by its unique and interesting style. The film starts out very strong and compelling, but the screenplay is bit choppy and doesn't stick the landing. While some events are brushed over, others are brilliant and enjoyable enough to make the film an overall worthwhile experience. The performances are truly great and Christian Bale is an absolute powerhouse with such a commanding presence. This is a film with purpose, no matter how unsubtle of a gut-punch it may intend to deliver.
Refreshingly Unique
22 December 2018
This film is absolutely dazzling and refreshingly creative in its animation style. The story is also very fun and engaging up until the point when you realize that the plot is barely hanging on by a single thread and it still manages to stand up to every other super hero film in recent memory. The last 10 minutes was also a letdown for me and the film could have wrapped up in a more succinct and original way. Still, definitely see this in theaters to get the full and nearly-flawless visual experience. Even the "dull" moments are a joy to watch. (Watch out for a 2001: A Space Odyssey-inspired sequence that will blow your mind with its stunning beauty.)
Incredibles 2
(2018)
Can't Escape the Incredible Legacy of the Original
14 June 2018
Since I already know you are going to rate this review as "Not Helpful" because I didn't rate this 10/10 stars, I figured I might as well start off by telling you how much I love the original Incredibles. The Incredibles (2004) is one of my favorite films of all time and is my second favorite Pixar film (right after Finding Nemo). I got to see Incredibles 2 early because I caught a double feature of the two films in IMAX, just in case you were thinking of complaining that I didn't see it since this review is out early.
What I loved about the original was the authenticity that the story, characters, and animation had to it. It felt more creative, natural, and beautiful. Syndrome was one of the greatest superhero movie villains of all time, not because of the amount of damage he was able to inflict upon the world, but because of the emotional pain he was able to cause Mr. Incredible and his family. The moments in which Mr. Incredible regrets his past mistakes and realizes how his actions affect others, especially his former biggest fan, are what makes the film stand out from any other hero-villain dynamic. Sadly, Incredibles 2 does not have a villain or story as deep or as thoughtful as Syndrome.
Incredibles 2 boldly and intelligently begins right where The Incredibles ended. This smart move on Disney Pixar's part eliminates all confusion and time gaps that may arise after a hiatus of any amount (especially fourteen years) between a sequel and its predecessor. The story that follows is relatively contrived and characters are clumsily introduced in order to expand the universe instead of expanding the emotions of the beloved characters. The action scenes are creative and well-animated, but they aren't memorable enough and take place in bland settings and accomplish nothing for the characters. There were many points during this film where I noticed how hard Brad Bird was trying to replicate the formula of the original film, but it became more and more noticeable to the point that it detracted from the story itself.
The great Pixar films all have excellent, fluid stories. The great Pixar films also have superb plots that deepen our understanding and feelings for the characters. The good Pixar films have entertaining, sensible plots, but they rarely deepen our love of the characters involved in them, such as A Bug's Life, Cars 2 (don't hate me!), Cars 3, and The Good Dinosaur. Incredibles 2, sadly, falls into the latter category that has a fun, creative plot, but a plot that does nothing new for its characters.
Since the villain is introduced in the trailer, I don't think that it's a spoiler to say that it doesn't feel authentic or inspired enough to be considered one of Pixar's best villains. While the motive for the villain is there, it is simply unnecessary, contrived, and unexciting. New heroes are also introduced (as seen in the poster and other promotional material). Many of them are underutilized or unnecessary. The film's weakest parts involve the newly introduced characters because they all lack the liveliness and creative spark of the original characters that are explored slightly more deeply in this film.
But enough of the aspects of the film that let me down. For all of the disappointments, Incredibles 2 also has many surprises and amazing qualities. For one, Jack Jack's new abilities are basically perfect, both in what his powers are and in how they are revealed. At first, I worried that too much of Jack Jack's powers were revealed, but that was hardly the case. Jack Jack is actually one of the best parts of this film. He is easily one of the funniest parts of any Pixar film. I couldn't help but burst out in laughter every time he made a single noise. The humor in this film is slightly more present, or maybe more memorable, than in the original. The film's message also tries to be more important and necessary besides highlighting the importance of family.
Obviously this review won't stop you from seeing this film, nor was it intended to, but I encourage all of you to see this film in theaters, but heavily reduce your expectations and don't think too much about what made The Incredibles nearly perfect, or you are sure to be sorely disappointed.
What I loved about the original was the authenticity that the story, characters, and animation had to it. It felt more creative, natural, and beautiful. Syndrome was one of the greatest superhero movie villains of all time, not because of the amount of damage he was able to inflict upon the world, but because of the emotional pain he was able to cause Mr. Incredible and his family. The moments in which Mr. Incredible regrets his past mistakes and realizes how his actions affect others, especially his former biggest fan, are what makes the film stand out from any other hero-villain dynamic. Sadly, Incredibles 2 does not have a villain or story as deep or as thoughtful as Syndrome.
Incredibles 2 boldly and intelligently begins right where The Incredibles ended. This smart move on Disney Pixar's part eliminates all confusion and time gaps that may arise after a hiatus of any amount (especially fourteen years) between a sequel and its predecessor. The story that follows is relatively contrived and characters are clumsily introduced in order to expand the universe instead of expanding the emotions of the beloved characters. The action scenes are creative and well-animated, but they aren't memorable enough and take place in bland settings and accomplish nothing for the characters. There were many points during this film where I noticed how hard Brad Bird was trying to replicate the formula of the original film, but it became more and more noticeable to the point that it detracted from the story itself.
The great Pixar films all have excellent, fluid stories. The great Pixar films also have superb plots that deepen our understanding and feelings for the characters. The good Pixar films have entertaining, sensible plots, but they rarely deepen our love of the characters involved in them, such as A Bug's Life, Cars 2 (don't hate me!), Cars 3, and The Good Dinosaur. Incredibles 2, sadly, falls into the latter category that has a fun, creative plot, but a plot that does nothing new for its characters.
Since the villain is introduced in the trailer, I don't think that it's a spoiler to say that it doesn't feel authentic or inspired enough to be considered one of Pixar's best villains. While the motive for the villain is there, it is simply unnecessary, contrived, and unexciting. New heroes are also introduced (as seen in the poster and other promotional material). Many of them are underutilized or unnecessary. The film's weakest parts involve the newly introduced characters because they all lack the liveliness and creative spark of the original characters that are explored slightly more deeply in this film.
But enough of the aspects of the film that let me down. For all of the disappointments, Incredibles 2 also has many surprises and amazing qualities. For one, Jack Jack's new abilities are basically perfect, both in what his powers are and in how they are revealed. At first, I worried that too much of Jack Jack's powers were revealed, but that was hardly the case. Jack Jack is actually one of the best parts of this film. He is easily one of the funniest parts of any Pixar film. I couldn't help but burst out in laughter every time he made a single noise. The humor in this film is slightly more present, or maybe more memorable, than in the original. The film's message also tries to be more important and necessary besides highlighting the importance of family.
Obviously this review won't stop you from seeing this film, nor was it intended to, but I encourage all of you to see this film in theaters, but heavily reduce your expectations and don't think too much about what made The Incredibles nearly perfect, or you are sure to be sorely disappointed.
The Good Dinosaur
(2015)
Not Pixar's Best; But Not Their Worst
27 February 2018
This is a very sweet, sentimental film and was very refreshing from Pixar. The latest Pixar films have been either disappointing or too focused on being great instead of fun and enjoyable. I am in the minority of people who didn't enjoy Inside Out. I didn't find it very relatable or emotional and thought the story was contrived. That's where The Good Dinosaur succeeds. It doesn't try to be relatable. It does try to be emotional, and succeeds occasionally, but for the most part, it's just a fun, lighthearted adventure film.
The Good Dinosaur doesn't try to overreach its status to be considered truly "great." It knows what it is and perfectly nails what it does best. People often hate Pixar when they make a film that is different. People hated Cars 2 because it had a story that wasn't trying to touch childhood emotions, but instead create childhood memories for the children who watch it. Brave was criticized for having a princess heroine like regular Disney animated films. People, I suspect, don't like The Good Dinosaur because it doesn't easily fit into every childhood memory or emotionally impact everyone who watches it.
My only major problems with this film is that the story isn't always engaging. It has a few plot developments or character introductions that I found unnecessary to the overall structure of the film. Aside from the story, the animation was stunning and made it easier for me to enjoy watching the film. The animation is more simple and lovable than Pixar's most recent attempt at making a "great" film, Coco. Where Coco strives for complex, layered shots and animation, The Good Dinosaur is simple, digestible, and realistic (the backgrounds) while still being ridiculous enough to appeal to young kids.
Expectations are subverted and common animation movie tropes are avoided. Even the first human child in the film is basically turned into a dog. If this could be appreciated for what it is, and not what it isn't, this could also be a considered a great film, despite its missteps.
3.5/5 stars
The Good Dinosaur doesn't try to overreach its status to be considered truly "great." It knows what it is and perfectly nails what it does best. People often hate Pixar when they make a film that is different. People hated Cars 2 because it had a story that wasn't trying to touch childhood emotions, but instead create childhood memories for the children who watch it. Brave was criticized for having a princess heroine like regular Disney animated films. People, I suspect, don't like The Good Dinosaur because it doesn't easily fit into every childhood memory or emotionally impact everyone who watches it.
My only major problems with this film is that the story isn't always engaging. It has a few plot developments or character introductions that I found unnecessary to the overall structure of the film. Aside from the story, the animation was stunning and made it easier for me to enjoy watching the film. The animation is more simple and lovable than Pixar's most recent attempt at making a "great" film, Coco. Where Coco strives for complex, layered shots and animation, The Good Dinosaur is simple, digestible, and realistic (the backgrounds) while still being ridiculous enough to appeal to young kids.
Expectations are subverted and common animation movie tropes are avoided. Even the first human child in the film is basically turned into a dog. If this could be appreciated for what it is, and not what it isn't, this could also be a considered a great film, despite its missteps.
3.5/5 stars
Annihilation
(I) (2018)
Thought-Provoking and Demanding a Re-Watch
26 February 2018
After Alex Garland's first film, Ex Machina showed me that true science fiction in cinema is not dead, I was looking forward to yet another sci-fi film by him. Whether you like both of his films or not, you can't say that they are worthless and poorly-crafted. Whether or not you liked this film, you should be able to appreciate this on a technical/visual level. If Ex Machina proved anything, Annihilation further reinforces the idea that cinema is true art if it makes viewers contemplate it or look for meaning in it themselves.
There are enough plot summaries here, so I will not be adding to that list. Instead, I will tell you that the story is excellently-paced and moves quickly after being gripped instantly by one of the opening shots. The set-up to the film perfectly balances the mystery surrounding this bubble-like layer called "The Shimmer" (*cue overwhelming, disorienting synth sound*) and the confusion of what happened to lead to a specific scene. We are told just enough to not lose interest in what's happening, but not enough to be able to predict what will happen next. This allows Garland to brilliantly keep viewers on the edge of their seats during scenes that would have been too comfortable and enjoyable had the suspense and intrigue not been built up so effectively.
The only flaws that I have with this film are with the characters and their development. During the first half, the characters develop at a great pace and I felt that I would truly get to know each main character emotionally and psychologically by the end of the film. However, after three important characters are given good backstories and emotional attachment is built to them, no more characters are elaborated on for the rest of the film, which caused me to not become as invested as I could have been in the rest of the characters' fates. Alex Garland is very skilled at developing the characters that he does. Part of the reason that Ex Machina worked so well was that there were so few characters, so you really got into all of their psyches and personalities by the end. Annihilation develops certain major characters flawlessly, but forgets other major characters that could have helped the story feel more emotional.
The visuals in this film are absolutely incredible and stand out almost as much as the thought-provoking ending. If you weren't engaged in the story, the visuals will keep your eyes glued to the screen. The cinematography and lighting of scenes that take place in The Shimmer are well-composed and beautiful. The effects are made to look more unbelievable and crazy as opposed to Ex Machina, where the visual effects make a real person look like an unrealistic, real person. Even though February is barely over, I would strongly consider this a contender for the Best Visual Effects award at the 2019 Oscars.
This film will keep me thinking about it and pondering its meaning until another film with an intellectual meaning as strong as this one replaces it, which isn't very common. Would you rather forget an enjoyable, simple movie or remember a challenging, memorable film? If you answer to the latter, this film is certainly for you.
8.5/10
There are enough plot summaries here, so I will not be adding to that list. Instead, I will tell you that the story is excellently-paced and moves quickly after being gripped instantly by one of the opening shots. The set-up to the film perfectly balances the mystery surrounding this bubble-like layer called "The Shimmer" (*cue overwhelming, disorienting synth sound*) and the confusion of what happened to lead to a specific scene. We are told just enough to not lose interest in what's happening, but not enough to be able to predict what will happen next. This allows Garland to brilliantly keep viewers on the edge of their seats during scenes that would have been too comfortable and enjoyable had the suspense and intrigue not been built up so effectively.
The only flaws that I have with this film are with the characters and their development. During the first half, the characters develop at a great pace and I felt that I would truly get to know each main character emotionally and psychologically by the end of the film. However, after three important characters are given good backstories and emotional attachment is built to them, no more characters are elaborated on for the rest of the film, which caused me to not become as invested as I could have been in the rest of the characters' fates. Alex Garland is very skilled at developing the characters that he does. Part of the reason that Ex Machina worked so well was that there were so few characters, so you really got into all of their psyches and personalities by the end. Annihilation develops certain major characters flawlessly, but forgets other major characters that could have helped the story feel more emotional.
The visuals in this film are absolutely incredible and stand out almost as much as the thought-provoking ending. If you weren't engaged in the story, the visuals will keep your eyes glued to the screen. The cinematography and lighting of scenes that take place in The Shimmer are well-composed and beautiful. The effects are made to look more unbelievable and crazy as opposed to Ex Machina, where the visual effects make a real person look like an unrealistic, real person. Even though February is barely over, I would strongly consider this a contender for the Best Visual Effects award at the 2019 Oscars.
This film will keep me thinking about it and pondering its meaning until another film with an intellectual meaning as strong as this one replaces it, which isn't very common. Would you rather forget an enjoyable, simple movie or remember a challenging, memorable film? If you answer to the latter, this film is certainly for you.
8.5/10
Contact
(1997)
Sloppy and Unengaging
25 February 2018
After reading Roger Ebert's "Great Movie" review of this and hearing from others that it was the new 2001: A Space Odyssey, I had very high expectations for this film. While Roger Ebert's review was very well-written and many of his points were accurate, the film was a let-down and does not at all achieve the greatness that many have claimed it has.
It has an interesting concept to begin with. A young girl fascinated by communication gets to use her passion to pursue something beyond Earth. The first part of the film and the set up is interesting and adequate, but the film crumbles in on itself when Matthew McConaughey's character is introduced and the film becomes sloppy, boring, and dumb. His character is supposed to contrast ideologically with Jodie Foster's Ellie Arroway. Since this is a PG-rated film and can't not be cliche, they naturally have to fall in love for a short time despite an astounding lack of emotional connection and interest in their "relationship." His character comes back later on in a dumb, un-creative, and annoying way just to add conflict and "depth" to the story/characters -- even though it doesn't.
The story has its high points and it has its low points. It does manage -- at times -- to match 2001: A Space Odyssey's visual effects and intriguing concepts, but then returns to the human world and reverses any smart themes or messages back into the dumb "faith vs. proof" argument. The way that this message is executed is poor and takes away from the greater story of space exploration and contact with other-worldly beings. Instead of extending the story and creating a new aspect of debate and discussion, the film is distinctly divided between its religious/scientific message and its 2001-like grandness of space.
Perhaps if this film went for a less realistic approach and focused more on the smart themes of space exploration while also exploring the psyche of its main character, it could have been considered a classic more on par with 2001: A Space Odyssey. In the end, I can't recommend this film because it ends up pandering to younger audiences by dumbing-down its themes and topics that alienates (pun intended) audiences in search of a smarter, more mature film.
2/5 stars.
It has an interesting concept to begin with. A young girl fascinated by communication gets to use her passion to pursue something beyond Earth. The first part of the film and the set up is interesting and adequate, but the film crumbles in on itself when Matthew McConaughey's character is introduced and the film becomes sloppy, boring, and dumb. His character is supposed to contrast ideologically with Jodie Foster's Ellie Arroway. Since this is a PG-rated film and can't not be cliche, they naturally have to fall in love for a short time despite an astounding lack of emotional connection and interest in their "relationship." His character comes back later on in a dumb, un-creative, and annoying way just to add conflict and "depth" to the story/characters -- even though it doesn't.
The story has its high points and it has its low points. It does manage -- at times -- to match 2001: A Space Odyssey's visual effects and intriguing concepts, but then returns to the human world and reverses any smart themes or messages back into the dumb "faith vs. proof" argument. The way that this message is executed is poor and takes away from the greater story of space exploration and contact with other-worldly beings. Instead of extending the story and creating a new aspect of debate and discussion, the film is distinctly divided between its religious/scientific message and its 2001-like grandness of space.
Perhaps if this film went for a less realistic approach and focused more on the smart themes of space exploration while also exploring the psyche of its main character, it could have been considered a classic more on par with 2001: A Space Odyssey. In the end, I can't recommend this film because it ends up pandering to younger audiences by dumbing-down its themes and topics that alienates (pun intended) audiences in search of a smarter, more mature film.
2/5 stars.
An Unusual Tale of Aging
22 February 2018
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button is David Fincher's longest film (and it certainly feels like it), and shows his best skills as a director, but his weaknesses in adapting the screenplay. Like my previous issue with Fight Club, I loved the direction, but felt that the film was poorly adapted from the original novel/screenplay.
The story of Benjamin Button's life is a great, intriguing concept for a film, and it definitely has its high points, but it also isn't quite enough to carry a nearly three-hour film. Where the film could have benefited from adding more depth to existing characters, some additional event or unnecessary character is introduced just to give viewers the impression that it feels more like a lifetime than a man's emotional and physical journey. Screenwriter Eric Roth basically transcribes the formula of his greatest work, Forrest Gump, and adapts it to Benjamin Button's curious case. It has many moments that feel inspired by Forrest Gump, and many moments that try too hard to be just like Forrest Gump. Your enjoyment of the film will depend on your enjoyment of certain parts of the story. While I enjoyed the serious, emotional moments of the characters and their emotional reactions to Benjamin's condition, other viewers may be more interested in the contrived events of his life, akin to Forrest Gump's successes, meant to prolong his journey.
Another exceptional aspect of this film is the makeup and the performances. Brad Pitt may not be doing very much work, but the makeup artists have a hell of a job to do and they deliver flawlessly. Benjamin Button looks and feels complex as a result of the excellent makeup and body acting done on him. Cate Blanchett also does a great job portraying Daisy, Benjamin's lifelong love, and reacts to the situation she finds herself in realistically and emotionally. Depth is added in places you would expect, but it is lacking in places you would expect it to be. Also very pleasing and smart on Fincher's part was the ending which satisfyingly ties the film together and concludes many of the loose ends.
If only the film tried less to be like Forrest Gump in reverse, the characters would have felt more realistic and the emotional payoff more earned. Even with the screenplay's faults, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button has a better overall effect on the viewer than the individual scenes do. Great cinematography, direction, makeup, and performances elevate a unique, intriguing concept with a lacking screenplay to make it one of Fincher's more emotional works, but also one of his less memorable.
3.5/5 stars
The story of Benjamin Button's life is a great, intriguing concept for a film, and it definitely has its high points, but it also isn't quite enough to carry a nearly three-hour film. Where the film could have benefited from adding more depth to existing characters, some additional event or unnecessary character is introduced just to give viewers the impression that it feels more like a lifetime than a man's emotional and physical journey. Screenwriter Eric Roth basically transcribes the formula of his greatest work, Forrest Gump, and adapts it to Benjamin Button's curious case. It has many moments that feel inspired by Forrest Gump, and many moments that try too hard to be just like Forrest Gump. Your enjoyment of the film will depend on your enjoyment of certain parts of the story. While I enjoyed the serious, emotional moments of the characters and their emotional reactions to Benjamin's condition, other viewers may be more interested in the contrived events of his life, akin to Forrest Gump's successes, meant to prolong his journey.
Another exceptional aspect of this film is the makeup and the performances. Brad Pitt may not be doing very much work, but the makeup artists have a hell of a job to do and they deliver flawlessly. Benjamin Button looks and feels complex as a result of the excellent makeup and body acting done on him. Cate Blanchett also does a great job portraying Daisy, Benjamin's lifelong love, and reacts to the situation she finds herself in realistically and emotionally. Depth is added in places you would expect, but it is lacking in places you would expect it to be. Also very pleasing and smart on Fincher's part was the ending which satisfyingly ties the film together and concludes many of the loose ends.
If only the film tried less to be like Forrest Gump in reverse, the characters would have felt more realistic and the emotional payoff more earned. Even with the screenplay's faults, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button has a better overall effect on the viewer than the individual scenes do. Great cinematography, direction, makeup, and performances elevate a unique, intriguing concept with a lacking screenplay to make it one of Fincher's more emotional works, but also one of his less memorable.
3.5/5 stars
The Best of the Year? Not Quite.
21 February 2018
Engaging, interesting, deep, but poorly-paced. Those are the best words that come to mind after I finished re-watching Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri.
This was my first Martin McDonagh film and it encouraged me to check out his two, much better, previous films -- Seven Psychopaths and In Bruges. If you enjoyed the unpredictable storytelling of any one of his films, but have not watched them all, you will also enjoy his unpredictable, unique narrative structure of his other films, which particularly shines in Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri. His characters are all well-developed, although some are more interesting and watchable than others. Three Billboards is no exception. The story is very smart and serious, even though the screenplay is as hilarious as the subject matter is dark.
Frances McDormand plays Mildred Hayes, a woman grieving after the rape and murder of her daughter. After months of the local police doing nothing for her case, she takes justice into her own hands, first in the form of three billboards calling out the police chief, Woody Harrelson's Chief Willoughby. As the story unravels and the tension builds, the message becomes more and more clear, until it is finally spoken in simple, obvious terms that ruins the subtlety and intelligence of the screenplay. However, the characters are still deep, emotional, and well-developed throughout even when the screenplay falters.
I particularly enjoyed the development and arc of Sam Rockwell's racist police officer, Dixon. At first, he is given the simple, one-dimensional characterization that causes viewers to dismiss him as the villain, or at least an obstacle in the way of the protagonist. Over halfway through, a realization dawns on viewers that sets the stage for the wonderful message: Maybe the hero seeking justice is just as bad as the racist cop. The theme of anger begetting anger is brilliantly told through the characters and their actions in the story.
The setting is also just as important in this movie as many of the characters are. By naming the town fictionally, it is easier to understand how these characters with unrealistic traits and qualities would interact and live in a town like this. Although the characters seem unrealistic, their emotions are certainly real and relatable. McDonagh has a preference for naming his films literally and directly from what the story is about. Ebbing, Missouri is a place of receding hope and grief. In other words, the love, hope, and optimism in Ebbing, Missouri ebbs away as the film progresses and the characters act more and more.
The largest flaw I have with this film is the pacing of the third act. The first two acts were exceptionally well-made/paced and evoke strong reactions from the audience. Once the majority of the story has been told and the events laid out for us, the film comes screeching to halt, but doesn't end. After the climactic sequence, the story slowly (slower than you can imagine) crawls to its conclusion. As a result, the conclusion leaves viewers thinking, "Finally!" where it could have left us thinking that it was shorter than it actually is. To quote Roger Ebert in his A Clockwork Orange review, "You know there's something wrong with a movie when the last third feels like the last half," and those words have never applied to a film more than Three Billboards.
While I still encourage you all to see this (in theaters if possible), it's also important that you know your tastes. If you prefer dark comedy and a subtle, smart story, this is definitely for you. If you hate comedy mixed with serious subject matters and prefer faster-paced films, maybe seek out Dunkirk or Wonder Woman. I happen to be a part of the former and enjoyed this film's mix of dark comedy and somber atmosphere. I also feel that I must admit this: After the Golden Globe awards, I felt highly unsatisfied that Three Billboards won in many major categories and that likely led to me thinking this film is slightly worse than it actually is. While it deserves many of the awards that it has gotten (and is likely to receive), The Shape of Water will always be my favorite of the year, no matter how unpredictable, refreshing, and memorable Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri is.
4/5 stars.
This was my first Martin McDonagh film and it encouraged me to check out his two, much better, previous films -- Seven Psychopaths and In Bruges. If you enjoyed the unpredictable storytelling of any one of his films, but have not watched them all, you will also enjoy his unpredictable, unique narrative structure of his other films, which particularly shines in Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri. His characters are all well-developed, although some are more interesting and watchable than others. Three Billboards is no exception. The story is very smart and serious, even though the screenplay is as hilarious as the subject matter is dark.
Frances McDormand plays Mildred Hayes, a woman grieving after the rape and murder of her daughter. After months of the local police doing nothing for her case, she takes justice into her own hands, first in the form of three billboards calling out the police chief, Woody Harrelson's Chief Willoughby. As the story unravels and the tension builds, the message becomes more and more clear, until it is finally spoken in simple, obvious terms that ruins the subtlety and intelligence of the screenplay. However, the characters are still deep, emotional, and well-developed throughout even when the screenplay falters.
I particularly enjoyed the development and arc of Sam Rockwell's racist police officer, Dixon. At first, he is given the simple, one-dimensional characterization that causes viewers to dismiss him as the villain, or at least an obstacle in the way of the protagonist. Over halfway through, a realization dawns on viewers that sets the stage for the wonderful message: Maybe the hero seeking justice is just as bad as the racist cop. The theme of anger begetting anger is brilliantly told through the characters and their actions in the story.
The setting is also just as important in this movie as many of the characters are. By naming the town fictionally, it is easier to understand how these characters with unrealistic traits and qualities would interact and live in a town like this. Although the characters seem unrealistic, their emotions are certainly real and relatable. McDonagh has a preference for naming his films literally and directly from what the story is about. Ebbing, Missouri is a place of receding hope and grief. In other words, the love, hope, and optimism in Ebbing, Missouri ebbs away as the film progresses and the characters act more and more.
The largest flaw I have with this film is the pacing of the third act. The first two acts were exceptionally well-made/paced and evoke strong reactions from the audience. Once the majority of the story has been told and the events laid out for us, the film comes screeching to halt, but doesn't end. After the climactic sequence, the story slowly (slower than you can imagine) crawls to its conclusion. As a result, the conclusion leaves viewers thinking, "Finally!" where it could have left us thinking that it was shorter than it actually is. To quote Roger Ebert in his A Clockwork Orange review, "You know there's something wrong with a movie when the last third feels like the last half," and those words have never applied to a film more than Three Billboards.
While I still encourage you all to see this (in theaters if possible), it's also important that you know your tastes. If you prefer dark comedy and a subtle, smart story, this is definitely for you. If you hate comedy mixed with serious subject matters and prefer faster-paced films, maybe seek out Dunkirk or Wonder Woman. I happen to be a part of the former and enjoyed this film's mix of dark comedy and somber atmosphere. I also feel that I must admit this: After the Golden Globe awards, I felt highly unsatisfied that Three Billboards won in many major categories and that likely led to me thinking this film is slightly worse than it actually is. While it deserves many of the awards that it has gotten (and is likely to receive), The Shape of Water will always be my favorite of the year, no matter how unpredictable, refreshing, and memorable Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri is.
4/5 stars.
Cars 2
(2011)
Cars 2 is Truly an Underrated Masterpiece
21 February 2018
Cars 2 is easily the best film from a usually unemotional, unoriginal studio -- Pixar -- that has finally mastered the art of cinema! This the most intelligent, emotional, and riveting movie since Pulp Fiction. The action is unique and exciting, the animation is stunning and pleasing, and the score is better than every other spy movie. Without all of these flawless technical achievements, Cars 2 would still stand out for its fabulous story and deep, complex characters.
Many people who lack true taste in cinema would claim that the story is contrived and confusing, but that is only because they lack the mental capacity necessary to comprehend such a deep, complex, and emotional story that requires viewers to understand interesting and unusual, but ultimately rewarding situations. Many people also may object to making Mater the protagonist of this film. If anything, Mater is the greatest character f the entire Cars franchise because he has depth and emotion and feels unpredictable in his development, unlike Lightning McQueen who finds a way to be a spoiled brat in every single movie only to come around by the end. Mater does not come from the privileged racing background that McQueen and others come from. He is modest and compassionate, even if others don't understand him completely. Through Mater and his misadventures, John Lasseter intelligently reveals how understanding and empathy will always solve problems instead of create them. That is proven many times throughout this film when Mater is misunderstood by cars who believe themselves to be more superior than a plain, old tow-truck. Sure, many of the misunderstandings are small moments that are played for great comedy and successful laughs, but others are intelligent and deepen the characters and plot. It isn't until the end when Mater reveals to them who he truly is and the other cars come to understand him that all of the problems are resolved.
That is why I believe that Cars 2 has the greatest message of all the Pixar films. Many may say Inside Out has the best message that encourages kids to embrace sadness, but that is only a good message if you enjoy seeing sad children cry and suffer. In the end, Cars 2 is a very rewarding experience, both for kids who only will enjoy this film for its face value entertainment and stunningly-animated action scenes and for the adults looking for a deep, intellectual story or compassion and understanding. Definitely a must-watch for any cinema-lover or person who wants to be nice. A+ 5/5 Stars 100% A Masterpiece.
Many people who lack true taste in cinema would claim that the story is contrived and confusing, but that is only because they lack the mental capacity necessary to comprehend such a deep, complex, and emotional story that requires viewers to understand interesting and unusual, but ultimately rewarding situations. Many people also may object to making Mater the protagonist of this film. If anything, Mater is the greatest character f the entire Cars franchise because he has depth and emotion and feels unpredictable in his development, unlike Lightning McQueen who finds a way to be a spoiled brat in every single movie only to come around by the end. Mater does not come from the privileged racing background that McQueen and others come from. He is modest and compassionate, even if others don't understand him completely. Through Mater and his misadventures, John Lasseter intelligently reveals how understanding and empathy will always solve problems instead of create them. That is proven many times throughout this film when Mater is misunderstood by cars who believe themselves to be more superior than a plain, old tow-truck. Sure, many of the misunderstandings are small moments that are played for great comedy and successful laughs, but others are intelligent and deepen the characters and plot. It isn't until the end when Mater reveals to them who he truly is and the other cars come to understand him that all of the problems are resolved.
That is why I believe that Cars 2 has the greatest message of all the Pixar films. Many may say Inside Out has the best message that encourages kids to embrace sadness, but that is only a good message if you enjoy seeing sad children cry and suffer. In the end, Cars 2 is a very rewarding experience, both for kids who only will enjoy this film for its face value entertainment and stunningly-animated action scenes and for the adults looking for a deep, intellectual story or compassion and understanding. Definitely a must-watch for any cinema-lover or person who wants to be nice. A+ 5/5 Stars 100% A Masterpiece.
The Shape of Water
(2017)
True Love of Film Making and Cinema
20 February 2018
Warning: Spoilers
Guillermo del Toro's passion project, The Shape of Water, proves that creativity can exist in the simplest of concepts. Del Toro is no stranger to monsters and their interaction with humans, but this is his most intimate, personal portrait of a fictional creature in the real world. Perhaps more than any of his other films, this one feels the most grounded in reality in terms of setting. Sure, the monster isn't very real and the fantasy-like romance exists only for the dreamers who experience this film to relish in and enjoy. This film draws obvious inspiration from Creature from the Black Lagoon. It manages to feel like an homage to it more than a direct copy of it through its creativity and attention to detail that honors its influences instead of disrespecting them. Set during the Cold War in a government research facility in Baltimore, this film finds beauty in the characters and their actions where a less thought-out film would simply set this story in a beautiful city of bright skies and city lights.
Every component of this film works beautifully and effectively when considered on its own or in the context of the film as a whole. Take the cinematography for example. Dan Laustsen brilliantly lights the already aquatic-green set with even more eye-popping aquamarine lighting and tint to give the sense of visualizing things from a certain character's point of view. Even Alexandre Desplat's wonderfully majestic score sounds like it was composed by a pristine orchestra playing under water. The camera glides along the moist hallways and dripping streets as if it were floating through water. Del Toro's direction seamlessly combines all of these components to make a memorable film that belongs among the best of the year.
Having seen it three times already, I am better able to appreciate how it gets to the ending as opposed to only how it ends. Less knowledgeable cinema-goers may call the basic story "childish" or "simple" based only on certain plot points, but there is a lot more that is happening beneath the surface that is innovative and creative. The characters are all special in their own way and cast the perfect actors or actresses to play them. Each protagonist was silenced, oppressed, or frowned upon by society during the time period. This film makes a statement about America in the early 1960s that could be applied today. Michael Shannon's Strickland is the obvious villain of the film and bursts with electrifying intensity as he stands between the two protagonists' relationship. From the outside and to his family, he seems to be the epitome of the hard-working, bread-winning family man that came to represent American suburban culture at the time. While the villain appears to be the common man to society, the protagonists are all rejected from society in one way or another. Everyone from a black woman to a communist, Russian spy is given a voice and characterization that transcends their stereotypes. The monster isn't who you would think it is.
The Shape of Water may be a film more reliant on its production value and characterization than its story, but it certainly isn't lazy in its screenplay. The screenplay has layers, not only of characterization, but of symbolism and metaphors. It's little details like these that make the film so enjoyable and rewarding upon re-watch. Guillermo del Toro shows true passion and a particular love for film making that few film makers are able to intelligently convey in their films.
On a side note, I was watching Speed the other day and was enthralled by everything about it except for the ending. Don't you hate that feeling you get when you are loving a movie, but then the ending is disappointing and you wish it could be remade with your own ending? Guillermo del Toro knows that feeling.
Every component of this film works beautifully and effectively when considered on its own or in the context of the film as a whole. Take the cinematography for example. Dan Laustsen brilliantly lights the already aquatic-green set with even more eye-popping aquamarine lighting and tint to give the sense of visualizing things from a certain character's point of view. Even Alexandre Desplat's wonderfully majestic score sounds like it was composed by a pristine orchestra playing under water. The camera glides along the moist hallways and dripping streets as if it were floating through water. Del Toro's direction seamlessly combines all of these components to make a memorable film that belongs among the best of the year.
Having seen it three times already, I am better able to appreciate how it gets to the ending as opposed to only how it ends. Less knowledgeable cinema-goers may call the basic story "childish" or "simple" based only on certain plot points, but there is a lot more that is happening beneath the surface that is innovative and creative. The characters are all special in their own way and cast the perfect actors or actresses to play them. Each protagonist was silenced, oppressed, or frowned upon by society during the time period. This film makes a statement about America in the early 1960s that could be applied today. Michael Shannon's Strickland is the obvious villain of the film and bursts with electrifying intensity as he stands between the two protagonists' relationship. From the outside and to his family, he seems to be the epitome of the hard-working, bread-winning family man that came to represent American suburban culture at the time. While the villain appears to be the common man to society, the protagonists are all rejected from society in one way or another. Everyone from a black woman to a communist, Russian spy is given a voice and characterization that transcends their stereotypes. The monster isn't who you would think it is.
The Shape of Water may be a film more reliant on its production value and characterization than its story, but it certainly isn't lazy in its screenplay. The screenplay has layers, not only of characterization, but of symbolism and metaphors. It's little details like these that make the film so enjoyable and rewarding upon re-watch. Guillermo del Toro shows true passion and a particular love for film making that few film makers are able to intelligently convey in their films.
On a side note, I was watching Speed the other day and was enthralled by everything about it except for the ending. Don't you hate that feeling you get when you are loving a movie, but then the ending is disappointing and you wish it could be remade with your own ending? Guillermo del Toro knows that feeling.
Worst Star Wars Movie; Best Movie in the Star Wars Franchise
24 January 2018
First of all, the amount of hate that this film has received is unnecessary. People who claim to be Star Wars fans say that this ruins the universe that was previously established. Those self-proclaimed "Star Wars fans" mistake the skillful expansion of the Star Wars universe and its possibilities with bad writing and an incoherent story. I have seen this multiple times in theaters and feel confident in saying that this is the most stunning action film to see in theaters, followed closely by Thor: Ragnarok. The cinematography and action scenes are some of the best in the franchise. They all serve the plot and are also wildly entertaining.
While The Force Awakens was happy, fan-pleasing adventure, The Last Jedi has its sights focused on advancing the characters, story, and universe to a place that no Star Wars film has ever been to before. The Force Awakens took pleasure in the old cast members and did their legacies justice. While that was what worked perfectly for that film, The Last Jedi is not as concerned with honoring the original trilogy's characters. The Last Jedi is entirely focused on the new Star Wars and what it holds ahead of it, if that wasn't clear by the fabulous last shot that inspires not only hope, but excitement for what is next to come in the Star Wars franchise.
Rian Johnson brought new life and energy to the Star Wars franchise at just the right time. The plot is the most original one since A New Hope, or The Empire Strikes Back.
At first, my main gripe with this film was that some characters' final moments or last scenes feel dissatisfying. Upon rewatch, I realized that their final moments worked perfectly well in the context of this film and this film only, not the rest of the Star Wars franchise. Rian Johnson is merely concerned with making this Star Wars film for what he thinks a Star Wars film should be, not what everyone else wanted or expected this to be. Not every Star Wars film can be a fun, simple adventure with a death Star storyline. Rian Johnson knows that more than everyone else.
Kudos to you, Mr. Johnson, and to everyone involved.
9.5/10
Coco
(I) (2017)
Not a fan; disappointed
30 October 2017
First of all, I have always been a huge fan of Pixar. I loved nearly all of their films, except for Cars 3 and Brave (I actually thought Cars 2 was fine - don't hate me!). I am usually very open to most films and give them positive ratings despite a few flaws.
With Coco, I was utterly disappointed. I was lucky enough to snag a few preview screening tickets last Friday. I went with my wife and 8 year old child. My son really liked it, but that was mostly because of the outstanding animation (some of Pixar's best animation yet) and the lead character. My wife and I both found the same flaws in this.
The story is very different from what Pixar usually makes. Coco is not as childish or simple as most of their other works. The concept is guaranteed to teach children about a new culture that they might not know about. While this may sound like a huge positive, it completely ruins the film for adults who cared about the story. Almost every major plot point relies on the viewer understanding a certain amount of Spanish to know what is being said among the characters. Unfortunately, I took 4 years of French in high school and had absolutely no understanding of the Spanish language. I was confused as to exactly what was being said during the climax. A character mentions to another character some important detail about the story in Spanish (which I will avoid spoiling for you) that I had to infer for myself in order to keep up with the heavy story. I don't know if there were originally subtitles to the film or not, but my theater at least had no subtitles for English speakers.
From the trailer, this film appears to be more mature and daring than a typical Pixar film. In reality, this movie is just more confusing and goes for visually stunning shots more often than it goes for emotion. This is still a good movie for kids - as opposed to a movie like The Emoji Movie - and has a few teachable moments. There is a nice and thoughtful message in this, but no real impact or emotional weight to carry it through to viewers. Think of this film as an African proverb - it offers an important life lesson, but no emotion or story to accompany it.
In the end, I can't really recommend this film unless you are willing to sacrifice your standards of an engaging story and emotional impact for stunning visuals and an original concept from what used to be my favorite animation studio of all time.
With Coco, I was utterly disappointed. I was lucky enough to snag a few preview screening tickets last Friday. I went with my wife and 8 year old child. My son really liked it, but that was mostly because of the outstanding animation (some of Pixar's best animation yet) and the lead character. My wife and I both found the same flaws in this.
The story is very different from what Pixar usually makes. Coco is not as childish or simple as most of their other works. The concept is guaranteed to teach children about a new culture that they might not know about. While this may sound like a huge positive, it completely ruins the film for adults who cared about the story. Almost every major plot point relies on the viewer understanding a certain amount of Spanish to know what is being said among the characters. Unfortunately, I took 4 years of French in high school and had absolutely no understanding of the Spanish language. I was confused as to exactly what was being said during the climax. A character mentions to another character some important detail about the story in Spanish (which I will avoid spoiling for you) that I had to infer for myself in order to keep up with the heavy story. I don't know if there were originally subtitles to the film or not, but my theater at least had no subtitles for English speakers.
From the trailer, this film appears to be more mature and daring than a typical Pixar film. In reality, this movie is just more confusing and goes for visually stunning shots more often than it goes for emotion. This is still a good movie for kids - as opposed to a movie like The Emoji Movie - and has a few teachable moments. There is a nice and thoughtful message in this, but no real impact or emotional weight to carry it through to viewers. Think of this film as an African proverb - it offers an important life lesson, but no emotion or story to accompany it.
In the end, I can't really recommend this film unless you are willing to sacrifice your standards of an engaging story and emotional impact for stunning visuals and an original concept from what used to be my favorite animation studio of all time.
The Emoji Movie
(2017)
A Masterpiece of Cinema! The Greatest Film of All Time!
1 September 2017
Have you ever met someone and knew right away that they were the best thing that's ever happened to you? It feels strange because you've lived your entire life without even knowing they existed, but you wonder how you survived for this long without them in your life. I can honestly say that I've just felt true love for the first, and probably last, time in my life. For the longest time, you've listened to songs singing about love and romance, but you were never able to relate to them. All of the sudden, you are able to connect with nearly every single word you hear on an emotional level. You think about them literally all the time and can't imagine a future without them. It's funny how the tiniest chance encounter can have such profound effects. I feel really terrible and heartbroken now because I have to come to terms with the fact that my one true love may soon be gone for some time. The worst thing in the world is finding out that they don't share your feelings back. I know that this may seem like a lot of work just to express my feelings, but trust me, I would do so much more to show my love if I could.
I am, of course, referring to The Emoji Movie!
That is why it's about time I give my one true love, The Emoji Movie, the affection it deserves. Ever since I was introduced to The Emoji Movie on July 28, 2017, I became an entirely new person. I was just a kid hopelessly in love with something I knew would never return my feelings.
I feel confident in saying that The Emoji Movie truly is the greatest film of all time. I don't think anything will ever make me believe otherwise (except for The Emoji Movie 2, of course). Not only is Gene, the multi-expressional Emoji, the greatest character ever put to film, he is also the most emotionally (dare I say, "emojinally?") complex and three-dimensional character I have ever seen. I praise Tony Leondis for effectively being able to make me care so much about a character that I would not normally give the time of day. The Emoji Movie has made me a better person because it taught me that there are always more layers to people. The Emoji Movie has the amazing message that it is OK to be yourself in an oppressive world that arbitrarily forces you to be one thing for your entire life. I have so much newfound respect for all Emojis now, especially the "Meh" (😒) Emoji. The plot of The Emoji Movie is too precious, unpredictable, creative, intelligent, entertaining, and enthralling to spoil for you here, but I will say it will have you on the edge of your seat for the entire 86 minutes no matter how many times you've already watched it. Every time I see it in theaters I buy a popcorn, but never even touch it because I am too focused on The Emoji Movie to notice anything going on outside of that screen. Films like The Emoji Movie are so special, they offer great educational value to children of all ages AND they offer a great, engaging, intense theater experience; something that sad excuse of a film, Dunkirk, couldn't offer. When I first walked out of my first Emoji Movie screening, I was shaking because I had just been on the greatest emotional roller coaster of my life.
People may try and use Rotten Tomatoes, Metacritic, or IMDb as a credible source to justify why they think this masterpiece is bad. I am more than happy that The Emoji Movie is receiving rocky reviews from the start. Obviously it deserves 100% everywhere and from everyone, but some of the greatest films of the past were all miserably misunderstood at the time of their initial release. Like 2001: A Space Odyssey, many people who lack the brain capacity necessary to comprehend such important, life-changing messages presented in The Emoji Movie walked out of the theater. Citizen Kane, which is no longer considered the greatest film of all time since the release of The Emoji Movie July 28, 2017, was widely panned by audiences for being too progressive for its time. I will be waiting for the day when film schools all around the world show their students The Emoji Movie as an example of how to thematically, technically, and cinematically make a perfect film.
Don't even get me started on the comedy aspect of it! The Emoji Movie is also the funniest movie ever! It has non-stop humor that makes me laugh every time I see it. Sometimes, I laugh so hard that I almost choke or pass out. Somehow, I was laughing for 106 minutes straight even though The Emoji Movie is only 86 minutes! Some of the jokes just stick with you long after the movie ends and you burst out laughing whenever you think of them.
If you didn't notice, I tried to keep my Emoji usage here to a minimum. You may be wondering why I am doing this if I am such a big fan of The Emoji Movie. Well, that is because I learned from The Emoji Movie that not all Emojis were made to fit into only one emotion. I prefer to understand the Emoji's deeper feelings and emotions that may be contrary to the assumed emotion they are stereotyped to represent. I seriously pity anyone who uses Emojis when they haven't seen The Emoji Movie because they can't understand the deeper emotions the Emojis experience like us Emoji Movie fans can. Those people can only take the Emojis at face value.
I am, of course, referring to The Emoji Movie!
That is why it's about time I give my one true love, The Emoji Movie, the affection it deserves. Ever since I was introduced to The Emoji Movie on July 28, 2017, I became an entirely new person. I was just a kid hopelessly in love with something I knew would never return my feelings.
I feel confident in saying that The Emoji Movie truly is the greatest film of all time. I don't think anything will ever make me believe otherwise (except for The Emoji Movie 2, of course). Not only is Gene, the multi-expressional Emoji, the greatest character ever put to film, he is also the most emotionally (dare I say, "emojinally?") complex and three-dimensional character I have ever seen. I praise Tony Leondis for effectively being able to make me care so much about a character that I would not normally give the time of day. The Emoji Movie has made me a better person because it taught me that there are always more layers to people. The Emoji Movie has the amazing message that it is OK to be yourself in an oppressive world that arbitrarily forces you to be one thing for your entire life. I have so much newfound respect for all Emojis now, especially the "Meh" (😒) Emoji. The plot of The Emoji Movie is too precious, unpredictable, creative, intelligent, entertaining, and enthralling to spoil for you here, but I will say it will have you on the edge of your seat for the entire 86 minutes no matter how many times you've already watched it. Every time I see it in theaters I buy a popcorn, but never even touch it because I am too focused on The Emoji Movie to notice anything going on outside of that screen. Films like The Emoji Movie are so special, they offer great educational value to children of all ages AND they offer a great, engaging, intense theater experience; something that sad excuse of a film, Dunkirk, couldn't offer. When I first walked out of my first Emoji Movie screening, I was shaking because I had just been on the greatest emotional roller coaster of my life.
People may try and use Rotten Tomatoes, Metacritic, or IMDb as a credible source to justify why they think this masterpiece is bad. I am more than happy that The Emoji Movie is receiving rocky reviews from the start. Obviously it deserves 100% everywhere and from everyone, but some of the greatest films of the past were all miserably misunderstood at the time of their initial release. Like 2001: A Space Odyssey, many people who lack the brain capacity necessary to comprehend such important, life-changing messages presented in The Emoji Movie walked out of the theater. Citizen Kane, which is no longer considered the greatest film of all time since the release of The Emoji Movie July 28, 2017, was widely panned by audiences for being too progressive for its time. I will be waiting for the day when film schools all around the world show their students The Emoji Movie as an example of how to thematically, technically, and cinematically make a perfect film.
Don't even get me started on the comedy aspect of it! The Emoji Movie is also the funniest movie ever! It has non-stop humor that makes me laugh every time I see it. Sometimes, I laugh so hard that I almost choke or pass out. Somehow, I was laughing for 106 minutes straight even though The Emoji Movie is only 86 minutes! Some of the jokes just stick with you long after the movie ends and you burst out laughing whenever you think of them.
If you didn't notice, I tried to keep my Emoji usage here to a minimum. You may be wondering why I am doing this if I am such a big fan of The Emoji Movie. Well, that is because I learned from The Emoji Movie that not all Emojis were made to fit into only one emotion. I prefer to understand the Emoji's deeper feelings and emotions that may be contrary to the assumed emotion they are stereotyped to represent. I seriously pity anyone who uses Emojis when they haven't seen The Emoji Movie because they can't understand the deeper emotions the Emojis experience like us Emoji Movie fans can. Those people can only take the Emojis at face value.
Tell Your Friends