Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Warfare (2025)
Good Movie
Rating - 8.0:
Overall, a good war film that authentically captures what the gory and deafening trauma the characters were going through as it does a good job showing the toll the ambushed mission had on these soldiers mentally, in a way that doesn't idolize the Iraq War but rather memorializes what happened; Warfare doesn't have the bells and whistles you would expect from a traditional war film because it is more about reacting to what these characters were experiencing as if you were there with them.
Direction - Good:
The direction on a macroscale is good as it authentically builds the world and how confined these soldiers were in this house, creating a sense of panic and anxiety for everyone; The direction on a microscale is all about the panic these soldiers are going through and the fear and shock they experience during the mission; The storytelling happens in real time as it is all reactionary to what these characters were going through, and because of this there really isn't that much of a story; They build tension effectively because this whole movie is about creating a tense environment that is so traumatic and anxiety-inducing that you feel you are with these soldiers on their mission
Story - Good:
The concept is pretty simple as it is just a real-life ambushed mission during the Iraq War, but this movie provides so much detail into what went on that it feels very authentic by cutting out the bells and whistles and focusing on the characters reacting to what is going on; the plot structure is non-traditional as there really isn't much story to go through; it is more about experiencing what these characters were going through as if you were there; but at the end of the day, you can say there was a linear plot structure with what little plot they have; character writing, as a group, is good as the movie is really about the trauma these characters were experiencing, and these depictions felt very authentic to those in the Iraq War
Screenplay - Good:
The dialogue feels very tactical and authentic to military personnel in the Iraq War, so, because of this, it may be a bit boring considering it doesn't have the bells and whistles you would expect from a traditional Hollywood war movie; the humor is very "bro humor," as it is stuff these soldiers would say for camaraderie; the symbolism is incredibly profound as it authentically portrays what these characters were experiencing, and it does so in a way that doesn't idolize war but memorializes what happened, authentically describing what these characters were going through and the negative toll it had on them; the movie shows how destructive the Americans were in Iraq as they had no regard for the locals and were as destructive as possible to defeat the enemy; this movie is very anti-war in its moral sentiments as it hammers the physical and mental toll the Iraq War had on them and how they were shown a lifestyle that wasn't what was advertised
Acting - Decent to Pretty Good:
D'Pharaoh Woon-A-Tai - Decent to Pretty Good (He plays his role well and has pretty good chemistry with the cast), Will Poulter - Pretty Good (He plays his role well as the leader and has pretty good chemistry with the cast), Cosmo Jarvis - Pretty Good (He plays his role well as he is the main soldier who goes through physical pain and trauma during the attack), Kit Connor - Decent to Pretty Good (He plays his role well and has pretty good chemistry with the cast;), Finn Bennett - Decent to Pretty Good (He plays his role well and has pretty good chemistry with the cast), Taylor John Smith - Decent to Pretty Good (He plays his role well and has pretty good chemistry with the cast), Michael Gandolfini - Decent to Pretty Good (He plays his role well and has pretty good chemistry with the cast), Adain Bradley - Decent to Pretty Good (He plays his role well and has pretty good chemistry with the cast), Noah Centineo - Decent to Pretty Good (He plays his role well and has pretty good chemistry with the cast), Evan Holtzman - Decent to Pretty Good (He plays his role well and has pretty good chemistry with the cast), Henry Zaga - Decent to Pretty Good (He plays his role well and has pretty good chemistry with the cast), Joseph Quinn - Pretty Good (Even though his character is very whiny and shouts a lot, he plays his character well and has pretty good chemistry with the rest of the cast), Charles Melton - Decent to Pretty Good (Basically, it feels like a cameo, but it works well with the group), Rest of the cast - Decent to Pretty Good (No one performance overshadows another; this cast works as a group to help tell the story and show both the camaraderie and tragedy of war)
Soundtrack - Decent to Pretty Good:
While there is no score and barely a soundtrack, the dichotomy between the beginning and ending songs shows the change in sentiment for the soldiers and the toll the war had on them
Cinematography - Good:
Well shot to make this movie feel like you were there with these soldiers in war
Editing - Good:
Helps increase the anxiety of the scenes and show the toll the ambush took on the characters
Sound - Great:
Sound is deafening and mimics the anxiety-inducing sequences these characters were going through, being under fire
Visual Effects - Good to Very Good:
It feels like they used many practical effects, as they authentically portrayed what was going on in the war
Production Design - Very Good:
Feels authentic as they showed side by side the real apartment and the set they used
Makeup - Very Good:
The blood and gore will make people squeamish; but it is necessary to show the gore and atrocities these characters were going through
Costumes - Good:
Helps show the authenticity of these soldiers in the Iraq War
Pacing - Pacing is very much on the slower side because there is barely any plot to go through, but this feels very intentional as it makes you experience the real-time wait for these characters and how help felt like forever away; the movie being 95 minutes feels right as there was nothing you could really add or cut
Climax - The climax is typical of a war movie, and those scenes were well shot
Tone - Tone is not your typical war movie; it is more of a psychological drama; you feel you are with these characters, experiencing what is going on in the war; it authentically portrays the horrors and traumas of the Iraq War
Final Notes - The movie effectively uses its low budget, as it is more about the experience and not the bells and whistles.
A Minecraft Movie (2025)
Pretty Bad Movie
Rating - 5.5:
Overall, a movie that is made for its target audience, as this movie was made for gamers who grew up on the game 15 years ago, but it is just not a good movie despite all of its memorable memes because this might be one of the simplest and ugliest movies I have seen; my theater experience was the only reason I enjoyed watching this movie because all the teenagers around me were clapping and shouting during the meme parts, especially during the "Chicken Jockey" scene.
Direction - Bad to Pretty Bad:
The direction on a macroscale is built in a very goofy way as Hess uses his signature style to create a movie for chronically online teenagers; the world-building for this movie might be some of the ugliest I have ever seen; the direction on a microscale is decent but pretty forced; the storytelling is so lazy as there is almost no struggle for the characters everything just happens in their favor; there is no tension built whatsoever
Story - Pretty Bad:
The concept is the stereotypical trapped-in-a-video-game motif, but they do a decent job with this because they use the vast world of Minecraft well to show the world they are in; the story feels like it has a good grasp of Minecraft as it feels like they did their research to adapt the source material; the plot structure is very linear and predictable, it never feels like these characters struggle because everything just happens in their favor; character writing is very shallow as the movie just makes everything work in their favor; ghese characters are just so forced, an example is Jason Momoa's character who is basically a rip-off of Ken
Screenplay - Bad:
The dialogue is forced and super-gamer, so the movie feels incredibly unnatural; they use words like "unalive" and have a character named "General Chungus"; the humor is unintentionally funny because of the memes; when the movie tries to actually be funny it is very flat; the symbolism is very surface-level, but the movie pays homage to both Minecraft creators like Technoblade and PewDiePie, and the director's first big break, Napoleon Dynamite; the foreshadowing makes this movie incredibly predictable
Acting - Decent:
Jason Momoa - Pretty Good (Feels like a rip-off of "Ken," but he does a pretty good job making this movie entertaining), Jack Black - Pretty Good (He uses his signature gamer charm to characterize the character and make this movie entertaining for both kids; even though he is a little too much at times, this movie really suits his comedic strengths; he uses his singing talent well to make this movie feel a little over the top), Danielle Brooks - Decent to Pretty Good (Isn't given a lot of material to work with, but has noticeable screen presence and decent chemistry with Myers), Emma Myers - Pretty Good (Has charisma and screen presence that makes her scenes noticeable; has pretty good chemistry with the rest of the cast), Sebastian Hansen - Decent (The child plays the role decently well), Jennifer Coolidge - Bad (It feels like they tried to extend her White Lotus character, but they gave her material that is nowhere near as good), Rest of the cast - Pretty Bad (The cast does not work best together as it is a little forced; the supporting characters do not really do much to add to the story or the main cast except for the child actors)
Score - Decent:
Incorporates themes from the Minecraft game
Soundtrack - Decent:
Tries very hard to be Barbie, so much so that they even had Mark Ronson write some of the songs
Cinematography - Decent:
Generic for a big-budget movie
Editing - Decent:
Generic for a big-budget movie
Sound - Good:
Does a good job incorporating sounds from the video game as this movie sounds like an extension of Minecraft
Visual Effects - Bad:
Might be some of the ugliest uses of CGI I have ever seen; this movie is only saved because the CGI used to create the worlds is decently accurate and the wolf CGI was pretty good
Production Design - Pretty Good:
The movie heavily relies on CGI to build the world, but it does do a decent job making this movie feel like it is set in Minecraft, even though it is obvious when they use a green screen
Costumes - Bad:
It does not translate well to the real world as the Minecraft objects just look out of place
Pacing - Pacing is incredibly fast, as there is no struggle for the characters, everything just happens in their favor
Climax - The climax is a predictable action climax; while it is entertaining, you know exactly what is going to happen
Tone - Tone is very similar to Barbie as it feels like they were trying to recreate Barbie with this movie
Final Notes - This might have been one of the theater experiences I have ever been to; as everyone there was in on the meme and was clapping and shouting during the moments you should; like "Chicken Jockey"
Black Bag (2025)
Decent Movie
Rating - 6.2:
Overall, a decent spy thriller that is carried by its performances, but the poorly explained conflict, incredibly fast pacing, and short runtime really hold this movie back from being memorable; I would have enjoyed this movie a lot more if there were subtitles because I couldn't understand what they were saying half the time.
Direction - Decent to Pretty Good:
The direction on a macroscale is very sharp and ominous, which helps set this spy-mystery tone; the direction on a microscale is sharp and well-executed, but the problem is that the scenes move too fast; the storytelling is a bit rough, as they do not do a good job presenting the conflict, and it just breezes through the plot to get to the end; they build tension decently
Story - Pretty Bad:
The concept is not really explained well, as it is a little too mysterious; just take this movie as a generic spy thriller; the plot structure is pretty void, as there really isn't that much plot, and they breeze through the runtime; character writing is pretty void, as they make these characters too mysterious, which hurts because you don't really care about them towards the end
Screenplay - Pretty Good:
The dialogue is sharp and what you would want for this movie, it is just spoken way too fast and not given room to marinate; the humor is pretty good, as it helps make it feel like an entertaining spy thriller; the foreshadowing is not really the best, but I might just have missed things because of how fast this movie goes
Acting - Pretty Good:
Cate Blanchett - Pretty Good to Good (She has so much poise that she carries any movie she is in; She has good chemistry with Fassbender), Michael Fassbender - Pretty Good to Good (He plays this role like he has experience, mainly learning from his mistakes with "The Killer"; he commands the scenes he is in; he has good chemistry with Blanchett), Marisa Abela - Pretty Good (She plays her role well and has pretty good chemistry with the cast), Tom Burke - Pretty Good (She plays her role well and has pretty good chemistry with the cast), Naomie Harris - Pretty Good (She plays her role well and has pretty good chemistry with the cast), Regé-Jean Page - Pretty Good (He has a sense of charisma that is infectious; he plays his role well and has pretty good chemistry with the rest of the cast), Pierce Brosnan - Decent to Pretty Good (Feels more like a cameo than he was offered because he's James Bond and this is a spy thriller; he does pretty well in the scenes he is in but is rarely given time to work with), Rest of the cast - Pretty Bad (There isn't that large of a supporting cast, but they do not do a good job supporting the main cast; They feel very inexperienced compared to the main cast)
Score - Pretty Good:
Helps set the tone and makes the movie feel mysterious and very spylike
Cinematography - Pretty Good:
Felt very sharp and crisp; the blurred light really helped the aesthetic of the movie
Editing - Good:
Felt very sharp and crisp
Sound - Bad:
The voices feel very muffled, and all the sounds feel very subdued
Pacing - Pacing is way too fast, so you never feel like you understand what is going on; They could have added 30 minutes to either slow the pace down or provide more content to make the story understandable and engaging
Climax - Climax provides suspense but feels a little too short
Tone - Tone is your typical spy thriller
Final Notes - This movie could have really benefited from a combination of better ADR, slower pacing, and a longer runtime.
Slanted (2025)
Good Movie
Rating - 8.2:
Overall, a good coming-of-age comedy that uses a potpourri of original ideas like "Dìdi," "The Substance," and "Mean Girls" to create a satirically over-the-top look at the juxtaposition between minorities in predominantly white communities in America.
Direction - Good:
The direction on a macroscale is good as it does a good job building the world and juxtaposing these Chinese characters in a predominantly white community, in a very satirically over-the-top way; the direction on a microscale is good as you get a sense of the protagonist's struggle trying to fit in and how torn she is between wanting to be white yet still having her identity be Chinese; the storytelling is very similar to other Bildungsroman's
Story - Good to Very Good:
The concept itself is a potpourri of many original ideas into one, like "Dìdi," "The Substance," and "Mean Girls"; the plot structure is broken up into two halves with a strong inflection point; character writing is very good as the movie deals with coming-of-age, identity, and race juxtaposed in a predominantly white community, albeit in a very satirically over-the-top way
Screenplay - Good to Very Good:
The dialogue is sharp and combines elements of Chinese with over-the-top English to show a strong contrast between the two cultures; the humor is very overt and over-the-top, and this helps create this movie as a satire on race and identity; the symbolism is very strong as this movie has messages about adolescence, identity, and being a minority in a predominantly white community, albeit in a very satirical way; the foreshadowing is present and comes to life towards the end
Acting - Pretty Good to Good:
Shirley Chen - Good (Does a good job playing the Chinese version of the protagonist, as you get a sense of how her character is trying to fit in; she has good chemistry with the rest of the cast; she plays the typical coming-of-age character well), Mckenna Grace - Good (You can see the exuded confidence her character gets when she becomes white, and it has a good contrast with the Chinese family as she tries to become more white; she has good chemistry with the cast), Fang Du - Good (Plays the parental role very similar to Joan Chen's character in Dìdi as the father-daughter dynamic feels strong and comforting), Rest of the cast - Pretty Good (A majority of the characters play their roles well and do a good job creating this satirically over-the-top white community)
Score - Pretty Good:
Makes the movie feel very coming-of-age
Soundtrack - Pretty Good:
The poppy soundtrack makes the movie a coming-of-age comedy for a teenage Asian girl trying to fit in with a white community
Cinematography - Good:
I really was a fan of cinematography, as it felt auteur-driven, as they used film effectively; the change in aspect ratio from 4:3 to 16:9 after the protagonist completes the surgery, from Asian to White, was a nice touch
Editing - Good:
Felt polished
Production Design - Pretty Good:
Very over-the-top and intentional juxtapositions place this Chinese family in a predominantly white community
Makeup - Good:
Used well to show the transformations and add some body horror elements
Pacing - Pacing is the right pace as it does not feel too slow or fast, especially considering the inflection point feels like it happens at the right moment
Climax - The climax is executed very well and the movie ends strongly, even though it is a bit safe
Tone - The tone boils down to a coming-of-age film, masked with satirical, over-the-top comedy; it has elements of body horror as well
Final Notes - Saw the jury award narrative feature screening at SXSW.
The Dutchman (2025)
Pretty Good Movie
Rating - 7.6:
Overall, a pretty good thriller that emulates the original play source material to discuss race relations in America, carried by André Holland's performance; However, because the original play is only one act, the movie feels dragged out as they attempt to stall for time to make the movie longer than it needs to be.
Direction - Pretty Good to Good:
The direction on a macroscale is pretty good, as they create this ominous world that the protagonist has to navigate through; the direction on a microscale feels like a play, as the director lets the actors act and work off each other; the storytelling is pretty good, as they inject the narrator into the story to help move it forward; they build tension pretty well, as it helps build tension and unease throughout the movie
Story - Pretty Good:
The concept builds on the one-act play "The Dutchman," but it honestly feels like it is trying to stall for time in new parts; the plot structure is centered around a one-act play, but has elements added to elongate this one act; the character writing is very good as each character has an important part in displaying racial issues in America
Screenplay - Pretty Good to Good:
The dialogue feels very theatrical, which makes sense because this is based on a play; the symbolism is very profound, as the messages deal with what it means to be Black in America and relations between white and Black populations in the country; the foreshadowing is present and plays a part toward the end
Acting - Good:
André Holland - Good to Very Good (Truly embodies the protagonist as he takes control of the movie and the tone throughout the film; he makes his scene partners better as if he were on stage for a play), Kate Mara - Good (Plays a real sinister character that creates a sense of unease whenever she's on screen; she has good chemistry with Holland in creating this dynamic that exposes racial tension in America), Zazie Beetz - Pretty Good to Good (A more subdued character, but she makes her presence known onscreen and has good chemistry with Holland), Stephen McKinley Henderson - Pretty Good to Good (An ominous figure, always present throughout the story, acts as the narrator, helping move the story forward), Rest of the cast - Pretty Good (It does a pretty good job supporting the main cast and acting as a background for the two-person scenes, emulating a play)
Cinematography - Good:
I took some liberties to create unique shots that make the movie interesting and captivating
Production Design - Decent to Pretty Good:
It helps make the movie look like a play in some scenes, as if the story were already written before
Pacing - Pacing is an issue because the movie feels slow and it is stalling for time; the movie is based on a one-act play that is really only 50 minutes, so the 20-30 minutes they added show because it feels like they are stalling for time
Climax - Climax feels a little anticlimactic; the ending feels very unfinished
Tone - Tone is similar to other supernatural thrillers
Final Notes - Saw the secondary premiere at SXSW.
On Swift Horses (2024)
Pretty Bad Movie
Rating - 5.4:
Overall, a lackluster, Oscar-bait period drama that is about characters exploring their sexuality in a time when it's taboo, but the movie does so in a surface-level way that provides no nuance to the issue and gives you no material to really care about these characters.
Direction - Pretty Bad:
The direction on a macroscale feels very similar to other period dramas like this; the direction on a microscale is pretty lackluster because the actors are giving emotion to material that has no substance or nuance; the storytelling is not good because the movie shallowly discusses the topic and doesn't really provide stakes that engage you
Story - Bad to Pretty Bad:
The concept is very surface-level and provides no nuance to these characters exploring their sexuality; the horse-racing storyline is poorly incorporated into the plot; the plot structure follows two parallel stories that intersect at points in the story; the two storylines do not really do a good job exploring the relationships of the characters; character writing is bad because it presents these characters exploring their sexuality in such a surface-level way that provides no nuance to why this was taboo in the 1950s, especially for Edgar-Jones' character
Screenplay - Bad to Pretty Bad:
The dialogue provides no substance as it is bland and boring; the symbolism is incredibly surface level and provides no nuance to these characters exploring their sexuality, especially Edgar-Jones' character; the foreshadowing is present
Acting - Pretty Bad:
Daisy Edgar-Jones - Pretty Bad (Gives a very surface-level performance; she doesn't really explore the character's sexuality at all and does not really have chemistry with any other characters; In a role that really depends on having good chemistry), Jacob Elordi - Decent (Gives a very surface-level performance; does an alright job exploring the character's sexuality, but it feels very forced and presents no nuance to the relationship's taboo; has alright chemistry with Calva, but very forced chemistry with Edgar-Jones), Will Poulter - Decent (Just a very standard, 1950s husband being cheated on, character; he does not really have chemistry with anyone), Diego Calva - Bad (Feels very forced and does not provide nuance to the character; it has very surface-level chemistry with Elordi), Sasha Calle - Decent to Pretty Good (Probably the best performance for the movie, which isn't saying a lot, because her character is somewhat believable and you can tell the struggle she's going through; she tries to build chemistry with Edgar-Jones, but it isn't reciprocated on the same level), Rest of the cast - Pretty Bad (Just a bunch of formulaic period drama performances)
Score - Decent:
Helps set the tone
Cinematography - Pretty Good:
The movie is well-shot and feels polished
Editing - Pretty Good:
Feels polished and well-edited
Sound - Pretty Good
Visual Effects - Pretty Bad:
The fact that they had to CGI the horses shows what is wrong with Hollywood right now
Pacing - Pacing is very slow because it doesn't feel like anything is happening; I would have liked to have seen them add more time to explore these parallel storylines and provide more depth, or just cut one of the storylines altogether
Climax - Climax is decent for how heartwarming it is
Tone - Tone feels like a typical period drama that's Oscar-bait;
Final Notes - Saw the U. S. premiere at SXSW.
Friendship (2024)
Great Movie
Rating - 9.2:
Overall, an "I Think You Should Leave" sketch, if it were 97 minutes long and shot by an auteur; this movie uses such a simple idea, like a friends breaking up, but dramatizes it so heavily and shoots it like a P. T. Anderson movie that it becomes the perfect parody; all brought together by Tim Robinson's cringe comedic style.
Direction - Great:
The direction on a macroscale feels very auteur-driven, as the movie feels like it was shot by P. T. Anderson, but in a parody style; The direction on a microscale feels like an "I Think You Should Leave" sketch for 97 minutes, and it's executed to perfection; the storytelling uses templates you would see from a hardcore thriller like *Uncut Gems* or *Prisoners*, but is just parody because of what the movie is actually about; they build tension incredibly well, because the movie just comes off as satire because of how seriously they make the stakes
Story - Great:
The concept is so simple because it is just friends breaking up, but because they make it seem more dramatic than it actually is, the movie just becomes even more funny; the plot structure is pretty standard; character writing is great as you really get a sense of who Robinson's and Rudd's characters are as they create a relationship that feels like a parody of "Talented Mr. Ripley" or "Saltburn"; the character writing makes these characters feel like they are in a dramatized production of "I Think You Should Leave"
Screenplay - Great:
The dialogue feels like it came straight from an "I Think You Should Leave" sketch; it is surprising that this movie wasn't written by Tim Robinson; the humor is great, as the movie is just an "I Think You Should Leave" sketch for 97 minutes; the symbolism is surprisingly there, as they talk about themes of loneliness, friendship, and obsession; the foreshadowing is prevalent
Acting - Very Good:
Tim Robinson - Incredible (I love you so much; you are everything I want you to be; He basically plays his "I Think You Should Leave" persona for the entire movie; he develops great chemistry with the cast, especially Rudd; it borderline feels method), Paul Rudd - Very Good (Plays the straight man very well, and his stature and aura help make the movie realistic in Robinson's being so attracted to wanting to be his friend; he has great chemistry with Robinson), Kate Mara - Good (Plays the wife character well and has good chemistry with Robinson), Rest of the cast - Good (Everyone in the cast really brings something to the table; they work very well with the main cast to make the movie funny and such a great experience)
Score - Pretty Good:
Helps make the movie feel mysterious and complements the tone shifts
Cinematography - Very Good:
Makes the movie feel like it was shot by an auteur, as each camera angle feels like an art piece; The director said he drew inspiration from "The Master," and it shows
Editing - Good:
Makes the movie feel like it was cut together by an auteur
Sound - Pretty Good
Pacing - Pacing is the right pace for the most part, as it uses its runtime well; Because the movie is a cringe comedy, it can feel slow at times; it definitely feels like they could have cut 5 minutes to make the movie a little tighter
Climax - The climax is executed to perfection as it feels like a culmination of this comedic ride we've been taken on
Tone - The tone is dramatic and thriller-esque, juxtaposed with "I Think You Should Leave" to create a movie that just feels like a parody of auteur-driven movies.
The Rivals of Amziah King (2025)
Decent Movie
Rating - 6.8:
Overall, a decent movie that feels very Southern with its music, dialogue, and tone, that is carried by Matthew McConaughey's return to acting after six years; however, the movie is a tale of two halves, and I feel like this made the movie feel very bloated, as either half could have been cut in half to put more emphasis on the other part.
Direction - Decent to Pretty Good:
The direction on a macroscale infuses mystery with Southern musical elements to make the movie feel like a Southern adventure; the direction on a microscale is pretty fast-paced and quick to simulate Southern culture; the storytelling is a tale of two movies as the first half feels very family-oriented and musical and the second half is a straight adventure mystery, though the two halves really don't connect because the inflection point is really meant to shock you and shift the tension in the room; the movie builds tension by shocking the audience at the inflection point by splitting the movie into two completely different stories and you are more confused and surprised about what is happening
Story - Decent to Pretty Good:
The concept is a mix of many different ideas to create a southern adventure to explore the characters, and these ideas are music, mystery, and family; yhe plot structure is a tale of two stories, with a strong inflection point separating the two parts; The plot structure was a big issue for this movie because it made the movie feel very bloated and unnecessarily long; they should have cut either story in half to put more emphasis on the opposing part; the character writing is good as the movie is really driven by its characters, especially Amziah King and Kateri, because they create interesting characters with unique qualities about them
Screenplay - Pretty Good:
The dialogue is heavily influenced by Southern culture and feels pretty authentic; the humor is pretty Southern and helps set the tone and vibe for the movie; the symbolism is present; the foreshadowing is set early on as it helps set up different parts of the movie, especially the inflection point between the two halves of the movie
Acting - Pretty Good:
Matthew McConaughey - Good (He fills up the room with his presence as his heliocentric charisma has all the characters revolving around him; The character really feels like it is written for him and his real-life persona, so this is the perfect movie for McConaughey to return to acting after six years; he has pretty good chemistry with the remaining cast, and good chemistry with LookingGlass), Angelina LookingGlass - Pretty Good (Her character really grows and opens up as the movie goes on; what's needed from her becomes more as the movie progresses; she does a pretty good job holding her own when she needs to and works well with other actors, especially McConaughey), Kurt Russell - Decent to Pretty Good (Really a minor character, but makes his presence known when he's called upon), Cole Sprouse - Decent to Pretty Good (More of a cameo, it has pretty good chemistry with LookingGlass), Owen Teague - Decent (Decent chemistry with Looking Glass), Rob Morgan - Decent to Pretty Good (Plays "the adult in the room" character pretty well; has decent chemistry with the cast), Tony Revolori - Decent to Pretty Good (More of a comedic relief character, and he does a pretty good job doing that; he has decent chemistry with the cast), Rest of the cast - Decent (There really isn't that big of a supporting cast because it's just minor characters coming and going; but they do a decent job helping tell the story and working off the main cast)
Score - Pretty Good:
Very Southern and helps set the tone and vibe for the movie;
Soundtrack - Good:
Filled with many songs that feel personal to the story and make this movie feel very Southern
Cinematography - Decent to Pretty Good:
Do not really commit to one style because they try many different angles and techniques; and while this is unique, it would have been nice to see them commit to things long term
Editing - Decent to Pretty Good:
Try many different techniques and styles throughout the movie, but it really felt like they would introduce different editing techniques once but then never commit to them; I would have liked to see them commit to different editing styles and techniques throughout
Sound - Decent
Production Design - Pretty Good:
Helps set this movie in the rural South, hidden among the pines
Pacing - Pacing is pretty slow as the movie feels rather bloated; The movie is structured in two parts, and I would have liked to see them cut one part in half to put more emphasis on the other
Climax - Climax is decent, but you feel kind of exhausted up to this point
Tone - The tone is very Southern and mixes elements of mystery, family, drama, and musical
Final Notes - Saw the world premiere at SXSW.
Clown in a Cornfield (2025)
Pretty Good Movie
Rating - 7.2:
Overall, a pretty good slasher movie that infuses comedy to make the film genre-bending and unique; while there are many moments that are stereotypical of other low-budget slasher movies, "Clown in a Cornfield" does a pretty good job subverting expectations or calling out and making fun of its stereotypes in a meta way to make the experience entertaining and fun.
Direction - Pretty Good:
The direction on a macroscale is pretty good as they do a good job blending slasher with comedy, making this an entertaining experience; the direction on a microscale feels very similar to other low-budget teenage horror to start with, but the movie really starts to get into its groove towards the 30-minute mark as it begins to subvert stereotypes and blend humor with horror; the storytelling is decent as it uses the stereotypical teenage slasher movie to lay the groundwork for the plot, then either subverts these expectations or calls out and makes fun of its stereotypes in a meta way; they build tension decently well, but it is a bit formulaic at times as it builds up to horror moments
Story - Decent to Pretty Good:
The concept is your typical clown slasher movie, but mixed with comedic elements to make the movie bend what genre it is; the plot structure is pretty standard for a slasher movie; character writing is surprisingly pretty good, as while the movie does have its fair share of stereotypical tropes that it calls out, these characters grow in ways that surprise the audience
Screenplay - Pretty Good:
The dialogue is filled with corny dialogue you would expect from low-budget, teen slasher movies; but the dialogue definitely gets better as the movie goes on; the humor is an integral part of this movie as it helps prevent the movie from being a straight slasher movie, being meta at times and making the movie feel pretty unique; the symbolism is present and somewhat profound; the foreshadowing is present and helps lay crumbs for how the story will transpire
Acting - Decent to Pretty Good:
Katie Douglas - Pretty Good (Even though she starts the movie off with many stereotypical teen horror scream-queen mannerisms, she grows into her own and has good stage presence by the end of the movie; she has decent chemistry with the rest of the cast, especially Abrams), Aaron Abrams - Decent to Pretty Good (Plays the fatherly figure pretty well, despite his corny moments; he has pretty good chemistry with Douglas), Carson MacCormac - Decent (He plays his role decently well, especially as more weight is lifted off his shoulders as the movie goes on; he has decent chemistry with the rest of the cast), Kevin Durand - Decent to Pretty Good (Has a presence on screen that is felt; has decent chemistry with the rest of the cast), Will Sasso - Pretty Good (Uses his comedic presence to make his character both funny yet Machiavellian), Rest of the cast - Decent (While the movie is filled with stereotypical teenage slasher performances, they do a decent job with what they are given and definitely get better as the movie goes on; they help support building tension and the main cast decently well)
Score - Decent:
Feels a little similar to other horror movies; very over-the-top in how it builds suspense for the horror moments
Cinematography - Decent:
Typical of other low-budget slasher movies
Editing - Decent:
Typical of other low-budget horror movies
Sound - Decent to Pretty Good:
Helps build suspense and tension similar to other low-budget slasher movies
Visual Effects - Pretty Good:
Good use of practical effects because this is what you want from a slasher movie
Production Design - Decent:
Sets the cornfield for "Clown in a Cornfield"
Makeup - Decent to Pretty Good:
It helps display the blood and gore for the kills; it helps paint the clowns
Costumes - Pretty Good:
Helps dress the clown for "Clown in a Cornfield"
Pacing - Pacing is slow at the beginning and then very fast once the conflict is introduced, so basically, every slasher movie
Climax - The climax is pretty good and brings everything together but is somewhat predictable considering where the movie was heading
Tone - Tone is not your typical low-budget clown slasher movie; the movie sprinkles in comedy throughout to bend the genre and make the movie unique
Final Notes - Saw the world premiere at SXSW.
Holland (2025)
Pretty Bad Movie
Rating - 5.6:
Overall, a lackluster mystery thriller that Nicole Kidman cannot save because the movie does a bad job trying to subvert your expectations because it tries to lead you down a bad path when searching for the mystery, but the foreshadowing in the beginning and promotional material for this movie already give the conflict away; the movie genuinely feels like 20-30 minutes worth of scenes were cut because there was a lack of context throughout and the movie just feels unfinished towards the end.
Direction - Pretty Bad:
The direction on a macroscale is pretty good, as it creates this mystery set in a society stuck in the past, like Holland, Michigan; the direction on a microscale is pretty good, mainly because the main cast is filled with experienced actors, especially Nicole Kidman; the storytelling holds the movie back because it intentionally leads you down the wrong path in the mystery they are trying to solve, and once the actual conflict is revealed, it does not provide any context or explanation for why it happens; they artificially create tension to make this movie a thriller, but not in a good way because it feels obviously forced
Story - Bad to Pretty Bad:
The concept as a whole is pretty good as it presents a conflict across a perfect, stuck-in-time utopia like Holland, Michigan; but that conflict is pretty poor as it intentionally leads the audience down the wrong path to subvert its expectations; the plot structure is a big issue for this movie because the movie basically leads you down an adventure to figure out a mystery, but then when you find out what the actual mystery is, it basically just ends the movie without giving any context or closure; it genuinely feels like 20-30 minutes of this movie was cut because the movie feels unfinished, evidenced by Rachel Sennott's one scene and the ending; the character writing is what you would expect for a movie like this because it follows your vanilla housewife in a traditional family investigating her mysterious husband
Screenplay - Bad to Pretty Bad:
The dialogue is decent and gives the actors something to work with; the humor is decent and helps lighten the mood; the symbolism is not really that good because the movie never really builds on anything or shares why certain plot elements are important; the foreshadowing is a big problem for this movie because the movie foreshadows what the actual conflict for this movie is overtly and very early in the movie, but then the movie foreshadows and goes down a different path throughout the movie; however, because you remember what the foreshadowing was early in the movie, plus the promotional material makes the conflict pretty obvious, it is not shocking at all when the real conflict is revealed, so you just feel like you wasted 40 minutes to get to this point
Acting - Pretty Good:
Nicole Kidman - Good (Nicole Kidman can never give a bad performance; it shows here because she really embodies the character and makes the most of what she is given; she has good chemistry with Macfayden and Bernal), Matthew Macfadyen - Pretty Good (Basically plays Tom Wambsgans, but more mysteriously; he has good chemistry with Kidman), Gael García Bernal - Pretty Good (He has pretty good charisma and has good chemistry with Nicole Kidman), Rest of the cast - Decent (A bunch of minor supporting characters do a decent job supporting the main cast)
Score - Pretty Good:
Helps create mystery and tension
Cinematography - Pretty Good:
Feels polished
Editing - Decent:
Feels polished; the cut for this movie feels a little unfinished
Sound - Decent:
Helps create tension and suspense
Production Design - Pretty Good:
Helps create Holland, Michigan, this stuck-in-time utopian city
Costumes - Pretty Good:
Helps bring Holland, Michigan to life
Pacing - Pacing is fine up until the actual conflict is revealed; then the movie just feels very mismanaged and rushed to get to the finishing line; I genuinely think that 20-30 minutes of this movie was cut, and that was needed to help provide needed context
Climax - The climax is very lackluster, with the ending feeling unfinished
Tone - Tone is what one would expect from a mystery thriller;
Final Notes - Saw the second premiere at SXSW.
Drop (2025)
Decent Movie
Rating - 6.5:
Overall, an entertaining rom-com, thriller that is carried by Meghann Fahy's performance and tension that constantly builds throughout, but the movie feels like the plot is a little too stretched at times and the editing style makes this movie feel like it was made for Gen Z.
Direction - Decent to Pretty Good:
The direction on a macroscale is pretty good, as it builds the world and sets the stakes well; the direction on a microscale is pretty good, as there is pretty good chemistry with the main cast, but there definitely are some corny moments; the storytelling is decent, as it uses tension and raises the stakes to move the story forward, even though it does get a bit repetitive at times; they build tension well, as it constantly builds to raise the stakes of the situation and keep you on the edge of your seats for this thriller
Story - Decent:
The concept is a new take on the "trapped girl" archetype, but with a modern twist; even though the concept does seem simple, they do make it engaging and thrilling; the plot structure is pretty good for the most part, even though I do feel like there are many moments in the movie where they are just stalling to add time because the movie gets very repetitive; the character writing is decent as it gives typical archetypes you would see from a movie like this
Screenplay - Decent to Pretty Good:
The dialogue is surprisingly pretty sharp for a concept this simple; the humor is forced but pretty good as it helps alleviate the tension; the foreshadowing is good as the movie feels closed-ended and does a pretty good job leaving clues for who is sending the texts
Acting - Decent to Pretty Good:
Meghann Fahy - Pretty Good (Has pretty good screen presence and a lot of confidence playing the "trapped girl" stereotype; commands the scenes she is in; has good chemistry with Sklenar and the rest of the cast), Brandon Sklenar - Decent to Pretty Good (He has a lot of charisma in his on-screen presence and has good chemistry with Fahy, but more in a rom-com type way instead of what is needed in a thriller), Reed Diamond - Decent (Your typical mysterious character who is important at the end of the movie), Rest of the cast - Decent (The remaining cast is really just filled with minor characters as the movie is really about the main two leads, but they do a decent job supporting the main cast)
Score - Decent:
Helps build tension
Cinematography - Pretty Bad to Good:
Feels a little exaggerated at times as they were trying to do too much to capture our attention
Editing - Bad to Pretty Bad:
More of a personal preference, but I really did not like how they overlaid the texts on screen because it made the movie look very tacky
Sound - Good:
Felt very exaggerated and loud, to make the stunts feel very real and hard-hitting
Visual Effects - Pretty Bad:
Felt a little too over-the-top and unnecessary
Production Design - Decent:
It uses one singular location and does a decent job of making the characters feel trapped there
Pacing - Pacing feels artificially fast because the movie is a thriller and keeps you engaged; but it simultaneously feels slow at the same time because the movie really drags out the plot
Climax - Climax is decently executed, even though it feels a little over-the-top; the ending feels close-booked and how it should have ended; the chase sequence is factually incorrect because there is no way she drove from the Loop in Chicago to the suburbs in about two minutes
Tone - Tone is very much a thriller, but has many rom-com elements to ease the tension
Final Notes - Saw the world premiere at SXSW.
Ash (2025)
Very Bad Movie
Rating - 3.7:
Overall, a very bad movie that does a poor job explaining the conflict's importance, is filled with visuals that look AI-generated, and feels very derivative, as the movie is basically what would happen if we started the movie at the end of "Alien" and told the story like it was "Memento," but in a convoluted yet boring way.
Direction - Very Bad:
The direction on a macroscale is basically void, as it does a bad job building the world and showing the importance of the conflict; the direction on a microscale is nonexistent because the movie mostly follows González's character solo, but when there are interpersonal scenes, they are very boring; the storytelling is a mess because it tries to start the movie at the end and continually jump back chronologically to tell the story, but it does so poorly; they build tension poorly because the movie does a bad job explaining what the conflict is or its importance, they just throw jump scares and poor gory visuals to make you 'feel scared'
Story - Very Bad:
The concept is literally just "Alien" but if it started at the end and worked its way backward; the plot structure is a complete mess as the movie starts at the end and constantly jumps back in the timeline to tell the story but does so in a very bad way; character writing is nonexistent because you learn nothing about the characters or why they are a part of this mission
Screenplay - Very Bad:
The dialogue is so bland and boring; the symbolism is lacking; the foreshadowing is bad because the movie starts at the end and does a bad job building the importance of the conflict and you basically already know how this movie is going to end
Acting - Bad:
Eiza González - Bad (Such a bland and emotionless performance because half the movie is just close-ups on her face, and she does a bad job actually reacting to the conflict), Aaron Paul - Pretty Bad (It really feels like he's in this movie just so they have somewhat of a big name, because he provides nothing), Rest of the cast - Bad (There is barely a supporting cast, but when there is, they do not provide anything valuable to the story; The supporting cast is basically just an off-brand "Alien")
Score - Bad:
Overbearing and makes the scenes hard to follow
Cinematography - Decent to Pretty Good:
Probably the only somewhat enjoyable thing about this movie is that it created some visuals I enjoyed and did a decent job creating tension
Editing - Bad:
The edit just makes this movie feel like a mess because there are all these fast cuts and edits to try to create panic; but this just makes the movie convoluted and hard to follow
Sound - Bad:
The score and sounds were poorly mixed
Visual Effects - Very Bad:
The visuals look so tacky and fake that it feels like they were created by Gen AI
Production Design - Decent:
Takes a lot of inspiration from "Alien"
Makeup - Decent:
What you would expect from a low-budget movie, but it does help create some gore
Costumes - Decent:
Decently designed, as they show the characters in space
Pacing - Pacing is a mess because of all the cuts in the storyline, so the movie ends up being slow and boring
Climax - Climax is a mess because it is just chaos, and you do not really feel anything resolved
Tone - Tone is basically "Alien" but pretentiously amplified to be more of a horror movie;
Final Notes - Saw the world premiere at SXSW.
The Ballad of Wallis Island (2025)
Pretty Good Movie
Rating - 7.9:
Overall, a well-made feel-good movie that infuses silly comedy and folk musical moments to keep the tone lighthearted yet profound; The film is carried by the performances of Tom Basden, Tim Key, and Carey Mulligan, as their chemistry really makes you want to see how these characters grow in the movie.
Direction - Pretty Good:
The direction on a macroscale is pretty good, as it creates this feel-good tone filled with many musical moments; the direction on a microscale is good, as it creates scenes that are both silly and profound, and in the microscale moments you can really tell the director just lets the actors act; the storytelling is pretty good; they build tension pretty well
Story - Pretty Good to Good:
The concept is good, as it really is about the friendship building between the two leads, and Basden's character reliving his past partnership with Mulligan's character; the plot structure is simple; character writing is very good, as you really understand what these characters are searching for in this movie
Screenplay - Good:
The dialogue is pretty silly and goofy, yet it has its profound moments; the humor is very silly and goofy; the symbolism is pretty good; the foreshadowing is good, as the movie has a full-circle ending
Acting - Good:
Tom Basden - Good (Plays the straight man well; does a good job in the musical moments; has good chemistry with Mulligan and very good chemistry with Key), Tim Key - Good (Plays the silly comic relief character well; has very good chemistry with Basden), Carey Mulligan - Good (She uses her experience to carry the role and shows why she is one of the best in the business), Rest of the cast - Good (There isn't that much of a supporting cast, but the three leads have good chemistry with one another)
Score - Good:
It infuses folk music into the score to set the tone
Soundtrack - Good:
Folk songs that help create the character's musical background
Cinematography - Decent:
Feels a little low-budget, but fine
Editing - Decent:
Nothing really special
Sound - Decent:
Nothing really special
Production Design - Pretty Good:
It feels like they shot on location to show the seclusion of the island
Pacing - Pacing is a bit on the slower side, but this lets the movie develop and the characters grow; 10-15 minutes could have been cut
Climax - Climax is pretty profound as it builds to a feel-good moment you want to see as the movie develops; the movie ended how I would have wanted it to end
Tone - The tone is mostly silly comedy, but infused with folk musical and dramatic moments
Final Notes - Saw the Texas premiere at SXSW.
Together (2025)
Decent Movie
Rating - 6.9:
Overall, a decent body horror movie that has well-executed horror sequences and good chemistry between Dave Franco and Alison Brie; but I personally wasn't a big fan of the conflict once it's revealed and thought the movie was very cringey at times.
Direction - Decent to Pretty Good:
The direction on a macroscale takes influences from horror movies like "Hereditary" and "Barbarian" with how it builds the conflict and the world, but has some comedic flavors; the direction on a microscale is too corny and white-couple-centric that it was too cringey to sit through, though there were some humorous moments I did enjoy; the storytelling is similar to "Hereditary" and "Barbarian" in how it searches for the conflict, then goes full send after it is revealed; they build tension very well, especially when building up the body horror sequences
Story - Decent to Pretty Good:
The concept is pretty unique and interesting, but I really wasn't that big a fan of the actual conflict once it is revealed; the plot structure is similar to "Hereditary" and "Barbarian" in the way the movie tries to build up to the conflict reveal, then goes full speed towards the climax once it hits the inflection point; the character writing is decent
Screenplay - Decent to Pretty Good:
The dialogue is too cringey and very stereotypically white; the humor is pretty prevalent, mainly because of the director and actors' comedy backgrounds; the symbolism is there, but I don't know if I am too much of a fan of it; the foreshadowing is very good as the movie drops clues on what the conflict is, well in advance of its reveal
Acting - Pretty Good:
Dave Franco - Decent to Pretty Good (Basically, he plays every character he always plays; he has good chemistry with Brie, mainly because they are actually married), Alison Brie - Pretty Good to Good (Really takes control of the movie as she has charisma and good screen presence; she has good chemistry with both main cast members, but especially with Franco), Damon Herriman - Pretty Good (He plays his role well and has good chemistry with Brie), Rest of the cast - Pretty Good (The cast is really small, but the main cast does work together well)
Score - Decent:
Helps set tension and tone
Cinematography - Pretty Good:
Feels well-shot, especially with the budget's size
Editing - Pretty Good:
Feels well-edited, especially considering the budget's size
Sound - Pretty Good:
Helps build tension
Visual Effects - Good:
Despite its low budget, the visual effects blended with the practical effects help make this movie look realistic, especially in the body horror sequences
Makeup - Very Good:
Done very well to help create the body horror sequences
Pacing - Pacing is two-pronged because it is slow toward the conflict reveal, then very fast afterward; while the pacing was intentional, I would have liked to have seen maybe 10 minutes cut from the buildup to the climax to make the movie feel more balanced
Climax - Climax is executed well, even the resolution is a little forced
Tone - The tone is very body horror but has comedic flavors
Final Notes - Saw the Texas premiere at SXSW.
Mickey 17 (2025)
Pretty Bad Movie
Rating - 5.7:
Overall, despite a good performance from Robert Pattinson and well-shot sequences on a macroscale, Bong Joon-ho fails to properly follow up "Parasite" as the writing holds the movie back with its overly overt messages and dialogue that feels very unnatural as many things are lost in transition.
Direction - Pretty Bad:
The direction on a macroscale is good as it feels auteur-driven and similar to his style; The direction on a microscale is very stiff and unnatural; The storytelling is bland and forced; They build tension poorly because they do not really build the stakes and you do not really care what happens to these characters
Story - Bad to Pretty Bad:
The concept is interesting as an idea, but poorly executed as it just becomes overt commentary on contemporary politics; The plot structure is fine, but the climax is predictable and the resolution is actually unnecessary; Character writing is bad because the characters really don't have that much personality, and Ruffalo's character is a composite of so many dictators that there is nothing unique to him
Screenplay - Bad to Pretty Bad:
The dialogue is a big struggle in this movie because it is very obvious that English is not Bong Joon-ho's first language; a lot of the dialogue is unnatural and many things are lost in translation; the humor is alright, but it tries a bit too hard; the symbolism is way too overt that it just feels too on-the-nose and hurts its message; the foreshadowing is pretty overt, as you exactly know how the movie is going to end when the climax hits
Acting - Decent:
Robert Pattinson - Good (Plays the dual role well as he creates two distinct performances tailored to the personalities of Mickey 17 and 18), Naomi Ackie - Decent (Plays the female lead decently well;), Steven Yeun - Pretty Bad (Feels very forced and does not have chemistry with Pattinson; It is choppy overall), Toni Collette - Good (Really enjoyed her character as her presence is felt onscreen and she really embodies the character), Mark Ruffalo - Bad (Does a bad job playing this dictator as he basically plays a composite of all these dictators; his performance and character have no personality or anything unique to him; a caricature of a performance that ends up just feeling more cringe than funny), Rest of the cast - Pretty Bad (Just a lot of minor, inexperienced characters that really don't do much to support the main cast;)
Score - Decent:
Helps set the tone;
Cinematography - Good:
Feels auteur-driven and utilizes its big budget to create grand scenes; It has some goofy shots to fit the tone
Editing - Good:
Tight and well-edited; it has some goofy cuts to fit the tone
Sound - Good
Visual Effects - Good
Production Design - Good:
Enjoyed the spaceship design for this dystopian society
Pacing - Pacing is pretty slow, as the movie could have been cut by about 20 minutes
Climax - Climaxes are predictable because you know exactly what is going to happen when they start; The ending is actually unnecessary and could have been entirely cut
Tone - The tone is too silly and goofy; this movie feels more like a caricature than meaningful dialogue
Final Notes - I have not seen his other English language projects; but I always see this problem when non-native speakers write dialogue for a language they do not understand, because it is unnatural and much is lost in translation.
Nezha: Mo tong nao hai (2025)
Decent Movie
Rating - 6.2:
Overall, a decent movie that is entertaining and has well-executed fight sequences, but it is held back by being too story-dense and having a dated animation style; personally, the movie was a bit hard to follow, mainly because I didn't watch the first movie, I don't really know the story, and I don't know Mandarin, so take this review with a grain of salt.
Direction - Decent:
The direction on a macroscale is pretty good, as the movie really emulates Eastern fight designs and an aesthetic you would see from Japanese animation; the direction on a microscale is decent; The storytelling is not the best, because the movie is very story-dense and they keep introducing new plot elements and characters, but this might only be an issue for me because I am not Chinese nor have I seen the first movie; they build tension decently
Story - Decent:
The concept is a retelling of the famous Chinese mythology, Ne Zha; the plot structure is very story-dense, so it may be an issue if you don't know the story, the language, or didn't watch the first movie; the character writing is decent, having many archetypes you would see in Eastern mythology
Screenplay - Decent:
The dialogue is pretty good and true to Eastern animation; the humor is pretty good, as it helps make this demon boy more of a clown; the symbolism is decent; the foreshadowing is expected given how the movie is set up
Acting - Decent
Lu Yanting - Decent (Plays the typical demon, chosen-child role decently well), Rest of the cast - Decent (Decent performances all around helped move the story forward)
Score - Pretty Good:
The eastern, ancient Chinese themes help set the tone and the story
Sound - Decent to Pretty Good:
Helped set the tone for the movie and the action sequences
Animation - Pretty Bad:
The animation style feels incredibly dated, as if they used the same engine from "Meet the Robinsons"; the animation in the second half was a lot better than the first half
Pacing - Pacing is fast and has a long runtime, making the movie very story-dense
Climax - Climax is well executed as it is a giant fight scene with good animation and meaningful for the hero's journey
Tone - Tone is similar to other Eastern mythology stories and honestly shares tones with "Naruto"
Captain America: Brave New World (2025)
Bad Movie
Rating - 4.8:
Overall, a bad movie because it was clearly obvious that this movie went through constant reshoots since there was no clear direction for what they were trying to go for, symbolizing the current track record for Marvel.
Direction - Bad:
The direction on a macroscale is very formally marvelous, specifically Winter Soldier, but I did enjoy most of the action sequences; the direction on a microscale is very cringey and forced Marvel humor; the storytelling is very shallow and forced; they build tension poorly; it is very evident that multiple reshoots were done for this movie because there was no clear vision they were going for
Story - Bad:
The concept is just a rehash of "Captain America: The Winter Soldier," with a loophole sequel to "The Incredible Hulk"; the plot structure is very straightforward and linear; character writing is bad because none of these characters have depth; They try to make Ross this "Trump-like" character, but give him sympathy, and they try to introduce doubt about Sam Wilson as the new Captain America, but this was already addressed in the TV show and it doesn't really go anywhere in this movie
Screenplay - Very Bad:
The dialogue is very bad and cringey, it is as if AI wrote this movie; the humor is forced and does not hit most of the time; the symbolism is not focused because they try to make this movie an allegory for the current presidential regime, but they give up on this halfway through the movie; the movie also tries to introduce character doubt, but they give up on this as well; the foreshadowing is bad because they just force plot points as you just have to expect things are going to happen because of the current track record of Marvel
Acting - Bad to Pretty Bad:
Anthony Mackie - Pretty Bad to Decent (He is fine as the new Captain America, but he is just given bad material to work with), Danny Ramirez - Pretty Bad (It does not do a good job filling the shoes Mackie left open, but this is mainly because its dialogue is pretty bad; it has okay chemistry with Mackie), Shira Haas - Bad (Has no chemistry with the entire cast), Carl Lumbly - Decent (Plays the elderly figure well in the movie but it just feels like his character was thrown in there with no proper backstory), Giancarlo Esposito - Pretty Bad (A very shallowly written character, and it just feels like he is in this movie for his name), Tim Blake Nelson - Bad (A very goofy villain that is written to be bigger than he actually is), Harrison Ford - Bad to Pretty Bad (It's very obvious he doesn't want to be here), Rest of the cast - Bad (Just a lot of toneless performances that do nothing to move the story forward or support the main cast)
Score - Decent
Soundtrack - Pretty Bad:
Not really the best song choices because they don't really match the movie's theme; they are kind of just thrown in there
Cinematography - Bad:
There are so many questionable shots in this movie that make me wonder why they even shot this movie in IMAX
Editing - Decent
Sound - Pretty Good
Visual Effects - Bad:
For the amount of money they spent on this, it feels oversaturated and not good
Production Design - Pretty Good:
I liked how they shot in DC and incorporated the cherry blossoms throughout most of the shots
Makeup - Pretty Good:
Helped create the villains
Costumes - Pretty Good:
Helped create the characters
Pacing - Pacing is very slow because the movie just does not know what direction it is going in, and the writing is so bad that you wonder why you are even watching this movie
Climax - Climax is very anticlimactic, as the final fight scene is not really that well executed
Tone - The tone is very Marvel, but because of the constant reshoots, the movie feels like it has no direction
Final Notes - The fight scenes were pretty well executed and entertaining, but that was really the only entertaining thing about this movie; it was very obvious this movie went through constant reshoots as there was no real direction they were going for.
Paddington in Peru (2024)
Pretty Good Movie
Rating - 7.6:
Overall, a pretty good movie that is a fun and playful adventure of Paddington in Peru.
Direction - Pretty Good:
The direction on a macroscale is very fun and playful, filled with adventure to match the movie's theme; the direction on a microscale is fun and playful, in a British way; the storytelling is pretty simple and straightforward; they build tension in a light-hearted way, as they try to play more at your heartstrings rather than being tense
Story - Pretty Good:
The concept is pretty straightforward, it's Paddington in Peru; the plot structure is pretty linear and straightforward; character writing is pretty good as it deals with issues of Paddington having two nationalities and juggling where he is from
Screenplay - Pretty Good:
The dialogue is fun and playful; the humor is silly; the symbolism is somewhat present as it deals with family, identity, and nationality; the foreshadowing is pretty straightforward
Acting - Pretty Good:
Olivia Colman - Pretty Good (She uses her experience well to help play the character), Antonio Banderas - Pretty Good (A very Antonio Banderas-like performance), Ben Whishaw - Good (Perfectly emulates Paddington as a friendly, naive bear who really tries his best to help his family), Rest of the cast - Pretty Good (A lot of fun, friendly performances that make this movie warm and cozy)
Score - Decent:
Establishes the tone
Cinematography - Pretty Good:
It does a good job placing the family against the backdrop of the Amazon
Editing - Pretty Good
Sound - Pretty Good:
Helps make the movie a fun action-comedy filled with bells and whistles
Visual Effects - Good:
The CGI for the animals is very good but the visual effects in the action sequences are not the best
Production Design - Good:
Enjoyed how the Amazon, the retired home, and the boat were integral parts of telling the story
Pacing - Pacing is a good speed
Climax - Climax is executed in a fun and lighthearted way; the ending is very emotional
Tone - Tone is very playful and fun.
Game Night (2018)
Decent Movie
Rating - 6.8:
Overall, a silly action-comedy that makes you wonder, "how could that be profitable for Frito-Lay".
Direction - Decent to Pretty Good:
The direction on a macroscale cultivates a very silly, action-comedy that is overall entertaining; the direction on a microscale is very silly and this is where the comedy comes out; the storytelling is a bit convoluted because they try to have too many twists to make the movie somewhat of a parody but it ends up just making the movie more confusing
Story - Decent to Pretty Good:
The concept is very silly and goofy, as it mixes a light-hearted idea like Game Night with espionage; the plot structure is fine for the most part, but the ending gets a bit convoluted with all the intentional twists and turns; character writing is funny for Jesse Plemons' character because he is just someone who really wants to be in Game Night
Screenplay - Decent to Pretty Good:
The dialogue is very silly and dumb, but that's what makes it funny because there are many memorable moments; the foreshadowing is a little all over the place because the movie tries to subvert our expectations with many twists, but it ends up making the movie more convoluted
Acting - Pretty Good:
Jason Bateman - Pretty Good (He plays his typical straight man in a comedy role he is known for; there was a reason he was hired, as this is a role he is very comfortable with), Rachel McAdams - Pretty Good (Her experience in comedies makes her performance feel natural; she has pretty good chemistry with Bateman), Jesse Plemons - Good (Still wondering how that could be profitable for Frito-Lay), Rest of the cast - Decent (Everyone seems like they are having fun; a lot of the performances are what you would get in an action-comedy)
Score - Decent:
Helps set the tone
Cinematography - Decent to Pretty Good:
Pretty typical for an action comedy, but I did like the shots that make the world look like a board game
Editing - Decent:
Typical of an action comedy
Sound - Decent:
Typical of an action comedy
Visual Effects - Decent to Pretty Good:
Typical of an over-the-top action-comedy, but I enjoyed the shots where they made the world look like a board game
Pacing - Pacing is a little too fast, as if they are breezing through the story
Climax - Climax is a little too convoluted because of all the twists they try to include, but the ending itself was pretty predictable
Tone - The tone is very typical of a silly action-comedy.
Ainda Estou Aqui (2024)
Good Movie
Rating - 8.0:
Overall, a good movie that tells the story nontraditionally as it is driven by the characters reacting to what is going on rather than showing major plot points onscreen, and this only works because of Fernanda Torres, as her performance really drives this narrative forward; the movie does have pacing issues and does not end well because of its two unnecessary flash-forward sequences.
Direction - Good:
The direction on a macroscale is in two halves: the first half is this home-video style film that presents this loving family using each other to get through hard times and the second half is this siloed viewpoint from the protagonist as she goes through hardships; the direction on a microscale is good, as this is a very character-driven movie where the characters react to what is going on; the storytelling is different from what I would expect because, instead of showing what was going on, a lot of the major and historical events happen off-screen, and the story is told by the characters reacting to what happened; they build tension pretty well, as the whole movie is about anticipation and waiting to see what happens next and providing closure on some issues
Story - Pretty Good:
The concept is good as it is a real-life story about the life of Eunice Paiva and the disappearance of Rubens Paiva during Brazil's military dictatorship, but instead of being a traditional narrative, it focuses more on the family and how they react to what is going on; the plot structure is alright for the most part, but the climax and resolution are not executed well; the character writing is good for Eunice Paiva as you can see how much of a concerned mother and wife she is, as everything she is doing is for her family
Screenplay - Pretty Good:
The dialogue is pretty good; the symbolism deals with family dynamics and the fight against a military, authoritarian regime; the foreshadowing is not the best because of how the film is structured towards the end, with its incredibly rushed climax and unnecessary epilogue
Acting - Good to Very Good:
Fernanda Torres - Very Good (A strong lead for the movie, as she does a good job playing a wife looking for the truth and a mother trying to protect and shield her family from what is going on outside; she has a good range of emotions; she really controls the film), Selton Mello - Good (He has good chemistry with Torres and plays the father and husband roles well), Rest of the cast - Good (Everyone does their job in helping tell the narrative, either by solving the mystery or by being part of a concerned family)
Cinematography - Good:
In the family setting, the film helps create the feel of a family home movie, especially when using the Super 8 camera; in the dramatic scenes, it uses a siloed viewpoint well to draw focus on Eunice and how she feels during this time
Editing - Good:
In the family setting, it helps the film feel like a family home movie, especially when they splice in the Super 8 camera footage; in the dramatic scenes, it helps draw focus to Eunice and how alone she feels without her husband and in the country she is in
Production Design - Pretty Good:
Captures Rio in 1970
Pacing - Pacing is a bit on the slower side for the first three-quarters, as the movie focuses a lot more on the characters rather than plot points; pacing is very fast in the final quarter, as it feels like they are just speeding through the end
Climax - Climax is poorly executed, as it feels like they are just speeding through the flashforwards, which are very unnecessary; personally, I would have just ended the movie before the time jumps, because that was the natural conclusion
Tone - Tone is very warm and familial in the family scenes and dramatic in the darker scenes
Final Notes - Even though I personally would not tell a story this way, I respect them for having the characters' reacting to plot points drive the story forward rather than showing what happens on screen because this movie is based on real events, so you can just look it up; I feel like the two flash-forward scenes are pretty unnecessary, especially the last one.
Flight Risk (2025)
Bad Movie
Rating - 4.4:
Overall, a bad movie that feels very cheap and lacks any effort from its direction, writing, and acting as the movie could have been cut into an episode of Law & Order; this very much feels like a "fulfilling a contract" type of movie.
Direction - Bad:
The direction on a macroscale is very plain and simple, especially with how low-budget it is; the microscale is bad, especially with the constant phone calls; the storytelling feels like filler as they try to add unnecessary plot lines to an already dry story; they build tension poorly
Story - Bad:
The concept is just a worse version of Speed, and they keep adding unnecessary plot lines to make the movie longer; the plot structure is not good; character writing is poorly written because of their poorly written backstories
Screenplay - Bad:
The dialogue is unnatural and bad; the movie tries its best, it is just fun, bad; the foreshadowing is very obvious
Acting - Bad:
Mark Wahlberg - Pretty Bad (He does something with the character but his character is poorly written), Michelle Dockery - Decent (The only passable performance in the movie is hers; she shows some range and definitely takes command; she tries her best with nothing to work with), Topher Grace - Bad (He tries his best to be the comedic relief; his character is so poorly written that it backfires on him), Rest of the cast - Very Bad (The main cast is very small, but the vocal cast from the phone calls is very bad because it is poorly mixed and unnatural; there is no chemistry among the entire cast)
Cinematography - Pretty Bad:
Very cheap and plain
Editing - Bad:
Very cheap and requires no effort
Sound - Very Bad:
Poorly mixed in, as the movie just feels cheap, and the phone calls do not feel natural
Visual Effects - Very Bad:
I understand the movie is low-budget, but it is very obvious when they use CGI, and that they are just on a set
Production Design - Bad:
It is very obvious they are on a set somewhere
Makeup - Bad:
Mark Wahlberg's wig is very obvious because you can see where they attached the bald cap;
Pacing - Pacing is so slow that it feels like they keep adding unnecessary plot points just to lengthen the time, which is already 90 minutes long; this movie could have just been an episode of Law & Order
Climax - The climax is poorly executed because it is over-the-top with how excessively bad it is
Tone - Tone is supposed to be an action thriller, but it does not know what movie it wants to be; the movie just ends up being fun bad
Final Notes - This feels very much like a "fulfilling a contract" type of movie; it felt like nobody wanted to be here.
Companion (2025)
Pretty Good Movie
Rating - 7.2:
Overall, a pretty good horror movie that feels very genreless; the film's unpredictable story, brought to life by Sophie Thatcher's performance, effectively uses its "mystery" premise to explore female independence; I saw this movie as an "AMC Scream-Unseen" and that was honestly the way to see it because this is very much a mystery movie that you should go in blind.
Direction - Pretty Good:
The direction on a macroscale feels unique, as the movie both feels genreless and very visual; the direction on a microscale is pretty good between the two leads, as you can feel there is a good amount of chemistry between them, but alright with the rest of the cast; Storytelling is very visual, as the director prefers to show rather than tell, especially in the flashbacks and action sequences; they build tension very well to make this movie uphold its thriller/horror name
Story - Pretty Good to Good:
The concept is very unique as it very much feels like an "Ex-Machina at home," but at the same time stays original and unique with all its twists and turns; the plot structure is pretty standard, but deviates a bit with all its twists and turns; character writing is good for Iris as the character not only looks at the morality of AI but explores female independence too
Screenplay - Pretty Good:
The dialogue is pretty lackluster and unnatural, but it does have good lines; the humor is a big element for this movie because it makes it feel very genreless; the symbolism is strong as it uses a discussion on AI and this flawed relationship as a way to explore female independence; the foreshadowing is very good as the movie uses a lot of twists and turns to make it unique and interesting, but is still very full-circle through its foreshadowing
Acting - Pretty Good:
Sophie Thatcher - Good (Really embodies the character as her character's emotions build throughout the movie; she has a good range by the end; she really controls the scenes she is in and has established herself as a future scream queen; she has good chemistry with Quaid, and you really feel her character is a companion who cares about her lover), Jack Quaid - Pretty Good (He has strong charisma onscreen and is really establishing himself as a film lead; He shows a pretty good range of emotions; he has good chemistry with Thatcher as he is one half of a very complicated relationship), Rest of the cast - Decent (Very standard background characters hold their own but don't do anything to really lift up the two leads)
Score - Decent:
Used to establish tension
Cinematography - Pretty Good:
I enjoyed it because it was important in helping build the world, create tension, and show Iris's perspective;
Editing - Pretty Good:
Cut in a way that brought out both humor and tension; it was pretty integral to the storytelling
Sound - Decent to Pretty Good:
Influential in building tension, but pretty standard compared to other thrillers in many areas
Visual Effects - Pretty Good:
Stays true to the low-budget horror movie feel, but is pretty good with its mix of practical effects and subtle ways to make Iris who she is
Makeup - Decent to Pretty Good:
Mainly for Iris, as her hairstyle made her feel very 1950s and subservient, something that her "boyfriend" was trying to make her look like
Costumes - Decent to Pretty Good:
Mainly for Iris, as her costumes made her feel very 1950s and subservient, something that her boyfriend was trying to make her look like
Pacing - Pacing is fine as the movie uses its runtime effectively
Climax - Climax is executed well, as it is full of unexpected twists and turns; the ending makes this movie come together full circle
Tone - Tone is very genreless as it combines black comedy, drama, thriller, and horror elements;
Final Notes - Telugu was mentioned, but probably not for a good reason; Saw this as an "AMC Scream-Unseen," and that was the way to see it because this is very much a mystery movie that you should go into blind, especially because the trailer and poster give nothing.
Dog Man (2025)
Good Movie
Rating - 8.0:
Overall, he's a dog, but he's also a man.
Direction - Pretty Good to Good:
The direction on a macroscale is very true to the source material as it is very silly, goofy, and cartoonish; the direction on a microscale is very much similar to other kids' movies, but has some more mature jokes and an overall adorable feel that makes it enjoyable for adults too; the storytelling feels very similar to other Dave Pilkey properties with how silly and meta it is
Story - Good:
The concept is cinema because he is a dog but he is also a man; the plot structure is pretty linear and typical of other children's movies as they speed through the plot in less than ninety minutes; Character writing is amazing because he is very much a dog but he has qualities that also make him a man
Screenplay - Good:
The dialogue is very silly, goofy fun, as the movie is filled with puns and jokes that are adorable; the humor is so silly and goofy that it makes the movie adorable
Acting - Pretty Good:
Pete Davidson - Pretty Good (Very goofy and silly, it feels like a PG version of Pete Davidson), Lil Rel Howery - Pretty Good (He has good chemistry with Dog Man and is good comedic relief), Isla Fisher - Decent to Pretty Good (Really, just a standard reporter character but has some funny silly moments), Ricky Gervais - Decent to Pretty Good (Really out of character for him, as a movie like this cannot utilize any of his comedic strengths but does a decent job), Rest of the cast - Decent to Pretty Good (Just a lot of silly, goofy performances that help make this movie what it is; I really respect them for making Dog Man's character just a dog because it made him more adorable)
Score - Decent:
Pretty minimal, as it is more just about establishing the tone
Editing - Good:
Makes it feel very much like other Dave Pilkey books, with these fast, cartoonish montages interwoven into the movie
Sound - Good:
Makes the movie feel very cartoonish and adorable
Animation - Very Good:
Makes the movie look and feel very true to the source material; this is exactly how I would want to see a Dave Pilkey property adapted on the big screen
Pacing - Pacing is incredibly fast because the movie is less than 90 minutes
Climax - Climax is a big action montage and I wouldn't have had it any other way
Tone - The tone is very silly and goofy, which makes this an adorable children's movie.
Presence (2024)
Very Bad Movie
Rating - 3.7:
Overall, a very bad movie that feels more like a bad student film than one directed by Steven Soderbergh; the only way a low-budget movie like this can survive is with a good story, and this movie's writing is so bad that it comes off more like a cringy teen movie than a supernatural thriller.
Direction - Very Bad:
The direction on a macroscale feels very much like an inexperienced student film, as you are just a fly on the wall in all the scenes, but not in a good way; The direction on a microscale is so pretentiously teen-movie, it comes off as parody; The storytelling is bad, as the conflict doesn't feel well put together and the story doesn't really move at all; They build tension poorly; I was not scared a single time during this movie
Story - Very Bad:
The concept is actually very dumb as it is not original at all, except for the perspective the movie is told; the interpersonal relationships for this family and their friends are not well put together; the plot structure is not good as the movie feels too short, with little rising action and no bridge from the climax to the resolution; the character writing is bad as it intentionally makes all of these characters void, with gaps in their history; also, the character writing left out anything about this family being Asian as these are some of the most whitewashed Asian people I have ever seen
Screenplay - Very Bad:
The dialogue is actually so poorly written it's hilarious; The humor is unintentionally funny; The symbolism is not well put together; The foreshadowing is very bad as you know exactly what's going to happen besides the somewhat "twist" at the end
Acting - Pretty Bad to Decent:
Lucy Liu - Pretty Bad (Feels like she is in this movie just so they can attach one name to the poster; She has this weird relationship with the family as it's like she wants to sleep with her own son and despises her daughter; She isn't really given much to work with but has one scene towards the end which is somewhat good acting), Julia Fox - Decent (Literally in the movie for only two lines at the beginning), Chris Sullivan - Decent (I feel like he does his best with bad material, as there are a lot of lines he says that are really cringey, but the delivery isn't bad; He has pretty good chemistry with his daughter), Callina Liang - Decent (The real protagonist of the movie, as the story is told through her; she owns her own and does a decent job carrying her scenes, especially with what she was given; she shows some range of emotion), Rest of the cast - Pretty Bad (The cast is pretty small, but the remaining characters were either standard adult actors or very pretentious "wanting to be cool" teens)
Score - Pretty Bad:
Sound like royalty-free ominous music
Soundtrack - Decent:
I did not expect to hear "Covet," but I actually like that song
Cinematography - Pretty Bad:
I don't understand what Soderbergh's obsession with using consumer cameras to shoot his movies is, but it is incredibly obvious he is the one shooting this movie because it just feels like it's a dude walking around holding a camera; The fly-on-the-wall POV of "Presence" was a good idea in concept but was poorly executed because it just makes this movie feel like a student film
Editing - Pretty Bad:
Might be one of the most basic editing jobs I have ever seen, as the movie just uses black screen cuts to go between scenes and uses ripple effects to simulate visual effects of the "Presence"; if this movie was not edited in Movie Maker over a weekend I would be completely shocked
Sound - Decent:
Pretty Basic
Production Design - Decent:
Literally just a suburban house they rented for a weekend
Pacing - Pacing is incredibly fast, as it just breezes through the story in less than 85 minutes; it feels like they just cut out chunks of this movie
Climax - The climax is so poorly executed; it is just abrupt, has bad effects, and poorly transitions to the end
Tone - Tone is supposed to be a thriller but just comes off as a bad teen movie that feels like a student film
Final Notes - The only saving grace for this movie is that it had a $2 million budget; it very much feels like a low-budget student film.
September 5 (2024)
Good Movie
Rating - 8.0:
Overall, a good movie that uses its story and editing to show the Munich Massacre from the perspective of a neutral and inexperienced ABC Sports team, but the movie fails to stick the landing because of its mismanaged climax and anticlimactic ending.
Direction - Good:
The direction on a macroscale fits the fast-paced, rushed guerrilla style of an inexperienced sports team breaking a terrorism event; The direction on a microscale is decent; The storytelling is good as the story and real-life events really make this movie interesting as you want to see what happens next; They use real-world events and the uncertainty of the news team covering the story to build tension well
Story - Good:
The concept is good, as the movie shows the perspective of the ABC Sports team breaking the news of the Munich Massacre in real time; a group of people who don't have the expertise are breaking a story that the whole world wants to see in real time; The plot structure is pretty good, but the climax is a bit mishandled and the ending feels a bit anticlimactic; There isn't that much character writing, besides some tropes, because the movie is about the story and the news group as a collective breaking it
Screenplay - Pretty Good:
The dialogue is pretty strong; The symbolism is pretty neutral, as it does not really try to be political, as the movie cares more about the neutral American sports team breaking the story, though there is some inherent Israeli preference due to the subject matter; The foreshadowing is not the best because the movie just feels so mismanaged in the end from how it is presented
Acting - Decent to Pretty Good:
Peter Sarsgaard - Decent (Plays the leader of the team but does not really show much emotion), John Magaro - Pretty Good to Good (Controls the room well and is the real protagonist of the movie), Ben Chaplin - Pretty Good (Shows poise and has good chemistry with the cast; Shows a pretty good range of emotion), Leonie Benesch - Pretty Good (Plays the foreign German role well; Her role is to dispel sexist stereotypes), Rest of the cast - Decent to Pretty Good (Everyone plays their part well in helping create the uneasiness of the situation)
Score - Decent:
Pretty minimal, used to set the tone and create tension
Soundtrack - Decent:
Mandatory "Fortunate Son" moment to show this movie takes place in the 1970s
Cinematography - Good:
The guerrilla style helps heighten the tension and show the unease of the team breaking the story; the style helps make the movie feel like it was shot by an Olympic cameraman
Editing - Very Good:
Feels well-put-together and is important to helping build the tension; The movie feels like it is cut by putting film strips together in the traditional 70s way, similar to what was being done in the movie; It does a very good job splicing in real-world footage to make the movie feel seamless
Sound - Good:
Makes the movie feel polished
Production Design - Good:
The darkness and crammed nature of the production room emulates what the actual team was going through
Costumes - Decent:
Very 1970s clothing
Pacing - Pacing is pretty good; The movie uses its short runtime well; but the ending feels a bit all over the place
Climax - Climax is very mismanaged, especially if you know what actually happens before watching this movie; the ending feels very anticlimactic
Tone - The tone is very journalistic, dramatic, and mixed with thriller elements to help build tension;
Final Notes - I hate that this movie is pronounced "September five" and not "September 5th"