Marval Movie

Here I am with my fiftieth post! when I started this blog I would have never guessed that I would have made it this far, so I have decided that on my fiftieth post that I will reflect over the year and a half I've been posting on this blog as-well as future posts that I have planned.

This blog was not started by me but my sister, she and my mother both said that I should channel my enthusiasm for movies and actually write about them and I would always say "I'd love to". But I also don't like it when something gets forced on me and I get put on the spot, so naturally that's exactly what my sister did, she set the blog up right in-front of me and pretty me said to me right there and then "go on write something!". I don't like situations like this and if I was going to have a blog I wanted to do it in my own time so I just left it be for a while.

Then it came on me one night while I couldn't sleep and I was having a surge of enthusiasm for an animated movie I watched recently about a DC comic book character and I spent most of the time just typing away and then next thing I knew it was half three in the morning and I had produced my first movie review.

My first review is not that bad for my first time, I knew how to write movie reviews because I was continuously reading Roger Ebert's movie reviews (and I  still do) so I got the gist. Over the months I would review whatever I felt like and have continued to refine my writing style over the past forty-nine posts. I think the most important part of the blog is when I decided to do the Star Trek month, because it gave me a deadline to work to and helped discipline me and by the end I think you can see an obvious learning curve.

As for the posts that I'm most proud of is probably my Alan Moore Swamp Thing review, its still stands as the biggest thing that I've ever written and may just hold that title for a long time, the other is probably the Beck: Mongolian Chop Squad review, its a great anime and I think I put a lot of genuine emotions in that review. Others like the Supergods review I just feel are really well done and the Samsara review captures my enthusiasm for the movie.

If there are any regrets I have it's two things, one is that I have too many positive reviews on the blog, its because I'm very particular about the movies I see in the cinema and the bad ones I make an effort not to see again and to simply not think about. The other is that I never got to add Batman Under The Red Hood to my list of Great Movies while I was reviewing Batman movies in anticipation for The Dark Knight Rises, I don't really know why it was just something that slipped through the cracks, ow well I know I'll get round to it someday.

Finally for future posts, I have a lot planned. Firstly I plan to see both Seven Psychopaths and The Hobbit next week so you can expect reviews on those movies. Next I plan to have my last post the same it was last year a Best of the Year list. As for the posts that I plan to do but have no specific date for it planned are Grant Morrison's New X-Men, Punk Rock Jesus, American Gods, all the Superman Movies, Psycho Great Movie and Neil Gaiman's Sandman. Big projects in mind, no telling if I'll get to do them all through next year but I'll certainly try, beyond that I have a rule to myself that I will always keep up the average passe of at least one post per month.

Well here we all are with ambition and enthusiasm  for the next year, that is if we don't all DIE! on December the 22nd. As of now while I'm typing this my blog has had "16545" hits whether they be people looking for me, the reviews I write about or just people who came on the blog mistakenly I am thankful to all of them and I have no idea what I'm going to do for post 100.

What My Mother and I Don't Talk About edited by Michele Filgate is an interesting collection of essays. Various writers explore their estranged relationships or their very close ones. Others explore trying to have a conversation with their mother that doesn't involve their father. One has a deaf mother - that had different ramifications in growing up.

The editor Filgate says in the cover blurb, "Our mothers are our first homes, and that's why we're always trying to return to them. There's relief in breaking the silence. Acknowledging what we couldn't say for so long is one way to heal relationships with others, and perhaps most important, with ourselves."

I found this book and the essays quite touching. There was such a huge variety. I have to say - I loved my mother but took her for granted. I did move to Texas after college at age twenty-one. I came back to visit my mom and dad twice a year, taking so much for granted.

My mother passed away when I was thirty four years old. Frankly, that has affected me for the rest of my life. Conversations we could have had as adults, questions I did have, etc - no chance for them. I think that's why this book hit a nerve with me.   A winner from my library.

 I will say - if you don't talk to your mother.....consider doing so...before it's too late.

Is it possible for the youth to really listen to their parents when they give them advise, or do they have to live long enough to appreciate what they're telling them? At the same time do parents really know better than their kids, or are they just set by their own experiences?

There are many stories that put forward a similar dynamic about the tension that happens between a parent and child. What is the important element is how it paints it's world and characters and the voice it gives them.

Our first image is a mother and daughter sleeping face-to-face in a bed, they straighten out the room and head home. While driving an argument arises about Christine now wanting to be called Lady Bird and go off to attend New York college while her mother doubts her abilities, her retort is to roll out of the moving car giving her a cast for most of the movie.

Lady Bird's goal is simple yet so connectible. She wants to forge her own identity, she rejects the name her parents gave her in favour of one she gave herself, she doesn't listen to her mother or others telling her that there are more reasonable paths for her to take her future because she is unlike anyone else ever (in her mind). It is that time of adolescence where you begin to learn that the rules that the adults force on you are not absolute but at the same time you are probably self-obsessed. It's just something a lot of us go through.

Saoirse Ronan embodies the character perfectly. She is already a veteran actor and perfectly masks her thick Irish accent. Because of the situation dynamic it calls on her to shift moods quickly, take one scene where she's in the midst of arguing with her mother in a store and when her mother shows her a dress she becomes joyful, or another where it starts with her seeking sympathy from her friend but it turns into a heated argument. Good script-writing can only take it so far, it needs actors to bring it to life.

Laurie Metcalf is Lady Birds mother and she is the other great pillar of a character in the tale as well as the other great performance. There are moments where she has to internalise much but persevere. Two examples are when she is dealing with a patient and what they have to tell them is heartbreaking but she still needs to ask them essential questions. The other moment is when she's chatting with Lady Bird's boyfriend and he says something that hurts her, the expression of hurt flashes on her face very quickly but you can feel it in that half second she has to show it. 

As an experienced actor herself Greta Gerwig fits into the directing chair with great ease. Her shots are simple but greatly effective and her definite great power is to get extremely well crafted performances out of her actors. They are all perfectly capable actors themselves but Gerwig adjusts them for the right level of funny, furious, vulnerable and sad.

Because of Lady Bird's self obsession, it lends itself to revelations about other characters. She becomes more sympathetic to others and picks up on details. It is an organic and refreshing way of having character revelations that is not contrived.

Lady Bird has the same subject matter as many other movies that I could name. But what matters is how such subject matter is framed and crafted. It is framed by a woman that is in her thirties so she has been the adolescent daughter but is also entering the age of the mother so she is at a point where she can gauge both perspectives. It is an experience which eloquently portrays the zany energy and sass of youth and the melancholy of looking back as an adult.

Rating: 4 stars out of 4

Watching a movie like Snatched isn't the hardest thing in the world. There are groaners to sit through but then there are others where you get to laugh, so in the end you come out of it unscathed. But how to handle that as a reviewer and need to let people know if it's worth their time?

Emily (Amy Shumer) is bragging to a costumer that her career will lead her places and her successful boyfriend's in a grup band and they'll be going on a vacation. This is of course not very acceptable and is then fired, what does she care with her boyfriend? Unfortunately when she goes to meet him he breaks-up with her, she's is boyfriend and job less. So her life sucks now, it's not helped by the fact that the person that takes the greatest interest in her life is her mother Linda (Goldie Hawn) a woman that has no real life so obsesses over her children and snuggles in her home, never leaving. The vacation is non-refundable and being that none of Emily's friends wanna go with her it's a mother and daughter trip.

While staying at the hotel there's plenty of tension between mother and daughter, they just don't click, but she meets a man at the kafe and he genuinely seems interested in her. He takes her out of the hotel area and experience the culture, the next day Emily insists to her mother that she come along on a drive he has planned. During the drive a van slams into them, they then wake up in  a dingy prison with people telling them what do and where to go. Now they have to get out of their situation alive.

The comedy is mainly focused on the incompetence of this duo being placed in an environment completely beyond their control or some cringe moments. They are a mixed bag, some jokes genuinely do land while others are far too forced and fall really hard. Take one moment where Emily is stumbling drunk back to her hotel lobby after a night-out with the guy she met at the bar, the big punchline is pretty-much as low-bar as it can get. There is though another time when they meet someone to help them navigate their situation and what they do with this character is funny. As a whole though it has more hits than misses.

The weakest moments are when Shumer tries to be the high-point of the scene. These aren't generous moments and she's trying way too hard to be ridiculous, she's not afraid to look foolish but in her efforts that all she does, look foolish.

The most consistently funny character is the brother Jeffery (Ike Barinholtz) and his interactions with a middle management Morgan (Bashir Salahuddin). They have a dynamic that is is snappy and instantly satisfying. So much so that a movie based around these two would probably have been better.

What we have is a movie paring two funny women together and at times gives them material which will get a laugh out of you. Other times it goes too far and becomes obvious and you just have to sit there until the scenes over. This wont go down as an endearing comedies, nor the high-point of Jonathan Levine's career. But it is not dreadful either.

Rating: 2 1/2 stars out of 4

Mother! Is a movie by a man that operates his own way. The setup is a man and a woman live in a little house together, they are married, there's an age gap between them and there was a fire which ruined the house and she has spent the her time repairing it for the two of them. We never learn their names, nor anyone's in the movie, the characters operate on the roles in the piece.

Jennifer Laurence is put through the emotional ringer as someone that has to be naive, balancing frustration and then terrified of her situation and others.

The other cast members are here to serve as counterpoints to her character.  Either intruding on her barriers or in no way being civil or polite. They all do this to varying degrees, some creep through bit by bit before they say or do something that is blatant, others arrive and are instantly crass and detestable. 

The house itself is made almost entirely of fresh wood, a spiraling staircase take it's inhabitants up and down and has designs on the windows, floor and ceiling that probably don't serve any other purpose than to engrave themselves on the viewers mind. It sits in the middle of a green field that is surrounded by a seeming endless forest.

The wife and Him (Javier Bardem) are living their lives when suddenly there is a knocking at the door. It is a man (Ed Harris) that was wandering and just wants to say hello, he is invited in for a drink and then is also invited to spend the night. All at the behest of Him. Then eventually the mans wife (Michelle Pfeiffer) arrives at their door and is also staying at their house. As each new visitor seemingly just arrives Him is completely accepting of every new arrival and welcomes them into their home.

Aronofsky's main reoccurring theme throughout his work is characters that seek divinity but ultimately fall short due to the world or their own shortcomings. Here Laurence's character wants to create the perfect, idyllic home for herself and the man she loves. However he is not content with simply her love, he needs it from others.

The movie is, I suppose a horror, it certainly has moments of fright, terror and unease. In the sound department it is certainly one. Every little spec of sound, from the footsteps, the insects outside and others that come later on that will most likely disturb are sharply captures and layered.

When we reach the climax of the movie it is like Children of Men within The Amityville Horror. It is a roaring, swirling, completely mad experience where all of humanities savagery is displayed before us and at times is horrific and at some bits, pretty funny. Like a cartoon. Aronofsky doesn't believe in slow, delicate climaxes, he always goes all out and loud.

This is a slow movie that builds to a heavy handed finale of no subtlety. But at the same time you can see that this is the work of a great craftsman who also posses an original voice. Just the originality and way it plays-out is something worth seeing in a time of remakes and franchises. In terms of low scale horror it is not as finely tuned or effective as Get Out, as a larger vision it isn't as rich as A Cure for Wellness but that's also it's appeal as a whole, it isn't like anything else.

Rating: 3 stars out of 4

During the production of the first Superman movie, the production and the budget kept getting off schedule and Richard Donner had falling out after falling out with the Salkhinds, so much so that Donner just avoided them altogether. Donner was instructed to focus on just getting the first Superman movie finished. At this point half of Superman two was shot and when the first move came out it was a huge hit. But the Salkhinds were in charge and they were as sick of Donner as he was of them and he was booted out of Superman two and they brought in Richard Lester.

The Salkhinds were on good terms with Lester due to him previously directing one of their early hits, The Three Musketeers, in fact he was even one of their choices to direct the first movie. So even though most of Superman two was shot anyway, Donner was kicked off and Lester took over. Lester, legally, had to direct a certain percentage of the movie to have his credit as director. So new scenes were added and he even re-shot scenes that Donner previously did. The Slakhinds clearly had such detest for Donner, this could have not been the most financially efficient move, but they were that sick of him and so, there we have it.

Superman two's plot revolves around the three Kryptonian villains that we saw at the start of the first movie getting out of their imprisonment and reeking destruction on Earth. We then move to Metropolis were Clark Kent is still very mild menard and Lois Lane is still a witty gogetta. There is a terrorist plot in Paris and Lois is on the scene and Superman isn't far behind to the rescue. Superman throws the bomb into space and in all the vastness of the cosmos it hits the Kryptonian criminals floating mirror. They are now free and heading for Earth.

Later Clark and Lois visit a Niagara falls resort on a story and when Lois decides to clean Clark's glasses she notices that without them he looks a lot like that guy who flies around and catches her a lot...huh. It is with this...shocking revelation hat Lois Lane is beginning to put the pieces together and suspects that Superman and Clark Kent might be the same person. After one failed attempt she tosses the idea away but after a very clumsily handled scene her suspicions are confirmed.

I enjoyed Richard Lester's work on the Beatles movie A Hard Days Night, but there while the choppiness of the pacing and the editing worked to get across the quick passe and the quick punchline nature and style of the comedy, here it works less well. Some of the handling are as if Guy Richie worked on the script, with it just relying on cheap punchlines.

So Superman takes Lois to his fortress of solitude for some alone time and seeks advise, not from his father but from his mother? Another choice that was made was that they would cut out Brando from the movie, no more Jor-El, instead the focus is pushed onto the mother Lara (Susannah York). Now there's nothing wrong with having the focus be on the mother, but that's not what was built up from the first movie. The first movie was all about the father son relationship, this is of course because Brando was so expensive they didn't waste a second of his time and used him to his full benefit. Now it seems as though the filmmakers scraped him just so they could save the pennies.

The Kryptonian villains here are Ursa (Sarah Douglas) as a cool, shrill, sadistic vileness that loves what she does. Then there's Non (played by former former boxer Jack O'Halloran) as a huge lumbering brute, he's just the big tough one, theres nothing else to him him other than that, but  both the characters and the movie knows it so its OK and its used for some decent laughs. Then we have Zod, General Zod played by Terence Stamp. General Zod is one of the most enjoyable villains for a superhero movie history. He is both reasonably threatening, hilarious and so enjoyably two dimensional along with a deep voice that sounds electronically lowered. He is one of those villains that knows hes a villain and his constant demand that Superman "Kneel before him" is always a highlight that never gets old.

In the end we get a scene that makes the whole movie worth full price, even though most of it is solid. The scene where Clark Kent walks into the Daily Planet and and then has a painful heart to heart with Lois. Even though they love each-other there's is a love that can never be, because, as the old saying goes, the needs of the many out weigh the needs of the few. And so Clark is forced too erase Lois's memories of her knowing the truth about Clark's secret identity. This scene is on par with the death of Jonathan Kent and as anyone who has read my Superman review will know that I consider that scene one of the most prolific scenes for Superman. However how he does it is another subject altogether.

Clark erases Lois' memories, fair enough, but he does it through a kiss. How was he able to do that? when did he get that power? does this always happen when he kisses people? Questions, questions this scene raises (more so that the spinning of the Earth rotation, for some reason). For all its faults I think its because Superman never demonstrated this power in all of his previous history and so this just comes off as unnatural to fans of the Superman lore.

Even though Superman two has its problems, most of them I have knowing the behind the scenes problems, it still is a really solid sequel. It expands and raises the stakes from the first movie and expands on the sacrifices and responsibilities that come with being Superman.

Rating: 3 1/2 stars out of 4

And so, seeing the unquestionable success that MARVEL has been having with their shared cinematic universe DC have stumbled greatly to get to this point. But nothing was gonna stop this cinematic train so we just have to deal with it. 

What brings our different heroes together are three boxes called "Mother Boxes" if all three are brought together they'll destroy the world (basically). The one that is out to get all these Mother Boxes is a giant being named Steppenwolf (Ciaran Hinds), he's about ten feet high, clad in Armour, wields a large axe and spouts over-the-top dialog. His role is similar to Loki in Avengers (even to the point of wearing over extravagant headgear) but he lacks Hiddelston's charisma as well as fails to convey a real threat. He's just a big threat that is no more interesting or memorable that a generic video game boss.

The first members that have already been established are Batman (Ben Affleck) the dark brooder that is just a skilled human with great technical resources and detective skills. Wonder Woman (Gal Gadot), she was the best thing in Batman v Superman and her own movie was the best of these movies but also rather good. The same present here. The Flash, the speedster played by Ezra Miller. He is here to portray the every-man, being more trepidatious and a lot more dumbfounded when giant man and bug creatures appear. But he says some things that are just odd, it is a weird thing that writers do where they put in quirks and think they've made a character, they haven't, he gets better as the movie goes on but when he starts he might be an alien on Earth. Next is Aquaman (Jason Mamoa), he can breathe underwater, is very strong and wields a large five pronged spear (not a trident), he will probably be the breakout character, being a swaggering brawler. Finally is Cyborg (Ray Fisher), originally a young student named Victor Stone has now been transformed by the Mother Box technology and is fused with it.

Probably the worst kept secret and obvious plot point that any five year old could see coming is that Superman (Henry Cavil) returns (he died in the last movie). He does and he is much better here than in the previous two movies, he knows what smiling is, I believe he's an optimistic person and they gave color back to his costume instead of a grey filter.

Due to a family tragedy Snyder had to pull out of the movie. Most of it was completed but still needed finishing. Joss Wheadon stepped in and completed the project. There is only so much one can really affect a movie when probably over seventy five percent of it has been completed. Whether it be due to fan outcry or Wheadon inserting it in where he could there are much more smiles in this movie. Characters are smiling and aren't brooding constantly. Having one moody one on a team is fine (that's what Batman's there for) but the others need to bring a balance of different types of characteristics.

Also more present in the movie is color. They still use heavy amounts of black but they are contrasted with deeper, vivid colors of red, golds etc. This is a better direction to go, it keeps the color but visually distinguishes it from the MARVEL movies.

Probably the biggest failure of the movie is the score by Danny Elfman. Not at any point did I feel my spirits roused by the music and I cannot hum any of the score. It is unfortunately forgettable and not moving.

Unlike all the other movies this one does have a post credits scene. So if you are so inclined stick around and you wont just see the credits scroll by. 

So it has indeed been a very bumpy ride. It did not get off  to a good start at all and from there on it got worse. But now the pieces have come together and the simpulan result probably wasn't worth it but it also wasn't a complete disaster. It was actually rather serviceable.

Rating: 2 1/2 stars out of 4

"I was watching Poltergeist last month, I got a question. Why don't white people just leave when there's a ghost in the house?"
-Eddie Murphy

This isn't the main problem, but it is one of the many that plagues Hereditary.

Horror is a medium that at it's best reveals our deepest insecurities and troubles as people. This movie means nothing and simply seeks to gross and horrify us with, the images and sounds it slaps us with.

We open with a house and inside it is a family that is preparing for a funeral. It is the grandmother who has died and the mother, Annie, is dreading the ordeal. Meanwhile on the side is her daughter Charlie (Milly Shapiro) that keeps to herself, draws in her sketchbook and makes a clicking noise with her mouth. The son Peter is a pretty normal, apathetic teenager. We learn that Annie's mother was very nice at all during her life and won't be missed now she's passed. But just because she's passed doesn't she's done tormenting her daughter and grandchild and all sorts of strange things start happening from here on.

You get to a point where you've seen enough movies to have an understanding of typical genre movies. In comedy, you tell when there will be a misunderstanding or a bit of slapstick. Horror is one where you know if there is blank space on the screen then something will move or jump out, or when there will be a build-up to something and nothing will happen only for the character to take a breath and that is when the thing goes boo! This movie is guilty of being predictable. I could tell how the scenes were going to play as soon as they started.

For some of it you don't know where it's going then you don't care because all it's doing is stitching one gross-out, disturbing moment with the next to give you a tapestry of horror. It doesn't, it's just annoying.

In the recent years, we have gotten some original voices and experiences in horror movies. Like, Don't Breathe, Mother!, Get Out, A Cure for Wellness, A Quiet Place, Unsane and The Babadook. All of these movies tap into a core fear that individuals feel or the masalah of people as a whole and have a whole vision. These movies will be remembered, this one will be forgotten.

It is easy to overlook the acting when the concept doesn't work or the writing is garbage. But this movie does have actors that genuinely good performances. Toni Collette as Annie truly and clearly conveys terror across her face, I believe she is scared in these situations. Likewise, Alex Wolff has to be a few things over the course of the movie and does them all well. What a shame that these talented people and all their effort go into a big pile of garbage like this.

This movie is not boring, it is however frustrating. Frustrating in how it uses the most simple, stupidest tolls to scare you, when it doesn't, it just goes boo! Frustrating that all these actors and crew had to waste their time on a rotten project. Horror is a brilliant genre that can reveal things about ourselves, not this, it's just a waste.

Rating: 1 star out of 4

It is Juliane Moore's performance that is the bedrock of this entire movie. She has been given the task of playing an extremely difficult to portray disease and must show it through all of its levels of picking away at her character one piece at a time.

Alice Howland has just celebrated her fiftieth birthday, she is a Linguistics professor at Columbia University, she is as sharp as a knife. Being a married woman, a mother of three adults and even though she has a very complicated job she thrives on it. She is happy, but seems to be forgetting things, words, people she's already been introduced to, wisely she goes for a checkup at the doctors and it is revealed that she has a rather serious case of Alzheimer's.

Alice's husband John (Alec Baldwin) a scientist who's also very smart, takes the news hard, but endures it because he must, he undrestands the situation and will take what time he can get. But he is also a practical man that knows he must work and wont be able to take care of Alice all by himself. Her eldest daughter Anna (Kate Bosworth) a doctor, then there's her son Tom (Hunter Parrish) currently in college. Finally her youngest daughter Lydia, played by Katolik Stewart. She is an aspiring actress that lives in Los Angeles, she has a few auditions lined up and has an agent that could open a few doors for her. But Alice does not approve. Stewart is very real and grounded in the movie, she knows the situation but talks to her mother like one adult talking to another rather than the pandering tone that everyone else has.

Alice knows that the Alzheimer will eventually, slowly but surely take everything away from her so he deals with it the best she can. She writes a test for herself on her phone, such questions like "What street do you live on?", "What month were you born?", and "What is the name of your eldest daughter?". Her students write that her lessons have become confusing and inconsistent, so she promises that she will work harder to make them better, she still wants to teach for as long as she can.

Alice also has moments of selfishness. While walking with Lydia she talks about what she wants and one of them is to see her go to college, to which Lydia says "You can't use your disease to get people to do what you want" to which Alice replies "Why not?". Another time is when she goes running and decides to get for ice-cream, worrying her husband and missing their dinner plans. Another moment she says she "Wish I had cancer".

What works about Moore's performance is that she has built up the character so well at the start of the movie and then during the rest has to slowly dismantle her one piece at a time, but still she must be Alice. Alice doesn't give up, she likes to have her say in things and she loves her family.

I remember in my childhood that I would obsessively watch Disney's Aladdin. How essential are those memories to me? What movies or stray experiences have shaped me into the person that writes this blog now?

The movie decides to use depth of field to an interesting effect. During some shots Alice is in-focus and the rest of the world around her is blurred. It is a cute technique but still an effective one.

Still Alice is a movie that shows us a disease that hasn't been depicted much in movies. Moore brings an amazing, admirable (also selfish at times) character to life. She is also backed up by wonderful supporting actors with Baldwin and Stewart. The test for a movie is (among other things) do you remember it? And I will. I remember that Alice lost her mother and sister in a car accident, I remember this amazing family and I will think back on the wonderful scenes between Alice, John and Lydia that are filled with Nuances. I remember this movie and I will be enriched by it.

Rating: 4 stars out of 4

As the saying goes, "There's how you remember it, there's how history will remember it and there's what really happened." I, Tonya clearly has this in-mind from it's inception, where it shows a story recounted by different characters that all see themselves as the others victim, disagree on the details and apologise for just about nothing.

The focal point is obviously the character that the movie is named after, Tonya Harding. We get footage that is set-up like a TV special on the people (again, focusing on Tonya). We see her, played by Margo Robbie, her ex-husband Jeff Gillooly played by Sebastian Stan and her mother LaVona played by Alison Janey. There are a few others but these are the pillars of the plot. Basically Tonya was an Olympic competitor and took home a few medals in her life but never got a any real recognition. She started skating at a really early age and kept it up.

Skating is clearly what Tonya lives for and all other aspects have no class or stability what-so-ever. Robbie has always been cast with attractive characters in mind, to be sure they were defined and she was very good at playing all the other roles but here she plays a character that requires her to be very rough around the edges. She cusses, is put into gaudy outfits that she has to make herself and smears the make-up on too heavy. And is very much realised in her performance, a smart choice and a bold move on Robbie's part. 

Jeff describes his time with Tonya and her mother like he found himself between two of the craziest human beings ever, one would attack psychologically while the other would fire a shotgun at him, also he denies hitting Tonya. Alison Janney as Tonya's mother is one of the great beasts in movies. She operates on tough love and that greatness is forged in fire, so she makes Tonya's life hell. It takes something for an actor to play this kind of character There are people that deal with challenges differently, some thrive with a challenge, others do better in calmer environments and others channel stress or naysayers into their best work. It seems that Tonya is the latter of these examples, when she has both mulut and physical abuse in her life right up to the point she skates she does what almost no other woman did in ice skating. When it's the closest to stable/healthy she misses the landing.

An element that the movie puts forward is that Tonya never brought home the gold or even the silver or the bronze because her great skating didn't come in a pretty package. They want to present their winners and the besets prettiest girls from classic, wholesome American families. She was not this and therefore got a few points deducted.

I don't know about any pelatihan Robbie went through for the skating scenes, in-fact it's not even necessary these days, through digital manipulation you can put an actors face over the actual sportsman and you'd never know, there were also a few times when I could tell that her whole body was C.G.I.  However none of this is really a detriment, I don't need to know how much the actor put themselves through for a role or what parts aren't authentic, what matters is what is on-screen before us. They are the highlights of the movie. The camera comes alive most in moments when the facts are ambiguous and it follows a character running and such, but there is the truest example of adding camera motion to give life to a scene in the sequences where she skates. 

How accurate the movie itself is may vary on of few of the moments, that is however to be expected, we still need a movie to flow narratively and adjust itself accordingly so to work as a movie. But how could it ever be properly chronicled with events this crazy and people in it this warped? It couldn't really, what really happened happened and some things are indisputable while others we'll have to just choose to believe. However one thing is for certain, at the end they show footage of some of the real people an how accurately they captured them, some of the footage is of Tonya skating, she sure was a great skater. 

Rating: 3 1/2 stars out of 4

Horror is a genre that needs to strike deep with its audience. It needs to be about real things that linger in the audience's mind after watching. There can be jump-scares but it's the ideas and concepts that it puts forward that need to grab you and then work their way under your skin. Crimson Peak delivers with a classic setup and visuals, only there's more effort and thought injected into all of its veins that you will be pumping it through your system for years to come.

We open with a girl named Edith (Mia Wasikowski) telling us that "Ghost's are real"  she met her first one after her mother died. It happened after the funeral, as she lays in-bed her mother came back to her to deliver only one message "Beware Crimson Peak." Cut to years later and she has become a very bright independent young woman that fancies herself an author, she tries to get her manuscript published (it's not really a ghost story, it's more of a story with a ghost character in it) but the publisher says it "needs a love story." As she re-writes her story a visiting businessman enters her life, the all-black-wearing, very English Thomas Sharpe, he needs financing for his estate that is dwindling, he is taken with Edith and love begins to bloom. But in the corners always glaring is Thomas sister Lucile (Jessica Chastain). The plot and many of the visuals are right out of any classic Gothic Horror/Romance, for the fans of Jane Eyre and Frankenstein they will feel right at home with the setting and the characters.

Mia Wasikowski as Edith is the right fit for this type of heroine, she is fragile having been kept in a gilded cage all her life but still is true to her convictions and beliefs. Tom Hiddleston seems to be channeling Basil Rathbone with his stature and old-school English delivery. Jessica Chastain has come a long way from her breakout role in The Tree of Life, now she is the personification of jealousy, resentment, and control, think of the evil step-mother, only a step-sister.

The imagery that Del Toro creates is some truly terrifying sight's to behold. He puts such care and thought into every aspect of his movies, things that would seem throw-away are given that much more effort from him and become so more enriching. Take for example a hand that grabs young Edith, it reaches out through pure darkness, the hand itself is also pure black, has long witch'like fingers and when they clasp around her shoulder the fingers start at the back of the hand and wrap around her. So much effort was put into the simple action of a hand grabbing our main characters shoulder to make it as creepy and as memorable as can be. Everything from the type of clothes the characters wear, from their mannerism to their beliefs is thought-through and displayed with either their dialog, costume and/or surroundings. It is what Del Toro has described as "Not eye candy but eye protein."

Next, we move to a new location and meet a new character all-in-one. Allerdale Hall, the Sharpe's mansion, is one of those movie locations that will take residence within your mind for the longest time. It is like the house in The Haunting or the castle in Beauty & The Beast or many other great striking movie locations. It is a high reaching building where the roof has been eroded away so the weather outside drifts in, the architecture was probably designed by a mad genius, the archways have spikes around them that make the hallways look like a long razor mouth and parts of it have come to life with moss and moths that have also made it home.

Locations can become characters in movies, even some instances where a soundtrack can become a character. But this is the first movie I've seen where I would say that a color has become a character, said color being red. It is so integral to the imagery and the story that you can't do without it. There are many other vivid colors for contrast and texture that create a lush palette on-screen, but it is the red that highlights and clues the audience to what is important.

Guillermo Del Toro delves deep into whatever movie he creates. He researches and refines the genre he works in. Hellboy was his Superhero, Pan's Labyrinth his fairy-tale and Pacific Rim was his monster movie. Crimson Peak is his ghost story, with as much thought, effort and intelligence put into it as the genre has ever had and maybe more than it deserves. But Del Toro puts it in any way, because it's for love.

Rating: 4 stars out of 4

What world am I living in? If you wound the clock back to 2012 and say that there's a new DC cinematic universe coming and Batman and Superman will be the disasters but Wonder Woman, Aquaman, and now Shazam! will be the winners of the bunch, I'd have looked at you like you were bonkers. Yet here we are, a movie about a beloved character from the comics that I'd thought would never get his own movie and if he did it would be forced through that dark or complex filter that DC movies seem to put most of their characters through. I am so happy this is not the case and we've got what we got.

Side note, this character was referred to as "Captain Marvel" for a long time, but due to legal reasons, it has been changed to Shazam which adds a whole lot of complications to it. I guess obviously if this movie was out and Captain Marvel that would lead to a very confused audience, both in the movie theaters and in the comic stores.

The setting is not of the dark gritty crime-ridden streets of Batman, the high tech science fiction of Superman, the mythological scale of Wonder Woman but a realm of magic, as in true fantasy magic, wizards, words, robes, and staffs. This gives the character and now the movie it's own unique tone and personality to distinguish itself amongst its competition.

Our tale begins on a dark snowy night where a little boy is in the back of a car and his father is driving and elder brother is in the front.  The elder brother and father clearly get along and care very little for him. But suddenly the little boy is transported to a deep cave with statues and an old man with a long beard, covered in long robes and holding a staff. This old man is a wizard (Djimon Housou) that offers this little boy great power, but the statues (that represent the seven deadly sins) tempt the boy to take an evil eye, this was a test and he has failed so he is cast out. Back to his old, loveless relatives.

We are then taken to years later and a little boy is at a carnival with his mother, trying to win him a toy tiger. She can't win the tiger but does get him a compass. While walking through the crowd the two get separated, the boy is taken in by the police and his mother never comes for him, he is alone. Skipping again to years later, now present day and the boy has grown up a few years into an early teenager and his name is Bill Batson (Ashner Angel), he's been in and out of foster homes for years always looking for his mother. Now he is in Philadelphia and put into another home. This one of the Vazquez, who have adopted many foster children. One of which is Freddy (Zack Dylan Grazer) who requires a crutch to walk but certainly never lets that get his spirits down.

Now in the present, the little boy in the car has grown up to become Dr. Thaddeus Sivana (Mark Strong). he has been searching for years for a way to get back into that mysterious realm of the wizard, fortunately for him he has now found it and takes the dark power for himself, unleashing the seven deadly sins from captivity and upon the world. So now we have our villain!

So, in his desperation, Billy Batson is taken to the cave and offered the power f the wizard known as Shazam! The powers are mean to be bestowed on a person with a pure heart but Billy is simply a good enough person. So when he speaks the wizards name a bolt of lightning hits him and he is transformed into a full grown man in his very own super suit, light up logo, cape and everything.

It is the casting of Zachary Levi as Shazam that is the cornerstone for the movie's success. He is so unashamedly a big kid, from his energy to his broad expressions you believe that there is a child working this adult body.

This movie takes place in the winter and within the gray streets of a city, but it is the characters clothing that makes them pop. Each character has their main color, Billy is red, Freddy is blue, another is purple, another is green and the villain wears black. This is a color move and a stylized superhero one so naturally, people are color-coordinated.

So now that he has been granted the body of an adult and has superpowers what to do now? Test them out! In a montage set to Queens Don't Stop Me Now where Billy along with Freddy test out his new body and see what its capable of. This sequence is for the audience to learn what powers Shazam has too as well as a simple serving of fun. These are children that have been handed these amazing abilities, of course, this is how they'd go about it.

This movie knows what it wants to be. It knows that it wants to tell a superhero story from the perspective of a child that isn't taking this all too seriously so neither are the filmmakers. It knows to insert it's tongue firmly in its cheek. However, this is probably the movie the be the most emotionally heavy, some filmmakers believe that dark equals emotional, it does not, something does not have to be dark it just needs to mean something of great importance to the characters and for you to be able to connect to it. If it's all dark then it's just unpleasant, but with the right amount of balancing between colorful and heavy emotional moments, then you have a truly whole experience.

As a fan of Superman and Batman, I am saddened by them getting poor treatment movies, but they have already had their good treatments and left their cinematic mark. It is time for new characters to get their time in the sun and for people to learn about their unique mythos and characters. I wholeheartedly embrace the renaissance of the underdog superheroes getting the treatment they deserve. This movie is fun, dark, emotional and well crafted, like an Ablin movie at their peak.

Rating: 3 1/2 stars out of 4

St. Vincent is like a nice hug from a person you don't really get along with. You know there not perfect, and you are more aware of their flaws, but you know the hug is genuine.

The movie follows Vincent MacKenna, a drunk, gambler, fowl mouthed loaner that hires a pregnant prostitute named Daka, played by an unrecognisable Naomi Watts. He doesn't really like people that much. Things don't go well when his new neighbours moving truck crashes into his tree which breaks the branch and crushes his car and fence. Vincent demands that Maggie Bronstein pay for the fence and the branch, he'll sue the moving company.

Bill Murray is as good here as he was in Lost in Translation. He is very controlled, not being a over the top but a real person. He uses more comedy but as a fallback for his uncomfortableness around other people. He does however put on a Brooklyn accent which he sometimes uses for certain parts, its ok at times but he never commits to it all the way.

Melissa McCarthy is also very good here. She is more real than we have ever seen her, she's a mother that is divorced from her cheating husband and works hard to make sure she can support her child. This isn't a character we haven't seen before but the character is so well drawn that McCarthy is able to bring her to life in a realised way. It was probably also a wise decision for her to have a straight role under her belt before she becomes too typecast.

But the true stand-out is Jaeden Leiberher as Oliver. He is synical beyond his years, there are the regular child actors, good child actors and there are the phenomenons. Leiberher is able to hold his own alongside McCarthy and Murray, two well established film stars. This is a kid with a bright future.

Oliver goes to a catholic school, even though he "thinks he's Jewish" his teacher, Brother Geragthy (Chris O'Dowd), welcomes all faiths from Buddhism, agnostic, he is Catholic which he of-corse says "Is the best religion because it has the most rules." He encounters bullies, as must every child in movies it seems. He takes the bus home because his mother works so much to support them.

Eventually Oliver and Vincent's paths cross, and Vincent sees a chance to make some babysitting money. This movie is the american eqivalent of About a Boy, although the main character in this movie might be even more dysfunctional than Hugh Grants character.

This is a movie that is hard to pull-off. It needs a character that is grizzly on the outside, but has a warm centre but at the same time be a believable human being. These are not real people but they are charming in their own way and are as good as they can be.

Rating: 3 1/2 stars out of 4

Jon