Samara Weaving as Bee Judah Lewis as Cole Emily Alyn Lind as Melanie Robbe Amell as Max
Release Date
2017
Language(s)
English
Running Time
85 minutes
The Babysitter is a mixed experience to say the least. The story follows Cole, your typical bullied nerdy kid and his babysitter, Bee, who acts as his friend, guardian, and confidante. Late one night, he finds out that his beloved Bee is actually the head of a satanic cult and has to find a way to get out of her cult’s clutches.
The setup for the plot isn’t awful . A kid with confidence issues finds out his babysitter, one of the few people he genuinely cares about, is head of a demonic cult and must find a way to survive. It leaves a lot of avenues to be explored. Unfortunately, the movie doesn’t make use of any of them. The nature of the satanic cult is never really messed around with. No cool ritual stuff or fun gimmicks. Interactions between cult members hint at a history between them (potentially funny) , but that’s never explored. Characters get no time to breathe or give us a reason to root for or against them.None of the cult members outside of Bee and Max (the crazy jock of the group) feels fleshed out so they come off as annoying caricatures. This second problem spills outside of the cult as well. A lot of the supporting cast feels useless or tacked on. Outside of Melanie, Cole’s best friend, no one is utilized properly.
Direction ranges from strange to slightly better than expected. The score is typical for the type of movie this is, so while it doesn’t distract, it doesn’t lend itself to leaving a big impression. The movie makes use of floating words and pauses to create a strange comic-book feeling. It didn’t really work for me and I thought it was kind of strange. It didn’t add anything thematically and if it was an attempt at satire, it came off strange.
Speaking of satire, the movie is pretty hit-or-miss with its attempts at being funny with the genre. It doesn’t fully embrace the absurdity of camp like Dude Bro Party Massacre IIIand isn’t as clever as The Cabin in the Woods. It’s pretty on the nose about things, so if you’re looking for subtlety look elsewhere. I thought some of the moments worked, but others felt tacked on. The satire also isn’t properly integrated with the theme at the heart of the story- facing your fears and growing up. If it was, I think a lot of the movie could have been elevated. In fact, the reason I liked Max, is precisely because his absurdity and depiction with Cole directly ties in to the latter’s growth.
You see, despite my criticisms, I do enjoy the story’s exploration with growing up. Cole’s coming-of-age journey is just a more extreme version of things a lot of us have gone through, and I think the movie really nailed it. The relationship between Bee and Cole is actually pretty sweet and well-established so watching him deal with the revelation feels meaningful. Weaving’s performance certainly helps sell the emotional undercurrent of the story . It’s easy to see why Cole would be devastated at the revelation of Bee’s true nature, but on the flip side easy to see how good she was at manipulating him.
REPORT
TLDR
The Babsitter has some interesting ideas but rarely manages to be anything more than average. There are cute character moments but unfortunately they never manage to elevate the story to the next level. If you like Samara Weaving or are in the mood for a cheesy teen black comedy then this movie might hit the spot.
Rating
6.3/10
Grade
D
Go to Page 2 for the spoiler discussion. Go to Page 3 to view this review’s progress report .
Samara Weaving as Grace Le Domas Mark O’Brien as Alex Le Domas Adam Brody as Daniel Le Domas
Release Date
2019
Language(s)
English
Running Time
95 minutes
As someone who loved Samara Weaving’s performances in both The Babysitter and Mayhem, I knew I had to watch this movie. I didn’t even watch a trailer – I just went in expecting to see a fun Weaving movie. I got that and so much more. Ready or Not is funny, clever, and brutal all at the same time.
The story follows Grace as she’s made to play a game of hide-and-seek after marrying into the wealthy Le Domas family. Except in this game, getting caught means being killed. What follows is an intense cat and mouse situation where Grace and the Le Domas family constantly seek to out maneuver the other party. What keeps these moments fresh is the circumstance under which the game is played and the family operates. I won’t spoil it, but the movie keeps you guessing on what’s really going to happen the whole time. Up until it was over, I didn’t know what was actually going to happen.
Even after having only seen the movie once in theaters and once for this review, I can remember most of the characters and their personalities fairly well. This movie, unlike a lot of other ones with big casts, doesn’t feel like it wastes any of its characters. There are clear motivations for each member – which is even more impressive when you realize how large the Le Domas family actually is. Yes, some of the arcs or backgrounds aren’t amazing or profound, but the fact that they are there at all is impressive.
Weaving absolutely kills it in her portrayal of Grace. She’s funny, wide-eyed, resolute, bad-ass, desperate, and everything in between. Her energy shines through and makes it really easy to root for Grace. It gives you a reason to care about the story and I found myself invested in the outcome. I think Brody’s performance as Daniel (Grace’s brother-in-law) was also fairly well done. He showed complexity and nuance and has some of the best character moments in the movie.
The movie’s discourse on families is interesting and doesn’t feel ham-fisted. Grace wants to be in the family because she’s always been alone- so for her family is a safe place. Meanwhile, her husband Alex resents his family for the practices they engage in so he wants to run away – but he still feels the need to follow tradition- which highlights just how strong family can influence the ordering of our desires. The way the parents evaluate their children’s’ spouses speaks volumes in what qualities they consider valuable. The perversion of family values is where the movie shines and the way it frames that discussion in relation to wealth adds another layer to think about.
Now for the problems. There are some character decisions in the third act that feel a bit off. They’re not incomprehensible, but they feel like they could have been developed a bit more so they wouldn’t feel as sudden. There are also some procedural issues I had with what knowledge what characters had about the mystery at the core of the plot. It feels like certain people should know things that would radically change their actions, but they don’t. Finally, there are moments where the camera feels/is handheld which takes away from the grandiose aesthetic. I wish the shots were stable throughout/moved only during more action-y scenes. This issue felt even more prominent on my second viewing. None of these problems are enough to make the movie bad, but they do lessen the themes the movie builds towards.
REPORT CARD
TLDR
Ready or Not is a clever twist on the comedic slasher genre. The plot is well-paced and will keep you guessing about what’s going to happen up till the very end. There are some story issues that creep up in the third act, but they can’t detract from the absurdly fun journey/ending. If you enjoyed Knives Out,you may also like this. It’s weird – but this movie feels like a spiritual horror version of that one.
Rating
9.0/10
Grade
A
Go to Page 2 for the spoiler discussion. Go to Page 3 to view this review’s progress report .
Talitha Bateman as Janice Lulu Wilson as Linda Stephanie Sigman as Sister Charlotte Anthony LaPaglia as Samuel Mullins
Release Date
2017
Language(s)
English
Running Time
110 minutes
Sketches for the Annabelle doll. The Annabelle doll takes center frame as Samuel (Anthony LaPaglia) makes its other body parts. Samuel brands the doll’s box. Esther (Miranda Otto) and Samuel (Anthony LaPaglia) tickle Annabelle (Samara Lee).The Annabelle doll starts innocent enough as a toy. It’s creator lives a happy life with his family and everything seems right.
A man begins to create the infamous “Annabelle” doll introduced in The Conjuring. He gets to work crafting the different parts of the toy; its hollow face takes center frame as it waits to be filled in and made whole. The finished doll is put into a box which the dollmaker, Samuel Mullins (Anthony LaPaglia), brands with his seal.
As he finishes, a note is slipped underneath his workroom’s door: “Find me.” Samuel gives chase; the note marks the start of a hide-and-seek game with his daughter, Annabelle (Samara Lee). He finds the young girl and promptly showers her with affection along with his wife, Esther (Miranda Otto). The loving parents dote on their daughter; the Mullins family is whole and their residence radiates with warmth.
The camera rotates and sweeps around the church……to reveal the Mullins family. The family waits on the road as their vehicle stalls out. Annabelle’s doll lays broken on the road. The title card is branded in with flames. The story moves 12 years forward – Annabelle’s gravesite becomes a threshold. But things turn for the worse very quick. The camera whips and flips around a church to signify the changing fates. Annabelle is brutally killed and the joyous mood collapses. The childlike innocence of the doll is broken in as the title card is “branded” in. The tragic site becomes the cursed threshold the orphans cross.
But these happy times are doomed to come to an end. The camera whips and flips around a church signifying the shift in fates while the family makes their way out of the service. On their way back home, their car stalls out and the trio waits on the road; something awful is about to happen.
A car approaches in the background. We notice it creeping in. Esther calls attention to the vehicle. The horrific realization of what’s to happen begins to dawn. Yet, when Annabelle runs in front of the car to retrieve a stray bolt and is promptly killed, the shock is all the same. Her broken doll occupies the frame: innocence has been destroyed. The title card is “branded” in with flames; the seeds of this horror story have now been sown. Then, the film cuts to 12 years later on a view of Annabelle’s grave-marker, and a bus of young orphaned girls passes by on route to the Mullins residence. Their crossing of the tragic threshold signifies the something sinister approaches them as well.
Janice and Linda hold onto their dolls. Janice (Talitha Bateman) uses the stair-helper. Janice (Talitha Bateman) is framed against the hellish glass-paned balcony. Janice (Talitha Bateman) sits by the stairs as Annabelle (Samara Lee) stands in the background. Janice and Linda’s invocation of the dolls draws a harrowing connection given Annabelle’s death and the nature of the demonic entity we’re familiar with. This feeling is confirmed as Janice explores the house. She enters an evil domain where what seems to be the spirit of the deceased Annabelle waits for her in the looming darkness.
However, the girls inside the vehicle are none the wiser to the horrors that await. They’ve struggled to find a place to stay while waiting to be adopted and the group’s caretaker, Sister Charlotte (Stephanie Sigman) sees the invitation from the Mullins to stay as a blessing from God. Meanwhile, a duo within the girls, Janice (Talitha Bateman) and Linda (Lulu Wilson), sit with their own dolls closely in hand, hopeful that the Mullins residence is just a stop on the road to their dream of being adopted together by a nice family.
They make their way into the residence and director David F. Sandberg gives us a tour of the abode in a James Wan-esque one-shot that sees the girls traverse their newfound home. At the end of the house tour, Janice gets into a stair-helper machine meant to help her manage her polio-related mobility issues and get around the house. Excitedly, she gets onto the machine and heads up the stairs to explore her new environment.
But as the camera pans from a hellish red-stained glass balcony that envelops the frame to reveal Janice emerging from the end of the structure, it’s clear her journey is going to evil places. The next shot confirms as much as a young girl that looks like the deceased Annabelle shows up in the looming dark space to the right of Janice which threatens to envelop her.
Far from being a godsend, the Mullins residence is a malevolent location fraught with demonic forces that seek Janice out from the outset. It’s from this backdrop that Sandberg and writer Gary Dauberman seek to not only explain how the Annabelle doll came to bewithin the larger context of the The Conjuring franchise while making sense of the convoluted logic of the previous franchise entry, Annabelle(also written by Dauberman), that attempted to do the same but also tell Janice and company’s story in a compelling manner in its own rite. Juggling one film is difficult enough but course correcting a former entry while maintaining a tonal consistency with it is a whole other task, and Creation deserves praise for mostly succeeding in its efforts.
The film improves upon its predecessors failures in two distinct fashions: first, it engenders a sense of goodwill towards its protagonist, Janice, by showcasing her personal struggles and developing her interactions with other characters to make her feel sympathetic; second, it streamlines the narrative to focus on Janice and her personal battle to furnish faith in a seemingly desolate world instead of trying to posture and tack on additional overarching, possibly conflicting thematic ideations.
By keeping the narrative and thematic throughlines easy to keep track of, the film is able to bracket its more generic supernatural set-pieces around a story that’s emotionally compelling enough to hold interest; simple parallels serve as markers that make tracking Janice’s journey through the otherwise contrived horror trappings easy to comprehend. Her friendship with Linda serves as a counterpoint to the potential possession by the Annabelle-like specter; one girl represents a path towards a fantasy while the other gestures towards nightmares. This dichotomy is extended through the presence of the film’s different dolls. Both girls have their own more innocent dolls and see them as extensions of one another. These figures represent a faith in a future where they’re together in the same home. Meanwhile, the Annabelle doll represents an evil that seeks to take refuge within, making a home out of its victim – an inversion of the idyllic dream shared by the girls.
However, the film does stumble occasionally when it shifts focus to the other girls – far less interesting characters who serve as little more than reminders of Janice’s alienation. Their segments create moments of temporary visceral engagement that leave little lasting impact, especially in the context of what the film sets out to do; the constant barrage of them, especially in relation to such tangential characters, end up raising questions regarding why the demonic forces present have not swiftly dealt with whatever they needed. When we see the evil entities wreak obscene havoc in spite of safeguards, it becomes hard to ignore when it then then pulls punches and leaves like the most obnoxious “practical joker” after getting a reaction. Cutting out these bloated sections would help the narrative maintain its momentum and avoid undermining the tension generated by the supernatural set-pieces related to Janice’s story.
Thus, while Creation is a step up from its predecessor and does a much better job at establishing the foundation for the Annabelle doll, it never becomes greater than the sum of its parts – a shame given Sandberg’s competence at building the set-pieces proper.
REPORT CARD
TLDR
Annabelle: Creation, sees Director David Sandberg tasked with righting the mythos surrounding the Conjuring franchise’s Annabelle doll. While he manages to establish a background story that works, both as explanatory mechanism and narrative in its own right, the constant barrage of temporarily upsetting but overall unmemorable horror set-pieces drag the better parts of the movie down. It’s competently put together and features performances that will get viewers to care, but it’s a disappointment given the skill hinted at.
Rating
7.3/10
Grade
C+
Go to Page 2 for the spoiler discussion and more in-depth analysis. Go to Page 3 to view this review’s progress report .
Mckenna Grace as Judy Warren Patrick Wilson as Ed Warren Vera Farmiga as Lorraine Warren Madison Iseman as Mary Ellen Katie Sarife as Daniela Rios
Release Date
2019
Language(s)
English
Running Time
106 minutes
I didn’t like Annabelle. I did likeAnnabelle: Creation. Both Wilson and Farmiga have been great in the other Conjuring movies they’ve been in, so when I saw the trailer for this movie I had real hope. The Warrens and Annabelle – maybe it could be as good as the movies in the main franchise. The movie even starts off with a bait, introducing Ed and Lorraine as they’re on their way back home with the Annabelle doll ready to be stored away. They get it in it’s iconic case and emphasize its power. Then they disappear from the movie and we get to the absurd mess that is the main story line.
The movie follows Judy, the Warrens daughter, and the mishaps that occur when her parents go off…to do something? Anyways, she’s left with her babysitter Mary for the day. Mary’s friend Daniela then comes over and opens and touches everything in the Warren’s demonic possession room. Then Annabelle gets loose and releases OTHER DEMONS to be menacing to the girls and the movie chronicles their miserably boring endeavors to fight them off. Another Annabelle movie where Annabelle doesn’t do anything of her own account. It’s like what’s the point of making these spin-off movies if you’re not going to actually expand on the character or make them more menacing in their own right.
Speaking of menacing- nothing in this movie is. All the “monster of the weeks” are poorly set up through lazy exposition and have no meaningful significance to any of the characters. They’re all just cheap attempts at recapturing the magic of creatures like the Nun or the Crooked Man but they don’t work. It’s sad because the movie is actually shot pretty well. There are some nice tracking shots that amplify the tension. If the scares took advantage of those the movie could have been so much more effective. There are plenty of great scenes early on where there are just scary apparitions in the background waiting- but the movie doesn’t know how to deal with them outside of fake-out jump scare. It gets repetitive which makes the 3rd act of the movie feel like the same scene happening in succession.
The whole movie just feels like a missed opportunity. So many cool ideas don’t get teased out properly.Exploring the life of a child ostracized because of her parents demonology background is interesting and I thought the movie would be a family drama centering around that issue. Instead, it’s ignored and never develops into anything meaningful. Exploring the Annabelle doll’s actual power? Nah, let’s let her summon other spirits instead. Have a good reason for someone to enter the room and do anything? Nah, we can just skirt around the issue and give her some vague sad backstory. It’s all just unsatisfying, especially when all the pieces to resolve these questions are present in the story. Heck you could even have the babysitter and her friend- just introduce them naturally and have the inciting incident be more believable. I don’t know – it just feels sloppy.
REPORT CARD
TLDR
Annabelle Comes Home feels like a series of missed opportunities wrapped up into a generic feeling horror movie. The Warrens are barely in the movie , so don’t hold your breath if your expecting this to feel like The Conjuring. It’s just a sad imitation.
Rating
4.8/10
Grade
F
Go to Page 2 for the spoiler discussion. Go to Page 3 to view this review’s progress report .
Sharni Vinson as Erin A.J. Bowen as Crispian Davison
Release Date
2013
Language(s)
English
Running Time
94 minutes
I swear after I first saw this movie, I was certain a sequel would drop eventually, but unfortunately it seems like that’s not the case. It’s a shame because You’re Next has all the ingredients necessary for a classic slasher movie: stylish kills, great villain design, a dry perverse black humor, and a wonderfully bad ass main character in Erin. The premise- a rich family is targeted by unknown assailants and have to fight for their lives- is simple enough, but its execution shows a real understanding of the craft.
What immediately set this movie apart from others for me is how thought out the story feels. Character motivations are present even for the bad guys so everything has a human element to it. Erin is immediately likable and is a great protagonist to latch onto. Sharni is a bad ass and from the way she carries herself up to the way her character takes charge, it’s apparent that she’s not going to be a pushover. The killers each have different face masks corresponding to a different animals which represent their personality traits. It’s subtle character work that goes a long way in making the group of villains feel distinct aesthetically. The members of the rich family feel nice and distinct in the few moments they get to interact with each other. I wasn’t expecting so many characters to feel so unique.
The reason the characters feel so memorable is because of how odd they all are. The family might be rich, but that doesn’t mean they’re any more functional than a middle or lower class family. The earlier scenes where they play off each other are great, even if the delivery of some of the lines feels wonky. Someone’s always got something strange enough to say to add a “unique” sense of humor to scenes. I personally thought the movie was hilarious (intentionally). I appreciate dry in-your-face humor that’s predicated on the absurdity of what occurs. I think it’s a more acquired taste so if you don’t think it’s funny watching it, I wouldn’t be surprised. But I think watching it from the point of view of a comedy makes the viewing experience more memorable and might be something you consider trying out.
Despite nailing most of important stuff, the movie suffers from a lack of impact. What I mean is that we barely get a chance to gauge the characters relations among each other, so when people start dropping it doesn’t feel like anything.It’s a shame because the few moments they talk to each other had me laughing, but all of that is pushed to the wayside for immediate action.That might be good if you just want a constant source of action, but that’s not my cup of tea. The movie also struggles to balance its tone at times. It wants to be funny but then acts too seriously at other moments to let the humor breathe. It makes it hard to process, especially when the third act starts.
REPORT CARD
TLDR
If you like weird humor that’s dark and kind of perverse and also enjoy gory slashers, then You’re Next is made for you. There’s a sensible story, aesthetically interesting villains, and a great protagonist waiting to be discovered. Just be wary of strange tonal shifts and bare-bones characterization.
Rating
8.2/10
Grade
B
Go to Page 2 for the spoiler discussion. Go to Page 3 to view this review’s progress report .
Jessica Rothe as Tree Israel Broussard as Carter Phi Vu as Ryan
Release Date
2019
Language(s)
English
Running Time
100 minutes
I was so happy when I saw that Happy Death Day was getting a sequel. I actually went to this movie on opening week and remember leaving the theater feeling immensely satisfied. After watching it again recently, I’ve come to understand why. It’s like every problem I had with the first movie has been resolved in this one. The movie makes the brave decision to ACTUALLY expand on the ideas (if only all sequels could do this) which help it carve out an interesting little niche.
The movie picks up immediately after the first one and it’s revealed that the cause of all the time loops is Ryan’s science invention. After a series of mishaps, Tree ends up sent to a parallel dimension and is forced to find a way to escape the baby faced killer again. The sci-fi addition to the franchise gives it some much needed personality and makes the gimmick something more interesting. The way the characters end up reacting to the new knowledge gives us a ton of fun creative scenes that really push the black comedy aspect.
Characters from the past movie get more to do in this one. Because it’s a new universe, everyone shows a different side of themselves which gives Tree a lot of room to navigate and form new opinions. It makes people from the first movie feel more layered and is a fun play on the butterfly effect. It also gives the movie a more poignant emotional core that really made me feel for Tree. Speaking of Tree, Jessica Rothe kills it again in her performance. She’s given more room to have fun in this one and she takes a lot of pleasure in it.
Unfortunately, the one area the movie didn’t really improve on is the horror element of everything. The killer and their motivation in the first movie was pretty whack so I was curious to see how it would play it out in this one, and while it’s believable to an extent, it also feels kind of out there.
The pacing of the movie also feels off- there’s one moment in the third act where it feels like the movie has a natural ending, but then it keeps on going. It’s not that the extension feels bad. In fact, what happens makes a lot of sense- but it feels like it’s missing the polish the rest of the movie had. Maybe a subplot should have been removed and some events should have happened in a different order. I don’t know. It’s just a weird anomaly. The end credit scene does give me hope that the third movie (Please come out) does some crazy stuff, so here’s to that.
REPORT CARD
TLDR
Happy Death Day 2U takes everything that was good from the first movie and amps it up. There’s a more interesting story, better character building, and even more fun levels of absurdity. The movie is more science fiction that it is horror, so if you’re expecting focused slasher you may want to look elsewhere.
Rating
8.4/10
Grade
B
Go to Page 2 for the spoiler discussion. Go to Page 3 to view this review’s progress report .
Groundhog’s day meets teen-comedy meets slasher movie –Happy Death Day isn’t incredibly original, but what it lacks in creativity it makes up in unabashed fun. The story follows Tree, a troubled sorority girl who finds herself trapped in a sinister loop that restarts every time she’s killed by a baby masked killer. As she desperately tries to figure out who’s coming for her she’s forced to confront her fears – both physical and emotional.
If there’s one reason to watch this movie, it’s Jessica Rothe’s performance. She gives the story a real personality which keeps it feeling spunky and fresh as opposed to tired and outdated. She’s rude, unresponsive, and miserable with herself and everyone around her. Watching her slowly come to realize her situation and adapt is charming because of how expressive and energetic Rothe acts. She sells the story and is why I enjoy the movie so much despite how predictable its story beats feel. Performances from other members of the cast are adequate with the campy and emotional elements given the proper respect.
The way the story unfolds is logical and makes sense. The identity of the killer is only revealed to attentive viewers at the hour mark because up till then the misdirection is done fairly well. I was particularly impressed with how layered the time cycles/loops were in both setting up the story and developing characters into something more than cardboard cut-outs( albeit not by much) . The movie knows when to switch up the pace, so no moment feels like it overstays its welcome. It’s definitely a movie I love putting on in the background or watching if I’m trying to perk up more.
Unfortunately, the narrative stability is achieved at the cost innovation. The story doesn’t really add too much to the die-live again formula. There’s a unique concept related to the time loops, but it never gets developed in a meaningful thematic or narrative way. It’s only used to get the story from one place to another. This sucks in particular because the concept could have been that unique element to push the genre in a new direction- to give something new to the die-live loop type of movie. There are also some logistical issues that make the nature of the killers eventual reveal more confusing. It feels like if the story spent a bit more time building up their backstory a lot of these issues could have been resolved. The movie stops short of where it needed to be to be a genuine classic of sorts, but that shouldn’t stop you from giving it a watch if it sounds even remotely up your alley.
REPORT CARD
TLDR
Happy Death Day is funny, filled with energy, and has some cute “awuhh” moments. It doesn’t fully utilize the potential of its premise, but it does enough to remain interesting from beginning to end.
Rating
8.0/10
Grade
B
Go to Page 2 for the spoiler discussion. Go to Page 3 to view this review’s progress report .
Alec Owen as Brent / Brock Olivia Taylor Dudley as Motherface Patton Oswalt as Chief of Police
Release Date
2015
Language(s)
English
Running Time
103 minutes
Despite what its title would imply, Dude Bro Party Massacre III is not a sequel to a well established franchise. Instead, it’s a criticism of privilege and insulation from punishment, an introspective look into frat culture and the social construction of masculinity, a fun satire of horror and slasher tropes, and is dumb and over the top in the best possible way. You can take out your brain and just enjoy the spectacle or you can have fun with the underlying themes- the movie works well for diverse crowds.
The plot is structured like a VHS tape- with an overarching slasher film and a series of advertisements in between- like someone recorded the movie as it ran on TV. The main story line follows the notorious Motherface, a killer who targets fraternities. The story is absolutely bonkers and goes in places I never expected. I can say with absolute certainty that most of ya’ll haven’t seen anything like it. The ad portions are fun, short, and to the point and never feel like they takeaway from the main movie.The absolute chaos of the movie also keeps repeated viewings fresh. If you like unique and interesting kills in an 80’s fashion, this movie has them in spades. The practical effects are great and I loved the ingenuity behind certain executions. You can tell there’s a lot of love that went into this.
Though the film intentionally tries to fail the Bechdel test, it absolutely feels like a feminist movie. Yes, the main characters are the brothers in the feature fraternity, but the movie makes it painfully obvious that all the members have participated in pretty horrendous stuff, despite how comical it all plays off. Motherface’s journey as such almost feels justified. It’s a slasher movie where you simultaneously for and against the “villain”. However, the movie still takes time to explore the nuance of a fraternity and the ideas of brotherhood related to it. Despite their problems, the frat members aren’t all malicious dudes. Some of them enjoy the experience because it gives them a sense of bonding that helps them feel less alone and isolated. It keeps the movie from ever feeling preachy.
Despite how much I love the chaos of the movie- at times it feels like misdirection for midsdirection’s sake. There are moments that are ominous and meant to trick a first time viewer, but they never feel like they pay off in the themes. So their fun but feel pointless. The movie also kind of drags on in the end. Don’t get me wrong – I love the ending. It’s amazing. But it also had me going why? These aren’t huge issues but I feel like they kind of muddled the point.
Report Card
TLDR
Despite being too absurd for it’s own good at times, Dude Bro Party Massacre III is a surprisingly topical satire that’s sure to leave you smiling by the end of it.If you want a fun movie to watch with friends put this on (as long as people are okay with gore). It should delight a lot of audiences. It’s smart, unexpected, and feels like a roller coaster in the absurd.
Rating
8.8/10
Grade
B+
Go to Page 2 for the spoiler discussion. Go to Page 3 to view this review’s progress report .
Adam Sandler as Howard Ratner Lakeith Stanfield as Demany Julia Fox as Julia Kevin Garnett as Kevin Garnett Idina Menzel as Dinah Eric Bogosian as Arno Keith Williams Richards as Phil
Release Date
2019
Language(s)
English
Running Time
135 minutes
Well the hype is real. I feel like my life has changed. Adam Sandler is actually a phenomenal actor. I feel like everything I’ve seen from him up till now has been a prank . Still in awe. Also the Safdie brothers are geniuses and I need to watch everything they’ve done. If you can’t guess by now, Uncut Gems, is one of the best movies of 2019 and this past decade and had me completely floored by the end of the 135 minute run-time.
This movie is an assault on the senses and I mean that in the most literal way. The way it’s directed from the camera movement to sound design is meant to induce a state of panic and anxiety. If you suffer from those issues already, the film may be too much and I genuinely think you should go see it with someone even if you don’t suffer from them. Now that the warning is out of the way- holy wow. I thought I was losing it during the film because of the way sound would keep cutting in. There is auditory clutter that makes it feel like you can’t hear yourself think. It keeps you on edge and tense – you have to focus to get at bits and I felt like the movie was sweeping me along. There’s always something going happening on the screen so it feels like your senses are constantly befuddled. I thought it was perfect – I haven’t been this purely immersed in a film in a genuinely long time. I could feel my heart pumping out of my chest by the time I started getting out of my seat.
All of this synergizes perfectly with the plot which follows Howard , a jeweler who has a “bit” of a debt issue and a huge gambling problem. There’s a constant sense of tension as Howard traverses from one deal to another, desperate to keep the antagonistic forces coming for him at bay. There’s also a lot of comedy – from the dysfunction of different schemes playing out differently than imagined or just Sandler exuding persona. It’s a perfect complement to the tension at play. Speaking of tension – a lot of it revolves around the NBA. If you like basketball (or are just a huge Kevin Garnett fan) this movie has a lot of fun moments for you. I remember feeling excitement about games that happened years ago but almost like I was reliving them viscerally because of how the sport is talked about and utilized. On top of all of this, there’s ripe family drama and watching the dysfunction play out is more than entertaining. Watching all these intersecting threads come together is a delight and makes the story feel like a train-wreck waiting to happen.
A story is only as good as its characters and this film has them in spades. Sandler’s performance as Howard is mesmerizing. I was rooting for him the whole film, but the character is scum-bag with a heart of gold(?). However, Sandler adds a depth of nuance to that that makes him far more complex and grounded. He goes from caring father, to inconsiderate lover, to gambling addict. Each transformation feels in place and all of them come together to make one of the most interesting protagonists of 2019. This movie would not work without Sandler – if Howard was unlikable or unbelievable the tension wouldn’t be as profound because there wouldn’t be real stakes.
Thankfully, Sandler is accompanied by a slew of actors (some of whom are acting for the first time) who let him really shine and show off the range of his emotions. If someone told me that Kevin Garnett could act as well as he could play basketball before now I wouldn’t believe it. Now all I want is more movies with him. He’s cool and aloof at one point and fanatical the next – watching him tango with Sandler is immensely satisfying. Julia Fox’s performance injects some much needed levity to the movie – she never takes away from the tension – she just helps accentuate it with proper changes in demeanor. Finally, Keith Williams Richards is absolutely terrifying as Phil. The fact that this is his first movie ever is shocking – he absolutely sold the underlying crime portion of the story and amplified the tension every time he was on the screen. I want to mention everyone but that would be way too many people – literally even minor characters get more characterization in this movie than some primary characters in other movies.
This film is one of the best depictions I’ve ever seen of gambling and addiction. When the thrill is high and the game is at play, we feel like Howard- ecstatic. When he wins, I win – or that’s how I felt as I saw his schemes playing out. However, it works the same way with losses. Whenever something went wrong or could go wrong, I felt tense. Twitchy. Anxious. Since the movie aims to put the audience into the same mood as Howard, every twist or reveal feels that much more serious. It also becomes comprehend how someone could become completely lost in game. This is why the movie worked for me – I feel like I got Howard and wanted him to succeed in spite of himself and the situation he was in and I absolutely should not have felt that way- which is kind of great in a perverse kind of way.
REPORT CARD
TLDR
An absolute attack on all fronts – this character study of a gambler addicted to big gains is a roller coaster that never stops to let you catch your breath. Sandler is a tour de force and the Safdie brothers know how to keep the audience engaged from start to finish. Don’t watch if you’re looking to calm down.
Rating
10/10
Grade
A+
Go to Page 2 for the spoiler discussion. Go to Page 3 to view this review’s progress report .
Francesca Hayward as Victoria Jennifer Hudson as Grizabella Jason Derulo asa Rum Tum Tugger Juddi Dench as Old Deuteronomy Rebel Wilson as Jennyanydots James Corden as Bustopher Jones Idris Elba as Macavity Judi Dench as Old Deuteronomy Ian McKellen as Gus
Release Date
2019
Language(s)
English
Running Time
110 minutes
I’m someone who normally gives pieces a more positive and optimistic shot than most. My higher than normal review scores are indicative of that. I always try and find something good to latch on in a movie and have fun with it. I saw the reviews for this movie on opening day and realized the potential horror of what I was walking into. I held onto some hope, because I loved Les Miserables, and thought that even a bad Tom Hooper musical would be okay. I was wrong. Not just wrong – horribly mistaken. By the time the first hour had passed I was literally just praying for the movie to end. This isn’t just the worst movie I’ve seen this year – it’s one of the worst I’ve ever seen.
The movie follows a series of horrific anthropomorphized cats as they talk about this vague competition that leads to an eventual rebirth. I’ll be the first to say I never saw or read about the Broadway show, and the plot was near incomprehensible to me. I’m someone who likes subtitles, so the fact that most of the exposition in the movie was sung hurt my ability to comprehend the movie. That normally wouldn’t be an issue but the film never takes a break to develop any themes or ideas. It literally follows the same structure the whole time- introduce cat – have song – maybe Macavity makes a slight cameo- then repeat. The lack of change in editing makes the whole movie drag on and I felt like I was being forced to endure the length of the film. The whole thing would have felt better 30-40 minutes shorter because at least then the absurdity of the film would stop while it was fresh.
Unlike most typical good bad movies like Troll 2, this film takes its sweet time being subpar so you can’t even laugh at the monstrosity at hand because it never stops or changes. There are few movies that have ever made me want to walk out in frustration – this film has joined the not so prestigious list. It’s not just that its bad- it’s that it won’t stop being bad so you can never laugh at how bad it is because you’re constantly being bombarded by worse elements.
The film goes at a breakneck pace but also feels incredibly slow because nothing meaningful ever happens. The movie could best be described as almost non stop exposition followed by an ending that tries to be emotionally resonant but fails on every note. This is because literally no character arcs or emotional bonds are ever set up in a way that could be conducive to any meaningful development. It’s a shame that the “antagonist” feels like a plot device instead of a meaningful character. I love Idris Elba and seeing him being used in such a poor fashion is upsetting. At least let him give the character some personality as opposed to be being a random bad guy. The only characters that give the movie any personality are Old Deuteronomy and Gus . The former takes command of the scene whenever she appears and makes the events feel more justified even though they’re just as haphazard as we think. The latter adds some emotional panache that gives the film much needed personality and actually helped jolt me awake near the end of the second act (or third act it’s confusing). The lack of real character motivation or explanation makes the whole movie feel like it’s a series of meaningful unrelated events. It literally feels unfinished.
Tonal whiplash is the name of the game and experiencing the shift from puns/comedic moments to the more serious nature of the competition the movie sets up(?) feels out of place. James Corden and Rebel Wilson are usually at least kind of funny, but their style of humor and incorporation into this film feels forced and out of place. I can’t take the movie seriously if the characters in it make jokes about it and poke fun at the holes. Normally this tactic would be fine if the movie didn’t take itself seriously – but it does- and worse than that – it tries to be emotionally resonant. That’s a no-no and absolutely took me out of any immersion I had tried to feel.
Honestly, the biggest issue with the movie is how unappealing the film is. Forget a boring plot. Forget the uninspired songs. Forget the fact that most of the movie feels like an exposition reel through song. Hell, you could forget about all of that if the movie was at least fun. But it isn’t fun. It’s hollow and feels like a quick cash grab. The characters are one dimensional and just repeat lines with no personality. No one’s motivation is explored. The CGI looks unfinished and terrifying at the same time. Some of the characters literally look like humans with “cat” like additions which feels at odd with other characters and makes the shoddy CGI more apparent. The characters are also all strangely sexual. Parents please don’t take your kids. The way the cats licked the milk, flicked their tails, and stretched themselves had me cringing not only in embarrassment but also sheer dread at how horny the whole thing felt like. I guess maybe if you’re a furry you could get something from these moments- but that’s a pretty niche market group.
REPORT CARD
TLDR
Cats broke me. I used to say “no movie is that bad.” But no – some are. You can’t find something great in every piece of media.If you’re a furry maybe you might like it if you can ignore all the awful portions. If you take a shot every time there’s an awful cat pun or a strange sexual moment you might find something fun – but I can’t guarantee anything. Honestly – there’s not a lot here and I’d recommend staying away unless you really like bad movies. At the very least the movie might make influence the zeitgeist so that a future Cats like movie is never created again.
Rating
1.8/10
Grade
F
Is there a point in a spoiler section? I don’t think so . Save yourself. Go to Page 2 to view this review’s progress report .
