2:39:1 Widescreen

One of 2019’s most anticipated releases is M. Night Shyamalan’s conclusion to his superhero trilogy with Glass. This has been a trilogy 19 years in the making, following the release of Unbreakable and then 2016’s Split. When I first saw Unbreakable, I was a projectionist, and I had to screen it the night before it was released to make sure everything was spliced together and the film played properly, and I just remember not really liking the movie at first.  I ended up giving the film another try, and I found I liked it a little more. Now over the years I’ve seen it several times, and the film has grown on me.  I’ve grown to appreciate the film to the point that when that final scene in Split plays and we got the reveal of David Dunn (Bruce Willis) I was extremely excited at the prospect of seeing this character revisited.  Before I get much further, if you haven’t seen Unbreakable or Split, if you plan on seeing Glass, do yourself a favor and watch the previous films first, and even if you have seen them, it wouldn’t hurt re-watching them just so the films are fresh in your mind while experiencing the conclusion of this trilogy.  With all that out of the way, how was the film?  It’s time to suit up and find out.

As the film opens up, it takes place not long after the events in Split, and we see that Kevin (James McAvoy) is under the control of his 24 personalities, and “The Beast” is responsible for numerous murders.  The media has been following the killer and has been calling him “The Horde”. Also in pursuit of the killer is David, who with the aid of his son, Joseph (Spencer Treat Clark, who played his son in the first film) are fighting crime together, with their home base being a security shop that they run together.  The opening act of this film is great. It flows nicely, and when we get to see David have his showdown with “The Beast”, it’s hard to not get excited for what is to come.  It’s the direction the film goes from here where I can see there being disappointment in what follows from this point up to the end of the film.

When it comes to Robert Zemeckis films, you never know what you’re going to get.  Like most, I’m a fan of his Back to the Future trilogy, and then there is Who Framed Roger Rabbit that to this day I feel is his best work.  While he’s churned out many good films, there are films of his that I’m simply not a fan of. Forrest Gump happens to be one of those films.  For the most part he makes audience-friendly films, but what I’ve always admired about the guy is how he’s always attempting to integrate new technology into his films.  Zemeckis has become one of the pioneers of motion-capture technology. Ever since The Polar Express (2004), he’s been making improvements with the technology, and now with Welcome to Marwen, it is stunning to see just how far he has come.

The funny thing about Welcome to Marwen is that it may be one of the biggest-budget art films produced in a long time.  Though the film is very much in tone with Zemeckis’s style, at the same time there is enough quirkiness in the characters and story that it may be a bit jarring for some.  Because of this, it’s no surprise that it will have a divided audience that will love or hate this film.

"My father was a lighthouse keeper. My mother was a queen. They were never meant to meet. But their love saved the world. They made me what I am: a son of the land, a king of the seas. I am the protector of the deep. I am ... Aquaman."

It’s been a rough year for the DC Universe, losing both Henry Cavill and Ben Affleck as Superman and Batman respectively. In a time when Marvel is heading towards a big finale of sorts, this should be when DC goes full steam towards capitalizing on any residual momentum. The loss of two members of the Justice League is going to put a crimp in that plan; however, thanks to the release of Aquaman, DC does not have to start from scratch. Jason Momoa returns as the titular character in this origin story of sorts. One of the breakout stars of the critical failure that was the Justice League movie, Momoa proves that he was made to command the seven seas.

“Everything is possible…even the impossible.”

To be clear, the fact that Disney has delivered a big-budget, star-studded follow-up to one of the most beloved family films in its staggering catalog is *exceedingly* possible. This is, after all, the age of reboots and live-action remakes of movies we already love. What seems impossible is that Mary Poppins Returns and its sensational leading lady both live up to and (re)capture the spirit of the Walt Disney-produced Julie Andrews classic from more than 50 years ago!

"60 minutes is all it took for the ancients to bring humanity to the brink of destruction."

It only took Peter Jackson's crew along with director Christian Rivers 128 minutes to bring their audience to the bring of falling asleep with their Star Wars rip-off of Mortal Engines based on a series of books by Philip Reeve. Universal was likely looking for a franchise hit here. Hugo Weaving couldn't save it. Impressive visual f/x couldn't save it. When I discovered the film had been in some kind of production phase since 2008, it all started to make a little sense. Sometimes the harder you work on something, the more you lose sight of the simple aspects of the film. Most importantly, you lose the connection to emotional characters, and you stop telling their story, but force them into telling yours.

At first glance, Mary Queen of Scots has all the makings of a film you’d expect to be nominated for numerous awards; after all, it’s a period drama that showcases some remarkable performances from Saoirse Ronan and Margot Robbie.  Unfortunately this retelling of the story between Queen Elizabeth (Robbie) and Queen Mary (Ronan) is bogged down with its politics and the struggles these women have being leaders while their differing religions present a conflict preventing them from ever working together.  Let me just jump into this and attempt to sort this film out.

For those who are not history buffs, I won’t disclose who it is that we see in the opening moments of the film as they are being led to their execution.  It’s an odd way to open the film; despite it being historically accurate, it just seems a bit off-putting.  The film then takes us to Mary arriving in Scotland to claim her throne after being away in France.  At the same time Queen Elizabeth has been ruling over England and Scotland; since she hasn’t married and has no children, it is Mary who is ready to take on the reins of becoming the heir to the throne of England.  This is the start of many squabbles between the two queens, where we see their relationship dissolve from a unique sisterhood to the pair becoming envious of one another.  Basically how most families are, only without the royal labels.

Ralph Breaks the Internet is a sequel to the hit Disney animated film Wreck it Ralph. In Ralph Breaks the Internet, we follow our heroes from the last movie, Ralph and Vanellope, as they travel the internet in search of a broken part for Vanellope’s arcade game. They find the missing steering controller on eBay, and it’s the last one in existence. Up for auction, they give the winning bid for $27,000. They now must find a way to earn the money to pay for the controller with a deadline in five hours, or they will lose Vanellope’s game forever. Ralph Breaks the Internet is a painfully average film, and compared to its predecessor, a huge disappointment. This sequel wasn’t bad, however, but it wasn’t too great either. There’s one big problem I had with this movie, and it’s Ralph. Ralph in the first movie had already gone through his character arc and was a very well developed character by the end of the film. In this movie it feels like they purposely broke the character just for a story line. Ralph in Ralph Breaks the Internet is now a needy, clingy, and annoying character. Throughout the movie Ralph is constantly holding Vanellope back from doing the things she wants to do to save herself. People who relate to her should start to feel how annoying Ralph can be.

Ralph was not the only problem I had with this movie. There is also a major plot hole that’s impossible to overlook. It doesn’t make sense that Ralph was able to leave his game for over 24 hours without it being infected by a bug. After all, he’s literally the bad guy in the game Fix-It-Felix, Jr., so how come nobody noticed he was missing? It wouldn’t be that bad of a plot hole except for the fact that Ralph being away from his game was the whole conflict in the first movie. You would think the writers and filmmaker would have noticed this, but I guess not.

When I first heard that Bradley Cooper would be making his directing debut with A Star is Born, honestly, I kind of groaned.  It’s not because I didn’t believe he’d have the chops; after all, he’s worked with many successful directors over the span of his career. I groaned because I believed the world didn’t need yet another remake of the film.   This will be the fourth incarnation of the film, and while many can debate on which version is their favorite, the film was pretty much a relic I felt should have stayed in the past.  I mention this and want to also put it out there that even after some of the trailers I had caught for the film, my excitement level was pretty low going into this.  Well, this turned out to be the sleeper hit of the year for me.  Sure, many could have told me this would be a hit, and because of the cast I wouldn’t dispute it, but when I walked out of the auditorium I felt like I had experienced something special (even if it had been made three times before).

The film opens with Jackson Maine (Bradley Cooper) taking the stage and performing for a large crowd.  After his show he’s looking to get a drink and stops off at the closest bar; as it turns out it is one that caters to drag queens.  Jackson doesn’t care about the location; all he’s interested in is getting some drinks, but that all changes when he sees Ally (Lady Gaga) perform on stage.  As the night stretches on and the two continue to get to know one another, one thing is undeniable; the chemistry between Cooper and Gaga is phenomenal.  The flow of the first act of this film is perfect, and by the time Maine has Ally convinced to go on tour with him, I was convinced this movie would be a box office smash.

Steve McQueen has established himself as a rather talented director. 12 Years A Slave was one of the better films of 2013 and one of the few times I happened to agree with the Oscars’ choice for Best Picture. When he tackled the heist format, I expected something unique, and I wasn't at all disappointed. McQueen managed to put a clever spin on a tired genre and provide us with a superior and inspired cast. It wasn't all completely his idea, of course. The film is based on a Canadian miniseries that goes back to the 1980's. That doesn't mean he hasn't found a way to imprint the material with his own style and bold choices. There's a lot to love about Widows, but I have pretty low expectations for this film at the box office. More on that later. Let's get down to it, shall we?

Harry Rawlings (Neeson) is a career criminal. His wife Veronica (Davis) knows where the money comes from, but she's willing to feign a great deal of ignorance to the fact, because she has become used to the comfortable style in which they live. But it all comes crumbling down when Harry's latest heist appears to go horribly wrong and Harry perishes in an explosive encounter with the police along with his entire crew. Now Veronica is feeling the grief that comes with the death of a spouse, but there's more to deal with than that. The man Harry and his crew took down was a gangster by the name of Jamal Manning (Henry), who has taken a dip into politics. He's going up against the corrupt Jack Mulligan (Farrell), who is running to take his father's alderman seat. Manning's $2 million war chest was Harry's target, and the money appears to have been destroyed in the explosion that took down the crew. Now Manning has gone to Veronica and has given her one month to refund his money.

"Is this the real life or is this just fantasy?"

I think even Queen's biggest fans might have trouble distinguishing between the two in the Freddie Mercury/Queen biopic Bohemian Rhapsody. And that's absolutely OK. If you look at the film's trailers, the movie looks less like a bio-film and more like a celebration, and that's exactly the kind of experience you're going to have from beginning to end. I'm sure that a lot of film and Queen fans shared more than a little skepticism over the project. I know that I certainly did. But all of that magically disappeared when the first trailer hit the internet and we all watched in amazement as actor Rami Malek appears to be channeling the manic spirit of Queen front man Freddie Mercury down to the smallest detail. Suddenly I believed that everything was going to be OK. But just as our hopes and expectations were about to hit the ceiling, the film started gathering controversy after controversy like a snowball rolling down a steep hill in the winter. Everyone already had an opinion before the film was even finished. For months the web has been filled with issue after issue, and it all seemed to threaten the buzz we all got from the trailers. We're going to talk about those issues, to be sure. If you let any of that filtercrap keep you from checking out Bohemian Rhapsody, you're going to be missing the next best thing to actually seeing Freddie and the boys live in concert. Since that's not going to happen, this is where you want to be.