2:39:1 Widescreen

"There are thousands of miles of tunnels beneath the continental United States. Abandoned subway systems, unused routes and deserted mine shafts. Many have no known purpose at all."

A very creepy, violent, and disturbing film, Us, enters theaters, and it’s probably going to be there for some time. Not only is the plot haunting and filled with terror; the acting that makes it work is superb under the guidance of Jordan Peele who gave us the film Get Out.  Adding more to the potentially Oscar-worthy film is the dank and fear-inducing cinematography with a soundtrack to match. If you like your horror nonstop, then Us is for you.

"Does announcing your identity help with the covert part of the job?" 

Let me begin by saying that actress Brie Larson doesn't want me to write this review. It's not that I didn't like the film and intend to cut it down. Actually I rather liked the movie, and while it isn't going to crack my top five Marvel films, it's a very entertaining film that adds wonderfully to this always evolving world of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, or as we fan geeks like to refer to it, the MCU. So she wouldn't take much if any umbrage with my evaluation of the film. It turns out that I happen to be a white male, and she has made it known that she doesn't want to see reviews for this film written by white males. Sorry, Brie. I suggest you skip this one. Just put it out of your mind. Still reading, Brie? I thought you might be. So, after a rather long wait for a movie only teased at in the final frames of a stinger added to Avengers: Infinity War, we finally get to meet the newest member of the Marvel MCU. Welcome, Carol Danvers, aka Captain Marvel, and as they used to say on the comic covers when welcoming new characters: I hope you survive.

Just imagine for a moment that a 12-year-old version of yourself was taking a little stroll and you came across a sword that was protruding from a slab of concrete. We’ve seen plenty of versions of the King Arthur story. Some have been good (Excalibur and First Knight) but many have been not so good. In the case of The Kid Who Would Be King, it’s not a story about King Arthur but more an adventure that asks what would happen if a boy were to find the sword in today’s world.  The film didn’t do so well at the box office, which isn’t a big surprise considering the film was made in the UK and not the States, but is the film one to be overlooked and forgotten, or is this a gem worth checking out?  Simply put, this is perhaps the best “kids’” film I’ve seen in years, and this is a film that I’m willing to bet will garner a cult status in the years to come.

From the moment I saw the trailer for this I thought it looked like fun, but when I saw that it was written and directed by Joe Cornish, this film worked its way onto my must-see list.  For those who may be unfamiliar with the name, Joe Cornish is responsible for the film Attack the Block (2011).  For those that haven’t seen Attack the Block, please remedy this immediately. For a quick summary, it was a film about a group of kids who end up having to fight a group of aliens that have landed and are attempting to take over the neighborhood.  The film is a fast-paced comedic blast that was responsible for kicking off the career for John Boyega, who went on to play the character Finn in a little franchise called Star Wars. So, it’s been a few years since Attack the Block has been out, and for me it was hard to keep my expectations in check, but Cornish managed to deliver another fun popcorn flick.

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.