Review: Inside Out 2

Review – Inside Out 2

Review – Inside Out 2

Inside Out 2 (2024)
PG  ‧ Animated Comedy ‧ 1 Hour 36 Minutes
Written by Meg LeFauve, Dave Holstein, and Kelsey Mann
Directed by Kelsey Mann

THE CAST

Amy Poehler, Phyllis Smith, Lewis Black, Diane Lane, and Kyle MacLachlan reprising their roles from the first film with Tony Hale (replacing Bill Hader as Fear), Liza Lapira (replacing Mindy Kaling as Disgust), Maya Hawke, Ayo Edebiri, Adèle Exarchopoulos, Paul Walter Hauser, and Kensington Tallman (replacing Kaitlyn Dias as Riley) joining the cast.

JOY AND ANXIETY – © 2023 Disney/Pixar. All Rights Reserved.

THE STORY

Joy, Sadness, Anger, Fear, and Disgust have been running a successful operation. However, when Anxiety shows up, they aren’t sure how to feel. The film takes place about a year after the original Inside Out, as the “puberty button” goes off inside of Riley, leading to the construction of a new control center and the emergence of new emotions like Anxiety, Embarrassment, Envy, and Boredom.

THE BEST

The BEST things about the film:

  • Emotional Accuracy and Depth:
    • The film brilliantly captures the complexity of teenage emotions, particularly the heightened sensitivity during puberty. The portrayal of anxiety and its interaction with other emotions felt incredibly real and visceral, providing a psychologically sound depiction of a teenager’s inner world.
  • Humor and Heart:
    • Inside Out 2 excels in its humor, seamlessly blending it with heartfelt moments. The jokes are well-timed, and the emotional beats are perfectly balanced, making the audience laugh and reflect simultaneously. The film engages children and adults, appealing to many viewers.
  • Innovative Animation:
    • The animation in Inside Out 2 is stunning, featuring a mix of traditional and new styles that keep the visuals fresh and engaging.

THE WORST

The WORST things about the film:

  • Upon my initial viewing, I found nothing to dislike about the film. It’s a flawless sequel that captures the essence of the original while adding new dimensions to the story and characters.
NEW EMOTIONS — Disney and Pixar’s “Inside Out 2” returns to the mind of newly minted teenager Riley just as new Emotions show up. Embarrassment (voice of Paul Walter Hauser), Anxiety (voice of Maya Hawke), Envy (voice of Ayo Edebiri) and Ennui (voice of Adèle Exarchopoulos) are ready to take a turn at the console 2024 Disney/Pixar. All Rights Reserved.

THE COMMENTS

  • Cast Changes: One notable aspect of Inside Out 2 is the change in voice actors for certain characters. Tony Hale replaces Bill Hader as Fear, and Liza Lapira takes over for Mindy Kaling as Disgust. These changes were reportedly due to a pay dispute, where the original actors were offered significantly lower compensation than Amy Poehler, who was receiving $5 million. While it’s unfortunate that the original cast couldn’t be retained, the new actors did an excellent job, bringing their own unique flair to the characters. This casting switch did not detract from the overall enjoyment or continuity of the film.
  • Audience Reception: During the special preview showing I attended, it was clear that both children and adults thoroughly enjoyed the film. The laughter, engagement, and occasional questions from the younger audience indicated that the film captivated them. This reception bodes well for its performance with family audiences, reaffirming that Inside Out 2 manages to appeal to a broad demographic.
  • Emotional Impact: Inside Out 2 doesn’t have a singular villain, which makes the story unique and focuses more on internal struggles. Anxiety acts as the antagonist, representing a realistic and relatable challenge that many people, especially teenagers, face. This nuanced approach allows the film to explore emotional depth without resorting to traditional conflict, making it both innovative and impactful.
  • Relatability for Parents and Teens: The film’s depiction of teenage emotional turmoil is both accurate and relatable, especially for parents who have or had teenagers. The representation of emotions like envy, embarrassment, and boredom during adolescence is portrayed with such authenticity that it resonates deeply with viewers who have experienced or are experiencing similar situations.
  • Cameo Appearances: Ron Funches, one of my favorite actors and a fellow nerd, makes a delightful cameo in the film. His distinctive voice adds a fun element to the story, and it’s great to see him getting roles in major films like this. As a comedian and actor who has made a name for himself, his inclusion in Inside Out 2 is a personal highlight and adds to the film’s charm.
  • Comparison to the Original: While comparisons to the original Inside Out are inevitable, viewing this sequel as a continuation rather than a direct competitor is important. Inside Out 2 builds on the foundation of the first film, expanding the emotional landscape and introducing new concepts that enrich the story. It’s a testament to Pixar’s ability to evolve and deepen their narratives while maintaining the charm and appeal that made the original a hit.
  • Educational Value: Inside Out 2 offers educational insights into emotional intelligence and mental health. It provides a valuable tool for parents and educators to discuss emotions with children, helping them understand and articulate their feelings. The film’s portrayal of the prefrontal cortex development and its impact on decision-making and emotional regulation is particularly enlightening. It serves as a reminder of the complexities of growing up.
WHAT IS HAPPENING? – In Disney and Pixar’s “Inside Out 2,” Joy (voice of Amy Poehler), Sadness (voice of Phyllis Smith), Anger (voice of Lewis Black), Fear (voice of Tony Hale) and Disgust (voice of Liza Lapira) are awakened to an alarming reality: everything is changing now that Riley is 13. 2023 Disney/Pixar. All Rights Reserved.

THE LESSON

Anxiety is Part of You, But Shouldn’t Control You: The film emphasizes that while anxiety can be helpful, it should not take control. It’s a part of who we are, but managing it allows our true selves to shine through.

IS IT REWATCHABLE?

Absolutely, Inside Out 2 is highly rewatchable. Its depth, humor, and engaging story make it a film that viewers will enjoy multiple times, discovering new nuances with each watch.

THE FINAL WORD

Inside Out 2 is an extraordinary sequel that delves deeper into the complexities of teenage emotions, blending humor and heartfelt moments with a psychologically accurate portrayal of anxiety and new emotions like embarrassment and envy. The innovative animation and stellar voice cast, including new members, enhance the engaging story. This film is not just fun, but also profound, making it a must-watch for families. It offers valuable lessons about managing emotions and understanding our minds, leaving a lasting emotional impact. Inside Out 2 is a beautifully crafted movie that celebrates the complexity of human emotions and is highly recommended for viewers of all ages.

THE VERDICT

My 3L system gives me the choice to Love It, Like It, or Lose It.

Inside Out 2 gets a Love It.

THE TRAILER

THE MEME REVIEW

Video Review

Audio-Only Podcast

Episode #219 – 7 Questions With Wild Eyed And Wicked

In episode 219 of “Black & A Half,” Silas interviews the creative team behind the new horror film Wild Eyed and Wicked. Join writer/director G.S. Foxworth and cast members Michael Summers and Stephanie Esters as they discuss the making of the film, the allure of the horror genre, and share behind-the-scenes insights. Plus, hear their unique and entertaining answers to Silas’s famous “Seven Questions.”

Don’t forget to like, comment, and subscribe for more exciting interviews and discussions!

Video Interview

Audio-Only Interview

7 Questions With Stimson Snead & Samuel Dunning

It’s an interview episode! Silas had a chance to chat with Writer/Director Stimson Snead & actor Samuel Dunning from the new film Time Travers And The Time Traveler’s Paradox. They discuss how the film was made and they answer the world-famous 7 Questions. 

Available in Video and Audio-Only Podcast

About The Film

It is called the Time Traveler’s Paradox. In which a scientist creates a Time Machine and kills their younger self. So now a man who should not- can not- exist, somehow does. That is the Paradox, and Paradoxes are impossible. And the man who has created it, is Tim Travers. A reclusive mad scientist whose stated mission in life is to stand alone with God at the end of time, and tell the bastard off!!

In the course of his adventure, Tim Travers will take on the mercenary gang whose stolen plutonium powers his machine, challenge an Alex Jones esk podcaster to a battle of wits, create a black hole, meet the one woman alive crazier than him, clone himself, destroy the universe, make a new one, and maybe-just maybe- learn to love himself at last.

TIM TRAVERS AND THE TIME TRAVELER’S PARADOX was written & directed by Stimson Snead. The film was executive produced by Ben Yennie, Felicia Day, and Rich Cowan, and produced by Kylie Walchuk and Casey Cowan. The film has a running time 104 minutes and is available for sale in all territories. TIM TRAVERS AND THE TIME TRAVELER’S PARADOX premiered at 2024 Cinequest where it won Best Comedy Feature. It also just screened at BIFFF, Phoenix Film Festival and the Seattle International Film Festival

Video

Audio-Only

Review – Sasquatch Sunset

Review – Sasquatch Sunset

Sasquatch Sunset (2024)
R  ‧ Comedy/Drama ‧ 1 Hours 30 Minutes
Written by David Zellner
Directed by Nathan Zellner, David Zellner

THE CAST

 Riley Keough, Jesse Eisenberg, Christophe Zajac-Denek, and Nathan Zellner. 

THE STORY

(In their own words). In the misty forests of North America, a family of Sasquatches find themselves on a collision course with the ever-changing world around them.

THE BEST

The BEST things about the film

  1. Acting and Character Portrayal: The actors, including Jesse Eisenberg, perform exceptionally, deeply immersing themselves into the roles of sasquatches. Their extensive physical training to master their characters’ body movements and non-verbal communication are major strengths of the film.
  2. Makeup and Practical Effects: The film’s use of practical effects, especially the makeup, is praised. This choice adds authenticity to the portrayal of the sasquatches, enhancing the viewer’s immersion into the film’s world without relying on CGI.
  3. Unique Concept: The film’s premise and execution are incredibly unique. The idea of a narrative told entirely through “sasquatchese” without any English dialogue or subtitles presents a fresh and innovative challenge to conventional filmmaking.
  4. Physical Comedy and Absurdist Elements: The film’s physical comedy and absurdist tone are effective in delivering humor and entertainment, making it stand out in the comedy genre.
  5. Engaging Performances: The cast’s commitment to their roles, particularly in their nonverbal acting and interaction, is identified as a highlight, making the characters compelling and memorable despite the lack of understandable dialogue.

THE WORST

The WORST things about the film

  1. Lack of Deep Engagement: While unique and humorous, the film reportedly struggles with not being deeply engaging. This could be attributed to its unconventional storytelling and minimalistic plot, which might only resonate with some viewers, particularly those unfamiliar or unappreciative of absurdist humor.
  2. Niche Appeal: The elements that make “Sasquatch Sunset” stand out—its absurdist tone and non-traditional narrative—make it challenging for the film to find a broad audience. Its appeal is likely limited to niche cinema fans with specific tastes, potentially alienating mainstream viewers.
  3. Minimalistic Plot and Pacing: Despite the film’s short duration, there’s a feeling that not much happens throughout its runtime. This issue, combined with the film’s experimental nature, might lead some viewers to perceive it as slow or lacking in substantive content, which could affect its overall pacing and viewer satisfaction.
  4. Absence of Subtitles or Understandable Dialogue: The decision to use “sasquatchese” without subtitles is bold but might also hinder viewer understanding and engagement. This choice requires viewers to pay close attention to non-verbal cues to follow the story, which could be demanding or frustrating for some.
  5. Divisive Humor: The film’s humor, which leans heavily on absurdism, might not be universally appreciated. Scenes intended to be funny could be seen as bizarre or off-putting to those not accustomed to or fond of absurdist comedy.

THE COMMENTS

“Sasquatch Sunset” is not without its challenges. The film’s lack of a conventional narrative and its reliance on absurdism might not resonate with all viewers. Its pacing, while brisk for a 90-minute film, occasionally feels slow due to the minimalistic plot. Yet, these same qualities make the film a fascinating study for those interested in method acting and physical theater.

Despite its potential niche appeal, “Sasquatch Sunset” offers a refreshing break from mainstream comedy, using its bizarre premise to subtly touch on themes of environmentalism and the impact of human encroachment on nature. It’s a film that might require a particular taste to appreciate its humor and artistic choices fully, but it’s undeniably a bold experiment in filmmaking that some will find delightful.

In conclusion, while “Sasquatch Sunset” may struggle to find a broad audience, its unique approach and standout performances make it a worthwhile watch for those seeking something out of the ordinary. It’s an interesting film that, while it might not make it to everyone’s favorites list, certainly deserves a watch in a theater for its collective humor and the communal experience it aims to create.

THE LESSON

  1. Environmentalism and Human Impact: The film appears to convey messages about human activity’s intrusion into natural habitats and its effects on native wildlife, represented here by the sasquatches. As the Sasquatch family encounters elements of human civilization for the first time, such as a paved road, it highlights human development’s profound impact on previously untouched natural environments.
  2. Discovery and Innocence: “Sasquatch Sunset” also explores themes of discovery and the innocent wonder of encountering the unknown. This is reflected in the sasquatches’ child-like curiosity and their process of learning and understanding new concepts, akin to young children or beings not as advanced as humans. This can be seen as a commentary on the universal nature of discovery and learning, regardless of one’s level of sophistication or intelligence.

IS IT REWATCHABLE

Yes, but only in the sense of research. If I was directing or acting in a play or movie that was non-verbal or wanted to show an example of good physical acting work. I wouldn’t watch this because it was on the tv and I wanted to enjoy a movie.

THE FINAL WORD

“Sasquatch Sunset” dives into the absurdist genre with its unique portrayal of a sasquatch family navigating life in the North American forests, communicated entirely through “Sasquatchese.” The film’s standout aspects include remarkable method acting and impressive practical effects that bring the sasquatches to life. However, its experimental nature and sparse plot might limit its appeal to a niche audience. Despite these challenges, “Sasquatch Sunset” offers a whimsical, if sometimes perplexing, exploration of environmental themes and the innocence of discovery, making it a curious piece of cinema that might be best enjoyed with a group for its full comedic effect.

THE VERDICT 

My 3L system gives me the choice to Love It, Like It, or Lose It. 

I rank “Sasquatch Sunset” as “Like It.” While I didn’t fall in love with the film, I definitely didn’t hate it either. Its unique qualities, and the performances are noteworthy, but it’s admittedly niche with its absurdist elements, which might not resonate with everyone. It might be better appreciated in a theater setting to capture its humor and artistic flair fully.

THE TRAILER

MEME REVIEW

VIDEO REVIEW

AUDIO-ONLY REVIEW

https://embeds.audioboom.com/posts/8493591/embed?v=202301#?secret=ue3ggNXh9D

Reviews: Challengers

Review: Challengers

Challengers (2024)
R  ‧ Sports/Romance ‧ 2 Hours 11 Minutes
Written by Justin Kuritzkes
Directed by Luca Guadagnino

THE CAST

Zendaya, Josh O’Connor, and Mike Faist.

THE STORY

(In their own words). Tashi, a tennis player turned coach, has transformed her husband from a mediocre player into a world-famous grand slam champion. To jolt him out of his recent losing streak, she makes him play a challenger event — close to the lowest level of tournament on the pro tour. Tensions soon run high when he finds himself standing across the net from the once-promising, now burnt-out Patrick, his former best friend, and Tashi’s former boyfriend.

THE BEST

The BEST things about the film

1. Narrative Structure: The non-linear storytelling approach is one of the film’s strongest aspects. This method isn’t just for show—it crafts a more intricate and engaging viewer experience, allowing the audience to piece together the characters’ pasts and present, thereby deepening the emotional and psychological complexity of the narrative. It helps frame the personal histories and motivations in a way that a linear narrative might not manage as effectively.

2. Cinematography and Visual Style: The film employs bold and experimental cinematography that sets it apart. Particularly notable is the use of the tennis ball POV shots during match scenes, which not only intensify the gameplay but also metaphorically represent the back-and-forth dynamics of the characters’ relationships. This creative decision enhances the immersive quality of the film, making the tennis matches not just a sport to be watched but a lens through which interpersonal conflicts are explored.

3. Acting: Zendaya, Josh O’Connor, and Mike Faist deliver phenomenal performances. Zendaya, in particular, should be praised for her nuanced portrayal of Tashi, who transitions from a tennis prodigy to a coach, grappling with her own past glories and current challenges. Her ability to convey deep emotional undercurrents—her passion for tennis, her complex relationships, and her own regrets and aspirations—anchors the film. O’Connor and Faist also deliver compelling performances, adding to the film’s emotional depth.

4. Engagement and Pacing: Despite its runtime of over two hours, the film does not feel its length, indicating effective pacing and engagement. This aspect is crucial in maintaining audience interest and speaks to the director’s skill in crafting a narrative that is both absorbing and brisk, keeping viewers hooked from start to finish.

THE WORST

The WORST things about the Film

1. Frustrating Character Choices: Some characters in the film make decisions that could potentially frustrate or perplex viewers. While integral to the plot and character development, these choices might not align with what the audience feels would be the ‘right’ or expected decisions. This can lead to dissatisfaction or disconnect with the characters, potentially impacting the viewer’s overall engagement with the story. However, it’s important to note that these choices also add to the realism and complexity of the narrative, as real-life decisions and relationships are often messy and challenging.

2. Polarizing Cinematography: The film employs innovative cinematography techniques, including very close-up shots and slow-motion sequences that might not appeal to everyone. Specifically, using the camera point of view from a tennis ball, could be distracting or disorienting for some audience members. While these techniques are designed to enhance the immersive experience and reflect the characters’ psychological and emotional states, they risk being perceived as overly stylized or gimmicky, potentially pulling some viewers out of the narrative rather than drawing them deeper in.

3. Specific Taste Required: The narrative and visual style of “Challengers” demands a certain appreciation for artistic filmmaking and a tolerance for non-traditional storytelling methods. Audiences looking for a straightforward sports drama might find the film’s approach too unconventional or challenging, which could limit its appeal to a broader audience.

THE COMMENTS

The film employs a daring approach to its cinematography and narrative structure that sets it apart from typical sports dramas. It challenges traditional storytelling norms in the sports genre, making it a topic of interest for discussions on film technique and character development.

THE LESSON

  1. The Importance of Passion for Success: The film illustrates how essential genuine passion and love for what you do are for achieving success. This theme is evident in the portrayal of Tashi’s character, whose deep love for tennis drives her and highlights the contrast with characters who may lack the same level of dedication. This passion is shown to be a crucial factor in overcoming obstacles and achieving personal and professional goals.
  2. The Complexity of Relationships and Growth: “Challengers” delves into how personal relationships can profoundly impact an individual’s growth and success. The characters’ interactions and history demonstrate that our connections with others can both challenge and propel us forward. The film suggests that navigating these relationships with honesty and resilience is key to personal development and fulfillment.

IS IT REWATCHABLE

Yes, “Challengers” is rewatchable. The layered narrative and intricate character dynamics make it a film that could offer new insights on subsequent viewings. The technical aspects of the film, like its cinematography, also make it worth revisiting to appreciate the artistic choices more fully.

THE FINAL WORD

“Challengers” delivers a potent mix of intense sports action and deep personal drama, elevated by standout performances from Zendaya, Josh O’Connor, and Mike Faist. Luca Guadagnino’s daring narrative techniques and bold cinematography turn this tennis story into a compelling exploration of ambition, love, and the personal costs of greatness. Engaging, emotionally charged, and visually inventive, it’s a film that redefines the boundaries of sports cinema.

THE VERDICT 

My 3L system gives me the choice to Love It, Like It, or Lose It. 

For “Challengers,” I definitely “Love It.” It’s a film that entertains and engages on an intellectual and emotional level, prompting reflection and discussion.

THE TRAILER

THE MEME REVIEW

VIDEO REVIEW

AUDIO-ONLY REVIEW

Movie Review – Civil War

Review – Civil War

Review – Civil War

Civil War (2024)
R  ‧ Action/War ‧ 1 Hours 49 Minutes

Written by Alex Garland

Directed by Alex Garland

THE CAST

Kirsten Dunst, Wagner Moura, Cailee Spaeny, Stephen McKinley Henderson, and Nick Offerman.

THE STORY

(In their own words).In a dystopian future America, a team of military-embedded journalists races against time to reach Washington, D.C., before rebel factions descend upon the White House.

THE BEST

The BEST things about the film

1. The writing and visual storytelling are just fantastic. 

2. Kirsten Dunst delivers an incredible performance as the lead photojournalist, one of the highlights. I think this is her favorite performance.  

3. The Sound Design is so immersive—especially since I saw it in IMAX, it made you feel like you were in the thick of it. These elements collectively elevate the whole experience of the movie.

THE WORST

The WORST things about the film

  1. Plot Holes: The film encounters a few plot holes, particularly near the end, which can make certain developments feel a bit unrealistic or poorly explained.
  2. Conclusion Issues: The way some scenarios wrap up towards the end of the movie is described as a bit ridiculous, which detracts from the overall impact and might leave viewers feeling unsatisfied.
  3. I wish they had explained the backstory a bit more. I wanted to see more of what had been happening and what led them to this war. 

THE COMMENTS

Beyond its surface as a dystopian adventure, “Civil War” delves into the complexities of journalism in war. It portrays the moral and ethical dilemmas journalists face and the often grave consequences of their work. This film layer highlights the sacrifices made to pursue truth and the personal toll it extracts from those on the front lines of reporting. Moreover, the film serves as a somber reminder of the fragility of democracy and the ease with which societal divisions can escalate into violent conflict. It urges a reflection on the values of democratic governance and peaceful discourse.

THE LESSON

The lesson from the film is a reminder of how precious democracy is and the importance of a peaceful transition of power. It’s a call to maintain our democratic values and avoid the divisions that could lead to such conflicts.

IS IT REWATCHABLE

Yes, “Civil War” is definitely worth a second watch. It’s the kind of film that fully benefits from multiple viewings to appreciate its nuances and complex storytelling. Plus, it’s the perfect movie for post-viewing discussions, whether you’re unpacking its themes with friends or debating its portrayal of societal breakdown.

THE FINAL WORD

“Civil War,” directed by Alex Garland and starring Kirsten Dunst, is a riveting portrayal of a dystopian America on the edge of collapse. Set against the backdrop of a fractured nation, the film follows embedded journalists racing to capture the unfolding chaos, with standout performances and immersive sound design that genuinely anchors the tension. Despite some plot holes towards the end, “Civil War” excels in its gritty realism and poignant commentary on the fragility of democracy, making it a compelling watch. This A24 film is not just thought-provoking but profoundly moving, demanding attention and discussion long after the credits roll. It’s a must-see for its stark, unflinching look at a potential future that feels uncomfortably possible.

THE VERDICT 

My 3L system gives me the choice to Love It, Like It, or Lose It. 

“Civil War” earns a solid “Love It.” It’s a film that not only entertains but also challenges its audience to think critically about the direction in which our society is heading. 

THE TRAILER

THE MEME REVIEW

Video Review

Audio-Only Podcast Review

Review – Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire

Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire(2024)
PG-13  ‧ Comedy/Fantasy ‧ 1 Hour 55 Minutes
Written by Gil Kenan, Jason Reitman
Directed by Gil Kenan

THE CAST

Paul Rudd, Carrie Coon, Finn Wolfhard, Mckenna Grace, Celeste O’Connor, and Logan Kim (from Afterlife), as well as Bill Murray, Dan Aykroyd, Ernie Hudson, Annie Potts, and William Atherton reprising their characters from the earlier films, And then we got new actors to the franchise, namely Kumail Nanjiani and Patton Oswalt.

THE STORY

(In their own words). The Spengler family returns to the iconic New York City firehouse where the original Ghostbusters have taken ghost-busting to the next level. When the discovery of an ancient artifact unleashes an evil force, Ghostbusters new and old must unite to protect their home and save the world from a second ice age.

THE BEST

The BEST things about the film

  1. Humanity and Relatability: The film stands out for its ability to weave intimate, relatable subplots into the larger narrative. This connects audiences with the characters on a personal level, making the fantastical elements more grounded and engaging.
  2. Comedy: The movie excels in its blend of comedy and ghost story. It balances the build-up of tension with comedic relief effectively, making for an enjoyable cinematic experience.
  3. Writing and Storytelling: Thoughtful writing and storytelling are highlighted as strengths. The film manages to incorporate important life lessons and themes into its action-comedy narrative, which adds depth beyond its entertainment value.
  4. Casting and Performances: The ensemble cast deserves an ovation for their performances. The chemistry among the cast is outstanding. They are great individually and as a cast. 
  5. Themes of Family and Identity: The exploration of themes related to family dynamics, identity, and belonging, particularly through Paul Rudd’s character, is a crucial element. This exploration adds an emotional layer to the story, making it more than just a ghost-catching adventure.

THE WORST

Plot Holes and Logical Gaps: There were moments in the film where the storyline seemed to leap over logical gaps or fall into minor plot holes. These instances, where character motivations or narrative developments didn’t fully align with the established logic of the Ghostbusters universe, occasionally pulled me out of the immersive experience. It’s like those “wait, but why?” moments that nag at you, even as you enjoy the ghostly chaos unfolding on screen.

THE COMMENTS

In the latest installment of the Ghostbusters saga, “Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire,” the iconic team of paranormal eliminators returns to the bustling streets of New York City, a stark contrast to the rural backdrop of its predecessor, “Ghostbusters: Afterlife.” The return to the metropolis injects a refreshing vitality into the series, affirming that the Ghostbusters franchise, even in 2024, continues to have a treasure trove of tales to tell.

“Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire” is a PG-13 rated cinematic journey that skilfully marries comedy and fantasy, drawing audiences into its world for nearly two hours of supernatural escapades. Directed by Gil Kenan and penned by both Kenan and Jason Reitman, the film boasts an impressive ensemble cast. 

The plot revolves around the Spencer family navigating the challenges of dealing with an ancient artifact that unleashes an evil force, threatening to plunge the world into a second Ice Age. This premise, while not entirely new in the realm of cinematic narratives, cleverly connects the Ghostbusters’ legacy with current members, underscoring the timeless allure of the unknown and the human fascination with the ancient and mystical.

What truly distinguishes “Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire” from its predecessors and contemporaries is not its special effects or comedic timing, though both are exemplary, but its heart. The film excels in weaving intimate, relatable subplots into the larger, fantastical narrative, grounding the story in its characters’ personal struggles and growth. This connection between the audience and characters, even supernatural ones, is a testament to the film’s thoughtful writing and direction.

Paul Rudd’s portrayal of a quasi-stepfather figure trying to find his footing in a new family dynamic exemplifies the movie’s dedication to exploring themes of belonging, identity, and responsibility amidst chaos. This nuanced approach to storytelling allows “Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire” to transcend the traditional confines of its genre, making it a compelling watch for a wide range of viewers.

THE LESSON

Do the Right Thing, Even If You’re Dead: Extending the discussion on ethics and morality into the supernatural realm, the film cleverly advises that doing the right thing is imperative, regardless of one’s state of being. This lesson speaks to universal morality that transcends life and death, suggesting that ethical principles should guide actions in all circumstances.

Don’t Judge by Age, Judge by Abilities: The film underscores the idea that age should not be the primary criterion for judging someone’s capabilities. 

IS IT REWATCHABLE

Yes, Can’t wait to watch it again. 

THE FINAL WORD

“Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire” hits the sweet spot between nostalgia and novelty, wrapping up humor, heart, and a horde of ghosts in a blockbuster package that truly stands out. With its blend of old and new faces, the film not only brings the franchise back to their roots in New York City but also injects fresh energy with a plot that balances supernatural hijinks with relatable, human stories. While it occasionally stumbles into minor plot holes and leans heavily into its comedic elements, these quirks hardly dim the sheer entertainment value of the movie. It’s a thrilling ride through and through, reminding us why we fell in love with movies in the first place. Whether you’re a long-time fan or new to the franchise, “Frozen Empire” is a must-watch, proving that some stories can keep on giving, delivering laughs, scares, and a little bit of heart, all in one ghostly package.

THE VERDICT 

My 3L system gives me the choice to Love It, Like It, or Lose It.

Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire gets a Love It

THE TRAILER

THE MEME REVIEW

Review – Dune: Part 2

Dune Part 2 (2024)
PG-13  ‧ Scifi/Adventure ‧ 2 Hours 46 Minutes
Written by Denis Villeneuve & Jon Spaihts
Based on a Novel By Frank Herbert
Directed by Denis Villeneuve

THE CAST

  • Timothée Chalamet as Paul Atreides, the exiled Duke of House Atreides, who is called “Muad’Dib” by the Fremen
  • Zendaya as Chani, a young Fremen warrior and Paul’s love interest
  • Rebecca Ferguson as Lady Jessica, Paul’s Bene Gesserit mother and concubine to Paul’s late father and predecessor, Leto Atreides
  • Josh Brolin as Gurney Halleck, the former military leader of House Atreides and Paul’s mentor
  • Austin Butler as Feyd-Rautha Harkonnen, Baron Vladimir Harkonnen’s youngest nephew and planned successor of House Harkonnen
  • Florence Pugh as Princess Irulan, the Emperor’s daughter
  • Dave Bautista as Glossu Rabban Harkonnen, the brutish nephew of Baron Vladimir Harkonnen and older brother of Feyd-Rautha
  • Christopher Walken as Shaddam IV, the Padishah Emperor of the Known Universe and head of House Corrino
  • Stephen McKinley Henderson as Thufir Hawat, a Mentat loyal to House Atreides who is forced to serve House Harkonnen
  • Léa Seydoux as Lady Margot Fenring, a Bene Gesserit and close friend of the Emperor
  • Souheila Yacoub as Shishakli, a Fremen warrior
  • Stellan Skarsgård as Baron Vladimir Harkonnen, head of House Harkonnen, Feyd-Rautha’s and Glossu Rabban’s uncle, sworn enemy to Atreides and former steward of Arrakis
  • Charlotte Rampling as Gaius Helen Mohiam, a Bene Gesserit Reverend Mother and the Emperor’s Truthsayer
  • Javier Bardem as Stilgar, leader of the Fremen tribe at Sietch Tabr

THE STORY

(In their own words). Paul Atreides unites with Chani and the Fremen while seeking revenge against the conspirators who destroyed his family. Facing a choice between the love of his life and the fate of the universe, he must prevent a terrible future only he can foresee.

THE BEST

The BEST things about the film

  1. Stunning Cinematography
  2. Incredible CGI. Sandworms are real, right?
  3. Its runtime of two hours and forty-six minutes feels much shorter than it is. This is thanks to excellent pacing and an engaging story. 
  4. The actors are great. 

THE WORST

The WORST things about the film

  1. TOO MUCH INFORMATION AND CHARACTERS. I don’t think I should have to watch a movie with a glossary by my side. 
  2. This is very much a Part 2, not a sequel. They just continue the story from the first one, and you need to remember what was going on, or you will be lost. They don’t do anything to help the audience out. I’d suggest watching the first one and then go the next day to finish the story. 
  3. As wonderfully acted as the leads are, the script does not serve Timothy Chalamet and Zendaya. Their relationship does not get the attention it deserves. I kind of left not caring about them.

THE COMMENTS

I feel somewhat like Judas saying how I feel about Dune Part 2. It is undeniably an impressive film. The cinematography, the special effects, the acting, the story. They are all larger than life and excellently done. I feel like I should love this movie, but I don’t. I feel like the main characters, played by Chalamet and Zendaya, had too many time jumps when I wanted to see their relationship grow. I imagine there’s probably a good forty minutes of footage of their relationship on the cutting room floor that I feel was desperately needed. 

I didn’t care about the film. 

That is so weird because this should be a Silas film if you know me. If you know me, you probably assume this film would be a lock for me. But it wasn’t. There are too many characters that I’m desperately trying to keep track of, too many subplots, too much of everything. I could never relax into the film and get swept away in the sandstorm. 

This movie has everything except heart. 

THE LESSON

You can either do what is best for your heart or best for the people. 

IS IT REWATCHABLE

You kind of have to to keep track of people. 

THE FINAL WORD

Dune: Part 2 is beautiful: Stunning cinematography and unbelievably realistic CGI. It is a well-paced epic sci-fi film that deserves a lot of praise. Remember, this is part two and not a sequel. The events of part one immediately precede this film, and it takes zero time or effort to get you up to speed, so make sure part one is fresh on your mind. Dune is the ultimate epic story with loads of characters and even more subplots, which ultimately bog the film down for me. Despite the beautiful acting by Chalamete and Zendaya, I didn’t feel invested in them as a couple. While I liked the film overall, I also didn’t care about it. Maybe I’m just not a Dune guy. 

THE VERDICT
My 3L system gives me the choice to Love It, Like It, or Lose It. 

I give Dune Part 2 a Like It. 

THE TRAILER

THE MEME REVIEW

Review: Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom

Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom (2023)
PG-13  ‧ DC Superhero / Action  ‧ 2 Hours 4 Minutes

Written by David Leslie Johnson-McGoldrick

Directed by James Wan

THE CAST

 Jason Mamoa, Patrick Wilson, Amber Heard, Yahya Abdul-Mateen II, Randall Park, Dolph Lundgren, Temuera Morrison, Martin Short, and Nicole Kidman. 

THE STORY

(In their own words). After failing to defeat Aquaman the first time, Black Manta wields the power of the mythic Black Trident to unleash an ancient and malevolent force. Hoping to end his reign of terror, Aquaman forges an unlikely alliance with his brother, Orm, the former king of Atlantis. Setting aside their differences, they join forces to protect their kingdom and save the world from irreversible destruction.

THE BEST

The BEST things about the film

  1. Special Effects – There are lots of special effects in this film. Probably not many frames of the film without it. It’s like watching a video game cut scene for 2 hours. 
  2. Message – They tried to warn people against the dangers of global warming. This film made me think, “Maybe we should hurry it up so we don’t have to see an Aquaman 3.”

THE WORST

The WORST things about the Film

It’s really hard to narrow down to just a few short answers what I HATED about this film. There are many reasons to dislike this rotting pile of fish carcasses that DC delivered for a film. I’m mostly mad at myself for giving it a chance and seeing it when Warner Bros and DC obviously had no confidence in the movie. They screened it for the press two days before the release date with an embargo on us to not speak about it until the day before the release date. They knew. THEY KNEW! I gave up time with my family around the holidays to see this; I was hoping for something good. So, I’m saying I’m not as mad at DC as I am at myself. I’m disappointed in DC because they have so much potential with decades of material to work with. However, they came up with two hours of an excruciatingly boring superhero film where the best part of it was the bad acting. 

So, let’s make it easy and do something fun for this review. Here are ten things I hated about Aquaman.

  1. The Acting – This is Jason Mamoa’s worst performance. Ever. Every time he screams, “My son!” or whatever other boring line they gave him, It looks like he is doing a cold-line reading for an audition. “Hey, I almost believed you were Aquaman for a second. Next!”
  2.  The writing – Bad acting starts with the bad writing. The credits list one person as the writer, but the “Story by” is five different people. That’s just too many voices in the room. This creates a film with no singular voice, style, or heart. This is “writing by committee,” which may work for the technical writing of a 1995 Microsoft Access user manual but not for a film. 
  3. The Villain – Why? Why must we return to the same bad guy as the last film? Cause he wants vengeance? And that’s it? His singular goal is to kill Aquaman. No other goals or things he wants? Just going for the one thing, huh? So…..yeah. I get it. Aquaman is to blame for the death of his father. This single-dimension villain character may work in a comic book, but it gets boring quickly on screen. Do you want me to care about this film? I gotta hate the villain if I’m gonna root for the hero. The characters need depth. I find it terribly ironic that a film that takes place in the ocean has the shallowest characters of any DC film.
  4. The Story – Long and convoluted. Okay…..films should be epic. But does the plot need to be that complicated? Some pretty amazing epic films have a simple plot: Titanic, Guardians of The Galaxy, Captain America, and Superman (pre-Snyder). How many times do we really need to raise armies to fight? Every film? Come on. 
  5. Too Much Reliance On the First Film – I only realized how unmemorable the first Aquaman was once they clearly expected me to remember a lot of the last film. And my slight memory of relationships from the first film doesn’t create emotional connections between characters. So, I ended up not caring about most of the characters and needed to be emotionally invested for the film to work. Sequels need to be able to stand alone. I can drop into any Iron Man film and get the relationship between Stark and Pepper Potts. Each movie is self-contained, and seeing the previous ones only adds to the enjoyment; it isn’t completely dependent upon the other film. 
  6. Same Tricks Over and Over – I wish I had a quarter for every time a character was just about to get killed by a Trident or something……when all of a sudden….Someone appears to stop them. It’s bad enough that this trick is used in most movies once… don’t do the same trick 5 times in the same film!
  7. The “message’ On Repeat – The film certainly tries to have a message behind it. Warnings against global warming and climate change and unintended consequences of all of it. I don’t mind that message, but it’s the fact that they repeat that message every 10 minutes throughout the film. OKAY, I GET IT! I AM ON YOUR SIDE!

Okay, I’m only doing seven things I hate about the film. “But Silas, you said you would do 10 things.” Yes, that feeling you have of being let down having been promised something that didn’t deliver… that’s how I felt when I left the theater.

THE LESSON

Global warming has unintended consequences. That’s the message. You’ll know because they say it like 50 times.

IS IT REWATCHABLE

No. But if you manage to watch it, be prepared to forget everything that happened in it within a week.

THE FINAL WORD

I like video games, so I enjoyed the special effects that made the movie feel like a video cut scene most of the time. However, I was there to watch a movie. I left the theater deeply disappointed in not just the film but also the life choices that led me to be there. What’s wrong with the film? Where to start? Jason Mamoa’s performance is awful. The film’s writing is uninspired, and it lacks a singular voice. The villain’s character is seen as one-dimensional, and the plot is convoluted and overly reliant on the first film. Frequent use of clichéd scenes and the repetitive messaging on global warming make me want to beat my head in with a trident. The film’s inability to stand alone as a sequel and its lack of re-watch ability make the best thing about the film is how forgettable it will be. Maybe I won’t remember that time I left my family during the holidays to bore myself in a theater for two hours. 

THE VERDICT
My 3L system gives me the choice to Love It, Like It, or Lose It. 

Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom gets “an Avatar “

(that’s whatever is below Lose It)

THE TRAILER

THE MEME REVIEW