Search Results

A lot of people believe that cinema as an artform, might be dying out. It's not like we're getting lesser movies or content or anything, quite the opposite. But first, by cinema, I don't mean all moving pictures because in this day and age there are so many different forms of entertainment out there, and cinema is just one of them. I mean the artform that is cinema, the type of films created with passion for the process and storytelling. The type of films someone like Martin Scorsese would call cinema. Films were made not just to entertain but in Martin Scorsese's own words, "Movies touch our hearts and awaken our vision, and change the way we see things". Pure cinema should be an expressive work of the director and be a unique vision. Films are important as they introduce us to new places, cultures, ideas and important aspects of life. Older films that have had a huge impact on today's filmmakers, such as Gone With the Wind, Mirror, Casablanca, The Good, the bad and the Ugly, M, The Apu trilogy, The Seventh Seal, Apocalypse Now and even by extension films like Close-Up, Silence of the Lambs and Pulp Fiction are all classics that embody everything that cinema stood for. Now, it's an undeniable fact that things are changing. It's obviously not as simple as today's movies suck and older movies were better, in fact that's blatantly incorrect. But there is something off nowadays, big studios are investing more and more money into franchises, reboots, remakes, sequels and more "content" that was very accurately described by Martin Scorsese as "Theme Park rides." This influx of "theme park movies" weren't a big problem but now I feel like it could be And of course like, all of this sounds pretentious but there's nothing wrong with these types of films at all, in fact I enjoy a good blockbuster now and then. It's kind of depressing though that since there's so much money involved in movies, there's a lot of financial problems studios need to deal with, they can't always make experimental films, cause there would just be a niche audience watching them. Studios have realized that franchise blockbusters are where the money's at and who doesn't want money? But that has led to the film industry playing it too safe and only working for commercial gain. That's why most of the films coming out nowadays feel derivative, cheap and oversaturated. The problem isn't that the general audience is eating this stuff up, because of course they are, that's the way it's always been. From even the 70s. The concern people have is that there may not be room for films that similar to what Andrei Tarkovsky or Ingmar Bergman created during their days. Marvel studios release 3 or more movies a year and films like that are crowding theaters and it's even harder for filmmakers to release or find markets for their films. A film like Blade Runner 2049 flops hard while a movie like the remake of Beauty and the Beast makes a billion dollars. It's a bit frustrating. The box office dictates the life of a film and now, it feels like original cinema might be on the losing side. And now at its lowest point... The pandemic hit. Theaters shut down. Movies weren't big made on the same scale as they were before, and worse we don't know if theaters could recover. Streaming services have gained even more viewers, and could topple theaters in terms of viewership. The future of cinema is unstable but I still think, cinema isn't dying. Sure, the majority of films made nowadays aren't made for the sake of art but with the advent of streaming I think we're entering a new era. It's not as hard as it used to be to distribute and make indie films, and with services like Netflix endorsing films such as Cold War or The Irishman, we may be getting a lot of great films in the future. Streaming services may challenge theaters but they're a great and easy way to watch films and to get a mass audience for great films. Foreign cinema and obscure cinema is now much more accessible due to the internet, and if you love movies, there isn't a better time to be alive. Indie films still exist, and if you know where to look for them, you don't have to worry too much for the future of cinema. The criterion collection has never been more popular and services like Mubi too are interested in curating pure cinema. Cinema is being kept alive by people passionate about it and no number of remakes, reboots or sequels could stop them. In the midst of all this, one studio that has gotten a lot of deserved attention is A24, A production and distribution company committed to the art and to a filmmaker's true vision. They've made a lot of great films, a few not so great ones but overall I love their stuff. My favourite A24 films are Moonlight, Lady Bird, The Florida Project, Hereditary, Climax, Ex Machina, Room, Midsommar, Good Time and The VVitch. Also, like I said, great cinema is still being made if you know what to look for. Here are some of my favourite recent films excluding A24 films - An Elephant Sitting Still, Portrait of a Lady on Fire, Ida, Frances Ha, Birdman, Sound of Metal, Burning, Her, Capernaum, Parasite, Raw and Loving Vincent. In conclusion I don't think cinema will ever truly die. It will just.. evolve. By @starwards1

Reviews by: @somuchlovecinema @thedefinitionofcreativity How Do I Even Begin To Review This Film.... La La Land is a 2016 American Musical Comedy-Drama Film written and directed by Damien Chazelle. Starring Ryan Gosling and Emma Stone in Lead Roles.. it follows a jazz musician and an aspiring actress who fall in love.. and their conflicts through love and passion as they explore their lives In Los Angeles. An Ode To All Of The Musicals In The History Of Hollywood. This movie makes you feel all of those emotions possible. From beginning to ending it has this vibe of amusement around it... and every scene is well-crafted. This film is a view of intellectual people all around the world and it's sophisticated. After finishing the film I had this... I don't know a bittersweet smile on my face and had this heavy feeling in my heart.. a feeling which I never wanted to lose. This is one of those films which can be made out of utter brilliance of an artist.. impossible otherwise. This film starts like a fairytale and ends like what would happen exactly in our real life. The awkward conversations, the immediate distractions, the disappointments of rejection all of these were shown in a truly realistic way and it hits right at the heart. This film is a musical drama, but if you relate to it, it feels like a nightmare. With stunning cinematography, masterful direction and writing, great acting and a masterpiece of a soundtrack.. This film is a once-in-a-lifetime experience. Guys watch it if you haven't.. this film has a great potential and passion in it and it needs to be seen. By @somuchlovecinema If most people have seen La La Land, they would say that it is perhaps their favourite movie musical, particularly if the musical is not the most compelling genre for them. I have wondered why that is. Movie musicals have been successful since almost the beginning of film. It has gone on a journey: from having bubbling optimism from the 1930s to the 1950s; to transitioning into deeper and darker material in the 1970s; to seeing all of this in animated form in the 1990s. But what I feel La La Land does successfully is combine all of these things, which is what many people who do not like musicals do not expect from musicals. This film wonderfully captures the light-hearted nature of the classic 1950s musicals like Singin’ in the Rain, most notably by filming the musical numbers in very long takes. It may not be something people notice immediately, but the continuity of the musical numbers makes the dancing flow much better and strengthens the chemistry between the two main characters Mia and Sebastian. Also, the film has colour grading that captures a similar aesthetic to these classic musicals, where it is almost dream-like and quite utopian. It reminded me of the vibrant pops of colour in The Umbrellas of Cherbourg, although La La Land’s colour are much lighter. In addition, La La Land’s realism in the development of its characters, despite the magical musical moments, is perhaps something that surprised people. We can see realism in musicals like Chicago and Dreamgirls. But unlike them, by stripping the musical away from it, La La Land would just be a romantic comedy drama, and so there would have been aspects that may not have appealed to viewers. However, Damien Chazelle’s writing ensures that Mia and Sebastian equally have both something for themselves and each other within their relationship. The outcome of their relationship is realistic, as everyone can perhaps relate to having to sacrifice something special in their life for something else. In this case, they both sacrificed their relationship for their careers. And whilst being displayed in an idealised and dream-like manner, the film’s ending is also realistic and relatable because I am sure we have all thought about what could have been. This leads me onto why Emma Stone and Ryan Gosling were perfectly cast for the roles of Mia and Sebastian. I feel some may think differently because they are not known as musical theatre performers. But La La Land feels like a different kind of musical because it has significantly fewer songs than most movie musicals. And so I interpret the use of musical form as progressing the dynamic of the characters and revealing their inner artistic selves through song and dance, rather than the musical form being used to usually develop the plot. For example, dancing during the Planetarium scene strengthen their romance, and was the film’s way of saying “they are now together”, rather than using words that would perhaps ruin the moment. It is interesting that songs are used for the most hopeful moments, but not in heated moments like their argument over dinner. I think it just shows that not everything can be swept under the carpet, and that there are things in life that need to be confronted. Once is a similar to La La Land, in terms of there being less songs than usual. The music is used to bring the two characters closer, as it seems as though they cannot breathe without music. The fact that the stage musical features actor-musicians - actors who play their own instruments and sing live on stage - emphasises this. The two characters in that movie are played by musicians rather than actors, which shows that the music was the most vital device in capturing their desires, pains, and romance. It was nominated for a record-tying 14 Academy Awards, alongside Titanic and All About Eve, and won 6 of those awards. Of all its awards, I was most elated with Emma Stone’s win for Best Actress. She is one of my favourite actresses, and this film combined everything she brought to life with previous characters, as well as what she still has to offer. Many actresses have won Oscars for their performances in movie musicals, such as Catherine Zeta-Jones as Velma Kelly in Chicago and Jennifer Hudson in her feature film debut as Effie White in Dreamgirls. But the last time an actress won a Best Leading Actress Oscar for their role in movie musical was the iconic Liza Minnelli as Sally Bowles in Cabaret - almost 45 years earlier. I loved how it marked how movie musicals can provide equally brilliant performances as every other genre. Since La La Land, Bradley Cooper and Lady Gaga have been nominated for A Star Is Born, Andrew Garfield for tick, tick…boom!, and Ariana DeBose won for West Side Story. La La Land has now become a modern classic - not just in the movie musical genre, but in film generally. It has received a wave of love amongst musical theatre fans and those who are not as keen alike. It has always been one of my favourite films since the moment it was released - considering that it is one of two films I have seen more than once in cinemas, along with the very recent The Batman. Every time I watch it, it becomes more personal to me, and it has done a lot for the movie musical genre. It seems to be one of the most popular and well-received films of the last decade, but if you have not seen La La Land, I highly recommend you watch it! By @thedefinitionofcreativity

Reviews by: @theplokoonyreview Positives: Christian Bale plays to the concept of the film phenomenally, and the introduction is enticing. Negatives: The fight scenes clash with the rest of the films tone, the world is ugly, the scope of the world isn’t well defined, while the second half is rushed and remarkably messy. Positive: Christian Bale Christian Bale works with the stories concept (it is against the law to feel emotion) and all the difficulties that come with this involving characterization. By channeling a genuine, childlike fascination with his emotions, while also using subtle, pained mannerisms to bring to light his conflicted feelings he elevates both his character and the whole film. Even when it becomes much more ridiculous later on and many events don’t have the development they needed, Bale keeps himself deeply invested in the role and delivers consistently fantastic character moments. If it should categorized as anything, this film is a testament to Bale’s abilities as a method character. Positive: The Introduction The introduction does it job with precise concision. In the rundown building it starts at (and up to around the 12 minute mark) the film surprises and engages the viewer with its premise. It’s handled very delicately in the beginning, much of the world is shrouded in mystery, and slowly but powerfully developed by the cutthroat attitude of the Clerics and more specifically Preston (Christian Bale). Also, there’s a fantastic use of drawn out darkness during a fight scene at the beginning, it’s a more experimental decision but it heavily paid off and the movie could’ve benefitted from more creatively executed scenes like this. Negative: Gunplay The fight scenes succeed in looking moderately cool, but when compared with the rest of the world end up feeling corny. In a colourless world where emotion is banned and the tone is bleak, the combination of guns and Kung fu sticks out as a more horribly misguided attempt to be stylish. This fighting technique could’ve been used to help build the world, but the concept of gun fu (called Gun Kata in the film) in a world such as this just dampens the horrors of the dystopia and adds an unfitting element of campiness. Furthermore, Preston is much too overpowered for any of these fights to have any suspense, weight, or slight realism. His ability to mow through every enemy with no trouble is amusing on a surface level, but in doing so it sacrifices any intelligence it could’ve had. Negative: Ugly World The world almost never looks good. Either it’s a painfully obvious and drab cgi landscape that has all the detailed textures of a PS2 game cutscene, or a cheaply constructed set that looks fake and uninspired. It can be argued this is all to construct a world which has had the life drained from it and passion stripped from its architecture, but there are many better ways to do this while making the set look palatable. As it stands, all that is shown through the world is a poor understanding of cgi and rushed set designs with no memorable qualities. Negatives: Scope of the world This film delivers its premise in a remarkably soulless way (just explaining to the viewer through monologue) but then it doesn’t answer many questions, rather just supplying generalizations. This becomes a problem later on, it’s hard to understand how big Libria or the Nether is and furthermore the size of any threat, like the resistance or even the people in power. It leaves the viewer unable to understand what’s truly at stake and a lot of contextual information is absent when it was needed for moments to properly land. Negative: Last Half The second half introduces and rushes through sub plots while overcomplicating everything. It’s an unwelcome change of pace from the first act, which acted as more of a slow paced character study. To twist everything in such a rushed and unpolished direction killed any shot it had at being good. It’s hard to explain what actually happened without this entire section turning into spoilers, so it’ll be left at this. It’s hard to invest in anything that’s happening because it’s switching between different events so quickly and awkwardly, characters are wasted or not given enough time to gain a remarkable presence, while it horribly over complicates itself in both regards and any emotional impact or investment in the plot is lost. In conclusion, despite a promising beginning and Christian Bales fantastic performance, this film has too many glaring flaws and outright confusing decisions that leave the viewer upset that they wasted time with it or amused by its absurdity. Critical rating: 4.5/10 Entertainment rating: 7/10 Final rating: 5/10 By @theplokoonyreview

"To be, or not to be: that is the question: Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, Or to take arms against a sea of troubles, And by opposing end them? To die: to sleep; No more; and by a sleep to say we end The heart-ache and the thousand natural shocks That flesh is heir to, 'tis a consummation Devoutly to be wish'd. To die, to sleep; To sleep: perchance to dream: ay, there's the rub; For in that sleep of death what dreams may come When we have shuffled off this mortal coil, Must give us pause: there's the respect That makes calamity of so long life; For who would bear the whips and scorns of time, The oppressor's wrong, the proud man's contumely, The pangs of despised love, the law's delay, The insolence of office and the spurns That patient merit of the unworthy takes, When he himself might his quietus make With a bare bodkin? who would fardels bear, To grunt and sweat under a weary life, But that the dread of something after death, The undiscover'd country from whose bourn No traveller returns, puzzles the will And makes us rather bear those ills we have Than fly to others that we know not of? Thus conscience does make cowards of us all; And thus the native hue of resolution Is sicklied o'er with the pale cast of thought, And enterprises of great pith and moment With this regard their currents turn awry, And lose the name of action.--Soft you now! The fair Ophelia! Nymph, in thy orisons Be all my sins remember'd!” William Shakespeare, Hamlet Usually we start at the end. The Big Bag generated a Universe. It's simple, I don't think so. Realizing that things has to end, could be pretty tough. But it's the only way to unsure a progression, an evolution. Dinosaurs exstintion facilitated our rising. We, literally, started existing after the death of an, almost, entire species. What about life afterwards? We feed from dead animals, mostly. Mufasa would call it The Cycle of Life, I call it reality. But accepting it, it's kinda hard. Accepting the fact that after our death there won't be anything, it would be different if we're living in a simulation, is tough. What do we do to cope with it? Religion, and I'm not talking about believing in an imaginary dude, or multiple dudes, who supposedly knows better. I'm talking about worshipping. We worship almost everything today: fame, money, politics, fictional characters, singers,.... It gives us solace. And we stand there, chilling in a golden cage crafted by our feeble mind who are too afraid to admit that death exist. It's only when you begin to crumbling down and ageing that you start respecting and dreading it. It shakes you to the bone the fact that you're going to turn into dust. What's the best way to adress this being who's called many names and has no face? Maybe we need to embrace it for what it is. A cold, distant and good friends who reminds us to use our life at the best of our possibilities, to not waste any chance of being better, to share our existence with someone who loves us. Maybe we need to let death being our inspiration, as the Arts did. Poets, Artists, Writers and Musicians have found a great source of ideas in it. Morrigan and all its forms has been celebrated for centuries, perpetuating his mottling cry and dark cloak. Like The Comes Silence, a Swedish postpunk band from Stockholm. A group which opened for Fields Of The Nephilim and Chameleons Vox in Germany in 2018 and are more frequently a part of the line-up on the festivals in Europe. The same year, Seth Kapadia and Jens Karnstedt left the band and Mattias Ruejas Jonson (ex A PROJECTION) and Spanish born Hugo Zombie (ex Los Carniceros Del Norte) became the new members of the band. A band who produces music to touch people's heart and mind. The passion for music has been there since a young age, as Hugo says: "It started as a child, one of the first music memories that i have is a The Beatles tape of their early stuff that my father had. I think that's when i felt in love with rock n' roll. Also i remember watching music videos on the TV, like Michael Jackson "Thriller", Duran Duran "Wild Boys", The Clash "Should Stay or Should i Go", and they impressed little me a lot. I guess i just wanted to be as cool as them and music was the way to follow" An experienced which left its mark, because The Clash, The Cramps & Ramones inspired him afterwards. Mattias, on the other hand, is influenced more by movie soundtracks, Jonas by punk band like Killing Joke and Cortex and Alex told us his cool process which helped him to find his muses: "As a kid, ABBA, AC/DC and KISS. As a teen Dead Kennedys. In my mid 20's the Latin American music culture. In my mid 30's electronic music and now... I'm back into punk and early 70's rock music" And Alex is the one who also finds inspiration from everything which surround him, good and bad things. An ideology which influences his creative process: "I write music all the time and I collect lyrics in my "book of lyrics". There's no certain moment or period for creativity. Only discipline and a vision in my head" For them music as a relevant, almost central, role in their life, as Hugo says: "Music is my passion, it made the person that i am now so i guess it's mostly represented in every interaction i have in life. It's been a bit difficult to deal with that during the pandemic, because of the complete change of lifestyle, but hopefully we'll be able to leave the cave soon, and rock like there's no tomorrow again" As well as Jonas: "Well, music is my life, hobby and profession. It's not everything, but allmost" Apart from their music tastes which are about Delirium Cordia by Fantomás, Echoes by Pink Floyd and Anchor Song by Björk, they're also interested in movies and series like Rosemarys Baby, Alien, Joker, Chernobyl, Peaky Blinders, Stranger Things. Today we're going to explore their latest album The Machine which has been defined: "Sweden own Gothic Rock and Post-Punk heroes Then Comes SIience have yielded their best album with Machine, an intense collection of 11 tracks that are their most satisfying songs to date." Post-Punk.com "Then Comes Silence win our Soundcheck and album of the month for the second time in a row with Machine. Hardly any band have made this in 25 years of Sonic Seducer." Thomas Voguel (Sonic Seducer) It's a dark album about everything sinister and upsetting. An ode to the macabre and gruesome things which are part of our life, like death. A return to their roots after their previous album Blood. “I wanted to take a different turnaway from the path and not make just another Blood” An album which has been hard to produce: “In 2016 we sprinkled the recordings with cashand had no idea how to calculate the cost. We had a generous budget for a small band and no experience how to use it. We believed we could lean back and take the ride. The hangover came later” And also hard to write, as Björn Springorum wrote about it: "Machine was a very painful album to write, in many ways a return to their humble beginnings as a Swedish underground phenomenon. The gripping beats, the eerily cold melodies, the wintry guitars and those ghostly hooks prove it was all worth it – even the “lost album” written by Alex before even starting on “Machine”. It all lead to this point. It all lead to seductive, gloomy anthems like “We Lose The Night”, “Dark End” or “Kill It”. Mixed by legend Stefan Glaumann (Rammstein, Deathstars, Killing Joke), Then Comes Silence come full circle and finally sound like they ever wanted to – “like ice cold water running through a pipe of stainless steel on a November morning.” Hearts will be melted. Blood will freeze" We Lose the Night is the first track of this album. I like its style and rythm, it's pretty catchy. The following is Devil, which starts with a good bass strum. It's pretty similar to the previous songs for a while but it distnces itself from We Lose the Night with what I consider a better refrain. The Devil seems to be representing our fears or remorse. Overall a pretty good track. Dark End is characterized by a slower rythm which amps up a little during the refrain. It isn't as good as the previous one but I like its style. It seems to be about the creepers, the people who likes to stalk and psychologically influence the victim. It's a pretty hard theme to talk about. It could also be referred to the Grim Reaper, who stalks us behind the light of life. The next one is I Gave You Everything, which has a cool intro, one of the coolest. I think that this song is about a sad and enraged person who has been left, or worse, by his or her partner. It's interesting the fact that has been added the phrase And it was worth it, which underline the fact that the person is mature enough to accept the split. Ritual is a song which features Karolina Engdahl. I think that her functions well in the song, because it gives us a softer voice. I think that this song refers to a Satanic Ritual and the featured singer represents the sacrificial virgin. This song elevates itself over the previous ones, because she brings something new and unexpected to the album. Apocalypse Flare is a song about an apocalypse, as the site suggest, but I interpret it as a metaphor for sex and making love. The experience is compared to watching the cataclysms unveil before our eyes. W.O.O.U. is the one who starts with a slower rythm but then increase it, making it more enjoyable. The meaning of this acronym is present in the refrain and its expresses the feeling of being part of a group. I like the fact that the acronim sounds like a jubilation. Pretty interesting choice of words. In Your Name is a pounding song which gets right into the vocal part. Drums are highly relevant because they allows the song to be have a clear rythm and, I think, a more gritty outlook. The following is Glass, which has a great start. I like how the bass are used here. I can say that the bass riffs are just amazing. The song seems like a cautionary tale for people who like to live dangerously. Kill It has a weird incipit but I like how they wanted to slow down for this track. It's a piece which seems perfect for a slow dance. It's one of the most tender piece of this album. I like the fact that here they wanted to focus on the lyrics. This is also the longest track but I think that it fits the style of this song. The last one is Cuts Inside, which is about the scars left by a wrong relationship or experience. This song seems like a wail and it evokes sad and haunting emotions. It isn't an optimistic piece but it exhorts the audience to look forward and don't look back because the feeling could worsen. It could be about the sense of powerlessness inflicted by Death. Then Comes Death is a remarkable postpunk and goth rock band which deal with interesting themes like Death in a mature and fascinating way. I think that you should check them out because they know their craft and have clear ideas about what they want to express. This is also a band who has a clear idea about their future and what they want to achieve. "We're in constant motion, so right now we are working on the next album. Finally we will be able to tour again, so there's a lot of preparations and planning" I want to leave with the sharp words of Alex, who's experienced Death firsthand and wanted to make us part of his struggle, to feel how he faced the black cloak of fate. "There’s absolutely no meaning in rebelling against death. Even though death is bringing grief and pain to the ones left behind, we have to accept the fact it’s everyone’s final destination. Its’ supposed to be that way. Deal with it. We’re all going there. If we talk about death, sing about death and think about death regularly we might feel better and appreciate everything around us more. Maybe we could reach a higher quality inside. I think about death everyday and that makes me a nicer person I’m sure" By @the_owlseyes

Reviews by: @tvnerdaran Michael Cimino’s ‘The Deer Hunter’ is one of my favourite films of all time. It is a stunningly acted, sensitively directed, beautifully shot and emotionally shattering film on the horrors of the Vietnam War, and how the war shattered an entire working-class community in the process. In this essay, I will explore the film’s exploration of war, horror, friendship, melancholy and the nature of life. ‘The Deer Hunter’ centres around a small working-class community in a Pennsylvania steel town, with the main characters Michael 'Mike' Vronsky (played by Robert De Niro) and Nikanor 'Nick' Chevotarevich (played in an Oscar-winning performance by Christopher Walken) enlisting to fight in the Vietnam War alongside fellow friend Steven Pushkov (played by John Savage), as Michael and Nick leave behind the woman they both secretly love, Linda (played by Meryl Streep in her breakout performance). However, the three friends are soon captured and tortured by the Vietcong where they are forced to play Russian roulette by their captors, before killing their captors and escaping. But the scars, whether they be physical, mental or psychological change the lives of the three friends and the entire community they live in forever. Firstly, the film has some of the greatest acting that I have ever seen committed to celluloid. Robert De Niro gives one of his finest performances as the loyal and intelligent Michael, a man who has the mindset of a group leader and always thinks of his friends and his community. Christopher Walken gives arguably the greatest performance of his entire career as Nick, with his gut-wrenching portrayal of a man who is psychologically destroyed by the horrors of war serving as the film‘s most tragic and sympathetic character. Meryl Streep shines in her breakthrough performance as Linda, the woman who both Mike and Nick love who gives the film its emotional core. Followed by a strong supporting cast of actors including John Savage and John Cazale, who tragically passed away from cancer shortly after the film finished filming. It is by far one of the best acted films I’ve ever seen from the entire cast all around. The film also has beautiful cinematography from Vilmos Zsigmond, who lends a sense of voyeuristic beauty to the film’s natural landscapes, and the film’s main theme “Cavatina” by Stanley Myers and Australian guitarist John Williams remaining to this day one of the most beautiful and tragic pieces of music that I have ever heard. But apart from the film’s technical aspects, it is also a masterpiece of storytelling. Though many viewers complain of the film’s first act and the nearly hour-long wedding sequence, it only serves to further enhance the characters and gets us the viewer to know and care about them and the struggles they face from my point of view. By spending so much time at home and with the characters, we as the audience warm to them and end up caring that much more about the struggles that they will face later on. The film’s brutal and infamous Vietnam scenes, where the Vietcong force Michael, Nick and Steve to play Russian roulette remains among the most intense and powerful scenes in cinema history. The scene is long, brutal and thoroughly intense, as each second feels like a ticking time bomb, keeping the viewer on the edge of their seats before the three friends manage to successfully escape. These scenes, as famous and iconic as they are, also managed to court their fair share of controversy, as there is no evidence whatsoever that the Vietcong forced their prisoners to play Russian roulette. However, director Michael Cimino has addressed this, and made it clear multiple times, that he never set out to make a definitive statement on the Vietnam War and who were the real victims or aggressors. He simply states that he set out to make a contemplative and personal film on the devastating effects that the horrors of war have on an entire local community. Renowned film critic Roger Ebert famously defended the film’s use of artistic license, stating: “The game of Russian roulette becomes the organizing symbol of the film: Anything you can believe about the game, about its deliberately random violence, about how it touches the sanity of men forced to play it, will apply to the war as a whole. It is a brilliant symbol because, in the context of this story, it makes any ideological statement about the war superfluous.” Ebert‘s allegory of the film’s use of Russian roulette applies to Cimino’s own views on the Vietnam War: an essentially horrific and pointless conflict full of random, unnecessary violence that caused only death and suffering to all of those involved. The Russian roulette scenes also serve the purpose of changing the characters and their attitudes towards life. Michael previously hunted deers for sport, and had no problems shooting any of them. However, after the war and his own harrowing experiences, he learns to appreciate the value of all life, human or animal, and can no longer bring himself to harm any more deers. This fundamental change in Michael’s character also applies to Nick, who initially was the film’s most cheerful and optimistic character, but emerged the coldest and most damaged of them all by his experiences, staying behind to play Russian roulette over and over again repeatedly in Saigon. Steve is also crippled physically as he is emotionally by his experiences, showing the both literally and figuratively crippling effects that war has on its survivors. The film also highlights the nature of life itself, with most of the film’s runtime depicting the characters’ daily lives and their interactions with others at home in Pennsylvania. This serves to ground the film in realism, as these characters feel like us, constantly trying to get by and pass through our daily lives and interactions with others, only serving to make the characters that much more relatable. Michael Cimino, in my opinion, is an absolute master of realism, depicting the daily aimless lives of his characters throughout his films, making them seem more and more like real people as a result. Cimino truly knows how to make cinema echo life itself in both this film and his other masterpiece, ‘Heaven’s Gate’. The film eventually reaches its emotional climax when Michael courageously returns to Vietnam in search of his long lost friend Nick, only to discover his friend as an empty, emotionally crippled husk of his former self who is driven purely by drugs and the deadly games he plays. The scene where Michael briefly gets Nick to remember his old life, before Nick ends up dying by his own hand when he pulls the trigger during his final game of Russian roulette with Mike. The scene remains among the most devastating and brilliantly acted scenes in cinema history, before the film eventually ends with the fall of Saigon and Nick’s untimely burial. Overall, ‘The Deer Hunter’ is an absolute masterclass in emotional filmmaking and cinematic realism, making each and every one of its characters fully fleshed out and feeling like real people, all while showing some of the most devastating scenes of war and its aftermath ever committed to film. I will finish this review with Roger Ebert’s famous quote emphasising the power of the film. “Michael Cimino's "The Deer Hunter" is a three-hour movie in three major movements. It is a progression from a wedding to a funeral. It is the story of a group of friends. It is the record of how the war in Vietnam entered several lives and altered them terribly forever. It is not an anti-war film. It is not a pro-war film. It is one of the most emotionally shattering films ever made.” - Roger Ebert. By @tvnerdaran

Reviews by: @ryan_the_nixon @moviereviewswithben @augustkellerwrites @lacompagnia.official Space Jam 2: A new Legacy 2021 U Director: Malcolm D. Lee Starring: Lebron James, Don Cheadle, Cedric Joe, Khris Davis, Sonequa Martin – Grace, Jeff Bergman, Zendaya, Gabriel Iglesias, Eric Bauza, Candi Milo, Bob Bergen, Fred Tatasciore etc Space Jam 2: A new legacy is about a rogue artificial intelligence who kidnaps the son of the famed basketball player Lebron James. Who then has to work with Bugs Bunny and the rest of the looney tunes to win a basketball game in order to get his son back. I absolutely hated this film with a passion, and it was nothing more than an embarrassing cash grab from Warner brothers. My first of the few positives would be the nostalgia, the fun opening scene. The basketball elements and decent character background. The film did manage to achieve brief moments of nostalgia for me. Whether it was the basketball scenes reminiscent of the original, the soundtrack or just seeing the looney tunes back in action, it did manage to have some nostalgic moments that entertained me. I also thought the opening scene was fun and provided some decent character background. The film worked at its best when it focused on the characters and the basketball without all of the other bells and whistles. It was nice to get some background into LeBron’s character and how he interacted with his basketball coach as a kid, it set up what he would be like with his own son in the present well. Now for my first few negatives. The set up was very generic, as well as the villain. The script and dialogue were terrible, as well as the performances and warner brothers using the film as promotion. The set up was so incredibly basic and predictable. Having the worn trope of having a son who doesn’t feel accepted by his father for not wanting to do the same thing as him has been used so many times beforehand and didn’t kick the film off in a good way at all. The villain was also incredibly generic. Think of the most simple motivations and reasoning behind a character’s actions and that’s what you had here, not even the charms of Don Cheadle could stop the poor writing behind this. The script and dialogue were also unfortunately very bad. It was forced, corny and never felt realistic. The dialogue was awkwardly executed, and you could tell even the actors were struggling to deliver the lines well, the script was simple and poorly constructed, it felt like no effort was put into making it even serviceable and it really effected the film. I do also have to say the performances were not very good. LeBron James seems like a likeable person, but his performance was terrible here. He delivered his lines in a forced and awkward manner and it all felt clunky and robotic, with no chemistry with the rest of the cast. I also thought this was just promotion for Warner Brothers. This didn’t really feel like a space jam film. It felt like egotistical and desperate promotion of Warner Brothers IP. With no effort to even cover it up. Going as far as having some scenes within the studios really shows where the studio had there priorities with this film. My final few positives would be the animation, the voice cast and character designs, as well as the fun scenes with the looney tunes. I thought the animation here for the looney tunes was excellent, due to improved CGI and just more attention to detail the designs of Bugs bunny and co were drastically improved and it was interesting to see them so well designed. I also thought the cinematography here was great. It was largely used as a distraction, but the film bounced off the screen with its fun and creative worlds and futuristic visuals that were a visual delight. I also thought the voice cast was excellent, it was great to hear all of the original cast return in there glory, with a great new addition with Zendaya who bought Lola Bunny to life in a much better representation of her character then the original. I also thought the character designs for the looney tunes opposing teams were fun. Combining famous basketball players with different animals was a fun idea, they looked great and posed a good threat to the main plot point and the team. Finally, there was also a lot of fun scenes with recruiting the looney tunes. Despite Warner Brothers using the film as promotion, the scenes involving the looney tunes being trapped in different brands were admittedly very entertaining to watch and some of the best parts of the film. My next few negatives would be corny tone and humour. The rushed pacing, as well as the repetitive conflict and odd character decisions. This film rushed over so many things, any form of development or important scene introduced was just rushed over, never giving the audience time for any of it to connect or sink in, so therefore I just didn’t care about the characters, I also thought the humour was terrible, I understand it’s a family film. But the humour was incredibly forced, awkward and just fell flat. It was incredibly corny and was just trying too hard to be cool or funny and it just came across as cringy. I also thought the conflict here was extremely repetitive, having the son not feel accepted by Lebron was fine and it was clear his passion wasn’t in basketball. But when the same lines and repetitive reasoning for the conflict was used so often without any form of development or just more to it, it just stayed in the same place and therefore it got tedious and repetitive. Plus, the son made some very questionable character decisions, the film made it come across like he hated his dad, without enough development between there relationship, so the son actually came across as naïve and extremely unlikeable, with illogical and harsh decisions throughout that made me even more disconnected to the relationships. My final few negatives would be the slow pacing in the second half, the lack of stakes or development to the plot. The awful 3D design of the looney tunes. And the messy final act. The film was easily thirty minutes too long, with a messy and clunky final act that dragged on for too long. The final basketball match was forty minutes long that’s almost half the movie, and it didn’t fly by it dragged along almost to the point of it being unwatchable. I also thought there was a complete lack of development or stakes to the plot. I never once considered the villain to be a threat or thought that there was a slight chance of the team actually losing, it was just predictably and simply laid out. With no development to the characters or further explanation into the villain. Finally, I thought the 3D designs for the looney tunes were terrible, I seriously don’t understand why the creative team behind the film decided having 3D designs instead of 2D would work in the final act, because it didn’t. Everyone looked poorly made and the designs were frankly off-putting and worked better with the original 2D designs. This didn’t need to be changed and was a poorly executed creative decision. Overall, Space Jam 2 is mildly entertaining in parts, and it was nice to see the looney tunes back. And will probably be mostly entertaining for young kids. But it was an embarrassing cash grab from Warner Brothers. It was lazy, forced and completely cringy. Another failed sequel to a classic that should have never been made. Warner Brothers, there is a difference between trying and trying too hard and this fell completely flat Overall rating 27/100 By @ryan_the_nixon Before I get into this review, let me be clear that I am not the target audience for this movie. I watched the original a few times as a kid and enjoyed it, but I’ve never felt the need to revisit it as an adult. I also don’t follow basketball very closely - well, apart from the year I jumped on the Raptors bandwagon and they ended up winning the Championship… anyways, clearly not the target audience. Space Jam: A New Legacy is made for two types of people - young children, and 90’s babies who grew up with the original, looking for a rush of nostalgia. For those demographics, I would say the movie delivers as advertised. From a critical perspective, it kind of sucks. The story and characters are as thin as a 2D cartoon. So many of the classic WB characters are sidelined in order to focus on Lebron and his fictional movie son. Unfortunately their story is predictable and pretty dull. None of the cartoon characters are given story arcs at all, and only act as side characters in a movie that should be about them. This movie also relies too heavily on references to other WB properties. Whether it’s Game of Thrones, Harry Potter or Batman, you’ll constantly be reminded that you’re watching a Warner Brothers movie. It’s the same kind of thing we saw in Ready Player One, but the difference is that movie used them to enhance its story - not in place of it. I did enjoy spotting the famous movie characters, but it doesn’t make up for a story that’s severely lacking. Thankfully, the animation and art style are fantastic. This movie looks gorgeous, and the way they handled both the retro and modern looks for these characters was impressive. I wasn’t crazy about the design for the villains, but Bugs Bunny and gang have never looked better. If you still cherish the original as an adult, this movie may scratch that nostalgic itch. If you’re a basketball fan, you’ll probably enjoy seeing some real life players in animated form. If you’ve got kids, they’ll likely love this as much as you loved the first one when you were their age. For me, this didn’t tick any of those boxes, but like I said - I am not the target audience. 3/10 By @moviereviewswithben Space Jam: A New Legacy is a hot mess. Its story is an excessive cluster of ideas. The concept of an NBA superstar joining forces with the Looney Tunes is already bizarre, but A New Legacy adds elaborate computer elements and a father/son conflict. These devices are individually fine, but A New Legacy lacks focus which undermines emotional investment. It's difficult to care when scenes feel rushed and plotlines are forgotten for extended periods of time. Plus, a cast centered around athletes and pedestrian child actors only exasperates the script's deficiencies. Ultimately, this movie fails to mask its commercial intent. Meanwhile, A New Legacy has mediocre filmmaking. The camerawork lacks energy despite its cartoonish content, and the visuals are cluttered with effects and merchandising. The editing pace is chaotic, rushing through plot points but milking pointless comedy scenes. The music is occasionally helpful but mostly trivial. Lastly, the production is crowded and overdesigned. The only positives here are the exaggerated sound design and the diverse effects. However, those strengths are limited by insufficient creativity and restraint. In the end, Space Jam: A New Legacy doesn't do much well and is more of an advertisement than entertainment. Writing: 2/10 Direction: 3/10 Cinematography: 4/10 Acting: 2/10 Editing: 3/10 Sound: 6/10 Score/Soundtrack: 5/10 Production Design: 2/10 Casting: 3/10 Effects: 6/10 Overall Score: 3.6/10 For more of my work: https://guskeller.wixsite.com/moviefilmreviews By @augustkellerwrites 🏀 Voto: 4 Devo ammettere che sono sempre stato un po' restio a far tornare in voga serie tv o film cult che hanno segnato una generazione. Il primo Space Jam con Michael Jordan dal punto di vista grafico non sarà stato sicuramente perfetto ma almeno sapeva farci divertire. Questo Space Jam 2 non riesce a fare nemmeno questo. Partiamo dal presupposto che i dialoghi tra le parti in causa sono del tutto forzati e si nota l’inadeguadezza di Lebron James nell’interpretare la sua parte, al contrario di quanto riesce a fare sul campo da basket. Non come il suo predecessore. Michael aveva quasi un rapporto simbiotico con il set cinematografico. Una delle cose più gratificanti del film é la versione 3D dei Looney Tunes, non più cartonizzati. Un’altro aspetto negativo sono anche le scelte di testo a tratti davvero sensa senso anche per un contesto come questo, forzatamente e volutamente scelte per portare la pellicola a passo con i tempi e piacere a tutti. Chiaramente come nel primo film abbiamo tutta la famiglia Warner Bros al completo, con Bugs Bunny, come sempre a capo della gang. Una cosa che mi ha fatto riflettere, è che nel primo capitolo, quello del 1996, il protagonista era sempre MJ e da contorno vedevamo i vari looney tunes che lo aiutavano nella sua folle avventura nel mondo inesplorato dei cartoon. In New legend, invece, non solo la figura di Bug bunny è molto piú presente, ma si ha come la sensazione che King James passi il testimone al coniglio della Warner Bros mettendosi in secondo piano nella scena più importante del film. La mia conclusione è: come Jurassic Park, Star Wars, Indiana jones, scomodare questi cult per far risorgere un epoca, si rischia quasi sempre di cadere nel banale e commettere errori grossolani. M.O ☕ By @lacompagnia.official

Reviews by: @the_owlseyes @leituras.leo Teen series tend to have the same plot, characters and themes. Most of them are about rich guys or working class guys who wants to be part of an elite. Just a few of them tries to adress other issues, without making the issue the main characteristic of a character. I think that teen dramas are usually mediocre shows because the producers think that teenager are dumb. This isn't true. Sure, maybe they don't have to think about grown-up things, but it doesn't make them simple or gullible. Teen dramas and such need to get better and stop usignthe genre to indoctrinate young people and force on them a political agenda. You can always watch something else, because there's a lot better than these shows. Just an opinion. PLOT "Prince Wilhelm adjusts to life at his prestigious new boarding school, Hillerska, but following his heart proves more challenging than anticipated" or "Swedish Teen Drama which tries to be Bridgerton and Gossip Girl". SCRIPT The premise of this show isn't original and it's clear that has been done to follow a political agenda. The series theme are friendship, royalty, love and sexuality. The last one is the used as the main trait of the protagonist and his lover. The other characters are caricatures or stereotypes and I don't find them interesting or remarkable. They're just there to serve as a background for the main story and to propell the Prince to do something. Only Prince has a character arch but I think that it isn't satisfying and could've been done way better. The character who becomes the villain in the end has a stupid motivation, considering how the Prince treats him during the show. What I dislike, which is the reason why I won't give a 6 to this show, it's how they handle homofobia and the fact that there're only 2 homoexual guys in a boarding school. It's a bit unbelievable. This problem makes the last episode a trainwreck because it ruins the plot twist with an irrilevant character. This is why I'm so disappointed in this series. Script: 5/10 ACTING It's acceptable but I don't think that it's impressive. Sure, it works but there's a little remarkable abou that. Edvin Ryding does a good job and he's able to handle well the dramatic scenes but overall he isn't requested to do a lot. Like every teen drama, the script doesn't offer a lot of material to work with to the actors, who delivers a performance which is common to every teen series. There sin't more to say, because the series doesn't offer a lot to talk about in this section. Acting: 6/10 PHOTOGRAPHY Light isn't flat and the director manages to alternate it with shadows in what seems a good blend. Colours don't seem to have any significant role here. There're a few of good looking shots but overall thi series is just sufficient. Photography: 6/10 EDITING Nothing remarkable about it. I would even say that it's below mediocre because there isn't any scene which is shot in an original way. This isn't just about a single episode. All the series is like that. I'm a lot disappointed. Editing: 5/10 SPECIAL EFFECTS There's so little of them that they don't seem there. It should be like it because the story would lose its credibility. There isn't a lot to say about them. Special Effects: 6/10 SOUNDTRACK It's made of pop songs and a repetitive soundtrack which is characterized by a large use of synths to make it more interesting for young boys and for young boys and girls. There're some scenes where one of the character sings but music doesn't have a relevant role here. Overall it's just a mediocre soundtrack crafted for a young audience. Soundtrack: 6/10 COSTUMES Usual teen clothes with, sometimes, a shade of wealth and non sensical traditionalism. Clothes don't have a particular role in this show. It's ok, even though I've expected more from a series about the elite. Costumes: 5/10 CONCLUSION Script: 5/10 Acting: 6/10 Photography: 6/10 Editing: 5/10 Special Effects: 6/10 Soundtrack: 6/10 Costumes: 5/10 AVERAGE: 5,57 A mediocre show with a unoriginal premise and a mixed execution. Give it a pass or watch only if you want to know more about he Swedish culture. Director: Rojda Sekersöz, Erika Calmeyer Screenplay: Lisa Ambjörn, Sofie Forsman Cast: Edvin Ryding, Omar Rudberg, Malte Gårdinger, Frida Argento, Nikita Uggla Soundtrack: Matti Bye Running Time: 45 minutes By @the_owlseyes Nota: 60/💯 . O principal ponto positivo da série e a escalação do elenco. É bom enfim ver uma série com protagonistas que realmente parecem adolescentes com espinhas e olheira, se distanciando do perfil hiperssexualizado do elenco de várias séries da Netflix e trazendo uma atmosfera mais natural pra trama, sem o excessivo apelo sexual da maioria das produções teen, preferindo apostar na trama romântica. . Os atores no geral têm desempenham ótimo. O casal protagonista principalmente, os dois entregam ótimas atuações, tanto em cenas românticas quanto dramáticas, a química entre eles é excelente, de forma que conseguimos nos envolver com sua relação, que é desenvolvida de forma saudável e condizente pra idade deles. Só o que me cansou foi o constante vai e volta, estilo novela mexicana, do casal. Porém, um problema aqui que me incomodou e muito: o casal protagonista são os únicos que de fato se destacam! Todos os demais personagens são em suma razos, com perfis, personalidades pouco exploradas, o que os torna desinteressantes e até genéricos. . Vejamos: - um garoto de linhagem rica que usa algum tipo de medicamento escondido descobre que de repente a família está falida; - uma garota de família nobre que não consegue se encaixar nas exigências de postura de sua posição; - uma garota de origem humilde que quer se sentir aceita pelos colegas da instituição de ensino rica que estuda; Tudo isso não parece já ter sido visto antes??? Mas o pior é que essas tramas são simplesmente inseridas, o desenvolvimento delas não me pareceu atrativo ou envolvente. . Além desses, há detalhes técnicos que não pretendo me ater como o fato de a série parecer ter um orçamento limitado com cenários muito simplórios e trechos em que a câmera balança demais. . No geral, não é uma série ruim, mas também não é nada de inovador ou diferencial. É mais do mesmo, mas pode agradar bastante ao público menos exigente que busca apenas uma trama de romance para se entreter. By @leituras.leo

Reviews by: @art_fanatic_313 21: The Battle of the Square is Soloup’s new huge graphic novel. It’s a 752 pages long comic about the Greek War of Independence. It follows a woman who is in her early to mid 30s and listens to the story of the war of independence from a homeless, old man. They meet for the first time after some racists harass him and after that they meet again in the same place multiple times, so that he can talk to her about the war of independence. The graphic novel is separated in 21 chapters and in each chapter there’s a part of the main story with the woman and the old man, but there’s also one (some times more) story (or stories) that are adaptations of actual writings of the time. This is a very interesting graphic novel. Personally I have a very good knowledge of Greek history and especially of that time, so I really liked how historically accurate it was and I also enjoyed learning many more things about that time that I didn’t know. Something else I liked is the way the graphic novel is structured. Because it’s so big, it could very easily become boring, but thanks to its very interesting structure it stays captivating until the end. Another thing that I liked in this graphic novel is the fact that it tells the story as it happened and unlike most other comics, books and movies about that time, it doesn’t try to make the Greeks seems like the heroes and everyone else like the vilains. Of course the Greeks were the “good” ones (if we can characterize something or someone as good or bad in real life), but they also did many horrible things and there were multiple instances when they massacred and raped Ottoman women and kids. Also, while they were fighting for their freedom, they started another war, a civil war which almost destroyed them and I’m glad that Soloup dedicated a lot of pages to talk about that stuff. Furthermore, one of the graphic novel’s most interesting aspects is the fact that it shows the story from multiple different perspectives. In the parts that are adaptations of actual writings of the time, said writings aren’t only by Greeks, but they are also by Ottomans and others. This is especially interesting because it allows the reader to see the multiple different perspectives, different people had about certain matters. Also, in some occasions, the different writings were contradicting each other, which is something very interesting. Finally, something else that I liked is that while this is a graphic novel about 1821-1830, it doesn’t fail to criticize the current situation of Greece. While this is certainly a very good and important graphic novel, I do have two problems with it. The first one is that up to some point it feels like the characters of the woman and the old man are used only as storytelling devices and that they don’t have personalities of their own. Fortunately, after a while, we get to see some glimpses of their personalities, but still, we don’t get to know them as well as I think that we should. I get that this is a graphic novel about the Greek war of independence and not about these two, but since the writer decided to set the story in the current era and have these two in it, I think that he should’ve dedicated more time on their personalities. My second problem with this graphic novel isn’t really a problem, but it’s something that bothers me personally, in most of Soloup’s comics. While he’s really great at writing comics, I think that he’s not as good at drawing them. His main job is working as a cartoonist for the newspaper and I think that that has affected his drawing style a lot. To me his style seems very simplified and I think that especially for a story like that, a more detailed and realistic style would’ve worked much better. That being said, the artwork at the parts that are adaptations of writings of the time seems to me a bit more detailed than the artwork in the main story and I think that if the artwork was like that in the entire graphic novel, it would’ve been much better. Furthermore, while I don’t really love Soloup’s artwork, it’s clear that he has a great understanding of direction. His panels have a very cinematic “direction”, which works very well. Also, I admire his understanding of background. The surroundings are always very consistent and improve the feeling of the artwork. Overall this is a very good graphic novel and I’d recommend it to anyone interested in Greek history or history in general. It has its problems, but it can still be read and enjoyed very easily. 9/10 By @art_fanatic_313

Reviews by: @planetnameless20 Created by: Shinji Nojima Director: Shin Wakayabashi Studio: CloverWorks Starring: Kanata Aikawa, Tomori Kusunoki, Shuka Saitō, Hinaki Yano etc. Number of Episodes: 12 + 1 Special Episode Original Post TRIGGER WARNING: The anime deals with subjects such a suicide, self-harm and sexual assault. Every season sees an increasing amount of anime series making their debut, one of this past winter’s breakouts was Wonder Egg Priority, by CloverWorks, that caught viewers’ attention for its stunningly detailed animation as well as for its focus on heavy subjects that aren’t often found in such colourful-looking series. Plot Summary: Ai Ohto (Kanata Aikawa) is one of our four young heroes and the main protagonist, at the age of 14 she’s lived her life as outsider due to being mocked for her heterochromia (each eye of a different colour) and at a moment when it seems like she’s finally found a friend, Koito Nagase (Azusa Tadokoro) commits suicide on the school’s premises which leads Ai to close herself off and to stop attending school. After buying a peculiar egg during a dream, the following night she finds herself in another bizarre dream that has her tasked with protecting a girl born from such egg, this girl will be taunted by malicious creatures named Seeno Evils with the intention of killing her, if Ai succeeds in defending the girl and defeating her source of trauma, she will get one step closer to bringing Koito back to life. These eggs Ai buys are provided by Acca and Ura-Acca (Yûya Uchida & Hiroki Takahashi), a pair of brothers who are trying to help girls bring back to life the friends they lost to suicide, there are other three girls that join Ai in her adventure for their own reasons: Neiru Anouma (Tomori Kusonoki), a serious young genius who’s CEO to a company and is attempting to bring back her sister, Rika Kaway (Shuka Saito), a former idol who feels guilty for the death of her only fan and struggles with her mother’s alcoholism, and finally there’s Momoe Sawaki (Hinaki Yano) who’s torn between her identity as a girl and her more masculine appearance, she’s trying to bring back to life the only friend who saw her as a girl but whose advances she rejected. Review: Despite trying to summarise the plot, these two paragraphs are only scratching the surface of an anime that mixes different genres trying to explore both the philosophy of death vs life while still infusing Wonder Egg Priority with the action that is expected from anime series. This unfortunately leads this first season to become unfocused and confusing after some strong first episodes. The first half of the series focuses on establishing and developing its characters, the choice of having a small cast further strengthens these first episodes as each character is given enough screen time to be developed. Ai is the ultimate protagonist but the other three girls each get their own episode that further explores their background and how they got to where they are, and what they’re going to be doing. The strongest element of Wonder Egg Priority is the friendship these vastly different characters create and how such friendship guides them through their tumultuous lives and hardships; despite protecting girls that have suffered from trauma, our four heroes also struggle with their own demons as both Ai and Rika are shown to have considered committing suicide themselves but found solace and strength in each other to continue on. What might be odd at first is how casually suicide is talked about by these characters but soon enough it becomes clear that the reason for such casual talk isn’t because of insensitive writing, but because they’ve all witnessed so much tragedy and are close enough to be able to let themselves be vulnerable and not treat such subjects as taboo any longer. It’s quite refreshing to see this happen on such colourful series, despite the heaviness of the narrative, these four still find time to experience joy and have a laugh while supporting each other through their shared and individual struggles. Also, the girls they must protect share what has led them to take such action and oftentimes their situation is consequence of traumatic experiences ranging from deeply rooted insecurities to sexual abuse, none of this is ever taken for granted by anyone and is instead shown for the horror it is whilst still trying to provide a sense of hope and understanding. These girls unfortunately cannot be revived but our protagonists always make sure to be there for them and share their compassion in order to guide them to a more peaceful end of their journey. Unfortunately, all this becomes muddled midway through the season when the more sci-fi elements of the story are introduced. I won’t go into much detail to avoid spoilers but it’s safe to say that Acca and Ura-Acca aren’t helping Ai and her friends out of sheer kindness, they have their own hidden agenda that is unfolded towards the end and leads to the introduction of a variety of new characters in a very short time. Such change in tone diminishes the more raw and authentic tone of the previous episodes with the show starting to use the trauma behind its characters as tools for its greater plot, a plot that is confusing on its own and isn’t rendered any clearer due to the lack of a definite ending to the season. Episode 12 is the last episode available to watch but doesn’t wrap anything up, of course not everything needs explanation since there’s consideration of a second season, but final episodes need to at least provide few minor conclusions or hints for the viewers to be excited for its future. Episode 8 also damages the pace by being a 23-minute-long re-cap of what’s happened in previous episodes, in fact the studio has been working on a 13th episode that will be released in June in order to produce a better finale. Wonder Egg Priority is a genuine attempt at criticising the real world’s struggle with mental health, insecurities and anxieties daily magnified by social media, it’s no coincidence that the ‘Seeno Evils’ the girls fight in their dreams eventually turn into stronger creatures named ‘Haters’. Such symbolism works in its favour, but the plot unfortunately gets lost in its own ambition after a brilliant first half. However, it never treats the severity of its themes tactlessly but instead defies their taboo status through vulnerable yet strong characters, despite its unfocused larger picture. Rating: 8/10 By @planetnameless20

Reviews by: @art_fanatic_313 This is the first issue of Ed Piskor’s new series, Red Room. As the title implies, this is a series about Red Rooms, which are places on the dark web where people can watch live streams of people getting tortured and brutally murdered. People need to pay good money (on Bitcoin) to watch these lives, so the people hosting them make a very good living out of it. This issue follows a man who’s a clerk for the police. After his wife gets killed by a drunk driver he’s left alone with his daughter and he’s having some problems. At the same time some Red Room legends are having a hard time making more streams, because they aren’t as popular as they used to and another streamer called Poker Face has been getting all the attention. They find out about the man and how he used to make amazing Red Room videos, so they kidnap him and offer him the opportunity to work for them (which means torture and murder people live, while wearing a mask). The man agrees, so he starts doing that, so that he can make money to send his daughter to a good college. This is a very unique comic. It has a lot of disturbing images and ideas, but somehow it manages to be great. The relationship between the man and his daughter is very well written. They are having many problems, as teens and parents usually do, but they also have a deep love for each other. This aspect of the comic is especially good because of how it contrasts with all the gore. Another thing I liked about the comic is that it’s not simply an excuse to draw people getting tortured. Underneath all that I think that there’s a very interesting social commentary, about internet, its future and the way people abuse people’s natural urges to profit. Furthermore, another thing I like about the comic is the comments of the lives. Whenever there’s a Red Room live shown in the comic, we also see the comments the viewers leave. They are all very interesting and many times actually funny and certainly make the images depicted in the lives seem less disturbing. What surprised me the most about this comic is how much I loved the torture and murder scenes. I’ve never considered myself someone who’s a fan of gore, but somehow in this comic I loved it and I’m not sure why. The artwork of the comic is incredible. It’s very detailed but also not extremely realistic. Ed Piskor has a very unique style which is beautiful and fits perfectly well with a story like this. He has a great understanding of direction, so the perspectives of each panel are always excellent and work perfectly. Also he’s amazing at drawings the torture scenes. The way he draws the bodies and especially the skin getting ripped off is very disturbing and also fantastic. Other than the artwork and the writing, Ed also does a great job with the lettering. Lettering is something that usually when is good goes unnoticed and when is bad distracts the reader in a terrible way. If that’s the general rule, then Ed’s lettering is a paradox, because while it’s amazing, it’s also very noticeable and distracting, exactly because of how good it is. There’s a beautiful consistency in each letter and all the speech bubbles are so gorgeous that it makes it impossible for me to not spend time admiring them. Overall, this is a great first issue and I can’t wait to see what’ll happen next in the series. 10/10 By @art_fanatic_313

This may not be the trilogy that comes to mind when we think of “the best trilogy”. We think of The Lord of the Rings, or the original Star Wars trilogy, or Christopher Nolan’s Batman trilogy. Of course, “best” may not be the right term to use because film is subjective. However, this trilogy has so much meaning and social relevance, whilst having such incredible writing, direction and acting. Here is why I believe the Before trilogy is the “best” trilogy in film. I like that the three films are snapshots of a universal feeling. Linklater is not trying to show everything that happens in Jesse and Celine’s lives. He is trying to authentically capture what it feels like to genuinely fall in love, to think about what could have been, and to reflect on what is happening right now. The involvement of the actors in the writing process makes all three films so personal and universal. It is rare that an actor can write a version of themselves across three films that is so personal to them, and then to be that character. The surreal feeling of falling in love. The disappointment of not feeling that genuine love again in other relationships. The frustration and turbulence of falling out with a partner, but not wanting to separate because you feel that you are too old to try and find love again. The unique experiences of the actors add to the realism of these moments that are so universal and personal to everyone. Linklater’s ability to show the impact of time in one’s life is astonishing and evident in all three films. Before Sunrise ends with shots of the places they have visited in the past day. It is like their romance has been captured in a series of postcards, and they have a memory to hold onto. In contrast, Before Sunset begins with the places Jesse and Celine are going to go to, immediately suggesting a distance between the two and how their perspectives on the past and the future are going to change over the course of the film. There is also something quite cyclical about the trilogy. Before Sunrise begins with Celine moving seats opposite to Jesse on the train because a German couple are loudly arguing, which leads to her involvement in Jesse’s life. And then in Before Midnight, Jesse and Celine become the married couple that are arguing. It is incredible how two people can be in complete awe of each other, and then get to a point their lives where they despise each other. And it all unfolds before our eyes in three films. I read that even the setting of the three films represents the nature of their relationship. Vienna is conveyed quite ideally and romantically, symbolising their optimistic and youthful views. Despite it being where Celine lives, I see Paris as a country influenced by jazz music, which is quite unpredictable in its improvisation - much like Jesse and Celine in this film. Greece is an ancient country with archaic ruins, signifying the slight crumbling of their marriage in Before Midnight. This is a perfect example of films that I like more because it didn’t do well at the box office, but is still considered one of the best films of all time. I don’t like when people consider how much a film grosses at the box office when ranking or rating films because it doesn’t always mean that they are good. This originated in appreciating the great but small budget films that River Phoenix starred in, like My Own Private Idaho and Running on Empty. But take the Disney live action remakes, for example. They gross hundreds of millions of dollars, and it infuriates me. Especially The Lion King 2019 remake, which was word-for-word the original and was not needed because we had a perfect film already. The trilogies that I mentioned at the beginning were both critically and commercially lauded, whereas this trilogy was only praised by critics. Perhaps when Before Sunrise was released, it was viewed by audiences as pretentious, but they would not understand what Linklater, Hawke and Delpy would do until the two sequels came out. It feels like nothing like this had been done before. The natural performances similar to theatre. The honest and subtle writing. The marvellous direction. It is inspiring, and what I would look to for inspiration if I were to write or direct my own play or film. Another way in which this trilogy is so personal to viewers is that their favourite or the one they most identify with changes as they experience more of life. I know that I can relate to the second film by looking back and thinking about what could have been, even if it is not romantic. But not having many married relatives means that I have no idea what it feels like to be a part of an environment like the third film. This is something that separates these films from any other, apart from perhaps coming-of-age films. This trilogy speaks to audiences in a way that others can’t. It is very unique in the way that the writing and acting was approached, and makes it inspirational for aspiring actors and writers such as myself. By @thedefinitionofcreativity

Reviews by: @thefilmobservatory Rating: 4/5 Dramedy/Coming-of-Age A Connecticut teenager with ASD, Sam Gardner (Keir Gilchrist), prepares to leave the nest of his supportive but protective family, as he is thrust into the world of relationships, higher education, and deciding how he’ll shape his future. While not a perfect series, Atypical is probably my favourite family dramedy. It tackles many issues in a sincere and sensitive manner, and it displays good representation and messaging. Atypical mostly achieves what it sets out to do and is positively subversive. The choice to centre a series around somebody with autism was a much-needed one, and the show helps in educating viewers about those who live with it, tackling common misconceptions that have sadly alienated people with ASD, in the past. However, Sam isn’t the only one portrayed as ‘atypical’, linking to the effective theme that nobody is really normal. Filled with great, likeable, and human performances, and heartfelt storylines and character arcs, Atypical is bound to leave even the most cold-hearted of viewers with a smile on their face. Gilchrist is very good in the role of Sam but I’d like to be careful to not overstate the accuracy of his performance, as he is a neurotypical, which has raised some eyebrows as to the authenticity and correct representation in the series. However, he seems to capture the emotions and characteristics of Sam very well, and the commitment to the role feels genuine, and shows that there had been a lot of research into how people with autism feel and about how they view the world. For example, Sam isn’t presented to simply be dismissive with no filter, rather that he feels just as much empathy and love as anybody else but struggles to read how other people are feeling. His ASD causes him to possess a very literal way of thinking, which is sometimes played to comedic effect but I don’t think this is a demonstration of ignorance. It’s rather to make the audience sympathise with him and realise how confusing the world can be for people that struggle to understand the abstract and the ambiguous, and since things in life are often unclear and indefinite, it’s then more obvious why things can become overwhelming for people with ASD. Overall, Sam’s character arc is done sensitively, as his ASD is depicted to not be a hindrance but just something that makes him different, like everybody else; normality doesn’t really exist since everybody is unique. The four seasons of Atypical display a brilliant character arc for Sam, as he grows more independent and confident in himself, despite the frighteningly overwhelming odds that people with ASD face, regarding chances of success and career paths that neurotypicals naturally have an advantage with. Sam’s love of Antarctica smartly comes in as important for many episodes, as his facts about the freezing landscape and its inhabitants often link into the storylines of the episode. For example, when he wants to start dating, he thinks about it like he’s presenting himself as a ‘mate’ and therefore needs to do things like find his chosen partner something special to give them as a gift, as a penguin would give a nice pebble to its chosen partner. However, these ideas of animals and nature also apply to other characters in each episode. When Sam’s sister Casey (Brigette Lundy-Paine) is doing a race for her track team, he describes how in nature, animals sprint as fast as they can to escape predators and that he doesn’t understand why Casey does it. He then explains how the deadliest animal isn’t a “large beast like a lion or a tiger or a cheetah”, but rather a “small, annoying one, that’s impossible to outrun: the mosquito”. This dialogue mirrors in the scene how, in the crowd at the stadium, a person’s ponytail keeps flicking and brushing against Sam’s face, which would likely be frustrating and uncomfortable for a person with autism. Obviously, this thought trail has gone away from the original subject, which was Casey’s race, which cleverly demonstrates how Sam’s mind can drift. Themes of the natural world, such as home and what’s essential for survival come into play for whole episodes too, as well as solely scenes. Another good example is when Sam gives an explanation about a major hole developing in Antarctica, despite the assumedly sufficiently solid foundation of the continent. This mirrors the disrupt and metaphoric ‘hole’ developing in the originally strong Gardner family dynamic, after a difficult turn of events from Season 1 to Season 2. It’s a smart storytelling device that helps portray how Sam’s mind works, and shows that this difference isn’t bad, rather that it’s unique. Sam’s passion for the South Pole and the wildlife there is wonderfully paid off by the end of the series and watching him achieve his dream is simply delightful: his character’s development and arcs seamlessly culminate by the end of Season 4, and he gets the most satisfying conclusion out of the characters in Atypical. Sam’s inner circle includes his mum and dad, Elsa (Jennifer Jason Leigh) and Doug (Michael Rapaport), his sister Casey, his girlfriend Paige (Jenna Boyd) and his co-worker and neurotypical best friend Zahid (Nik Dodani). By the end, Elsa and Doug’s relationship has gone through a lot and is brilliantly nuanced. Season 1 sees the especially over-protective Elsa struggling to know what to do, as Sam is growing more independent, removing her full-time job as a mother. This leads to some… I’ll say complications, to avoid spoilers. However, Doug also faces a major past mistake and works hard for redemption for it. Leigh and Rapaport give excellent performances as flawed but caring parents and their journey as a couple is also an integral, and interesting part of the show. Their storylines as a couple and as individuals deal with grounded subjects such as marital issues, miscommunication and forgiveness, dealing with grief, reconnecting with estranged family members, and obviously overcoming the challenges of raising two teenagers. They feel like real people and help expand Atypical’s target audience, as there are things for adult viewers to especially relate to and understand. Other than Sam, Casey is the best character in the show. Lundy-Paine is phenomenal in the role, and they perfectly convey the nuances of the complicated character. Sam and Casey’s sibling dynamic is refreshingly realistic, as the two constantly fight but have just enough moments to show just a little bit of care for each other. Casey gets the best lines in the show, as she is constantly wise-cracking and annoying her mum, but also has the most heartfelt storyline overall. Her early relationship with Evan (Graham Rogers) is very important for the story and Casey’s character, as she learns about love, and the complications that come with it (side note: everybody loves Evan, he’s the best, and the show does him criminally dirty later on, and this was unfortunately something that didn’t work for me as the seasons went on). The two support each other, especially in each of their family issues, and their love feels real: it’s so nice to see an onscreen teenage relationship depicted maturely. As the show progresses, it sincerely tackles relevant themes for Casey, as her coming-of-age years show her exploring her sexuality, while also struggling with the mounting pressure for her to be successful at track. Mental health issues, such as anxiety, are increasingly common for teenagers, so this representation of it makes viewers realise that many people struggle and it’s important to take a break from what’s causing stress and to lean on those that you love, when everything is becoming too much. Casey’s relationship with her classmate and fellow member of the Clayton Prep track team, Izzie (Fivel Stewart), also naturally evolves, and is mostly executed with sensitivity and heart. Like Evan, Izzie doesn’t generally take centre stage but her many issues with family present a side to the character that many others don’t think about. While other characters might think that Izzie is just a mess because she sometimes doesn’t show up to school without explanation, the show offers a very different perspective, as it spends time to present how difficult her home life is, and how she is truly a kind and caring person. Apart from some occasional jarring plot points and slightly illogical character moments, their chemistry feels genuine, and the progression of their story is effective. Paige and Zahid round out the main cast, the two being supporting characters but also fan-favourites. Boyd and Dodani each serve vital roles, as Sam’s girlfriend and best friend respectively. The former is an enthusiastic overachiever, and can annoy characters like Casey, however she purely sees Sam’s mind as beautiful, is incredibly defensive for him if anybody tries to hurt him, and she understands and adapts to his preferences and needs, making Paige ultimately a very likable, and kind-hearted side character. She teaches Sam a lot about relationships but does come into her own, as the show progresses, and her subversive storyline displays positive messaging of coping with failure and disappointment. While she has some funny moments, there’s an emotional core to Paige, as with many of the characters in Atypical, that takes the series to another level as a dramedy and coming-of-age story. And then there is the fantastic Zahid, perfectly brought to life by the brilliant Nik Dodani. One of the best things about Sam’s best friend is that he treats him normally, moving away from the overdone tropes of alienation for people with ASD. While he isn’t always the most ethically sound person, he really cares about Sam and offers him much advice, that often comes into storylines, such as one where Sam is wondering about dating language, which he completely lacks experience in, so Zahid becomes his translator. They have each other’s backs and Atypical displays a warm, delightful friendship between the two. Season 4 was also a highlight for Zahid’s character development, as he starts to become a better person, although the arc felt a little rushed towards the end, which is unfortunately where some of my criticisms of this mostly very good show come in. The ending of Atypical is not a dealbreaker, in that it doesn’t definitively make or break the show. Most characters had a satisfying conclusion to their story, others felt slightly rushed, and some got the short end of the stick and partly got forgotten about. The final season focuses in on Sam and Casey, and both characters’ storylines are excellently done. However, I felt that the series was a little ignorant of the fact that Atypical possessed an ensemble cast. Elsa and Doug don’t have much to do in Season 4, largely because their main story as a couple had mostly concluded by the end of Season 3, leading to a lack of direction in what to do with their characters towards the end. However, the worst instance was one of my favourite characters, Evan, essentially having around 5-10 minutes of screen-time in Season 4. For people who have seen the series and know what happens, it’s not surprising that his time in the show gets massively reduced but I found it a shame that he was only really important in relation to a main character in the series (Casey). A similar thing happens to Izzie, specifically in the final episode. She’s in a major scene at the beginning of it but then doesn’t really show up after that. I don’t know whether the creators and crew of the series wanted to end it at this point, or if the series got cancelled, but it felt like they could have done with some more episodes to round out the storylines for each of their characters more effectively. Season 4 of Atypical is good TV overall but there were some aspects that I felt could have been handled better. As for other issues, I have heard differing opinions on the accuracy of the representation of people living on the spectrum, and I do think that the series should have included more people with autism in its creation, so as to be privy to the personal opinions and advice of those from the community it strives to be offering positive representation of. The extent to which I can comment on this is limited, as I don’t know enough about life for people with autism, and their exact experiences, but ultimately, I hope that Atypical’s efforts in representation worked for the most part and weren’t upsetting for any viewers. Season 1 in particular does lean into some stereotyping too much for various kinds of representation but the series improves on avoiding that, moving forward from there. While the series reuses a lot of motifs and doesn’t appear to offer any new music for the score beyond the first season, it nicely conveys character moments and emulates their emotions well. And the theme song is quite catchy. As for camerawork, it’s all done in a pretty standard way for this niche of TV, so there’s nothing particularly adventurous but it’s all executed professionally. While the show’s storylines are often relevant and grounded, the show presents them well in a funny, more family-friendly manner, and the script is very consistent. I’m interested to see what also the creative team behind Atypical can do because of the display of immense talent at brilliantly balancing the comedy and drama in the show. Despite some of its limits, Atypical is a show that’s mostly pretty good and is sometimes pretty great. It’s one of the best Netflix series that I’ve seen and it’s a heart-warming story about likable, relatable characters that also presents mature themes for audiences to connect with. Atypical is very underrated, and I recommend it to fans of family dramedies and/or coming-of-age stories, those looking for a heartfelt comfort show, and anybody who likes these kinds of relatable, human TV series. By @thefilmobservatory

Reviews by: @art_fanatic_313 Fragments of Horror is a volume that collects eight short horror comics by Junji Ito. These stories are about a futon that makes you go crazy, a woman who falls in love with a house, has sex with it, makes it come to life and lose all its value, a witch who collects heads, a family who creates real projections of their dead loved ones, a girl who’s obsessed with getting dissected, an angelic/demonic time travelling black bird woman, a writer obsessed with tics and a woman who gets abused in her personal life and gets a chance to live through the a girl she instructs who’s unable to make any decisions for herself. All of these stories are very bizarre, each in a different way. While all eight of them are very unique, some main themes and ideas seem to appear in this collection. Some of these are infidelity, trauma, the fear of losing the ones close to us and the need to have some sense of control in our lives. All these themes and ideas appear in some of the stories, but there seem to be two main things that Junji Ito is interested it. Said things are obsession and the horror of beautiful women. About obsession, in most of the comics in this collection the characters seem to be controlled by an obsession which ultimately destroys them. That can be something as simple as a house or a futon and as absurd as tics or dissection. Obsession is something that destroys people and there’s no one who presents that in a better way than Junji Ito. A bit more weird is the constant appearance in these comics of terrifying beautiful women. It’s very interesting to see how Junji Ito makes so many of the stories’ “villains” beautiful women. These characters usually manipulate the people around them and ultimately destroy them. Beauty is something mesmerizing that makes people focus on it and forget about the person’s character and motives. That makes it easier for someone beautiful to manipulate others. This is a very interesting idea that I spent a lot of time thinking about after reading this comic and it’s amazing how well Junji Ito presents it. The comics aren’t really scary (at least for me), but they are creepy and they do have some disturbing images. Their main positive aspect tho is how many layers they have. Junji Ito’s comics can be read as simple horror stories, but if you dig deeper you’ll find many philosophical ideas, hidden meanings and concepts. My favorite story from the entire collection is “Gentle Goodbye”, which follows a girl who has lost her mother and lives only with her father. She’s having constant nightmares that her father will die that continue to torture her for many years. The girl eventually marries a young guy. The guy’s family has a weird tradition to prey very hard in the funerals of their relatives and bring them back as projections that “live” for about twenty years. Eventually, after about ten years, the girl finds out that she’s a projection as well and she leaves her husband to go live with her father. This story is a great example of Junji Ito’s love with obsessions. All the characters are in one way or another obsessed with death. The family makes the projections in order to make death easier for them and have some extra years to be able to let go of their loved ones, but eventually it becomes apparent (to the reader) that the projections do quite the opposite, because the members of the family get more attached to their dead relatives and then it’s even harder for them to let them go. That creates a very unhealthy obsession with death and dead people which consumes their (almost) every thought. The girl on the other hand is obsessed with death in a different way. Her obsession is created because of trauma and she’s terrified that her father will die and she’ll be left alone. This is a more natural and healthy obsession which ultimately seems to actually have some positive impact on her. The artwork in every story is simply amazing. Junji Ito’s artwork is very detailed and while it’s (at some extend) classic manga artwork, it’s quite realistic. Also, the perspective of each panel is very interesting and helps the story a lot. That being said, what Junji Ito truly excels at is monsters and kinda psychedelic scenes, like the double page spread from Futon. These two pages are really beautiful and they made me fall I love with Ito’s artwork. Overall, this is an amazing comic collection with great writing and fantastic artwork. It can be read simply as a fun collection of stories or as something deeper than that and it’s always very enjoyable. 10/10 By @art_fanatic_313

Reviews by: @art_fanatic_313 Naked Bones is a Greek graphic novel, written by Dimosthenis Papamarkos and drawn by Kanellos Cob. It’s a futuristic, dystopian, sci-fi story, which mainly follows a man and his robot companion. It takes place in an irretrievably destroyed planet, which reached that condition after a huge war. The human and the robot survive through the consumption of other humans, until they met a woman, sent from a different planet. Her arrival changes things and the three of them go on an adventure, the outcome of which will impact the entire world. This is a very interesting comic. The writing is great and every character is unique and has very understandable motives for everything he/she/it does. Also the chemistry between the man and the robot is great. In my opinion the most important thing in any science fiction story is the world building and in here that’s done excellently. It’s a very bleak world, but it’s also very realistic and after reading this comic you feel like you could see yourself living in a horrible world like that. The comic in general is very pessimistic, but in the end it has a tiny bit of hope, which changes the entire feeling you’re left with, after finishing it. Whenever things seem terrible it’s important to remember that there’s always hope. Personally I’m not a huge fan of science fiction, but that’s exactly the kind of science fiction I like, because it uses the medium to showcase certain philosophical ideas. Similar sci-fi movies/comics are Frank Miller’s Ronin, Stanley Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey and Andrei Tarkovsky’s Solaris. The artwork by Kanellos Cob is truly beautiful and it works very well. At first I didn’t really like the way the faces were drawn, but after a while I got used to it and I realized that it fits very well with the rest of the artwork. In the graphic novel there are multiple splash pages and all of them are really gorgeous. Kanellos does a great job establishing the various settings where everything takes place. Also, there are multiple pages without any words, in which the reader is entirely dependent on the artwork to follow the story and thanks to Kanellos’ great storytelling abilities and panel to panel consistency, everything flows perfectly and is very easily understood. Overall, this is a great science fiction comic, with a lot of depth and artistic value. Personally I’d put it amongst the top 10 greatest Greek comics of the last decade and I’d recommend it to anyone interested in reading a more philosophical sci-fi story. 9/10 By @art_fanatic_313

Reviews by: @somuchlovecinema I think we can truly represent this film when we talk about artistic cinematic experience... Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue Of Ignorance), simply known as Birdman, is a 2014 American Black-Comedy Drama film written and directed by Alejandro G. Iñárittu.. Starring Michael Keaton, Zach Galifianakis, Edward Norton, Andrea Riseborough, Amy Ryan, Emma Stone And Naomi Watts. The Story Is About a fading actor trying to make a comeback via Broadway and his struggles with guilt and fame through this journey... You know... by the time this film released I didn't even know it existed..... And I saw an analysis on this film in a local newspaper and I was completely fascinated by the review.. And then I saw this film and I was utterly impressed how it turned out to be... Truly Amazing. The difference between fiction and reality executed through the wonderful direction... This film never stops to surprise me. The concept is dealt with complexity and depth and it's randomness and metaphors are sublime. This is a film about everyone of us... trying to figure out our true selves. The film talks about Relationships, Fame, Power, Success and Happiness.. And The Euphoria The leading character feels always eludes him in real life. The way Absurdic Melancholia And Imposter Syndrome is dealt with in this film is SO Good. The Cinematography, The Direction, The Writing, The Production, The GODDAMN EDITING, and a Beautiful cast... This is what I call cinema. Birdman is something that is influencing and unforgettable... and who haven't seen this.. I recommend this film to you people... By @somuchlovecinema

Reviews by: @the_owlseyes @ryan_the_nixon @moviereviewswithben @__movie.shmovies__ @dylanandhismovies @reviews_by_morg @miscellaneous_media_reviews “Imagine you’re a fish, swimming in a pond. You can move forward and back, side to side, but never up out of the water. If someone were standing beside the pond, watching you, you’d have no idea they were there. To you, that little pond is an entire universe. Now imagine that someone reaches down and lifts you out of the pond. You see that what you thought was the entire world is only a small pool. You see other ponds. Trees. The sky above. You realize you’re a part of a much larger and more mysterious reality than you had ever dreamed of” Blake Crouch, Dark Matter In a multiverse where every choice is realized and you're just another you amongst a multitude version of yourself, what makes you special, what makes you what you are? In a multiverse where every path is already written, what can you do to exert your free will? Who are you going to be, when everything has already been? Maybe we shouldn't look for convoluted ideas to explain why we are not in control of our life. Maybe it's time to take a choice regardless of the risk and the sacrifices. Maybe it's time to take a stand rather than being passive and accomplices. Forge your own life, your own personality and your own path. Don't lose yourself. Be your true self. PLOT "The mercurial villain Loki resumes his role as the God of Mischief in a new series that takes place after the events of Avengers: Endgame" or "It's time to make the MCU weirder". SCRIPT This, this is one of the most imaginative, clever and well done script out there. It takes a character at his lowest and brings him up, by letting him have an impressive character development. Loki is well written but I can say the same about the other characters, even though some of them get a short time to shine, the show is able to flesh them out and let us fall in love with them. The series approach interesting themes like identity, time, sexuality, free will, freedom, choice, fate, moral, friendship,....a lot of different aspects, and it analyzes them in a sharp and interesting way. In fact, this show isn't only strong in terms of plot and characters but also regarding dialogues, which are witty. Obviously, as every other Marvel products, this series manages to recognize when to be serious, funny or sad. I find interesting the fact that the producers have been able to sneak in a relevant character without wasting him and to explain what could've been a plot hole. This series will leave you wandering what will happen next. You'll desire to know about it. I find remarkable that this series is able to keep you hooked from start to end, without dragging and wasting its time in useless sequences. Script: 9/10 ACTING Tom Hiddleston, Owen Wilson and Sophia Di Martino delivers incredible performances. Hiddleston plays Loki at his best, as always, Wilson portrays his character in a charming, tender and likeable way. Sophia Di Martino, who is like a newcomers here, is the perfect casting choice for her character, who is able to portray as cunning, vulnerable, strong, fascinating and deceiving. The point is that all the cast does it's best and it shows. Richard E. Grant, Gugu Mbatha-Raw, Wunmi Mosaku, DeObia Oparei and Jack Veal, all of them are just great in their roles. This series could be a 10 but I'll give it something lower because I want to see what's going to happen next season. Acting: 9/10 PHOTOGRAPHY Just beautiful. A lot, a lot of wonderful and marvellous shots which seems like paintings. Lights is using in interesting ways and colours are what makes this series a gem. I like how yellow, green, purple and blue are used to identify different characters, situations and to represent Lokis archs. It's one of the best photography I've ever seen. Photography: 9/10 EDITING Well, it surprised me. I didn't expect this variety of shots, especially a long shot which is just one of the best thing which happens in this show. Slow motion is used only when it's necessary and meaningful and the series doesn't shy out of doing something bonkers with the camera and shots. There's an episode which start with a shot which seems out of nowhere but it's extremely original. Editing: 8/10 SPECIAL EFFECTS Usual high quality Marvel cgi. It isn't the main strength of this series but it's carefully done and it helps in getting into this universe which is becoming crazier. I like how it achieves to be almost flawless without being redundant and invasive. A lo of credit should be given to the director and how she managed to make the best of it. Just one thing lowers the overall quality of this section but you'll find it out easily by yourself. Special Effects: 7/10 SOUNDTRACK Wow. I didn't see that coming. Marvel has impressed me and this is a sign that it's resolving one of the weakness which characterized the franchise. This soundtrack is a never stopping delight and it suits the show and the protagonist like a glove. Not only it delivers epic moments but also touching, tense and majestic ones. It's like a ticking clock which aligns with the show main theme. This soundtrack is what pushed this show above every other products of the Marvel studios, so far. Soundtrack: 9/10 COSTUMES Usually a superhero movie or series displays mediocre costumes, which are used just as suits by the heroes and villains. Not here. Here every costume is used to represent every single character and his evolution and traits. Not only the show respects the source material but it goes beyond it, by using the clothes as a visual cue to let us understand what the character is gling through. Tom Hiddleston wears more costumes here than any other movie he starred in. Costumes: 8/10 CONCLUSION Script: 9/10 Acting: 9/10 Photography: 9/10 Editing: 8/10 Special Effects: 7/10 Soundtrack: 9/10 Costumes: 8/10 AVERAGE: 8,42 An awesome series which you need to watch. It doesn' t matter if you aren't a Marvel or Loki's fun, this series is a gift and should be appreciated and all the peole who worked on it should get all the credit they deserve. Just get on Disney+ and watch it. By @the_owlseyes Loki 2021 12A Director: Kate Herron Number of episodes: 6 Starring: Tom Hiddleston, Owen Wilson, Sophia Di Martino, Gugu Mbatha Raw, Wunmi Mosaku, Lauren Revard, Tara Strong, Richard E grant, Jonathan Majors etc After the events of Avengers Endgame, Loki finds himself imprisoned in the mysterious clutches of the TVA (Time Variants Authority) as he figures what he wants for himself and discovers his future. He teams with other variants of himself and members of the TVA to uncover what is truly happening with the timeline and who is behind this mysterious organisation. Loki for the most part was some of the strongest work from the MCU, but there are a few issues that they still haven’t fully managed to fix with there current selection of shows. My first few positives for this series would be fantastic cinematography and set pieces. The phenomenal world building. The great tone it had. As well as the performances and chemistry between the cast. The cinematography and set pieces for Loki for me was some of the strongest visual work that the MCU has done. The use of colour was so interestingly used to establish tone and a unique visual style that not many shows or even movies have replicated and truly made it stand out from the crowd. The set pieces of the TVA and the different planets such as Lamentis, were so intricate and detailed. It really made you engulfed in this new world and was really strong. I also thought the worldbuilding here was incredibly strong, how they built on the rules of the story world within the TVA and all of the different processes was well explained and a fun element to the series. The amount of detail and explanation into the different timelines and what it can do was well thought out and written, whilst also having a lot of excellent implications for future MCU projects. Loki also managed to execute an excellent and unique tone that was built and developed well as the series developed. The show had a fun sci fi and futuristic tone that was developed and more noticeably used as the show expanded. It made the show standout a lot more and was a creative aspect, this was largely supported by the excellent sound design which was incredible throughout. The performances from the whole cast were fantastic. Tom Hiddleston was in his element here; this was his strongest performance as the mischievous antihero. He was charming, witty, and hit all different emotional beats for his character excellently, truly making him a multi layered character to connect with, whilst also keeping that cunning and mischievous side to him. I also thought Sophia Di Martino did a fantastic job here, she held her own with Tom and did a fantastic performance for Sylvie. Other key cast standouts were Owen Wilson, Gugu Mbatha Raw, Wunmi Mosaku and Tara Strong. Who were very strong supporting cast members. I also have to appreciate the excellent chemistry between Tom and Sophia, they worked excellently together in this series. They bounced off each other excellently, with plenty of humorous moments between them both, but they also both grew and developed together as well. My next few positives for the show would be the fun scenes, humour. Development to the plot. The excellent character background and development, and the great action and mind control. I also liked the fun scenes that this show had; it didn’t take itself too seriously all of the time which I appreciated. Especially episode 5 ‘Journey into Mystery’ having the fun interactions between the different variants was just so entertaining to watch. The show built so many amazing characters and was so creative in how they portrayed them that the episodes would always entertain you. The humour of this show was also excellent. The comedic chemistry between Tom and Sophia was excellent, both getting to show a lot of diversity to there performances, and the humour landed, and it didn’t feel forced or overused, it felt like a natural addition to the show. Richard E Grant was another great comedic standout. I also thought the plot of the series developed well. The show slowly revealed more and more about the mystery about the timeline and what was truly happening, keeping you invested after every episode, with brilliantly crafted cliff-hangers and a specific focus within each episode to develop and further expand the plot. I also loved the character background and development. I thought the show did a good job with the character background of Sylvie. It clearly set up her arc very well with the TVA. Set up good conflict, as well as fantastic implications and hints as to what was really going on with the TVA. I also thought the character development between Loki and Sylvie was well written, both characters grew tremendously as the show developed, as they realised what they truly wanted with their life and not wanting to be alone and to have people constantly not trusting you and I think Loki’s relationship with Mobius and his realisation of his feelings for Sylvie made him really grow as a character. But I also loved how the show balanced this development out with the mind games and powers expected from a show about Loki. Both Loki and Sylvie were still delightfully unpredictable, and often only helped each other if it benefitted them, so the show managed to balance developing them both but also sticking to their mischievous selves, showing a great balance as to why that’s a good and bad thing for there characters. And both characters got to play around with their powers a lot more as the show progressed, adding new layers to their abilities especially with Sylvie. Now for some of my issues with the series. There was a lot of pacing issues and overusage of exposition in certain episodes, that felt like filler and didn’t develop the plot enough, whilst also making it too easy to find certain characters. I had similar issues with the falcon and winter soldier series with pacing issues. The first two episodes of Loki especially were extremely slow paced and was almost completely reliant on dialogue. Both episodes dragged and got me worried for the show as it took a little while for it to find it’s footing and to truly get started. The episodes weren’t developing enough considering there 45-minute run time. The set up for finding Sylvie was too easily executed, and the episodes had too many ideas that were introduced in too little screen time. Perhaps a couple more episode would have benefitted the show. My final few criticisms for the show would be the lack of TVA in certain episodes. Certain characters felt underdeveloped, including Sylvie. And the finale was slightly disappointing with how abrupt it was. I felt like the TVA weren’t used consistently enough throughout the series, in the Lamentis episode they weren’t even involved, this was a missed opportunity to build and develop on the world of the organisation and the rules behind it all that weren’t explored to there full potential. Another missed opportunity I found with the series was the underdeveloped characters and one-dimensional character goals for Sylvie. I felt like the show introduced the characters within the TVA realising they had lives beforehand, but then went on to not really develop it further. I understand there will be a second season but characters like Mobius and certain guards needed more development. I also found it frustrating how mostly one dimensional they made Sylvie in terms of her motivations for revenge. I felt like she didn’t have much else to her character that wasn’t finding the creator of the TVA, and despite her achieving this by the finale she needed more layers to her character. Finally, I also thought the finale was underwhelming and slightly abrupt. Despite Jonathan Majors doing a fantastic job as Kang and introducing his character, the show went back to some of its old faults from previous episodes with a dialogue and exposition heavy episode that felt more like a set up for future projects and seasons instead of concluding the show in a satisfying way, and a good finale is supposed to do both of these things successfully. My final few positives for the show would be the excellent set up for the main plot point. The excellent writing and explanation to the plot. Some great familiar faces and excellent themes and plot twists. What the show did so well was to set up each episode with a cliff-hanger that just made you want to watch the next episode straight away, always keeping you intrigued. And it handled all its different themes and changes to the plot surprisingly well and set up multiple different layers to the show. The show was written excellently, the dialogue was incredibly clever and played to the actors and characters personalities excellently. Each episode was excellently crafter and even though some were slower and had too much dialogue I still respected the excellent writing involved, it didn’t leave one plot point unexplained and went into great amounts of detail with the story world and making the sure the audience didn’t get left behind with the amount of plot points. I also loved the familiar faces sprinkled throughout the show. In true Marvel fashion there was some great and fun Easter eggs and it was a pleasant surprise to see characters from Loki’s past such as Sif make her brief return. I also thought the show highlighted some interesting themes. The ideas of love, grief and loneliness were handled really interestingly with the character of Loki. It made me realise how through all of the fun Loki had as a character you never stop and think as to how lonely it must feel. Which is a good reflection on modern success, money and fame doesn’t always reflect with your happiness, so this was a good reflection on society and gave Loki some good depth. The show also executed its twists excellently, the show was unpredictable and went in a completely different direction then what I was expecting. With the twists within the TVA and how it all worked out making for a very well-crafted show. Overall, Loki is one of the strongest entries in the MCU. It was clever, excellently written. With a charming cast, its own unique tone, and fantastic worldbuilding, it got off to a wobbly start with dull, exposition heavy couple of episodes that felt underdeveloped. They fixed these issues, but some of these came back for the finale. But still sets up multiple phase 4 films and future seasons very well. Overall rating 89/100 By @ryan_the_nixon ’ll start by saying that overall, I loved this season of Loki, and it’s my favourite of the three Disney+ MCU series. If you’d asked me what I thought of it at the season’s midpoint though, I would have had a different answer entirely. I’m not saying the show was ever bad. I really enjoyed the first episode and learning about the lore of the TVA. With episodes two and three, however, I felt like the series was spinning its wheels. To me it was like Disney realized they had a great character, but didn’t really know what to do with him. I was entertained, but worried this might be the rare misfire in the MCU. The second half of the season certainly put those fears to rest, as Loki evolved into one of the most ambitious projects Marvel has given us. Tom Hiddleston outdoes himself here, adding so many more layers to an already complex character. This is his best performance yet as the God of Mischief, and I can’t wait to see where season two takes us. Speaking of performances, the entire cast is fantastic. The characters played by Sophia Di Martino and Owen Wilson became instant MCU favourites of mine, and Wunmi Mosaku’s stern TVA agent was really great too. It was the two big guest stars though, who each only appear in a single episode, that really blew me away. Visually, this show is stunning. The dark, retro aesthetic of the TVA Headquarters, with splashes of orange throughout, is gorgeous. As great as that looks though, it’s the locations outside of the TVA that really wowed me. The use of colours, especially purples and greens… it’s beautiful. I also have to praise the original score by composer Natalie Holt. This is some of the best music in any Marvel project, including the films. Loki ties into the MCU perfectly and does a lot of heavy lifting to set us up for phase 4. The series takes a little time to find its footing, but once it does, it becomes an epic and essential addition to this massive franchise. 8/10 By @moviereviewswithben When the bar for quality of the MCU TV shows is on the ground, it's easy to take one step over it, which is exactly what Loki did. The level of enjoyment of this series will come down to whether you truly care enough about the characters and the story or if you can handle all the tons of exposition that are dumped on us. Some say, "You have to read up to understand the complexity." To which I answer: "Am I taking a university course on a superhero TV show?" It's the creator's job to make it all crisp and clear but frankly, they couldn't craft an interesting enough storyline. I understand that it's MCU and we aren't supposed to think too much but the topics in this series create way more questions than they provide answers for. This pretentious omnipotent TVA made everything that happened before in the MCU look insignificant. In other words, the writers used a nuclear bomb to blow up the lid of The Pandora's Box and from the looks of it, they wont be able to explain what was inside of it or how to close it at the end. As a result, it will be difficult to enjoy the down-to-earth films like Winter Soldier because on the grand scale of things, it's all meaningless now. At this point, the MCU has entered the dangerous waters of the galactic/time level of events and they have to continue building up on it or otherwise, they wilk sink their mighty ship that has been heavily damaged. While Hiddleston is terrific in his performance, Loki is known for his manipulation, scheming and betrayal which is what I wanted to see. Instead, once again we got your average run of the mill superhero story that had its moments but didn't make me feel any kind of emotions. He is a God with Divine abilities and a silver tongue but we never get to see him use those powers nor drop a nice phrase. I have to admit that it had many layers, Owen Wilson was fantastic and the music was spot on. Much like the TVA, the show is full of pretentious ambition which comes off as average due to inconsistencies and poor writing. 6/10 By @__movie.shmovies__ Just a very quick SPOILER WARNING, because there will be SPOILERS in this REVIEW!!!!!!!!!!! To kind of describe my feelings about this show I wanted to describe my feelings about the other MCU Disney+ shows. With both WandaVision and TFATWS, I enjoyed what they brought to this new phase… but as time went on and I thought about them more and more, the cracks started to show. Maybe because both shows have odd finales that feel a disjointed from the rest of the episodes. Where do I stand on Loki? Well I think it’ll be safe for me to say that this show will hold up. Even though I do have my problems with the show, its uniqueness and its commitment to the story. I think WandaVision tried to straddle the line between this crazy sitcom show, and a generic marvel movie. TFATWS tried to straddle the line between this introspective story about race, and being a cool spy thriller. In some respects, both shows dropped the ball. Loki in this context is very consistent. It knows what it is, and it doesn’t really try to be anything else. It’s kind of feels like Doctor Who Lite (Trademarked). The show has to rush a lot of character development for the main timeline Loki, because like 20 minutes before he was picked up, he was just bodying thousands of people in NYC. But Tom Hiddleston is SO good as Loki, that it didn’t really feel that rushed to me. He is just that charismatic. Sylvie was introduced early as the foil to the TVA and a place of intrigue for Loki. I really liked Sophia Di Martino in this role. She plays off Tom Hiddleston very well and the set up for her character was great. But as time went on I found myself being a bit apprehensive about what they were doing with her in relation to Loki. I think they really rushed their romantic relationship. I do like how their relationship emphasizes Loki’s narcissism. In that, the one person that they fall in love with is another version of themselves. The other big dynamic was between Mobius and Loki. I just think that Hiddleston and Wilson’s chemistry worked really well. I was really captivated in every scene that they were in. And a lot of their scenes are just of them sitting or standing somewhere, talking. In fact, there are a lot of scenes like this throughout. I think it works best with Loki and Mobius, but the finale with Sylvie, Loki, and He Who Remains was very captivating. I think the writers did a pretty good job, but I think the obvious standout is Kate Herron’s direction. Maybe it’s just me, but I think it’s a bold choice for a marvel project to let shots sit and breathe. It actually allows for you to see characters emote genuinely. And that seems like a basic need in a lot of projects, but I think it’s used very well. In key moments of the finale, you kinda feel what these characters are experiencing because of how it’s set up. The one episode where I’m not sure if it works or not is episode 3. Like I like learning more about these characters and dynamic, but I kinda had to “get through it”. While I did appreciate a dancing/singing Tom Hiddleston, I didn’t feel like that episode was all that necessary. And you could make that same argument for episode five, but at least that episode really expands the world around the main cast. And we all got the mutherfockin thanoscopter and other fun tidbits. Where I’ll leave this review is - what makes Loki work is that it is consistent in what it’s trying to do. Even though it hugely sets up for the rest of this phase, it never loses sight of its own goal, its own story, or its own characters. Yes, like any other marvel project, it has its moments, but they are few and far between. I am genuinely interested in how long they will take in putting out a S2. I’ve heard rumours that it was already shot and that the one season was cut in two. I don’t know if I believe that, but hey we never know what’s going on at Marvel. But for now, I’m gonna give Loki an 8.3/10! I liked it a good bit. What did you think of it? By @dylanandhismovies I'm really glad that this show mostly heald up on rewatch, even if there are a few areas which I've become ever so slightly more critical on. Set after his escape in Endgame, the show sees Loki embark on an adventure outside of the flow of time. Every aspect of the writing on this show hugely exceeds the other two MCU Disney+ shows in my eyes, which also gives this show the added benefit of being the most fun to binge, as it almost entirely still holds up on rewatch. The only part which didn't really hold up for me was Sylvie herself, as this time around I found her to be quite irritable upon being introduced, and then even a few episodes later I just found that I don't really care for her. This then comes into my other gripe, being that Sylvie and Loki's 'relationship', just in terms of how they interact with each other as the show goes on' feels really rushed, which can be a little jarring at times. Otherwise though, I don't really have any huge issues with it. Another factor which only serves to amplify the show's quality is Natalie Holt's incredible score. It's definitely the best and most memorable of the shows so far, and for me it has to be one of the strongest which has come out of the MCU as a whole. It just perfectly builds up tension, especially when it's used over the credits as it makes you desire that next episode a little bit more. The performances also continue to be really strong, which isn't a shock at all coming from Tom Hiddleston who has had more than enough time to learn his role, but Owen Wilson and Sophia Di Martino do great for their first outings in the MCU, and even smaller roles such as that of Richard E. Grant and Jamie Alexander are really memorable. Overall, knowing Loki has a second season coming some time in the future is really exciting, especially with everything that happened in that finale. It's definitely a show I would recommend, and I look forward to seeing what ramifications it has on the rest of the MCU, as it's sure to shake things up a lot. By @reviews_by_morg Loki is the Marvel Cinematic Universe’s third venture into the world of television through Disney Plus. It was released in 2021, is 6 episodes long, and was directed by Kate Herron. Loki follows the adventures of the alternate, past version of Loki, that escaped during Avengers Endgame. I really loved Loki, and I believe it’s easily the best show Marvel Studios has released thus far. Compared to all the other Marvel movies and shows Loki feels completely different from everything that came before it. It has a different tone and atmosphere and tells a very creative, fun, thought provoking, and even heartfelt story. While the MCU has plenty of movies and projects I love, Loki is still a really nice breath of fresh air. One of the main reasons Loki stands apart from most of its MCU counterparts is how it’s made on a technical level. While there have been some great directors in the MCU, only a few of them have ever really left a personal “mark” on their movie or show. Most of them are well made but don’t stand out all that much from each other. This is mostly intentional so that the movies and shows fit together cohesively in the shared universe. Loki however, manages to break away from that mold. It has more dynamic lighting, more interesting camera work, and a beautiful color palette. Lots of MCU movies can seem sort of dull or flat in their color choices, and many backgrounds and environments seem like plain green screen backdrops. With the CGI maybe going too far in some places, making nearly everything a visual effect and taking away some of the movie’s authenticity. It seems like the main focus in most of these movies and shows is more on the action, characters, and story. It’s not every MCU movie that’s like this, just some. Which is fine, but Loki manages to focus on the action, characters, and story, while also bringing in a beautiful visual style. The sets are thoughtfully crafted bringing in a 70s style from the tan coloring and dated technology, to the sort of retro futuristic look of some locations. As I said before the lighting and shading are much more dynamic and it really adds to the atmosphere and tone of the show. Each location the show visits is different from the last because of the great use of color, and the creative visuals and designs. From the TVA to the various planets and voids, each location is vibrant and unique. Loki is also much more cinematic than other Marvel projects. It is very dialogue heavy and one of the main reasons that works is because these scenes are filmed in dynamic and engaging ways. On top of the incredible visuals, this show's score, by Natalie Holt, is incredible. I was actually stunned with how good this score is, it’s truly award worthy. I’ve stayed through the credits of each episode just to listen to the score play. The music in this show elevates it to an insane level. This show is light on action but during an intense scene when the score kicks in you really feel it in your heart and your chest. The score can be bombastic and epic, fitting the stakes, using electronic instruments for this effect, fitting into the futuristic side of the show. But it can also be very quiet, utilizing Scandinavian folk instruments to a surprisingly great extent. This stays true to Loki’s roots. And not only does it sound beautiful, it fits the show perfectly. Managing to fit whatever is going on, whether it’s unsettling, emotional, or wondrous. This is definitely one of my favorite scores in anything ever, and the show is worth it for the music alone. Aside from the technical side of things the main part of this show works really well, that being the acting, writing, plot, and character work. The dialogue and writing is great. As mentioned before this show has a lot of dialogue and it’s always engaging in one way or another. The acting is also very good overall. Tom Hiddleston being the standout as Loki. He does a great job portraying many different emotions and makes a lot of development that his character goes through convincingly, even though so much of it happens in a short span of time. His performance is part of the reason so many people fell in love with Loki in this series. Owen Wilson also does a great job with the character Mobius. I think the character development in this show is really great, sometimes character progression can fall to the wayside in the MCU. but this show makes that the focus, similar to Wandavision. However, I think Loki does a much better job. The story itself is very good, it’s nothing truly mind blowing, but it’s very creative and fun. This show deals with the concepts of the multiverse and time travel and I think it explains it all perfectly for the most part, and utilizes those concepts beautifully. I can’t get into the story much because of spoilers, but I haven’t been this excited for the MCU since Endgame, and I can’t wait to see where things go following the finale of this show. This show manages to perfectly combine a satisfying character arc with a great overall story, and I think what this means for the MCU going forward is very exciting. In conclusion I think Loki is a great show, I love more about the show than I can fit here. I didn’t even get to talk about how funny this show is, and how well the comedy works. I may be biased in my enjoyment because I am a massive Marvel fan, but I still think most people would enjoy this show. However, if you aren;t caught up on most, if not all of the MCU, you won’t enjoy the show as much. I think it’s possible to watch this show without ever seeing any other MCU movies or shows but it won’t feel as impactful and you’ll probably have a fair amount of questions. My only criticisms are really related to some decisions made with the story and how some character development and relationships feel a little rushed. But I can’t really get into that without spoiling anything. It obviously isn’t perfect, but I think it’s great regardless. Objective Score: 8.5/10 Personal Score: 9/10 By @miscellaneous_media_review Director: Kate Herron Screenplay: Michael Waldron Cast: Tom Hiddleston, Gugu Mbatha-Raw, Wunmi Mosaku, Eugene Cordero, Tara Strong, Owen Wilson, Sophia Di Martino, Sasha Lane, Jack Veal, DeObia Oparei, Richard E. Grant, Jonathan Majors Soundtrack: Natalie Holt Cinematography: Autumn Durald Arkapaw Running Time: 48 minutes

Reviews by: @reelworld_review Director: Sofia Coppola Starring: Bill Murray, Scarlett Johansson, Giovanni Ribisi, Anna Faris Year: 2003 ~ An aging movie star and young, neglected woman form a curious bond after crossing paths in Tokyo. I would consider this one of my favorite movies, but I’ve only watched it maybe three or four times in the seven years since I’ve seen it (which is low for me, I rewatch my favorites a lot). That is because this movie produces a very specific kind of emotion in me: an aching melancholic feeling. Lost in Translation does not embody simple sadness, but emptiness, loneliness, and uncertainty about the future. Bill Murray gives a really marvelous performance as Bob Harris, an older actor beginning the slide into obscurity. The reason he’s in Tokyo? To film a whiskey commercial. He gets paid well, but is unsatisfied with this work. Scarlett Johansson, in one of her earlier roles, plays the pensive and neglected Charlotte, whose husband, a photographer, is frequently absent and preoccupied with colleagues. The relationship between Bob and Charlotte is odd but understandable with how lonely they both feel, and they give very genuine and vulnerable performances. Sofia Coppola offers a really beautiful and intimate vision of Tokyo. While there is plenty of energetic sequences full of bright lights, upbeat music, nightclubs, and general recklessness, there are many quiet moments. Charlotte visits a shrine in Kyoto and sees a traditional wedding procession. The pair have an incredibly tense and awkward lunch at a small, empty restaurant. Bob spends a lot of time and lonely moments in the huge bathtub at the hotel. It’s a nice balance of excitement and tranquility. And this film isn’t just feelings of emptiness all the time, it’s very funny. Bill Murray naturally shows off his comedic chops and brings some much needed levity to the film. The editing and cinematography are both unique and fitting for this movie, almost dreamlike in some parts and unflinchingly real in others. One of my favorite aspects of this film is the music, I think it’s used very well to help convey the emotion of each scene. In particular the song in the last scene, "Just Like Honey" by the Jesus and Mary Chain, evokes a strange mix of sadness and the feeling that everything will be okay in the end. I find that this movie lingers in a way many others don’t. It speaks to a certain emptiness I’m sure everyone feels at some point in their lives better than any other film I’ve seen. By @reelworld_review

“I will love you always. When this red hair is white, I will still love you. When the smooth softness of youth is replaced by the delicate softness of age, I will still want to touch your skin. When your face is full of the lines of every smile you have ever smiled, of every surprise I have seen flash through your eyes, when every tear you have ever cried has left its mark upon your face,I will treasure you all the more, because I was there to see it all. I will share your life with you, Meredith, and I will love you until the last breath leaves your body or mine” Laurell K. Hamilton, A Lick of Frost We live a life which is particularly hard to endure. Work and society demand from us to be active and respectable citizens but nevers tell us how to make all of it less tough. We find distractions to help us getting through it. A passion, an hobby or a simple interest to keep our minds occupied. It's good and remarkable to have something interesting and remarkable which defines us but this isn't enough. The possibiity to get lost in our world could affect, in a bad or good way, our staged life, which is just a mask of what we really are. We need someone who can see us for what we're and push us further, beyond hardships and difficult times. We need a friend, someone to be ourself with. We need a partner, someone to be our emotional self with. Someone who sticks us and gives a mean to keep up and hold through the day. Every man and woman in history looked for it and grew after finding, through an intricate path of weird and occasional experiences, the right person to share his or her life with. Love. The most celebrated human emotion. Poets, Novelists and Singers. All of them have been inspired and still are inspired by it. This is what inspires Mikey J, a multi-instrumentalist out of Melbourne, Australia. A humble and talented guy who writes, performs and and records his music from his home on what he consider a (too) simple setup. A passion which started from an early age learning piano and cello and singing in a choir, but this wasn't what get him into it, it was more like a tease of what came after. At 12 he received a guitar from his father and this is where his journey started. He learned by himself how to play it. He emulated other pieces at first and then, when he was ready, started an high school band, which helped him get even better. It was at this time that he started writing his own songs. Today music holds a special place in his life: "It has the power to take away my stresses and re-centre me when I’m finding it difficult. It allows me to express my inner-most feelings and leaves me with the best natural high you can get. I love how it gives me the chance to learn new skills, hone my talents and create songs I am really proud of" And he keeps playing to make more and more people happy, to make others feel what he feels when he plays. His works is heavily influenced by the great songwriters of bygone days and his family and experiences: "My musical inspirations are wide and varied: The Beatles have been my biggest inspiration all through my life, but also love listening to Jimi Hendrix, Pink Floyd, Bob Dylan, Simon and Garfunkel, The Small Faces, Ben Folds, Nirvana, Pearl Jam, You Am I, The Cat Empire, Jason Mraz, Bruno Mars… the list could just go on forever!" And, not by chance, his music tastes are aligned with his inspirations. While My Guitar Gently Weeps by The Beatles, Best Imitation of Myself by Ben Folds and Nothing by The Cat Empire are just a few songs and artists out of all his favourites, which are a lot. Mikey J songs are a mix of rock, blues, folk, funk and indie music. And his creative process is: "Fairly consistent: guitar or bass tinkering to build the structures of the songs, start some noodling to get melodic lines and think about what other instrumentation might work with the song. Finally, I write lyrics (the hardest part for me) and then start putting it all together!" Today we're going to explore his third album in 12 months: Dancing in the Clouds. It was written, performed and recorded at home, mostly during various lockdowns, and it comprises of 9 tracks ranging from alternative/indie pop rock, reggae, ska and funk. All the songs come from his personal experiences and centre around his beautiful and really supportive wife, Ella. An aspect which is noticeable in the songs themes which are relationships and finding, cultivating and keeping that special someone in your life. His creative process which enabled him to craft this album is, as he explains, fairly consistent: "Guitar or bass tinkering to build the structures of the songs, start some noodling to get melodic lines and think about what other instrumentation might work with the song. Finally, I write lyrics (the hardest part for me) and then start putting it all together!" Always be Your Guy is the first track of Dancing in the Clouds. It's a soothing song which makes me think about the sea and sand. It sounds like an 80's song and I like it a lot. The lyrics is a love poem which is tender and passionate. "Is a jazzy, pop song about finding and that special girl. It starts with a pretty guitar lick, has a groovy bass line and a melodic guitar solo" The following track is Dancing in the Clouds which is pretty chilly and relaxing. This is the kind of song which you can enjoy a lot during sunny days, in a grass field. You can wonder in the clouds, in their soft shapes. Your mind goes free, flying in the blue sky. It's so relaxing, to the point that the lyrics become a aloof, just an accompainment. "Started as a bass line and grew into a dreamy and mellow pop song that has light guitar accents and 2 key changes. It speaks to how when you’re in a great relationship you feel like floating away!" The next one is Skips a Beat and it's particularly upbeat and it's a bit funky. Like the previous songs, this is also a love lyric and it's about falling in love. " A quick-tempo ska-inspired song that has an electric 12-string guitar solo and a killer horn section. It tells of that feeling when your heart gets all fluttery when you find a great gal" This is the slowest one so far. It tells about approaching That Girl which you like but you don't know how to start talking to her. I like the bass solo, maybe it's the best part of this song. "A sultry blues song that also began as a bass line and some gravelly vocals. The bass solo slows down the song while the outro makes good use of wah. It’s a shoutout to all those girls who are just out of reach" Yearning is even slower than the previous one and the pacing is coherent with the song's theme. It's a song for wanderers. "A slow indie rock ballad that brings you through the ups and downs of yearning for that special someone. It’s got heavy reverb on the chilling stripped back beginning, and a meaty guitar solo" Lazy Days is a cool and relaxing song. It's about the relevant role of lazy days in a life made of work and responsabilities. It's an uplifting song which adress a bleak reality with a genuine sincerity. "Was inspired a little by Jason Mraz. With an folly beginning, moving into a reggae inspired verse and chorus, Lazy Days laments the dreariness of a 9-5 job. The ukulele also makes a quaint appearance" Steal My Heart starts with the best notes and in a while it becomes my favourite tracks of this album. I like it's pace and rythm, it's tantalizing. "Features my first ever attempt at a slap bass line! It’s a bluesy jazzy song about how she’ll just take that heart away. It feels a little like Can Calloway without the scatting. It finishes with some wispy guitar noodling over the main riff" Every Little Thing is a song which represent a return to the rythm which charcterizes the first songs of this album. It's a song about being grateful for every little thing which defines your partner. It's a funky song which makes you feel at ease. "A heavy funk song about all those little things that make a girl really special. It features a funky bass line and duelling wah guitars, is a little bit sassy and risqué and a whole lot of fun" High and Dry is the album's last song. It's a bit dramy because it is slow but not that much. It's about the fact that a partner should keep his partner's morale up to let the couple thrive. It's an empathic piece which is remarkable for its lyrics. I would say that this track puts the singer's words front and center. The words are promises full of love. "The final track in the album. It has heavy tremolo on the guitar lines and the bass line moves you through the song effortlessly. A soulful guitar solo will leave you feeling the warmth of this love ballad" Dancing in the Clouds is a passionate work, made of feelings and empathy. I like that he wanted to craft a tribute to his wife. Check out Dancing in the Clouds his other albums by clicking here to know more about this Australian singer and his extreme care for bonds and relationships. By @the_owlseyes

Growing up in the Westworld...having our childhood shaped by shows like Topgear, Takeishi's castle, Power Rangers, and waiting for weekly and monthly episodes and issues of our now silver screen heroes. But over time we kind of drift out of this life and get pushed into "adult life" or saying "you're too old for this" or the hobby just became less interesting. But what if I were to say, in japan a comic (manga to be precise) is still being celebrated, and even today's adults who started reading it 20 years ago (..gasp...) are still following it through and as a silver lining, unlike western comics, the story hasn't changed, the author changed, the story hasn't branched out into dimensions, alter egos, so on and so forth, furthermore the story hasn't ended yet. Regardless of its current predicament several authors and several stories altogether. How did a streamlined single-author comic that hasn't been made in the west beat the batman comics entirely in terms of sales. Now let's dive into the world of Marvel and DC's new competitor. How much is it ahead ?: Before we skydive into the so-called one-piece, I would like to provide some vague data on how much this series has pushed down the Dark Knight back into his dark alleys The entirety of Batman has sold 484 million copies worldwide as of 2021, however, in the same 2021, the worldwide sales of one-piece were 490 million copies, which leaves one-piece second to Superman (600 million copies worldwide). Introduction to One Piece: One Piece follows the adventures of Monkey D. Luffy and his pirate crew in order to find the greatest treasure ever left by the legendary Pirate, Gold Roger. The famous mystery treasure is named "One Piece". This is probably the simplest way to summarise One Piece, (by imdb). However, this story is more than just your typical anime/cartoon and will completely break your stereotypical views about anime. But this will only happen when you get through the staggering 1019 chapters and 960+ episodes, wooooaah... I know right? longer than Simpsons and The Tonight show So the following text will follow some of the aspects that make this story a 'once in a generation story'. A unique way of storytelling: Written by Eichiro Oda, One Piece has a unique method of storytelling, which cannot be found in any other movies or TV series. Not even Scorcese or Hitchcock has adapted this method of storytelling i.e instead of using main characters to move the story, the author uses the main characters to travel through the story... For better understanding normally in a movie, the main character would be introduced and we follow his adventures and just show the main character's story and any other element introduced would start when the main character gets to that element and moves the story forward. But in one piece the story doesn't need moving, the author has established a world where the story is already happening and actively moving with or without the main characters, and the main characters are just used to travel through this pre-established storyline. A Multilayered Storyline : Next, one-piece follows a multilayered story line which means the main characters aren't the only focus of the story. They are just one of the layers. So in One Piece there are three layers, The Strawhats layer (Main Character & viewers perspective) World Government layer (Emperors, Marines & Celestial Dragons movements) The Void Century Layer (A layer which has been foreshadowed, hinted - one of the greatest mysteries in one piece) The God Layer ((Unexplored but heavily hinted) These layers have been loosely connected but it is one of the things that keeps viewers to continue watching the series even after 20 years. These layers are full of mysteries and is only loosely connected which will be connected completely by the end of the series. But the series hasn't ended yet, so it keeps the viewers guessing, formulating theories, etc. Furthermore, the author apparently has watched all these theories on social media and has said not any of these theories are remotely correct to the ending he has planned for the series. Incredible World-building : Like I said, the story moves actively without the main characters, so there was a necessity to pre-build the world without building as the main characters progress. So dare I say, the world-building is only second to Spielberg? Yes, I do. Without spoilers, the world is divided into 4 simple regions with 1 central stream of islands that flow through the middle of the world. This line in the middle of the world is divided into 2 regions. Characters with actual story depth : Now I don't mean Batman doesn't have character depth. Batman is one of the characters with the most character depth, however, I mean characters with story depth. How each character are established in the story and the story just travels according to our perspective i.e the author makes us choose which is right and wrong because in the story every character are doing things from their very own perspective The sense of Adventure : As mentioned above, the characters travel through the story, since the main characters themselves are new to the pre-existing story. So we the viewer/readers are also a looooong adventure with the main characters. No Romance : Now one piece is a pure, downright adventure story. The author was really keen on keeping the story this way, that he even confirmed that the series will never have romance. This is an incredible feat considering even Superman needed a romance side plot to keep the story going, so in summary, One Piece has been going on for 20 years and readers/viewers are still hooked without romance sideplot Mystery upon Mysteries: As much as one piece contains adventure, it has an equal amount of mysteries. All of the mysteries have been carefully set up from episode 1 through episode 900+. And these mysteries have only been set up slowly by foreshadowing and dialogues, but haven't been actually revealed. But these mysteries when revealed will blow up the internet and fans probably can't handle it. So until that moment all of us should just keep waiting (Halfwaythrough 2021 still no Shanks) Conclusion : These paragraphs are only a brief context of one of the greatest series ever made, as it is nearing its 1000th episode, I personally would recommend you wonderful readers to check it out. I know and can understand when I say 1000 episodes it seems a bit daunting, however, I can assure you that after you finish the series, you will complain there aren't enough episodes. By @the_th3rdeye

Reviews by: @tvnerdaran @miscellaneous_media_reviews “My film is not a movie. My film is not about Vietnam. It is Vietnam. It’s what it was really like. It was crazy... And little by little, we went insane.“ - Francis Ford Coppola. Apocalypse Now is one of my favourite films of all time. It is a stunning and beautifully shot visual epic meditating on what it truly means to be human, though it gives a very dark and bleak view of the human condition, exploring the darker side of the human condition and the meaning of true horror as well as the duality of man. Apocalypse Now focuses on Captain Benjamin L. Willard (played by Martin Sheen), a tormented and broken man who is sent on a secret mission to assassinate Colonel Walter E. Kurtz (played by Marlon Brando), a rogue colonel who has reportedly gone insane. But the film is so much more than that. It is a dark and surreal exploration of the human condition and what it means to be human. The film focuses heavily on the duality of man, and how every human being is capable of both good and evil. This is discussed heavily throughout the film, including in Willard’s meeting with his superior officers who send him on the film’s main mission where General Corman discusses the breaking point that Kurtz has supposedly reached, and how every person has their breaking point when facing the true horrors of war. This is even further explored in the French landowners scene in the equally brilliant Redux version, where a French woman tells Willard, “Don’t you see? There are two of you. One that kills, and one that loves.” This further establishes the film’s message of how every human is capable of good and evil, and how it’s up to us to choose between our inner conflicts and morality. The film’s exploration of horror, represented by the Vietnam War, shows the darker side of human nature, with numerous atrocities being committed by American soldiers, and the insanity of the whole Vietnam War itself establishes the film’s surrealism, offering a scathing critique of American imperialism, jingoism and foreign interventionism. Horror as shown by the atrocious and insane nature of the Vietnam War brings out the inner human darkness and turmoil within the main characters, and perhaps all of us. To me, the Heart of Darkness in the film represents the darkest abysses of the human soul, and the corruption that any of us can succumb to such mindless horrors. Kurtz is also worshipped as a God by his followers and reads religious poetry, adding a mythological nature to the film. The film is a stunning exploration of war, horror, God, art, myth, violence, military imperialism, and above all, the darker side of the human condition. This film is truly a masterpiece on every level and is quite simply one of the greatest films ever made. By @tvnerdaran Apocalypse Now is a war/drama film directed by Francis Ford Coppola and released in 1979. The film follows Benjamin Willard, a captain struggling with the trauma he has endured in Vietnam. When Willard is assigned a top secret mission and sent back into the field he and a small crew will be forced to undergo a perilous journey through the Vietnam jungle. Along the way they face the horrors of war and mankind, as they fight to retain both their sanity and humanity. I knew little to nothing about Apocalypse Now when I first watched the movie recently, and I was completely floored by it. While at a glance it may look like a standard war film, that couldn’t be further from the truth. Apocalypse Now is a genre bending masterpiece. The movie almost resembles more of a psychological horror movie set in Vietnam, than a straight up war film. I’ve never seen a movie quite like Apocalypse Now. Apocalypse Now is one of the most visually stunning movies I’ve ever seen. This is due in large part to the film's unmatched setpieces, which are the greatest I’ve ever seen. The war torn Vietnam setting is perfectly crafted. Every enormous set is filled with a startling amount of realism and detail. Complete with real military helicopters and explosions that ravage the landscape. I was in awe at several points watching this film seeing these incredible battles and conflicts unfold on such a grand scale. More so that they were all filmed practically. This adds an insane level of realness to the film that makes it so much more impactful. On top of the incredible production the film has phenomenal cinematography. Each shot feels purposeful to the narrative being told, and features perfect framing. This works along with the colors and lighting to create a visually stimulating film like no other. The colors present help to create a very foreboding and mysterious atmosphere while also making the film look beautiful. The oranges, and yellows paint the jungle in a way that feels ominous and oppressive. Characters are at times shrouded in darkness and shadow which adds to the sense of uneasiness. These shadows also illustrate the way the characters are all slowly being consumed by war, their own darkness, and the jungle of Vietnam itself. Working alongside the visuals is the score. It’s incredibly foreboding, ominous, and haunting, but is also very versatile. There are moments that fit more naturally with the incredible action, and some moments that more boldly service the horror elements of Apocalypse Now. But mostly the score does stick to a very present and distressing sound that you can’t get out of your head. It makes the terrifying subject matter and at times horrific story even more intense and impactful. It creates an incredible atmosphere made up of dread and tension that leaves you on edge. It fully showcases the jungle as something terrifying and oppressive and adds to the films’ greatness. The story and structure of Apocalypse Now is another exceptional aspect of the movie. The simple premise sees the film divided into separate sections. The first part of the movie follows Willard and his crew as they’re caught up in a massive battle. This part of the film depicts a more typical war film, and delivers the most impressive action set pieces. Shortly after this the crew boards a small military boat to traverse the river to their destination. From this point on the movie becomes more similar to a psychological horror movie. The once eager and valiant crew becomes more troubled as they experience the horrors of Vietnam and see the worst humanity has to offer. This takes up the majority of the movie and perfectly illustrates the effect war has on its participants. This structure also shows the two sides of war often depicted in film. The spectacular action with massive battles filled with heroic characters “fighting the good fight.” And the more realistic and slow drama showing the toll war takes on all of its participants. The conflict becomes muddy as their mission and the war as a whole becomes more grey. The film also features narration from Martin Sheen who plays Captain Willard. This narration allows the audience to get in the head of Willard, and shows the conflict within him as he reflects on the events of the film. The narration works wonderfully by immersing the audience and hooking them on the story even more. This is due in large part to Martin Sheen’s spectacular performance. The rest of the acting in the film is also great. As I previously mentioned Martin Sheen gives a spectacular performance as Willard. He does a great job selling the turmoil and trauma this character has endured and is still experiencing. He demonstrates this in both his physical performance and through his voice over. Willard is a very troubled character and that can be heard in the narration. Marlon Brando gives a haunting performance as Colonel Kurtz, and Laurence Fishburne and Robert Duvall have standout performances as well. Aside from them, every other role in the movie works perfectly. These performances add a lot to the great characters seen in Apocalypse Now. Willard is a compelling character and a great protagonist, and each member of his crew is also interesting in their own way. They each react and cope with war differently which leads to great emotional moments in the story. Each character in the film is very memorable and serves a purpose within the narrative. Overall Apocalypse Now is an incredible, mind bending journey. This is a very complex film filled with interesting themes and concepts. The effect of war and the way people cope with it is explored in great depth throughout the film. The story is phenomenal and keeps the audience hooked at all times. The atmosphere in this movie is one of the best I’ve ever seen, and is nearly unrivaled. This sensory journey is aided by the spectacular cinematography and fantastic visuals. The score is magnificent and works in connection with the other elements of the film to create a completely unique and visceral experience. All of this working with the great acting from a star studded cast makes for one of the best movies I’ve ever seen. Objective Score: 10/10 Personal Score: 10/10 By @miscellaneous_media_reviews

Reviews by: @theplokoonyreview Positives: The duration and difficulty of the tasks are fine tuned The imposter is sus the symbolism is subtly executed the game’s customizability is extensive. Negatives: Most of the maps are forgettable online multiplayer isn’t engaging the new updates overcomplicate and negatively effect the experience Positives: The Tasks There isn’t a major learning curve to the tasks, instead of individually working as challenging puzzles their concise nature benefits the entire amogus experience. It keeps the crew-mates busy mentally, they will already be thinking of ways to do these tasks most efficiently, while on the other hand they need to keep an eye on other players, especially the sus ones. It adds another layer to the whole experience, it doesn’t overtake the game but adds as an additional motivator for crew-mates and imposters while further nuancing to the experience Positives: Imposter is sus Every amogus game is different, but the susiness of the imposter stays as a constant threat. They’re given a variety of abilities that liven the experience to keep it more interesting than an average social deduction game. Venting is an escape/infiltration method which is fine tuned to have a healthy balance of risk and reward to it. Sabotaging also helps manipulate the other crew-mates decisions, whether to act as a decoy or a trap. The biggest complaint in this area is that the cool down on shutting doors needs to be increased, it can mindlessly spammed which doesn’t lead to any inventive strategies and is more annoying than anything else. Positives: Effective Symbolism Many pieces of art throw Christian symbolism in the audiences face and it loses all its potency. However, Amogus does it right by working exclusively through allusions, rather than direct comparisons. Of course, it takes inspiration from the New Testaments story of Jesus and his 12 disciples. It narrows its focus specifically on Judas, who was the “imposter” among the disciples and like any good imposter, sabotaged Jesus with a Roman solider assault. This all being said, there is a deeper meaning to this story which in turn makes Amogus a much more narratively rich experience. Judas killed himself after he won the game out of guilt, it begs the question, yes Imposters are sus, but do they want to be sus? The message is delivered with enough intelligent subtly to impact those who uncover it. Positives: Customizability The sheer amount of customizability in each games settings shows how much of a subjective experience each game is. This is mostly a positive, people can change the ruleset to turn games into hide and seek and tag while also changing any problems a person may have with the default rules. However, this creates a few problems of its own. There isn’t a definitive rule set, most people find their own which leads to disseverance. Also, it’s excessive to have nearly every element interchangeable, it feels like an attempt to immunize itself from criticism and actualize its vision of being a subjective social deduction game. However, this had already been achieved by the actual gameplay and to have so many options just feels ridiculously unnecessary. Negative: The maps The Skeld sus to be the default pick sus most people due to how sus it is to understand while sus leaving the potential for complex sus. The rest of the maps sus lack its charm, either introducing sus elements which fall flat due sus their over complexity (door logs in Mira hq) or so sus that the map feels more sus one big gimmick than a sus way to play the game (airship). Sus maps are still fun, but sus concise, well developed nature of Sus Skeld is missing in all sus them. Negative: Online Multiplayer Local multiplayer is sus most interactive way to play sus game, while online multiplayer is sus dysfunctional, disengaging and charmless mess. Sus, I’ve never enjoyed an online sus unless if I was finding sus to annoy other crew-mates with sus. It’s largely due to the sus of communication, it’s a social sus game whose online strips any sus element from it and replaces sus with a chat system lacking sus any personality. Negative: Updates The game sus is updated as to keep it sus. Unfortunately, these updates either add sus problems or add tweaks to sus great elements. As was previously sus, the airship, being their newest sus also feels the most excessively sus to appeal to fans wanting sus bigger rather than actually building sus anything. The new update changed sus layout of an emergency meeting, sus original was great and got sus point across well, which makes sus change so annoying. The art sus feels more busy and overly sus, leaving this change as nonsensical. Sus, the account creation system was sus implemented to keep children safe, sus making an account is incredibly sus and restricting the traditional ability sus chat takes away the minimal sus the player had. In conclusion, I’m so happy I’m done talking about Among Us. Local Multiplayer: 7.5/10 Online Multiplayer: 5/10 Overall rating: 6/10 By @theplokoonyreview

An auteur of techiques, David Fincher creates a world of deception that allows us as an audience to completely immerse ourselves in the manipulation. A direction style that is borderline obsessive Fincher is one and the only in his field of work who endorses each and every aspect of film making with care and perfection. So what makes his shots so iconic and his movies a masterpiece? THEMES Unreliable Narrator This he has incorporated in both Gone Girl and Fight Club - the narration from the point of view of an reliable character creates a sense of suspense and surprise which leads the story into a space where we actually start getting what the narrator feels. Are we being manipulated or are we just as insane as that person on the screen? Everything that glitters isn't always gold! Fincher's narrative mostly includes corruption in places of power. He is more interested in what lies underneath a seemingly shiny surface of affluence and perfection. The elaborate lies in Gone Girl, the disloyalty in The Social Network, and the political corruption in House of Cards all place a spotlight on the flaws in these seemingly ideal settings. What appears to be isn't always true is it! Psychologically complex characters Fincher's characters are almost beautifully complex. He conjures up these dichotomies in psychology that seems almost impossible to exist. More often these traits exist in the same character or two separately but either way it serves the purpose of challenging us to decipher their minds or guess their next move. No matter how hard it is to relate to them, there always remains a small factor that connects us to them in a strange and disturbing way. THE MASTER OF TECHNIQUES 'Dark subject matter' predominates David Fincher's world of cinema. He builds his world one detail at a time and creates an immersive experience for his audience. He is in complete command of his scenes and understands technique like a master. Story Fincher's power is deception which has an effect on the audience as well as the narrator. Like in Fight Club, our unreliable narrator is so successful in deception that he has deceived himself completely. Even sometimes we become susceptible to manipulation by his characters. In gone girl, the ocean of lies and deception is impossible to navigate. Thus his stories depict a dark side to humanity and sometimes darkness wins. Production design It includes locations, wardrobes, props and Fincher's attention to detail here is borderline obsessive. In Fight Club, the protagonist gives in to seduction of a very diff life where rules and expectations disappear. Through the production design Fincher presents contrasting worldviews. The antidote to the narrator's monotonous life is seen in Tyler who has achieved pure personal freedom. The lawlessness of his lifestyle is expressed through his rotting filthy place quite in contrast to the narrator's modelled apartment. According to Fincher, characters are defined by their environment and he is meticulous in achieving that level of expression through simply (not so much) manipulating the environment. Colour David Fincher's world is not a colourful and vibrant one. His movies are typically colour-graded to a uniform shade: green, blue, red, yellow. Many of his nighttime scenes possess a tinge of yellow creating a suspenseful or tensed situation. Whenever he does include contrasting colours it stands out, usually meaning something: it either draws out attention to a particular character or a particular element of the scene, on which, he wants us to focus deliberately. Cinematography A lot of his story telling is accomplished with camera movements. He doesn't simply capture a moment but also captures the character's realisations. He lets action play out in wide frames and uses close ups only when necessary. But one thing is clear from his cinematography - he moves camera only with a purpose. He moves a camera to suggest mental strength like the slow zooming in Panic Room; also subtle or grand movements according to the actions of the character. If they move we move creating a line of connection between us and the character. Editing Keeps audience engaged. Sound Design and Music Fincher chooses expressive sound design carefully. It is abstract and catchy and also soothing at the same time. Together the sound and image combination mimics a situation. He uses sound to creatively align with a characters experience. But most importantly music serves a great purpose. It is either thematic or ironic. He uses songs with lyrics that echo the theme or some scenes are crafted completely around the music. Just imagine watching Fincher without the music! Yeah! The fun seeps out just my the thought of it! By @cinema_wallah

Reviews by: @art_fanatic_313 "Salome" is a one -chapter play written by Oscar Wilde in 1891 and was banned in countries such as England for decades because of its portrayal of biblical characters. This play is followed by Salome, trying to seduce and fail John. After that, the seven hijab dance danced to her mother's husband Herod and ordered the execution of John the Baptist. Finally, Herod, angry at John's death, ordered the execution of Salome. This is really a beautifully written play the dialogues and monologues is not realistic at all, but it is very beautiful, charming and poetic. In the background, there are many homosexual tones and although this never affects the main story in any way, it is very enjoyable and enjoyable. In general, in this play, there is love for men and the male body that can only be achieved by gay writer. The descriptions of the body, hair and mouth of the Baptist John are really beautiful and wonderful. The various multiple descriptions of the moon are beautiful. I don't think his relationship with everything that is happening has been explained at all, but this is a very interesting topic to think about it. This play revolves more than anything else about the battle of the sexual strength, where Herod represents male sex and female. In general, this is a good play that is definitely worth reading, because it is not a masterpiece or anything else, it is very short, so even if you don't like, you will not waste much time reading it. 9/10 By @art_fanatic_313

Reviews by: @ryan_the_nixon Freaky 2021 15 Director: Christopher Landon Starring: Kathryn Newton, Vince Vaughn, Celeste o Connor, Misha Osherovich, Emily Holder, Nicholas Stargel, Uriah Shelton, Dana Drori, Katie Finneran etc Overall rating 77/100 Freaky is about A young girl in high school who, after switching bodies with a deranged serial killer discovers she has less than 24 hours before the change becomes permanent. I had such a fun time with Freaky, but there were a few things that held It back from reaching its full potential. My first few positives would be the effective gore and great kills. The great over the top slasher tone, as well as the humour and fun dynamic between the two main characters. This movies slasher moments were excellent. The gore was over the top and used very effectively to add impact to the scenes, it was the kind of over-the-top fun you can expect from this kind of genre, the kills were also very creative. I felt like the kills were actually different and fresh compared to other slashers and didn’t go for conventional generic kills which was nice to watch. I loved this film a lot when it had its over-the-top slasher tone, I personally didn’t think this stayed consistent throughout (more on that later) it never treated itself too seriously and I respected that about the film, it made my enjoyment level so much higher for it, and the little attention to detail in the soundtrack and even the font of the writing for the change of days was so much fun. I also thought the film was absolutely hilarious. The amount of clever and well-timed humour they could get out of two completely opposite people switching bodies was excellently executed. The dynamic between Millie (Kathryn Newton) and The Butcher (Vince Vaughn) was fantastic and there were constant laugh out loud moments. It was a clever idea that was very well executed and was refreshing to watch. My next few positives would be the fantastic cast. The excellent cinematography, the great set up for the main plot point. As well as the development to the plot and the great representation. The Whole cast here did a fantastic job. Everyone had fantastic chemistry and excellent comedic timing. Vince Vaughn was brilliant, and it was nice to see him back in a leading comedic role again. His timing and delivery were excellent, he didn’t hold back which was amazing to watch. But also, Kathryn Newton did a fantastic job here, both her serious and comedic acting was brilliant, and I think she has a bright future ahead of her. Other key standouts for me were Celeste O’Connor, Misha Osherovich and Uriah Shelton who all did a fantastic job and had loads of charm to their performances, hopefully they get some more work out of this. The cinematography was also excellent, considering the small five million budget, the visuals were extremely strong, and they made the most out of the limited budget they had. With particularly excellent usage of colour and CGI. I loved the set up for the main plot point of the body swap, it was set up in the way of a classic slasher with a chase and was incredibly fun to watch and well executed. It set up the tone for the film as a whole and served its purpose well. I also loved the development to the plot, it never once got boring, keeping you entertained at a nice fast pace with good character development and strong twists to keep you invested. Finally, I also thought that the movie handled its representation of LGBTQ and black characters within horror very well, Both Celeste and Misha were very strong supporting cast members that actually served a lot to the plot and the main characters, also cleverly playing on the joke of these types of characters being underrepresented or killed early in horror films, this was cleverly done and refreshing to see. However, there was a far few negatives that for me, held the film back from reaching its full potential. There was a fair amount of genre tropes, a lazy set up and some very forced conflict. For me, despite some refreshing twists on genre tropes, the film still couldn’t escape a lot of them. Especially with the main character, she fitted into the stereotypical high school outsider for this kind of film, and a lot of character decisions were very predictable and generic that made the more refreshing moments and creative decisions have slightly less impact. The conflict at Millie at her school just felt forced and it was never really explained or developed properly, so it felt unneeded and once again fell into genre tropes that could have been avoided. I also thought the set up was very lazily done, having Millie being stuck at her school and straight away and not to make the sensible decision to go home with her friends was silly to me. It felt lazily written which most of this film wasn’t and could have been handled much better. My final few negatives would be the tonal imbalance, the lack of emotional connection and the unneeded ending. The film never fully managed to balance its horror and its comedy. It felt imbalanced far too often throughout the film. It started off strong as a horror/slasher and then as soon as the comedy came into play the film struggled to find a good balance. And for me there wasn’t enough kills and horror elements throughout, therefore I found myself enjoying it and viewed it more as a comedy. I also found myself emotionally disconnected from the film. Whilst appreciating the development and the film adding more depth to Millie and her family it wasn’t needed for this type of film. I think trying to add emotion onto an already imbalanced mix of comedy and horror was the wrong choice, if it was cut from the film I would have still enjoyed it equally as much. I also found the ending to be completely unnecessary. It felt like the film had already ended, with satisfying arcs for the characters and the antagonist dead. But somehow it didn’t end there and the whole final sequence felt unnecessary and tagged on for the sake of it, holding no purpose whatsoever, if they wanted to set up a sequel this was not the way to do it. My final few positives would be the fantastic script, the great character development. The fantastic rising of stakes and the fun final act. The script for this film was excellent, the comedic writing was incredibly clever, playing on genre tropes. Whilst also playing on the body swapping dynamic excellently. I also liked how the character of Millie developed. Despite the character depth not being needed it definitely added layers to some of the characters and Millie. And how her character developed in her confidence of herself and it was nice to see, I cared about the characters which isn’t always the case with films like this. I also thought the final act and the rising of the stakes was excellent. It was entertaining, hilarious and gruesome, adding a new layer just enough times for it to be unpredictable, with a clever nod to one particular moment at the beginning of the film. And the characters had good arcs and before the unneeded ending was a satisfying end to the film. Overall, Freaky can’t escape some tired genre tropes. And works better as a comedy than a horror with both of the genres not fully gelling. But the film is elevated by the fantastic and charming cast. Its fantastic dialogue and humour and the execution of its creative idea. And I still had a fun time with it. By @ryan_the_nixon

Reviews by: @the_owlseyes “Deus ex machina not only erases all meaning and emotion, it's an insult to the audience. Each of us knows we must choose and act, for better or worse, to determine the meaning of our lives...Deus ex machina is an insult because it is a lie.” Robert McKee, Story: Substance, Structure, Style, and the Principles of Screenwriting This isn't going to be an easy review. One of the best concepts ever has been oversatured and has lost it's relevance, even though there're people like me who believe in it. This is what you get when you get cocky and money becomes your main interest. This is how the art of film making dies, by the creation awful scripts which are insult to every screenwriter who wants to be acknowleged for his works. This is how this movie has been conceived, with good intentions and bad ideas. Only because this story needed to be a trilogy. Sometimes we have to stop and find something else to do. New stimuli to evolve and become better person. Evolution is so hard when your ego is bigger than your brain. Just. F$%k. PLOT "The human city of Zion defends itself against the massive invasion of the machines as Neo fights to end the war at another front while also opposing the rogue Agent Smith" or "Now it's just about Good, Evil and Jesus". SCRIPT Every character is unuseful because Neo, alias Jesus, saves everyone. Trinity, Morpheus and the battle of Zion seem like blur and it's hard to feel something for the last one. I think that this script is in contradiction with the previous chapter, where is clear that choice has a role in the Matrix, even though is all a simulation. So, what's the point of this movie, where everything is explained by the concept of fate and inevitability. I'm also extremely upset for the treatment reserved for Agent Smith, who is reduced to another one dimensional villain. Most, almost all of them, of the movie's characters are passive. Paradoxically the minor ones are more interesting. Also I don't understand why Link has to be reduced to having only 2-3 minutes of screen time. There's also the fact that the symbolism here isn't subtle as the first one and seems dumb, even though in one scene is clever. Time is also another issue of this flick, where it's hard to understand how Smith was able to rot our world in such a short amount of time, to the point of changing the weather as he wants. The Oracle and the Merovingian are other characters which are unuseful and seems more like plot props. There's only one salvageable thing here: the concept of love for programs and generally for people without a purpose. I sincerely think that this chapter is just a self indulgent ego trip of the Wachowskis, who tried to give another ending to a series which should've stopped after the first or second movie. Script: 4/10 ACTING Only Hugo Weaving seems interested about this movie, because he's the only one who poures all of himself in his characters. The others, they seem to be bored to death, especially Jada Pinkett Smith, Carrie Ann Moss ad Lawrence Fishburne. Paradoxically minor actors seem to be more competent. I can say with certainty that this is one of the corniest and cringily acted ever. It makes this chapter a bit cartoonish and it doesn't help the audience to get the relevance of the things happening on the screen. Why? Why such a movie is screwed up by that I don't understand. I'm very disappointed. Acting: 5/10 PHOTOGRAPHY White, green, blue and black have a relevant symbolic role. But it isn't just about that. Lights and shadows dance in an alternation which is beautiful to look at and elevates this movie from a simple sci-fi movie to a masterpiece. There're some shots which are genuinly wonderful to look at and just a few which I find uninteresting. Photography: 8/10 EDITING This is marvellous. The Wachowsky's trademarks is noticeable in every scene. Slow Motion increase the strength of every punch, the dynamism of every bullet and the nimbleness of every movement. Moving shots increase the impact of every action scene and some scenes, where we can see only the outline of every character is just delightful. Editing: 8/10 SPECIAL EFFECTS It's the one with the best cgi and effects. Fortunately the directors have learnt by the previous movie and has worked their ass off to give us competent VFX which doesn't seem like a videogame. Sure, there's better today, but for its times this is outstanding. It retains also the innovative models introduced by the previous movies and it build on them. Special Effects: 7/10 SOUNDTRACK It has the usual high quality but I can say that the best tracks are in the climax, especially the one below. It's pretty epic. I like how the theme grows in this one, marking a valuable step up from the previous ones. It still isn't the best I've ever heard but it stands up for itself masterfully. Soundtrack: 7/10 COSTUMES Same leather punk and suit's style as the previous movies. In the second one it was already redundant. Here it's stale. Sure, it defines the saga but afterward it's a bit corny. Costumes: 5/10 CONCLUSION Script: 4/10 Acting: 5/10 Photography: 8/10 Editing: 8/10 Special Effects: 7/10 Soundtrack: 7/10 Costumes: 5/10 AVERAGE: 6,28 It's an enjoyable movie ruined by a bad, pretty bad, script and tasteless acting. I think that you should skip it because it can ruin your opinion about the saga and quit The Wachowskis. You can still see it but you should turn your brain off to appreciate it. Watch it to finish the saga but lower your expectations. A lot. Director: The Wachowskis Screenplay: The Wachowskis Cast: Keanu Reeves, Laurence Fishburne, Carrie-Anne Moss, Hugo Weaving, Jada Pinkett Smith Soundtrack: Don Davis Cinematography: Bill Pope Running Time: 129 minutes Budget: $130 million By @the_owlseyes

Reviews by: @the_owlseyes “The world is a dangerous place to live, not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don't do anything about it” Albert Einstein We create monsters to feel better about the evil which resides in all of us, to fell like good people in a vicious world. We're monsters, nothing more than savages who have learnt how to use their brains for an higher purpose. Maybe we're less violent but violence evolves and molds us. We've become worse than killers, we've become accomplices and perpetrators of psychological abuse. It happens every day and every day we shut our mouths because we don't want to change anything and to avoid losing our privileges, which are just illusions built by a society based on sand. Is there good in the world? Are you good? Act PLOT "Supernatural, semihistorical, horror anthology series, where each season is inspired by a different infamous or mysterious real life historical tragedy" or "Horror is real". SCRIPT It's an horror series based on characters and it's all about them. The first season is about comradery, vices, the harship of leadership, loneliness and the sense of desolation. The second one is about family, infamy, war, discrimination, the relevance of the past and remembrance. Both have are characterized by spiritualism and how it factors in our daily life. I think that the first season, where the characters don't have an arch, is intended to be an hopeless story about mankind's nature. The second is hopeful because shows us the fact that only by accepting the past and telling the truth we can have a future and build something new. Overall all the characters are pretty sympathetic but they aren't righteous and that makes it a particularly grounded show. Script: 8/10 ACTING The first season has better acting and more charismatic leads. This is pretty noticeable. I think that Jared Harris is the one who sells the series and makes it impressive. Sure, in the first season the supporting cast is great but it's hard to single out someone who is not Harris. The second season has a weaker lead in Derek Mio and a mixed supporting cast. I think that the best performer of the second season is the actress who interprets the demon, Kiki Sukezane. I think that the second season could've been better with different actors, but probably the producers didn't have the budget for better actors. Overall is an impressive script and I'm impressed. Acting: 8/10 PHOTOGRAPHY This show has stunning shots, where there's an alternation between lights and shadows. Colours have a relevance, especially in the first season where white is as frightening as darkness. Chromatic symbolism is also present in the second season but it's more subtle. Nonetheless is used in a competent way. I like the fact that in the season there're some filters to determine the difference between the past and present and the life and afterlife. Photography: 9/10 EDITING Another strength of this show, which is characterized of long takes, side-to-side movement and generally the camera is used in a dynamic way when it's needed and long, pensive shots to increase the sense of fear. Sometimes it uses slow zoom ins to make us realize the viciousness of some people. I like how it parallels the past and the future, without fading cuts, to show how the current situation is influencing the characters. It is used in the first and the second season, but I think that the editing is better in the first. Overall I like it, because it's used to help convey the shows themes. Editing: 8/10 SPECIAL EFFECTS Practical effects are top notch but the cgi is a bit clumsy. They try to hide them behind shadwos and blurry landscapes but, when they're under light are a bit off putting. I think that the first second lose a bit of quality cause of it. Somehting which makes the second season great is exactly the fact that there's a large use of SFX and VFX are used only to refine them. I think that the second season could be considered a step up in terms of quality. Special Effects: 7/10 SOUNDTRACK Both seasons feature a gripping soundtrack which holds you on your seat. I think that the first season has a more interesting theme, even though the second doesn't lose much in quality. I like it because it achieves a lot without being flamboyant, as the series style. In the first season it makes us feel the coldness of the pole's ice and in the second it's a blend of japanese sounds and an underlying horror theme of afterdeath. I think that this is what makes this series original and appaling. Soundtrack: 8/10 COSTUMES They're great because they respect the time period of both season and fit the characters perfectly. In the second season they have also a role in the plot. I think that there's a lot of care and attention to details. Something which needs to be acknowledged. Obviously they aren't particularly original but they are coherent, and that's enough. Costumes: 8/10 CONCLUSION Script: 8/10 Acting: 8/10 Photography: 9/10 Editing: 8/10 Special Effects: 7/10 Soundtrack: 8/10 Costumes: 8/10 AVERAGE: 8 It's a marvellous series with compelling stories and characters. There's an attentation to details which is impressive and it's noticeable in the costumes, editing and photography. It's one of the best horror shows I've ever seen and I think that you should watch it because it could entertain and give what I can consider a cathartic experience. Director: Tim Mielants, Edward Berger Screenplay: Andres Fischer-Centeno Cast: Jared Harris, Tobias Menzies, Paul Ready, Adam Nagaitis, Ian Hart, Nive Nielsen, Ciarán Hinds, Derek Mio, Kiki Sukezane, Cristina Rodlo, Shingo Usami, Naoko Mori, Miki Ishikawa, George Takei Soundtrack: Marcus Fjellström, Mark Korven Cinematography: Florian Hoffmeister, Frank van den Eeden Running Time: 48 minutes By @the_owlseyes

Reviews by: @theplokoonyreview Season One Positives: The Titans are terrifyingly well executed Death is harrowingly impactful The characters are realistically flawed while being intelligently constructed The animation is beautifully fluid and intricate Negatives: Sometimes the show can’t keep up with its own pacing which leads to awkward exposition cutaways and convenient backstory inserts. Positive: The Titans The creator successfully encapsulates an uncanny form of dread in the Titans. Their expressions largely stay reminiscent of humans, but all the warmth and personality in expressions are drained and replaced with something much more cold and distant. For many Titans it drives inspiration from a babies eyes as well, there’s a look of innocent curiosity in many of them, which makes their horrific actions all the more uncomfortable to watch. Moving on from the face, their physique is also critical to the intended effect. They tower over humans, leaving any grounded resistance futile which is demonstrated time and time again. Meanwhile their lumpy, unformed bodies are once again akin to a babies, the inspiration the creator takes from this is evident and is surprisingly ingenious at being creepy. Physical traits aside, the mental damage Titans leave on humans keeps the dread alive even in moments where they’re absent. It’s evident in everything, humans have hide themselves behind large walls to keep them away, characters dedicate their life to getting further away from the outer walls, while the ptsd the soldiers deal with stays as a constant throughout every battle and its aftermath. The Titans aren’t just an antagonist, they are the reason behind nearly every decision made. It gives the story and characters within it a clear overarching direction, while in its 24 episodes it fleshes out the fear these Titans produce from nearly every angle. Positive: The Potrayal of Death Death is handled with extreme delicacy, striking a tasteful balance that grounds the entire show in its own tense and brutal nature. The realism it brings is a huge reason for its success, there’s a variety of both quick and drawn out deaths, with each serving their own purpose and contrasting each other to pertain a random element. The quick deaths usually are used to help create a merciless atmosphere and demonstrate the fragility of the rest of the characters. Whereas the drawn out are used to display a droning sense of hopelessness, when a Titan snatches a human with its strong grip there is almost never an escape, and when there is it’s a testament to the characters strength. In these moments before an inevitable death, characters will react differently but all with the same dread and fear, whether they’ll cry out or condemn the Titans it all feels incredibly real and grounded. The careful execution of each of these scenes makes it difficult not to admire. Positive: Characters Characters are immediately easy to sympathize with, making the scenes where they die all the more tragically impactful. Right from the first episode the destruction and death Titans wreak is evident, while the humans reactions to it feel spontaneous and flawed as the dread the Titans exhibit creeps into their decision making. It’s not overly emphasized and there isn’t any stand up hero in this episode, rather it’s a one sided battle that’s only won by selfish decision making. From this point forward, the characters decisions and reactions feel much more visceral and realistic, the audience understands the fear that drives them and can easily relate it back to the horrors the main characters and the audience witnessed in the first episode. All this being said, the humour in the characters works as a good change of pace which enters when appropriate and consistently brightens the atmosphere to show characters in a different light. It also works well in showing differences between characters, (VERY MINOR SPOILERS) when Sasha steals a potato and eats it during the military training orientation, it’s assumed she hasn’t experienced the same horrors as the three main characters and then her disrespect to the leading officer solicited this. It’s a fun throwaway scene that demonstrates the officer-cadet relationship, but the looming threat of the Titans doesn’t leave, in fact her innocent attitude in all this carries a bitter realization to the viewer, once she faces a real Titan the same horror the main characters faced will be thrust upon her. The opposite is also shown with Jean in a more serious tone, watching him go through a town filled with horrors of a battles afternath and trying to identify corpses, while also being reeled back in shock and fear by the sights of his dead friends. Before this he was displayed as snarky, simple minded and selfish. However, amongst this dreadful scenery, he carries a solemn attitude, and empathy for the fallen soldiers while struggling with his own fear of Titans brought humanistic depth to his character. (MINOR SPOILERS END) These characters still fall under many anime cliches (obsessive love interest, character who loves food) and in most other shows this would feel cliche, but nearly every characters attitude can be traced back to their experience (or lack of) with Titans and it layers their personality and decisions with a psychological undercoat. The writer plays to this incredibly, the fear characters face with the internal and external struggle the Titans (and corrupt humans) invoke upon them is a fleshed out topic which brings depth to every member of the survey corps. Positive: Animation The animation adds layers of detail to its setting while also leading to incredibly fluid and detailed fight scenes. It’s commendable that everything is filled with this detail, while never calling attention to itself as to keep the focus inward on the characters and Titans. It’s appropriate for this show, the buildings and forests are realistic to match the harsh and grounded tone established while the animators paint a telling and beautiful picture that appropriately blends into the world. For example, while watching three characters go into a tunnel, there was a slab of wood above them that appeared for a few seconds. In this slab, there were layers of intricately drawn lines sketched across to give it a layered look while also mixing different browns to show the age of the wood. The impressively high quality control is present in everything, no matter how insignificant it seems. A beautifully, or horrifically detailed picture is present at every turn. Aside from this, fight scenes are an incredible spectacle. The 3D maneuver gear members of the army use hoists them into the air and sends them lunging across buildings at blisteringly quick speeds. The animators capture this through quickly changing angles as characters fly through the sky and of course, laborious work on making their movements look natural as they glide across the sky while the progression they make across any terrain is apparent. It gives the viewer enough time to understand the situation through quick yet digestible shots, while also conveying the high speeds and delivering quality character and setting animation. Negative: Too fast paced for its own good This show has an incredibly fast pace, bouncing from one significant event to another with the only space in between being for grieving the dead after battles. This is largely a great thing, it’s a refreshing change of pace from many long shows where events are needlessly drawn out, it’s rarely boring and the events that it covers do consistently achieve their intended goal with extraordinary prowess. However, with such jumpy pacing and ambitious storytelling there’s bound to be moments where information can’t be properly delivered, and the solution to this does feel cheap. To avoid spoilers there won’t be a specific example, instead this rough description will apply to how this show occasionally deals with delivering context and backstories. In the middle of a battle the show will forget the context to which a scene needs to make sense, or the background information for a characters decision to make sense. This will usually leeway into another scene delivering this information then going back into the action after the viewer has already been pulled out of it. It feels like a cheap jab at both a emotional response and haphazardly created solution to a problem. Having another 2-3 episodes (especially during the training arc) would’ve been incredibly beneficial to both the characters and flow of information. Negative: The Introduction This point is a minor one but at the beginning the pre teen versions of Eren and Armin were ridiculously overly idealistic and lacked any subtly. It’s due to this portion of the show being very brief, the creator had a lot to say in this short segment and unfortunately the characterization suffered from this. They over explained their idealistic point of views to a point of embarrassment and immediately had their personalities hyperbolized, which was unfortunate since it was delivered too fast for anything to sink in. This segment suffered from the insanely fast pace the show sets. As was previously mentioned, this fast pace is well maintained and leads to many great positives that keep the show captivating, but there are negatives, however minor, which do have a affect on the experience. Overall, Attack on Titan season 1 is an emotionally impactful, fantastically written, and beautifully animated introduction which leaves the viewer excited for what’s next. There’s many positives that I wasn’t able to properly cover (music, plot) due to the review becoming too long, in my reviews for the later seasons I hope to further touch on these. Entertainment and critical rating: 8.5/10 Final rating: 8.5/10 Season Two For the good, the soundtrack compliments the rest of the show while being uniquely brilliant, the second half is marginally better than the first, and the animation still has an impressively high quality. For the negatives, the deaths feel much more like cheap jabs at emotion, backstories annoyingly disrupt the pacing’s flow and the first act is a jumble of poorly managed ideas. Back to the good, while proving to be distinctly unique with nearly every track, the tracks each convey a range of powerful emotions. The orchestra is drenched in the dramatic quality the rest of the show exhibits. These classic instruments are all used in unison to create a resounding, rich sound while the epic choir further emphasizes this. This use of orchestra leads to a fantastic soundscape, it’s used at just the right moments to increase the drama within the tension and stakes, however this isn’t what gives Attack on Titan its “edge”. Within these epic pieces, there’s techno and rock rooted into the pieces as well. This show is able to take excessive edginess and intensity, then turn it into an art form by grounding it in its own world until it feels completely natural, which is masterfully mirrored in its own soundtrack. It always has the familiar sound of an orchestra to ground itself, but the seamlessly mixed gut punching effect of the techno and rock take this soundtrack to new heights entirely, leading to a masterpiece of an ost. This also applies to the first season, but seasons two is even more ambitious in the sounds it creates and ends off being superior between the two in this area. Secondly, the later half (from episodes 6-12) of this season fortunately choses a direction to commit to and even though many events are missing a regrettable amount of meaningful build up or context, they still have enough of a noticeable effect on the plot to have critical merit and emotional impact to maintain the audiences attention. This is largely due to the meaningful battles which take place, Attack on Titan seems to always be at its best when there’s a eminent threat around the corner, the creator is incredibly good at playing with tension and he channels his talents the best when a battle is taking place, or the threat of one is hanging in the air. These elements were in the first half, but the effect was dampened since it felt more like an exposition dump that was too afraid to actually deliver any exposition, rather just posing questions again and again between elongated flashbacks. The second half had this problem pop up a few times as well, but fortunately was undermined by some fantastic battle scenes whose intensity and stakes became the centre focus. It should also be mentioned that this second half had a human element weaved into it by grounding itself in feelings of heart piercing betrayal, it became much more character focused as it explored their inner conflicts and felt much more akin to season 1’s heavily grounded approach, which was a welcomed return. Thirdly, the animation is as beautiful as ever, being on par, it not slightly more impressive than season 1 in comparison. Many of the points from my review for that season still apply here, the architecture and setting are packed with descriptive amount of detail while still retaining a grounded look to fit into the very realistic, medieval inspired backdrop. Character designs share similarities to the background in their realistic approach. However, there isn’t a design that feels rushed, each one still has enough feint, yet prevalent personality in their design which amalgamates to a distinct feeling in each person. For example, there’s Levi with his sharp, refined features present in his chin and nose, while his hairstyle is an undercut with a carefully trimmed amount of hair covering his forehead. While Jean’s face is drawn out enough to distinguish him from the rest of the cast, but not enough for it to be obvious and works subtly instead. His hair also is styled with an undercut and hair sprouting out from the top and swaying across the back, front and sides of his head. These details all play a role in bringing the character to life, while these details even subtly allude to their personalities.  One detail that has reached another level since the last season is the shading and use of colour, it conveys a much more complex picture that not only is beautiful to look at but further warps the viewer deeper into the world. This is all I have to add onto what I previously said about animation in season 1’s review. Onto the negatives, the handling of death was a major strength of the first season, however there are many instances in this season where it’s much more artistically indulgent and overly bloody to a point where the effect becomes lost and it tries too hard to invoke an emotional response. In the first episode, the death of one character tried too hard to prove a point (I’ll never surrender even if it kills me) to a point where their death lost all rational thought since the character make stupid choices to get to this point. Then the actual death itself was so overly gory and drawn out that it just became too self indulgent to feel anything but grossed out. Also, the creator seemed very keen on implementing dramatic irony to deaths. In a show which is so grounded like Attack on Titan, simplistic deaths which don’t force any emotion or significance, rather just let them speak for themselves always are the most impactful. While season two still has this, it also has deaths which are depicted in much more artistically profound ways, which feels out of place and as if these moments are pining for emotions instead of letting them naturally enter. (SPOILERS) One character mentions how he would love some alcohol to drink a few times, then while Titans are trying to kill him he finds a bottle, opens it but it’s empty and then he gets eaten. Hannes also talks about how he wants to relieve his glory days and protect the three main characters, then he’s killed by the Titan who killed the main characters mom. (SPOILER END) These moments definitely are impactful, but they’re also incredibly transparent in their desire to force emotion and it ends in the effect being heavily dampene Secondly, the sheer amount of insignificant, drawn out and overall boring backstories is unbelievable and the show can be a slog to get through sometimes because of it. It pulls the viewer out of the scene they’re already invested in, then asks them to sit through something that most of the time they aren’t given a good reason to care about. What’s even more impressive is that these backstories don’t even contribute to the overarching goal of the series and just further confuse its already strained focus. In the middle of a Titan invasion, the show is posing questions involving the Titans. This is because the past episode (and a large portion of the first season) was focused on developing the mystery beneath Titans. However, instead of having this elaborated on, over half of the next episode is dedicated to Sasha’s backstory and how her family happens to live near the invasion. It’s a gross misunderstanding of what people actually care about and it feels so disconnected and inconsequential from everything else that it’s just a waste of the already limited time the show has. There are many more examples of this, Hannes’s flashback to simpler times was shoved in between battles, the viewer had just witnessed a huge Titan battle which ended on a suspenseful note. The tension was cut by this backstory, it was drawn out, awkwardly written to feel like it’s own mini comedic sub plot, and painfully transparent in its goals to show Hannes’s dream to get back to the “good old days.” This was only worsened after he explained in annoyingly obvious detail that this is what he wanted, enough though we already watched the backstory which alluded this well enough, it felt like the show was babying the viewer and further dragged out an already near unbearable segment. Lastly, the first half of this season is remarkably difficult to get through. It pulls the viewer in so many different direction, starting with the mystery of the Titans and churches involvement with them, then moving onto abnormal Titans, then the dynamic between Ymir and Christa. It’s within 5 episodes, all while cramming backstories, many of which are drawn out or insignificant. Unfortunately, this makes for a very complicated and frustrating experience, it’s dealing with all these different concepts but it doesn’t actually elaborate on any of them to maintain mystery, but unfortunately the cost of maintaining mystery is the audiences patience and also the pacing feels jumpy because its going back and forth between seemingly very disconnected ideas. (SPOILERS) What’s even more disappointing is that all these directions mostly get abandoned near the end, instead opting for the conflict with Reiner and Bertolt. It’s great that it found a direction, but it also abandoned 2 other directions while merging Ymir’s in a way which wasn’t able to properly flesh it out and felt more like a compromise. It’s reasonable to leave unresolved aspects for future seasons, but to introduce two story-changing elements, build a mystery around them and then abandon it is just a poor management of ideas. (SPOILERS END) The show needs to go back and forth between these ideas, not much sinks into the viewers mind since the show itself is already so scatter brained. Unfortunately, this leads to moments that otherwise would’ve been incredibly impactful, especially the one involving Ymir and Christa induce more of a “ok well I guess this is happening” response rather than the surprise it should’ve. The season is constantly to shock you with the next big reveal, until it becomes tiresome and the significance behind events begins to fade away. CONCLUSION Season 2 is beautifully scored and animated while its second half has some great moments and a better sense of direction. However, this season is a shocking downgrade from the first, it doesn’t handle most death scenes with the same maturity, the plot is confused for most of the season and the backstories range from inconsequential to elongated. This season could’ve been a masterpiece, but these negatives are too potent and prevalent to overlook. Entertainment and critical rating: 6.5/10 Final rating: 6.5/10 Season Three For the positives, the world building is dramatically impactful and engaging, the handling of death and backstories have been remarkably improved on from the last season, and the tension and animation present in battles reach new heights. For the negatives, there were moments in battles where blatant tricks were used to create undeserved emotional investment, Mikasas character isn’t expanded on nearly enough. Positive: World Building Season 1 and 2 were shrouded in a mystery throughout, while the characters grasped at straws to understand even just the scope and complexity of their situation. While there was a simplistic charm to season 1, which left bigger questions to the sidelines. Season 2 on the other hand made an effort to establish the big picture, but was restrained since it wanted to maintain mystery and couldn’t expand on what it set up. Season 3 is unlike what came before it, the creator takes no liberties in revealing as much information as possible, it redefines the scope of the show while the bold delivery makes it both refreshing and jarringly impactful. It’s not as if it’s delivered immaculately, it rather answers all the right questions it’s been setting up since the first episodes and all the answers provided are incredibly interesting. These aren’t just simple answers either, it throws itself into so many rabbit holes which make this world even more fascinating to learn about, it’s been so meticulously constructed that the amalgamation of ideas uniquely belongs to Attack on Titan. The viewer is already rooted in the show, due to how grounded the characters are and how visceral their struggles, and even their deaths can feel. The new direction doesn’t uproot the connection to this show, it never relied on its plot to stay grounded the plot’s always been wildly unrealistic, but the characters haven’t changed, rather this new revelation has challenged their perception of the world and further nuanced them. Aside from all this, despite the insane amount of information delivery, there is restraint used just at the right times. This is more specific to the second part, it delivers new ideas and exposition through flashbacks and books, instead of throwing the characters into these newly established conflicts. There is a significant amount of potency put behind the character journeys, but this still is an introduction to a much larger plot. However, this is an incredibly well fleshed out introduction, it’s fascinating on its own to finally see the mystery unravelled after 50 episodes of being beat down and battles that seemed to end in nothing but casualties, but it’s also given the show a clear direction and has opened the door for so many more character possibilities. The world building is such a prominent, well executed positive that makes this season and the possibilities for what’s next fascinating. Positive: The Improved Use of Death and Backstories Due to the complex plot and an unforgivingly harsh tone, exposition and/or character backstories and death have been a constant in Attack on Titan and in this season, they are better executed than ever before. For backstories, the most significant tend to be put at the end of major events, by doing this it avoids becoming intrusive while letting the show explain all the unanswered questions and redefining the significance and scope of the previous events. This could easily begin to feel like a cheap trick, but these backstories always stay concise while coinciding nicely with the previous and following events. Furthermore, the characters who are the centre focus for the two main backstories (SPOILERS Kenny and Grisha SPOILERS END) are unconventional picks, yet both have mystery shrouding their motives and a personality which was previously hard to pin down. By making them the spotlight, it gives time to deliver exposition while unveiling these characters motives and dreams. It makes the actual exposition much more easy to invest in since there’s an interesting character at the core of it, by the end of one of these segments the character of focus ends up being just as fascinating as the painstakingly crafted world building. As for the handling of death, it finds ways to emotionally effect the audience while staying rooted in its harsh reality. Death scenes have an inward focus, it never feels like it’s “trying” to terrify the audience through being scary or gross, rather it terrifies the shows characters. It stays investing, being focused on the raw reactions of characters makes the experience feel more like a breakdown of spontaneous human reactions under a terrifying situation, being equally fascinating as it is stressful. What I said about the handling of death in season 1 also applies here, and this point will be further developed in the next slide. Positive: The Battles Battle sequences have always been one of Attack on Titans strongest elements, every stage of these fights, from beginning to the actual fight to the aftermath, it’s all fantastically elaborated on, while mixing in engrossing character drama and finely detailed animation. In this season, this is all present but more effective than ever before. Even though the beginning of fights could’ve benefitted from having more time spent on them, it’s always impressive how there’s unique battle plans created for each one of these sequences. These plans creatively work with all its elements, even the personalities of characters influence the creation of plans (Erwins experience and willingness to gamble while Armin is much more nervous and his plans are well formed but have an optimistic caution). Meanwhile, everyone else reveals much about their own character through reactions to plans, there’s a general feeling of unfaltering loyalty among many of the survey corps, but delving deep into each characters reaction to plans, then showing how they act during the actual battles consistently leads to interesting contrasts. It’s an ingenious way to implement meaningful characterization into the planning phase, there’s so much interesting initial development to pay attention to during this phase that is expanded on throughout the rest of the battle. As for the battles themselves, watching each strategy be implemented throughout the duration helps liven up the dynamic of these battles, whether it be capitalizing on the element of surprise, using a newly created technology to throw the opposing side off guard or predicting enemy movements, each time this happens a new element is added to the experience, it’s done at the right time to give nuance to these battles while never becoming too much, each new element is implemented with purpose and that purpose stays a factor as the sequence progresses. Seeing the initial plan being followed is interesting enough, but seeing plans fall apart and being reformed on the spot is where this show finds it chance to reach a deeper, more meaningfully nuanced understanding of its characters under the pressure of the situation. Whether it be due to the circumstances or their own agendas, it takes the pre existing knowledge of the character and evolves it. This leads to a deep, beautifully articulated understanding of characters, with the impact of this development being all the more heightened thanks to the underlying tension and stakes which are established and emphasized throughout. As for the aftermath of these fights, they never forget to acknowledge the most horrific parts of battles and bathe the atmosphere in these horrors of war to induce a haunting effect on all the characters minds, inducing an effect akin to, if not ptsd. This death has inescapable impact for both the characters and the viewer, it gives any “victory” a bitter double meaning and stays consistent with the brutal and unforgiving tone set throughout. (SPOILERS) If should be mentioned that the fight against Mr Reiss’s Titan doesn’t carry the a depressing aftermath, instead ending hopefully with Historia becoming queen and no one dying. It’s one of the weaker battles in the show, but it was far from bad. It was nice to see them have a victory, especially before the second half of this season begun, while lightening the mood so the creator could naturally show off the a more lighthearted sides of these characters. (SPOILERS END) To end off, the animation has also reached a new level of quality and its best depicted during fight scenes. Impossibly fast speeds are beautifully captured through animation techniques that a feeling of whiplash can practically be felt through the screen. Meanwhile, there is barely any cgi used on the Titans, which is commendable and it leads to a fantastic looking final product. The Colossal Titan is cgi, but it’s still heavily detailed and keeps from awkwardly standing out. Negative: The Few Shortcomings of Battles Before this negative section even begins, I want to clarify all these are very minor and the positives are so prominent that they feel incredibly insignificant when looking at the season as a whole, however they still exist and should be acknowledged. (SPOILERS START) Right before the battle of the Orvud district begins, Eren, Mikasa and Armin see three kids who look up to to them in confusion at what’s about to happen. It’s painfully obvious in its attempts to mirror the moment where Eren, Mikasa and Armin watched their city get destroyed when they were younger. This moment is woefully misplaced, the stakes had already been set up since an entire city of people is at risk, so to add this was just an artistically indulgent jab at emotion before it began. It’s also incredibly cheesy, this moment may have worked better in an inspirational sports anime but with the context of Attack on Titan this moment is grossly obvious in its attempts to pander to emotion. (SPOILER END) This moment isn’t a huge deal when compared to all the other masterfully executed moments that deserve their own segment (which I just don’t have the time or space to write for) but it was jarring to see such a moment in a show like this and I also needed material for the negative section. Aside from this moment, there’s one element in these fights that has been irritating to watch since season 1. Right before an element is introduced that will change the course of a battle, the show goes into a flashback and explains the significance and thought process behind this new element. While these flashbacks stay brief and concise, they still tend to interrupt the flow of pacing and the way it tries to morph the actual battle and preparation phase feels more like a compromise. Having them be separated from each other would’ve been a much more interactive experience, the audience would know all the tricks and strategies that can be implemented, leading to a strong foundation of knowledge for these battles to take place upon. Sometimes this happens and the result is a phenomenal fight scene where the audience has been told enough to create an emotional investment, understand the stakes and feel a gripping sense of tension even before the fight scene starts (Erwin Smith’s charge against the Beast Titan). However, there are other times where this isn’t the case and it consistently feels like a missed opportunity to elevate the scene. Negative: Mikasa It speaks to the quality of this seaosn when there’s only significant flaws with one of the characters, I would’ve loved to touch on what made each individual character fantastic but once again, I am running out of space to write. Mikasa’s character seems to have hit a roadblock. In part 2 she did have some inarguably good moments, but even in these moments her relationships with character never evolve or reach a deeper level. They get tested constantly but these tests don’t change her, rather just confirm the surface level understanding the audience already has of her. It’s still awkward to watch Mikasa interact with Eren, their conversations are stilted they’re emotionally far apart from each other. Also, despite showing protective feelings for Armin there hasn’t been an insightful conversation between the two. It’s not as if character relationships can only be shown by dialogue, but her actions towards others are also stubbornly predictable. Also, most major events in this show involve attempts at capturing Eren, so she’s typically only focused on protecting from or getting him back which limits the depth of both her and their relationship. It is interesting how she won’t risk the success of a mission to save Eren or Armin or can’t function when one of their lives are endangered, but this was established in season 1 and it hasn’t changed. Mikasa is meant to be cold physically, yet has deep protective feelings, but this contrast can only be played with for so long before it needs to evolve and it shows no sign of doing so. Overall, this season is the best of Attack on Titan so far, all of its technical elements have reached a new peak while the writing is consistently outdoing itself in new and inventive ways. It’s emotionally jarring, visually stunning and takes risks which pay off immensely, or to put it simply this season is a masterpiece. Critical and entertainment rating: 9/10 Final rating: 9/10 By @theplookonyreview

Reviews by: @the_owlseyes What would you do if you were obliged to be part of a Battle Royale for the sake of your people? Would you kill or try to win it in another way? This could be a realistic situation. What makes your life more valuable than other? Your intelligence, your skills, your experience,...or life goes beyond that. Would you feel remorse after killing someone or it will be just another death necessary to reach freedom? Maybe the issue isn't about killing or being killed. It's about freeing ourselves from the people who want us to kill each other for the sake of their entertainment and delight. Would you rebel against the people who are oppressing you? Or is it too hard because you have to put some effort in it and risk everything? Do it. PLOT "Katniss Everdeen voluntarily takes her younger sister's place in the Hunger Games: a televised competition in which two teenagers from each of the twelve Districts of Panem are chosen at random to fight to the death" or "Battle Royale with teens". SCRIPT There isn't a great plot here and the characters are front and center here. Only Katniss could be considered a likeable character and I think that it's intended to be like that. The issue is that she's too pure for this movie. I don't like how she gets into the Games and the fact that she's the "first volunteer in a long time" like she's special and she's a chosen one. Her arch isn't compelling but I like the fact that she is the spark which starts the rebellion. Peeta isn't much different, because he shifts from a shy simpleton to a sanctimonious clever man. It's a bit unbelievable. The other characters and villains aren't interesting because they're superficially represented. It feels like an aimless movie in the end, because there isn't a progression. I like the social commentary about reality shows, image, oppression, utilitarism, survival and death. They aren't explored in depth but only hinted at. Sometimes it isn't subtle and I consider it bad executed. Overall is a mediocre script with potential. It doesn't deliver more than that. A bit underwhelming. Script: 6/10 ACTING It isn't bad and it isn't extremely good. I like Jennifer Lawrence's performance, I think that her acting makes the movie a little better. I also like Woody Harrelson, Stanley Tucci and Elizabeth Banks, who crafts interesting characters, even though they aren't analyzed in depth. Donald Sutherland is interesting too, because he delivers a charming, threatning and fascinating performance. I don't understand why Lenny Kravitz is here, because his acting is a bit out of place. Josh Hutcherson, who plays the role of Peeta, isn't exceptional. Acting: 6/10 PHOTOGRAPHY Some good shots here and there but there isn't anything particularly remarkable. I like when the camera focus on the nature but the city isn't interesting, like other settings. Light isn't used in an interesting way and colours don't have meaning, even though the hosts are characterized by them. Overall is just mediocre. Photography: 6/10 EDITING There's a lack of originality here and I don't like it. This is why this movie seems to drag a lot, especially in the first and last act. Sometimes there's slow motion but it's used in a boring way and seems like the movie doesn't know other shooting techniques. It's sufficient but it doesn't go beyond it. Editing: 6/10 SPECIAL EFFECTS Considering the fact that this is a 2012 movie, the cgi isn't good. The director tries his best to conceal it by using it in dark scenes. Unfortunately they have a relevant role here and hurt the experience a bit. The production could have used its money on more practical effects and, maybe, cutting out most of the cgi. Special Effects: 5/10 SOUNDTRACK It's acceptable but I don't find it remarkable. Sometimes it's appreciable but it doesn't try to do something interesting. Soundtrack: 6/10 COSTUMES Nothing interesting about them. Sometimes there're interesting clothes, like the opening's suits. The technical suit are pretty simple and there's no differentiation between members of different districts. Peeta's camouflage is good but it isn't enough. Hosts and rulers have interesting clothes but these aren't unforgettable and don't have any role in the plot. Costumes: 6/10 CONCLUSION Script: 6/10 Acting: 6/10 Photography: 6/10 Editing: 6/10 Special Effects: 5/10 Soundtrack: 6/10 Costumes: 6/10 AVERAGE: 5,85 A movie with good ideas but a poor execution. Nonetheless is a good teen drama with good themes and a good production, even though the cgi is bad. Watch it to find out why this series has been so influential in the past. Director: Gary Ross Screenplay: Suzanne Collins, Gary Ross Cast: Jennifer Lawrence, Josh Hutcherson, Liam Hemsworth, Woody Harrelson, Elizabeth Banks, Lenny Kravitz, Stanley Tucci, Donald Sutherland Soundtrack: James Newton Howard Cinematography: Tom Stern Running Time: 142 minutes Budget: $78 million By @the_owlseyes

Reviews by: @art_fanatic_313 Epifany is an anthology magazine which includes a variety of different stories and each one of them continues in (almost) every issue. This issue includes 9 stories, with 1 of them being a new addition to the title. This new one is called “Johnny Rocket” and it follows a spaceman who fights aliens. In his first appearance, after he fights some aliens, he gets launched in an alien porn cinema, where his imagination comes to life. It was an ok story, but honestly nothing really special. I liked the artwork, but the story wasn’t that interesting. Hopefully it’ll continue in a better way in the next issues. From the rest of the stories, I don’t think that there’s anything that stands out. I usually enjoy “Soldier Kane” and “He-Punk and the Bastards of the Universe” a lot, but nothing big really happens in either one of them. Thankfully the artwork by Vasilis Lolos was still absolutely beautiful, so I was able to enjoy He-Punk, even without anything big happening. Another comic I usually like is “Blood Cracker”. This is a comic about a storytelling robot and the kid who uses it to listen to stories. In this issue the robot tells a story about how greed can destroy you and how you need to focus on other things, like love and family. It was a nice little story, but I don’t think that I liked it as much as I did in some previous issues. That being said, it was probably my favorite comic from this issue of Epifany. Another story I enjoyed is “The Grim Reaper” (“Ο Χάρος”). I’m still not sure how it’s gonna continue in the next issues, but so far it’s pretty interesting and the main character is a very unique vigilante. The rest of the stories were honestly nothing special. “Boham City” is a nice story, with good social commentary, but it’s also only 1 page long, so before you even start it, it’s over. “Grrrowl” is continuing in a very interesting way, but this issue’s story was just ok. “Old Man Time” and “The Whispers of Hades” were (like always) not for me. The artwork in both comics is great, but other than that, I read them just so that I can finish this magazine. Overall this issue of Epifany was alright. It was certainly not my favorite one, but it still made for a nice read. Non of the stories changed my life and the way I look at comics, but they did help me pass my time in a fun way. By @art_fanatic_313

Reviews by: @the_owlseyes “Wolves attack the hindquarters of prey first, biting into the animal's meaty rump or ham. They stay away from the tendons near the hooves. People hamstring wolves, wolves do not hamstring prey. Hard, sharp, and lethal, hooves are the last things wolves want near their heads. They aim for the flanks, grasping for a hold in the large muscles, hoping to bring the mammal down. A trip, a stumble, a fall, and the wolves go for the throat. The animals in the rear begin feasting as their partners crush and remove the herbivore's windpipe.” Jon T. Coleman, Vicious: Wolves and Men in America Who is the good guy? PLOT "A young woman, traumatized by a tragic event in her past, seeks out vengeance against those who crossed her path" or "Joker meets the #MeToo movement". SCRIPT It's a movie intended to be female empowering. I like the fact that the concept of sexual predator is flipped and makes us ask ourselves if we're really good people. It isn't only about men but also about women. This movie condemns who perpetrate the rape and who stands there doing nothing, almost endorsing it. The movie is pretty realistic and, unlike most of the feminist's movies, don't take sides but tries to be as objective as possible. The protagonist's violence isn't glamourized and the ending shows that all of his actions have real consequences. Maybe Cassie is an hyperbolized version of some girls who take revenges against rapists, but it works well as an empowering character. It's sad to see that the only hopeful character in this movie doesn't get to be happy. Here there's a lot of attention and care to details, which pays off in the ending. The fact that they've able to slip in a transgender woman in a subtle way, without making her sexuality her main trait. None has an arch and the movie is intended to be like that, but the main characters are interesting, even though they aren't explored this much. In fact the plot here is pretty thin but it isn't a problem because it revolves around its concept. It's above most of the feminist movies but it isn't the best one in terms of script. Script: 8/10 ACTING Everyone does a great job here, but Carey Mulligan is the best one. She's able to act as different people with such an ease. I like when she lets her character show her darker, more wicked side. She never overacts and this performance is what makes this movie special. With this movie she showed us that she's able to play characters which are very different. This way she distances herself from his role as a tender, sweet and shy woman in The Great Gatsby and Drive. Bo Burnham is pretty good in his supporting role and I think that he should receive more credit for it. But it's understable to put him in the background, after all it's hard to do better than Mulligan. The other actors do a good job, especially Alison Brie, but I haven't anything more to say about them. The acting is remarkable overall. Acting: 8/10 PHOTOGRAPHY There're a lot of good shots here. I want to say that the last one makes me think about The Shining. Lights and shadows are relevant, as well as colours. The movie is brighter when the protagonist is experiencing good emotions and it dims a bit when she dwells into dark ones. Shots which are usually used to represent attractive women are subverted, as well as the ones which represent masculinity. I liked it, even though it isn't the best I've ever seen. Photography: 7/10 EDITING There's a lot of symbolism here. The first scene is framed to expose the male gaze in contrast with the female gaze. It's hilarious and I think that's ingenious. There's a scene which implies the fact that the protagonist might be good, framing her like Mary the Virgin. The rest of the movie has good editing but most of the scenes aren't as remarkable as they seem. It's above average but it isn't particularly special. Editing: 7/10 SPECIAL EFFECTS There's a lack of it to keep the movie as grounded as possible. Sure, there's a bit of VFX but nothing particularly impressive. A bit of green screen here and there but t isn't noticeable. Nothing more to say about it. Special Effects: 6/10 SOUNDTRACK Instrumental music and pop songs are well alternated to create what I consider a good soundtrack. The first one is perfect, because it's dreadful and gripping. Tension is present almost in every scene and it works, because it makes the protagonist unpredictable and threatning. Pop music is pretty and on point. I think that it works because makes the movie more appealing for younger people and helps to convey some ideas, which respect the scenes theme. I think that the one below is the best one. Soundtrack: 7/10 COSTUMES The protagonist wears different costumes to adapt them to the personality which is required to have. Sure, they aren't particularly interesting, but they works well in the movie. I like the fact that their colour is linked to the emotions showed by her, like love in the image below. The last scene present a, I don't know if I'm misreading it, nod to Harley Quinn, who is considered a symbol of the #MeToo movement and of the LGBTQ+. The last costume is the only one which has a symbolic meaning which is linked to the plot. It isn't enough to say that this section is above average, but it isn't mediocre. Costumes: 7/10 CONCLUSION Script: 8/10 Acting: 8/10 Photography: 7/10 Editing: 7/10 Special Effects: 6/10 Soundtrack: 7/10 Costumes: 7/10 AVERAGE: 7,14 A competent movie made of a great script and beatiful performances. It's a clever movie which is able to be entertaining and empowering with ease. There're some flaws but nothing particularly bad. I think that you have to see it to understand something about our reality. Something which is sinister and we doesn't want to talk about, because it's uncomfortable. Director: Emerald Fennell Screenplay: Emerald Fennell Cast: Carey Mulligan, Bo Burnham, Alison Brie, Clancy Brown, Jennifer Coolidge, Laverne Cox, Connie Britton Soundtrack: Anthony Willis Cinematography: Benjamin Kračun Running Time: 113 minutes Budget: $7.5 million By @the_owlseyes

Reviews by: @the_owlseyes Do you feel like you have a choice? Do you feel like every action has a consequence or like everything is prearranged and you're just a cog in a big machine? I doubt that knowing the nature of your choices would change your approach to reality, because it won't change anything. So, why do we have to think about that? Maybe because the ability to choose makes us different from any other species, but this what would think a person with a limited amount of knowledge. Does it matter? It could but it doesn't change the fact that everything starts with you and our life isn't in the end of another being of machine. It's possible that we live in a simulation of a simulation but what you're going to do? Are you going to roll in the mud lamenting your situation or you'll try to use this knowledge to be a better person. Maybe we're inconsequential but this is why you should understand that this is the best thing which could happen to us. It means that everything doesn't matter and that we decide what matters. What matters for you? PLOT "Freedom fighters Neo, Trinity and Morpheus continue to lead the revolt against the Machine Army, unleashing their arsenal of extraordinary skills and weaponry against the systematic forces of repression and exploitation" or " SCRIPT Here we have an interesting concept but the execution is a bit bad because it's unfocused. A lot of scenes aren't necessary and could've been cut off, especially sex and orgy scenes, which are a bit cringy and unuseful. There are a lot of characters and it doesn't help to focus on the main ones, which aren't analyzed as well as in the first movie. The villains are a bit generic and it seems like a copy and paste of the previous movie. I like the themes which are choice, fate and love. The point is that the movie becomes self-indulgent in the climax and amps up the exposition, which destroys the flow. This is a typical case of plot over character and here is badly done. It's hard to consider it a good script only because the idea is groundbreaking. I'm disappointed. Script: 5/10 ACTING As the first movie, this one has mixed performances. Keanu Reeves delivers a better performance, as well as Lawrence Fishburn. I like the fact that Reeves does his own stunts. I don't like the acting of Carrie-Ann Moss and Jada Pinkett-Smith because it's a bit off. I can say the same about Monica Bellucci, who is there just to add a femme fatale to the mixer. I like Lambert Wilson for his quirky an weird performance, even though he's there for a few minutes. Overall the acting is mediocre and it isn't special. Thanks to Hugo Weaving, the movie is able to stay afloat and doesn't come out as a B-movie. Acting: 6/10 PHOTOGRAPHY It works but it doesn't have the nuances of the first movie. Light is used in a competent way and there's the same chromatic simbolysm as the first one. Colours are used to differentiate the Matrix, Zion and the real world, which are defined by shades of green, blue and green. There're some genuinely stunning scenes but I don't find all of them particularly remarkable. Photography: 8/10 EDITING I don't like the use of slow motion because it's overused and after a while it becomes comedic. Nonetheless there're a lot of good shots and it's highly noticeable. I think that the editing is original because it has a lot of dynamism and it's inventive. The Wachowskis are able to make simple scenes seem cool and action scenes awesome. It mantains the editing quality present in the first one, even though the slow motions becomes a weakness of this movie. Editing: 7/10 SPECIAL EFFECTS Well, it isn't the best. Even though it's a 2003 flick, it didn't age well. The point is that the movie is overconfident with its cgi and it hurts. Sure, the VFX is a bit clumsy, but an action scene is still in my mind: the freeway chase scene. Considering that to pull it off, the production has built an entire road only to shoot the movie, it impressive. This is incredible. I think that this scene is what makes this movie special, even though the cgi is flawed. Special Effects: 7/10 SOUNDTRACK It's great but I don't think that is better than the first one. The music style synchronizes perfectly with the movie and it's beautiful because it's a blend of techno and classical music. Some scene are elevated by the soundtrack and I think that most of this movie quality is determined by this section. Sure the music doesn't have a role in the plot but it helps at conveying the right amount of tension and adrenaline. It could be considered the soul of this movie. Soundtrack: 8/10 COSTUMES What made the first one iconic, here seems to be repetitive. Sure, we're introduced to the Zion's style but there's nothing interesting in it. Leather coats becomes a staple of the Matrix Universe and, unfortunately, it becomes unoriginal. Although the costumes are still able to define part of the movie's style. Costumes: 6/10 CONCLUSION Script: 5/10 Acting: 6/10 Photography: 8/10 Editing: 7/10 Special Effects: 7/10 Soundtrack: 8/10 Costumes: 6/10 AVERAGE: 6,71 A great concept with a great production but it isn't on the same level as the first one, because it has a poor script. It expands the Matrix Universe but it doesn't let his character grow because there'is a multitude of them. I think that you should see it only because it's a competent movie with flaws and explores interesting ideas. Don't skip it. Director: The Wachowskis Screenplay: The Wachowskis Cast: Keanu Reeves, Laurence Fishburne, Carrie-Anne Moss, Hugo Weaving, Jada Pinkett Smith, Gloria Foster Soundtrack: Don Davis Cinematography: Bill Pope Running Time: 138 minutes Budget: $135 million By @the_owlseyes

Reviews by: @ryan_the_nixon Fear Street Part 1: 1994 2021 18 Director: Leigh Janiak Cast: Kiana Madeira, Olivia Scott Welch, Benjamin Flores Jr, Julia Rehwald, Maya Hawke, Charlene Amoia, David W Thompson, Fred Hechinger, Noah Bain Garret etc Overall rating 93/100 Fear Street part 1: 1994 is about a circle of teenage friends who accidentally encounter the ancient evil responsible for a series of brutal murders that have plagued their town for over 300 years. Welcome to Shadyside. This was a fantastic film and one of the strongest slashers I have seen. My first few positives would be the opening scene, the fantastic cinematography, soundtrack and Jumpscares. The opening scene was just fantastic and set the type of tone this film was going for perfectly. It was intense, it was stylistically and visually creative. And the slasher tone and the feel of the film came across instantly, getting you invested and wanting more straight away. The cinematography, not just in the opening scene but in the whole film was excellent. The use of colour to represent how the characters were feeling or the danger they were in was excellently used. I loved the uses of Blue and Red especially. It made the film stand out and it was very creatively used. I also loved the soundtrack in this film. Some other critics could say it was overused, but for me it perfectly fit in with the tone perfectly and made the scenes so much more fun to watch. With loads of 90’s pop culture references sprinkled throughout; it was a nice creative touch to the film for me. I also thought the Jumpscares were very effectively used. For me they weren’t overused due to the focus on the tone and building tension. But when they were used, they were very effective and startling which helped increase the tension within each scene, they were sometimes predictable but nonetheless still effective. My next few positives would be the building of tension. The excellent slasher tone to the film, the fantastic humour as well as the great chemistry and performances from the cast. This movie-built tension excellently. With each scene the stakes were increased and the more you cared about the characters the more intense it got. The film did an excellent job at spreading and building the tension evenly throughout and when it came to the final act it went all out. I absolutely loved the classic slasher feel to it. With the soundtrack and the excellent character design of the killers reminding me of scream, it bought back lots of nostalgic 90’s slasher vibes whilst also balancing that out with feeling fresh as well. Also, with the great performances and over the top reactions and screams just made it that much more fun to watch. I also thought the cast did a fantastic job here. Everyone played their roles well, but key cast standouts for me where Kiana Madeira, Olivia Scott Welch, Benjamin Flores Jr and Maya Hawke. They bought the extra intensity and depth to there characters. But the whole cast had excellent chemistry with each other, it reminded me of stranger things with the group dynamic. I also think due to the casts chemistry the humour was excellent. There was some excellent comedic performances and timing from the actors, and they all bounced off each other in an organic and fun way. My next few positives would be the use of gore, the interesting dynamic to the killers. The LGBTQ + representation, the excellent plot twists as well as the development to the plot and mystery. I thought the use of gore was very effective, it made the scenes even more intense and gave them more impact. Some of the kills were very brutal and truly made it standout from some more teen and younger audience-based horrors, it gave that little bit more of a punch and was effectively used. I found it really interesting that the killers were revealed, it added an interesting and fairly fresh dynamic to the film. Instead of building a mystery around who the killers were it was much bigger than that. The plot developed really well, and the mystery was built excellently. They didn’t disappoint with the reveals and the plot twists were excellently done, making you guess what was going on constantly which kept me entertained throughout. I also thought that the LGBTQ+ representation was refreshing and nice to see, having the two leads in a relationship and for to be explored properly and with depth throughout was nice to see, it was proper representation and not watered down or making them feel like token characters. My two negatives for the film would be the unexplained conflict, and the generic conflict and character motivations. I thought the conflict between the two neighbourhoods of Shadyside and Sunnyvale was slightly unexplored. It was never fully explained why both places hated each other so much and it felt like a missed opportunity and it came across as generic, and they only touched the surface with the conflict, making it come across as usual high school drama. My other negative would be that there was some generic conflict and character motivations. I felt like this made the film tonally off in places only because it felt more like a teen drama which I feel like most of the film was trying to differentiate itself from. And some of the character motivations and decisions did fall into some genre tropes that were frustrating in parts but mostly forgivable. My final few positives would be the worldbuilding, depth to the relationships, the fantastic final act. And the brilliant set up for the future instalments. I thought that the film had excellent worldbuilding. The different killers and the towns history were well explored and intriguing, they went into a good amount of detail into how everything was connected and therefore I was invested in the story and excited for the world to expand with the future instalments. I loved the depth that they added to the main characters relationship. It was all about accepting each other for who they were without fear of judgement from others, and the events that took place and risk of death to both of them only bought them closer, the movie didn’t shy away from the themes they embraced it and therefore the characters grew and developed nicely with a satisfying character arc. The final act was incredible. At first It seemed like it was going to a simple and fun final act with a final battle, but it was much more than that. The stakes and tension were incredibly high, so much that you didn’t know what was going to happen to the characters, and just when you thought it was the end they threw in another twist. This led to an unexpected and fresh set up for the next instalments that I didn’t see coming, it was refreshing for them to seemingly end it in a positive way only for it to be flipped on its head. Overall, Fear Street part 1: 1994 is one of the strongest slashers in years. Serving as both a homage to previous slashers but also paving its own path and brand. With an intense, layered and visually stunning feast for the eyes, and despite me being nervous for the rest of the franchise due to this being so good and the film already revealing a lot about them, I am excited to see where this trilogy goes. By @ryan_the_nixon

Reviews by: @the_owlseyes “I am too alone in the world, and yet not alone enough to make every moment holy. I am too tiny in this world, and not tiny enough just to lie before you like a thing, shrewd and secretive. I want my own will, and I want simply to be with my will, as it goes toward action; and in those quiet, sometimes hardly moving times, when something is coming near, I want to be with those who know secret things or else alone. I want to be a mirror for your whole body, and I never want to be blind, or to be too old to hold up your heavy and swaying picture. I want to unfold. I don’t want to stay folded anywhere, because where I am folded, there I am a lie. and I want my grasp of things to be true before you. I want to describe myself like a painting that I looked at closely for a long time, like a saying that I finally understood, like the pitcher I use every day, like the face of my mother, like a ship that carried me through the wildest storm of all.” Rainer Maria Rilke, Rilke's Book of Hours: Love Poems to God PLOT "Various people find themselves on a mysterious train with an endless number of cars, each one being its own universe, and they must find a way to get home in this animated anthology series" or "A mash-up of Adventure Time and Rick & Morty SCRIPT This series is an antalogy about growth and character development. Every season has one or two characters who experience an evolution which is aided by the train's cars and denizens. I like the fact that the train is used as a turning point for every passenger. The series manage to explore 4 different characters, which are identified by 4 different issues which are overcome by the end of every season. Tulip is the one who's getting through parental problems and is a bit lost , Empty is the one without an identity, who is looking for it and want to become part of the real world, Jesse is a fast talking kid who is characterized by his inability to stand up for himself and take a side, Grace is the Apex leader who wants to be seen by his neglecting parents and she represent the character with the most interesting and full rounded arch, Simon has a similar story but he lose himself in grief and rage and last but not least, Ryan and Ming-Ni are two friends who lost themself in the stream of time and damaged their friendship. Each one of them has to face the train's challenge to reach their potential and become better people. The theme of growth is present in every character, from he protagonists to the villains, and it's explored in depth. There's also the theme of identity, which is one of the series pillars. Each season expand concepts previously introduced and develop the universe the stories are set in. None of the season is a waste of time and is introduced organically, even though the last one is characterized by an half-baked introduction. This is one of the best show for children and adults because it teaches important lessons and could move you to tears. It's just delightful, a cathartic experience which can change you. Script: 9/10 ACTING There're a lot of talented actors here like J.K. Simmons, Lena Headey, Ben Mendelsohn, Bradley Whitford and Margo Martindale(who is more known for Bojack Horseman). This is why the less talented one don't ruin the experience, because they're aided by the actors above. I think that the voice acting is remarkable and every voice fits his character perfectly. I think that it's hard to tell who is doing the best work but I think that Kate Mulgrew is the best art portraying the deceiving and fascinating character of The Cat. Acting: 8/10 PHOTOGRAPHY This is where the series shows that it's a special show. Colours are bright but the light isn't, which makes every scene look like a painting. I like the fact that every train's car has its own style and colours, to make each care unique in itself. I also like the fact that the outside is a red landscape which could represent the desolation of mankind or the fact that there isn't nothing more relevant than our train of thoughts. I like also how the producers differentiated the conductor from every other character by designing it with white colours, to underline his robotic and rational nature, which is different from every other character on the train. Colours have a meaning, as well the use of light and shadows. This is wonderful and amazing. Photography: 9/10 EDITING It's well done and smooth. I like almost every transition and the use of varying shots to give the show a lot of dynamism. Sure, it isn't particularly imaginative overall but it works well. Editing: 7/10 SPECIAL EFFECTS Animation is great in its neatness. I like how fluent it is. Cgi is used only when the scene focuses on the train's outdoor. Overall is great but it isn't the best I've ever seen. At least the animators are having fun here. Special Effects: 7/10 SOUNDTRACK Marvellous. Just marvellous. This soundtrack made of synths and sounds which come from the 80's is amazing. It fits the sci-fi side of the series and the fantastic adventure one. It's dreamy and tantalizing. It gets you hooked from the first minutes and it stays there, enhancing the spectacle of every scene and characters experience. Outstanding. Soundtrack: 9/10 COSTUMES They're pretty varied, good looking and interesting. I think that the costume of every creature displayed on the train is remarkable, because they're defined by their clothes. The Train's fantasy is strongly opposed to the boring reality where everyone wear ordinary clothes. Even though this isn't the main strength of this show, it sure isn't mediocre. Costumes: 7/10 CONCLUSION Script: 9/10 Acting: 8/10 Photography: 9/10 Editing: 7/10 Special Effects: 7/10 Soundtrack: 9/10 Costumes: 7/10 AVERAGE: 8 A beautiful and outstanding animated series which teaches important lessons to kids and grown-ups. Everything about it is awesome and remarkable and I think that you, everyone, should watch it. This isn't just a series, this is an experience. Your train won't wait for you. Director: Jill Daniels, Alen Esmaelian Screenplay: Owen Dennis Cast: Ashley Johnson, Jeremy Crutchley, Owen Dennis, Ernie Hudson, Kate Mulgrew, Lena Headey, Robbie Daymond, Bradley Whitford, Ben Mendelsohn, Kirby Howell-Baptiste, Kyle McCarley, Isabella Abiera, Diane Delano, Johnny Young, Sekai Murashige, Minty Lewis, Margo Martindale, J.K. Simmons, Margaret Cho Soundtrack: Chrome Canyon Running Time: 11 minutes By @the_owlseyes

It was always hot when I was with him. Even if it was snowing or raining and the wind was blowing for the rest of the world. "It's late," I told him, shaking myself from his thin arms, which always became very strong, when passion was about to burst, between us. "Do you really need to go?" He replied, kissing my neck. I made an effort. The feelings he gave me were winning. Still. "Yes. It's time to go back to the real world. » My phone had already rung three or four times. It was definitely not our first date, but every time I couldn't help but think that the innocent sound of a text was my personal version of midnight for Cinderella. I needed to go and leave that car which was our refuge; The place where the passion between him and me began, then he lived and died when it was too late for me to stay. "OK. Just let me smoke one last cigarette and I'll take you home. » We got out of the car and he lit his cigarette, then he kissed me one more time. I wasn't happy. I hated kissing him, when he smelled like smoke, but I knew I would anyway. It was like my favorite dish and that detail wasn't enough to stop me being hungry for him. We had been seeing each other for three months and I basically didn't know why. Admitting that I liked him seemed impossible, and inconsistent with the labyrinth of pride we got lost in even for silly little things. Maybe it was chemistry, but I wasn't even too sure, because I thought it was something magical and sweet and blinding. I had watched a million TV shows about chemistry as a teenager, hoping to one day understand what my favorite characters were feeling. There, with him, I could see none of it, but wasted my time waiting for a glimmer. “You look beautiful today,” he said, halting my thoughts. A small cloud of smoke escaped from his mouth. I thought he was attractive too. I loved his leather jacket, his shirt and his beard, but I've never been able to tell him. "I wish I had." “Do. You know, I mean it. » In an uncharacteristic rush of affection, I walked up to him, cupped my face in my hands, and kissed him softly. "It's the first time we've kissed outside," I whispered. And it was also the first time I'd seen any greenish dots in his brown eyes. We had known each other for years, but it was the first moment I noticed them, as the May sun gently touched their faces. I loved them, but let that moment slip away and said nothing to them. He would never know. His response was a hard and clear spanking on my ass, which suddenly froze my awkward effort to show any sort of love. I didn't tell him anything, but I wanted to cry. I felt it was the only thing I deserved - a spanking as a response showing feelings. Maybe he saw something in my eyes, because he said to me: "A penny for your thoughts." "No thoughts. I just have to go home. » He finished his cigarette and threw it away, casually. “Let's go,” she said, and jumped into the car, smiling at me. She looked happy, but I couldn't figure out why. We didn't fit in. We were incomplete and unfinished and I didn't understand why she wanted to be with me. I never had enough time to experience it. Who cares, I thought it was our first time outside, and she screwed it. And perhaps, without meaning, he had screwed me too. “You are so thoughtful. You can talk if you want. » “I'd better not. We're in the safe and the rule says no arguments here, right? » “You made this rule because you can't trust me.” I sighed and tried to calm down, but replacements and regrets that I could never repress suddenly came to mind. “Remember Victoria, my colleague? She had a flower last week. An anonymous person left it in her car. » "Why are you telling me such things?" Regrets and hesitations have given way to cold sweat and rapid heartbeat; Symptoms of my fear of that part of him that I would never get used to. "Good, because you'd never end up with something like that, but I'd like to." He suddenly stopped his car at the corner of the street and stared at me. «I'm not that kind of guy» he declared «If you want something like this, then go find someone else!» At that moment I realized that we weren't there. We were just two independents who had really wanted me but were never able to become a real couple. I had honored her request to keep quiet about our relationship, because I thought it might be fun, to have a refuge that the world knew nothing about. A safe, as we have christened it. It didn't take me that long to realize that I didn't fit the plan and that I hated keeping that secret and needed to see him tell our feelings to the world and to do it myself, lest I feel like I was in jail. My eyes filled with tears that I had held a couple of minutes earlier. His words hurt me and I felt guilty sticking to me like liquid glue. It was my fault that he couldn't like me without spanking my butt and that I was in pain. I was lost and couldn't get proper communication with him but he couldn't see him. Maybe it was my fault too. While I cried, he continued to drive. He didn't look at me or try to cheer me up, because he didn't understand that right now the hole in my heart needed him more than ever. We were close, but far apart, and that distance was bound to get bigger. I dried my tears, thinking about those three months with him. About how he'd taken all my energy and how much time I'd wasted, hoping that, sooner or later, he'd be nice to me. About those three words he said to me, but I've never been able to fully believe. When we got near my house, he stopped the car and looked at me. “You know I love you, right? I'm in love with you »he said « I know why I fight and hurt and hurt each other, but living without you seems like the worst scenario ever, to me. » I was not flattered. Love shouldn't be destructive and push you away when you need to. I didn't need such empty words and he knew it very soon. I close my mouth. I didn't even tell him that he only loved me in our safe and that, in the real world, he wasn't even able to say my name when talking to our acquaintances. Not that I was better than him. In the real world I ignored him and ran away from him all the time. Maybe I was waiting for him to pick me up, or maybe I knew our timing was as bad as we were. I smiled and kissed him. “You're interested too,” I whispered as I stepped out of the car. He ran away and I watched him until he disappeared. I was about to leave the house the following day. I moved to another city without saying anything and he never tried to reach me. Not a single call, message, or email. Maybe that didn't cause him so much trouble, but my life was forever changed. From @fedrica.marchica

Reviews by: @the_owlseyes Every kid wants to be some kind of superhero? One who flies, who is strong, invisible or any other thing their imagination is able to conceive. This gives them hope and it never stops, as long as they want to dream. Growing with superheroes gives us a mean to be better physically and culturally. It's what pushes us to be more than just people in an overcrowded world. And our models become heroes in our youthful eyes, someone to look at when we need to grow and someone we can look for when we're down. Each one of us could be the superhero of someone else. Each of us could be a symbol of good, hope and love. This isn't a job, this is something more relevant. This is a feat. Do your best because who is an hero today could become a villain tomorrow, if he isn't able to take good and righteous choices. PLOT "A newly fostered young boy in search of his mother instead finds unexpected super powers and soon gains a powerful enemy" or "People shouting words and punching each other". SCRIPT The plot is particularly thin here and the movie is more about the growth of Billy Batson and his friend. His arch is satisfying because it respects the movie's theme, family, and represents a resolution which opposes him to the villain, who has been made by an abusive family. In a way Sivana is sympathetic but the cause of his distress doesn't make sense. How many people has the wizard traumatized to find a champion? This is wicked. How the villain made money by using his trauma it's a bit unbelievable. The main problem I have with the movie is the Chosen One trope. Billy isn't exactly an example of virtuosism. I understand that he was built this way to prompt an arch, but I think that Freddy Freeman has better qualities. One could say that he steals and, generally, he's like that to survive and find his mother but that doesn't make him a better person. Also, how do you determine if someone is good? I think that this is extremely subjective and it isn't up to a bunch of dust to decide who should be some kind of Superman. In fact Shazam has too much in common with Superman, which isn't helpful. I won't criticize more the logic of this movie, especially the fact that the superhero lore seems a blending of greek, jewish and egyptian culture, makes it a bit bonkers and in contradiciton with Wonder Woman. Overall is an Ok script without anything interesting. Script: 6/10 ACTING Zachary Levi has found his role. He's perfect as Shazam. I can say about all the other actors, especially Jack Dylan Grazer and Adrien Brody. Mark Strong shines as Dr. Sivana, even though I've seen him in better roles. The actors are perfectly casted but they don't shows different emotions, which makes their performances pretty stale and boring. Sure, it isn't a movie intended for the Oscars but it doesn't require a lot from the performers. Acting: 6/10 PHOTOGRAPHY It's particularly bright and it distances itself from the other DCEU's movies, which could be considered his strength or weakness. Shadows aren't used a lot and the movie seems flat most of the time. Colours don't have a relevant role. It's below average, in my opinion, because it doesn't manage to offer stunning scenes or something new in terms of photography. Photography: 5/10 EDITING It's mediocre most of the time but sometimes it does something original. I like how slow motions is employed, even though is a it bit poor in one scene. There're some sudden cuts used for a comedic purpose and side-to-side shots to increase the movie's dynamicity. It isn't remarkable overall but it doesn't hurt. Editing: 6/10 SPECIAL EFFECTS As the costumes, the cgi it's a bit shoddy and it's highily noticeable. If you don't have the budget, don't create a movie which revolves around VFX. This lack of quality affects the battle's realism and tension is zapped. Not good, not good. Special Effects: 5/10 SOUNDTRACK It's a blend of instrumental music and pop songs. The first is pretty forgettable and the second is pretty effective. I like how the songs are integrated in the movie to let us feel good when the kids explore their new superpowers. Some times it's a bit cheesy but they work. This soundtrack makes this movie a feel good flick, which could be good or bad, depending on your mood. Soundtrack: 6/10 COSTUMES A bit cheap and mediocre for a superhero movie. Considering that I've seen better suits made by cosplayers, this isn't good for a $90 million movie. Sure, there's a link between the kid's clothes colours and their superheroes suits, but it isn't remarkable because I've seen it multiple times before. I've expected more and I'm a bit disappointed. Costumes: 5/10 CONCLUSION Script: 6/10 Acting: 6/10 Photography: 5/10 Editing: 6/10 Special Effects: 5/10 Soundtrack: 6/10 Costumes: 5/10 AVERAGE: 5,57 A feel good movie which is enjoyable with a nice theme and good characters. The logic is through the roof but it works, in its limits. It isn't the best superhero movie, mediocre at least. I like it, with moderation, but there's a lot better. Surely it represents the beginning of a good franchise. I hope that DC will be able to manage it properly, to avoid screwing it up. Watch it if you want to cheer yourself up and nothing more. Director: David F. Sandberg Screenplay: Henry Gayden Cast: Zachary Levi, Mark Strong, Asher Angel, Jack Dylan Grazer, Djimon Hounsou Soundtrack: Benjamin Wallfisch Cinematography: Maxime Alexandre Running Time: 132 minutes Budget: $90 million By @the_owlseyes

Reviews by: @the_owlseyes “Oh how wrong we were to think immortality meant never dying” Gerard Way PLOT "An immortal Scottish swordsman must confront the last of his immortal opponent, a murderously brutal barbarian who lusts for the fabled Prize" or "A random guy becomes a god without reason". SCRIPT The concept is amazing and interesting but the main characters are a bit of a blur. The protagonist is a hero without a reason and his powers are random, as well as the villain. I like the themes which are death, life, immortality, love and good and evil but most of them are a bit generic. Immortality is analyzed well but it could've been done better. The love interest is a bit boring and it's just a damsel in distress who tries to be a strong woman. Ramirez is the best character and the one who gets less screentime. I think that this movie could've worked better with an higher budget. Script: 5/10 ACTING Christopher Lambert isn't a good actor, I think. He's flat and unexpressive. His laughteris weird and off putting. Most of the actors here overact, like him and Clancy Brown, or underact, like Roxanne Hart. The only one who keeps the boat afloat is Sean Connery, who deliver a compelling performance with his iconic manners and accent. After all is a Cannon movie, I can't expect a lot from it. Acting: 5/10 PHOTOGRAPHY Nothing interesting about it. The light is flat most of the time and, when it's dimmer, it's a bit hard to understand what's happening in the scene. There're good shots of Scotland but the city isn't shot in a compelling way. Colours don't have a role in the movie, even though some costumes stand out more than others. But it isn't about costumes, it's about photography and here is a bit mediocre. It's an old movie but it does its job, as long as you are not picky. Unfortunately I am. Photography: 6/10 EDITING It's a mixed bag because there're interesting transitions and good shots but sometimes it goes overboard and degenerates into sudden cuts and bad looking shots. It's basic editing because there isn't anything particularly interesting about that. Overall it works but if you have high standards you're going to be disappointed. Editing: 5/10 SPECIAL EFFECTS Not good. It's the 80's but they look cheap as hell and a bit bothering sometimes. I can say the same about the make-up, which is even cheaper. Sure, the budget is low, but the money haven't been managed well by the production. Which is kinda sad because it's a good concept. Special Effects: 5/10 SOUNDTRACK A blend of Queen's songs and 80's style background sounds. It isn't a strenght of this movie but it does its job. I think that sometimes the music is a bit out of context and that hurts the experience a bit. There isn't much to say about it because it isn't a memorable soundtrack, even though Queen's music, which is the stick and the carrot here, is appreciable. Soundtrack: 6/10 COSTUMES The scenes which are set in the past are characterized by good and coherent costumes. I want to give credit to the production for the care involved in crafting Kurgan's armour and clothes and Ramirez suit, which is slick and helps Connery in creating an iconic character. 80's clothes are nothing exceptional but they works. Costumes: 7/10 CONCLUSION Script: 5/10 Acting: 5/10 Photography: 6/10 Editing: 5/10 Special Effects: 5/10 Soundtrack: 6/10 Costumes: 7/10 AVERAGE: 5,57 An enjoyable but heavily flawed movie, characterized by good costumes, an original soundtrack, an half-baked script and a kinda bad acting. Just watch it because it's an iconic movie with a good concept. Director: Russell Mulcahy Screenplay: Gregory Widen, Peter Bellwood Cast: Christopher Lambert, Roxanne Hart, Clancy Brown, Sean Connery Soundtrack: Michael Kamen Cinematography: Gerry Fisher, Tony Mitchell Running Time: 111 minutes Budget: $19 million By @the_owlseyes

Reviews by: @art_fanatic_313 Bizarre Adventures #28 & What If...? #35 This omnibus starts with a 10 page long story from Bizarre Adventures. There aren't many things I can say about it. It's a small and forgettable story, who's only strength is its very nice, black & white artwork. After that follows an issue of "What If...?" which asks the question "What if Elektra had lived?" Practically the answer is that her and Matt would live a happy and carefree life together, away from all the troubles. That's honestly quite depressing, considering that she's dead and Matt's chance for happiness is long gone. The artwork in this issue is done by Frank Miller and it's very similar to the style of artwork he used in his Daredevil run. Personally I love that style of artwork and I especially love Frank's very innovative work with page structure. Score: 7/10 Elektra Assassin It's hard to understand exactly what's going on in this story, because a very big part is narrated by Elektra and let me tell you, there's something wrong with her mind because her thoughts are totally messed up and make little to no sense. This story takes place long before Elektra's death in Frank Miller's iconic Daredevil run and it starts with her remembering her past, her hard childhood, her abusive father, her years getting trained by Stick and everything leading up to the assassination job that she currently has to do. She escapes from the place in which she was imprisoned and she does the job. Because of that, someone wants to kill her and she fights back, but instead of killing the guy, he blows him up and leaves him almost dead. The company that he works for (SHIELD) is able to catch her and he, Garrett, falls in love with her. Somehow she escapes and both her and him find themselves in an airport, in which she wants to kill Wind, which is a guy who runs for president, but she actually kills someone else. After that it gets even more confusing. Some people trap Elektra's conscience in another girl's body and Garrett tries to free her and after he does so they somehow get in an underwater fight with some SHIELD agents and they defeat them and the whole organisation is after them. This was a very interesting comic, but also way more hard to read than it should've been. Elektra is great and this comic certainly evolves her character a lot. She's a very complex and damaged character. She has lived a very hard life and she has daddy issues and delusions. The she's written is certainly one of this comic's highlights. Another good thing about this comic is how feministic it is and also how it criticizes various things from the real world (like the fear of a nuclear war, which was something very real at the time this came out) and especially politicians. It very heavily criticizes Nixon and also how politicians are double faced and they use very questionable tactics during the elections. Besides everything good, this comic also has multiple negatives. One of the main things that I found negative is the fact that it had way too much text. Usually I'm a fan of comics with a lot of text, but in this one it's very hard to follow, because half the story is narrated by Elektra who is sort of crazy and the other half is narrated by Garrett who is a drunk and also sort of crazy. Fortunately, after a while things start making sense, but until then the reading experience isn't very good and the lettering certainly doesn't help. The lettering in this comic is very confusing. The way the narration boxes are placed in the pages make the whole reading experience very hard and unpleasant. I get why Frank Miller wanted to make this comic confusing, but it's not something that I particularly enjoyed. Probably the greatest aspect of this comic is Bill Sienkiewicz's artwork, which is beautiful and crazy. Bill's style is very unique and he really knows how to perfectly combine the colors and create really special pages. His artwork is very surreal and it fits perfectly with the story. Overall, I think that while this comic has many negative aspects, it also has many positives, which are more and of greater importance. It's not particularly a fun read, but it has a lot of nice action and violence and the characters are very complex and interesting. I wouldn't call it one of Frank Miller's best works, but it's certainly one of his good ones. Score: 7.5/10 Elektra Lives Again Despite what you might think, this isn't really a comic about Elektra, but a comic about Matt Murdock (Daredevil). The story takes place shortly after Elektra's death and it follows Matt, as he's being haunted by Elektra's memory, when he's awake and when he's asleep. His dreams of her are becoming a torture and he does whatever he can to end it. This was a very short and good comic. It's a very easy and enjoyable read, but it also deals with very important things like grieve, loss, pain and acceptance. This could very easily become a story filled with misery and boredom, but thanks to the way Frank Miller combines everything serious in this comic with fun action, it becomes a great read. I really like the fact that while we see Matt a lot in this story, he's never fighting in his Daredevil costume, full of glory. Instead he's a normal person, trying to deal with something very real, the death of someone he loved. The artwork by Frank Miller is very good. Frank always changes his style a lot and while many times this leads to atrocious results, this time it works perfectly. The way the characters and the action are drawn is great, but in my opinion, the best aspect of the artwork is the perspective of each panel. Frank really knows how to "direct" each panel and in here he does that perfectly. Overall, this was a really great comic, probably the best in the entire omnibus, in my opinion. It's easy to read, it has a lot of depth and it's beautifully drawn and colored. Score: 10/10 The entire omnibus score: 8.5/10 By @art_fanatic_313

Reviews by: @the_owlseyes @ryan_the_nixon @thefilmobservatory @guimondreviews @dylanandhismovies @trickstaz @augustkellerwrites "Some stories have to be told at the right time and in the right way. Society isn't enough to justify the fact that a female character is able to get his own movie only after her cinematic death, the birth of the #MeToo movement, the less misogynisitc view of the people and the wokeness which permeates our reality. This ipocricy moved by greed and a necessity to change its image in function of the trends. This is wrong and wicked. Femal characters deserve more because women deserve more. It's time to change this mysoginistic, patriarchal and abusive society for the best. Let's start by recognizing to the women their merits and stop acting like woke drones to please the elite and every stranger who doesn't give a f***k about us. If you're a man stop using your cock to think and start using your brain to understand what's around you and the people who seem to care about you. Get rid of that f***ing ego which has always got in the way of your relationships and start listening. If you're a woman, it's the moment to stand up for yourself and get rid of your abusers and to take your life in your own hands. Be brave and leave your toxic friend, partner or husband and start forging your own destiny. It's your life and no one gets to tell what to do. I hope that my ranting has moved someone and I didn't pass as a woke person just because I'm talking about this topic. This movie is supposed to be empowering but it's just a reiteration of what a man think of a a strong woman. I'll leave you with this thought now. What are you going to do next? PLOT "A film about Natasha Romanoff in her quests between the films Civil War and Infinity War" or "An origin story of a dead character". SCRIPT It's a mixed one. It's also a bit weird because it's set between Civil War and Infinity War, which feels like an eternity ago. In fact this movie needed to happen earlier, because it's a movie which does so little to move the new phase and seems a bit unnecessary because (SPOILER guys) Natasha is dead. The point is that the plot is just generic and of a lower quality than Marvel series and recent movies, like Spider-Man: Far From Home. At firist it seems like an origin story but then it evolves in an unfocused movie, which revolves around a character rediscovering her origins. I can easily say that this flick got me in the epilogue and opening credits but lost me during the second act. The pace isn't good and a lot of times the movie drags and action segments are stretched for too long. I'm not saying that it's boring but it's surely hard to stick to the screen. The protagonist doesn't have a real arch, even though it takes some steps towards some kind of growth. This is why all of her journey seems aimless and the resolution undeserved. The supporting characters are interesting, especially Yelena, but it isn't enough to say that they're good. The villain is boring and it's strange that Marvel has pulled off such a weak opponent, which is just about being evil and doing bad thing for the sake of being bad. Taskmaster is good and intriguing until it is destroyed by a bad plot twist. A character like that should've been handled in another way, maybe by making him a recurrent villain. The themes here are, obviously, family, remorse and sins. I like the fact that Taskmaster is linked to Natasha, I like how the different notions of family are showed here and I also like how past sins affect the characters. I don't like the fact that every women in this movie seem powerful and invulnerable, which makes clear that the guys at Marvel are pushing a political agenda here. I'm just disappointed. This movie could have been something more, something memorable. In the end it's just another Marvel product. Script: 5/10 ACTING Almost every performance is on point. My issue is with the accent, which isn't consistent and convincing thorughout the movie. I'm talking about David Harbour, Florence Pugh and Rache Weisz's one. I can say that everyone does a good job, besides Olga Kurylenko, who seems out of place and almost inexistent. Ray Winstone does a good job with what he got but he isn't particularly memorable. In fact everyone here delivers a forgettable but acceptable performance. This is why this movie seems just like another superhero flick. Acting: 6/10 PHOTOGRAPHY There're some good shots but nothing particularly amazing. Light and shadows are used with care only in the epilogue. After that it becomes the usual Marvel sh*t, which is characterized by flat light and a boring use of colours. The movie don't make feel me anything on this side. I tried to find something good about it, to give it something more than 6 but unfortunately there isn't anything more than what we get here. Photography: 6/10 EDITING It's more than acceptable. I like how Slow Motion is used and there're some geniunely good transitions. Action scenes are a bit shaky and sometimes seem more competent. Overall it works, even though I don't find it remarkable. Well, it's before the movie becomes a blunt Marvel movie. Editing: 6/10 SPECIAL EFFECTS There's a lot of them but they blend perfectly with more practical effects. Sometimes they seem a bit fake but overall they work. Fortunately they decided to use a cgi pet only in one frame. Usually this is the reason why the cgi is considered bad. Special Effects: 6/10 SOUNDTRACK The opening credits are stunning and the music is wonderful. After that the movie becomes another Marvel movie with a mixed soundtrack, which is a bit forgettable and a bit acceptable. I like the fact that they wanted to integrate Russian notes in the theme and to use part of the Avengers theme at the end. Nonetheless it remains a very mediocre score. Soundtrack: 6/10 COSTUMES It's a superhero movie, obviously the costumes are one of the main staples. Natasha's suits are interesting, even though there're 3 of them for merchandising purpose. I like the Red Guardian's one, which is a variation of the Captain America suit. Taskmaster gets a weak costume and I don't like it a lot. There're better designs of him out there, why this one was selected? I like the nod to the Infinity War costume, which marks how things have changed for Black Widow since Civil War. Besides supersuits, the other clothes are normal and uninteresting, but they don't hurt the experience because they're cherent with settings and characters. Overall this section is pretty mediocre. Costumes: 6/10 CONCLUSION Script: 5/10 Acting: 6/10 Photography: 6/10 Editing: 6/10 Special Effects: 6/10 Soundtrack: 6/10 Costumes: 6/10 AVERAGE: 5,85 It's an ok movie. Watch it ti stay up to date with the MCU but yu can skip it if you don't care about superhero movies. Director: Cate Shortland Screenplay: Eric Pearson Cast: Scarlett Johansson, Florence Pugh, David Harbour, O-T Fagbenle, Olga Kurylenko, William Hurt, Ray Winstone, Rachel Weisz Soundtrack: Lorne Balfe Cinematography: Gabriel Beristain Running Time: 134 minutes Budget: $200 million By @the_owlseyes Black Widow 2021 12A Director: Cate Shortland Starring: Scarlett Johansson, Florence Pugh, David Harbour, Rachel Weisz, Ray Winstone, Ever Anderson, Violet McGraw, O-T Fagbenie, William Hurt, Olga Kurylenko etc Black Widow is about Natasha Romanoff, as she confronts the darker parts of her ledger when a dangerous conspiracy with ties to her past arises. Black widow was a fantastic film, it was definitely more flawed than a lot of marvel films, but I still enjoyed myself a lot. My first few positives for black widow would be the fantastic cinematography and action. The great character background, the fantastic chemistry between the cast as well as the great family dynamic. As expected with the MCU the cinematography and attention to detail with its visuals was excellent. It was beautifully and professionally shot. With excellent uses of red to reflect the tone of the film well as well as the characters. I also liked the visual imagery to represent key stages of Natasha’s life and how they were repeated during different scenes. The action was also fantastic. It was thrilling, exciting and excellently choreographed, also a lot more gritty and hard hitting than a lot of previous MCU movies which I appreciated. I also really appreciated the character background. The opening scene set up Natasha and her family well. Establishing her life prior to the avengers, it was interesting to finally see how Natasha was growing up as a child so this was a nice element to the film. I also loved the fantastic family dynamic and the chemistry between the cast. This was definitely one of the strongest elements of the film for me. The whole family dynamic was so believable and fun. They came across as a genuine albeit unconventional family that needed to patch things up. Scarlett, Florence, David and Rachel all did fantastic jobs here and there on-screen chemistry was excellent. Especially Scarlett Johansson and Florence Pugh who worked so well together here, there sister bond was excellently written and Florence is a deserving replacement for Natasha. My next few positives would be the building of tension. Darker themes, great worldbuilding and character depth. As well as great performances and comedic dialogue. I thought the film managed to build tension very well, this was largely due to the much darker themes for Marvel. The opening scenes and the amount of detail they went into how they trained the Widows and how they separated them from their families was surprisingly tough to watch, and as I learned more about the widows the tension increased amazingly with the villain behind it all as well as the action. I thought the worldbuilding was also great, it filled in a few holes within the timeline of the movies as well as Natasha’s character. Building on the red room and Natasha’s dark past was well explored. Therefore, the film had strong character depth. As we discovered Natasha’s dark past and her regrets, as well as trying to get to the bottom of who her true family was it gave the needed depth to her character that was missing from some of the previous entries within the MCU therefore making this standalone feature for me worth people’s time in terms of learning more about her character. I also appreciated the depth they gave to Yelena (Florence Pugh) as well, her being free of the mind control of the widows was a really interesting element, and just sad to see her go into so much detail about the widow’s lack of freedom and having so many things taken away from them. The performances here were great the main 4 cast members were fantastic. Scarlet Johansson was brilliant, she bought the grounded and passionate performance expected from the character of Natasha and she didn’t disappoint. Rachel Weisz was also fantastic showing she can hang with the younger cast members well. David Harbour was brilliant, his comedic timing was excellent and Red Guardian was a great character. What helped was the excellent comedic writing for his character, it was witty, well timed, and genuinely funny and David just made it work. But the star of the film was Florence Pugh. Wow what a star making performance. She delivered in every aspect needed. She delivered in the action, the more serious and emotional side to her character. But she also bought this fresh humour to the film and had some excellent moments. However, the film was far from perfect. My negatives for Black Widow would be the rushed scenes, underused villains, lack of detail to the deeper themes. As well as the off-putting CGI in the final act. There were certain scenes that needed more explanation and more time to breathe, considering how detrimental they were to the whole film, there was just certain scenes involving the widows and how to free them that felt glossed over and lacked attention. I also thought that the villains were extremely underused. Despite some good explanation, the main villain was mediocre for the MCU and didn’t have enough presence within the film to leave a lasting impact. There was a similar issue with Taskmaster as well, it felt like a missed opportunity with that character so hopefully she is bought back. I also thought that there was a lack of depth to the bigger themes. I felt like the film introduced the darker themes really well, but then never really went into any more detail with them, so therefore the films bigger messages were lost within the action. Finally, I thought the CGI in the final act was very off putting In places. There were just certain scenes that had badly done CGI involving characters faces. And CGI and green screen was overused for when the Red room was destroyed, as I wasn’t a particularly big fan of the flying action scene. My final few positives would be the decent villain, explanation to the villain. The plot twists, the great character conflict and tone. As well as the great final act. Despite the villain overall being mediocre, I did appreciate his role within the film. I think Ray Winstone did a solid performance for the character to come across as intimidating and threatening, as well as being instantly dislikeable due to his treatment of the widows. I also liked the explanation and twists with his character. The background with his daughter being killed was a good motivation for his character and was well linked with Natasha’s backstory. The twist with taskmaster was also well executed in my opinion and was a plot twist I didn’t see coming. I also really liked the character conflict. The tension between Natasha and the villain and the conflict due to Natasha escaping the red room before was great. I also appreciated the conflict with the family, due to there troubled past and giving Natasha and Yelena away but not knowing where. Introduced some good conflict that was well explored and drew them all closer as a family. I also thought the film managed to execute a fantastic tone, switching between its more serious and emotional tone to its comedic tone very well. I also loved the spy espionage feel to it, fitting with the character of Natasha excellently. Finally, I thought the final act was great. Despite my issues with some of the action. It was thrilling, entertaining and gave Natasha and Yelena the closure they needed for there characters. The end credit scene was also excellent. Setting up Yelena’s MCU future excellently. Overall, Black Widow misses the mark slightly with the villains and the deeper themes are lost within the action. But it is still and incredibly entertaining, intense and strong addition to the MCU Serving as both respect to Scarlet and what she has done with the character of Natasha, whilst also introducing us to the new phase of heroes with Yelena, with a star making performance from Florence Pugh. Overall rating 84/100 By @ryan_the_nixon 3/5 Action-Adventure/Superhero Famed Avenger and former assassin Natasha Romanoff (Scarlett Johansson) is on the run from the government, when her past comes back to haunt her, in the form of the secret, malevolent Black Widow program. After a roughly 2-year hiatus from the big screen, Marvel is back! And the results are… mixed. Parts of Black Widow work but, overall, it’s not up to the usual MCU standards for me. However, it is sufficiently enjoyable so if you lower your expectations, you might have a good time. Unfortunately, Black Widow was burdened with the task of being the first major return to the MCU, other than the Disney Plus series’, so the lower stakes of its story may not appeal to some, who were hoping for another Marvel epic. While this wasn’t fair for the mostly standalone adventure, Black Widow’s flaws can’t be simply relegated to this, and it’s pretty underwhelming, especially because we’re all aware that the MCU can do so much better (if you’re new to Marvel and like espionage thrillers, skip this and go watch Captain America: The Winter Soldier, you would not regret it). Shortland’s film presents good ideas for the story and most of the beats work adequately. Black Widow does begin with an explosive opening, that gives a taste of the type of action that’s to come, and also effectively introduces Natasha’s family dynamic with her sister Yelena Belova, and their parents Alexei Shostakov and Melina Vostokoff, played by Florence Pugh (as an adult), David Harbour and Rachel Weisz, respectively. On paper, this family setup demonstrates a compelling side to Natasha, that we haven’t previously gotten to see. However, the execution partly lets this film down. The script feels quite amateur, and all of the aforementioned actors are so much better than what they get to work with, here. While the stoic Johansson isn’t really on form in Black Widow, the highlight of the film for me was the wonderful Florence Pugh. She brings a unique sense of humour and charisma to the MCU, with her cynical yet light-hearted sarcasm, and lovable remarks about how “cool” her vest is. However, it’s also evident that she can kick anyone’s ass when she needs to. The sisterly bond between Natasha and Yelena is done well, and one of the better parts of the film is a scene where we get to spend some downtime with the two, who are each having a drink and chatting about their lives. As an action-adventure that spans across various parts of the world, there isn’t much time for some good old dialogue, so Black Widow feels fairly thin in its emotional depth, as we don’t get enough time to properly bond with these characters. The film instead prioritises large set-pieces, which can work in certain films, and it massively depends on how good the action is, bringing me to my next point. There’s a close-up fist-gun-and-knife fight earlyish in the film that feels reminiscent of the intense action in The Bourne Identity. A subsequent bike chase in Budapest made me think of that excellent sequence in Mission Impossible: Fallout. One of the main villains, the Taskmaster, is basically the Terminator, at points. Black Widow has clearly been influenced by numerous action films, so why do the fight scenes feel so uninspired? Firstly, the editing is too choppy and makes it so that we can’t enjoy much of the action because it’s partly unclear what’s going on. Take the example of the legendary corridor fight scene in Marvel’s Daredevil. That is a fantastic sequence, because the choreography keeps it feeling kinetic but also brutal; the protagonist takes a lot of punches and he’s clearly running on low, but he weightily dodges and parries and uses the environment to take out about 15 men. Over the 5-10 minutes of varied combat, there isn’t a single cut. It works especially well because it’s shot with technical prowess and we can always see what’s going on. Black Widow fails at this in multiple ways. In the Bourne Identity-esque scene, the choreography is good but we keep switching to so many different camera angles that the sequence doesn’t get to breathe on its own. Another problem is showcased near the end of the film when Alexei, aka ‘Red Guardian’, gets into a brawl with the Taskmaster, and we’re lured into getting excited to finally see him in action. However, the film keeps cutting away whenever the fight is about to get interesting. It feels as if the movie deliberately baited us into getting hyped about this showdown, despite the fact that it wasn’t meant to be a big part of the final action scenes of the film. And of course, Disney decided that a small teaser of this battle would be a great idea to put in the trailers! This kind of treatment sadly feels disrespectful to the characters and the fans. My final major qualm with the execution of the action is partly to do with the stakes. Because it’s a prequel, the film isn’t bothered with presenting realistic stunts for Natasha, and it gets quite distracting. Near the beginning, she’s in a regular, civilian car that gets bombarded by a rocket, and flips over around 5 times. Natasha does not have super soldier serum, or the physicality and strength of a god, or a practically impenetrable suit, yet she emerges from the wreck, seemingly unscathed, with no blood or injuries anywhere. And that’s not even the most egregious example. I apologise for the slight rant but a character’s eventual fate already being established does not excuse an implausible level of invincibility, in stunts that feel like they were done solely to ‘look cool’, with no regard for consequences. In a world where a roughly 10-foot purple alien wiped out half of the universe with a magic glove and some colourful gems, it’s best to take these things with a grain of a salt, but it happens so often in Black Widow that it becomes frustratingly noticeable. Ok, now my rant is actually over. David Harbour and Rachel Weisz both hold their own in the film, presenting an interesting bond as ‘colleagues’ and surrogate parents. Harbour is given some funny lines here and there, and his portrayal of a washed-up, once-famous Soviet hero is entertaining to watch. He does get a decent character arc and is overall a nice presence in the film. Rachel Weisz is solid too, and there’s a good (double?) twist with her character towards the end, although she isn’t given quite as much to work with. Harbour and Weisz are never going to be bad in a movie, and they give honourable performances that manage to transcend the mediocre script. As for another famous cast member, Ray Winstone shows up, and he’s fine in the film. He’s intimidating enough to be a respectable threat to our protagonists, but his character is forgettable. The worst butchering of a villain that I’ve seen in the MCU in a while though is unfortunately in this movie, and you’ve probably predicted who it is… Taskmaster. Firstly, I’d like to clarify that neither gender nor sex are anything to do with how well a character is portrayed, so f*** anybody who thinks that the traditionally male antagonist was ruined by making them a woman. Characters shouldn’t be relegated only to a specific gender and/or sex, and different interpretations are always valid. The issue with Taskmaster here is that she is very underused, and the story dictates a version of the infamous mercenary that feels underwhelming, and inconsequential to the MCU. She could have been a methodical, dangerous presence in the movie, but she instead hardly has a line of dialogue and the character’s classic ability to mimic other people’s moves feels here simply like a little gimmick to add some flair to certain scenes. I absolutely don’t have as much of a grievance with the adaptation but I can understand why the comic-book fans are disappointed. I’m hoping that she’ll get the chance to be up against our heroes again in the MCU, or perhaps she could operate in a more ambiguous grey area: she isn’t bad in the film, the character just isn’t used enough, so there’s still potential. I apologise for how negative a direction part of this review has gone, so I’ll shift back to what I liked. As per the standards for Disney and Marvel, the film looks visually great. The cinematography shines through and saves some of the less compelling sequences from being plainly boring. This atmosphere is also amplified by a very solid score from Lorne Balfe, that adds intensity when necessary, but can also tug at your heartstrings, when the themes of empowerment and family hit (sadly, Dom Torretto does not show up though). Most of the action scenes work broadly well, and the crew exemplified the talent in this department that Marvel is so good at finding. Finally, as a general statement, I’m always happy to see more of the MCU and its world-building. I appreciate that we have these 2 hours and 14 minutes of filling in the gaps in Natasha’s story between Captain America: Civil War and Avengers: Infinity War, and learning about her past. While Black Widow didn’t live up to what it could have been, it’s still a sufficiently entertaining adventure, with likable protagonists and an action-packed narrative. It isn’t a particularly good movie, but it just about rises above its flaws and adds some welcome depth to the iconic Avenger. I recommend Black Widow to Marvel fans, those who like globe-trotting action-adventures, and casual viewers who are happy to see any fun blockbuster, after so long away from the cinema. Just don’t expect top-tier MCU. By @thefilmobservatory Though I'm glad we finally got a new installment to the MCU, I may have had my expectations just a little too high for this one. It's certainly fun and has an intriguing storyline, but it struggles at the same time. Black Widow follows Natasha Romanov as she teams up with Yelena and Alexei to take down Dreykov, leader of a group of mind-controlled women. First of all I want to say it's already a bit of a let down knowing when and where this film takes place. I was under the impression that it would be an origin story, and I suppose it is at times, but it's more of a side story/spin-off from the other films that just felt like a tacked on cash grab. Trying to wrap my head around what time this film took place in was irritating, as they make it obvious that this was after The Avengers, with references dispersed throughout. The rest of the story is cool in concept but in execution comes off a little convoluted. It's interesting to think about a villain who controls an entire population and seeing the effects. I was able to understand it all fairly well, but I felt like they used too much runtime to give us all this backstory on Dreykov and the Widows that wasn't all necessary. I didn't think they were terrible, but Dreykov certainly could have been a better fleshed out character also. With that being said, we do see the theme of trying to gain freedom and be empowered effectively shown. The other big flaw to this film is that it just was not realistic at all. Maybe other MCU films were like this, but this one takes the cake for being the most unrealistic, at least as far as characters that avoid death. There were so many moments where the characters somehow survived that make no sense at all. These include: falling out of the sky and avoiding debris, stormtrooper aim bullets, ridiculous acrobatics, and like ten explosions that would definitely kill you. A lot of the action with Natasha and Yelena fighting is fun, but I had a hard time seeing past these ridiculous moments. This film does sprinkle in some funny moments that I thought didn't overshadow the weight of the story, and had the right amount. As far as characters go, it was a mixed bag. Scarlett and especially Pugh shined as the main characters, while Harbour had some good moments, often comedic ones. Kurylenko as Dreykov's daughter was very forgettable, while Dreykov could have been played better. Overall this film is one that I really am still not sure how much I liked. There's a lot to both like and dislike, but I appreciate at least being able to get a new MCU film after 2 years that didn't disappoint completely. Rating 7.6/10 By @guimondreviews I don’t really know what to say, I wasn’t really excited to watch Black Widow, so I can’t say that I was disappointed…but it was just very middling. It never really evoked any emotion out of me, and a lot of that lies within the fact that this movie probably should’ve came out in like 2014/2015. Y’know a point where we would need some backstory to back up Nat’s more reflective moments in AoU. But it happening now in 2021 just feels tacked on and useless. There’s no real stakes whatsoever for Nat, and a lot of the tension between her and the villains feels fake. The CGI was also pretty weak. There were many moments where it either looked blurry, or it looked like the objects in question jumped or fell too fast. Stuff like that really takes me out of movies. I really appreciate attention to detail and care into immersion, and this movie really struggled with that. My final complaint is that I thought they used Taskmaster weirdly. (Kind of spoilers) but they do this reveal with that villain and it’s kind of weird because you only met these characters in this movie, and they were supposed to have this huge impact on who Nat is as a person, but we literally never met them before. So what did I like about this movie? I think the thing that definitely stands out the most is the family dynamic between Harbour, Weisz, Pugh, and Johansson. In particular I really loved Florence Pugh; she plays the snarky “little sister” role very well. She kind of spends a lot of time making fun of Nat and those moments are cute. Another stand out was David Harbour. He plays this bombastic Russian Cap ripoff (and a father figure to Nat/Yelena) who lies to everyone about this rivalry with/and fighting Captain America (it’s pretty funny). And his dynamic with Weisz’s character is solid (even though she doesn’t get a lot of stuff to do). This is a movie where the “quirky sidekicks” actually work, are better than the main character, and they actively elevate the movie. On the topic of the action, I mean I thought it was okay. They definitely went for a Jason Bourne/MCU mix of an action style. So during the hand to hand stuff the camera’s moving around a lot (like JB) and it has a fair amount of cuts (like the MCU). But when it actually shows people doing actual stunts, it is really cool. Like when Nat and Yelena (Florence Pugh) first meet as adults in this movie. There’s also a pretty decent fight right before the last big action sequence, that I enjoyed. I just think that a lot of good MCU properties rely on being different, or trying something new and exciting; and now that we’ve seen stuff like that… these “grounded” stories need to really excel on some outstanding stunt coordination, more exciting action, or just a stronger emotional core. Black Widow itself is an enjoyable enough movie; like it never actively made me angry or cringe, but it rarely evoked positive emotions either. Maybe I’m just becoming cynical, but for a large portion of the movie, I just spent it watching with a straight face. It’s like 140 minutes long and it feels like that (maybe even more), and a lot of scenes in the middle are paced horribly. But then again, this main group of characters were pretty great. And I am especially looking forward to seeing more of Florence Pugh in the future… she was easily the best part of the movie. It’s probably not in the bottom five of the MCU, but it’s close. I’m giving Black Widow a 5.2/10. It was really nice going out to the theatre with my family again, and I hope to go to some more soon! By @dylanandhismovies Jahrelang war ich überzeugter Marvel-Ultra. Ich war. Dieser Film ist das perfekte Beispiel dafür, warum ich es so lange mit großer Freude sein konnte und warum ich es längst nicht mehr bin. “Black Widow” sieht ganz ordentlich aus (also der Film, ist klar), ist zumindest besser getrickst, besser ausgestattet und hat bessere Looks als man das aus dem Blockbuster-Kino sonst so kennt. Die Fightszenen sind verhältnismäßig bodenständig, ganz okay choreografiert und setzen vermehrt auf handfeste Faustkämpfe statt CGI-Krieg. Zumindest nehme ich all das einfach mal an, denn das in Actionsequenzen plötzlich einsetzende Schnittgewitter, das man sich in ruhigen Momenten noch verkneifen kann, macht die meisten Szenen unübersichtlich, dazu nimmt die wohl nahezu ausschließlich digitale Umgebung fast jedem Schlag seine Wucht. Die Action will “Captain America 2” sein, aber der Film wirkt eher wie die kleine, bei Familien-Fotoshootings gern auch mal vergessene Schwester, die von Oma immer 5€ weniger zugesteckt bekommt als alle anderen. Und trotzdem ist “Black Widow” - und das ist halt das Ding mit Marvel - besser als vieles, das ansonsten so im modernen Actionkino läuft, aber längst kein guter Film - das ist das andere Ding mit Marvel. Mittelmaß auf höchstem Niveau eben. Die Dynamik zwischen Natascha und ihrer verlorenen Familie fühlt sich real genug an, um die actionfreien Minuten ertragbar zu überbrücken, der ein oder andere nette Gag ist zumindest mal dabei, ehrlich emotional wird’s nicht, doch für Hollywood-Gefühlsduselei reicht’s. Ich mochte die Figur der Black Widow eigentlich immer ganz gerne, ihr erster eigener Film hat mich ihr nur leider kein Stück nähergebracht. Und mal ehrlich: Hat sich irgendwer aus dem Special Effects-Department Gedanken über die Feuereffekte gemacht? Da sieht sogar das Flammen-Emoji realistischer aus. -Herding By @trickstaz Black Widow is self-defeating, never committing to an idea. It wants to be a spy thriller centered around family drama, but that's confused by formulaic MCU tropes. Consequently, it evades real conflicts, underdevelops characters, and lacks growth. Its messages are sanitized, its plot is contrived, and everything amounts to pointless, boring filler. The acting has chemistry and there are vulnerable moments, but that's outweighed by a cliche climax and desensitizing action. Plus, there's no tension, little emotional repercussions, and plenty of telling rather than showing. Ultimately, Black Widow feigns themes, drama, and grit, but it's all a sterile illusion. Technically, Black Widow is bland and generic. Its visuals use some lighting, movement, and focus, but it's mostly shaky, cluttered, and drab. The editing has weak momentum, a disjointed structure, and bloated action. Meanwhile, the soundtrack is forgettable, the production design is stale, and the excessive CGI is alien and ugly. Its sound has some split cuts, echoes, match cuts, and muffling, but remains mostly inconsequential. Still, the cast is recognizable and elevates the mediocre material. Overall, Black Widow clashes with itself, attempting incompatible tones, not integrating its action, and hollowing its messages. It's a big pile of nothing. Writing: 4/10 Direction: 4/10 Cinematography: 5/10 Acting: 7/10 Editing: 5/10 Sound: 7/10 Score/Soundtrack: 5/10 Production Design: 5/10 Casting: 9/10 Effects: 7/10 Overall Score: 5.8/10 By @augustkellerwrites

Reviews by: @theplokoonyreview Positives: The world building is filled with intricate detail Impressive amount of customization Gunplay is brilliant The story is engaging. Negatives: The enemy designs are bland Forgiving respawn system hurts tension Beginning is overwhelming Positive: An Incredibly Crafted World The rundown underwater city is fantastically expanded on in each of the games levels. These confined areas are brimming with things such as posters peeling off the walls, rundown facilities and video tapes which give context to certain people or areas. Everything has the wholesome style of the 50’s in America, with corruption also showing how it’s destroyed and twisted its innocence. Besides the setting, the Big Daddy’s and Little Sisters have a the deep story behind them and the role the player develops with them keeps them a highlight of the game. In each level, the Big Daddy’s give more life to the environment due to how it contrasts the other enemies and that it lacks any 50’s inspiration. The passion put into this game is evident in every section of the levels, in these spaces an incredibly intriguing environment is created. Positive: Customization The customization is vast, letting the player play in almost anyway they want. “Plasmids” are used to give different abilities (lightning, fire, bee swarm) to your character. There’s a diverse variety of these, plus there’s even separate plasmids to enhance things such as hacking and physical abilities. The player starts with only a few slots for plasmids, which keeps it from being overwhelming, giving a chance to understand the system and what the players prefers before more options are given. Also, there’s a huge amount of customization in the settings, if there’s any gameplay or audio problems it can be fixed there. Positive: Gunplay Thirdly, the gunplay is crucial to a first person shooter, and Bioshock gives the player a diverse array of firearms. The chances are a player won’t be able to only use one, since many different types of ammo given out, using different weapons is necessary which invigorates the gameplay. Discovering that a gun is more useful than initially expected is always a welcomed surprise, and the fact that the game forces the player to do so is a tell of good gameplay design. The sound design is also incredibly satisfying, shotgun pumps out shells with all the power a shotgun should, while aiming and firing the crossbow has impact beneath every shot. Positive: A Well Crafted Story Finally, the story is initially hard to invest in, but once the player is able to it presents a satisfying experience.(SPOILERS) The twist reveal of Atlas being the overarching villain was fantastically delivered, he had been acting as your guide throughout the game, and once the player has no use for a guide his real role in the game is revealed. (END) All the characters in the game also make the story more interesting, their use of friendly 50’s slang combined with their grimy and corrupt personalities is incredibly entertaining and makes learning about them more intriguing. Negative: Forgettable Enemy’s There are three types of enemies, Big Daddy’s, Splicers and Security Bots. The Splicers are the most frequently encountered enemies and they’re also the most boring in presentation and abilities. The differences between different splicers are incredibly hard to notice, they all have the same “deteriorating human” look and the dialogue they’re given makes them come off as silly rather than scary. This hurt the horror aspect of the game, since by fighting them so much they didn’t feel like a threat Negative:Negative: Respawn System is Too Forgiving Secondly, when the player dies they respawn in the nearest “Vita Chamber” with some health and EV (the energy used for plasmids). These Vita Chambers are easy to access, and walking from a Chamber to any other area doesn’t take very long. So far, this sounds like a positive but it does majorly hurt tension. There is rarely a fear of death (aside from the occasional well placed Vita-Chamber) to a point where just dying is a better idea than using health kits. It makes the game easier, but cheap strategies also become much more viable and it makes trying to survive in some areas feel pointless. Negative: Rough Beginning Lastly, the overbearing introduction makes the game hard to invest in. This game wants to keep a lot of its elements a secret, so at the start it feels way too dependent on insane coincidences and lacks any real explanation for what’s happening. It’s a rocky start, but as the game progresses things begin to become more apparent. Ultimately, despite some minor flaws Bioshock offers a fun and interactive experience with an intriguing world and addictive gameplay. Entertainment rating: 8/10 Critical rating: 7.5/10 Final rating: 7.75/10 By @theplokoonyreview

Reviews by: @the_owlseyes Words have a different meaning when you have to be quiet to protect yourself and the people you love. PLOT "Following the events at home, the Abbott family now face the terrors of the outside world. Forced to venture into the unknown, they realize the creatures that hunt by sound are not the only threats lurking beyond the sand path" or "This time being quiet isn't going to be enough" SCRIPT It's simple but pretty effective. The plot isn't particularly complex and it's all about the characters. They haven't a particular arch but all of them share a goal and a desire. Most of the characters development has been done in the first movie and here is more about worldbuilding. The villain, which here isn't simply the monster, has a point but it isn't accurately analyzed in depth. The climax works, even though it isn't particularly gripping. Overall it's a good script but it misses something about character developing. Script: 6/10 ACTING This is top notch and I think that Noah Jupe is the MVP of this movie. He's able to portray happiness, pain and fear perfectly. Emily Blunt and Cillian Murphy are good in their roles, as well as Millicent Simmonds. Djimon Hounsou is sidelined and I don't understand his inclusion. I can say the same thing about Scoot McNairy, who delivers a good performance for a short time. I think that all the actors involved do their best and are well directed. The ensemble works well together and the performances are very good. Acting: 7/10 PHOTOGRAPHY I like how the light is being used by alternating it with shadows. Surely it isn't flat and it's a delight. Colours don't have a role here and a symbolic meaning. There aren't impressive shots. Overall it's good but not remarkable. Photography: 6/10 EDITING It isn't particularly interesting but I find the first action scene very well edited because it's dynamic and I like the fact that there's the presence of one shot. The rest of the movie isn't characterized by impressive shooting techniques. There isn't slow motion, an Hollywood's staple, and I like the fact that the director don't want to glamourize violence. Editing: 6/10 SPECIAL EFFECTS Decent but it doesn't go beyond that. The monster's design isn't particularly original. Considering the budget, this is more than enough and it doesn't disappoint. Special Effects: 6/10 SOUNDTRACK I think that is pretty good because it creates sensations of dread and suspense and it amps when panic is present in the characters. It works well in its neatness. It isn't unforgettable but it's pretty effective. Soundtrack: 7/10 COSTUMES Nothig interesting here. Usual clothes which people wear during a survival situation. They don't have any kind of meaning and don't have a role in the movie. It's just enough but nothing more. Costumes: 6/10 CONCLUSION Script: 6/10 Acting: 7/10 Photography: 6/10 Editing: 6/10 Special Effects: 6/10 Soundtrack: 7/10 Costumes: 6/10 AVERAGE: 6,28 A good movie with a simple premise which is intededto expand the world which was set up in the first movie. It focuses on entertaining the audience and forget about the characters. Even though it has some flaws, this movie shines with a good, gripping soundtrack and remarkable acting. Watch it if you are a fun of the first one or you simply like the genre. Director: John Krasinski Screenplay: John Krasinski Cast: Emily Blunt, Cillian Murphy, Millicent Simmonds, Noah Jupe, Djimon Hounsou, John Krasinski Soundtrack: Marco Beltrami Cinematography: Polly Morgan Running Time: 97 minutes Budget: $61 million By @the_owlseyes

Reviews by: @ryan_the_nixon @mind_of_a_nerd Chaos Walking 2021 12A Director: Doug Liman Starring: Tom Holland, Daisy Ridley, Mads Mikkelsen, Demian Bischir, David Oyelowo, Nick Jonas, Cynthia Erivo Overall rating 41/100 Chaos walking is about two unlikely companions who embark on a perilous adventure through the Badlands of an unexplored planet as they try to escape a dangerous and disorientating reality, where all inner thoughts are seen and heard by everyone. This film had such an interesting premise and such a charming cast, but I was left incredibly disappointed with how the film turned out. My first few positives would be the interesting idea, creativity to the plot, the good worldbuilding and the fantastic cinematography. The idea and premise of the movie itself was intriguing and was explored well. The thought of all the men having all there thoughts out in the open really intrigued me and made me think of the lack of privacy that gives you with all the characters. This introduced some really interesting elements and some good worldbuilding. Learning that different characters with higher power within the town learned how to control their powers or use it to protect themselves was well done and established a good world for the audience to get invested in, especially within the first half of the film. Moreover, the cinematography was excellent. How the noise was visually conveyed was creative and interesting with an eerie almost mist like quality to there thoughts, and the colour palette for the different noise was excellently done. My next couple of positives would be the set up for character development, and the promising set up for the main two characters. I thought that the film set up development between a lot of the characters, especially Todd (Tom Holland) and his parents as well as Todd and the Mayor (Mads Mikkelsen) they did some intriguing things with how Todd felt about the mayor and set up a good character arc for proving that he could be a man and rise to the occasion, whilst also balancing that with his more grounded homelife with his parents. It’s a shame this set up wasn’t executed (more on that in a future paragraph) but the set up itself was strong. I also thought the main set up for the relationship between Todd and Viola (Daisy Ridley) was also strong. It set up a great mystery of why she was the only woman and why her ship was coming to the mayor’s land. It also set up a clear fantasy and sci fi genre and tone and left me intrigued as to how the plot would develop from there and was a strong start to the film. However, now lets move onto some negatives. There was a complete lack of character background, a lack of explanation to the plot therefore effecting the pacing, whilst also having some very irritating creative moments. The movie jumped straight into the setup, now if done right this could be a positive. But the audience had absolutely no clue who the characters were or any form of fleshing out of the story world before jumping into the action, this is frustrating because It made me really struggle to connect with the film or its characters from the beginning and that’s never a good sign. One of my biggest issues was the complete lack of explanation to the plot. It had a great set up but never developed that until about two thirds into the story, for so long the film kept the audience in the dark to what was going on, therefore this really effected the pacing of the film as it just wasn’t going anywhere, and I often found myself losing interest. There were also some extremely irritating creative decisions as well, the idea of the noise despite definitely being interesting soon wore very thin. It was overused and the film relied on it too much to attempt to develop the plot and characters, it just created too much exposition and got extremely irritating after a while. My final couple of positives would be the great creature designs and the chemistry between the cast, specifically the two leads. I thought that the creature designs were very creative and interesting, despite only being in one scene possibly due to editing issues, the creatures proved that the money was well spent on the film and I wish they were Included more. I also thought the whole cast had great chemistry with each other. Tom Holland and Daisy Ridley are very charming and likeable and they both did solid performances here and definitely had great on-screen chemistry. The whole cast did a solid job with what thinly written material they had. Plus Mads Mikkelsen is great in whatever film he is in. My next few negatives would be the lack of development to the relationships, how predictable the film was and how emotionally disconnected I was. The movie set up so many great relationships with the characters in the first act, and then went on to not develop them whatsoever, there was so many missed opportunities at character depth, the characters just stagnated and stayed the same, this made me completely emotionally disconnected. Character deaths had no impact on me due to not caring about the relationships and the lazily underdeveloped characters and was a massive disappointment. The film was also painfully predictable, it left the audience in the dark for so long and when they finally started to develop the plot slightly and reveal more, I had already predicted it and there were no other surprises, a good movie isn’t supposed to be so basic and structured in such a basic step by step way that you can predict it all. My final few negatives are the mediocre villains, the lack of expansion to the story world and the underwhelming ending. Despite the strong performances from the actors the villains were very underwhelming. They had no depth and development apart from the simple point that they were threatened by the woman because they had no noise, they just needed more intensity and the film focused more on the conflict between the villains instead of developing them more. They also failed to take it to the next level in terms of developing the story world, there was some interesting elements to do with the noise and the dynamics between the different villages, but it always felt like it needed to up a gear and expand the story world and the stakes and it just never went there. The ending was also very underwhelming, there was no character arcs and it just wasn’t satisfying, it felt like a lazy set up for a sequel that most likely won’t happen. Overall, Chaos walking had a very intriguing premise. And a solid start, but despite the charms of the two leads, the film fell flat. Leaving the audience in the dark for so long and when it finally revealed something it was painfully predictable. It just turned into a generic YA film that honestly felt lazily made and felt like it was edited multiple times, lazily setting up a sequel that I unfortunately don’t want. By @ryan_the_nixon You know this was one of the first movies to come out in theaters when they had just started opening again and I can see why it was one of the first ones. Because they knew people wouldn’t see it and I think that was the right call. Chaos Walking is directed by Doug Liman who has directed The Bourne Identity and Edge of Tomorrow among other things. I want you to keep that in mind. It tells the story of a world in which only men live in the world and all of the women have been killed. And in this world your thoughts are out in the open above your head and it's called “noise”. Then suddenly a woman crash lands from outer space and suddenly causes a ruckus among this community. Believe it or not I was excited for this movie...in 2017. For those of you who don’t know, this movie went through hell. I remember actually following this movie and it had been so long that when they had announced the trailer I was like “That’s still happening?” Regardless of that I skipped the movie because of the reviews and I was being careful with what I saw in a theater being that I was taking a risk actually going to the theater. Thankfully Hulu put this movie on there for me for free to watch and I must thank them because they spared me from spending my money on a steaming pile of garbage. Chaos Walking is exactly what the title says. It is an absolute chaotic mess from the literal first shot of the movie and does not fix itself in the slightest. The only real positive I can give to the movie is Tom Holland and Daisy Ridley. They seriously tried but in the end what they’re given is just garbage. Also there were a couple of sequences that were decent in the movie. Other than that there is nothing. Where to start? The whole concept of the “noise” is interesting but terrible in execution. It was so bad that I was actually becoming annoyed hearing Tom Holland’s voice so much. Every time it happened it just sounded like people talking over each other and it was even worse when it would happen with multiple characters. It was just annoying. Nick Jonas is laughably bad in this movie. I was actually shocked at how bad he was acting. Not good at all. The pacing is awful. I thought the movie was at least getting to the end but I had the dark realization that there were still 40 minutes remaining. The movie is so generic that it becomes boring. Yes the concept is fresh but after a while it just fizzles out into nothing and just becomes another generic YA adaptation. I don’t understand how this cast and this director came together and this is the result. This should’ve been way better than it was. Also the ending was insanely rushed. Like after the third act stuff finishes there was another scene and then it happens and then I saw the credits and I was like “That was it?” Guys I honestly have nothing else to say. This movie is just another worthless YA adaptation that has nothing new to offer except disappointment and boredom. I’m going to give Chaos Walking a 4/10 By @mind_of_a_nerd

Christopher Nolan - one of the most ambitious and intriguing directors of this generation. Before diving into the Nolanverse, if I can describe Nolan's mastery of using bleak and dark colors it would be " If Quentin Tarantino portrays violence with pink color, Nolan portrays love with black color". Primarily his use of bleak colors is due to his red-green color blindness, but Hey.... thanks to that we have got incredible and innovative symbolism and color tones. With that in mind let's delve into the dark and amusing world of Christopher Nolan. The Beginning : We all may know and will remember Nolan as this crazy director who has a kink for non-linear storytelling and exploring concepts that cannot be explored in real life. Prestige doesn't have both of those, instead, Prestige was a steampunk film that just burst into sci-fi when no one saw it coming. In this film, initially, the film was kind of bright with a 1960s Victorian vibe, but as the movie progresses the colors transition from a yellow-white theme to a blue-black picture. This blue-black color was used to convey the darkness unfolding. Initial and Final Colours of The Prestige As we can see above, the yellowish colors in the film convey a sense of lethargicness and curiosity to make the audience think - "Oooh magic this should be fun!", but then the blue color is to make the audience think - "Dude... this ain't magic". Maybe this is where Nolan just thought he can manipulate dark and bleak colors to his way of non-linear storytelling. The Darkest way to tell a lighthearted-dark story : Now the trilogy of Darkness (quite literally), everyone's favorite Dark Knight Trilogy. This set of movies was where I believe dark colors actually meant something in a movie other than poverty or knowledge. Opening sequences of The Dark Knight Trilogy These three pictures above resemble the lifecycle of a bat. The first movie "Batman Begins", has an orangish scheme symbolizing dusk i.e sunset which is when a bat is the most active representing the beginning of the trilogy. The movie also follows the same color scheme in a very subtle way. The second movie had a blue-black scheme which represents the 'middle of the night' with a ray of moonlight. Finally, the third and final movie had a pitch-black color scheme with some sprinkle of white, this symbolizes the night sky without moonlight and ready for dawn, this is the time when the bat goes to sleep, meaning the end of the trilogy. Although I have only used the opening sequence, the complete film is dependant on this theme, especially the crucial scenes i.e when Joker's first appearance, Bane's hideout, etc. War & Betrayal in blue: Dunkirk was critically acclaimed and was the 'Nolan War Film' because who would think "Imma' make this film with an emotional weight with a crazy time-flow". Back to the colors, blue colors were formerly used to invoke creativity, passion, and so on. Although one could argue directors use any color according to their ideas, the blue and orange theme never (according to me) gave us an ominous presence lurking in the form of fighter planes pre-dunkirk. A space odyssey that used black to symbolize hope: My personal favorite from Nolan-Interstellar. The majestic space adventure takes you beyond comprehension and unfolds into something simple. If you look closely at both of these pictures, they both have similar dark tones but the first one has an earthy-green kind of texture but on the second picture, it has a black-purple tone. The first picture is a scene during the opening where hope for surviving on earth is close to zero, the second picture is a scene when the main character gets a chance to travel to outer space and find a planet for human migration. The first picture and its associated scene carry a weight of hopelessness, whereas the second picture and its associated scene have a sense of hope. These two pictures are why Nolan manipulates dark color schemes so well, that he can convey opposite feelings with similar color tones. Conclusion: For the references and scenes mentioned above, I have tried my best to detail colors and their very closest meanings. So based on my observations, although color blind I believe Christopher Nolan has opened our eyes to another side of the move color spectrum. By @the_th3rdeye

"Never rat on your friends and always keep your mouth shut" Goodfellas and Irishman are two of Scorsese’s most popular movies and for good reason, I think they’re both two of his masterpieces, and they’re both shining examples of the absolute best in the crime/gangster genre. Now this isn’t a comparison post like the ones I’ve done in the past because I think Goodfellas and The Irishman bring different ideas to the table, but when analyzed together, they make for the most important story told in this genre. I’m gonna do my best to explain why I think they go perfectly together, and why both of these movies improve on each other. "Three people can keep a secret only when two of them are dead" Goodfellas and Irishman are two sides of the same coin, one could say, they both evoke very different feelings but in the end accomplish a common goal. Goodfellas is a glorious and celebratory representation of its time, and the gangster life, it brings out the period from the 50s to 80s vibrantly, and enthusiastically, almost as if you’re living there, and life could never get better. It’s epic and energetic. On the other hand, The Irishman is cold. It does not invite you into the time period but instead is a representation of our time, as it reflects back on history, reminiscing about the times and trying to understand what went wrong. It’s a contemplative film that feels empty as if it’s breaking down the gangster life. Goodfellas breaks down the gangster life as well, but not in the depressing manner that The Irishman does. Goodfellas is frantic, chaotic and has shock value but The Irishman is moody and calm, like an old man narrating the story of a falsely glorified life. The Irishman provides a context to Goodfellas, where Goodfellas shows us gangsters in their prime in a highly stylized and elegant manner that does have a subtle undertone on the obvious dangers of the gangster lifestyle, it’s fun. Albeit a powerful deconstruction of the mob-life by the end, it’s still a fun watch that could be a genre film. The Irishman however lifts the veil, so to say, the violence is not exciting, instead it is patient and factful. The Irishman has been called a culmination of Scorsese’s previous gangster films because it’s the last one, and because it’s probably the last gangster film that will star the likes of Robert De Niro, Al Pacino and Joe Pesci. But moreover, The Irishman is the film that reflects and provides context to films like Goodfellas and Casino which back then, were the product of their time periods, they were the peak of the gangster genre. Now it’s practically dead so the Irishman feels like one final, bittersweet farewell to it and it couldn't have been this farewell without the existence of the masterpiece that is Goodfellas, which 100% makes The Irishman a better viewing experience The contrast that The Irishman provides to Goodfellas is striking, they have similar structures, both told in a non-linear fashion depicting the life of a single man, with a grander overarching narrative that ends up dictating the story of a single day. The characters are similar, the cast is also very similar and so is the visual style. But the tonal disparity is really interesting. The third act of Goodfellas is frantic and chaotic, ending in an overwhelming sense of wildness, but The Irishman is calm and deliberate. Even the narrations and freeze frames are not as fierce as Goodfellas. It truly reflects on the entire genre and life that these people had. The third act of the Irishman even starts off just about the same time Goodfellas ends, and it’s like a swan song. A final goodbye, and essential piece of context to Goodfellas. I think both of these movies are profound and hit hard and it’s impossible to miss how well they complement each other to form one large story of crime, power but also the loneliness and isolation that comes with a life like this. By @starwards1

Reviews by: @the_owlseyes "I'll stop you right there. Are you sh!£ting me? Don't read this lame and boring review, which is good to wipe my beautiful ass. Yes, and move yours because it's time to find a new hobby. What's the point of scrolling your home like a dumb monkey? Now movie your ass and get Disney+. I know that it isn't cheap, do you think that Mickey f***ng Mouse and Bobby live with the stimulus check? Now do it, watch the movie and experience my awesomeness by yourself. Or do it with a girl. It could be great for a fisrt date. Maybe I can help get you laid. Sex is soooo soooooooo good. And treat her with care, as a gentleman, not as a sh*ttard a**hole. Nice chat. Now get the f**k out" "Still here. You really want to know about my movie. Ok you lazy motherblusher. On IMDb the plot is "A wisecracking mercenary gets experimented on and becomes immortal but ugly, and sets out to track down the man who ruined his looks", which is the laziest attempt at describing this majestic movie. It's about me obviously(I'm Deadpool, if you haven't been able to figure it out from this post's cover) and my revenge against Francis, a british cockhead. Obviously is an origin story but I'm not a hero, don't f***ing say it. I'm the best villain the shitty X-Men universe has been seen. At least, it has been like that as long as I have been under the claws of a dumb production company. One of the worst. It's more known for it's crappy political mumbo-jumbo than its movies. So sad, yeah. I deserved more but I fear that Disney producers will f**k me up as they did with Star Wars. Anyhoo let's get back to this marvellous script. I'm well written but there're some cliches. Unfortunately Rhett and Paul preferred to do an half-baked job rather thant working their godddamned ass off. Thanks to this morons the villain, Francis, is a one dimensional douchebag without an interesting goal. Unfortunately I should say the same about Vanessa, f***k I miss her boobs and ass, she's so sweet and a dragon in bed, Dracharis motherf***s. I'm the first and only good adaptation of myself so it felt amazing. Being a superhero R-rated movie in a world of PG-13 s**t. I can't wait to join my Marvel's fellows. Just to shake up a bit the dumb seriousness of all of them. I hope that it won't be to politically correct, because I don't want to be part of anything woke as hell. White people and their f****g necessity to feel better by being hypocritical. I'll give myself a....7. I wanted to go for 8 but my actual writer likes pickles....up his ass" "I don't know why. is it necessary to add another paragraph? Ryan is the best pal I've ever had. He knows how to imitate me. I felt like Leo diCaprio in The Wolf of Wall Street, this movie is sick. Do I need to say more? I get an 8. I don't care if for you is a 7. Now I control your f****g keyboard motherslasher" "Again. Stop" "Stop. Ok. The costume is beautiful and makes my ass beautiful as ScarJo. God, I want to touch myself now. 8 again. Boom. Pretty high votes, do you like it? F***k objectivity, it's for people with a stick up their a-hole" "DMX is legit guys and Tommy is a gift from Hans Zimmer. 8. Don't, it's stays like that. 7. You cockhead, stop being so lame. It's 8" "I'll skip the rest because it's all 6. This way I'll let you have more time to download the movie. Pirate it and f***k the police. Who cares about pigs?" "It's a 7" "Ok, now I have to go because I have to kill some baddies and bang my girl" "Shew...get the f***k out. No one is paying you to stay here" By @the_owlseyes

Reviews by: @the_owlseyes @augustkellerwrites @s.sohan2005 “But what if God himself can be simulated, that is to say can be reduced to signs that constitute faith? Then the whole system becomes weightless, it is no longer anything but a gigantic simulacrum - not unreal, but simulacrum, that is to say never exchanged for the real, but exchanged for itself, in an uninterrupted circuit without reference or circumference” Jean Baudrillard, Simulacra and Simulation PLOT "When a beautiful stranger leads computer hacker Neo to a forbidding underworld, he discovers the shocking truth--the life he knows is the elaborate deception of an evil cyber-intelligence" or "Phylosophical Action Movie which marked an era" SCRIPT The best thing of the movie and I'm considering also its flaws. Just a few character have an arch, like Neo but it's a bit undermined by the Chosen One trope, which deprives the character of agency. Trinity has one also but Morpheus and the other people of the Resistance don't. The villain has an interesting motivation but it's hard to call him sympathetic. The point is that this movie has a wonderful concept and it's executed extremely well. I want to point out the fact that there's a maniacal attention to details and the symbolism, Jesus Christ has never been this cool, is remarkable. The fact that the Wachowskis have been able to make Baudrillard's theories cool by applying it to an action movie is incredible. This is like a mash-up of Stanley Kubrick and Michael Bay, it's impressive. Hands down one of the est script ever written because it's witty and everything about it is interesting. And it never drags. Script: 9/10 ACTING Some actors do a fine job and others a mediocre one. I think that Keanu Reeves, even though he isn't the best of the bunch, is able to bring physicality to hi character and build an icon. Lawrence Fishburne and Carrie-Anne Moss shine as Morpheus and Trinity and their performances improves Reeves's one. The best actor here is definitely Hugo Weaving, who plays with charisma the villain. Only him could've been able to portray Smith and make him likeable. We're talking about the same guy who played Elrond in The Lord of the Rings saga, that's enough to say that he's heavily skilled as an actor. Acting: 7/10 PHOTOGRAPHY There aren't incredible landscapes or such here but colours are used in a meaningful way. In the Matrix there's a green filter, to mirror the code, and outside the colours are more natural, with an emphasis of blue. Even the coded simulations are differentiated by reality and ours, by having a yellow filter. I've said that there aren't wonderful natural shots but the computer generated ones are amazing. There's one in the last act which is breathtaking. Overall it's impressive and it easily remains in your mind. Photography: 9/10 EDITING It's imaginative and, I could say, groundbreaking. There isn't a scene which is shooted in a trite way, this is why the movie flows smoothly. This is the movie which glorified certain kind of shootings like slow motion. I would've written about the others but there's too much of them and I don't want to bore you, reader. But really, this is a movie's strength. As other sections, this kind of editing influenced the whole industry. This isn't ordinary. Editing: 8/10 SPECIAL EFFECTS Considering the time period and the budget, this is simply amazing. This is why the movie is still holding up after years. There's nothing corny or cheesy about that. Yeah, these aren't pitch perfect but their imperfections don't hurt the movie. This movie layed the foundations of what we have today, because is one of the first movie the feature a lot of cgi. And the scene where i's involved are what have been repurposed more than one time by other movies. Special Effects: 8/10 SOUNDTRACK It's good but it's good enough to say that it's wonderful. I like how electric music is used here but I don't find it memorable. Yes, thanks to this movie the electric genre became mainstream but it doesn't make the music itself impressive. The point is that this style is present in all the movies of late 90's and early 2000's, it isn't original. Soundtrack: 6/10 COSTUMES Even though these are mostly leather made, we can't deny that it influenced cinema as a whole. Without this movie leather jackets won't be as relevant as they're now. The others are ordinary but I want to say that Smith's suit is laso part of our culture. It's weird because basically these aren't special but the movie is able to make them seem cool. Costumes: 7/10 CONCLUSION Script: 9/10 Acting: 7/10 Photography: 9/10 Editing: 8/10 Special Effects: 8/10 Soundtrack: 6/10 Costumes: 7/10 AVERAGE: 7,71 A striking movie which has brought new concepts, ideas and filming techiques to the industry. It's certainly one of the most iconic movie ever made and I think that every one should see it once because it's an incredible experience which allows you to question your own reality and certainties. I've said enough just go and watch it. Now. Director: The Wachowskis Screenplay: The Wachowskis Cast: Keanu Reeves, Laurence Fishburne, Carrie-Anne MossHugo Weaving, Joe Pantoliano Soundtrack: Don Davis Cinematography: Bill Pope Running Time: 136 minutes Budget: $63 million By @the_owlseyes The Matrix defines Y2K sci-fi action. Its special effects are most notable because a combination of CGI and practical gives the film a dreamlike, yet grounded feel. Plenty of action is enhanced by effects in The Matrix, but the highlight has to be the shootout in the lobby because it is done without CGI. Painstaking work was put into actually dismantling that lobby and it paid off. Next, the production design of The Matrix builds a sleek world of green hues and leather jackets that still inspires aesthetics today. The dystopian future is appropriately bleak while the computer world is appropriately polished. Meanwhile, The Matrix has dynamic camerawork. Its use of the bullet time effect has become synonymous with the film and is even known as "the Matrix effect". The sound design is surreal and the music is borderline iconic. The story is philosophical and trippy. Lastly, the direction is wonderful because The Matrix has such a precise style. Its combination of eastern and western action, its slick fashion, and its futuristic visuals create an experience that cannot be replicated. Because The Matrix is jam-packed with so much excitement, flair, and abstraction, it is a generational experience. Writing: 9/10 Direction: 10/10 Cinematography: 9/10 Acting: 8/10 Editing: 8/10 Sound: 9/10 Score/Soundtrack: 9/10 Production Design: 10/10 Casting: 8/10 Effects: 10/10 Overall Score: 9.0/10 For more of my work: https://guskeller.wixsite.com/moviefilmreviews By @augustkellerwrites The Matrix is a blessing to cinephiles all around the world. It is a mixture of "groundbreaking" cutting-edge technology, Jim Woo gunfight scenes, Yuen Woo-Ping martial art, philosophical sci-fi ideas executed perfectly in a neo cyberpunk world. The movie takes a lot of inspiration from other great movies and wears it on its sleeve but balances it by being fresh and unique. It does not feel derivative. The direction of The Wachowski's is impeccable and their ideas are visionary and used in this movie. The Matrix at its thematic core is - based on two questions "What is the Matrix ?" and is "Neo the One ?" The movie exploring the first question gives the worldbuilding to the audience in an efficient manner but doesn't make it boring. The first half of the movie leaves you intrigued about the world and it makes you want to know more about this world. It makes you sit through a 15-minute exposition scene which is executed interestingly with the Oracle (played by Gloria Foster) and Neo(played by Keanu Reeves). The second question deals with the character development of Neo, Trinity, Morpheus and the supporting cast and Dozer is the standout in the supporting cast. It deals with the choices made by Neo to save Morpheus in the second act and that question makes you care about Neo's character so much. He is confused about whether he is the Chosen One but he still makes the brave choice. That makes him likable and human throughout the movie, the audience feels dread for him and, the setup for him becoming the one is executed perfectly so when the payoff happens and Neo believes he is the One and he stops the bullets from the Agents and the theme crescendo happens it feels satisfying and ends his character arc on a high with his purpose being to save humanity from the Matrix. The performances by Lawrence Fishburne as Morpheus, Carrie Annie Moss as Trinity, and Keanu Reeves's Neo are the heart of this movie. They carry the emotional weight of this movie. Hugo Weaving as Agent Smith is amazing and an iconic role referenced in pop culture to this day. Gloria Foster as Oracle is a solid performance and she had a hard job to execute which she played to perfection. Overall The Matrix is a mixture of great ideas and spot-on execution. The cutting-edge technology helped by the fact being a modest budget helps this movie to be more creative in ideas and to use technology properly. This makes the Matrix a movie remembered for the ages to come. By @s.sohan2005

Art is something entirely subjective. Each person has different criteria for what counts as art and while this is more obvious that anywhere else in modern art, it can also be seen in “pornographic art”. Artists often feel the need to depict in their art (no matter what kind of art that is) sexuality or nudity. Sex is a part of nature, so its depiction in art is completely natural, if not necessary. The problem comes when certainly people use said depictions of sex, either for a very specific personal use, or to criticize the piece of art in which said depiction of sex was. There’s nothing wrong with criticism, but a variety of people tend to consider art pieces with extensive depictions of sex as not art. This is nowhere more obvious than in cinema. When a film includes multiple and long sex scenes, many people start criticizing it for that negatively, without considering the importance and need of said scenes and just considering the fact that they exist and they depict sex. This sparks the question, at what point does art become pornography? Like in everything else, when it comes to judging what counts as pornography and what counts as cinema, each person has different criteria. Said criteria often are very similar, but also very different. Some people make the argument that art stops being art and it becomes pornography, when the sex scenes depicted are very realistic and the actors actually have sex. A movie like that is Gaspar Noé’s “Love” which has been described as pornographic multiple times. Another set of people believe that art becomes pornography just when any kind of sex or nudity are depicted. If we count this opinion as correct, then a vast amount of films, paintings and sculptures stop being considered as art, just because they depict one of life’s most natural aspects. To me that sounds absolutely insane. My opinion on that matter is often very different from most people’s. Personally I believe that the previous opinions are wrong and that there is only one distinctive differences between art and pornography. This is the fact that they are made for very different reasons and I think that that’s what separates them. Art can be made for a variety of reasons, from the artist’s need to express himself, to the studio’s need to make more money. Art can really be made for many different reasons, but pornography is always made for one, very specific reason, so that the viewer of the porn “film” can masturbate. Of course the studios that make porn have other reasons as well, like their need and want to make money, but they make said money because people use their creations to masturbate. Some people use films that depict sex to do that, but that’s not the reason why the film was made, that’s just something that the viewer decided to do. Someone could make the argument that any kind of art that can also be used for someone to masturbate stops being art and it becomes pornography. I think that this argument can be very easily debunked, because you never know what is sexually arousing for someone. If someone is a necrophiliac and he finds murder movies or zombie movies arousing, does this mean that these movies are pornographic? Of course not. For better or worse, you can never know what someone will find arousing and use to masturbate, so that’s not a valid argument. With that in mind we can see that if we count my opinion as the correct one, then art never becomes pornography, because art is never created for the same reasons as pornography. No matter how many sex scenes are in a movie and no matter how realistic and extensive they are, if they are made strictly for artistic reasons and not for the viewer to masturbate, then this movie is art and not pornography. It can be good art or bad art, but that doesn’t matter, because it’s still art. This can spark another question, can pornography become art? As I said, for me what separates the two is the reason why they are made, so pornography can never become art. There are pornographic films with a story and very good direction and cinematography and when you take all that out maybe they don’t even have that much more sex than a Tinto Brass film, but they are made for a different reason, so they aren’t art. So, to conclude, in my opinion what makes art art and pornography pornography isn’t how good it looks, nor how much story it has, nor the actual amount to sex it has, but simply the reason why it's made. By @art_fanatic_313

“Beyond the edge of the world there’s a space where emptiness and substance neatly overlap, where past and future form a continuous, endless loop. And, hovering about, there are signs no one has ever read, chords no one has ever heard.” Haruki Murakami Since the first spark gave birth to our first fire, since the first rounded wheel has been developed out of nowhere, since we started to find an explanation about the beings and events which surround us, we've always looked at the stars, wondering about their nature. We started by thinking that we were at the universe's centre, a miopic vision which survived in our society for almost a millennium. We got past it, and it was hard. At first we rejected the idea of being just another rock in a solar system. Time passed and our universal relevance dwindled. We shifted from being God's creation to specs lost in an ever expanding universe made of rocks and ashes. One thing was necessary at this point: we decided to get on another star, to conquest another unexplored world, because here everything was discovered. We dreamed about it for ages but, when the project started, it seemed unreal. We were working toward reaching the moon, our only and lonely satellite. We've always considered it far, unattainable and pure. Until July 20, 1969. After 7 years of tests, which started with the Sputnik 1 by URSS, mankind has been able to bring 3 men on the lunar surface. Buzz Aldrin, Neil Armstrong and Michael Collins conquered the pale planet. “That’s one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind” An event which influenced our story in a radical way. Science and Society changed. Art changed. A lot of different artists where influenced by it. David Bowie, Elton John, The Police, Pink Floyd, Europe and more composed songs to celebrate this events. Space and the Universe are a great source of inspiration for a lot of musicians and bands, because it's fascinating and unknown. This is what inspired JM Mantecon, a young music composer and multi instrumentalist from Sevilla, to compose A Brief History of Space Age. JM's passion for music goes back to when he was only 6 years old, when he started playing the piano. From that moment he knew that he was going to be a musician and he did evertyhting to reach his goal. An interest which has been nurtured by his favourite, who is a music lover too. He introduced him to artists like Vangelis, Pink Floyd, Jarre, Supertramp, and many more. "He used to play songs by these artists on the piano, though he also had his own musical ideas" Later JM entered music school but he left it after a few years and he finished self-teaching it himself. At 14 years old he entered a recording studio and from there started his career, which perfectly overlapped with other technical aspects of his first job. Music has had a relevant role in his life so far and for him is more than just sounds and tones: "For me, music is a physiological need. I need to create, play, listen, and feel music every hour of every day. It’s what I make a living on, and it’s my way of communicating with the world. My life orbits around music. I live off of it as a producer, composer and sound engineer. Every single day I’m either studying piano, going to the recording studio, or performing live" An idea which is heavily noticeable in his creative process: "I think music has to come before technology, which is why I mainly compose on the piano or directly on my mind. Later, I enter the phases of musical arrangement, formal construction, etc. I usually do composing sessions in which I improvise for a while on the piano, the synthesizer or the guitar. Also, while walking through the fields, I can visualize the works and at the same time work on them on my mind" As his inspirations: "I search for inspiration in literature and movies, and also in documentaries. Basically, anything that fills my mind with emotions so that I can later on portray those feelings in sound form. My works are sort of movie sound tracks, which take you through many sensations and emotions in a musical trip, sometimes also a physical one" And his tastes about music, movies and series reflect all of that. Not only Spiral by Vangelis, Flight from the City of Johan Johansson and Lacrimosa by Mozart have a relevant role, even though his favourite songs could vary with his mood and the time, but there's also a myriad of movies which have left a mark in his works. He is into different kind of movies and series, I'm really impressed. For him is hard to choose because his likings are pretty wide and varied: the original Blade Runner, 2001: A Space Odyssey, all the 80's sci-fi movies, all Kubrick and Woody Allen movies. That's a lot. His series tastes are narrower: Mr. Robot, Raised by Wolves and Mozart in the Jungle. The album we're going to talk about today is A Brief History of Space Age. It's a tribute to all the artists and movies which influenced JM imagination and music.A lot of great minds has brought him to create what could be considered his best work. I'm talking about Carl Sagan, Stephen Hawking, Elon Musk, Nikola Tesla, Philip K. Dick, Arthur C. Clarke, Isaac Asimov, Stanley Kubrick, Evangelos Odysseas Papathanassiou, Kitaro, Jean Michel Jarre, Félix Rodríguez De la Fuente, José Luis Comellas, Tomás Hormigo, Iker Jiménez...Well, I think that no one has been left out. All started right after the quarantine, many years after his previous albums Odyssey and Magallanes. It's a returns to the origin for JM Mantecon who discovers himself in this electronic and cosmic work, surprising with his spectacular power and current sounds having being recorded on a tape recorder and mixed in an analogue way. A Brief History of Space Age is a celebration of the greatest milestones of mankind's journey in the Universe, all the while paying tribute to spectacular stellar phenomena. You'll notice it just by taking a look to the songs names. I find it original and particularly clever, because it shows how much JM cares about the album's theme. On June 9th 2021, it became available for digital and physical purchase, and it will soon be launched as a vinyl. This vinyl will include a special bonus that will not be available in the digital nor the physical versions of the album. To realize this album JM has decided to go against the norm and do something more natural and spontaneous: "For this album I mainly used improvisation on synthesizers and the piano. I could look for an arpeggio in the Arp 2600 and then play with it while I added other elements with the rest of keyboards, all the while being recorded on multi track. Once I selected the interesting parts, I did the arrangement and the programming of the rhythms with the drum machines. We then went to the studio and we recorded all the material on tape recorder" In Translation is the first track of this album It starts with a speech by JFK and after that the music kicks in. It's techy and it makes me think about all the people who worked and are still working on lunar modules, shuttles, rockets and such. It has a fast pace and it's dreamy. Wow, this is a great way to start an album. It hooks you up because it's incredibly exciting. It's an ascending track, which evolves and it's particularly dynamic. The ending is quiete and terminates the song with JFK's speech. "This track is an overture of the album, a description of the immensity of space, with the not-so-empty emptiness that surrounds it and the violent energy activities that take place in it, such as supernovas, quasars, etc. The track opens to an excerpt of President Kennedy's famous speech exalting the American population to support the Space Race and the first trip to the Moon. The main motif is an arpeggio that appears shy at first, but then evolves accordingly with the song, to finally reach an explosion, a climax, together with the symphonic percussions and a polyphonic choral, to later dilute again little by little, ending, once again, with Kennedy and his clear statement of wanting to send a man to the Moon and bring him back safe and sound before the decade of the 60's was over" The next one is Ignition. And the pace is still high, maybe higher than the first one. It has a first part where it sets the mood, a second where new sounds are added. It's an hopeful song and it seems like a celebration. The fact that there're shades of 80's music is the cherry on top. It's dreamy but it's also incredibly. There's a singed part which starts toward the middle of it and it's beautiful. JM is a master with keyboards. "This song is probably the most metamorphic one of the album, dedicated to Elon Musk, all the SpaceX team, and to their project of wanting to take humans to Mars in this decade. Music-wise, it is a piece that changes its form constantly, starting with a series of intertwined arpeggios that later introduce synthetic strings and the song's leitmotif with a lead of the synthesizer. After a several-hand improvisation with more synthesizers, the vocoder emerges singing the main melody and, to top it off, a powerful chorus is interpreted by a main voice and choruses in the background. The song finishes with a powerful movement that describes the rise of the space rocket and its exit from the atmosphere, to then return to the arpeggios of the beginning as a form of coda" Oort Cloud, named after the theoretical cloud of predominantly icy planetesimals, starts slowly, to build up an atmosphere of awe. It feels like drifting in space, lulled by the stars and novas lights. It's quiet and soothing. You lose yourself in it. Space is a beautiful place. It would work well as soundtrack for a sci-fi movie. "This is a transition track; gliding music in the style of Klaus Schulze. It describes the hypothetical space located in the most distant region of our Solar System, source of the non-cyclical comets that orbit just once around the Sun. It starts with gliding pads and ghost-like choir voices created out of synthesizers. While it develops, its harmonic form changes into an arpeggio ad libitum. The synthetic metals appear with an epic chant, which the choir voices repeat in unison, reinforced by symphonic percussions, reaching the climax and, finally, slowly vanishing while the signal that the Sputnik satellite sent to Earth in 1957 can begin to be heard, thus linking together with the next song of the album" Sputnik is, I think, the most beloved track of JM. It's the kind of music I would put on in my car to feel like David Hasselhoff in Knight Rider. It has a consistent rythm and in the middle it becomes slower, to take a breath I think. Then it slowly pick up speed but it remains restrained, without exceeding in virtuosity. As Ignition, it has a singed section but it's shorter. There's a sudden stop toward the end, to introduce us in the last section, which seems like a goodbye. It's an homage to the first object which has ventured in space. "This song is dedicated to the first artifact that humans sent into space. It was the first satellite ever to send a signal and for this one to be picked up by Earth. Back in its time it was a big sensation, with everyone going out on the streets to see how that tiny light passed by through the stars. It begins with a sequence composed of seven sequencers that enter progressively, creating a hubbub of intertwined musical notes, entering and exiting. Classical and descriptive electronic that takes us back to the coldness of the USSR and to the scientific images of those times. The sequence develops until the main synthesizer comes in with a typical Moog sound, with an evocative melody, which takes us into the next part: an explosion and a rhythmic pause, opening the way for the pads and the synthetic strings, describing the moment in which Sputnik goes into outer space and starts orbiting the Earth. Galactic effects escort this moment jumping from one side to the other of the panorama. The sound of a theremin and the boost of the rhythm both stand out in the following part, which takes us to the climax of the song, with more rhythms entering and with a strong synth-wave sound, with a manual arpeggio and a clear Roland Jupiter 8 sound. Next, a brief vocal melody comes in, singing the story of the Sputnik, to later enter in a musical bridge with a few intertwined melodies, and in the end, an ambient moment in which the pads, with distorted effects, leave us floating again in the immensity of the cosmos" Hawking Piece is the oddest track. It's short and it seems like a transition piece. It's characterized by the mechanical voice of Stephen Hawking. I think that him describes it in a better way. "This track anticipates and introduces the next song, Space and Time, with the narrative of one of the well-known speeches of Stephen Hawking, interpreted with the genius' voice synthesizer and with a series of sound effects that describe explosions and the massive energy splurge of black holes, on which he focused his career" The next one starts with a bang and it feels like a voyage through Space and Time. It's wonderful and uplifting. It's the only track which is to all effects a song. It's also one of the few without an underlining speech. "Metaphor of a love relationship with the Universe as its background. It is the only sung pop song in the album. A powerful up-tempo hymn, with an evocative main melody interpreted by synthetic leads and the vocal track interacting with them, referencing giant red stars and the Bible with the expression: “dust we are and to dust we shall return”, thus also resembling Carl Sagan's thought that "we're made of star stuff" Mr. Hubble starts quietly and after a while it becomes similar to disco music. I don't know but it remembers me Flash Gordon, with its quirky and weird style. It's a track which works well for dancing, because it has a good pace and nice sounds. I think that a singer is missing here, because it would have been more impactful in my opinion. "This song has a strong Italo-disco character, in the style of Giorgio Moroder. It contains a rhythmic part highlighted by a Linn Drum and a pounding bass, and a casual melody interpreted with the Italian monophonic synthesizer Jen SX-1000. It's dedicated to the space telescope that broke the barriers of modern astronomy and, at the same time, to the astronomer after whom it is named, Edwin Hubble, who proved the expansion of the Universe" Sagan Piece starts with Sagan's voice. Some inspiring word by a person who has stimulated our world to reach out of hearth's atmosphere. This is a transition piece. "This is a small piece that anticipates the next song, Neowise. A strong change is contemplated in the dynamics of the album, coming closer to a more sober sound, with an Easter Egg to Vangelis' song Heaven and Hell, which was interpreted in Cosmos. Sagan's voice plays along the whole piece" The next one is Neowise. Starts as a tender composition and seems like a lullaby. I think that this is one of the less dreamy pieces of the album. It distances itself from the previous tracks by being less dynamic. Now it remembers me the 80's He-Man Movie. It sounds like an anthem for space, to celebrate its beauty. The use of drums makes it similar to a royal march. "This is a song with a strong symphonic character. It is the perfect tribute to Vangelis: a repetitive bass marking the rhythmic base and the synthesizers' melody acting as a guitar together with the acoustic piano describe the calm arrival of the comet while it approaches the Sun and begins its activity, its gas and dust tail being born due to solar radiation. The song reaches its climax when the symphonic percussions, symphonic kettle drums, snare drums, plates and the symphonic choral all come in, thus culminating in an epic apotheosis, describing its orbit around the Sun, to then return to the calmness of a piano solo, while the comet NEOWISE wanders off forever" The Last Goodbye it's a symphony. It continues the style brought in by the previous track but is so much slower. It sounds like a music for wanderers, who like to look at the sky and fancy new, unexplored worlds. "This song is an orchestral adagio, but creating the timbre with the synthesizers, following the trail of the previous track. Also, reference items to Isao Tomita, a Japanese musician famous for interpreting classical music scores with synthesizers, are added. This work, sad but at the same time epic and hopeful, is dedicated to those who died for the Space Race, and especially to the Challenger crew. A melancholic melody accompanies the mourning while a heroic chorus begins as a tribute to the space heroes. The culminating moment occurs when the choir and the symphonic percussions enter. After that, the feminine voices remain in a suspended wail, giving way once again to the main melody, which now acts as a coda" Oumuamua, named after the asteroid which is believed to be a planet killer or an alien ship(interesting theories), is here celebrated. I think that this track could represent the voyage made by the extratterestrial object. It's inteesting the fact that JM uses for a while sounds which are usually attributed to aliens, I think to recognize the asteroid's theories. It's an uplifting piece which could bring you happiness with an alien-ish style. "In the year 2017 a space object approaching our Sun was discovered. It was first catalogued as a comet, later as an asteroid. Its high eccentricity, its behaviour and its peculiar shape jolted the whole scientific community, making them reach the assumption of it being an interstellar object. Its own name suggests it: "the first distant messenger". Some scientists even declared it to be an old extra-terrestrial ship wandering through space. This track begins with synthetic strings, which precede the entrance of a simple and cheerful melody. It is a clear reference to Jean Michel Jarre. The song reaches a chorus which is interpreted with a common sound in Jarre's Oxygene. Later, it outbreaks in a festive chorus of synthetic metals and bell sounds, celebrating the conquest of Space by humanity. All of this while being surrounded by the choir. In the end, it breaks in a closing musical part where sounds and effects from the Space Race can be appreciated: Neil Armstrong with his famous phrase "one small step for man", Sagan, Hawking, Gagarin... All of them can be heard as an interference while the music dilutes, leaving only the sound of Saturn, captured by the Cassini space probe, until its complete fading" The last one is Neowise Piano Version. In my opinion this version is even better than the original, because it's more graceful and plush. "This Neowise piece, interpreted on piano with variations in its arrangement and harmony, evokes the escape of humanity into outer space, towards the stars. It is accompanied by a small sound effect alluding the space emptiness" JM Mantecon is a pretty talented composer who is able to revive the 80's and celebrate the universe with a cool, original and dreamy style. I like how every track's name has a reason and every song has it's own narrative. I like his style a lot and I think that you could too. Look for his album and starts a fully immersive and outworldy experience. You won't regret it. By @the_owlseyes

Reviews by: @the_owlseyes @dylanandhismovies Curiosity and knowledge are the best things of our species. One abates with time and the other, in theory, should rise with it. When we're younger we have one of them and viceversa when we're older, if we aren't able to find the right balance. There's a period when we get to decide what we're going to be. If our parents don't let us explore the world around, because they aren't confident about their education, we're going to be frightened, ignorant grown up with a complex of inferiority and a lot of self indulgence and arrogance. If they're able to let us wander and find our way, we're going to be balanced and humble people who are able to put ourselves in discussion. It isn't just about our faily but also our relaity could influence us. A reality which doesn't accept us for what we're can alienate us and feel out of place. It's hard to be teens and kids. So much to do and explore with a lot of limits. Maybe we should reconsider our assumptions about curiosity, fantasy and knowledge. PLOT "On the Italian Riviera, an unlikely but strong friendship grows between a human being and a sea monster disguised as a human" or "Two cultures clash and bridges are created". SCRIPT It isn't an original story and it's full of cliches and boring tropes but the characters are well written and have interesting archs. The themes are relevant but a bit trite: immigration, inclusiveness, freedom, autonomy, growing up and parenting. I think that the protagonist is enjoyable and a lot of kids could empathize for him. The relationship between him and his friend is good but flawed, which makes the climax a bit badand anticlimatic. The rules of this world are sometimes inconsistent and unclear and the implications are a bit underplayed. The villain is just there as an obstacle and is one dimensional. I don't like the fact that he's evil just for the sake of it. Pretty forgettable. This cripples the movie because it fells like an aimless movie without a real sense of threat, tension or urgency. It isn't a bad movie but this script is forgettable and heavily flawed. I don't like it because it's just a boring, unimaginative kids flick. Script: 5/10 ACTING The voice acting works even though it isn't the best I've ever heard. Jacob Tremblay and Jack Dylan Grazer do a good job but it isn't enough to say that's impressive. The other actors, especially Maya Rudolph, deliver a good performance and I like the fact that I could say the same about italian voice actors. But, after all, it's just another movie with mediocre and stale acting. Acting: 6/10 PHOTOGRAPHY This movie is pretty bright and there're some wonderful shots but most of the time the light is flat and boring and colours don't have any symbolic menaning. I like some shots of the sea and PortoRosso, which is a clear nod to Porco Rosso. I don't have a lot to say about it because it's average and doesn't offer anything interesting to talk about. Photography: 6/10 EDITING It isn't particularly remarkable. I like how slom motion is being used but this movie isn't characterized by an impressive editing. Fast cuts are used in a comedic way but it isn't something new. It works but it's hard to remember this movie for its editing. At least it isn't as bad. Editing: 6/10 SPECIAL EFFECTS These're good but it's the usual Disney-Pixar animation. I like the mutation's animation but overall I don't think that's amazing. The monsters design is good but it's forgettable. I don't find the cgi interesting here because it doesn't take risks and this style is becoming a bit repetitive. Special Effects: 6/10 SOUNDTRACK I like the inclusion of 50s Italian music, which gives the movie an identity but the instrumental part is pretty forgettable. Music doesn't have a relevant role in the movie and it's more like background noise. Soundtrack: 6/10 COSTUMES 50s clothes and style, nothing more. I like that the movie pays homage to the Italian 1950s but it's all about that. Costumes don't influence the plot and it's ok like that. Costumes: 6/10 CONCLUSION Script: 5/10 Acting: 6/10 Photography: 6/10 Editing: 6/10 Special Effects: 6/10 Soundtrack: 6/10 Costumes: 6/10 AVERAGE: 5,85 A good movie with a lot of flaws which isn't the best animated movie I've ever seen but it's enjoyable. I don't find it particularly exceptional and I think that seeing it isn't necessary, because the plot is ordinary and the script isn't the best you can expect. You can watch it but you'll have to lower your expectations. Director: Enrico Casarosa Screenplay: Enrico Casarosa, Jesse Andrews Cast: Jacob Tremblay, Jack Dylan Grazer, Emma Berman, Saverio Raimondo, Maya Rudolph, Marco Barricelli, Jim Gaffigan, Peter Sohn, Lorenzo Crisci, Marina Massironi, Sandy Martin Soundtrack: Dan Romer Cinematography: David Juan Bianchi, Kim White Running Time: 101 minutes Budget: $5 million By @the_owlseyes I want to preface and say that Luca was apart of my top 12 most anticipated movies this year. I was hoping for a deep tale of friendship set in a beautiful part of Italy. What I got, really disappointed me. Pixar’s Soul was my favourite movie from last year; it surprised me by going that deep into death and purpose. Luca, in my opinion, is surface level on almost every account. I genuinely think that it’s only highlights are its fresh art style and animation, and some of the highlights within the score. I could tell that a lot of care was taken into making a warm and welcoming Italian setting. Director Enrico Casarosa puts a lot of love into the atmosphere of the world, but what is ultimately lacking from Luca is purpose. It feels like it wants to be a challenging story about friendship (or even love), but it devolves into this weird story about winning some Italian triathlon, with the former idea sprinkled on here and there. It’s the definition of safe. You know you have the literal “fish out of water” story, you have the friends fighting before the climax, the generic villain who has zero motivations (and is a dick just because), and a lot more stupidly safe choices. Now I’m not really bothered that the majority of the main cast isn’t Italian, but what does bother me is that the only major character voiced by an Italian is the villain. It’s probably just a coincidence, but it felt very weird to me. And despite me not being that bothered by the lack of Italian voices, y’know it would’ve been a lot more authentic and immersive. Sort of like how Moana casted Auli’i Carvahlo in that titular role. And maybe if Jacob Tremblay and Jack Dylan Grazer put in substantial vocal performances, I wouldn’t be bothered… but it wasn’t really special. It sort of feels like Pixar just said, “hey so we just made a pretty challenging movie in Soul… so let’s do the exact opposite and make it extremely safe.” I think the only moment that breaks free of that moment is the exchange between Luca and Alberto at the very end. It ends the movie on a relatively high note without making a big deal about it. Although the resolution of the conflict with Ercole was really stupid. It kind of just ends and they’re like “it doesn’t matter that they’re fish people even though we literally try and hunt them, because they won the race.” It quite literally felt like they were solving sea racism. Just beat the land people in a race and then they’ll stop hating you. Maybe I’m out of touch here, but it felt very forced and inorganic. I really love the art style here. It did bring a lot of warm, summertime feelings. It’s smooth, but it also tried to be ambitious at points throughout the movie. I love how it looked when the fish would transition to and from their natural look. They did a great job of setting up the look of the world, and I commend them for that. But my problems lay heavily within the progression of the story and the boring characters. It’s a pretty quick film, about 86 minutes before the credits, and it definitely wasn’t a gruelling watch, but I was pretty bored. There are some cute and funny moments here and there, with a great moment at the very end… but it was not enough to charm me into liking it. It definitely isn’t Pixar’s worst movie, but it’s probably within the bottom five or six. I hope their future projects try to be a bit more daring and exploratory. For now I’m gonna give Luca a 5.5/10. And that’s probably a bit too generous, but I did appreciate the animators work and the film’s composer Dan Romer’s work. Have you seen Luca? If so, what’d you think? By @dylanandhismovies

Reviews by: @art_fanatic_313 This comic is set in 1894 and it follows the mysterious things hunters, Filimon Karteris and Zachary Nicholson, as they try to find what happened to a man named Lefteris who disappeared one week ago. In their hunt they are lead to a creepy inn, in the middle of nowhere and things there get very bloody. This comic is written and drawn by Thanassis Petropoulos. It's quite short, but it still manages to be very fun and entertaining. The mystery is interesting and the characters are well written. The two main characters are very different from each other, but they also have great chemistry. The horror aspects of the comic aren't really scary, but they certainly are good. Thanassis's artwork is very unique. He has his own style, which is quite distinctive. It's not particularly realistic or detailed, but it fits perfectly well with the story. I like a lot the way he draws fog and all sorts of scary creatures, like wolves, haunted donkeys and monsters. Overall, this is a very fun short read, with great aspects of humor and folklore horror. 8.5/10 By @art_fanatic_313

As more and more directors strive for social realism in film more and more non actors are used to gain the kind of authenticity that these productions require. The non actors’ performance is generally one of hyper realism, as if the camera is somehow hidden and the artifice of reality is created by a literal transference of the characters real life onto the camera. Obviously criteria must be met, the non actor must be able to ‘act’ or appear comfortable for the audience, naturalistic and create effectively the world of the film. The question that I ask my self when watching realism is one of technique and whether this type of performance is indeed acting? It seems at complete odds with the old days of stanislavskian method actors, where in emotional memory was an a performer’s main tool of expression. Performers using stans’ method would relate the Mise-en-scène to a similar event in life and try to recreate the emotions felt there. Even using Bertolt Brect’s method where an actor would remain an actor and wear the character like a dramatic cloak are insufficient. So what technique is employed to create ultra realistic performance, used by actor or non actor, and can it even be considered acting? In Sarah Gavron’s 2019 film Rocks the story revolves around the lives and struggles of a group of kids in inner city London. The film populated by non actors has a documentary like feel and the artifice of realism is perfectly realised. The performers are playing the self’s in front of the camera, recreating there lives for film. Is that acting? In Chloe Zhao’s The Rider the titular character is in life exactly what he portrays on screen. A cowboy unable to cowboy, because of injury gained, well, cowboying, again his existence is cinematically rendered on screen. The film making is beautiful the artifice of reality realised, but is it acting. Then we get to Nomadland. Ahh Nomadland, can you answer the question? I think the answer lies in the comparison between actor and non actor. If an shred of technique was on show in Frances mcdormand's exquisite performance it would have rendered the the film utterly bunk and completely unrealistic. So the acting technique she employed, in order to gain absolute realism was one of non performance. Not a inch of performance technique is present and reality is perfectly produced for the screen. No mean feat for any actor. Like Marilyn Monroe and Laurance Olivier in The Prince and the Showgirl where Marilyn had been off studying Misner technique and made the world’s greatest living actor's performance look acty (can anyone say Keanu). This same effect would be devastating for the any of the films mentioned above and in no uncertain terms destroy the film and the artifice of realism completely. So is it acting? The answer my loves lies in an exact recreation of reality, with absolutely no technique visable. I always felt it was a lot harder to play Gilbert Grape as apposed to Arnie, harder to play Bruce Wayne than Batman, what I mean by this is the more 'normal' and rooted in reality the character is, the deeper you have to search for the characters' truth. I suppose with all this in mind the answer to the original question has to be yes, it is certainly acting. The very subtle and highly skilled technique employed by actors, the technique of non performance. By @any_left