Easter Sunday Review

If it weren't for Jay Chandrasekhar directing this, I would have skipped out on Easter Sunday. Even though he didn't write the script for this film, his knack for finding good projects (Arrested Development, Community, Psych) is there. This one falls a little flat early and does recover to where it's above average. Not good, but there is much worse. One of the stranger comedies I have seen in theaters.

Jo Koy (Yes, that's his name, a stage name) plays Joe Valencia, A Filipino actor who is trying to find work beyond being a comedian. In the midst of finding that big break, he is also divorced, trying to be there for his son and attend his mother's home for Easter Sunday. What should be a normal gathering of family does not exist. Feuding sisters, scammers, anything you can think of derails what Joe wants to do and he has to keep his sanity in check while making sure things don't go wrong.

This falls into the realm of very dysfunctional family. Only with a Filipino family. It plays a little bit of factor in the plot with Joe not wanting to be a stereotype when going for his big break. I get it being natural has its perks. Doesn't work all the time in Hollywood though. The material is stuff some can relate to. Not every family is happily together. Bickering members and grudges against each other. It's something you can laugh at and have fun watching. Some of it is outlandish such as the character Eugene owing money to gangsters. Otherwise, the script here is something that you'll get a grasp of.

This doesn't have the most recognized cast, though some familiar faces will leave you wondering how they managed to "insert actor's name" in it. The cinematography was excellent and the lighting was done great. Music was hit or miss. This is not a gut busting type of movie and the first 20 minutes or so will feel a bit slow. Once it gets to where Joe and his son being around his family does it kick up a bit and be funny. Lots of chuckling. If Easter Sunday is right up your alley, go see it. Otherwise, watch at your risk. Your mileage may vary on if it interests you greatly.

Score: 6.5 out of 10 

Father Stu Review

I'm not an overly religious person. That said, Father Stu seemed like an interesting film. A guy who wants to find his true calling and tries several things before deciding to go into priesthood. There's probably better films of this type of genre, but this isn't too bad.

Mark Wahlberg plays Stuart Long in this true story of what Long did at points in his life. A local boxer who is forced to retire because of health issues, he wants to make a name for himself and Hollywood is where he believes he can do well for him and his mother. He tries his luck and finds himself in bad situations until catching the eye of a young lady named Carmen who goes to church every Sunday. Long decides to clean up his act and do better and believes in joining the priesthood with ups and downs along the way.

The real Stuart Long passed away back in 2014, so this is a film that knows there will not be any sort of happy ending. I don't know how to explain the movie. No matter what throughout it, Long is determined to get what he wants. Even if it sounds crazy, he knows he has a true calling. It's also redemption, especially with the rocky relationship of his father, played by Mel Gibson. So many things you can describe. And it's a passion project that Wahlberg wanted to work on, hence helping finance it according to multiple websites. Redemption and also tragedy with Long's health and past wounds that don't heal.

Outside of some pacing issues, the cinematography had a bit of a grittiness and some excellent lighting usage at points. That was used with big effort in the later part of the film. There was a little bit more of a movie score along with a few songs here and there. The only other problems would be the subject matter. It was a decent enough film. Definitely an on the fence type of choice. If you're interested, see it before it gets pulled out of theaters within a few weeks. There's far worse true story movies.

Score: 6.5 out of 10

The Lost City Review

The Lost City is one of those films that caught my interest a little bit. I was a little hesitant to see it in theaters and waited on reviews. I would rate it right around where the critics would place it. It's a fun little film that has its share of adventure and some humor mixed into it. Not a straight up action. As much as I liked Uncharted, I would put Lost City over it, but not by far.

This is centered around Loretta, played by Sandra Bullock. She writes adventure novels and is part of a book tour that begins in New York. Along with that first promotional of the book is her cover model, Alan, played by Channing Tatum. Loretta is frustrated at having to do book touring. In the midst of it, she is kidnapped by a billionaire. Abigail, performed by Daniel Radcliffe, wants her to find the real treasure as done in the books. It ultimately become a rescue mission and a treasure hunt with a real sense of adventure.

The film takes its moments to be light hearted. Have some humor in it here and there. And then hit a serious moment. It finds a good balance on continuing the story. They develop the characters as it goes on. You get to understand the feelings of what Loretta and Alan are going through. The fact they open up more of Alan says a bit about wanting to be more than a book cover model. And Abigail is an eccentric bad guy. The performances altogether are well thought out. The action is not overdone and contribute to the story. Like I said, it finds good balance.

I like that there is more of a movie score with some songs put into it. The cinematography is excellent and the production design is well thought out for being a treasure hunt type of film. It can drag in a couple spots, though, and a couple characters do get somewhat annoying in some scenes. But otherwise, check out The Lost City. It's a fun popcorn film that isn't as ridiculous compared to other films.

Score: 7.5 out of 10

Uncharted (Movie) Review

I've only gotten familiar with Uncharted in the last five or so years. Enjoyed the original PlayStation 3 trilogy and heard stuff about a movie being made. It was in development hell for many years and it finally made its way to theaters this year. If you're a fan of the games, you'll get some good enjoyment out of it. Others, your mileage may vary. But a lighter action film that isn't a comic book adaptation feels necessary to have.

Tom Holland steps into the lead role of Nathan Drake, a young man who gets the opportunity of a lifetime. He meets Victor "Sully" Sullivan, played by Mark Wahlberg. Sully tells him about the treasure of Magellan and the adventure takes the duo to several parts of the world, trying to avoid a pair of bad guys, with Tati Gabrielle and Antonio Banderas filling in villain roles. This also has Sophia Ali playing Chloe Frazer, as this is more of an introduction to the characters without taking it too far.

This film tries to piece together elements from the games. For the most part, it succeeds. Moments with Nate and his brother Sam. Twists in the story with double crosses and betrayals. Death defying moments such as flying out of a plane and getting back into it. Traps and humor. Without spoiling it too much, it feels very much in tune with the games. But it also does give out a vibe of Indiana Jones and a little bit of Tomb Raider and The Goonies.

I like that it stuck to a musical score that works with the scenes with a minimal amount of songs. The cinematography was through the roof. Some of the effects look very real. That said, it can be a little ridiculous. I like the performances of Holland and Wahlberg, but I kind of wish Wahlberg would have had a little more gruffer voice similar to Richard McGonagle. The mileage will also vary on your experience of the series and if they got it down the first try. I'd like to see how Holland does if a sequel does get greenlit. Ali was magnificent as Chloe and I would like to see if she is implemented more if brought back.

I would try to see this in the theater. Gamers should have blast with this. Definitely room for improvement, but it captures the essence of Naughty Dog's vision, only in movie form.

Score: 7 out of 10

The Call of the Wild Movie Review

The Call of the Wild is one of the most recognized books of the 20th century. It is one that has been read by literally tens of millions since it was first published back in 1903. This was inspired by author Jack London's experience in the Yukon. There have been several adaptations over the years. This one does a fairly good job of trying to be accurate to the book, but has changes, which is no surprise with any of these adaptations.

Story-wise, it is centered on the dog, Buck. He is pampered and causes mischief. With the gold rush in the Yukon reaching an all time high, a Santa Clara citizen kidnaps him and ships him off to there and work as a sled dog. From there, the St. Bernard goes on various adventures with a team of dogs and whatever owners own him. Along the way, he meets John Thornton, who has had his share of troubles with family.

Considering the standards of animal rights these days, there is a bit of computer generated stuff throughout it. There is no way that they were going to do this with PETA coming in if things went south. And even then, teaching dogs to act is not easy. Terry Notary plays Buck and the CG and mannerisms help the performance. I know it ruins the authenticity for some, but for something like this, I don't think there was much choice.

As far as the adaptation goes, I would say it does a great job covering most of the story. Like I said, there is changes. You don't see any major deaths until late in it. They do alter the mid part and end of the book in this version. I look at this being a PG movie and not wanting to be completely dark. Not to mention there are a few parts at the end that are rather insensitive if they had filmed those parts. Even with this being PG, this is not a kids film. This is for adults. If you do take your kid to it, I'd be weary of a couple scenes.

I like the cinematography quite a bit. A lot of good use of color lighting for a number of scenes. There is a music score throughout the entire film and it is excellent. Harrison Ford plays John Thornton well and the writers make him someone you sympathize for. Dan Stevens' few scenes as Hal provide conflict in place of the original scenes. I enjoyed Omar Sy and Cara Gee's scenes early on as Buck's first caregivers in the Yukon.  The sledding parts were a blast and can put you on edge. It moves at a good pace. There isn't too much to say.

I don't have any real complaints. Maybe one or two scenes that drag and that it's not completely faithful. Considering other adaptations takes, this is more than likely the best one. A plot that stays true to the book somewhat. Nothing convoluted. The Call of the Wild is one I would check out in the theater before it gets pulled. Definitely enjoyable.

Score: 8 out of 10

Sonic the Hedgehog (2020) Film Review

If I have to describe this new Sonic the Hedgehog film a couple words come to mind. It's surprisingly good. Considering last April with the design of the character and bringing it back to the table. This has been put into a bigger test if people would actually see it and the delay has paid off in its opening weekend.

Long ago, Sonic had a power ever since he was little. But it attracts bad guys and he must live in other planets, including Earth. With that, he resides in Green Hills, Montana, a small town lead by police officer Tom Wachowski. Both have their own goals. Sonic wants a real friend. Tom wants to do grander things to help the public similar to his veterinarian wife. But the hedgehog's upsetting emotion of being alone makes him speed very fast and cause a huge power outage. It prompts the government to bring in the psychotic Dr. Robotnik. And that's where the adventure starts.

With the performances, the voice of Sonic isn't annoying. Ben Schwartz does a solid enough job to not make it all about the attitude that the games make him out as. James Marsden has a wide range of emotions that work great in most of the film and falter in a couple scenes. Of course, the hoopla with Jim Carrey as Robotnik, it's not that over the top. Not to the level of Ace Ventura or The Mask, but definitely some crazy moments with the physical comedy. It could have been like an In Living Color character. Other characters are performed relatively well and deal with the idea of an alien hedgehog being in their world.

The CGI isn't overused. Sonic and his old planet were given a lot of care. Robotnik's technology is in line with later games. It is a little light on the comedy, but come in at the right times for the humor. What's nice is having a score that has its sappy moments, action. Doesn't rely on using songs as a crutch for its best moments. A number of references to the games and the idea of speed. It goes by at a good pace. I would stick for a few extra minutes when the credits as you don't want to miss what could happen.

There aren't many kids films out right now, but Sonic the Hedgehog isn't a bad choice. If you have kids, take them to the theater. They will be entertained. Fans will enjoy this as well. It could have been a disaster, but fixing stuff for the fans helped Paramount and Sega. This has a good two to three months of being in theaters throughout the country.

Score: 7 out of 10

Initial Sonic the Hedgehog Movie Reaction

I've waited a little bit for the buzz to die off on this, so I can have a genuine thought on it. Sonic the Hedgehog is heading to theaters in November in live action form. My reaction to the trailer from last week is that it will be an okay movie. Might be something I would see.

It is nice to see Jim Carrey actually doing a movie and not his usual political garbage he does now these days. The question on portraying Robotnik is how much he will act like him or if it is similar to other movies of his. But it does seem like a form back to what he was like in the mid to late 90s. For the Sonic design, I didn't hate it. The only thing I wasn't huge on was the face. He's going to be CGI from the looks of it and the special effects from the trailer don't look horrible.

As far as plot, it has some thought compared to other game to movie adaptations. But it's a matter of how audiences will react when the film does come out. I don't think the trailer was as bad as most think it is. A few spots could have been better. For now, it's on my radar for when it comes out to maybe see in theaters. Until then, not much to talk regarding the film.

Shazam Movie Review

Normally, I'm not into today's modern comic book movies. They all feel the same. But Shazam caught my eye a little bit. I went in expecting a goofy over the top movie, and while it had its light moments, it was a little darker than what I anticipated. That being said, it was better than what I thought it would be. And it is also a case where you don't need 10 A-list actors and a bloated 200 million dollar budget to make a good comic book movie.

Billy Batson is a teenager who has been in foster care for a long time. His reasoning is not hard to figure out as he wants to find his mother. On the other side, there is Doctor Sivana, who experienced seeing the wizard Shazam in the 70s as a child. Shazam wants to find someone that has a pure heart and a few other things that will take over his place as a hero. Sivana has been working on trying to get to that dimension and hearing others stories about what he experienced. Escaping from bullies after fighting them, Billy finds himself in that dimension and reluctantly becomes Shazam.

After that, Billy comes to terms and tries to figure out his new powers. Along with that comes a greater responsibility, a lot of funny moments, and action that you don't think could happen. The people involved made this more in line as a dramedy. Early on, it has its serious moments and lighter toned parts through the first half. After that, it becomes more serious like and action oriented with a few sprinkles of humor here and there. As far as actors, the performances are excellent. I don't know how others will feel, but there is a Santa Claus that is very over the top, so your mileage will vary. The humor is not cringeworthy. Its action sequences are solid and the editing for those parts is excellent.

The cinematography is done well. Lighting is about as good as it gets. Special effects are not overdone and despite the 100 million dollar budget, it comes off very real. It's a fun little popcorn flick that should appeal to a lot of people. There are a couple knocks I do have to give. It is a little slow in the beginning and about 10 to 15 minutes longer than what it should have been. Otherwise, it gets point across at a good pace with no filler or side plots outside of Billy trying to find his mother. Check out Shazam in theaters. It's an example of a film where less is more in a good way.

Score: 7.5 out of 10

The Upside Review

Looking at trailers for The Upside, I was expecting along the line of a comedy that was very down to earth.  With it's two leads having big runs in non-serious TV shows and films, you would think it a little bit. It has its funny bits, but the core of this is a drama, which some call a dramedy. This has been on the backburner for almost a year because of being bought by Harvey Weinstein and his scandals. All that aside, it's surprsingly good despite it's leads.

In the oddest castings, it pairs Kevin Hart and Bryan Cranston. Hart is Dell Scott, a con who has spent serious time in jail. He can't do squat and his ex-wife and son don't want anything to do with him. Finding jobs ain't great, either. Needing signatures, he finds himself at an apartment complex and meets Philip LaCasse, a writer who can't move at all and needs assistance. Dell's out of touch and it makes Philip consider hiring him, which ultimately happens and the two have one of the strangest friendships and relationships from a working point of view.

From what I understand, it's based on a movie called The Intouchables, but I won't go into that since there's so much stuff that gets Americanized and vice versa. At first, it starts off rather goofy with Dell not paying too much attention with taking care of Philip. You see this in a number of comedies. After a while, he gets better at his job, and the two start sharing a bond and shooting the breeze. While his caretaker helps, Philip also has his issues beyond not moving. He has nightmares and some health problems, especially when it comes to his late wife, Jenny. Deep down, him and Dell need each other to get through their good, bad, and tough times.

The editing is to the point and even though it's almost two hours of a runtime, it doesn't feel slow. Hart is surprising in this role. It's not award winning, but to transition to dramatic scenes is worth noting. I'd say the opposite applies to Cranston, though more so with a few jokes and quips. However, he still puts on a solid performance and gives off quite a few emotions. The only other big role of the film is Philip's assistant, Yvonne, played by Nicole Kidman. Don't let her early scenes make you judge her quick. Yvonne is kind of a bitch early on, and rightfully so, but they ease the tension as Dell continues to work and help Philip. Other than that, the rest of the cast is well thought and play to the strengths of Hart and Cranston.

It has that suburban type feel with the cinematography. You get the sense of both Dell and Philip's worlds with where they are throughout the film. They make it a little gritty, but also a down to earth despite both character's situations. This also reflects in the script, and the struggles they endure. There are a couple scenes that are either cringe like or they take a little longer than usual, but there's not much else to talk about. The Upside is not as bad as you would expect. This will surprise you in certain ways. There aren't too many movies of this type for adults at the moment, so this is one you might have to make due with until there's more dramedies.

Score: 7 out of 10

Welcome To Marwen Review

With the holidays the last couple of weeks, I haven't had much time to see any films in the theater, but this was on my radar. Welcome to Marwen came off to me as an interesting movie, part of it thanks to Robert Zemeckis. I've loved a number of the director's films that includes Back to the Future, Roger Rabbit, Forrest Gump and a few others. It's a surprisingly well made movie that has flopped in theaters. Very unfortunate because Zemeckis' idea of visual effects is done in a way to have a story within a story.

Based on a true story, Steve Carell plays Mark Hogancamp, a man who was brutally attacked by five guys to within an inch of his life. He has no recollection of his past and it's a struggle every day now living in upstate New York. That being said, he does have friends of his own, mostly in women who understand his pain. One thing he has been into is a town he has created called Marwen. A fictional town in Belgium during World War II, he has a version of himself who fights Nazis along with a handful of women, all based on ones he knows personally or during his time recuperating from his attack. He takes pictures to capture what he envisions and has a very active imagination in what he sees out of his piece of paradise.

Zemeckis and Caroline Thompson create these two stories to get the sense of what Hogancamp was feeling at times and what he had with what went on in Marwen. They bring a lot of emotions to the guy. Marwen is his way of coping and making sure no one is to ever get hurt. At the same time, it also brings out the worst as it gives Hogancamp nightmares and painful memories. Almost, it comes off as hallucination with some of the scenes. Also, it does come off as PTSD. Not just when doing things with his fictional town, but having to deal with his attackers in court and hearing about the incident. They don't sugar coat it. They create a deep amount of fear and being scared.

Visually, it doesn't go overboard. It is probably one of Zemeckis' biggest use of special and visual effects in any of his live action efforts since Roger Rabbit and Back to the Future Part II. This isn't used as an excuse. Much like Back to the Future, it adds to the story and makes it less of a popcorn flick. Carell is excellent as Hogancamp. Much of the cast did a great job as well. There is a little bit of comedy every once in a while with the Marwen scenes, but this is purely a drama. And they get their points across without dragging on.

There isn't much to complain about. It may come off as being a little childish, but it's Hogancamp's way of coping and doing other stuff since being attacked. Maybe it's a bit corny at times in the Marwen scenes, but it may or may not be for everyone. If this is still playing in theaters, I would try to see it before they pull it out. Very solid, and I'd say a must watch.

Score: 7.5 out of 10

Vice (Movie) Review

Back a few years ago, Adam McKay made an adaptation of The Big Short, a story about the housing crisis in the mid 2000s. It was not the biggest hit, but it garnered awards. Vice is making that same kind of impact, though with lesser success critically and commercially. I think it's the subject matter, and with a film on politics and targeting conservatives, you can see where McKay was going.

The whole movie is centered around Dick Cheney. Outside of a brief scene of dealing with September 11th, the first half focuses on the pre-2000 days of him. McKay portrays him as a complete idiot who partied too much and needing to shape up for his wife, Lynne. After that, they show parts of his time being involved with Republicans in the White House. They don't explain too much, and I don't know if either McKay's liberalism is the reason or they didn't go through and see what made Cheney such a figure in being around Nixon, Ford, Reagan, and George H.W. Bush. The third be because it's such a long movie, there was some cuts that were made. Either way, they make it out as Cheney working hard and following the ideals of Republicans, particularly with Donald Rumsfeld. A little humor at a few spots, but otherwise, it's serious.

For the second half, it goes on about Cheney being George W. Bush's Vice President. I don't know how accurate Vice is as McKay and company don't know the exact details. He goes in a direction that isn't too surprising. Cheney asks for a bit of power and Bush agrees. Most of the focus is on September 11th and the Iraq war. A couple other things, but overall, those two examples are what they go after. I get Bush was not too great of a President in the eyes of many, but I don't feel like I learned anything about Cheney's power. It feels like they had to rush through some of the parts of the 2000s, trying to cover all the big moments within an allotted time. They make him out as this big monster who could do anything he want. However, some of the stuff and reading some articles, is accurate in some ways.

Throughout the film, there is narration from a normal person and there is a lot of reliance on good and bad images and footage. I guess it's to paint the picture on life and how things go in certain situations. I do think McKay was trying to get the story out there on what Cheney was like. It's a mix of both what actually happened and a bit of a bias on his part. More of the bias being shown in the second half of it, though as mentioned, a bit of it being accurate. Thinking about it now, it does feel like an excuse a little bit to bash Donald Trump. Whether that's intentional, I don't know. I don't blame the mixed reception. It's rather hard to make a political film in today's world.

Christian Bale does a great job portraying Cheney. Amy Adams is fantastic as wife Lynne. Sam Rockwell does a good George Bush in appearance and voice. One strange casting choice is Steve Carell as Rumsfeld. He comes off as a goofball in most of his scenes. I understand Carell is more of a comedy guy doing tons of movies and television shows, but I think they could have done better in finding another person unless they made it that way. Another weird choice is Tyler Perry as Colin Powell. The few scenes of him are very meh.

Vice dances on that fine line of at worst being an okay film and at best, decent to good. It's far from horrible, but the cast made the best of the questionable script. It also dances on that line of being accurate but also having a bit of bias from McKay. Your mileage will vary. If you think it's worth watching, go check out it. If not, then you're not missing too much.

Score: 6 out of 10

Creed Review

How about a double review for this Tuesday? I have seen all six Rocky movies, but Creed was something I thought about seeing in theaters in 2015 and forgot about it. With the news this year of the upcoming sequel, I needed to get caught up. What I watched was good, but nothing impressive.

Other than the first five minutes or so, I felt like I was watching a grittier version of the first Rocky. Adonis Johnson, who was conceived by Apollo Creed because of an affair, is a scrappy person who likes fighting. Even though Apollo's wife, Mary Anne, takes him in as a child, he still has thoughts about boxing, which includes some bouts in Mexico while working a regular job as an adult. He quits and decides to go full time boxing. With that, he heads for Philadelphia to see if Rocky Balboa will train him.

In a way, it is like viewing the first Rocky, though it's not directly similar as far as Adonis' story goes. The relationship between the two is similar to how Rocky and Mickey were. Rocky is not exactly willing to go back to the ring as a mentor and trainer, but decides to. Mickey was somewhat like that, but he didn't want to waste time training bums considering he could train other contenders. Adonis wants to make a name for himself and the training is a combination of the first three films, which includes the chicken bit that originated from Rocky II. Basically, Rocky wants to see if the kid has the stuff and if he is not a pretender.

As far as the character relationship goes, Michael B. Jordan and Sylvester Stallone gel together quite well and give great performances as Adonis and Rocky. You feel the ups and downs as they battle personal issues and the training to be the best. Outside of the training, there is also the relationship between Adonis and Bianca, played by Tessa Thompson. Luckily, it doesn't go the route of what Rocky and Adrian had. It's more along the line of hate and then turning into love. Bianca is also not afraid to say what is on her mind, but as a whole, the character is more than just a supporting role as she experiences some of the highs and lows that Adonis has.

Like all the others, there is the boxing. We get to see a few, which includes the final scenes of the film. Taking a page from Rocky V and Balboa, they got some real boxers for them, and I wouldn't be surprised if they took some major damage from some of those punches. They are not portrayed as villains, which makes it feel more real and grittier. It's not a show like the first Rocky, nor is it over the top like III and IV.

It is very lengthy, but there is more than enough to keep you watching. Like I said, it doesn't impress me, but Creed doesn't need to do anything revolutionary. It continues on the legacy of the Rocky series. Judging by what they doing with the newest one that comes out soon, being a drama is what makes the movies work and when done right, it makes the experience a lot more better.

Score: 7 out of 10

The Grinch (2018) Review

In my mind, I've enjoyed the few adaptations that How the Grinch Stole Christmas has had. The special from the 60s is enjoyable and one of the greatest specials. Other than a few dark things, I liked (and many others I knew as well) the 2000 live action film with Jim Carrey. To say this newest take on it is interesting to say the least. An animated version from Illumination would certainly raise some eyebrows, both good and bad. It's better than you think.

As with following, the idea of the Grinch stealing Christmas is the main basis of the plot. A problem with the live action film was adding enough to keep people interested for an hour and 40 minutes. This one has that issue, too, but not as bad. This version of Grinch, voiced by Benedict Cumberbatch, is not as mean, but he can pull off some dastardly stuff. His backstory as a kid is similar to the live action one, though with different reasons for hating Christmas. His dog, Max, is still loyal, and there is a bond between the two you don't see in the cartoon or film. At least in terms of them getting along.

The town of Whoville is a bit more unique with people being more excited for Christmas. That was the case in the live action film, but that was more about competition and glorification of gifts and stuff like that. Here, it's people waiting for that day and celebrating it. Their take on Cindy Lou Who is a lot more friendlier take. They make simply a kid and enjoying her life, all while wanting things to be good for her single mother, who does lots of things for her and her twin baby brothers. Among the other noticeable people for the town is Mr. Bricklebaum. He provides some of the laughs with trying to get the Grinch to get into the holiday spirit. 

Visually, it's a very clean looking film. A lot more lighter toned than the live action take. The characters are a combo of what Dr Seuss created along with the style Illumination does.It's take on Whoville is very beautiful in capturing a Christmas town. Regarding the script, there's a fine balance of giving the main characters adequate time and enough to provide substance to their plots. It's not over the top or cheesy for a kids film. This doesn't rely on fart jokes or anything gross, which is surprising but also a bit of a breath of fresh air. 

It is pretty short, but not to the point where it is boring. My only big complaint is the Grinch sounding like multiple characters. Then again, it's not easy to have an idea of what he should sound like. I do think they nailed it and got a good interpretation of him. There aren't too many choices for the holiday season that isn't a Disney movie (Wreck it Ralph 2 comes out next week) for kids, but at the very least, The Grinch is a safe option. Not my number one recommendation for kids stuff, but a choice you can use if you want to see this in the theater with your family or kids. 

Score: 6.5-7 out of 10

Won't You Be My Neighbor? Review

Before I get into this review, this movie might not be in your theater. Despite coming out nationwide last week, it didn't come to my theater until this past weekend, so grin and bear it if it hasn't and you want to see it. There will be some spoilers, so caution is needed here.

One of Sundance's notable films this year has been Morgan Neville's Won't You Be My Neighbor?, a look at Fred Rogers and his television show, Mister Rogers' Neighborhood. It takes a look at life before, during and just after its 33 year run from 1968 until 2001. You wouldn't think of this as being anywhere good, but it's a great documentary and captures the intentions of what Rogers had.

A lot of these interviews come from members of the Rogers family, people that played characters on the show, crew members, people involved in public television. It's amazing how many people they found to do this, especially for ones that are really old. They look at Rogers as a big pioneer and he was. He was a guy that thought being genuine to children was a lot more rewarding than just doing slapstick comedy like other kids shows back then.

One thing also is that Rogers tackled big important issues in his own way that could be related to actual incidents. When the show debuted in 1968, Vietnam was all you heard on the news. PBS over a year away from becoming a thing. The fact that they also immediately tackled assassination following the killing of Robert Kennedy says a lot. He was able to convey that sense of vulnerability that children might not understand and help them learn something very valuable that you will know in the end.

Then there is the testimony Rogers gave to the Senate in 1969 in regards to PBS getting 20 million dollars for funding. Long story short, he was the face of the network, not Sesame Street. And looking at what he was doing, he didn't change a thing and that's why he is one of most beloved figures for public and educational television. Of course, they go into him being the subject of parody like Saturday Night Live, Johnny Carson, and In Living Color. I wonder how much it really bothered him, because he really is an easy target to do for comedy. That didn't stop him from doing he did.

I'm not going to go too much farther into it, but the legacy he left behind should be one that needs to be cherished. They do show certain stuff late in his life of the wrong messages he may have sent and that he ruined kids. That seems to be nothing but hogwash. They also talk briefly about what would Rogers think about today's world. In this age of Trump's mouth, liberals, and everything inbetween the social media landscape, I think it would have been hard for him to show his message. I don't think he would have given up as some of the people interviewed said as well.

There is still some good to be had and I think we can learn a thing or two from Mister Rogers. This is a great documentary. Try and see it in the theater if it has come to your town. It shows us the efforts of his use of television and how it paid off to be a beloved figure and a big alternative to other programs.

Score: 8.5 out of 10

Uncle Drew Review

It's been over a week since Uncle Drew came out and with it still somewhat in my mind from seeing it last week, here is my take on it. Before this, it was a series of commercials for Pepsi who did produce this film with Kyrie Irving being the spokesman portraying the 75 year old character. I didn't see an ad for this until around its debut in theaters. I'll tell you this. Your expectations will be either exceeding or disappointing you.

The premise is this guy putting a team together to compete in a street basketball tournament in hopes of winning 100 thousand dollars. In the midst of this, he loses his team to a high school rival played by Nick Kroll and is kicked out of his house by his girlfriend. Desperation comes in as he searches for anybody that can play for him and one day he sees Uncle Drew and sees the talent. Ultimately, it becomes a search for his former teammates from way back in the 60s and to show the new generation a thing or two about how to play basketball.

You wouldn't think it would be truly funny, but it is. Especially with them casting Shaquille O'Neal, Chris Webber, Reggie Miller, Nate Robinson, Lisa Leslie, and of course Irving. It's a weird group to consider, but they show themselves that they can be hilarious but also show the skills that they have had for a long time, even after retiring from pro basketball. Some expense comes at some of the nods of their careers, and it's subtle.

It gets its plot across at a good pace and doesn't come off as a rushed product compared to some of these projects involving sports stars. A little slow in the middle of the film, but the basketball scenes come off authentic despite these athletes in tons of makeup and made to look 75. Overall, it's a good film that you wouldn't think would be good, but it is. Hilarious all around, try and find it before it leaves theaters.

Score: 7 out of 10

Tag Film Review

The premise for Tag is not a bad idea. It's idea comes from adults who have played the game for such a long time, and this is a movie take on a group that takes the game seriously for one month every year.

It's five guys who have played for 30 years the same game of tag. One of them has never been touched and considered it and he is looking to retire after getting married. With that, the other four try to find ways to tag him. However, it's not as easy as it sounds. For a comedy, it's not as bad as you think. They work around the one that has never been it as someone who is a lot smarter and has a lot of tactics to not get touched. The methods the other four do come very close, but he is one step ahead of them every time.

There isn't much substance to the plot as it is very simple. Not really any side plots outside of a part with two of the group trying to win over a woman that they dated in high school. The focus is tagging and the methods. One thing I am a bit surprised is that the women that are watching this unfold are not fazed or angry. In fact, one of them at times gets crazy about the game and wanting to see the one finally get tagged.

I don't know what else to say. It's not as bad a film as you think, though your mileage may vary. There are some monotonous moments around the mid late part, but it's consistent in being funny. This isn't one I would recommend fully, but if it is still playing in your theater, it's not a bad choice to see.

Score: 6.5 out of 10