Change Your Image
![](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BOTQ0YjlhMDMtNjM3OS00MTQxLTgzMzQtOTZkMzJmYzY3ODQzXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyMTE4NDM5ODQy._V1_SY100_SX100_.jpg)
MB-reviewer185
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Twisters (2024)
Chase. Ride. Survive.
I thought the original film Twister (1996) was ok by liking the weather stuff in the film but not caring that much about the two leads played by Bill Paxton and Helen Hunt, who are not giving bad performances, I just liked everything going on around them involving the tornadoes rather than liking them; so, I heard this new film was reboot sequel of sorts where it does things like the original but does it with new characters and an occasional updated thing to make it a little bit different. After watching, I will say that I liked the film Twisters (2024) more than the original with it having well-done performances, great weather effects, good suspense with good tension for the lead character's safety, nods to the original, funny moments, and some subtle changes to this film that works well with this premise about storm chasers like the original; there will be people who like the original who are worried that this film will change what was good about the first, but actually this film does not change anything except for uses of newer technology and newer looking cars.
The main two characters Kate and Tyler played great by Daisy Edgar-Jones and Glen Powell being storm chasers who are at odds with each other at first until they build a bond and get along, with Kate being a likable character who was done with storm chasing because of an incident that happened but returns because of a friend of hers asking for her help; Tyler at first was unlikable in a weird charming way at first, but throughout the film he becomes more likable because of his storm chasing past, and builds a storm chasing bond with Kate that I liked seeing. Lastly, there are other characters that either are there to be picked off by the tornadoes, or there to be weird people who are bad or are good and helping the leads such as Tyler's crew who record him doing his storm chasing , along with a friend of Kate's being Javi played very well by Anthony Ramos who is part of some kind of company that he thinks is helping people by getting data on tornadoes but is really doing something else leading to him having good development to being against things to helping the leads by the end.
The effects on the tornado/tornadoes were great to look at with them looking real and intense, though there was an occasional unbelievable moment, I did feel the suspense and wanted the characters to survive, along with it being entertaining to watch when it is destroying places or sucking people up; also, there are moments where they make it more threatening or scary once a certain event happens, and I thought it was cool to watch. If you are fans of the original and are thinking this film is going to change what was good about it, you do not have to worry about any of that, because nothing is changed that much except updated technology and newer looking cars for the storm chasing; at least all of the film is similar to the original, with certain characters, places, and storm chaser equipment used that is almost exact on how the original is executed, which is why I think fans of the original will like this movie because it does not mess up or retell anything the film before it has done already.
I liked the film Twisters (2024) more than the original with it having well-done performances, great weather effects, good suspense with good tension for the lead character's safety, nods to the original, funny moments, and some subtle changes to this film that works well with this premise about storm chasers like the original; there will be people who like the original who are worried that this film will change what was good about the first, but I think fans will be satisfied with this film because of how entertaining and fun it is. I am someone who thought the original was ok, and thinks this newer film is better than it, so other people will either disagree or agree with me; if you like natural disaster movies, then I will at least suggest watching the original Twister (1996) and this film back-to-back making an entertaining and fun double feature.
Longlegs (2024)
Horror, thrills, and murder
All I knew going into this movie was that it was some kind of crime mystery involving Nicolas Cage playing a serial killer, and after I finished watching the film, I was surprised about what I saw with how everything looks, how it is directed, and how it is executed; because of the certain things in this film and because it is a slow burn while watching, I can see this film being divisive with a lot of people, only certain people who like movies like this will probably like this more than others. The horror thriller film Longlegs (2024) was fantastic with its great direction, excellent performances, creepy and disturbing moments from beginning to end, an investing FBI serial killer search, great cinematography, with it being cut together well with well-done editing, and a serial killer played by a great actor giving a creepy and disturbing performance; without giving any spoilers, I will give my thoughts on the film and what I liked in it, because I recommend watching this film little about the plot and without seeing any trailers that could give away details about it.
The lead actor Maika Monroe as Agent Lee Harker was fantastic, with everything about her feeling a bit off by the way she acts, talks, or moves around to different crime scenes, along with her having a past of sorts that she either has forgotten about or is dealing with the effects of what happened; without spoiling anything, I will just say she is good at her job with her having sudden things occur that notify her about the murders and where to look for the killer. It is hard to say anything else about any side characters because it either leads to spoilers or there is not much going on with them, but I will say there are other characters like Lee Harker's mother played by Alicia Witt or FBI Agent Carter played by Blair Underwood; the last thing I will say about any of the main or side characters is that the main character is that her past was interesting and creepy when you are figuring it out as you go along with her while she is trying to solve these murders to find the one responsible for them.
Nicolas Cage as the serial killer called Longlegs was great, though he is not in the film that much, when he was on screen, he gave such a creepy, disturbing, insane, and entertaining performance that was amazing to watch; without spoiling who or what he is, I will say he and Lee Harker have a connection of sorts that is very interesting to learn more about and the way he kills people is also interesting and brutal, but also whatever Longlegs does in the film either has a reason or it does not and it just shows how insane he is. The cinematography is excellent with nice wide shots, panning shots, and camera movements that fits well with the creepy tone or atmosphere the movie has, along with being cut together well with a well-done musical score that helps with any suspense or creepy moment that happens; what I also liked, alongside the great uses of silence in moments, was that the search for the serial killer is investing and there are quite a few very effective creepy and disturbing scenes that creeped me out and gave me chills while watching.
The horror thriller film Longlegs (2024) was fantastic with its great direction, excellent performances, creepy and disturbing moments from beginning to end, an investing FBI serial killer search, great cinematography, with it being cut together well with well-done editing, and a serial killer played by a great actor giving a creepy and disturbing performance; I am not going to expect a lot of people to like this film, but I am sure there will be a small few of people like who love this film, which is why this will be divisive amongst critics or casual audience members. I am simply happy that an original horror film like this came out to theatres and that my auditorium at the theatre was filled with people interested to see this film, and I am glad that I saw this film; after watching it I wanted to go back and rewatch it because of how much I liked this movie and how it is directed, which is why I would highly recommend giving this a watch, especially if you like horror films like this.
Twister (1996)
The dark side of nature
I do like natural disaster films that involve tornadoes, floods, volcanoes, earthquakes, etc, especially since there are quite a few of them in the 90s, with the film Twister (1996) being one of those films that people either like or dislike because of certain things that occur in it; after watching it, I thought the film was good and entertaining enough to watch with its occasional silly or over the top situations involving the tornado, despite issues that are hard not to notice while watching. The film Twister (1996) is an entertaining enough disaster movie that fine performances, standard characters, well-done weather effects, entertaining action scenes, and tornado destruction that makes the film at least fun to watch; there are stuff that happens in this movie that are implausible or just too silly to believe and a certain thing going on between the main two leads that I felt like could have been taken out or done better to make them better characters to follow when they are going around chasing these storms to get some data or when they are just doing this for fun.
The main leads Bill Harding and Jo Harding were fine characters, and they are played fine by Bill Paxton and Hellen Hunt, but I did not like that they were both divorced by having Bill Harding have a bland fiancé and Jo Harding being obsessed with storm chasing and not going along with the divorce; they got annoying at times when they would constantly argue and one was pushing the other into doing something that could kill each other when getting close to a tornado. Another storm chaser who is shown as an antagonist is named Jonas Miller, who is played fine by Cary Elwes, he does not do much in the film except to be a rival to the leads and to act like a jerk in certain moments, along with him not being in the movie that much; also, I will say that I do like what happens to him by the end of the film, because it was entertaining to watch. Lastly, the rest of the storm chaser crew were a bit annoying and weird, but since that is because they are excited about what they are doing involving this tornado, it did not bother me that much; what did bother me was how the fiancé Melissa Reeves played by Jami Gertz could have been cut out of the movie, that is because she does not do much and her performance went from blank expression to screaming every second because of the destruction.
The effects on the tornado/tornadoes were well-done and they did look real, though there were occasional moments of noticeable CGI, it still look cool, along with it being entertaining to watch when it is destroying places or sucking people up; also, there were quite a few moments involving it somehow knowing where the main characters were and was following them, and I thought that was a bit unrealistic on how it was shown. The stuff with the divorce and the fiancé could have been taken out or changed to make it work better and there were moments where the characters survive certain attacks, and it did not look believable, but I will say that the action scenes involving them dodging things being flung at them was entertaining to watch; I will also say that hearing their knowledge on storms and tornadoes was cool, and the way describe different forces of tornadoes was interesting and it made sense that they would know this kind of stuff.
The film Twister (1996) is an entertaining enough disaster movie that fine performances, standard characters, well-done weather effects, entertaining action scenes, and tornado destruction that makes the film at least fun to watch; there are stuff that happens in this movie that are implausible or just too silly to believe and a certain thing going on between the main two leads that I felt like could have been taken out or done better to make the characters at least likable, which is why I like everything else around the characters. I do like natural disaster films that involve tornadoes like this if they are done well, though there are people who dislike this film because of how stupid it can get, I did find this movie at least entertaining and fun to watch; I can understand why there are people that like this movie and why there are people who dislike it, but I think this movie is worth watching at least once if you have not already.
The Garfield Movie (2024)
Indoor cat. Outdoor adventure.
I like the Garfield comic strip by Jim Davis, and I did not like the two live-action films that came out in 2004 and 2006 because of how little had to do with the character and how it portrayed certain things in a wrong way, so I was at least hoping for an animated Garfield movie somewhere down the line because it could only work like that; with this animated film I liked the look of it but was not sure how having actor Chris Pratt in the role was going to go. The Sony animated film The Garfield Movie (2024) was an enjoyable and funny enough time watching with nice voice acting, excellent animation, some good action, funny enough slapstick, a crazy villain who was just ok, and an interesting enough father and son relationship between Garfield and his dad Vic; I did think the heist part of the plot was a bit weird for this character but found it entertaining enough and there is kind of a side romance for a side character that they focus on occasionally by the second act, this could have been taken out because it was not really needed for a film like this.
Though Chris Pratt was not my first choice to voice Garfield, he was not bad in the role, and I got used to his voice as the film went on whenever he said a line of dialogue; he was funny with how he gave certain sarcastic comments, with how lazy he is, and how he uses drone delivery to get a bunch of food with it coming into play later, also the backstory on how he met Jon was nice seeing along with why his real dad has not been seen for years. Garfield's real dad Vic voiced well by Samuel L. Jackson, who has some kind of past that involves a debt he owes the villain and having to toughen up the indoor cat Garfield who gets forced to help, and I like how Garfield argues with Vic about where he has been for years and why he left; the father and son relationship was not bad and Vic teaching Garfield about the outdoors while on the heist was not bad. Lastly, there is Odie who also gets forced to do the heist who does have an occasional funny moment, there are side characters who has an occasionally funny line, and Garfield and Odies's owner Jon, voiced fine by Nicholas Hoult, also has an occasional funny scene despite not being in the film that much.
The cat villain in this is named Jinx, voiced fine by Hannah Waddingham, who was a character that acted crazy in a way that can get a little annoying whenever she is just talking to someone or telling her dog minions what to do; she was a fine villain who has a connection to Vic and wanting to get her revenge on him by doing a milk heist, which was a bit entertaining to watch, especially when you see the security and the many rooms it has. The animation is great with it being pretty to look at by having nice visuals, movements, and backgrounds including characters like Garfield having funny big expressions and nice details in his orange fur; this film does have quite a bit of funny moments with a heist element to the film that made it entertaining but a bit out of place for the Garfield character, and the dad drama was a weird addition despite it being done well, along with a side romance with side characters that could have been cut out because of it being weirdly focused on quite a bit by the second act to the third act.
The Sony animated film The Garfield Movie (2024) was an enjoyable and funny enough time watching with nice voice acting, excellent animation, some good action when on the heist, funny enough slapstick when getting out of situations or getting into something, a crazy villain who was just ok, and an interesting enough father and son relationship between Garfield and his dad Vic; I did think the heist part of the plot was a bit weird for this character but found it entertaining enough and there is kind of a side romance for a side character that they focus on occasionally by the second act, this could have been taken out because it was not really needed for a film like this. If you like the Garfield comic strip by Jim Davis, then you will like this film fine, because I thought it was an entertaining and enjoyable enough animated film; this animated film was not bad, I liked it more than the other two live-action films, and I would say that this is film is worth watching at least once.
Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga (2024)
Remember her.
I did like the fourth film Mad Max: Fury Road (2015) quite a bit and thought it was an awesome thrill ride of an action movie that was investing to watch, and while watching it I thought the Furiosa character played by Charlize Theron was cool, so having film about her origin and how she got to where she is in Mad Max: Fury Road (2015); I went in with reasonable expectations, and came out thinking it was almost as good as the last film. The fifth film in the Mad Max franchise by George Miller called Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga (2024) was an excellent revenge story with fantastic performances, great effects, fun and fast action sequences that are investing to watch, an entertaining villain, a few uses of noticeable CGI and green screens, and small pacing issues; the film does have some cool connections to the previous film in some way that makes sense, and I liked the whole revenge story in this film because it makes this story very personal for the main character and eventually satisfying when she succeeds in what she wanted to do by the end.
For most of the first act it focuses on a young Furiosa played by Alyla Browne, who does an excellent job portraying a young silent Furiosa who goes through so much involving how the villain ruined her life by attacking her family, doing torturous stuff, and just thinking he can do anything to innocent people; when we get around to the second act we get Anya Taylor Joy in the role of Furiosa as advertised, and she was fantastic as this character, with her not saying anything for most of the film except in small quick moments that were cool to watch and it was very entertaining watching her on her revenge quest leading to a satisfying conclusion. There quite a bit of characters from Mad Max: Fury Road (2015) that you are going to notice, like Immortan Joe or Rictus Erectus, and they do have roles in the film involving a cool confrontation between the villain named Dementus and the last film's villain Immortan Joe; there is one character who Furiosa bonds with on her journey, and I like how this bond makes certain things from the last film better in many ways that means for her character.
The villain in this film is Dementus played by Chris Hemsworth, who is having fun in this role giving an impressive performance, with him looking almost unrecognizable and him speaking with a weird voice that made him fun to watch in many scenes; he was funny, threatening, and unlikable enough when he does evil and brutal things to powerful people or he just does whatever he wants to innocent people. The action sequences are fun and fast paced with amazing stunts and choreography, along with great effects and locations; the only thing noticeable in some scenes were a few uses of CGI and green screen instead of being completely practical, but it was not all awful because it did make things look grand and the wasteland look big with great visual storytelling. Lastly, my favorite thing in this film was Furiosa's revenge against Dementus and how it builds throughout the film until the third act climax in a fulfilling and satisfying way; I like how certain things that occur in this film effect what happens in the last film, and the visual storytelling with showing Furiosa through the years until completing her goal by the end was investing and made me more and more interested in her.
The fifth film in the Mad Max franchise called Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga (2024) was an excellent revenge story with fantastic performances, great effects, fun and fast action sequences that are investing to watch, an entertaining villain, a few uses of noticeable CGI and green screens, and small pacing issues when going to different points in Furiosa's life that are split up by chapters; the film does have some cool connections to the previous film in some way that makes sense, and I liked the whole revenge story in this film and how personal it is to the character leading to a great conclusion. Though this is the first film in the Mad Max franchise to not have Max in it, I still highly recommend giving this a watch for those who loved Mad Max: Fury Road (2012) or for those who just like revenge films in general, because this was an excellent experience; do not skip this film.
The Casagrandes Movie (2024)
Mexico, demigods, and family
I like The Loud House spinoff show The Casagrandes that started in 2019, which ended in 2022, because I thought it was an enjoyable animated show with likable characters and a nice-looking animation style like The Loud House; I am hoping that at least the movie on Netflix is had what I liked about the show since this a conclusion for the show, especially since this film is not going down the musical route like The Loud House Movie (2021), which I did not expect. The Netflix film The Casagrandes Movie (2024) is an enjoyable enough film that has good voice acting, nice-looking 2D animation, a good enough and interesting villain, likable main characters, and some new elements added into this film that were not established in the show; this film is not spectacular by any means but it was a good conclusion of sorts to the show that people who watched the show will like, and for those who have not seen the show, the film is good and enjoyable enough so you do not have to see the show to watch this movie.
The main Casagrande family is likable enough, with Ronnie Anne Santiago trying to get alone time on her twelfth birthday away from her family, until accidentally releasing a demigod; I like Ronnie Anne trying to fix what she did by working with her family, and since her and her mother tend to disagree, her mom has to learn to give Ronnie Anne space to be on her own and Ronnie Anne has to fix her issues and make up with her mom by the end. The rest of the Casagrande family are not in the film that much, but they are entertaining and likable enough with each one of them having a certain personality or quirk, along with them helping in the third act; I like the family relationship between Ronnie Anne and her family, and I would have liked to have seen them more because they are not given much to do. Lastly, the history of Mexico and the Casagrande family was interesting, along with the new additions of demigods and magic that was not in the show but was cool seeing with the improved animation and the bright visuals to make it investing to watch.
The villain is this demigod Punguari who was fine, like she is not bad or anything, I just thought she was a good enough villain for a movie like this, with her backstory having a connection of sorts the Casagrande family and her being a angst filled teenager who wanted to be a god despite not being ready for it; the elements introduced in this were not established in the show, that being any magic or god elements, which is used in the villain's plan in some way involving taking over Mexico for her own doing. The 2D animation looks the same as the show just with more movements and certain shading details to make it look improved on with bright visuals/colors making Mexico look pretty, and there was an occasional funny moment; there is not much else to say because this film does not have a complicated premise or anything or anything really big or noteworthy, I will just say that this was an easy watch.
The Netflix film The Casagrandes Movie (2024) is an enjoyable enough film that has good voice acting, nice-looking 2D animation, a good enough and interesting villain, likable main characters, and some new elements added into this film that were not established in the show; this film is not spectacular by any means but it was a good conclusion of sorts to the show that people who watched the show will like, and for those who have not seen the show, you will just see this as an enjoyable Nickelodeon movie. The last thing I will say is that I would recommend giving some episodes of the show a watch because I do think it is a good enough show, with it being enjoyable to watch; for the film, it is just a fine animated movie that is worth watching at least once.
Garfield: A Tale of Two Kitties (2006)
Lazy and royalty
I did not like the first film before this called Garfield: The Movie (2004) because it did not do much in making a film about a likable and relatable character, but instead gave a film that had good voice talent for the character and everything but there were major changes in the film that did bother me since I do like the Garfield comic strip by Jim Davis; so I was not that interested in the live action sequel that much, despite the voice actor for the character Bill Murray returning. The live action Garfield movie sequel Garfield: A Tail of Two Kitties (2006) was also not that good with ok voice acting, mediocre/over the top performances from the human characters, improved on but obvious CGI, a bad script with lines of dialogue that are bland or too silly, a rare funny moment occasionally, and pointless moments that could have been taken out to save on time along with some weird editing; this film has less to do about Garfield than the other film, with there being a royal cat that looks like him and Garfield having weird personality at random moments that do not fit his character.
Having Bill Murray voice Garfield is still good for the role, but he is still not given anything clever to say except for an occasional funny line, or he will say things that are supposed to be sarcastic that rarely work; despite eating a lot and supposedly being known as lazy, there are lots of moments in the film where he somehow is doing a lot of athletic things despite being a heavy/ fat lazy cat, along with him being mistaken for a royal cat that looks like him and doing things that is different than how he is supposed to act when comes to talking with other royal animals at the castle. There is nothing to the character named Prince voiced by Tim Curry except that he is mistaken for Garfield and that he is royalty, along with the dog Odie not doing much in the film, and the rest of the real cats and dogs talk with obvious CGI that is very noticeable. Lastly, Breckin Meyer and Jennifer Love Hewitt as Jon and Liz again is still generic and they still do not have much personality, but instead they are the opposite of what they are supposed to be; they are barely in the film with Jon following Liz to London and Liz doing something vet related in London.
The villain is someone who is related to royalty named Dargis, played by actor Billy Connolly, who gives a standard but sometimes over the top performance as someone who wants to own the castle and get rid of Prince who is currently ruling the castle; he does not do much and he is forgettable once you finish watching the film, but also for some weird reason the movie makes him look and sound like the actor John Cleese. The CGI on Garfield and Prince looks a bit better but not great, despite there being some slight detail in the fur and an occasional big expression from him, but there are moments where the CGI distracting to watch; once again there are random moments that were put in that could have been taken out to save on time, like one or two dance scenes and a side thing going on involving Jon trying to propose to Liz in a cheesy way and Garfield going back and forth on if he likes Liz or not, along with the film having weird editing and an ending that did not feel like an ending and felt more like it just stopped out of nowhere.
The live action Garfield movie sequel Garfield: A Tail of Two Kitties (2006) was also not that good with ok voice acting, mediocre/over the top performances from the human characters, improved on but obvious CGI, a bad script with lines of dialogue that are bland or too silly, a rare funny moment occasionally, and pointless moments that could have been taken out to save on time along with some weird editing; this film has less to do about Garfield than the other film, with there being a royal cat that looks like him and Garfield having weird personality at random moments. Lastly, I will say that this sequel has less to do about Garfield as much as the first film, which is why this film was just as bad as the first, and why fans of the comic strip will not like this film just like how they will not like the first; this something I will not recommend and will suggest you stick to reading the comics.
Garfield: The Movie (2004)
Fat cat. Lazy film.
The Garfield comic strip created by Jim Davis that started in 1978 and is currently still making new comic strips around this character, are funny and enjoyable to read with the characters, mainly Garfield, being likable and somewhat relatable when they are doing weird or normal things in each short comic; making a film on the character could work alongside having Bill Murray voicing the character, but what was a bit worrying was that it was all live action and not completely animated, making me cautious about it. The film Garfield: The Movie (2004) is not that good with ok voice acting, mediocre performances from the human characters, poorly done CGI, a bad script with lines of dialogue that are bland or by the numbers, barely any funny moments, and pointless moments that could have been taken out to save on time; the main thing that was disappointing was that it was less like the comic strip it is based on by changing major details about characters, with the only thing close to the comic is that they replicate the basics about Garfield, which is that he is lazy, loves lasagna, and he can be sarcastic, without showing much of why we like the character in the first place.
I do like the choice of having Bill Murray voice Garfield, but he is not given anything funny or clever to say except for bad simple jokes about cats or dogs, or he will say things that are supposed to be sarcastic and funny that do not work; despite eating a lot and supposedly being known as lazy, there are moments in the film where he has too much energy and is able to do over the top stunts somehow, while also not being likable or relatable in any way. The dog Odie looks nothing like he is supposed to, or he is the wrong kind of dog for the role, so when I see the dog react to or interact with Garfield it can sometimes be believable but mostly just look like they are using something off camera to get his attention; also, the rest of the real cats and dogs talk with obvious CGI that is very noticeable. Lastly, Breckin Meyer and Jennifer Love Hewitt as Jon and Liz were too generic and did not have much personality, in the comic strip one is a dorky idiot, and the other is a cynical person, but instead they are the opposite of what they are supposed to be in this; all of this was bothersome despite not being in the film that much.
The villain is someone who works as a cat food advertiser named Happy Chapman, played by actor Stephen Tobolowsky, who gives a standard but sometimes over the top performance as someone who works for a cat related product despite being allergic to cats, which is why he kidnaps Odie; he does not do much and he is forgettable once you finish watching the film, but also he does and says weird things without context that added nothing to the plot. The CGI on Garfield is not that good, despite there being some slight detail in the fur and an occasional big expression from him, but there are moments where he did not look like he was in a scene and when people pick him up it looks like their hands are hovering over him making the CGI distracting to watch; also there are random moments that were put in that could have been taken out to save on time, like one or two dance scenes and a side thing going on involving Jon trying to ask out Liz in a cheesy way like it's a romance movie, which was weird seeing.
The film Garfield: The Movie (2004) is not that good with ok voice acting, mediocre performances from the human characters, poorly done CGI, a bad script with lines of dialogue that are bland or by the numbers, barely any funny moments, and pointless moments that could have been taken out to save on time; the main thing that was disappointing was that it was less like the comic strip it is based on by changing major details about characters, with the only thing close to the comic is that they replicate the basics about Garfield, but there is nothing showing why the character connects with lots of people. If there are any fans of the comic strip, you are not going to like this film that much, it takes what was good about the character and does the opposite with it making a film that is not funny or entertaining to watch; I like the comic strip, and I did not like this movie, so I do not recommend watching this.
No Time to Spy: A Loud House Movie (2024)
Dropping into save the world
I do like the show The Loud House that started in 2014, which is still releasing new episodes to this day, because I thought it was entertaining and funny with likable characters and a nice-looking animation style, along with The Loud House Movie (2021) being a simple animated film to enjoy despite not being anything groundbreaking; I honestly did not know there was going to be a second movie so I went into this blind, but after watching it, I liked it more than the first film. The second Loud House film on Paramount+ called No Time to Spy: A Loud House Movie (2024) was funny and entertaining with nice and simple 2D animation, nice voice acting, likable characters, some fun action, and a fine villain; the spy focus was an interesting change of pace since the last film, even though there were hints at spy stuff in the show, the spy elements did make the film at least fun to watch, along with having the Loud's new member of the family being a real spy that Lincoln is a fan of.
The main Loud family is likable, with Lincoln Loud trying to be a spy like his new Gran-Gran Myrtle and being on this island for her and his grandpa's wedding while learning about an evil plot taking place, which involves him trying to step up as a spy with the help of Myrtle; I like that Lincoln how he learns what it means to be a hero/spy while on this mission, and because of Myrtle's past, he learns some additional things about her past as a spy and how he looks up to her as a cool person. The ten sisters are not in the film that much, but they are entertaining and likable enough with each one of them having a certain personality or quirk like they do in the show, along with them helping Lincoln on the spy mission when things get serious; I still like the brother sister relationship between Lincoln and all ten of his sisters, and I like how their quirks are helpful/useful on the spy mission. Lastly, the new member of the Loud family Myrtle was a cool character, she is a nice and likable character who cares for her new family but will also use her spy skills when necessary; I also like the information and details on her past as a spy and that the Loud family knows all about it.
The villain is known as Dr. Dufus in this which eventually leads to a twist by the third act, which is why I will just say that this villain ties into Myrtle's past and is a fine villain that fits a spy story like this; the elements introduced in this were kind of established in an episode or two of the show before, that being an occasional episode wanting to be a spy because of his comics, which is not badly handled and was a bit fun when using these spy film tropes in a way that is entertaining. The 2D animation looks the same as the show with its simple style that can funny expressions and movements, along with there being quite a few funny moments, but also there are action scenes in the film that are fast paced and fun to watch; the reason I like this second film more than the first film is because this was funnier, more entertaining, and fun to watch when it came to the spy stuff, along with an occasional over the top moment that works for this kind of movie.
The second film No Time to Spy: A Loud House Movie (2024) was funny and entertaining with nice and simple 2D animation, nice voice acting, likable characters, some fun action, and a fine villain; the spy focus was an interesting change of pace since the last film, even though there were hints at spy stuff in the show, the spy elements did make the film at least fun to watch, along with having the Loud's new member of the family being a real spy making it at least cool to see how that character's spy past connects to the Loud family in some way. I am sure there are quite a bit of people who did not know this film came out, which is understandable because even I did not this movie was coming out, but I liked this more than the first film and had quite a bit of fun with it despite it not being groundbreaking by any means; this film was just a simple animated movie to watch and be entertained by, but mostly it is for any fans of the show that happens to watch this, so I will just say that this is not that bad of an animated movie to check out.
In a Violent Nature (2024)
Nature is unforgiving
The main draw of this film is that it is like a Friday the 13th film but from the killer's point of view, and that is mainly why I decided to watch this, but also that I like slasher films and elevated horror films; after watching this, I will say that people will either like this film or they will have mixed feelings about it, and I am one of those people who did like it. The film In a Violent Nature (2024) was an interesting take on slasher films that had slow pacing, practical effects, brutal kills, a mediocre script with intentional bad dialogue, a simple but cool killer, and teenagers and other characters that are intentionally turned into walking and talking slasher movie cliches; there is some lore to the killer that was interesting, and I like how the film is like a deconstruction of many slasher movies we have seen before, but because of the slow pacing the film can feel longer than it is despite being invested enough with whatever the killer was doing when walking around or sneaking up on someone to kill them.
The main killer named Johnny is a simple silent being that awakens from the ground trying to find this locket that was stolen from him from random teenagers, and I like how you only see his face for one scene and the look of his face has good makeup and prosthetics, along with him wearing an old looking firefighter mask that does make him look threatening; we do get some lore behind him that is talked about by the teenagers Johnny overhears when walking by them, and the way he is talked about is like there was a film before this that set this up involving past events with him, but it is done in a way you can understand. Every other character is a slasher movie cliche, like most of the film are these teenagers Johnny runs into and overhears when walking near them that are having their own slasher film side plot going on, which is why I like that moments that are major plot points in regular slasher films are just things happening in the background having you imagine what the perspective of the teenagers are and how Johnny's actions affect them; this kind of stuff I did like because it was like a deconstruction of how slasher films usually play out.
The cinematography is very good with-it having lots of nice pretty shots of the woods or any big landscape, with there also being lots of fixed camera shots behind Johnny walking around, fixed camera shots from a far of certain areas in the woods, and moments where it changes focus by blurring the foreground and focusing on the background or blurring the background and focusing on the foreground. The movie's pacing is slow because the whole film is just the killer walking around, which is why the movie can feel longer than it is, but I was not bored watching it; the kills in the film were brutal and bloody with great practical effects, I also like the way use overhead camera shots and how they do off screen kills. Lastly, I like how we see the killer walk around overhearing what these teenagers talk with stereotypical lines of dialogue for this side plot involving them doing things they would do in a straightforward slasher film from their perspective with us seeing how Johnny moves around when attacking someone or sneaking up on them; also, I will say that I like how this film has no musical score at all, and instead just uses the sound of his footsteps and the nature outside making the film weirdly soothing in a way.
The film In a Violent Nature (2024) was an interesting take on slasher films that had slow pacing, practical effects, brutal kills, a mediocre script with intentional bad dialogue, a simple but cool killer, and teenagers and other characters that are intentionally turned into walking and talking slasher movie cliches; there is some lore to the killer that was interesting, and I like how the film is like a deconstruction of many slasher movies we have seen before; the slow pacing might bore some people or make the film feel longer, which is why I think there will be people who will have mixed feelings with this film. It might be a while before I watch this again, but I did like how this film did something different for a slasher film and will say that I do recommend giving this a watch, along with it not having a musical score making it calming in a way so you can play this film in the background while doing something else; if you do not like this, that is fine, but as a fan of slasher films, I was entertained and liked watching it.
Incredibles 2 (2018)
An incredible return
I loved the first film The Incredibles (2004) from Disney Pixar that was written and directed by Brad Bird because it is one of my favorite Disney Pixar animated films, so with the long-awaited sequel that comes out fourteen years later, I and everyone else hope that the sequel is better or at least as good as the first; after watching, I can say that this sequel is as good as the first film, though not better, it is still a great follow-up to a great film that was worth the wait. The Disney Pixar sequel Incredibles 2 (2018) was just as fun as the first with its great voice acting, outstanding animation, fun action sequences, and an investing premise involving legalizing superheroes; the only thing I will say that is not as good as the first film was the villain, because the villain in this could have been better in how he is shown or revealed later on in the film, though the concept of the main villain was not bad.
The main Parr family once again including Bob Parr/Mr. Incredible, Helen Parr/Elastigirl, Dash Parr, Violet Parr, and the youngest Jack-Jack Parr with still excellent voice acting by actors Craig T. Nelson, Holly Hunter, Spencer Fox, and Sarah Vowell; the family dynamic with them was well-done with them still being believable and likable as a superhero family, and each one of them are still entertaining in their own way. Bob Parr/Mr. Incredible being the one looking after the kids, trying to fix major problems, and controlling the multiple powers Jack-Jack has can be entertaining, but most off all showing how just being a parent can be heroic enough as Bob Parr is a stay-at-home parent; along with that I liked the part of the story with Elastigirl being used to make superheroes legal again while dealing with the villain Screenslaver who is trying to stop that from happening, which is why this part was also interesting with how there is a debate about superheroes and the law. Lastly, I liked seeing more of Lucius Best/Frozone voiced again by Samuel L. Jackson, I liked seeing Edna Mode voiced by Brad Bird again, and I liked seeing the newly added superheroes that were in the film.
I liked the concept of the main villain Screenslaver and what he is trying to do, which is trying to keep superheroes from being legal again and controlling people through screens, but the mystery of who he is, and the reveal could have been and a little less obvious; which is why I think Syndrome from the first film was a better villain than this one, though I did like the idea around this villain. The 3D animation is outstanding with being improved on since the first film, with it having lots of details and good expressions from the characters, along with it making the action sequences fun to watch; the action sequences are fast paced, suspenseful, fun, and investing to watch, especially when Elastigirl is using her powers to maneuver through obstacles when going after someone or to stop an accident from happening. Lastly, there are lots of realistic debates between Elastigirl and the government on people choosing what they want to believe if it is true or not, or if superheroes should be legal at all, which made the film interesting and investing.
The Disney Pixar sequel Incredibles 2 (2018) was just as fun as the first with its great voice acting, outstanding animation, fun action sequences, and an investing premise involving legalizing superheroes; the only thing I will say that is not as good as the first film was the villain, though I liked the look and concept of the villain in this, I still thought the villain Syndrome from the first film was better. This was a fulfilling sequel that fans of Disney Pixar/fans of the first film will love, which is why I thought this sequel was as good as the first just not better; you can tell while watching this that Disney Pixar and Brad Bird wanted to make a worthy follow-up to a great animated film, and they succeeded in every way.
The Incredibles (2004)
Expect the incredible
This is a Disney Pixar original superhero movie directed by Brad Bird, that alone is what will get you to watch this film, and that is why I watch it, along with it just being one of Disney Pixar's most famous animated films that people still like to watch till this day since the year 2004 the year it came out; I will just give my thoughts on the film after rewatching it recently. Disney Pixar's film The Incredibles (2004) is an excellent and fun animated film with great voice acting, nice 3D animation, funny moments, and a few fast-paced action sequences; I liked that there were occasional jabs at superhero movie tropes and the family dynamic they have both when trying to be normal and when they are out being superheroes was well-done, along with the premise involving superheroes being forced into retirement because of certain incidents that occur sounding like a realistic take on superhero movies we have not seen a lot in more famous or well-known superhero films.
The main Parr family includes Bob Parr/Mr. Incredible, Helen Parr/Elastigirl, Dash Parr, Violet Parr, and the youngest Jack-Jack Parr with excellent voice acting by Craig T. Nelson, Holly Hunter, Spencer Fox, and Sarah Vowell; the family dynamic with them was well-done with them being believable as a superhero family, and each one of them were entertaining in their own way. Mr. Incredible missing the glory days and wanting to go back out there by taking some job to an island was entertaining to watch, how him and Elastigirl met was interesting, having everyone use their powers is cool, and I like how hard they try to hide their powers; also, the point in time shown at the beginning of Mr. Incredibles's past was goes from something entertaining to something realistic from how the law on superheroes changed through the years. Lastly, there is Bob Parr/Mr. Incredible's friend Lucius Best/Frozone voiced great by Samuel L. Jackson who was funny and entertaining in the film, and superhero suit designer Edna Mode voiced very well by Brad Bird who was also very funny and entertaining to watch when she appears.
The villain Syndrome voiced great by Jason Lee was an entertaining villain who has a good backstory that makes sense that connects to Mr. Incredible in a way from the past, with it making him interesting by having him not have superpowers but instead just uses gadgets to his advantage so he can mess with or just show Mr. Incredible that anyone can be super even without any special powers. For the year 2004 the 3D animation is great with good character designs and believable expressions or movements, nice backgrounds of the city or the island, a few fun action sequences that work well with the animation, and the animation helps with the comedy in the film; the film was funny with quite a few memorable lines of dialogue, there is a great family dynamic, jabs at superhero movie tropes that can be funny, and there are moments in the film that did feel realistic in a sense, which was interesting to see in an animated film like this.
Disney Pixar's film The Incredibles (2004) is an excellent and fun animated film with great voice acting, nice 3D animation, funny moments, and a few fast-paced action sequences; I liked that there were occasional jabs at superhero movie tropes and the family dynamic they have both when trying to be normal and when they are out being superheroes was well-done, along with the premise involving superheroes being forced into retirement and the leads wanting to be heroes again is a good idea, and it works well with the great direction, the script, and the animation. I am sure everyone has seen this film before, especially for Disney Pixar fans, so I am not saying anything new about and I am just saying my own thoughts on the film; this film is worth watching for Disney Pixar fans and for those who are not big fans of superhero movies in general, because this is a fun animated film that is worth both the chance of watching and rewatching.
The Peanuts Movie (2015)
Misfit. Blockhead. Hero.
I like the Peanuts comic strip by Charles Schulz that started in 1947 and ended in the year 2000 after the creator passed away the same year, I also like some of the holiday/ regular tv specials and some of their movies that came out in the past, this is mostly because I like the Peanuts gang, their personalities, and the big impact they have on lots of people; so, I was interested in Blue Sky Studios making a Peanuts film hoping for it to be good. The film The Peanuts Movie (2015) was excellent and delightful to watch with amazing 3D animation, likable characters, emotional moments, funny moments, and just overall everything people love about the Peanuts comic strip, along with the film having a simple premise; it is hard to point out a negative for this film because of how enjoyable it was, and I like that this film feels like the comic strip brought to life in a way with it staying true to what Charles Schulz made when he created the comic strip back in the 40s.
Charlie Brown is such a likable character, and you understand why he would think his friends do not like him because he tends to screw up simple things or his friends will choose not to work with him on certain school assignments, despite being a nice and likable person; him having his first crush on The Little Red-Haired Girl was both funny on how he tries to talk to her and cute/relatable when he gets nervous and tries to not make himself look like an idiot in front of her. The rest of the Peanuts gang like Lucy, Charlie Brown's sister Sally, or Linus are funny, likable, and entertaining characters that you like seeing interact with each other; they each have their own personalities and they all have at least something related to the plot. Lastly, I liked The Little Red-Haired Girl in the film and that we slowly find out she has some small things in common with Charlie Brown, and though Lucy seems to act a bit much like a hater of Charlie Brown in the film, she does start to show why she is friends with him and does help him out at one point when he needed advice.
Snoopy and Woodstock were adorable to watch, and because the original voice actor Bill Melendez has passed away, they reused archive footage/sound to bring him and the characters back to life in a great way; Snoopy's Flying Ace fantasy story was investing and entertaining, and I liked how he got inspiration from Charlie Brown's main dilemma to make certain things happen in his fantasy, while also helping Charlie Brown as his loyal dog and having some funny moments with both Snoopy and Woodstock interacting off each other. The 3D animation is wonderful, with it having a great animation style that fits the look of the comic strip along with certain details to it to make it look like a long moving comic strip you would casually read; the film has emotional moments, sweet and adorable moments, funny moments, and just overall lighthearted moments that are nice to watch making the film enjoyable beginning to end.
The film The Peanuts Movie (2015) was excellent and delightful to watch with amazing 3D animation, likable characters, emotional moments, funny moments, and just overall everything people love about the Peanuts comic strip, along with the film having a simple premise; it is hard to point out a negative for this film because of how enjoyable it was, and I like that this film chose to stay true to what the creator Charles Schulz made when he created the comic strip back in the 40s. Fans of the Peanuts comic strip and specials will love this film, and people who like Peanuts alright or think the comic strips are ok, will like this film; this was a delightful animated film to watch by Blue Sky Studios, and I highly recommend watching this whenever you get a chance to.
IF (2024)
A story you have to believe to see
I like John Krasinski both as an actor and as a director, so having him direct and write a family film about imaginary friends with a lot of well-known actors got my interest, and when it comes to this film, I was expecting this film to be enjoyable or at least nice to watch; after watching it, I can say that this is an enjoyable and imaginative family film that was nicely handled. The film called IF (2024) was nice to watch with its great performances, funny moments, nice looking 3D CG animation, nice looking cinematography, heartfelt moments, and creative but simple imaginary friend designs; I liked the premise to the film with it sounding like Foster's Home for Imaginary Friends (2004-2009) the animated show on Cartoon Network, and I thought director John Krasinski did a great job with putting that premise in a live-action setting with the great 3D CG animation that makes the imaginary friends look like they are there in a scene interacting off of the main two leads.
The performances from the leads Bea and Cal, played by Cailey Fleming and Ryan Reynolds, were both well-done with Bea trying to grow up too fast and being able to see a lot of imaginary friends and Cal trying to help these imaginary friends with finding a kid to be friends with; Bea was believable enough as this kid dealing with the loss of her mother and her dad, played by John Krasinski, being in the hospital while learning about imaginary friends and lending a hand in finding new owners. Cal seems like a grumpy character of sorts who knows a lot about how the imaginary friends work and where they live, and he can be funny at times, along with him being a likable enough character like Bea; Bea and Cal worked well together when trying to find owners for the imaginary friends, and they build a nice friendship with each other. Lastly, all the imaginary friends were entertaining with them all having well-known actors voicing them, like Matt Damon, Emily Blunt, Bradley Cooper, Etc, along with Steve Carell as a main one named Blue who is a likable character trying to find his owner; each imaginary friend had a simple but creative design, and they looked good in the live-action setting with its nice-looking 3D CG animation.
The 3D CG animation for the imaginary friends was particularly good with it having nice details and made them look good in live-action locations, with them also looking believable when interacting with the two lead characters; I like that there is no villain/antagonist in this film, because it does not need to have one, it is just an entertaining and funny film that also has effective emotional moments. At times, the film would feel like it was going all over the place, but it was not confusing, and I felt like there could have been more done with a premise like this, but they still did a respectable job with it; the film is imaginative with how the imaginary friends look, how Bea's imagination works, and how imaginary friends find friends or their old owners, along with their being quite a bit of creative things involving Bea using he imagination to change look of a certain thing.
The film called IF (2024) was nice to watch with its great performances, funny moments, nice looking 3D CG animation, nice looking cinematography, heartfelt moments, and creative but simple imaginary friend designs; I liked the premise to the film, and I thought director John Krasinski did a great job with putting that premise in a live-action setting with the great 3D CG animation, along with some minor issues with the film. This is just an enjoyable an entertaining family film that plenty of people will like, because this film took an interesting premise and did something fun with it, so I will recommend giving this a watch, especially if you like John Krasinski as a director; sometimes all you want is a nice heartfelt film to watch, and this is one of those.
Winnie-the-Pooh: Blood and Honey 2 (2024)
Friends will gather to take revenge
The first film Winnie the Pooh: Blood and Honey (2023) was not that good, with its bad performances and unconvincing designs to Winnie the Pooh and Piglet, along with them clearly trying to work with the small budget they had; what got me interested in this film was that this sequel had a higher budget and that the movie, from the look of the trailer, improved on some things that I had problems with in the previous film. The sequel Winnie the Pooh: Blood and Honey 2 (2024) is not great but it is an improvement over the last film with some better effects, good cinematography, performances that are a bit better than the last film, the script/screenplay is better, and the lead character is better; though there are quite a bit of stuff that are better than the last film, the film is still not great despite going in the right direction, with it still having some small weak effects, side characters giving weak performances, and serious moments that does not make the film terrible but it did feel like there was a bit too much to mix in with the fun moments.
Christopher Robin is now played by Scott Chambers, who is the best part of this film with him making the character likable enough by learning more about his past with Winnie the Pooh, how the events of the last film affected him, and how he managed to work at a hospital in his hometown despite rumors; I did like how when Christopher Robin was young he had a certain way he looked at Winnie the Pooh until he got older and realized what Pooh really is like. The designs for Winnie the Pooh and Piglet look better along with Tigger and Owl also having good designs, and there is an interesting backstory to what happened to them and how their friendship with Christopher Robin occurred a long time ago; also, each one of them acted differently with each one of them being based on horror icons, like Winnie the Pooh being based on Michael Myers or Tigger being based on Freddy Krueger making them entertaining. Lastly, the weak performances mostly come from the side characters while the main lead character is giving a believable performance, so all the side characters are disposable people to get killed off in some way or people make a difference to Christopher Robin's life.
The kills are brutal and bloody with the mix of practical blood effects and weird looking CGI blood effects, and the kills can be creative in the ways Winnie the Pooh and his friends kill people, which leads to there being a lot of dumb fun entertaining moments that I found funny, such as this scene at a party/ rave; the masks, makeup, and prosthetics on Winnie the Pooh, Piglet, Tigger, and Owl was well-done and were more believable as these killer anthropomorphic animals with an occasional line of dialogue, along with there being uses of bad CGI that would look like a PlayStation 2 effect like the effect of Tigger's tail. The script/screenplay is better than the last film, with there being quite a bit of moments of Christopher Robin looking back on his childhood with Winnie the Pooh and how he saw him back then, but sometimes it could be a bit too much for a film like this because these ideas they put out and explain are good ideas and they are done well; I did like the backstory and how they go over how the friendship between Christopher Robin and Winnie the Pooh occurred over a false assumption, but the film focuses a bit too much on it despite having fun entertaining moments occur before or after these scenes.
The sequel Winnie the Pooh: Blood and Honey 2 (2024) is not great but it is an improvement over the last film with some better effects, good cinematography, performances that are a bit better than the last film, the script/screenplay is better, and the lead character is better; though there are quite a bit of stuff that are better than the last film, the film is still not great despite going in the right direction, with it still having some small weak effects, side characters giving weak performances, and serious moments that do work well but not completely so it can mix well with the dumb fun moments. This was way better than the first film and it used its higher budget well, so I could recommend this film more than the other, and you do not have to watch the first film to understand this one; this was what I wanted the first film to be, despite this sequel still not being great, it is entertaining to watch and you could watch in that horror guilty pleasure way because of how dumb and weird it can get with its idea.
The Strangers: Chapter 1 (2024)
They don't need a reason
I did think the original The Strangers (2008) was an enjoyable enough simple home invasion thriller, and thought its sequel The Strangers: Prey at Night (2018) was not good, but it had a few small entertaining enough good moments despite the issues it had; I was interested in seeing how a new The Strangers remake/reboot trilogy was going to go starting with chapter one, so going in I was hoping for something at least good or new, but instead I got a complete retread of the original except this time not as good. The recent remake/reboot The Strangers: Chapter 1 (2024) had standard performances, dumb characters, fine cinematography, fine camera work, a bad script, a nice setting, and killers who are creepy enough for a premise like this; since this was chapter one, I was expecting an ending that would be open ended in some way but did not feel unsatisfying in a way that could mess with the film, instead the film just ends with the words To Be Continued after a final scene before the credits that felt like a copy of the last scene from the sequel to the original that came before this.
The main couple played by Madelaine Petsch and Froy Gutierrez, though giving ok performances, they were dumb throughout the whole film, from staying at this Airbnb because of their car being repaired in the shop in this eerie suspicious town to doing dumb things when being attacked by the killers; what I did not like was how the at first the boyfriend character sounded smart when being suspicious about how weird this town is and how their car broke down at that moment, to him doing dumb things that could him or the girlfriend killed, along with the girlfriend character being oblivious of the weird town and the boyfriend's suspicions then she does the most idiotic things in this situation. The three killers do what they usually do going from just knocking on the door to breaking in and chasing after the leads, it is the exact same thing they have done in the previous two films before this; there is an occasional good moment where they are subtly in the background making it creepy, but other than that they show up to do some kind of cheap jump scare and act crazy.
The cinematography was not bad with there being a lot of nice shots of the woods and outside/inside the Airbnb, with some good enough camera work along with there being shots that shows the scene normally but has something in the background you can notice by a reflection or looking in the darkness; there were lots of moments that were frustrating when the characters did something dumb or started out smart but made an idiot later on in the film. A lot of the movie was stuff I have seen before in the original 2008 film and there were not that many suspenseful moments, except for one scene where the leads go through a crawl space in the Airbnb, but other than that there is no other scene that was effective; there are occasional new scenes in the film but the third act climax is too similar to the climax of the original. Lastly, I will just say I did not care about the leads that much because of how annoying they could get or how dumb they would get when it came to having an advantage against the killers or having a way to escape, along with the script just being bad with it having bad lines of dialogue; also, the To Be Continued ending and mid-credits scene just left me frustrated with the entire film and how it was continue with its second chapter later this year.
The film The Strangers: Chapter 1 (2024) had standard performances, dumb characters, fine cinematography, fine camera work, a bad script, a nice setting, and killers who are creepy enough for a premise like this; since this was chapter one, I was expecting an ending of sorts to get me interested in the next chapter, but instead I was frustrated by this first chapter and more interested in if the next chapters are going to get better than this. The film was bad mostly because of the very idiotic characters and the unbelievably bad script, even though everything around it was just everything I have seen before either in other films that are similar or in the original 2008 movie; though I am interested in what the next chapter is going to be about and if it will be better, this first chapter was not that good of a start to this new trilogy.
The Pirates! In an Adventure with Scientists! (2012)
Pirates and scientists
The stop-motion animation studio Aardman is always excellent with how their films look, and this film is based on the book named The Pirates! In an Adventure with Scientists by author Gideon Defoe; though I have not read the book before, I have seen this film before, so this will be from me rewatching it and saying it is a fun stop-motion animated movie; fans of stop-motion animation will like this movie, and it this is a collab between Aardman and Sony Pictures Animation. The Aardman stop-motion animated film The Pirates! Band of Misfits (2012) is a fun and funny time with great voice acting, fantastic stop-motion animation, funny and likable main characters, weird moments, and a simple but funny enough premise about a pirate captain wanting to win the Pirate of the Year Award; I will say that you do not have to read the book it is based on before you see this, because I have not read the book and I understood what was happening in this and I was invested in the movie without knowing anything before it.
The main Pirate Crew is funny and entertaining to watch with each crew member having their own weird quirk to them, and you have the pirate captain just named The Pirate Captain voiced very well by Hugh Grant, along with this other member just named The Pirate With a Scarf who is also called "Number Two" by the captain; The Pirate With a Scarf is also voiced very well by Martin Freeman. The premise involves The Pirate Captain trying to win a Pirate of the Year Award and going to London because of a certain thing involving a rare kind of bird, so it is about him learning what being a pirate is all about and the fun he has while doing it, with his crew helping him out in their own weird way; these characters were entertaining and I was invested in what they were doing. Lastly, there are some rivals of The Pirate Captain, like Cutlass Liz voiced well by Salma Hayek and Black Bellamy also voiced well by Jeremy Piven though not in the film that much, they were entertaining when they were shown; also, there is Charles Darwin voiced nicely by David Tennant, who is dragged in for a certain reason because he starts out helping the antagonist but soon helps the main Pirate Crew with their plan that involves a rare bird people want.
The main antagonist is Queen Victoria voiced well by Imelda Staunton, who is an entertaining enough character with some crazy moments that hates pirates, which is why she is a main antagonist that goes up against the main Pirate Crew; she also has something to do with her wanting the pirate's rare bird for certain reasons that does have enough to do with the plot, other than that there is nothing much about her that could stand out more. I love the stop-motion animation with how every character moves around, how the water looks, the details on everything involving the characters and the locations like London, and the occasional fun action scene; the movie is funny and weird, with the film having subtle jokes in the background or running jokes that are effective. Lastly, I will just say that Aardman did an excellent job making this film, you can tell this took a lot of time to make, which is why I love stop-motion animation; this animation clearly takes a lot of time to do, but when you see the final product, it is impressive seeing what they achieved and how much effort they put into it.
The Aardman stop-motion film The Pirates! Band of Misfits (2012) is a fun and funny time with great voice acting, fantastic stop-motion animation, funny and likable main characters, weird moments, and a simple but funny enough premise about a pirate captain wanting to win the Pirate of the Year Award; I will say that you do not have to read the book it is based on before you see this, because I have not read the book and I understood what was happening in this and I was invested in the movie without knowing anything before it. I highly recommend this film to anyone who loves stop-motion animation or for people who are fans of the studio Aardman, this was a nicely crafted animated film that was fun and funny to watch, which is why it was great for me to rewatch this again; to end my thoughts I will say that if you like Aardman's other projects like their film Chicken Run (2000) or any Wallace and Gromit shorts and films they have made that range from short to theatrical release, I suggest giving this a watch whenever you get a chance to.
Mad Max: Fury Road (2015)
The future belongs to the mad
Out of the original trilogy Mad Max 2: The Road Warrior (1981) was the best one out of the three, with the first film in the franchise Mad Max (1979) being a good revenge film, and then there is the third film Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome (1985) which I though was ok but the weakest in the original trilogy; so, doing a follow-up thirty years later after the last one got me interested on how director George Miller was going to expand on the Mad Max world, and after watching it, I will say that this film was excellent. The follow-up Mad Max: Fury Road (2015) was a fun and fast paced action film with outstanding performances, amazing action sequences, great looking practical and special effects, cool stunts, beautiful cinematography, nice camera work, and exceedingly small subtle uses of CGI; this film does feel like a long car chase, but the entire chase was investing and thrilling, with there also being moments where you can catch your breath and learn a bit more about the characters and their motivations for why they are currently doing what they are doing.
Max played by Tom Hardy was great and he was cool to watch, with him not having that many lines of dialogue, and he goes from being captured by this tyrannical ruler to teaming up with new character Furiosa, with her he gradually learns to work together with other people again since he has been a loner the past two films; Mel Gibson was good as Max in the original trilogy, and with this follow-up, Tom Hardy did a great job as the new Max. New character Furiosa played by Charlize Theron was cool and just great to watch, with her rebelling against this tyrannical ruler and being in search of her homeland with the aid of female prisoners and the drifter Max; she was an awesome character and you occasionally learn more about her and how everything starts to affect her, it was also just fun to watch Furiosa and Max work together and trying to survive this long car chase and these other crazy characters. Lastly, the film has a lot of weird and crazy other characters, like Nicholas Hoult as Nux who starts out working for the villain but eventually helps the main characters once he learns to be on his own, and to not be pushed around and told to do wrong things.
The tyrannical ruler villain named Immortan Joe played by Hugh Keays-Byrne was a very entertaining and crazy character who has followers, lots of green life, and water which he tends to keep from other people, along with him using another resource known as gasoline, which is in a supposed tanker the character Furiosa is driving around in throughout the film; he was insane in the action sequences and there was just lots about this character that made him very entertaining to watch throughout the film. The cinematography is spectacular with-it having lots of wide shots of the cars driving on this desert wasteland read or people just walking through the wasteland going from place to place, and the camera work was great with lots of tracking shots, fast movements, and fitting close ups; the action sequences were fantastic with great practical and special effects, amazing stunts, and an intense long car chase that I was full invested in. Lastly, I will just say that though this film feels like a long car chase, there are scenes where we learn about the two lead characters and their motivations, which was nice to see, and it helped make the film more interesting; I will also add that how the villain lives in this world is interesting along with him having a story that is also interesting to know about.
The follow-up Mad Max: Fury Road (2015) was a fun and fast paced action film with outstanding performances, amazing action sequences, great looking practical and special effects, cool stunts, beautiful cinematography, nice camera work, and exceedingly small subtle uses of CGI; this film does feel like a long car chase, but the entire chase was investing and thrilling, with there also being moments where you can catch your breath and learn a bit more about the characters and their motivations. I liked this film more than the other three films before this, though those films are not bad and I do like them, I liked this more mostly because this film was a fast-paced action film that blew me away while watching; this is more than a worthy follow-up to the previous three Mad Max films, fans of the franchise will love this movie and casual moviegoers will love this film, which is why I highly recommend watching this if you have seen the others and if you love fun action movies.
Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome (1985)
Two men enter. One man leaves.
The first film Mad Max (1979) was good, though it could have been better, it was still not bad of a revenge movie to start to the Mad Max franchise, and the sequel Mad Max 2: The Road Warrior (1981) was a fun and entertaining action movie that I liked more than the first; after watching the sequel, I have heard from fans that the third film is not the best one, so after watching it for the first time I will say that it is just ok compared to the last film. The third film Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome (1985) was an entertaining enough film that has good performances, a few fun action sequences, cinematography that looks good, nice looking camera work, good enough antagonists, well-done stunts, and a slow but fast pace that can be entertaining; I did like the look of the town Max goes through and goes against, along with all these other characters he meets during the movie like a queen running the town, and the whole Thunderdome part of the premise could have been built up better for the third act instead of being used too early/quickly.
Mel Gibson was great once again as the lead character Max with him just being a drifter being exiled and rebelling against this advanced town, and being cool when doing certain things to go against the queen, along with him finding a group of abandoned children who help him thinking he is this hero they are looking for; I will say he was still a cool character just like in the other films, so when there is a fun action scene or dialogue scene, he is entertaining and tough when he is talking to certain people to mess with them or get them on his side. The rest of the characters are weird or crazy, with them having some over the top performances that were entertaining to watch; there was a reliable performance that was from this queen running this town named Aunty Entity played well by Tina Turner, and there are these two characters named The Master and The Blaster who are tough and entertaining to watch in the scenes they are in, especially when they go up against Max.
The cinematography and camera work were excellent with there being nice shots of the town or nice looking shots of the desert wasteland, especially in the occasional action scene that has well-handled camera shots with good stunts and practical effects; I will say that the editing is good, in this you can tell what is happening and there is an occasional wide shot showing everything in frame, so you can now see any car crashes, shootings, or explosions that occur. I will just say there are a lot of fun and entertaining moments that occur in the performances, the third act climax, and how the Thunderdome was shown. Also, I will add that I like the look of the Thunderdome with a variety of weird looking characters, and the fight in the Thunderdome with Max was entertaining to watch; after the use of the Thunderdome early in the movie, I was interested what was going to happen next after it already showed the main focus of the film, but I feel like it should have saved it for the third act along with the film having a slow pace at first until it goes faster by the third act.
The third film Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome (1985) was an entertaining enough film that has good performances, a few fun action sequences, cinematography that looks good, nice looking camera work, good enough antagonists, well-done stunts, and a slow but fast pace that can be entertaining; I did like the look of the town Max goes through and goes against, along with all these other characters he meets during the movie like a queen running the town, and I liked the whole Thunderdome part of the premise. I will end this by saying that I liked the second film more than the first film and this third film, I just thought the second film was a better handled movie, but Mel Gibson is still cool in the role of the character Max; I now understand why there are lots of people/fans who think this film is the weakest in the old original trilogy, because I do agree, and even though this film was not as good as the last film I am still on board with this George Miller as a director and the world he has created.
Mad Max 2 (1981)
Just one man can make a difference
The first film Mad Max (1979) was good, though it could have been better, it was still not bad of a revenge movie to start to the Mad Max franchise, so with the sequel I hear that this is a favorite among diehard fans or just casual moviegoers; after watching the sequel, I will just say that I liked it more than the first, and I also like it goes from the first film being a fine revenge film to just being a straight up entertaining action film. The sequel Mad Max 2: The Road Warrior (1981) was a fun and entertaining action film that has good performances, fun action sequences, excellent cinematography, nice looking camera work, entertaining enough antagonists, well-done stunts, and an entertaining fast pace that keeps you invested; what was better in this than the first film was that it kept its focus on the main premise, and it makes better editing choices so you can tell what is happening with this battle for gasoline against a horde of weird but entertaining bandits.
Mel Gibson was great once again as the lead character Max with him just being a drifter on the long desert road, and being cool in certain action scenes, along with him trying to get gasoline from this community of survivors who are under siege by brutal bandits who also wants the gasoline; I will say he was a cool character throughout the movie, so when there is a fun action scene, he is entertaining and you can also understand why he is helping this community fight back against these weird and crazy bandits. The rest of the characters are weird or crazy, with them having some over the top performances that were entertaining to watch; there was a reliable performance that was from this person leading the large group of bandits named The Humungus played well by Kjell Nilsson, who tries to be fair by negotiating for the gasoline, but you can tell he is tough and will use force if necessary.
The cinematography and camera work were excellent with there being nice shots of the desert wasteland or long shots of people driving on the road, especially in the action scenes where there are expertly handled camera shots with good stunts and practical effects; I will say that the editing is better than the first film, in this you can tell what is happening and there is an occasional wide shot showing everything in frame, so you can now see any car crashes, shootings, or explosions that occur in an action sequence. I will just say there are a lot of fun and entertaining moments that occur in the performances, the action sequence, and especially the third act climax. Also, I will add that I like the look of the desert wasteland and the variety of weird looking characters you can run into while on the road, you see that when you look at the designs of the bandits; this film does make want to see more of this world and what interesting and weird characters live in this world, so that is probably why I like this sequel more than the first film, because the first film was a good start but it did not get me fully on board with it.
The sequel Mad Max 2: The Road Warrior (1981) was fun and entertaining action film that has good performances, fun action sequences, excellent cinematography, nice looking camera work, entertaining enough antagonists, well-done stunts, and an entertaining fast pace that keeps you invested; what was better in this than the first film was that it kept its focus on the main premise, and it makes better editing choices so you can tell what is happening, along with being interesting on how much they make gasoline a necessary resource to have. I will end this by saying that I liked this more than the first film, I just thought it was a better handled movie, with Mel Gibson still being cool in the role of the character Max; I now understand why there are lots of people/fans who love this film, because I did too, and I am now fully on board for whatever happens next for this franchise.
Mad Max (1979)
He rules the roads
The film Mad Max (1979) has good enough performances with some over the top performances, nice looking cinematography and camera work, some cool stunts, odd editing choices with there also being strange cuts to go from scene to scene, and a revenge plot that takes a while to get going that also connects to this motorcycle gang going around; the main thing I thought was weird is that the character Max played by Mel Gibson is not in the film that much and the film instead focuses on other side characters, which is odd when Max is technically the main character and the film is named after him. I am not saying the movie is bad, I do like the film, it is just I thought it mostly did not have a complete focus on what it was supposed to be about, or it just felt like it went from scene to scene that somehow comes together by the end for a third act climax that was not bad and was cool to watch like the opening sequence with Max involving a chase scene.
Mel Gibson was good as the lead character Max with him being a professional police officer, and being cool in certain scenes where he deals with certain crimes, along with the ways he gets his revenge being a brutal but also cool to watch; I will also say that he has a believable enough connection with his wife and his infant son, so when a certain thing happens, you can understand his anger against this motorcycle gang. The rest of the characters are weird or crazy, with them having some over the top performances that can be entertaining to watch; for example, one over the top performance was from this person leading the motorcycle gang named Toecutter played well by Hugh Keays-Byrne who had a couple of funny and entertaining moments. Lastly, the revenge plot does feel like it takes a while to get going because of the film building up to it, which was understandable and was something done well, but the film by the third act goes straight into it after a long build up, while also losing focus at times on the motorcycle gang storyline and how they are effecting people; without any spoilers relating to this, I will say there is a lot of focus on a certain member and it does get interesting with what they do with/to him.
The cinematography and camera work were well-done with there being nice shots of a town or long shots of people driving on the road, especially in certain action scenes there are nicely handled camera shots with good stunts and practical effects; despite that, sometimes the editing can be a bit quick so the film can have scenes that can be hard to follow or just hard to figure out what happened, when it came to car crashes, shootings, or explosions. I will just say that other than there being entertaining moments especially in the third act climax, but also the way certain moments were put together were a bit random at times next to the editing used in weird uses at times, despite that I did also like how simple but dirty looking the town/city people were in looked along with the look of the long roads to show the occasional car chase or action stunt that is executed in a certain way.
The film Mad Max (1979) has good enough performances with some over the top performances, nice looking cinematography and camera work, some cool stunts, odd editing choices with there also being strange cuts to go from scene to scene, and a revenge plot that takes a while to get going that also connects to this motorcycle gang going around; the main thing I thought was weird is that the character Max played by Mel Gibson is not in the film that much, which was a little disappointing when you expect to see your lead character more since the film is about him getting revenge. I will end this by saying that I did like this film, I just thought it could have been better, but Mel Gibson is believable in the role of the character Max and director George Miller did not do that bad a job directing; it might be a while before I rewatch this, but this movie is not bad of a start to the Mad Max franchise.
Abigail (2024)
Children can be such monsters
If you have seen the trailer for this film then you will know what kind of film this is, and what got me wanting to see this was that it was a vampire movie, but also that this film was directed/produced by the filmmaking team called Radio Silence who have made other great films like Ready or Not (2019), Scream (2022), and Scream 6 (2023); after watching this vampire movie, I will say that this was a very fun and entertaining movie that has become one of my favorite vampire movies to watch. The film Abigail (2024) was a fun and entertaining horror thriller with excellent performances, entertaining characters, a cool but creepy setting with a creepy and cool entity, some funny moments, and a play on some vampire movie tropes or certain ways to deal with a vampire; other than the way they make the characters likable enough for you to root for their survival, but the young girl playing Abigail was excellent in her performance going from a normal enough scared girl to becoming a killer being that could kill anyone very quickly.
All the performances from the main characters/main kidnappers were well-done, with the film finding a way to give details about them despite these people being told not to tell anything to anyone, and they each have some personality that can be made fun of and used later in the film; the two performances that stood out were from Melissa Barrera as Joey and Dan Stevens as Frank, these names are fake and are not their real names. Melissa Barrera's character has a certain past to her that comes to make sense once it is revealed, and why she is a part of this kidnapping, also with why she starts off by trying to protect Abigail at first from the others when they kidnap her and is trying to get her through it with little to no difficulties; along with her is Dan Steven's character who seems like a jerk throughout the film but is still mad likable in a way where you can root for him, with him having a backstory revealed later on, and having an occasional funny moment. Lastly, I will say that the group of kidnappers do not know much about each other which leads to them arguing on what they should do, or just trying to figure out what they should do once they find out about who Abigail is; also, there is actor Giancarlo Esposito in a small role.
Alisha Weir as Abigail fantastic in this role, with her starting out like a normal and scared girl, but soon shows herself to be a terrifying and brutal vampire who is clearly just messing with the kidnappers; what was impressive and cool to see was that actor Alisha Weir did her own stunts when it came to dancing around like a ballerina or jumping around attacking these people, which was entertaining to watch along with her killing, biting, or dancing in creepy/brutal ways. I did love the setting of the film with it being in this big mansion like house that has a creepy atmosphere, with there being fun action scenes with Abigail chasing or attacking them, and I liked the ways Abigail used her dances to take these people out or to move around; I also liked how they tried different ways to kill her by using what they learned from old classic vampire movies to see what works and what does not. Lastly, though the kills were brutal, bloody, and entertaining, there were occasional things mentioned during the film that could have been paid off more or tweaked a bit more to make it better; but those small issues are just small nitpicks I managed to make while watching.
The film Abigail (2024) was a fun and entertaining horror thriller with excellent performances, entertaining characters, a cool but creepy setting with a creepy and cool entity, some funny moments, and a play on some vampire movie tropes or certain ways to deal with a vampire; other than the way they make the characters likable enough for you to root for their survival, but the young girl playing Abigail was excellent in her performance and made the film fun to watch. To end my thoughts, this was an incredibly fun vampire movie that I would watch again around the Halloween season, which is why I highly recommend giving this a watch, but also you should avoid the trailer because it might surprise you more if you go in blind; either way people who love horror thrillers or vampire movies will love this film, this is worth a watch.
Boy Kills World (2023)
Deaf, mute, and out for revenge
The title of this film was what mostly got my attention, that and that it was an action movie with some well-known actors, like Bill Skarsgård in the lead role, along with me only going by what little I knew about the premise and what little I have seen of the trailer, so I did not know what to expect when going into this film; also, I will add the fact that this film is by a first time film director, so I thought this was an interesting film to start out on. The film Boy Kills World (2024) was a fun, weird, and brutal action movie with excellent performances, outstanding action sequences, well-done choreography, nice camera work, a lot of weird and brutal moments, and a twist I was not expecting; I will say that going into this film not knowing much and without seeing the trailer, I think you will have a good time watching and will be surprised by how weird but stylized this film is.
The lead character named Boy played by Bill Skarsgård was excellent because the character is deaf, and mute so he must only do facial expressions throughout the film, and he does a fantastic job with both that and the fast-paced action sequences; I also liked the inner voice we hear voiced by H. Jon Benjamin who was funny and was not overused, he was used at the right moments, and I liked how he chose this specific voice to be inside his head. Other than the simple motivation for his revenge with it being that the Van Der Koys killed his family, and the training montage we get of him preparing, he also becomes part of a two-person resistance group who are entertaining in the film and are helpful on multiple occasions; to add to that, Boy trying lip read what they are saying can be funny because of how it is shown and how he can misinterpret something. Lastly, there is this Shaman character who trains Boy to get revenge, but without spoilers I cannot say anything else about him, so I will just say that he is just there to be a trainer until a major thing happens by the third act/third act climax.
The villains being the Van Der Koys who were all over the top in their performances but entertaining to watch, when either running their show known as "The Culling," or just going around picking up less fortunate people for their show, it was also entertaining to watch Boy pick them off one by one in many brutal ways, and these characters had an occasional funny line; lastly for villains, there was a cool character named June27 played by Jessica Rothe who was awesome to watch and looked cool in the action sequences when going up against Boy. The action sequences were spectacular with the great uses of wide shots and tracking shots where it is easy to see, and choreography is well-done with the actors being doing an excellent job performing these stunts, especially since the kills in the film are brutal and bloody; the film was funny, it had a twist that caught me off guard, and the only thing negative I noticed is from me nitpicking, but what I noticed was that there were some uses of CGI blood effects by the third act/third act climax that was a bit distracting during the major fight scenes.
The film Boy Kills World (2024) was a fun, weird, and brutal action movie with excellent performances, outstanding action sequences, well-done choreography, nice camera work, a lot of weird and brutal moments, a twist I was not expecting, and a simple revenge story handled in a crazy but investing way that kept my attention from beginning to end; I will say that you should go into this film without seeing the trailer, because I think it will help you a fun and entertaining experience with this weird and stylized film. People who love crazy and weird action films will like this, and for those who do not know much about this film or just are not that big on action movies, I highly recommend giving this a watch; not sure how many people will like this film, but I will say that this is definitely an action movie I am going to own and rewatch in the future.
Captain Underpants: The First Epic Movie (2017)
50% Hero. 100% Cotton.
I have read most of the Captain Underpants book series by author Dav Pilkey, and think they are enjoyable books with funny visuals and funny characters, so I was a bit excited to see how the animation studio DreamWorks was going to make a film adaptation; after watching, I can say that this is one of my favorite book adaptations and favorite DreamWorks film, and had good time watching it. The film Captain Underpants: The First Epic Movie (2017) was a fantastic and very funny movie with outstanding voice acting, excellent animation with a fitting animation style, references to the books, weird moments, moments that are faithful to the books, and once again lots of funny moments; I know the humor in this is immature with it talking about bathroom humor and other stuff like that, but the way they do it is in a way that does not make it annoying but it makes it funny, that is mostly because of the likable characters and the way they act and say their lines of dialogue that makes the movie entertaining to watch from beginning to end.
Kevin Hart and Thomas Middleditch were excellent as George and Harold, with them having a nice friendship with each other, and some of the pranks they pull off are funny, with them also being funny in the way they act and the lines of dialogue they say; when their principal threatens to split them up into separate classes, it is funny by how dramatic they make it, but also you can tell that it is a big deal to them and you do not want it to happen. Ed Helms was fantastic as Captain Underpants/Mr. Krupp, he was very funny throughout the film with the funny over-the-top mean personality as Mr. Krupp, and the clueless nice personality of the hero Captain Underpants; I like how he switches back and forth between the character's personalities, and the multiple very funny lines of dialogue he has as both Mr. Krupp and Captain Underpants. To add to my thoughts on George and Harold's friendship, is that I like how they make their comics with one responsible for coming up with the story and the other doing the illustrations, along with the cool treehouse they use as their comic headquarters; I also like how they figure out how to hypnotize and control Mr. Krupp, and then having an idea that starts funny but becomes difficult when they turn him into Captain Underpants.
The villain is a villain from the books with the immature name Professor Poopypants, who is voiced greatly by Nick Kroll, who hates people laughing at him because of his name and has a simple but understandable plan on getting rid of laughter; he had quite a few funny moments and lines of dialogue, and he gets help from a student named Melvin, voiced by Jordan Peele, who does not laugh at anything funny which can be funny for how characters react to that. I did love the animation style for this movie, because it fits the silly cartoony vibe it is giving off that does fit the style of the books, with nice drawn visuals showing George and Harold's creative process, and details from the book that work well with the comedy and the action; the movie was very funny with how the characters acted and say these funny lines of dialogue, yes it is mostly immature humor, but they do it in a way where it is more funny and less annoying than if it were in a mindless kids film that was trying to be smart.
Captain Underpants: The First Epic Movie (2017) was a fantastic and very funny movie with outstanding voice acting, excellent animation with a fitting animation style, references to the books, weird moments, moments that are faithful to the books, and once again lots of funny moments; I know the humor in this is immature with it talking about bathroom humor and other stuff like that, but the way they do it is in a way that does not make it annoying but it does make it funny, along with the film just being enjoyable to watch. I will say that fans of both the books and DreamWorks will like this film, even people who love animated films will like the film, it just depends on if you can get through this film's sense of humor to full like and enjoy this film; I have seen this film before, and I can say that this movie is a great book adaptation, and is one of my favorite DreamWorks film to watch.
Finding Dory (2016)
An unforgettable journey she probably won't remember
The first film Finding Nemo (2003) is a fantastic Disney Pixar animated film that is funny, entertaining, and heartfelt from beginning to end, so having a sequel thirteen years later did make me worry a little bit; after watching it, though not better than the first film, this sequel is still excellent and is almost as good as the film before with it being just as funny, entertaining, and heartfelt as the first. The sequel Finding Dory (2016) is just as enjoyable and funny as the first movie, with its excellent voice acting, fantastic 3D animation, likable characters, heartfelt/touching moments, and an investing story about Dory remembering her past and trying to find her family; they did a great job making Dory less of a comic relief side-character to an interesting and likable character, especially with how they handle her disability not just for humor but for touching moments and is used to keep the movie going at a nice fast pace, with an occasional slow moment that works nicely.
Once again Ellen DeGeneres is fantastic as Dory, with her having this wonderful journey to find her parents which leads to a Marine Life Institute, and I like how we slowly get more fragments of her memories with her parents as the film progresses letting us put things together; she is a likable and funny character who has her short term memory loss used both in a comedic aspect and a heartfelt/serious aspect for the story, which was nice to have a good balance because it could have gotten annoying if they did it poorly. We have Albert Brooks doing a great job again as Marlin and have Hayden Rolence as Nemo, it was nice seeing these characters again and having them help Dory find her parents, but later must try and find her in the Marine Life Institute; I still like the friendship between them and Dory, and that they have to put more trust in her to do certain things. Lastly, there are new characters like Hank grumpy but likable octopus voiced great by Ed O'Neill who helps Dory around the Marine Life Institute to find her parents, a whale shark named Destiny voiced well by Kaitlin Olson who is Dory's old friend, and Bailey voiced well by Ty Burrell who is Bailey's neighbor.
The 3D animation is excellent, with the sea creatures having real-looking but animated designs, and the look of the ocean water looking pretty with it being shown during different times of day and how it shows them going in and out of the water, along with the Marine Life Institute being nice to look at with its different exhibits and/or locations; the emotional/touching moments are highly effective with it showing Dory's backstory and her relationship with her parents, and the movie is funny from beginning to end, both the emotional/touching moments and the funny moments blend well together, especially with the short term memory loss aspect of the film which does not get annoying and is used very well. I like that there is no real villain in the film, and that it is just Dory trying to find her parents while trying to escape the Marine Life Institute, along with the ways she gets fragments of her memories and uses them to go from location to location is handled nicely and used cleverly; this is good because it easily could have gotten annoying after a while with her forgetting things a lot, but luckily it does not.
The sequel Finding Dory (2016) is just as enjoyable and funny as the first movie, with its excellent voice acting, fantastic 3D animation, likable characters, heartfelt/touching moments, and an investing story about Dory remembering her past and trying to find her family; they did a great job making Dory less of a comic relief side-character to an interesting and likable character, especially with how they handle her disability not just for humor but for those touching/heartfelt moments, and it works very well. I am glad this is a very good Disney Pixar sequel, because you never know how a sequel to a fantastic film will go, so that is why I highly recommend giving this a watch; Disney Pixar fans who love the first film will like this film, and it is worth rewatching just as much as the first.