Ladies, and gentlemen, today, we continue on the Indiana Jones train. This time, we will be reviewing the very film in the library that I originally planned to make the first film that I rewatched, and reviewed. However, after hearing that the prequel, Indiana Jones & The Temple Of Doom takes place before the events of the other now four films, I decided to review that one first, and then review them in order of their release dates from there. That is since they are in order release wise, and chronically from there. So now, let’s finally review Indiana Jones: Raiders Of The Lost Ark.

Plot: When Indiana Jones (Harrison Ford) discovers that Nazi German forces are in Tanis, Egypt to seek, and excavate for the Ark Of The Covenant, he reunites with ex-flame Marion Ravenwood (Karen Allen), and, together, they attempt to find the Ark, and put it in a safe, and secure place before the Nazis find it, and attempt to use it for their own power, and gain?

Hands down, Indiana Jones: Raiders Of The Lost Ark is most definitely one of the better films of this franchise, especially when it comes to one’s that were released in the 1980s. First of all, the storyline feels much more stronger, and grittier than Indiana Jones & The Temple Of Doom at least seemed to be. I’m not sure where Steven Spielberg put his creative brain when he directed Temple Of Doom. However, after this one, I’m not sure that Spielberg had all of his creative brain on him, since Temple Of Doom didn’t seem quite as strong as either Raiders Of The Lost Ark, or possibly even 1989’s The Last Crusade (though we’ll see about the latter one once I rewatch that one as well). Anyway, enough of those comparisons, eh? Indiana Jones: Raiders Of The Lost Ark has a great plenty to like. First of all, the villains are very good. Also, for a starter film, it is really good. It almost feels like a James Bond type of film, but with more archaeology, and mystery involved. In addition to all of this, how could you not like Harrison Ford playing the leading role in this film? In addition to him, there’s also Karen Allen as ex/flame, soon to be love interest again Marion Ravenwood, Denholm Elliott as Jones’ loyal friend, Marcus Brody, and John Rhys Davies as Egyptian excavator, and Jones’ acquaintance, Sallah. Okay, before I move on with this review, let me just say that John Rhys-Davies really seems to help bring humor in many movies that he’s been in, like The Lord Of The Rings trilogy, and more. Any of the Indiana Jones films that he’s in are no exceptions. What’s more is that Indiana Jones’ relationships are handled really well, including the romance between him, and Marion Ravenhood, you name it. Additionally, there was the score by John Williams. Of course be did the score for films like the earlier Star Wars film, and Home Alone. Well, he did the score here, and most of the other Indiana Jones films like this one. Once again, Williams doesn’t disappoint. This Indiana Jones film also does a splendid job of keeping you on the edge of your seat. I mean from the action, to keeping you on the edge of your seat, and overall being excited nearly every moment of the film, there’s hardly a dull moment at all in Indiana Jones: Raiders Of The Lost Ark. Oh, and it was really cool to have part of the Bible brought up in this film since, well, this film revolves around our heroes, and villains trying to find the Ark Of The Covenant.

Still, there is at least one thing that keeps this film from having an A+. That being that there is a scene that occurs somewhat near the end. It is an iconic scene too, by the way. Anyway, one of the most iconic scenes that occurs near the end likely may drag for a little too long. Yes, it was still a good scene. It’s just that it probably could have been cut a little short.

And that’s my review for Indiana Jones: Raiders Of The Lost Ark. Honestly, after seeing both this film, and Temple Of Doom, I will say that part of me wishes that Temple Of Doom had been the one released in 1981, and Raiders Of The Lost Ark released in 1984. But hey, whether or not the franchise would have been as successful, or not, you got me. Either way, this film is engaging, had likable characters, a fantastic score, well developed relationships, and really great action. If you haven’t seen Indiana Jones: Raiders Of The Lost Ark, then al the more reason to see this film. Now, will Indiana Jones: & The Last Crusade be just as good, if not better, than this first film? We shall! Well, see you all in the next review either way!

Final Grade: A

Well, everyone, I wasn’t sure whether or not to review this film again after first seeing, and reviewing it when it first came out back in 2018. However, since I did something like this a couple times last year, and because I have more things to say than I did back then, I figured a second viewing, and another review were definitely in order. So, with all that said, let’s dive back into at least the first Spider-Man film of this animated Spider-Man franchise, and talk about it. Yes, it is Spider-Man: Into The Spiderverse.

Plot: After getting bitten by a spider, Miles Morales (Shamek Moore) develops new spider-like abilities. After meeting some new friends from alternate universes, including Peter Porker/Spider-Ham (John Mulaney), a Japanese girl from an anime-like universe named Peni Parker (Kimiko Glenn), and a couple other members, can they stop a crime boss named Wilson Fisk/Kingpin (Liev Schreiber) from bringing destruction on Miles’ universe, as he knows it, once and for all?

Now, for those of you who were friends with me on Facebook, you may recall that I gave this film a B+ when first seeing, and reviewing Spider-Man: Into The Spiderverse just on there back in 2018. Is that still a fair grade? Well, while I will still admit that this film does have a couple issues, I will also admit that this film is a little better this time around. But let’s go ahead, and start worth the negatives first. First of all, Kingpin was a decent villain. However, he could have been a little better developed, and, somehow, more menacing. He wasn’t a poorly developed villain, per se, but he could have been more memorable. The other issue is that there were a couple of the Spider crew members, like Peni Parker, who, while fairly well developed, could have likely been a little more fleshed out. Hopefully she, and any of the other lesser developed Spider members will have a little more time to shine in the newer film.

Now, with those out of the way, let’s discuss the good things. First of all, there’s the comic book type animation. The animation was drawn cleverly well, especially for a mainstream animated film. It also looked like a moving comic book. That was really clever, and served as proof that animation can somehow work one way, or the other. I mean you have things like a character saying “Owe!”, and the word “Owe” appearing onscreen, and some other clever moments line that make this film even more brilliant. So, if you want to see an animated film in with newer types of of backgrounds, and different kinds of drawn characters, then all the more reason to see this film. It was also creative to have these different Spider-creature characters each come from alternate universes, and different backgrounds, despite some of them being more developed than others. Oh, and how could you not like characters like Peter Porker/Spider-Ham? Honestly, especially when he, and the other Spider characters appeared around the middle to end of this film, he had quite a few funny lines, and moments, most notably when it comes to particular joke that he makes at one point. It was also nice to see that Columbia Pictures, and Sony Pictures Animation wasn’t just trying to just make a reboot of the Spiderman story that mainly featured Peter Parker, Mary Jane, Harry Osborne, Norman Osborne, and all of them. To have a newer character named Miles Morales, Gwen Stacy, even if they go a newer route with her character, Miles parents, and more, that was definitely a great way to go this time around. Well, not only that, but to also have this Spiderverse even spoken of is really good too. Finally, there were some really good lessons to take away from this film, a couple in particular. First of all, It was great to see this Spiderman, and his newer friends really teach the audience how, even when one hits the bottom, the only place to go left is up. Yes, that may sound cliche, but it was true for this film, and is still true in real life as well. The other really great lesson is how we really need to take leaps of faith in life, even when it may be hard. Definitely a great reminder as well, that’s for certain.

And that’s my review for Spider-Man: Into The Spiderverse. Even though it does have a couple issues like last time, I will admit that it was, and is better this time around. It has clean comic book style animation, fun characters, a really creative premise, and has some really good lessons to take away from. Spider-Man: Into The Spiderverse is most definitely one of Columbia, and Sony Pictures Animation’s better animated films for reasons such as these, and more. I would say that before you see the sequel, definitely see this film. Even if, for some odd reason, you don’t want to see the sequel, still see this film anyway because of how surprising of a film it actually is.

Final Grade: A-

Everyone, today, in honor of the new Indiana Jones film, Indiana Jones & The Dial Of Destiny being released near the end of this month, we are going to be going through the other films that came before it, starting with what apparently was a prequel to 1981’s Indiana Jones: Raiders Of The Lost Ark, and going through 2008’s Indiana Jones: Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull. So now, let’s go through this series, beginning with Indiana Jones & The Temple Of Doom.

Plot: Set in 1935, after surviving, and escaping from a murder attempt by Shanghai crime boss Lao Che (Roy Chiao), Indiana Jones, with the help of former nightclub singer Willie Scott (Kate Capshaw), and an Asian kid named Short Hand (Ke Huy Quan) arrive in an Indian village in the Himalayas called Myapore. They ask Indy, and his friends to retrieve a sacred lingam stone that was stolen by evil forces that live nearby in a palace called Pankot Palace. Jones agrees, believing that it is one of five sacred stones that helps fight evil. Will Jones, and his friends find this stone? Will Jones’ hypothesis be proven true, and will he be able to vanquish the evil that resides in Pankot Palace, and save the rural village from destruction?

So, 1984’s Indiana Jones & The Temple Of Doom is apparently a prequel to 1981’s Indiana Jones: Raiders Of The Lost Ark. How interesting! Well, was it a good prequel? Well, let me put it to you all this way! Indiana Jones & The Temple Of Doom was a decent prequel, but probably not the best. Oh yes, there is still some good things in it. So let’s start off with those. First of all, there are some action stunts/scenes that were very creative, most notably one action scene that occurs around the beginning of the film. Also, some of the characters, including the Chinese kid, Short Hand (who sometimes goes by the nickname of Shorty throughout this film) have some really funny lines, and moments. It was also nice to see some of the culture of the Indian village in the Himalayas, even if we could have gotten to know them a little more. The design of Pankot Palace was also really cool. We also get to see a softer side to Indiana Jones than we seemed to see if him in any of the other films. Well, I still have yet to rewatch the other Indiana Jones movies, but let’s just go with that for now, shall we? If that changes after rewatching the other three, soon to be four, films, I’ll let you know. The climax also had a good pace set for it as well. Finally, who doesn’t like the Indiana Jones theme music for this film, or any of the other Indiana Jones movies that have come out, or will be coming out?

Still, Indiana Jones & The Temple Of Doom does have some issues as well. First of all, the setup of the story wasn’t the best. I mean one moment this thing is happening a little too quickly, and then it’s onto the next thing. We don’t get too many of the characters too well, besides Indiana Jones, Willie Scott, and Short Hand. The storyline also doesn’t seem to feel all that solid, and gritty either. As for the villain, Mola Ram, he was a decent villain, but probably not the best. Sure, the filmmakers did a good job with him making the human sacrifices from time to time. Still, aside from that, he seemed to feel more one note. Same goes with most of the other characters. You don’t seem to care about them all too much. Like I said, Indiana Jones, Willie Scott, and Short Hand, you at least care for them to a degree. Still, even they didn’t seem to feel as memorable this time around. There were also a couple plot holes in this film as well. As a result of all this, the storyline doesn’t feel quite as solid, and feels a little too muddled in the end. So, did the filmmakers do better with Raiders Of The Lost Ark, The Last Crusade, or even Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull? Well, we shall find out fairly soon.

And that’s my review for Indiana Jones & The Temple Of Doom. Despite it having some good things in it, there’s no denying that this Indiana Jones movie seems to be one of the weaker films in this franchise. Yes, the kid was funny, some of the action scenes were fairly well choreographed, and things like those. Do the weaker elements make this film bad? Not exactly! As I said, the good elements help keep this movie afloat. Still, this Indiana Jones film could have been stronger, and better in the end. So, hopefully the filmmakers learned their lesson for the future films of this franchise that they would make, or will make. Well, still see Indiana Jones & The Temple Of Doom if you still have yet to. It’s still a part of the Indiana Jones franchise, there’s some fun action here and there, and there are a few other good things about it. So, definitely still see it, and see what you think!

Final Grade: B-

Continue reading “Movie Review # 605: Indiana Jones & The Temple Of Doom (1984)”

Well, everyone, today, we are going to be reviewing the latest installment of the Fast & The Furious film franchise. This time, not only do we have Vin Diesel returning as his character, but we have Jason Momoa joining the car crew as a newer character in this new sequel. So now, let’s discuss Fast X.

Plot: While Dom Toretto (Vin Diesel), his wife, his wife, Letty Ortiz (Michelle Rodriguez), their son, and the rest of their crew are traveling for business, a crime lord named Dante Reyes (Jason Momoa) comes into the scene to try, and bring harm on Dom, and the rest of his friends/family through threats, and whatever else he can do to avenge the death of his father sometime ago. Can Dom, and his crew stop Dante from accomplishing his diabolical scheme?

So, now, the question remains, did we need another Fast & The Furious movie, or did we even need any of the sequels that needed the 2001 film to begin with? Well, probably not! However, at the same time, if we were to have as many follow ups as we have had thus far, Fast X is surprisingly one of the better ones that we have gotten thus far. Now, I know what you’re thinking. A tenth film of film franchise one of the better ones, when typically, it’s the second, maybe even also the third film of a franchise when a sequel ends up being really good? Well, maybe that is the case more often than not. And yes, the Fast & The Furious movie franchise has had both it’s hits, and misses since the franchise began back in 2001. However, what makes this one of the better sequels, as well as likely even a standout from many of the previous sequels is the different tone, and approach that it seems to take this time around. I mean many times, we’ve been having quite a few fun action car films with this franchise over these past two decades. This time, however, not only do we have that, but we also have a sequel that seems much more exciting, more gritty, has what may be one of the best villains that this franchise could have, and surprisingly even some good messages, most notably when it comes to one of the main themes of Fast X being about having faith in situations, even when it may feel hard to do so. Elements like these help make this sequel feel much stronger than it likely would have been otherwise. Fast X also feels darker in tone than many of the other Fast & The Furious films. I won’t say how so, but let’s say that you’d be surprised by how enjoyable of a sequel this is as a result. It’s also one of those sequels where you’re most likely wanting to see more, due to there being a cliffhanger at the every end. What’s more is that there seems to be a lot of heart put into this sequel because of this. Why this film hasn’t made as more money than it already has is, well, a little mind boggling. Oh, and as far as the villain goes, you known how I mentioned that Fast X ends up having one of the best villains that this film series could have? Well, did I forget to mention that Jason Momoa (who, as I’m sure many of us know, plays Aquaman in the Aquaman film series) ends up being the one to play the villain, Dante Reyes? Well, the way he is handled, and how symbolic his character ends up being makes this movie even better. As for Dom Toretto, Letty, and the rest of the crew on the team of the good guys, the development of each of their characters is handled well too.

With all that said, are there any downsides for this film? Well, while the cliffhanger at the end is good, for the most part, there were still some aspects of the ending that felt like a plot hole, and, let’s just say stinted on a little bit of character development because of that. I won’t say what the situation was, except that it could have probably been handled a little better with an additional draft, if not more.

And that’s my review for Fast X. It is still worth seeing in the end. The film has great messages about learning to have faith no matter how hard that may be at times, mostly better character development, a stronger storyline than some of the other sequels in this film series of the past, and more. Fast X truly ups it’s game with better action, great messages, developing both the old, and new characters to the best ability possible, making this film feel like a more mature, and darker film than many of the other Fast & The Furious films, and more. I would say definitely Fast X whenever you can You’ll be glad that an additional sequel, or two, is in the works after seeing this film. It is one of those times where you’ll be bettering for more. So, see Fast X whenever you can. You’ll be glad that you did. Oh, and Vin Diesel, and Jason Momoa, you can’t go wrong with them, along with the other stars if this film, you know?

Final Grade: A

Hello, everyone! Welcome to yet another session of movie reviewing! Today, we are going back to an era, known as the 1970s, especially the early to mid, maybe late 1970s, when it seemed a little more common for movies to be turned into musicals, for films to be adapted from the original Broadway musicals. Wow, what a great time during both the 1960s, and 1970s, when that seemed to be more of a thing! Today’s film stars a young Victor Garber at the time (whom some of us may known for being in films like Titanic, Legally Blonde, Tuck Everlasting, and films like those), David Haskell, Robin Lamont, Gilmer McCormick, Katie Hanley, and a few other celebrities in the movie business. Oh, and did I forget to mention that today’s musical film just reached it’s 50th anniversary as of recently? Crazy, right! Anyway, let’s discuss the film adaptation of the musical, Godspell, the title of this film as well, and which was released back in 1973!

Plot: A small group of people that live in New York City gather together, and create their interpretation of the Gospels, mainly the Gospel of Matthew. In the process, they each begin to have close relationships with each other, and sing some original songs.

Alright, so what made decide to see Godspell was a couple things. One was that I’ve begun to appreciate musicals more as of almost 20, maybe 25 years ago, sometime like that, and see some of these older live-action musical films that I haven’t seen yet. The second reason was that, when I was in high school, during my sophomore year, my drama, and musical theater put on a show that I was in where we all sang a variety of songs from different Broadway plays, and/or films. Well, during my sophomore year, “Day By Day,” which derived from this film, known as Godspell, was one of those songs that we sang, and performed. Still, I never took time to see this film adaptation of the Broadway play, Godspell until just recently. Oh, and that leads to my third reason for being more eager to see this film. That is the fact that this film reached it’s 50th anniversary as of this year.

That all being said, was this film good? Actually, very much so. Sure, Godspell may have felt a little more like people performing a skit on stage in front of a live audience. Still, because it was done well, had some rather humorous moments, as well as plenty of memorable songs, especially during the beginning of the film, qualities like these, and more, make this film worth one’s time. What’s more, is that this film is really funny at times. Yeah, the way these characters create their interpretations especially of the Gospel of Matthew is creative, funny, and overall memorable as a result. The characters, and the actors, and actresses that played them have really great singing voices. Whoever was in charge of casting for this particular film did a really great job at it. The reason being is because, again, they sang the songs really well. I’m not sure how much auditioning, or even rehearsing needed to be done, be it the lines, or songs, you name it. Well, however long those all took, it all paid off well in the end. As far as casting goes, we have a young Victor Garber, at the time, playing Jesus, David Haskell playing both John The Baptist, and Judas Iscariot (I know that may sound strange for one actor, or actress to play multiple characters at least in a live-action, film, but, as you watch this film, you’ll understand why), Katie Hanley playing a diner waitress, Robin Lamont playing a window shopper, Gilmer McCormick playing a celebrity model, and more. The characters themselves are also really fun, and likable. As for the songs themselves, they are also amazing. Granted, it’s really the songs around the beginning to middle that you’ll probably be singing for weeks, and have stuck in your head, from “Day By Day,” “Prepare Ye The Way Of The Lord,” “God Save The People,” “Light Of The World,” and all of those songs. Yes, the songs after the middle are good too. It’s just that the ones that I mentioned that played around the beginning to middle of the film seem to be the more memorable ones. That reminds me, some of you have heard of a musical lyricist by the name of Stephen Schwartz, have you not? Well, first of all, he wrote the songs for both the original Broadway version of this musical, and this film version. He also wrote songs for shows like musicals like The Magic Show, The Baker’s Wife, Children Of Eden, and many more. When he started writing for musical films as well, not only did he write the songs for this film version of Godspell, but, in later years, he also wrote songs for films like Pocahontas (1995), The Hunchback Of Notre Dame (1996), The Prince Of Egypt (1998), the animation/live-action hybrid, Enchanted (2007), and quite a few other films. He’ll also be writing songs for the upcoming film version if the musical, Wicked, which will apparently be divided into two parts, with Parts One, and 2 being released near the end of 2024, and 2025 respectively. Anyway, although his soundtrack may not be fully memorable in this film, his ability to make some of the most memorable songs in other plays, and films that many of us likely know, and love has increased more, and more over the decades since then. Oh, and one more thing to add! If you like movies that have been made by Columbia Pictures, yet have not seen any of the films from say before the 1980s, 1990s, and onwards, and are curious to see what the Columbia Pictures logo was like with films like this one, then that’s another reason to see this film.

With all that said, are there any downsides? Well, first off, as I mentioned before the songs that came around maybe the third act of this film could have probably been a little more memorable. Additionally, there were one, or two scenes around the beginning of the movie that could have maybe been tweaked with one, maybe two additional drafts. Finally, the third act could have likely been handled a little better, particularly by expanding what might as well have been the climax, and final scenes of this film by an addition 15-20, maybe even 30 minutes. Maybe I’m missing something, but it seemed like that portion of the film felt a little rushed. It was almost like maybe the filmmakers were either a little too eager to get the audience to the end of the film, or some other unknown reason, something like that. Well, you got me!

And that’s my review for 1973’s Godspell. Though it may not quite be the classic film that might reach the same tier as other musical films like The Sound Of Music, Fiddler On The Roof, or some of those movies, Godspell still has plenty to offer. Yes, the songs that Stephen Schwartz wrote for this film could have been slightly more memorable than they were in the end. Still, even this film along with films like Pocahontas, The Hunchback Of Notre Dame, and The Prince Of Egypt, and others serve as proof Schwartz is very gifted when it comes to writing memorable original songs. It was also great to see the people in this movie reenact some of the Gospels in the New Testament in some of the the most clever, and inventive ways that one could think of. So, if you would like to see a movie with some good songs, and an overall creative way of hearing of the life of Jesus Christ, then all the more reason to see this film. I’ve even heard that people who were once atheists became Christian’s after seeing films like this one. Wow, if a Christian-themed film can even have that kind of an impact, then what a miracle! Anyway, definitely see Godspell, if you never have. It could have been a little better, sure. Still, for what it is, it is most definitely worth your time. So, watch it On Demand, try checking Godspell out from your local library, or whatever else works for you!

Final Grade: B+

P.S. Again, happy 50th anniversary to this movie musical version of Godspell!

Ladies, and gentlemen, today, we review the latest live-action remake that Disney just released a couple weeks ago, during Memorial Day weekend, as a matter of fact. It is a remake of the very Disney animated film that started the Disney Renaissance Era that went from 1989-1999. Yes, that’s right! It is a remake of the 1989 Disney animated film, The Little Mermaid. This time, we have Halle Bailey as Ariel, Javier Bardem as King Triton, Melissa McCarthy as Ursula the Sea Witch, Awkwafina as Scuttle, and more. So now, here is my review of the remake that was released 33.5-34 years later following the animated film’s release.

Plot: A Mermaid named Ariel (Halle Bailey) longs to go to the human world, against her father’s wishes. But one day, when she gives her voice to the Sea Witch, Ursula (Melissa McCarthy), she gets her chance to go to the human world, and stay there, if she can get Prince Eric (Jonah Hauer-King) to fall in love with her, and kiss her, or else belong to Ursula for eternity. Will Ariel’s plan succeed?

Alright, so I’ve been hearing a variety of reviews for this remake, ranging from people saying things like it’s one of Disney’s most woke films, to this remake being better than the original 1989 Disney animated film, and things like that. So, do people stand correct on both of those opinions? Well, there’s no right, or wrong when it comes to opinions. Still, we’ll address the latter issue now, and the former one later on in this review. First of all, the 1989 Disney animated film is such a classic film. Of course , the same can be said about all the other Disney animated films that Disney had made into live-action in recent years. So, it’s definitely hard for any of these remakes to outshine their original animated counterparts. Still, in a case like this new Little Mermaid, there are a few aspects of it that people may probably like better about it. First of all, there are the songs. Yes, “Daughters Of Triton,” and “Les Poisson,” we’re absent from this new remake. So, the comedy found in this new version shall be missed. However, we still have songs like “Fathoms Below,” “Part Of Your World,” “Under The Sea,” “Poor Unfortunate Souls,” “Kiss The Girl,” and all of those. We also have some new music, including a new one that Ariel sings called “For The First Time,” a solo from Prince Eric called “Uncharted Waters,” and a really, really hysterical rap song that Scuttle, and Sebastian sing, as a duo, called “The Scuttle Butt.” I mean for that last song that I mentioned, to have a song called “Scuttle Butt,” and a character named Scuttle singing it is just brilliant in and of itself. Oh, and to have both Alan Menken (who wrote the songs for the 1989 Disney animated film), and Lin Manuel Miranda team up for the music of this film, wow, definitely a great collaboration this time around. Additionally, although this remake does in fact have a lot of the same spirit of the original animated film, it seems to really put it’s own spin on it that didn’t seem to be found as much in remakes like Aladdin, or The Lion King, for instance. I mean it almost seems to feel like The Little Mermaid with a Pirates Of The Caribbean vibe added to it. Okay, okay, maybe that sounds like an exaggeration, since 2023’s The Little Mermaid, wasn’t violent like the Pirates Of The Caribbean films were, along with the fact that this film was rated PG, and not PG-13, and things like those. However, I will at least say that this film seems to have that type of vibe due to some of the music that plays, and was played during the time period that both movies were set in, that there were ships in both films, and more. Additionally, much like many of the remakes that Disney has churned out in more recent years, Disney does well with fleshing out a good majority of it’s characters. For instance you understand King Triton’s motives for hating humans, you seem to understand a little more of Ariel’s motive to want to go to the surface, and understand humans, and their way of life, and things like that. Ursula the Sea Witch was also really well developed. It was really great how Disney designed her, and things that revolved around her. Oh, and to have Melissa McCarthy play the Sea Witch, Javier Bardem playing King Triton, Halle Bailey playing Ariel, very good choices. Sure Ariel may be played by a dark-skinned person. Still, at least Bailey had a beautiful voice, and you can tell that it’s actually her singing voice. Disney also did excellent with some of the newer elements that they added to this version of The Little Mermaid. It is especially surprising with some of the plot twists that they added to this film. Yes, there is still some predictability with this film. However, you’d be surprised by the amount of plot twists that are found in this film as well. As for the amount of emotion that is involved in this film, even if there may be a tiny bit of raw emotion lacking in this film, there is also a greater amount of that as well. The CGI is also amazing, especially the underwater moments. If you liked the underwater scenes in films like the 1989 animated version of The Little Mermaid, or even in the 2003 Disney/Pixar film, Finding Nemo, chances are you’ll love the underwater scenes in this film too. Oh, and this film will surprisingly have plenty of laughs as well. Finally, the ending will most likely pull at your heartstrings.

But are there any downsides for this remake of the 1989 Disney Animated Classic film? Well, there are at least a couple things. First off, there’s the the elephant in the room, the whole woke deal. Okay, please, hear me out! In regards to say there being a rap song like “The Scuttle Butt” is a horrible thing, or that it’s a crime for Ariel to be played by a black female, that Scuttle is a female bird, and things like those, I’ll take arguments like those with a grain of salt. I mean with “The Scuttle Butt” being a rap song, let’s remember that Lin Manuel Miranda rapped in Disney films like Mary Poppins Returns, Moana, and Hamilton, one one song, or more, for all of those films, for instance. So, why should Little Mermaid be any different in that regard? I mean at that point, you might as well consider the other three films that I mentioned woke. Also, with Halle Bailey, sure, she’s black, but at least she demonstrated that she has a beautiful singing voice. Finally, what’s wrong with Scuttle being a female bird this time around, especially when she was voiced by Awkwafina, of all actresses, and she succeeded in bringing life, and a lot of comedy for this character, you know? That all being said, there is at least one thing that could potentially be woke about this film. What is that, you may wonder? It’s the whole deal about Ariel’s other six sisters being of different nationalities. Yeah. Okay, I don’t mean to sound racist, or anything like that. However, for one of her sisters to be black, one Asian, another Caucasian, I’m not sure that was the best move. Yes, I know this is just a movie. But come on, unless King Triton were to have multiple wives, or something like that, they should have all stuck close to one race, for the most part, you know? But hey, if you want to have a discussion about that, feel free to do so, if it’s CIVIL. Putting that potential woke real aside, there is one other way in which this film could have been better. That being that they could have elaborated more on why Ursula was exiled, and why she went from being a mermaid to being a creature that was half human, and half octopus.

And that’s my review for 2023 remake of The Little Mermaid. Although, this was a good film, Disney needs to be careful about not having any political agendas in their films, and starting to go back to coming out with more original live-action films like in better days. Still, because this film was very well done, definitely go see this film. You’ll have fun with it, get some laughs out of it, will enjoy some heartfelt moments, and more. Honestly, if you like the 1989 animated version of this film, chances are you’ll likely enjoy this new live-action one just as much, maybe even more so. So again, go see this new Little Mermaid, and see what you think!

Final Grade: A-

P.S. I have seen this movie twice already, which, nowadays, I don’t see as many movies multiple all too often. So there you have it!

Ladies, and gentlemen, today, we will be diving back into the world of the Marvel superheroes that include Captain America, Iron Man, and all those. But that’s not all. Today, after missing them for the past six years at least in a movie that included exclusively then, we are hanging out with Star Lord, Rocket the Raccoon, and the rest of that gang, in what is rumored to be the final chapter with this particular crew of the Marvel gang. That being said, let’s go fly away with with the “Guardians Of The Galaxy” in Guardians Of The Galaxy: Volume 3.

Plot: When Rocket the Raccoon (voiced by Bradley Cooper) gets fatally wounded, Peter Quill/Star Lord (Chris Pratt), Nebula (Karen Gilla), Groot (Vin Diesel), and the rest of the Galaxy gang travel to Orgocorp’s headquarters to find a code that could potentially heal Rocket. Now, the question remains, will Rocket get healed of his wounds, or will Star Lord, and the gang end up seeing the last of the talking raccoon?

As I’m sure many of us know, this is the final of the series at least as far as the Guardians Of The Galaxy solely go? Or is it? Watch through all the credits until the very end, and you guys tell me. That being said, did this “final chapter” with these characters go out with a bang? Was this film the best of the three, as many claim it to be? Well, let me put it to you all this way. Guardians Of The Galaxy: Volume 3 was another good film, and sequel, no doubt about it. However, it would be safe to say that the previous two films of this series were most likely a little better. Okay, okay, before you all decide to shoot me with regular guns, or even laser guns for saying that, please hear me out! But we’ll discuss the upsides first. First of all, some of the newer characters were good, especially the villain of this film. Man, did he end up being really well developed to the point where you seem to understand his motivations for his actions? The score that John Murphy composed was also really good. It was also great to see characters like Rocket the Raccoon fleshed out better than he seemed to be in the previous two films. And it was also cool to hear about how Rocket, and some other animals got to be talking ones in the first place. The action is also really good, especially around the climax of this film. And the comedy, need I say more in regards to that aspect? I’m sure many of us can agree that, with one, or two exceptions, Marvel knows how to in the right kind of comedy in their films. Whether it be funny moments in this film, hilarious lines from characters like Star Lord, or Drax, or things like that, it gives audiences all the more reason to enjoy this latest film with these characters. Oh, and another thing to mention. Even though some character arcs could have likely been handled a little better, they were still executed fairly well. The film also had some more raw emotion at some points as well. Finally, there were some scenes that had some really good, and clever lines.

Still, was this truly the best of the Guardians Of The Galaxy films? Probably not! That title would probably go to the first, or even second film. First of all, the storyline was probably not quite the best of the three. For one, it feels like we seem to have a little too much of a backstory for Rocket. Okay, I understand that this film mostly revolves around the other main characters trying to save his life, and things like that. Still, couldn’t we have perhaps either had his backstory in a shorter snippet, or even have a solo movie for Rocket get released in between the second, and third films? I don’t know, I guess it’s almost like some of the flashbacks that involved Rocket in his younger years seemed to be a little long, as well as caused the movie to drag a little too long as well. For crying out loud, this movie was around 2.5 hours long. Seriously, why not have the movie be a little shorter by having Rocket have a solo film, or something along those lines, you know? Don’t get me wrong, it was great to see Rocket more fleshed out than in the previous two films. However, even if this film was enjoyable, did we really need it to be as long as it was just so that a lot of the film involves Rocket being fleshed out? Maybe I’m sounding ridiculous to ask. Still, just a thought! Also, the way things ended could have probably a little more satisfying than it was in the end.

And that’s my review for Guardians Of The Galaxy: Volume 3. It is a good film, no doubt. However, to call it the best of this trilogy might feel a little bit like an overstatement. Yes, there were some good, or decent character arcs, the the film had more raw emotion, and it was great to see Rocket fleshed out more. Having said that, however, because of this film focusing on certain aspects a little too much, and dragging the film as a result, this sequels falls slightly short of being the best of this trilogy. Nevertheless, Guardians Of The Galaxy: Volume 3 is still good for the majority of great things that it has going for it.

Final Grade: B+

Well, everyone, we’ve finally arrived at my 600th review. Today, you may, or may not be surprised by what I picked out for this special occasion. Well, feel free to tell me either way. Today, just as I picked a film that was based on a beloved fantasy book series for my 250th movie review, that is going to be the case today too. Okay, to refresh your guy’s memories, I picked The Lord Of The Rings: The Fellowships Of The Ring for my 250th review back a few years ago. This time, I shall be reviewing a film adaptation based on one of a few books in this series that were all written up by English, and Christian author C.S. Lewis. It is the one, and only 2005 adaptation of this chapter of the series, The Chronicles Of Narnia: The Lion, The Witch, & The Wardrobe, featuring Tilda Swindon as the White Witch, William Moseley as Peter Pevensie, Anna Popplewell as Susan, Skandar Keynes as Edmund, Georgie Henley as Lucy, and Liam Neeson as the voice of the Great Lion of Narnia, Aslan, among other actors, and actresses.

Plot: Set during WWII, four children with the last name of Pevensie, Peter, Susan, Edmund, and Lucy (played by William Moseley, Anna Popplewell, Skandar Keynes, and Georgie Henley respectively) are evacuated from London, England, and to the countryside, in the home of Professor Digory Kirke (Jim Broadbent). One day, while in a huge wardrobe, the four children find themselves in a magical land called Narnia, a land that has been under snow, and ice for a century. Once they encounter characters like the evil White Witch, Jadis (Tilda Swindon), and the good Lion, Aslan (voiced by Liam Neeson), as well as get caught up in a great battle between the two sides, the four find themselves having to join Aslan, and all the creatures that side with Him, in a fight for the freedom of Narnia from the White Witch’s rule. Now, it is up to the four children (who are also referred to sons of Adam, and daughters of Eve in this film), Aslan, and all those who believe in the greater good of Narnia, to defeat the White Witch, and bring an end to her tyrannical rule once and for all.

Alright, so, as I write this review, I have to confess that I did in fact read all seven of the books of The Chronicles Of Narnia starting from around probably my mid teens through late teen years, sometime like that. Maybe I should go back, and read them again to see if I will see both this film, and all of the book series with fresh new eyes, eh? Either way, how was this film adaptation of The Chronicles Of Narnia: The Lion, The Witch, & The Wardrobe? Well, I will be honest with you all, it was definitely well done. Granted, I don’t entirely remember how the book version of this story went down. However, I will say this, the film was well done, and seemed to stick very close to the book version of this part of the series. First of all, how could you not appreciate that this film does a really good job of translating most things from the book to the big screen? Sure, there were likely some liberties taken along the way just line with any film adaptation. Even so, nearly every character is well written, and made perfectly in nearly every way that they were done in the the book version of this story. It seemed quite clear that Disney wanted to do their best to get this story as right as they could. What’s more is that if this film had been made by any other company, be it 20th Century Fox, New Line Cinemas, or some company like that, and had the right directors, and filmmakers to make this film, this adaptation probably would have been just as good, maybe even better, than it was in the end. It’s just a shame that neither Prince Caspian, or Voyage Of The Dawn Treader performed quite as well as this film did, especially since there were no more of the Narnia films made for the big screen after the flop of Dawn Treader. Anyway, what’s more is that the executives did an excellent job of keeping most, if not quite all, of the Christian symbolism that the book had, from Aslan representing Jesus, the White Witch symbolizing either the devil, or a pawn of the devil, certain events in this film, and story being parallels to events from the Bible, and a whole lot more. Truth be told, films like this version of The Chronicles Of Narnia: The Lion, The Witch, & The Wardrobe serve as proof that Disney needs to go back to making films like this, and making more original stories, instead of many if the remakes, and sequels that they’ve been doing as of recently. I’m sure even Walt Disney himself would agree with that, and put a stop to what the executives at Disney have been doing lately in regards to that. Anyway, if you liked film adaptations of fantasy stories like the Harry Potter films, the Lord Of The Rings trilogy, or even the Hobbit trilogy, for instance, chances are you’ll most likely love this Chronicles Of Narnia film, and at least the two that followed. The music is also amazing. Granted, the two songs may not be the most memorable of this film. Still, since there is so much other good stuff in this film, that part could more than likely be overlooked. With that in mind, the score by Harry Gregson-Williams is amazing. I’m just sorry that I never got the soundtrack for this film. It is that good. Even when the climax occurs, you’ll especially love it. What’s more is that the score is just as great as when Howard Shore did his score for the Lord Of The Rings trilogy. I’m sure that many of us can agree on how amazing that score was too. With that said, you can tell Williams truly knew how to capture the audience with his majestic, and amazing score for this film. If this did not win Best Original Score at the Oscars, then that’s a shame, since it deserved it. Additionally, the acting is phenomenal, from the actors that played the four Pevensie kids, Tilda Swindon as the White Witch, and especially Liam Neeson as the voice of Aslan. Wow, whether Neeson is playing a hero, or even a villain, he knows how to play the role really well. Here is no exception. He truly did capture the mannerisms, and characteristics of Aslan. Same goes for the actors that played their respective roles. Overall, the characters themselves are well memorable. Another thing to love about this film is that this film is excellent with balancing the emotions, whether they be funny moments that make you laugh, or even the times that make you sad, and nearly cry. Finally, the film does well with pacing it’s story, and hardly, if ever, drags at all.

And that’s my review for The Chronicles Of Narnia: The Lion, The Witch, & The Wardrobe. Honestly, if you haven’t seen this film, but have read the books, I would highly recommend that you see this film. It does well with following closely to the source material. Again, yes, there are some liberties taken in the process. Still, with how well done this film is, I can guarantee that even C.S. Lewis himself would have been proud of what Disney accomplished with with this movie. It’s just a shame that Disney was unable to get all of his books off the ground, and adapted to the big screen. Well, on the bright side, at least we have this film, Prince Caspian, and Voyage Of The Dawn Treader. Well, let me just say definitely see The Chronicles Of Narnia: The Lion, The Witch, And The Wardrobe. You’ll be glad of it, I’m sure.

Final Grade: A+

Well, everyone, this is it. As of now, we are now one review away from my 600th movie review (which I may not get to until sometime next week). In the meantime, to close out on the reviews that were in the 500s, we now review a film that is based on a true story. Not only that, but it is based on the life of well-known wrestler champion George Foreman. So now, let’s discuss Big George Foreman: The Miraculous Story Of The Once And Future Heavyweight Champion Of The World.

Plot: The film centers around the life of George Foreman (Khris Davis) and how he rose to power as a wrestler, and later became a preacher.

So, for a film that’s a biopic, did they do a good job with this film? Well, I don’t know how much was left out of this film that was a depiction of some of George Foreman’s life. However, it would seem that they covered a great plenty that needed to be shown for audiences in nationwide, and worldwide. I mean the fact that film companies like Affirm Films are mainstream, and have succeeded in the past in making, and coming out with films like Soul Surfer, Courageous, War Room, Miracles From Heaven, and now George Foreman: The Miraculous Story Of The Once And Future Heavyweight Champion, among other films, that is most definitely a miracle in of itself that Christian films have been successfully produced, and even making first to theaters before video, and On Demand. That is especially since more people have become hostile towards Christians, and anything associated with Christianity like Christian-themed films, and things like those, you know? Anyway, even though we don’t get to know many of George Foreman’s family members, at least we still get to dive into some of George Foreman’s childhood, why he became the boxing champion, his steps to becoming a preacher, and more. It really did help develop his character in this film. Khris Davis truly did pull off playing this role, and trying to truly fill the shoes of this real-life person. Now, obviously, we know that no can truly fill the shoes of another person, dead or alive. Still, one can still get a good feeling, and idea about how another person acted, or felt about situations, their outlook on things in life, and/or life in general, and things like that. That’s exactly what actor Khris Davis did well with accomplishing when trying to play the role of a person like George Foreman. Anyway, for those of you who aren’t familiar with George Foreman’s journey in his life, this film is definitely a great way for anyone to know about it. Is it possible that they may have left some things out? Sure. Still, this is a film. And yeah, they can only include so much in a film. Could the filmmakers have made this film longer by making it around 2.5-3 hours? Maybe! And yeah, we could have perhaps gotten to know more of George’s childhood, and learned more of his family. However, since George Foreman is more of a famous person, and this film itself has come out, at least this film could likely pique people’s curiosity more as to what life was like for his siblings, his mother, and things like that. Not to mention that George Foreman is still alive. So at least we can ask him personally what it actually was like to go through that. So how about that? Additionally, it was very interesting to see some of the history of George Foreman’s life, and to start off going into things like boxing for the wrong reasons, and then become a Christian, and have a better outlook on life, and making decisions more for the right reasons. Yes, he may have made mistakes after becoming a Christian, like we all have since, well, we’re all human, and no human that has walked this Earth has been perfect, again, except for Jesus Christ. However, at least George Foreman serves as a living example as to why we don’t need to let our past failures define us, and only need to let Jesus define us no matter what. Anyway, when it came to George naming his kids, and things like that, let’s just say that you’d be surprised as to how he handled a situation like that. Finally, the theme of letting God be in control of our lives, and making decisions for the right reasons, and not the wrong ones end up being very powerful, and I’m sure will continue to remain true.

And that’s my review for George Foreman: The Miraculous Story Of The Once And Future Heavyweight Champion Of The World. Yeah, I mean whether some of us grew up hearing about George Foreman years ago, and seeing him in wrestling, and more, or are learning about him for the very first time by seeing films such as this one, this film is most definitely a must watch. Why this film has not gained more popularity yet is mind boggling. Maybe not too mind boggling, since not nearly as many Christian-themed films have been released as of recently. Well, not in the mainstream media, or even in theaters. Regardless, this is most definitely a must-see. It has heart, it does well with showing much of what life was like for George Foreman growing up, and the movie can help us truly think critically about life, and how we should handle situations in life. Quite frankly, I hope that even non-Christians will give this film, and maybe they can be touched by it, and become Christians themselves. Well, again, a film like this, among other tools, serve as proof that God works in mysterious ways . One way, or another, definitely make it a point to see this film. It may be over two hours long. However, it is worth sitting though 129 minutes, or less to see this movie. You will be glad that you saw this film in the end. So, go see it if you can! You’ll be glad that you did in the end.

Final Grade: A+

Well, everyone, welcome back to yet another session of movie reviewing! Today, we are going to be reviewing a film that is evidently based on a book series by book author Judie Blume. Not only that, but the first of this book series was apparently written over fifty years ago, in 1970. So now, over fifty years later, we have the first of this book series adapted into film, and set in 1970. Oh, and did I forget to mention that this film stars Rachel McAdams, Kathy Bates, and Abby Ryder Fortson, among some others? Well, with all that being said, let’s discuss the film, “Are You There, God? It’s Me, Margaret”.

Plot: Set in 1970, a pre-teen named Margaret Simon (Abby Ryder Fortson), and her parents end up moving from New York City to a suburb in New Jersey. After settling in, making some new friends, and more, her 6th grade teacher assigns her, and the class a year-long research project. This prompts her to explore other religions by going to services like a Jewish one at her grandmother’s synagogue, going to a Nativity mass with a friend of hers, and more. As she does this project, will she realize why she believes in God, or will this affect her relationship with God, and draw her away from Him in the end?

Now, the question remains, did this film remain faithful to it’s source material, or the first part of it? Well, I have never personally read the source material. So, I can’t vouch for that yet. However, as far as a film goes without comparing it to the book, it’s still very good. First of all, you have to give this film credit for rating this film PG-13. I mean yeah, it can feel like more like kids/family film at times. However, because this film had talked about more mature topics like puberty, a female having her period, and things like that, it was probably for the best that this film was given the rating that it had in the end. Quite honestly, I was kind of surprised to find that the book ended up being controversial, due to it being a middle school novel that also talked about these rather heavy subjects. Anyway, the cast was phenomenal, from Abby Ryder Fortson as the main character, Margaret, to Rachael McAdams as her mother, Benny Safdie as her husband, Herb, Kathy Bates as Margaret’s grandmother, and more. Honestly, you can tell that each person had so much fun with their respective roles. The movie can help younger people, especially those in middle, high school, or even younger kids that see this film, really think about life in general, especially when it comes to learning how to handle social situations. It was also great to see a film that featured kids learning to fit in, and sometimes may even struggle with their faith in God from time to time. I mean to have God included in a mainstream media film, especially nowadays, that is great that we can still films like those even in theaters. Oh, and the movie does a fantastic job of demonstrating why religion doesn’t work. Yes, the Book Of James portrays religion in a positive light by saying that true good religion is helping orphans, and widows, and things like that. Anyway, the movie does deal with hard issues like forgiveness to those that hurt us, reconciliation, and quite a few other things as well. It’s also great to have a film in which each of the characters feels genuine, and real.

If there were any negatives about this film, it would be that, one, there were some scenes that felt a little corny, and stupid at times. Also, the ending may have ended a little too abruptly. Thankfully, with those being the only complaints, that doesn’t keep this film from being enjoyable overall.

And that concludes my review for Are You There, God? It’s Me, Margaret. It is great to see a film that remains faithful to the book, and doesn’t add any unnecessary elements that might cause some people to not want to see it. Yes, there are some heavy subjects covered in this film, like the ones that I mentioned before. Still, because of the fact that God is talked about in this film, the characters being well developed, the storyline being mostly well done, and other things too, you will definitely not want to miss it. Trust me, after you see it, I can guarantee you’ll be glad that you did. So go see Are You There, God? It’s Me, Margaret., and see what you think!

Final Grade: A-