Search Sweet and Sour

"Bumblebee" is a John Hughes-Mixed-With-Transformers Film

By: Keaton Marcus

Charlie Watson (Hailee Steinfeld) in Bumblebee

Genre/Action/Adventure/Sci-Fi

Age Rating/10+

Lemonradar/70% sweet/sour

Introduction

Hi, this is Keaton Marcus from Sweet and Sour Movie Reviews and today I will be reviewing the newest Transformers franchise installment, Bumblebee. After the planet Cybertron was destroyed, Optimus Prime, the leader of the Autobots sent the remainder of the resistance to Earth to hide out before attempting to fight back. In the year 1987, Bumblebee, an Autobot is found by an 18-year old girl, Charlie Watson (Hailee Steinfeld) while he is hiding, however, when the Decepticons get Bumblebee’s distress signal, they plan to wage war on Earth in order to find Bumblebee; Bumblebee, Charlie, and her friend Memo must protect Earth before the battles of Cybertron find its way to their planet.

How Was The Cast?

Refreshingly unfamiliar, younger singer-turned-actress Hailee Steinfeld takes the main role of Charlie Watson with a commited, charming and old-fashioned performance, driving the movie with gusto. Supporting roles include John Cena as Agent Burns, Jorge Lendeborg Jr. as Memo, and an enjoyable side part by Dylan O’Brien, who voices Bumblebee.

As mentioned, Hailee Steinfeld known for The Edge of Seventeen, the Pitch Perfect franchise, Ender’s Game, True Grit etc. as Charlie Watson. A more convincing and well-scripted Transformers hero than Shila Boeuf disappointing Sam Witwicky in the first three films, or Mark Wahlberg's slummy Cade Yeager in parts four and five, this is very surprising, but it shows throughout the film that Steinfeld, a more supporting actress has better action-film charisma than the more seasoned Bouef or Wahlberg. Steinfeld’s character, Charlie, is also more developed, better-scripted and much more likeable franchise hero, and is not objectified, like the other “supporting” female characters in previous installments. Previously, Steinfeld has delivered a supposedly amazing lead performance in coming-of-age drama, The Edge of Seventeen, and solid supporting roles in Ender’s Game and True Grit. Steinfeld has also had a much better transformation from song to film than most, and is currently sitting at the top with the likes of Lady Gaga, who was brilliant in this year’s A Star is Born.

Secondly, actor John Cena known for The Wall, Ferdinand, Blockers etc. as Agent Burns. In his wrestling-to-film transformation, Cena has had some success, but he found it to be very limited, and not as powerful as Dwayne Johnson has had to audiences; In his previous efforts, critics found Cena’s performance in Blockers to be hysterical, and his role in The Wall to be quite compelling, but Cena flopped in disappointing performance in 2017 animated feature Ferdinand, which was much anticipated. In this year’s Bumblebee, Cena is strictly a side-character, but has enough pratfalls, and kick-ass lines to break even, and creates another solid performance to the sprouting career on the big-screen which may or may not deride the audiences from the fact that they are listening to a previous wrestler act in a Hasbro-based Transformers flick, but surprisingly, it works.

Fourthly, we saw actor Jorge Lendeborg Jr. known for Love, Simon, Spider-Man: Homecoming, Brigsby Bear etc. as Memo. Although, Lendeborg character is usually cut-off, or having the spot-light stolen by Hailee Steinfeld’s performance, as the supporting character, the actor manages to generate enough laughs and charisma with the cast, bringing an enjoyable amount of dorkiness, and amidst the relentless action sequences, Lindenborg delivers a light within the film. Also, very new to the film business, Lindenborg has a so-far very successful career, treading in fantastic films such as Love, Simon and Spider-Man: Homecoming, and giving an abnormal, weird performance that supposedly works in Brigsby Bear, playing a supporting role.

And an honorable mention to actor Dylan O’Brien III voicing Bumblebee, the actor is known for his roles as Thomas in The Maze Runner trilogy, which we praised, he also delivered an enjoyable supporting performance in terrific disaster flick Deepwater Horizon. In Bumblebee, O’Brien only had a limited amount of lines, which did pull back his talents, though he made the most of it.

Quality

Directing this Transformers prequel is filmmaker Travis Knight known for Kubo and the Two Strings, ParaNorman, The BoxTrolls, and Coraline. With Michael Bay directing the first five films in the now fatigued franchise, with bombastic, loud and messy action sequences, only bringing impressive visual effects to the table.

Director Travis Knight practically doubles down on everything fans loved about the originals, delivering coherent action sequences, dazzling visual effects, and an emotional Iron Giant-type connection between human and machine, although the film does sometimes get cut-off by a somewhat choppy storyline and a less-than-stellar script; Though, overall, Knight’s Bumblebee is not only the best in the franchise, it may as well be the savior to the saga, as rumours see a sequel being placed to the timeline.

Special effects wise, Bumblebee stands at a reported 135M cost, and the film uses it wisely, bringing dazzling eye-candy to the table, including two thrilling Cybertron battle scenes that are particularly good, surprisingly un-confusing action sequences and a great new look for the Transformers. Box Office wise, the film delivered a soft three-day weekend of 21.654M, though was moderately helped by a five-day of 34.253M, this is because of franchise fatigue, and by far, this debut remains the lowest opening in the franchise. Though, luckily, for Bumblebee, the film has the smallest cost in the franchise, with Transformers (150M), Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen (200M), Transformers: Dark of the Moon (195M), Transformers: Age of Extinction (210M) and Transformers: The Last Knight (217-260M).

Storyline wise, the film fared better than the rest of the franchise, but still had trouble finding its way, suffering from a choppy layout that did not always work out, though its flaws were helped by solid performances from the cast, visual effects and a lessening of run-time, standing at just 114 minutes, compared to the other installments, Transformers stands at 143 minutes, Revenge of the Fallen at 150 minutes, Dark of the Moon at 154 minutes, Age of Extinction at 165 minutes and The Last Knight at 149 minutes.

Aging ‘The Transformers’

Much more family-friendly than the other installments, Bumblebee carries a reported PG-13 rating, but could also arguably be PG, but for older kids. The film includes the common action sequences, but lessened and more coherent, there is also some mild language and very mild sexuality.

The violence includes a beginning scene on Cybertron that features loud action, including rapid gun-fire, and explosions galore, though fans of the franchise will enjoy, the film also endangers the main characters commonly, and the Decepticons will take innocent lives just to find the remainder of the Autobots.

Language wise, there are single uses of s..t, damn, hell, ass, crap and shut up, however most of these words will pass by younger viewers heads. Sexuality wise, this Transformers installment lessens on the objectifying of the lead female characters and portrays Charlie as a strong, independent character; The majority is the flirting between Charlie and Memo which shows throughout the film, and in one scene she asks him to take of his shirt for an experiment.

Transformers Best Installments

Bumblebee 70% sweet/sour

Violence: ⭐⭐⭐⭐☆

Language: ⭐⭐☆☆☆

Sex: ⭐☆☆☆☆

Age Rating: 10+

Transformers 59% sour

Violence: ⭐⭐⭐⭐☆

Language: ⭐⭐⭐☆☆

Sex: ⭐⭐⭐☆☆

Age Rating: 13+


Bumblebee 70% sweet/sour

Storyline: ⭐⭐☆☆☆

Cast: ⭐⭐⭐⭐☆

Role Models: ⭐⭐⭐⭐☆

Transformers 59% sour

Storyline: ⭐⭐☆☆☆

Cast: ⭐⭐⭐☆☆

Role Models: ⭐⭐⭐☆☆

News Related to Bumblebee

$plurge, $tream, $kip: Although is occasionally cut-off by a choppy storyline, and script, Bumblebee delivers fantastic action sequences, dazzling special effects and compelling performances, which make it the best in a truly fatigued franchise…$TREAM IT

Rated: PG-13

Run Time: 114 Minutes

Director: Travis Knight

A QUINN REVIEW: BUMBLEBEE

BUMBLEBEE

(2018)

AGE: 11+

80% SWEET

So What’s the Story?

Cybertron has fallen to a brutal war, and Optimus has sent the remaining autobots in the resistance scattered across the universe. Bumblebee is sent to Earth in order to start building an Autobot base. Soon he loses his memory in a fight against StarScream a Decepticon. Bumblebee is forced to go into hiding as he disguises himself as a car (a yellow beetle). Soon 18 year old Charlie Watson, a girl struggling with the recent death of her dad discovers Bumblebee. Together they go on a journey of adventure in which they will discover their inner self.

Is It Worth Your While?

Who knew that a Transformers movie would turn out sweet. I mean not in a million years would I think another Transformers installment would be good, but I had faith in this one, and that faith paid off. Now here are my reasons. First off, the directing. I thought that Travis Knight, director of Kubo and the Two Strings did a phenomenal job of bringing the fun, and imagination to a bloated blockbuster franchise. He creates coherent, and fun action sequences, filled with eye popping special effects. He also directs it in a style of the 80’s that’s accurate, and funny at the same time. Next I thought that the special effects were mixed with brilliantly done action sequences. However I did only see it on a small screen, I’m sure that it’s even cooler on a big screen. Third I thought that the story was fun, and had some funny 80’s references throughout. It also had a good message of finding out who you truly are even when there are challenges that once prevented you from doing so. Fourth I thought that the script was funny, and overall good, although at times it did feel contained, and repeated sometimes. My main problem was the first scene of the battle of Cybertron, felt rushed, and did not hook me into the movie like I felt it should have. Overall Bumblebee had a clumsy opening, but good directing, great special effects, and a good, but flawed script, and story.

How Was the Cast?

The cast in Bumblebee all did a very good job in the film. First we have Hailee Steinfeld as Charlie Watson. I thought that she brought a package of emotion, laughter, and a great, realistic Iron Giant like connection with Bumblebee. Overall she proves herself to be a great actress. Next we have Jorge Lendeborg Jr. as Memo. I thought that he brought the most laughs into the movie, and worked well with the script in a ridiculously fun way. He was realistic, fun to watch, and overall a light in the movie. Third we have John Cena as Agent Burns. He just gets better, and better with every film that he does, and in this he pushed himself to be as serious, and funny as he was in this movie. I loved the scene in the beginning where he sarcastically, and repeatedly shoots his partner with a fake gun. Overall i thought that the cast in Bumblebee did a great job.

Aging ‘Cybertron’

Bumblebee has some scenes of violence including gun shots, explosions, missiles, lasers the usual. It can sometimes get emotional, but also teaches a good message. Overall though, it will satisfy viewers from the age of eleven and up.

Buy Bumblebee on Amazon for $12.99

"Mary Queen of Scots" Features Saoirse Ronan’s Compelling Performance in an Otherwise Average Political Drama

By: Keaton Marcus

The period piece "Mary Queen of Scots" delivers strong lead performances by both Saoirse Ronan and Margot Robbie--screaming the word feminism--and the film is a suitable tribute to the subject matter. This is of course despite the fact the film is occasionally failing to bring the true story to a cinematic wonder--sporting choppy scripting and poorly edited scenes. Although the film has many disappointing imperfections, the shining star in the production is the beautifully done costume design--filled with rich color and detail--along with the realistic final touches; the scenery of Ireland and England, is also fantastic, and the film definitely deserves an Oscar nomination for Best Cinematography--brought to life by John Mathieson. The abundant talent in the cast is never put to waste, but never quite reaches their full potential--generally because of the really "meh" film around them.

The two "queens" never really have met--as the film sets up Elizabeth (Robbie) and Mary in different, rival countries of England and Scotland--Protestant and Catholic. The story takes place smack in the middle of the 16th century when a female-led rivalry between the two leaders was steaming up to a battle. Mary (Ronan), at first an 18-year-old Catholic was married to King Francis II, primarily the leader of France--but after he died--she was widowed, soon before being remarried to Lord Darnley (Jack Lowden)--and demands that she is given a child to rule after her prophesized death (shown in a flash--in the opening scene).

In Scotland--director Josie Rourke knows how to heat up the scene--as Mary plows through several husbands, she has a sexual affair with everyone. The leader is the primary reason that "Mary Queen of Scots" is rated R--as the director plays it safe in almost every other conceivable way--which is at times disappointing. However, her second husband, the aforementioned Darnley clearly prefers Mary's gay advisor Rizzio in bed--fueling the sexual tension even more, and by god--at least the film has some entertaining moments. On the other hand, the virgin queen Elizabeth of England stays away from men--and as the post-script tells us, the ruler never had children at all--this is really a hysterical comparison; and is actually one of the smartest concepts the generally dreary film delivers. Clearly showing that Mary was all in (figuratively and literally), while her cousin never even dreamed of sexual intercourse with men--as Robbie so successfully represents in the film.

The leading women are one of the only successful things that "Mary Queen of Scots" can produce, largely because of their prominent talent. Actress Saoirse Ronan who delivered a supposedly magnetic performance in last year's coming-of-age drama "Lady Bird", is the definite version of a complete bad-ass feminist--who clearly does not let the supporting (and generally evil) men tell her what to do and not. The only problems with Ronan's terrific outing are that her heroic attempts at a Scottish accent do not always work--generally because of the laughable script. Overall, however--in this political drama, Irish American actress Saoirse Ronan delivers a performance TO BE WATCHED.

The supporting cast is generally just as firm as the tour-de-force Ronan provided. Led by Oscar-nominated actress Margot Robbie, playing Queen Elizabeth of England, Mary's cousin at the time. While the film shows that they are blood-related--the two different characters are completely different, Elizabeth is a virgin, while Mary never turns down the offer. Also, Elizabeth is portrayed as the "Darth Vader of the 16th century", while Mary's character development plays more like the rebel alliance--as England does not accept Catholics. Robbie made her big-popular-break in 2016's DCEU produced "Suicide Squad"--and while the film around her was truly a total mess, Robbie's performance as titular character Harley Quinn attempted many times to take down the flaws. In "Mary" Robbie's talent is showcased solidly--albeit not as well as it could be--again courtesy of the disappointing screenplay. Elizabeth is truly one of the most complex, and interesting (in good and bad ways) roles to play in a film and filmmaker Josie Rourke never digs deep enough to the character's origins. Otherwise, "Doctor Who" star David Tennant joins the cast as a snarky, brutal John Knox--who accuses Mary of giving birth to a bastard--before saying that the ruler has committed adultery. Tennant's performance is so annoying, and irritating, that it works--then again it depends what kind of person you are--watching Mary being raped by many men--then being called her a whore. Mentioned by me many, many times before the cast members shine in what I call a stocky period film.

The final verdict is: The two leading women bring grace along with a solid amount of grit to the film, and the costume design is undeniably beautifully done--but the unintentionally funny script and choppily executed film editing makes "Mary Queen of Scots" a handsomely mounted, but stuffy drama pic that benefits from Ronan and Robbie's performances...$TREAM IT

Mary (Saorise Ronan) and Lord Darnley (Jack Lowden) in Mary Queen of Scots

Mary Queen of Scots kicked off in limited release, with a powerhouse three-day of over 194,000 from just four theaters. In its second weekend, the film gained 259%, grossing a sophomore of over 699,000 from 66 locations, topping 962,000 domestically. Currently, the film has baked up over 16.4M domestically and 43.1M worldwide.

Genre: Drama

Age Rating: 15+

Lemonradar: 60/100 "sweet/sour"

"Mary Poppins Returns" is a Joyful, Fun, Nostalgic Ride

By: Keaton Marcus

Mary Poppins (Emily Blunt) in Mary Poppins Returns

Genre/Kids/Family/Fantasy

Age Rating/6+

Lemonradar/67% sweet/sour

Introduction

Hi, this is Keaton Marcus from Sweet and Sour Movie Reviews and today I will be reviewing Disney’s reboot of a classic tale, Mary Poppins Returns, starring Emily Blunt, Lin-Manuel Miranda, Ben Wishshaw, Colin Firth and even Meryl Streep. In the depression-era of London, the Banks family have become dull, unimaginitive people that have forgotten joy in their lives, when the bank threatens to reposses their home unless they find the money on Friday, Mary Poppins (Blunt) returns to help the family cope through the hardship, and realize that even in tough times, you may still find happiness in your life.

How Was The Cast?

In this reboot/sequel of the brilliant classic film, Mary Poppins, we see actress Emily Blunt play the familiar role, and hopes to become the new Julie Andrews of Disney, while Blunt never quite matches up, she adds to the legacy with nostalgic laughs, and a phenomenal singing voice. Supporting roles include actor Ben Wishshaw as Michael Banks, Lin-Manuel Miranda as Jack, Colin Firth as Wilkin/Wolf and veteran Meryl Streep as Cousin Topsy.

As noted, Emily Blunt known for A Quiet Place, Edge of Tomorrow, The Adjustment Bureau, The Devil Wears Prada etc. portrays the pivotal character of Mary Poppins. Fitting suitably in the role, Blunt uses her natural charisma, plentiful amount of laughs and wisecracking in the film, and her wonderful singing voice (already shown in Into the Woods) to deliver a well-scripted, solid interpretation of the character, even though Julie Andrews still sits on the throne for the best Mary Poppins to date. After earlier this year, Blunt starred in amazing horror pic A Quiet Place, this was a much-needed palate cleanser. Overall, Blunt provides more than enough to break even that she is not as wonderful as Julie Andrews, and adds another suitable role to her collection of brilliant performances, truly, Blunt shines.

Secondly, we saw actor Ben Wishshaw known for the Paddington couplet, the James Bond franchise, The Danish Girl etc. playing Michael Banks. While it is very nice to see Wishshaw bring Michael to grown-up years, and the actor is known for supposedly above-average roles, particularly the voice of Paddington, I miss the cute, little Michael so well-portrayed in the original, the younger version had much more important scenes, and even enough songs to go around, so while Wishshaw fits the adult Michael, director Rob Marshall greatly mis-uses the talented actor, and gives him just one poorly written song.

Thirdly, we have actor Lin-Manuel Miranda known for The Odd Life of Timothy Green, the hit-musical, Hamilton, BoJack Horseman as Jack. While we do not usually see Miranda on-screen, we have seen more than enough talent on stage lending his singing voice to Hamilton, which he supposedly blew the crowds away; While, in Mary Poppins Returns, it might not be his most magical performance, he brings many delightful songs, particularly “Under the London Sky” which is truly brilliant, and his dazzling appearance on-screen coming with more than enough chemistry with the action-packed cast to go around.

The more supporting roles remained Wilkin and Cousin Topsy, played by Colin Firth and Meryl Streep (in that order), Firth delivers a simple, but small and satisfying little performance that resonated with the audience, and Meryl Streep shined in her one song “Turning Turtle”, where she delivered a fun, magical performance that was clearly magnetic. The film has also packed with cameos which included refreshing show-ups from Dick-Van Dyke, Angela Lansbury and even Karen Dotrice (played Jane in the original) who had a cute little scene.

Quality

Directing this new piece of Disney fluff is filmmaker Rob Marshall known for Into the Woods, Chicago, Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides and Nine. Marshall is perfect for the film, mostly credited for musicals that feature talented casts, and dazzling music, and while he does hit some very basic targets in Mary Poppins Returns, Marshall never quite captures what made the original so amazing.

Delivering dazzling special effects, working with most of the cast fairly well and producing some good songs and choreography, but featuring a cluttered story, and stiff directing, Marshall does not quite lift off of the ground, however the talented works from an all-star cast, visuals and music deliver a spoon full of sugar for the audience.

Special effects wise, Mary Poppins Returns stands at a reported 130M production budget, which may be a little excessive, but its visuals out-man that fact, delivering creative, and all-above fun eye-candy which in my opinion, dazzles me. The film has already delivered a 22.235M three-day, and a 31.049M five-day, and is tracking towards a 40M+ seven-day weekend which is most likely enough to break even with international help. This budget is much higher than most of Marshall’s work, topping the 45-50M costs of Chicago and Into the Woods, but surprisingly, it works.

Storyline wise, this surprisingly remained the film’s weakest point, not able to find balance between special effects and intelligence, the film just remained too cluttered, stuffing in every possible character into each little scene, which translates into “loud madness”, and the pic’s running time, standing at 2 hours and 10 minutes is also too bloated and extended, and is mostly caused by the stiff beginning 20 minutes or so that could be easily condensed, and it may not make you want to dance for the whole time.

Aging ‘The Umbrella’

Very similar to other Disney live-action adaptations, Mary Poppins Returns stays true to its reported PG rating, and may, arguably be G-rated, the film does include some very mild violence that may be a little tense for the youngest of viewers, some rude language, and very little sexuality that does not usually take place.

The violence includes a chase scene that takes place through a dark forest, but is animated, there are scenes of argumentation from a mean banker to children, and yelling in a discussion between Michael and his children, and the neighbor to the Banks’ fires a cannon every day.

Language wise, there is rude humor that includes pea brain, fool, buffoon and common British dialect such as bloody, and blasted. Sexuality wise, there is many scenes of flirting between Jane and Jack, and one implies that Jack likes her, and very vague lyrics in a song “she only wore a smile, plus two feathers and a leaf” implying that the person was naked, and there was a hip-thrust dance move by Mary.

Mary Poppins Showdown

Mary Poppins Returns 67% sweet/sour

Violence: ⭐⭐☆☆☆

Language: ⭐⭐☆☆☆

Sex: ⭐⭐☆☆☆

Age Rating: 6+

Mary Poppins 90% sweet

Violence: ⭐☆☆☆☆

Language: ☆☆☆☆☆

Sex: ⭐☆☆☆☆

Age Rating: 3+

Mary Poppins Returns 67% sweet/sour

Storyline: ⭐⭐☆☆☆

Cast: ⭐⭐⭐⭐☆

Role Models: ⭐⭐⭐⭐☆

Mary Poppins 90% sweet

Storyline: ⭐⭐⭐⭐☆

Cast: ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

Role Models: ⭐⭐⭐⭐☆

News Related to Mary Poppins Returns

$plurge, $tream, $kip: Although occasionally burdened with a cluttered story, Mary Poppins Returns features a fantastic cast, solid music and creates enough nostalgic magic, even without ever matching up to the original…$TREAM IT

Rated: PG

Run Time: 130 minutes

Director: Rob Marshall

A QUINN REVIEW: MARY POPPINS: RETURNS

MARY POPPINS: RETURNS

(2018)

AGE: 5+

75% SWEET

So What’s the Story?

Mary Poppins: Returns is about the return of the magical nanny Mary Poppins to help the Bank’s children, during the great slump by showing them a marvelous world of creativity, and imagination that brightens up each of their lives. Meanwhile Michael Banks (the father) struggles to keep the families house from being sold back to the bank. Filled with imagination, and some solid dance routines, here is my review for Mary Poppins: Returns.

Is It Worth Your While?

Mary Poppins: Returns has many good things during the film, but does not necessarily live up to the original with an 89% rating. Now here are my reasons. First of all, I thought that the directing was overall good. He provided solid dance routines throughout the film, but the most shocking one was when the candle lighters danced around the lamps, there I feel like he really captured the image. Next I thought that the special effects were cool to watch, and I thought that it was a creative idea bringing back old animation, and mixing it with real life scenes during the movie. I thought that the script was good, and provided some excellent songs that were either calming, jumpy, fun or all of the three. My main problem was the story. I thought that it did not emotionally touch me as much as the original’s, and by using too many themes from the original it made it a bit predictable the whole way through. Overall I thought that Mary Poppins: Returns had good directing, cool special effects, a good script, but a flawed storyline.

How Was the Cast?

The cast in Mary Poppins: Returns was overall good. First we have Emily Blunt as Mary Poppins. She gave the most shocking performance in the movie acting so full of herself, and being as jolly as she could be, her performance soared as one of the best I’ve seen in a long time. Next we have Lin Manuel Miranda as Jack. I thought that although missing a perfect cockney accent, his dances, and voice was overall solid, providing a happy, and funny experience for the audience. Third we have Ben Whishaw as michael banks. He was extremely emotional, and surprised me with a talented singing voice, andx overall I think was perfect for this particular role. Fourth, and finally we have Colin Firth Wilkins/Wolf. I thought that he was a good villain, and provided a creepy performance that was not over the top, or ridiculous, but just plain great.

Aging ‘The Balloon’

Mary Poppins: Returns is practically harmless for kids. It provides laughter, color, and a sense of adventure throughout the movie. Although having some mild emotional themes, take your whole family to see it, your in for a spoonful of sugar indeed. Mary Poppins: Returns is perfect for kids, and families willing to go for the ride.

Buy Mary Poppins Returns on Amazon for $14.99 or rent it for $2.99

A QUINN REVIEW: AQUAMAN

AQUAMAN

(2018)

AGE: 13+

85% SWEET

So What’s the Story?

Arthur Curry, the son of a lighthouse keeper, and the queen of Atlantis soon learns that he is the true heir to the throne, but knows that he can not leave the surface. However he soon learns that his half brother king Orm plots to rage war upon the surface world. Therefore Arthur is forced to go back to his world, and take his rightful place as king, and stop the war. To do this he must find the indestructible trident forged from Poseidon himself that can be used for good or evil. With the help of Princess Mera, the fate of two worlds is in his hands.

Is It Worth Your While?

DC has not been a good franchise over the years, but with the shockingly good Wonder Woman, I thought wow good job, but now that Aquaman has hit, I thought could DC continue this streak of good movies. Aquaman blew me away! First of all the directing by James Wan, known director from Furious 7, and the Conjuring franchise. Used pure creativity, and a pure sense of wonder bringing to life unimaginable worlds, and ideas that are just so amazing that it’s hard not to like them. He also incredibly directed action scenes with amazing special effects, and graphics. Next I thought that the special effects were pretty much as good as any great MARVEL film. In other words, they sure improved off of other DC adaptations. The worlds, the action, and a great kiss at the end surely deserves at least a nomination in the Sweet, Sweet awards. Also I thought that the musical score was awesome, dark, and just got stuck in your head (in a good way) after you finished the film. In addition the story’s plot was similar to other films such as Black Panther, but was also so much more. Next I thought that the script was filled with humor, and emotion that was just hard to resist. Are there any flaws with Aquaman? Well one in particular that brought it down from at least a 90% score. I thought that there were so many good opportunities to end the movie, and build more suspense. I mean I liked the final fight, but since Aquaman 2 is already in the works, maybe they could of had it then. Overall Aquaman has creative special effects, great directing, a great script, and story, but a small flaw of too many endings.

How Was the Cast?

The cast in Aquaman did an outstanding job. First we have Jason Momoa as Arthur Curry/Aquaman. He was funny, realistic, and packed the most power in the movie with his amazing, and irresistable performance that can’t be missed. He worked perfectly with the character, and the script, plus the some of the sickest hair you will ever see. Next we have Amber Heard as Princess Mera. Although it seems she is mostly trying to be like Scarlett Johansson throughout the movie, she actually does a pretty good job playing the role. She was also realistic, and funny providing a good joke here, and there. Third we have Willem Dafoe as Vulko. He worked well with the training scenes, and his part of the script while providing a great performance for the character. Kind of reminding you of the next Obi Wan Kenobi. He never really does bad in films such as Spider-Man or now Aquaman. He can easily provide emotion, and a sense of realism into the movie. Fourth, and finally we have Patrick Wilson as King Orm. Scary, realistic, and suiting the villain well comes Patrick Wilson playing the half brother of Arthur Curry. He did well with the action, and his script, and was perfect for the role of a bad guy. Plus his chemistry with other actors was serious, and overall great.

Aging ‘the Trident’

Aquaman has tons of action throughout the movie. Laser fights, hand to hand combat, explosions. There are frightening creatures that live in a very dark world, there are also monsters, and other types of creatures in the movie. However it teaches the message of never giving up, and teamwork that would be very inspirational to see.

Buy Aquaman on Amazon for $9.99 or rent it for 3.99

"Aquaman" is a Dazzling DC Superhero Picture that Suffers from an Overload of Action Sequences

By: Keaton Marcus

Aquaman/Arthur Curry (Jason Momoa) in Aquaman

Genre/Action/Adventure

Age Rating/12+

Lemonradar/65% sweet/sour

Introduction

Hi, this is Keaton Marcus and today I am reviewing DC’s newest comic adaptation, Aquaman, starring Jason Momoa, Amber Heard, Willem Dafoe, and Nicole Kidman. When the queen of Atlantis, Atlanna (Kidman) gives birth to half breed Atlantean, Arthur Curry, she is executed for raising the boy on land. When Arthur (Momoa) learns that he has the special powers of an Atlantean, and unless he finds the trident of Atlantis, his corrupted brother, King Orm will start a war with the surface world; When a new villain arises, known as Black Manta, Arthur and Princess Mera (Heard) team up to search for the Trident and to stop this war once and for all.

How Was The Cast?

After seeing Momoa first appear as the iconic character of Aquaman in pitiful DC team-up Justice League, the actor returns once again to perform in the character’s first stand-alone flick. Surprisingly, Momoa brings laughs, and lots of charisma to the table. Supporting roles include actress Amber Heard taking on Princess Mera, and even two veterans: Willem Dafoe and Nicole Kidman play Vulco and Queen Atlanna (in that order).

Firstly, as mentioned, we saw actor Jason Momoa known for Game of Thrones, Conan the Barbarian, Justice League, Braven, The Bad Batch etc. return for the role of Aquaman/Arthur Curry. As noted although he tends to have amazing roles wasted in sub-par films; In Aquaman, the actor delivers chemistry with the fellow cast members, good humor, laughs, his cocky persona, and strong build  which makes him utterly perfect for the role, almost creating DC’s version of Chris Hemsworth’s Thor in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. This is a huge improvement on other DC adapted characters such as Ben Affleck’s tired Batman, and Henry Cavill’s flimsy Superman. With Aquaman 2 already in the works, we expect Momoa to deliver the same comedy, and joyfulness soon. Overall, among the amazing action sequences, and special effects, Momoa rises to deliver laughs, abundant charm, and an almost perfect (and muscular) vision for the popular comics character, effectively bringing Aquaman from pages to screen.

Secondly, we saw actress Amber Heard known for Drive Angry, The Rum Diary, Zombieland, Pineapple Express etc. play Princess Mera. Although known for some supposedly solid comedies, such as Zombieland, with co-stars Woody Harrelson and Jesse Eisenberg, she is objectified, and mis-used in almost every single film by the director, however in Heard’s newest feature film, filmmaker James Wan successfully delivers a kick-ass, powerful character, while the Marvel Cinematic Universe tends to be much more evolved in creating strong female characters, the DCEU, after having Gal Gadot deliver an amazing performance as Wonder Woman, the male-driven franchise is finally moving to the 21st Century. In the film, there were many other actresses’ that could do even better, in particular Scarlett Johansson who plays a kick-ass Black Widow in Avengers, Heard is a decent match with Momoa, and works very well with the actually, very interesting character. Overall, Heard does not come from much, but still manages to deliver a solid performance, bringing some banter. Fits the character and is overall yet another kick-ass DC female character.

Moving on to the more supporting roles, we saw veteran Willem Dafoe (Platoon) deliver a cheesy, abeit good fun type-performance with nice, slicked back hair, giving a reassuring sign that the legend still has talent. And lastly actress Nicole Kidman (Australia) surprisingly joins the bunch with a decent layout for Queen Atlanna, a second powerful female character that overall really delivers.

Quality

Directing this water-themed superhero pic is filmmaker James Wan known for Furious 7, The Conjuring, Saw, Insidious etc. Mostly known for gory, R-rated Horror pics, Wan bears a very different career than most other DC film directors.

Surprisingly, Wan makes it work, delivering thrilling action sequences, good performances from the leading roles, eye-catching special effects, and even a solid batch of story and heart at the helm, even though the script might not be as strong as it should be. A big improvement over Zack Snyder’s Justice League and Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice, who although brought some great special effects, the productions were utterly brainless, however Wan creatively, and successfully brings Aquaman to the big-screen.

Special effects wise, standing at a reported 160-200M production cost, Aquaman is one of the most beautiful films of the year, delivering a creative vision of Atlantis, surprisingly amazing set-pieces that come with beautiful filming locations, and many, good battle and action sequences that are driven by wonderful CGI. Compared to other DC budgets, it reigns over Wonder Woman (120-150M), is on parr with Suicide Squad (175M), and Green Lantern (200M), while it is smartly behind the excessive 225M+ production costs for Man of Steel and Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice, or even the massive 300M spent for Justice League. Box Office wise, this averaged 180M cost is respectable, as it is predicted to open with 100M+, delivering another DC hit.

Storyline wise, unlike many other DC pics, Aquaman not only hits the bar with visuals, it also strikes the tone for intelligence, delivering a surprisingly coherent, thrilling story and plot, juggling many different tales, and plots at once, and while the script writing does occasionally water-log this fun adventure, the visuals, acting and directing easily outweigh it.

Aging ‘The Trident’

Very similar age-range to other superhero pics, Aquaman stays completely true to its PG-13 rating. Violence includes the common comic-book type action, some generic language and many scenes that include flirting, and banter.

The violence includes lots of fantastical action sequences, some blood shown while Arthur and Mera fight against creepy monsters, with punctures in the head and stomach, but very little shown, near the end of the pic, there is an epic-type, but action-packed battle that includes lasers, explosions and loud sound, and in the film Arthur and Orm compete in a Gladiator-type match that features intense (and fun) sword-fighting-type moves with the two Tridents.

Language wise, there is one use of d..k, and other rare uses of ass, hell, s..t, and a cut-off what the f..k. Sexuality wise, there is the common flirting, hugging and banter, and near the end Arthur and Mera share a passionate kiss with each other.

Best DCEU Movies Showdown

Aquaman 86% sweet

Violence: ⭐⭐⭐⭐☆

Language: ⭐⭐⭐☆☆

Sex: ⭐⭐☆☆☆

Age Rating: 12+

Wonder Woman 85% sweet

Violence: ⭐⭐⭐⭐☆

Language: ⭐⭐☆☆☆

Sex: ⭐⭐☆☆☆

Age Rating: 11+

Aquaman 86% sweet

Storyline: ⭐⭐⭐⭐☆

Cast: ⭐⭐⭐⭐☆

Role Models: ⭐⭐⭐⭐☆

Wonder Woman 85% sweet

Storyline: ⭐⭐⭐⭐☆

Cast: ⭐⭐⭐⭐☆

Role Models: ⭐⭐⭐⭐☆

News Related to Aquaman

$plurge, $tream, $kip: Although occasionally water-logged by script-writing, Aquaman delivers spectacular visuals, charisma within the talented cast, an intelligent story and overall brings the best DC film since The Dark Knight to the table…$PLURGE IT

Rated: PG-13

Run Time: 143 minutes

Director: James Wan

"Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse" Provides an Excellent Animated Counterpart to the Franchise

By: Keaton Marcus

Miles Morales (Shameik Moore) in Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse

Genre/Action/Kids/Family

Age Rating/9+

Lemonradar/88% sweet

So, What’s the Story

Hi, this is Keaton Marcus (13) from Sweet and Sour Movie Reviews and today I will be reviewing Sony/Colombia’s newest Marvel installment, Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse. Miles Morales, a teenager who lives in Brooklyn is struggling in his new elite boarding school, feeling different; When his Uncle Aaron takes Miles to the underground, he is bitten by a radioactive spider, and acquires the powers of Spider-Man. However, when a new villain known as Kingpin arises, and uses a Universe Collider to bring different dimensions together in hope of bringing his family back, he fails, and brings and unique versions of Spider-Man to Brooklyn. The Collider causes earthquake-like destruction to New York, and the team must stop Kingpin before he tries again.

How Was The Cast?

Refreshingly unique to other installments in the inter-connected Spider-Man universe, Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse is utterly successful in bringing unfamiliar actor Shameik Moore to take on the role of Miles Morales, bringing laughs, and above all, a truckload of diversity. Supporting roles include actress Hailee Steinfeld as Spider-Gwen/Gwen Stacy, Jake Johnson as Peter B. Parker, and even two more seasoned veterans, Academy Award winner Nicholas Cage voices Spider-Man Noir, and Academy Award winner Mahershala Ali voicing Uncle Aaron.

As noted, known for Dope, Incredible Crew, The Watsons Go to Birmingham actor Shameik Moore plays Miles Morales. Black Panther started the diversity stand-up for superhero films earlier this year with an all-black cast, including Chadwick Boseman and Michael B. Jordan, and scored an impressive 85% “sweet” on the Lemonradar. With Spider-Verse released, scoring an even better 91% “sweet”, it turns out that you do not need a bunch of superstars to make a great film. Sony/Colombia takes the risk on this, and Spider-Verse seldom follows the generic layout for a common Spider-Man flick. Shameik Moore, new to the film business, delivers a magnetic performance, leading the film with hip-Spider-Man type acting and bringing many laughs that Tobey Maguire nor Andrew Garfield ever delivered. Playing the best-acted Spider-Man there is, Moore is phenomenal having terrific chemistry with the surrounding cast members. Amidst the loud music, colorful animation and surprisingly thrilling action sequences, Moore delivers the family-friendly, diverse, and funny neighborhood Spider-Man that we thought we would never have.

Secondly, we see actress Hailee Steinfeld known for Ender’s Game, The Edge of Seventeen, 3 Days to Kill, True Grit etc. voicing Spider-Gwen/Gwen Stacy. Performing in last weekend’s Bumblebee (70% sweet/sour), Hailee leads with a committed performance, remaining the best Transformers hero to-date, Steinfeld delivers another solid outing in Spider-Verse. She introduces the character of Spider-Gwen to the big-screen for the first time with a bold, unique performance that really works. Steinfeld makes genuine gender diversity amidst the cast, and after Bumblebee, the actress opens up to a completely different, but yet another kick-ass female character, and audiences truly care about Gwen Stacy just as much as the run-of-the-mill Peter Parker (crossing the fingers that Gwen gets her own film).

Thirdly, known for The Mummy, Tag and 21 Jump Street, actor Jake Johnson voices Peter B. Parker. Not just the common, by-the-numbers Peter Parker, nerdy, skinny and weak, Johnson’s Parker is a lazy bum, which although is strange, at least the actor never adheres to the generic formula. Johnson, wasted last year in Tom Cruise’s horrible fantasy reboot, The Mummy (35% sour), and delivering just a supposedly average supporting role in this year’s comedy, Tag, the unfamiliar actor needed something new. His newest role in Spider-Verse is actually very good, delivering a nice, refreshing, Peter Parker from another universe, brings the common laughs, and has natural chemistry with the other talents on-screen. As mentioned, two veterans also join the cast, actor Nicholas Cage carries a surprisingly committed performance, and introducing Spider-Man Noir to the big-screen with an above-average outing, delivering a sign that despite all of Cage’s slumps, he can still act with a good director (s). Otherwise, Academy Award winner Mahershala Ali hands out a fantastic, twisty performance as Miles’ uncle, and the villain, Prowler who is a new-Terminator-type character that is overall triumphant.

Is It Worth Your While?

Directing this Spider-Man spin-off are the three filmmakers Rodney Rothman (known for his work on Forgetting Sarah Marshall, 21 Jump Street, The Five-Year Engagement), Peter Ramsey (Rise of the Guardians) and Bob Persichetti (animation department for Treasure Planet, Shrek 2 etc.) who all direct with style.

They find an amazing balance between dazzling animation, an intelligent story, resonating messages, fantastic lead performances and another successful diverse superhero pic, that may be at times cluttered with wonderful characters, but the many positives make Spider-Verse one of the best superhero origins of all time.

Rothman, one of the fantastic directors, also wrote the heroic screenplay with Phil Lord which resonates with the actors, and conveys the laughs, and creative writing that we would never expect from an animated Spider-Man pic. After Ruben Fleischer directed this year’s Venom (70% sweet/sour) with incoherence, Sony/Marvel offers their best film to date.

Special effects wise, Spider-Verse stands at a skinny 90M budget, and features dazzling animation, that is not only creatively used, it holds a layout of a superhero comic book creating a never-before-seen superhero pic to the audience. The film is colorful, and a huge step-up for the Sony Animation department. The film debuted with over 35M, delivering the biggest animated opening of December, keeping the superhero alive, and topping the Box Office. The following weekend, the film grossed over 16M and crossed 73M domestically after the five-day weekend. To date, the film has grossed an impressive 91M domestically and over 156M worldwide. It has yet to debut in Japan, while looking at another good third weekend, and looks to cross 100M in the next couple of days. Compared to other Spider-Man pics, the film looks to be way more profitable. Spider-Man (139M budget), Spider-Man 2 (at 200M), Spider-Man 3 (at 258M), and then Andrew Garfield rebooted the franchise with The Amazing Spider-Man which stood at (200-230M budget), and The Amazing Spider-Man 2 at 200M, all the way to a possible 293M budget, then the money-making franchise was rebooted again, starring Tom Holland, with Spider-Man: Homecoming standing at a 175M budget. Storyline wise, unlike most action films, Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse finds amazing balance between intelligence and visuals;

Standing at 100 minutes, the film has a perfect running time, delivering just what the audience expected, and so much more. This spin-off has brains and a diverse story, all the other Spider-Man flicks run over 2 hours, though Spider-Verse proves that you do not need a bloated running time nor an inflated budget to deliver a quality story

Aging ‘The Multiverse’

Much more family friendly than other superhero flicks, Spider-Verse carries a reported PG-rating, and is a very good Marvel-type installment for older kids. The film includes moderate, animated action sequences that are loud for the youngest of viewers, some rude language and very mild sexuality.

The violence includes common comic-book action sequences, dialed down, with large-scale destruction, including many loud explosions from the Collider, gun-fights, and a long-scene of hand-to-hand combat in Aunt May’s house, the multiverse causes earthquake-type rumblings and destroys many buildings in Brooklyn and Kingpin/Wilson Fisk is brutal, and does not stop his violence until he finds his family.

Language wise, there are uses of crap and hell, and insults such as janky, old, broke, hobo, fat, stupid, dumb and pig. Sexuality wise, there are many scenes of flirting between Miles and Gwen, and Miles uses a flirtatious move on her learned from his Uncle Aaron, and later they hug, but do not go further than that.

Best Spidey Showdown
Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse 91% sweet

Violence: ⭐⭐⭐☆☆

Language: ⭐⭐☆☆☆

Sex: ⭐⭐☆☆☆

Age Rating: 9+

Spider-Man 90% sweet

Violence: ⭐⭐⭐⭐☆

Language: ⭐⭐☆☆☆

Sex: ⭐⭐⭐☆☆

Age Rating: 12+

Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse 91% sweet

Storyline: ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

Cast: ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

Role Models: ⭐⭐⭐⭐☆

Spider-Man 90% sweet

Storyline: ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

Cast: ⭐⭐⭐⭐☆

Role Models: ⭐⭐⭐⭐☆

News Related to Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse

$plurge, $tream, $kip: Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse delivers a diverse cast, fantastic animation and a unique, bold story which bolsters its inviting premise…$PLURGE IT

Rated: PG

Run Time: 100 Minutes

Director: Rodney Rothman, Peter Ramsey, Bob Persichetti

A QUINN REVIEW: SPIDER-MAN INTO THE SPIDER-VERSE

SPIDER-MAN: INTO THE SPIDER-VERSE

(2018)

AGE: 9+

90% SWEET

So What’s the Story?

Based on the comics by MARVEL comes Spiderman: Into the Spiderverse. Young Miles Morales, a normal school student from Brooklyn is bitten by a radioactive spider. Soon he undercovers a plot being set by King Pin to unleash a machine called the collider upon the city. While testing the machine King Pin accidentally opens five other dimensions in the multiverse unleashing five other Spider people into Miles world. Together, they must figure out how to stop the collider before it destroys Brooklyn.

Is It Worth Your While

Spiderman Into the Spider-Verse is an incredible achievement for Sony animation, and a great leap for MARVEL. Now here are my reasons: First of all the directing. Now I know that there are three directors to get through here, but with the proper research, I should be able to explain them all, and what they have done in there career. First we have Bob Persichetti. He is a first time director, but he has worked in the animation department for years. Flushed Away 67% sweet/sour, The Emperor’s New Groove 80% sweet, Shrek 2 89% sweet, are just few of what he has done in the animation, and story department. Next we have Peter Ramsey. Who directed Rise of the Guardians 78% sweet, and now Spider-Verse. This guy has done 30 films in the art department, Such as Minority Report - No Score yet, Men In Black 75% sweet, and lot’s of others! We can all agree that these first two rookie directors obviously have a lot of talent in the art, and animation departments for the majority of movies they have done. Third is our friend Rodney Rothman, full disclosure we have had breakfast with him in the past, and talked about movies together, but I swear that this movie rocks regardless of hanging with Rodney. He obviously is a big writer for films, and TV with many written episodes for TV seasons such as The Late Night Show with David Letterman, and a lot of others that I know nothing about, and now Spider-Verse, and soon a 21 Jump Street spinoff. He is also a rookie director having only done this film, and soon the Jump Street spinoff, and something called, well The Something. Overall these three directors combined their amazing, and diverse talents to make something truly special. Next I thought that the animation in the film was some of the most spectacular I have seen in a long time. without wearing glasses it still felt 3D, it was colorful, and stylish, and overall was just a wonder to behold for children and all ages. Third, I thought that the soundtrack was fantastic, catchy, and a whole lot of fun whilst it swirled around your head while you saw the action happening. Fourth, I thought that the story was intelligent, and highly compelling and inspiring for the heart and soul. I thought that it was a cool idea to bring five different types of spider people into the movie, meaning five times the laughter, five times the emotion, and five times the Spider-Man. Finally I thought that the script by Rodney Rothman, and Phil Lord was funny and creatively entertaining for the whole audience to witness. Overall I thought that Spider-Man into the Spider-Verse had great directing, fantastic animation, and a creative soundtrack, script, and storyline.

How Was the Cast?

The cast in Spider-Man Into the Spider-Verse was funny, and overall great. First we have Shameik Moore as Miles Morales/Spider-Man. I thought that he was funny, and had a great, and realistic voice for his animated character. His script, and origin story clearly worked well with the actor too. Next we have Jake Johnson as Peter Parker/Spider-Man. Playing a run down, and older version of Spider-Man clearly was a match with his incredible, and funny talent with every scene that he does including the awesome training scene in the laboratory that was completely hysterical with both characters acting dorky. Overall I thought that Jake Johnson did a wonderful job playing this new Spider-Man. Third we have Hailee Steinfeld as Gwen Stacy/Spider-Gwen. Wow, she has done two of the best reviewed movies of the year! Bumblebee 80% sweet, and now Spider-Verse 90% sweet, and all in the same year! She played the character perfectly, providing laughter, and attitude throughout the film. Overall she is doing extremely well as a young actress, and I hope that she will continue to play in great films. Fourth and finally we have Brian Tyree Henry as Jefferson Davis. Overall I thought that he was the most moving character of the film, with a great piece of script writing, and a great actor to go with it.

Aging ‘The Multiverse’

Spider-Man into the Spider-Verse has tons of action including explosions, and gunshots. Also there are a few emotional scenes that could be hard to get through depending on your age. There is a good message in the movie stating that you can be who you choose to be, and anyone can be Spider-Man. The characters never give up, and are inspirational for children. Overall I recommend this film for ages 9 and up.

Buy Spider-Man: Into the Spider-verse on Amazon for $9.99 or rent it for $3.99

"Mortal Engines" Has a Unique Premise, and Dazzling Visuals--Which are Not Enough to Save the Fantasy from an Insufficient Screenplay, and Character Development

By: Keaton Marcus

London in Mortal Engines

Genre/Action/Adventure

Age Rating/12+

Lemonradar/50/100 “sour”

‘Mortal Engines’ does leave the audiences guessing that the creators, Peter Jackson and Co. were preparing to make an epic new saga, as teased in the massive, exhausting trailer, especially since the original book ended up a quartet. Jackson also changed the finale of the book, clearly setting up for a potential sequel. In the opening scene, while the blaring soundtrack by Junkie XL is playing, we are seeing a London on wheels chasing a generic mining town named Salthook—a visual marvel that features ridiculous, and awesome lines such as “prepare to ingest”— as audiences are sure to have fun seeing London eat the christ out of the small, speedy burg.

Overall, ‘Mortal Engines’ follows the story of a girl named Hester Shaw (Hera Himar), a girl with the intentions to assassinate her mother’s killer, Thaddeus Valentine (Hugo Weaving) who later creates a dangerous weapon that can destroy a city in a matter of seconds, called M.E.D.U.S.A, later on in the film, she meets Tom Natsworthy (Robert Sheehan) and outlaw Anna Fang (a career first performance from Jihae Kim), and team up to stop the weapon from destroying “The Shield Wall” (May or may not be a reference to Trump’s wall).

Peter Jackson— its writer and producer — and Christian Rivers are behind the visual effects and direction of ‘The Hobbit’ and ‘Lord of the Rings’ trilogies, which are both critically acclaimed, creative and dazzling; The creators are trying to make a sci-fi extravaganza, with a massive, behemoth-type plot, and they are willing to borrow spare parts from many other, and better epics such as ‘Star Wars’ and ‘Mad Max’. The visuals are consistently impressive, as expected, which is pretty much the only praise needed for a film called ‘Mortal Engines’, an ambitious movie about predator cities (London)— eating smaller, weaker cities; While the eye-candy is plenty, the film is almost completely bereft of intelligence.

The screenplay by Peter Jackson, is extremely disappointing, and the writing for the seemingly two-dimensional characters, Phillip Reeve’s novel did not only have brains, but it had a compelling narrative, told from Tom’s perspective. The film adaptation, however, changes the primary character to Hester Shaw, who always seemed a secondary role in the novel— and provides her with a poorly-written script—and a loud, formulaic film around her. The performances also struggle to come out against the massive film, as the only character I felt for was an undead cyborg, called Shrike, played by veteran Stephen Lang—Otherwise, another convincing showcase was a career-first outing for singer Jihae Kim, who plays Anna Fang, an anti-traction city outlaw. Hera Hilmar and Robert Sheehan who play Tom and Hester are wasted by the lack of direction and plotting around them.

The final verdict is: 'Mortal Engines' is an ambitious film filled with dazzling eye-candy, and the creators are willing to make a sci-fi extravaganza made out of spare parts, but its unoriginal plotting, screenplay and disappointing direction make the sci-fi epic a visual marvel that feels like ‘Star Wars’ on wheels.

Peter Jackson Showdown

Mortal Engines 50% sour

Violence: ⭐⭐⭐⭐☆

Language: ⭐☆☆☆☆

Sex: ⭐☆☆☆☆

Age Rating: 12+

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey 60% sweet/sour

Violence: ⭐⭐⭐⭐☆

Language: ⭐⭐☆☆☆

Sex: ☆☆☆☆☆

Age Rating: 13+

Mortal Engines 50% sour

Storyline: ⭐⭐☆☆☆

Cast: 2.5/5

Role Models: ⭐⭐⭐☆☆

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey 60% sweet/sour

Storyline: ⭐⭐⭐☆☆

Cast: ⭐⭐⭐☆☆

Role Models: ⭐⭐⭐☆☆

News Related to Mortal Engines

$plurge, $tream, $kip: Mortal Engines is a dazzling film, featuring occasional signs of ambition and creativity, but the script, direction and loud, incomprehensible action sequences make the novel adaptation pale compared to the fantastic source material…$KIP IT

'Mortal Engines’ bombed in the Box Office, grossing just 7.5M in its opening weekend, against an expensive 125M production cost, next weekend the film plummeted 76.8% to a sophomore frame of 1.7M.

A QUINN REVIEW: MORTAL ENGINES

MORTAL ENGINES

(2018)

AGE: 12+

65% SWEET/SOUR

So What’s the Story?

Based off of the book by Philip Reeve comes Mortal Engines. The story of the aftermath of the sixty minute war that brought mankind to the brink of extinction. However humans found a way to adapt to the new environment, by building cities on the sea, in the sky, but the most dangerous ones, were on wheels. The predator cities such as London hunted other small villages for survival. Hester Shaw the witness of her mother’s death swears to avenge her by killing Thaddeus Valentine. She soon meets up with Tom Natsworthy an outcast from London, and Anna Fang, an outlaw. Soon they uncover the plot that London has in store, and the rebellion is formed to stop it once, and for all.

Is It Worth Your While?

Mortal Engines overall satisfied me with many reasons, although it was clearly flawed. Now here are my reasons. First, directing by Christian Rivers was solid, and he surely produced some great shots that were beautiful, and great looking. However his directing had flaws such as the fact that he liked to zoom up on people’s facial reactions too much. My papa actually gave me this reason, and I didn’t agree with it at first, but then I looked deeper. Next I thought that the special effects were outrageously good, and produced an incredible experience for the audience that was colorful, and surprisingly not a mess. The musical score was also surprisingly good, and filled me with adrenaline in the big battle scene. However during this epic scene I felt some clear Star Wars Deja Vu with a few scenes. I mean the rebellion destroying the massive weapon with futuristic ships, I mean come on! The part when Hester, and Thaddeus are fighting, and something happens that is incredibly similar to one specific Star Wars film. Finally, the suspense level in the movie was very limited, meaning that there were no real surprises during the movie. Overall I thought that Mortal Engines had solid directing, great special effects, a good musical score, but some, want to be a Star Wars film stuff here, and there, and a low suspense level.

How Was the Cast?

The cast in Mortal Engines had some good performances, and ones that were, well you get the picture. First we have Hera Hilmar as Hester Shaw. She is not a well known actor, but she did pretty well in the film. She managed to provide emotion without going completely over the top, and seemed to fit the character quite well. Next we have Hugo Weaving as Thaddeus Valentine. He has worked with Peter Jackson before in the Lord of the Rings movies, but to my surprise, he actually was not that good. He seemed stiff, and confused with what was going on. Plus, the character did not seem to suit him at all, and made a serious man like him, look goofy. Third we have Jihae as Anna Fang. She is a new actress, but seemed to provide the most commitment, and laughter into her performance, resulting as the best one of the movie. Fourth, and finally we have Robert Sheehan as Tom Natsworthy. One of the weaker performances of the movie Tom clearly missed the mark for the character. The moment he entered the movie in his opening scene I immediately made up my mind about him. He was just an over the top actor during the whole film!

Aging ‘The Engine’

Mortal Engines is packed with action, and an enormous amount of special effects. There are explosions, gun fights, deaths, and a dark premise to the movie. In addition, there is a zombie that may frighten certain children. Overall I recommend this film to older tweens, and up.

Buy Mortal Engines on Amazon for $14.99

"Creed II" Uses the Same Generic Formula, but the Performances, and the Fight Scenes are Consistently Impressive

By: Keaton Marcus

Adonis Creed (Michael B. Jordan) and Rocky Balboa (Sylvester Stallone) in Creed II

Genre/Drama/Sports

Age Rating/12+

Lemonradar/68% sweet/sour

Introduction

Hi, this is Keaton Marcus from Sweet and Sour Movie Reviews and today I will be reviewing the sequel to the universally-acclaimed reboot/sequel to the Rocky franchise, Creed II. After the events of the first film, Adonis Creed (Michael B. Jordan) currently holds the title of the Heavyweight Champion of the World after wiping out Danny Wheeler, but when a new boxer by the name of Victor Drago, who he finds is the son of Ivan Drago (Dolph Lundgren), the fighter that killed his father, Apollo Creed in the ring; Adonis must balance his family life with Bianca Creed (Tessa Thompson) and attempt to take the looming challenge of the Drago family.

How Was The Cast?

Returning to the now “epic” Rocky franchise, yet again with another impressive lead performance is Michael B. Jordan; The actor succeeds with the series once again, proving that Jordan never half-asses it in a lead role, even in his worst films to date. Tessa Thompson also returns to this solid sequel, the actress plays the main female role, Bianca Creed which is well-directed. Supporting the cast is the series veteran, Sylvester Stallone taking the commonly-known role of Rocky Balboa. Also, pleasant returns include actor Dolph Lundgren, playing Ivan Drago and actress Phylicia Rashad returning for the role of Mary Anne Creed. Jordan, known for his previous roles in Black Panther, Creed, Fahrenheit 451, Fantastic Four and Friday Night Lights is becoming a superstar, now having many lead performances, in money-making pics and even TV. Jordan held a compelling performance in the original flick, introducing the character of Adonis Creed to the big-screen with universal success (scoring a 84% “sweet” on the Lemonradar), praising his acting; In Creed II, the actor delivers a very solid performance, with exhilarating boxing sequences, a suitably ripped look for the new franchise hero, and wonderful chemistry with the talents within the cast, despite the less-than-stellar script by Juel Taylor, barely comparing to the original. In his other, previous films, Jordan starred in reboot attempt Fantastic Four, which had an expensive budget, and a decent performance by Jordan, but was overall a crummy third try to the franchise (scoring 30% “sour”); Otherwise, earlier this year, Michael offered an emotionally compelling, as well as violent villain in superhero pic Black Panther (scoring 85% “sweet”); Also this year, based off of the critically-acclaimed book, Jordan starred as Guy Montag in Fahrenheit 451, and while the actor was magnetic for the role, it disappointed compared to the novel (scoring 40% “sour”). In his newest effort, this is one of the best films the actor has performed in, and provides the only franchise in his career with very solid success. Known for her previous performances in Creed, Thor: Ragnarok, Annihilation, Westworld and Sorry to Bother You is actress Tessa Thompson who returns to the franchise in a more quiet, though well-done performance. In the first Creed flick, the actress brought a new supporting role to her career, a position in which Thompson thrives, striking the tone emotionally for audiences; In her newest film, Thompson delivers a very low-key, if well-directed performance as Bianca Creed, Adonis’ current wife which is pale compared to the original, but hits all the basic targets for the role. The actress’ career really got going in popularity after she played Valkyrie in Thor: Ragnarok (scoring 86% “sweet”) which was never in the shadow of even Chris Hemsworth’s massive performance as Thor, delivering a funny and charismatic presentation, her best performance to date, still standing. Thirdly, franchise veteran, Sylvester Stallone known for the original five Rocky films, Creed, the Expendables trilogy, and Bullet to the Head, was in need of another great film, or even franchise, and that is when Coogler’s Creed came along. In Creed II, it is a very assuring sign to see Stallone  in another big, not to mention good franchise, as the actor started his career slump after the first three Rocky pics (90%, 63% and 69%) with Rocky IV scoring 28%, and Rocky V scoring 20%. Stallone continues the franchise with a very impressive supporting performance in the “eighth” installment to the franchise (if you include Rocky Balboa) with a tightly-directed script, and a nostalgic outing for the actor. Actor Dolph Lundgren, returning to the franchise, after playing Ivan Drago in Rocky IV, is the infamous Russian boxer who killed Creed’s father, Apollo, in the ring delivers a cool, if very supporting implementation in Creed II, after acting in DC’s superhero pic Aquaman (86% “sweet”) a few weeks ago. Otherwise, actress Phylicia Rashad returns from the original Creed, to play Adonis’ mom, Mary Anne Creed. Although in both movies, the director seldom uses the talented actress, Rashad’s chemistry and natural charisma on-screen help audiences fit one more important, but rarely seen character in the franchise.

Quality

Directing Rocky was filmmaker John G. Avildsen, who also directed the fifth installment, while Sylvester Stallone made films 2-4 with mostly positive results. Director of critically-acclaimed superhero flick Black Panther, filmmaker Ryan Coogler delivered wonderous results in Creed, balancing a talented cast, a compelling script, appealing performances by Jordan and Stallone, while striking the tone emotionally, overall making another above-average Rocky installment; Filmmaker Steven Caple Jr., who delivers his first wide-release pic, Creed II; This sequel packs less-punch than the original installments, and Creed, mostly adheres to the franchise formula and turns out to be more of a drama pic than sports film, but delivers solid lead performances from Michael B. Jordan and Tessa Thompson, exhilarating boxing sequences and a very well-told, albeit less-moving story. Offering another good Rocky pic, while never matching up to the original. In the Box Office, Creed II has grossed a fourth-to-best (in the franchise) of 114.388M domestically after its first 47 days in release, along with over 144M worldwide, on a 50M production budget; Compared to the previous installments, Rocky grossed 117.235M, Rocky II at 85.182M, Rocky III with 125.049M, Rocky IV with 127.873M, Rocky V at 40.946M, Rocky Balboa with 70.270M and Creed ending with an impressive 109.767M domestically. Storyline wise, Creed II has a less-compelling footing, and a generic plot will not help, but its nostalgic feeling, solid performances and a more low-key layout for the franchise, this solid sequel succeeds.

Aging ‘The Ring’

The film carries a reported MPAA rating of PG-13, and mostly stays true to the guideline, and is more-or-less similar to your run-of-the mill Rocky installment. The film includes some boxing violence, common, mildly used strong language and mild sexuality. The violence includes lots of scenes of intense boxing sequences, a spurt of blood is shown, and slow-motion is used for hard-hitting punches (for effect), there is also much pain caused in the intense training Adonis does, and after one fight Adonis loses and breaks ribs, ruptures kidneys and is shown very hurt in the hospital. Language wise, the film includes uses of s..t, hell, b..ch and damn, but is pretty mild. Sexuality wise, there is a passionate love scene between Adonis and Bianca, and while no nudity is shown, the basic layout is shown for some time.

Creed Showdown

Creed II 68% sweet/sour

Violence: ⭐⭐⭐☆☆

Language: ⭐⭐☆☆☆

Sex: ⭐⭐⭐☆☆

Age Rating: 12+  

Creed 84% sweet

Violence: ⭐⭐⭐☆☆

Language: ⭐⭐☆☆☆

Sex: ⭐⭐☆☆☆

Age Rating: 11+

Creed II 68% sweet/sour

Storyline: ⭐⭐⭐☆☆

Cast: ⭐⭐⭐⭐☆

Role Models: ⭐⭐⭐⭐☆

Creed 84% sweet

Storyline: ⭐⭐⭐⭐☆

Cast: ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

Role Models: ⭐⭐⭐⭐☆

News Related to Creed II

$plurge, $tream, $kip: Creed II lacks original punch, and adheres to franchise formula, but Michael B. Jordan’s compelling performance, exhilarating boxing sequences and solid storytelling make another above-average installment…$TREAM IT

Rated: PG-13

Run Time: 130 minutes

Director: Steven Caple Jr.

A QUINN REVIEW: RALPH BREAKS THE INTERNET

RALPH BREAKS THE INTERNET

(2018)

AGE: 4+

61% SOUR

So What’s the Story?

From Disney animation studios comes the second installment to the Wreck it Ralph franchise, in which Vanellope loses her game due to the loss of the player’s steering wheel. Desperate to find another one Ralph, and Vanellope travel to the internet in hopes of finding another steering wheel for Vanellope’s game on their journey they make new friends and undergo challenges along the way.

Is It Worth Your While?

Surprisingly, I don’t think so. Ralph Breaks the Internet was a clear disappointment in my point of view, and nothing compared to the original, but that does not mean that it was completely bad, now here are my reasons. First of all I thought that the directing by Phil Johnston, and Rich Moore was done poorly even with these two fantastic writers and directors. Phil Johnston was the writer of Zootopia 92% sweet, and the director for this installment, and writer for both Wreck it Ralph movies. Next we have Rich Moore, director of Zootopia, and writer+director of both Wreck it Ralph movies. What I thought was done so poorly with them is that I thought that most scenes were rushed, and filled with clutter, however some scenes had creative ideas, and a few jokes here and there. Also I thought that the end scene completely jumped the shark on a number of levels, plus the story’s message did not affect me as much as the original’s. Next I thought that the animation was not only colorful, but stunning, and beautiful to look at. This is the clear upside of the movie, that even thought the original’s animation was really good, I thought that this one improved a lot! Third I thought that the story had some creative ideas in it, but was not as entertaining, and compelling as the original’s. Fourth I thought that the script was funny, and filled with jokes that every audience will love. Overall Ralph Breaks the Internet had poor directing, a less compelling story and message, but colorful and stunning animation plus a funny script.

How Was the Cast?

Overall the cast in Ralph Breaks the Internet did not disappoint me. First we have John C. Reiley as Ralph. He never ceases to give audience members laughter throughout the whole movie. I have to say that Ralph has been one of his best performances yet because he not only can immediately get into character for every scene, but can also hook audiences in immediately. Next we have Sarah Silverman as Vanellope. I thought that she brought a sense of joy into the movie, and had a fantastic, and funny combination with the princesses in the film. Although she is not highly known far and wide, she has made her mark in this growing franchise. Third we have Gal Gadot as Shank. I’m surprised that she was in the movie given that she is also doing Wonder Woman 2, but in this she gave a stunning performance filled with character, and a sense of commitment to the role. Fourth and finally we have Taraji P. Henson as Yesss. I thought that she fit the character perfectly, and provided a few jokes along the way.

Aging ‘The Internet’

Ralph Breaks the Internet is completely harmless to children. Providing nothing but colorful animation, jokes, and many famous disney characters to watch and enjoy. Overall I recommend this film to children ages 4 and up.

"Green Book" is an Entertaining, and Breezy Dramedy Featuring Dazzling Performances

By: Keaton Marcus

Comedic filmmaker Peter Farrelly directs true story-based dramedy, "Green Book" and while it does not exactly "tackle" racism, the flick is a carefree, enjoyable and well-acted pic that is meriting a watch. In terms of the road trip genre, "Green Book" should be considered a landmark, as the film covers the potentially bumpy territory with surprisingly smooth execution; Considering the subject matter, the flick could be a lot better, and a contender for one of the best films of the year, the entertainment value-- the distinguished displays by an overweight Viggo Mortensen and a pinprick Mahershala Ali in the supporting role make "Green Book" a successful Farrelly-production that overcomes its genre clichès.

The film follows the story of an Italian American living in Brooklyn, named Tony Vallelonga aka Tony Lip (Mortensen) a loudmouth who works in a bar as a bouncer; But when the place is closed for renovations, Tony is looking for a job with enough money--he then finds that an African American pianist, Dr. Shirley (Ali) is looking for a chauffeur for his eight-week concert down in the south of America. The man surprisingly hires Tony, and the whole film plays out a road-trip film, but with many injected surprises between the lines.

The cast outshines any other prospect in the film; Viggo Mortensen tends to be the star of the show, playing the generic loudmouth Italian Tony--but remember the hunk we once knew from the early 2,000's in "The Lord of the Rings" trilogy, or the western sweeper "Hidalgo" from the year 2004. Well in "Green Book" the usually muscular actor reportedly gained over 35 pounds to play the role of Tony, and it clearly shows throughout the entire film that the Viggo we knew is almost unrecognizable in his newest effort. His performance is brilliant, and jaw-droppingly funny occasionally, despite some expected falters in the script, the entertaining film around them allows Mortensen to ease into the solid pic without ever (and I mean ever) playing it safe. Academy Award winner ("Moonlight") Mahershala Ali also joined the cast and plays pianist Dr. Shirley (as mentioned before). The actor's performance is superb and is one of the best-supporting showcases I have seen all year long; The odd-couple in the film is similar to the Farrelly-directed buddy comedy "Dumb and Dumber", and while not as funny, it is easily more clever and intelligent.

There are many obvious laughs during the movie, the initial idea that comes to my mind is the hysterical scene of when Tony introduces Kentucky Fried Chicken to Dr. Shirley, and while the doctor is unwilling at first, Vallelonga ultimately influences him, soon before they are both stuffing their faces in delicious, but oh so unhealthy food. Otherwise-- in one other exhibition, Dr. Shirley catches Tony writing to his wife Dolores (a talented Linda Cardellini) and helps him right annoyingly descriptive letters, changing his word choice, and fixing his punctuation.

"Green Book" also happens to be the most important, meaningful and (best) Farrelly directed film of all time. Peter Farrelly is generally known for directing gross-out comedies with his brother Bob, such as the aforementioned "Dumb and Dumber", the Jack Black-vehicle "Shallow Hall" or the Jim Carrey-starring "Me, Myself & Irene". Farrelly's films tend to be occasionally funny, but there generic plots and paper-thin character development generally make them average. This newest film is extremely surprising for such a juvenile filmmaker, especially since he made reportedly "racist" comments which hurt his chance in the Oscars for Best Director.

The final verdict is: "Green Book" is simplistic occasionally, and could make some more interesting points to take down racism, but the performances and easy laughs make this feel-good dramedy a worthy Oscar-contender that audiences will be cheering for...$PLURGE IT

FILM REVIEW “GREEN BOOK”

Dr. Shirley (Mahershala Ali) and Tony Vallelonga (Viggo Mortensen) in Green Book

Genre: Drama/Comedy

Age Rating: 13+

Lemonradar/Score: 76/100 "sweet"

"The Crimes of Grindewald" is a Dazzling, but Overstuffed "Potter" Installment

By: Keaton Marcus

Genre/Fantasy

Age Rating/12+

Lemonradar/41% sour

Introduction

Hi, this is Keaton Marcus from Sweet and Sour Movie Reviews and today I will be reviewing the newest installment to the Wizarding World saga, Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald. In the events of the first film, dark lord Gellert Grindelwald (Johnny Depp) was captured by the Ministry of Magic, but soon after, Grindelwald escapes his custody and seeks followers to destroy Albus Dumbledore (Jude Law) and to ensure that his mission for the purebloods to rule the earth over muggles is successful; Dumbledore reports to his most favored student, Newt Scamander (Eddie Redmayne), that Grindelwald is on the loose, Newt, Kowalski, Queenie and Tina must team up once again to face evil.

How Was The Cast?

The original Fantastic Beasts film was an enjoyable prequel to the legendary Harry Potter franchise even without having an ensemble cast, The Crimes of Grindelwald sticks to the same main characters, but adds many fresh faces which seems to be one of the film’s biggest problems; The sequel features actor Eddie Redmayne as Newt Scamander, Johnny Depp as Gellert Grindelwald, Katherine Waterston as Tina Goldstein while supporting roles include Jude Law as Albus Dumbledore, Alison Sudol as Queenie Goldstein, Dan Fogler as Jacob Kowalski, Ezra Miller as Credence Barebone and Zoe Kravitz as Leta Lestrange. As mentioned we saw Redmayne known for Jupiter Ascending, Les Miserables, The Theory of Everything etc. as Newt Scamander. In the first film, Redmayne was the most spectacular thing about the movie delivering a comedic and emotional performance while giving a very likeable charisma to the audience; In Grindelwald, his performance is respectively mediocre at best and while there lurk a few scenes of charm, almost the entire film, Eddie’s character is greatly misused by both director David Yates and writer J.K. Rowling, having to trudge in a horrifically bad script, while being surrounded by a whirlwind of new (and poorly executed) characters and surprisingly choppy action sequences. Overall, Redmayne has delivered many Oscar-worthy performances in the past, this however, is not one of them. Secondly we saw actor Johnny Depp known for the Pirates of the Caribbean franchise, Alice in Wonderland, Murder on the Orient Express, Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street, Into the Woods, Rango etc. as Gellert Grindelwald. At the end of Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them, we finally see Grindelwald in his true form, featuring Johnny Depp as the iconic villain, perfectly leading audiences for a sequel; Even though in Crimes of Grindelwald, we get to see much more of the titular character, Depp delivers terribly, splotching on an unidentifiable accent, a ridiculous (and unintentionally funny) costume and hair-due, all while being pounded down by a incoherent story, poor direction, writing and heavy production cost which is more than enough to trample the ever-so-talented Johnny Depp into oblivion, however, one compliment was the truly awesome quote of “I hate Paris” at the end of the film which at least captures Depp’s tendency to make the audience laugh (if that scene was even intentionally funny); Overall comparing Depp’s Gellert and Fiennes’ Voldemort is like contrasting The Phantom Menace and The Empire Strikes Back. Thirdly we saw actress Katherine Waterston known for Alien: Covenant, Logan Lucky, Mid90s etc. as Tina Goldstein. In the first movie, all though arguably a supporting role, Waterston playfully delivers a well-scripted and directed role actually forcing audiences to think about her as a main character, as much as Newt Scamander, which tends to be rare these days; After giving terrific outings in both Alien: Covenant and Logan Lucky in 2017, the actress needed another good role, when I first noticed that Waterston would be returning to the Wizarding World, I was expecting another solid performance, the result was painfully disappointing, giving the actress a lame part to work with, a lack of chemistry between Tina and Newt and pretty much drenching the talented, young actress in stock characters. Supporting roles were exceedingly well-cast (but misused) featuring actor Jude Law delivering ho-hum performance as young Dumbledore (much less convincing than Gambon’s version), terrible chemistry between actor Dan Fogler and actress Alison Sudol (pale compared to the first film’s charm) and disappointingly stiff performances by Ezra Miller and the talented Zoe Kravitz as Credence Barebone and Leta Lestrange.

Quality

Directing the film is acclaimed filmmaker David Yates known for directing most of the original Harry Potter franchise films including The Order of the Phoenix, The Half-Blood Prince, The Deathly Hallows P1+2, The Legend of Tarzan, and of course the original Fantastic Beasts film. Starting the film was a beautifully filmed, epic chase scene that was actually decently directed, but as the film goes on and the story becomes more confusing and incoherent, while adding more and more disappointing performances. Although this muddled sequel features visually dazzling special effects seen commonly in most Potter films, the brains’ spell was much weaker and less effective than previous installments, marking the first negatively-reviewed film in the Wizarding World saga. What was most missing about the film was “fantastic beasts”, and besides a couple nostalgic scenes with the Niffler (Newt’s cutest beast), there is nothing to love here. Special effects wise, the film stands at an official production budget of 200M, marking one of the highest costs in the franchise, The Sorcerer’s Stone (125M), The Chamber of Secrets (100M), The Prisoner of Azkaban (130M), The Goblet of Fire (150M), The Order of the Phoenix (150M), The Half-Blood Prince (250M), The Deathly Hallows P1 (250M), The Deathly Hallows P2 (250M) and, of course, Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them (180-200M). Although the story, performances, directing and script writing suffer from stiffness, the special effects and CGI flash are something to love in The Crimes of Grindelwald, using creative visuals, amazing set-pieces and the beautifully filmed beginning scene to make the film a dazzling, but brainless and senseless exercise, which is considered a disappointment compared to the original franchise. Storyline wise, although the film looks pretty, but is chaotic, confusing, loud and a complete mess which leaves you coming out the theater dreaming of a refund; In a literal sense, the sequel has no story (at least not a good one), or plot to really keep the audience's on the edge of their seats as they were in the original(s).

Aging ‘Grindelwald’

Darker than some of the earlier installments, The Crimes of Grindelwald has some strong action sequences, potentially creepy moments, common PG-13 rated language and some flirting, but what really will have kids running from their seat is how bad the quality is. The violence includes a weird, creepy appearance for Grindelwald, there is a short sequence of World War II with shooting, killing etc., of course there are magical-related action sequences, later on in the movie Aurors get burned by blueish fire (including one of the main characters), and there is a couple of threatening beasts. Language wise there is common mild language, but it should not be a problem for older kids, however, maybe the younger kids should skip this one; Sexuality wise, despite many scenes of flirting between Tina and Newt and Jacob and Queenie, there is no actual “sexuality”.

Fantastic Beasts Comparison

Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald 30% sour

Violence: ⭐⭐⭐⭐☆

Language: ⭐⭐☆☆☆

Sex: ⭐☆☆☆☆

Age Rating: 12+

Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them 73% sweet/sour

Violence: ⭐⭐⭐⭐☆

Language: ⭐⭐☆☆☆

Sex: ⭐☆☆☆☆

Age Rating: 12+

Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald 30% sour

Storyline: ⭐☆☆☆☆

Cast: ⭐☆☆☆☆

Role Models: ⭐⭐⭐☆☆

Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them 73% sweet/sour

Storyline: ⭐⭐⭐☆☆

Cast: ⭐⭐⭐⭐☆

Role Models: ⭐⭐⭐☆☆

News Related to Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald

$plurge, $tream, $kip: The Crimes of Grindelwald has visually dazzling special effects and a talented cast, however both are wasted in chaotic storytelling, stiff directing and a mess of a script…$KIP IT

A QUINN REVIEW FANTASTIC BEASTS: THE CRIMES OF GRINDELWALD

FANTASTIC BEASTS: THE CRIMES OF GRINDELWALD

(2018)

AGE: 10+

30% SOUR

So What’s the Story?

In the second installment to the beasts franchise. Grindelwald has escaped from prison in order to achieve his goal of wiping out all half bloods, and muggles. Dumbledore sends Newt to stop him from doing so.  As he reunites with his friends he heads out to paris to find hidden secrets from the past, and to find, and stop Grindelwald from unleashing his entire army upon the world.

Is It Worth Your While?

Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes Of Grindelwald was a complete disappointment for this evolving franchise, and for the Harry Potter franchise as well. Now here are my reasons. First of all the directing was so messy with out of control special effects all over the place, and not a good story or script to stop this problem. I mean this is the fantastic director of most of the new Harry Potter movies, and the first Fantastic Beasts as well. Overall I think that the directing was so much worse than the classical style of the original. Next I thought that the whole plot was just so boring, and had not enough twists or turns to keep you going. Also I could not quite point out what was going on in the movie because it was just confusing, and downright messy. Next I thought that the script was completely flawed, and did not work with the actors at all. I mean this is J.K. Rowling we are talking about right now, and it really just seemed like she rushed the entire thing. The only decent thing about the movie was that the special effects were pretty amazing, but again there’s really no surprise there. Overall I thought that Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes Of Grindelwald had good special effects, but a terrible story, and script.

How Was The Cast

Even the cast in the film did not do as well as the first one. First we have Eddie Redmayne as Newt Scamander. Now Eddie is a great actor in every one of his movies that he plays in, but the main flaw in this one is that he seemed to not work well with the terrible script, and I can’t blame him. Next we have Johnny Depp as Grindelwald. Two things you need to know before casting this dude into a movie. One, he is not fit to play a scary character, but he can do weird characters such as his previous role of Jack Sparrow. Two, casting him in this movie was the worst thing ever done to him. He had this fake accent that just made me cringe throughout the movie. Third we have Katherine Waterston as Tina Goldstein. Even she was not as good in this as in the first. She lacked the right amount of chemistry, and emotional depth with the characters, and seemed confused about what was going on during the movie. Fourth we have Dan Fogler as Jacob Kowalski. All I can say is that he went a little over the top in this film, and lacked so much of the humor from the first one. Fifth, and finally we have Jude Law as Albus Dumbledore. It was a creative idea to show young Dumbledore in the film, but it ended up to be a bad finale. Jude Law was a terrible choice for the role, and could have done so much better if he wanted to.

Aging ‘The Beasts’

Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald has mild action sequences. Grindelwald is a semi scary character for younger children. There is some flirting, and a premise that may be too confusing for younger ages. Some characters in it are strange, and completely weird. Overall I recommend this film to older kids, and up.

"The Grinch" Reboot Has Benedict Cumberbatch in a Disappointing Take

By: Keaton Marcus

Genre/Kids/Family

Age Rating/5+

Lemonradar/52% sour

Introduction

Hi, this is Keaton Marcus from Sweet and Sour Movie Reviews and today I will be reviewing Illumination’s take on The Grinch, based on Dr. Seuss’ acclaimed classic children’s book. In a little town called Whoville, Christmas has always been their biggest holiday, disrupting the Grinch’s peace and quiet up in his lonely mountain overlooking the place, when the Whos claim to make this year’s Christmas three-times bigger than last year, the Grinch decides that the only way to keep his solitude was to steal this year’s Christmas, all the toys and decorations; Later, he makes a plan to pose as Whoville’s idol, Santa Claus. Down in the little town of Whoville, a little girl called Cindy Lou Who plans to speak to Santa Claus to help her over-working single mother, Donna Lou Who.

How Was The Cast?

In this modernized retake on The Grinch, star Benedict Cumberbatch stars as the titular schemer, which is very unusual, and very risky, considering his British background and the tale being an all-american children’s book, the talented star does bring little to the table. Supporting roles include Rashida Jones as Donna Who, Cameron Seely as Cindy Lou Who and Kenan Thompson as Mr. Bricklebaum. Firstly, as noted, we saw Benedict Cumberbatch known for Doctor Strange, Avengers: Infinity War, The Imitation Game, the tv take on Sherlock, Penguins of Madagascar etc. play the iconic role of the Grinch. Cumberbatch does not bring much unique traits to the character, delivering a somewhat bland performance, and while there were laughs and sporadic giggles to be heard, Cumberbatch’s american-accent, and the wasting of his talent in this film is very disappointing; Being in multiple animated films and performing CGI’d characters (Smaug in The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings), and delivering fantastic performances as Sherlock Holmes, and many other live-action appearances, Cumberbatch cannot help but drown in the mess of a script and story. Overall, the talented actor has laughs, pratfalls and some great moments, but on the whole, he delivers a disappointingly mediocre performances. Secondly, we saw actress Rashida Jones known for The Office, Inside Out, The Simpsons, Our Idiot Brother, The Social Network etc. take on the role of Donna Who. Looking at her mostly comedic career, Jones is actually a very good actress overall, and looks as though she is seemingly right for the role of Cindy Lou Who’s overworked, single mother, Donna Who, this part has never actually been told to the audience in all three Grinch film adaptations, and while it is creative to bring another character to the screen, considering how funny Jones is in previous films and tv, directors Yarrow Cheney and Scott Mosier completely waste the talent; Failing to go deep on her character development, or focus on her for that matter, the newly added character of Donna Who is left in the wasteland of many other characters not receiving enough attention from the script. Overall, Rashida Jones delivers an unfunny, unfocused performance which is that much more disappointing considering her talent. Thirdly, actress Cameron Seely known for The Greatest Showman, Madam Secretary etc. as Cindy Lou Who. Being an iconic part to play throughout the years, in the original Grinch adaptation, directors Chuck Jones and Ben Washam portrayed the little girl as a soft-spoken, more timid version, in the year 2000, director Ron Howard failed to give the titular role more focus, ending up delivering a tired, up past her bedtime-type Cindy Lou, and currently, in The Grinch, the film gives her a spunky, energetic, more modern type nature, which works like a charm. Young actress Cameron Seely delivers a funny, over-the-top and all above cute performance as Cindy Lou. Lastly, for honorable mention, we had actor Kenan Thompson known for Big Fat Liar, Saturday Night Live, Snakes on a Plane, The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon, Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt etc. as Mr. Bricklebaum. Like actress Rashida Jones, Thompson plays a newly added character to the mythology, but with much more success; While I would love to see more of the actor playing the hysterical, laugh-out-loud role, Thompson gives enough comedic pleasures for the audience, delivering a very big, if supporting role in the film.

Is It Worth Your While?

Directing this third adaptation to the children’s book is directors Scott Mosier (Clerks, Good Will Hunting, Chasing Amy etc.) and Yarrow Cheney (The Secret Life of Pets) come together to film The Grinch. Having limited success, Mosier and Cheney do direct with enough visual wit, but receive mixed results from the cast, wasting both Benedict Cumberbatch and Rashida Jones, and have a tough time executing the original story, however their directing is an arguable improvement over Ron Howard’s atrocious filmmaking for How the Grinch Stole Christmas (2000), and they do scratch the surface many times, but ultimately fail to stand out amongst many other mediocre Dr. Seuss adaptations. Special effects wise, like many other Illumination and Dr. Seuss adaptations, The Grinch succeeds delivering dazzling animation, creating a loveable world for children; Standing at a reported 75M production budget, it middles among other adaptations including The Lorax (70M), Horton Hears a Who (85M), The Cat in the Hat (109M) and How the Grinch Stole Christmas (123M). This somewhat low production budget helps the already Box Office hit become more profitable. Storyline wise, this seems to be one of the weakest parts to the film, delivering a chaotic, unfocused situation and while it is aided by some charms within the cast, and charismatic narration, the overwhelming sense of rushing through the film drowns the nostalgic attempts to reboot the classic story.

Aging ‘Christmas’

Similar to other Illumination features such as Despicable Me, Minions, The Secret Life of Pets, The Grinch is strictly for kids, the film including cartoonish violence, rude language and behaviour and an absence of sexuality or adult situations. The violence includes throwing large objects, destroying an alarm clock, the Grinch decapitates a snowman (for comedic entertainment), also causing some damage to Whoville and there is a scene towards the end that features the main characters in peril, on top of a mountain. Language wise, nothing to say except some rude humor including insults such as dumb stupid, and oh sugar plum. Sexuality wise, there is a scene that features the Grinch in underwear, and a shot of a nude Who, but a cookie covers his lower half.

Dr. Seuss Showdown

The Grinch 52% sour

Violence: ⭐⭐☆☆☆

Language: ⭐☆☆☆☆

Sex: ⭐☆☆☆☆

Age Rating: 5+

The Lorax 50% sour

Violence: ⭐⭐⭐☆☆

Language: ⭐☆☆☆☆

Sex: ⭐⭐☆☆☆

Age Rating: 6+


The Grinch 52% sour

Storyline: ⭐⭐☆☆☆

Cast: ⭐⭐⭐☆☆

Role Models: ⭐⭐⭐☆☆

The Lorax 50% sour

Storyline: ⭐⭐☆☆☆

Cast: ⭐⭐⭐☆☆

Role Models: ⭐⭐⭐☆☆

News Related to The Grinch

$plurge, $tream, $kip: The Grinch has its moments, and is exceptionally cute for kids, but is only sporadically funny and ultimately fails to stand out amongst other Dr. Seuss adaptations…$KIP IT

A QUINN REVIEW: THE GRINCH

THE GRINCH

(2018)

AGE: 4+

40% SOUR

So What’s the Story?

The Grinch retells the story of whoville, a town where the most cherished holiday is christmas, and this year it will be three times as big. The only one who despises christmas lives up high in the mountains, and he is called The Grinch. Who plans a scheme to steal christmas so that it never comes again. The only question that remains is why?

Is It Worth Your While?

The Grinch was a complete disappointment for the Illumination studios, and for animated movies in general. Now here are my reasons. First of all I thought that the directing lacked the pure magic of the original, and could not capture the true meaning of christmas in any way shape or form. Plus the story’s complete lack of character, and joy insulted the original’s fantastic short story. In other words, The Grinch was truly made to be a short story, not into a full motion picture. At first, I thought that it was a creative idea to remake the classic tale, but soon found it to be a completely irrelevant, and stupid result. Also Cindy Lou Who, the most important character besides The Grinch did not matter at all in the movie, in other words, nobody cared about her. I think that the only thing to die for in the movie was it’s colorful, and bright animation that younger kids would love. Overall The Grinch has terrible directing, a bad plot, and terrible character development that not even it’s great animation can overcome.

How Was the Cast?

The cast in The Grinch missed the anticipation mark by a long shot. First we have Benedict Cumberbatch as The Grinch. Again, great idea to put such a talented person into the movie, but the overall outcome was terrible. He used this fake american accent that sounded nerdy, and strange instead of his awesome british accent that would have been so much better in the movie. Plus his performance felt rushed, and felt like he did not put any effort into the role like he normally does in films such as Doctor Strange, and The Imitation Game. I overall just wanted to see him do better. Which he easily could have, but missed the mark. The rest of the cast barely has a role to describe, so they won’t be in this paragraph.

Aging ‘The Grinch’

The Grinch is completely kid friendly with its jokes, colorful animation, and a sense of fun for younger children, and for those seeking a ridiculous holiday film for the family.

"Bohemian Rhapsody" Has a Solid Rami Malek in a Mis-used, Poorly Directed Biopic

By: Keaton Marcus

Acclaimed filmmaker Bryan Singer directs long-awaited Queen-based biopic, "Bohemian Rhapsody", and the result is that a spectacular performance by Rami Malek can't save the muddled, routine drama pic; There are many high-notes that "Rhapsody" easily hits, including an Oscar-worthy outing from Malek, along with incredibly executed scenes of music, but that never quite stops the film from becoming more of a rock concert than a film, which may or may not be what some fans are looking for. The anticipated direction by "X-Men" filmmaker Singer is extremely disappointing, trying to squeeze the truly mature story into such amateurish execution; this along with the surprisingly dull script by Anthony McCarten, who never really told the life of Mercury successfully.

The film follows the story of a young, lonely man named Farrokh Bulsara who is currently in an unsuccessful relationship with his concerned parents, working at a baggage handler at Heathrow airport. However, when he starts finding growing inner talent for song, he auditions for the remainder of the band in a parking lot, which will soon become rock band Queen; along with changing his name to Freddie Mercury. Mercury falls in love with a girl named Mary Austin (Lucy Boynton), but soon becomes timid off stage, and in their relationship because of his climbing attraction for men. "Bohemian Rhapsody" clearly loses for authenticity in his utterly "gay" life, as they portray the disturbing moments in many scenes, though play it safe far too much.

I mentioned it a couple of times before, "Bohemian Rhapsody" is always trying (and struggling) to input a truly R-rated life of Mercury, into a truly watered down PG-13 tagged film. This surprising issue hits the film many times, as they skimp in almost every conceivable moment of what makes Mercury...well, Mercury. While there are many ridiculous, and clever scenes; especially where Mercury is shown dressed as the king of England, along with saying nonsense the pleasing moments are nowhere near enough to save the mediocre and familiar biopic, especially considering the subject matter.

There are many impressive bits and pieces about the film, but the only real thing to go watch is the rocking performance by Rami Malek. The actor, to cover the authenticity of the role, even wore fake teeth to impersonate those bulging, dirty chompers of Freddie Mercury; along with this--for most of the songs--the actor mixed his voice with Mercury's voice, which works in spectacular fashion. The new, young actor to the film business digs himself so deep into the role, that sometimes, the audiences are just wishing for the many...and I mean many flaws to just f..k off, Malek is really the man to play the rock icon. The actor performs many titular songs, such as "We Will Rock You" and of course "We are the Champions", along with the hit "Radio Ga Ga"; the song "Bohemian Rhapsody", which is a six-minute "epic" was really mentioned in a comic scene featuring Mike Myers, where the actor portrayed an EMI record executive, who denies inputting the song on the radio, after noting that no one will listen to a song that long. That stumble along the way was followed by terrible critical reception, reporting that it was an unsuccessful mash-up of rock and classical music; and as we look upon this today, we think, oh god, they were so wrong. The film also features a twenty-minute concert sequence, which is the finale to the film, and is the best scene consisting in "Bohemian Rhapsody". This is where Malek/Mercury sings most of their famous songs. While the LIVE AID concert can get lengthy, if you watch the real-life Mercury, and then compare it to Malek's impersonation, you will find them identical; and I mean this is a sincere compliment. The sequence is beautifully filmed and well-edited, giving a truly undeserving movie a killer ending.

The final verdict is: "Bohemian Rhapsody" features an Oscar-worthy performance by Rami Malek, and as expected, the musical scenes are top notch, but this watered-down biopic suffers from poor direction and many, many holes in the scripting...$KIP IT

FILM REVIEW “BOHEMIAN RHAPSODY”

Freddie Mercury (Rami Malek, center) in Bohemian Rhapsody

Bohemian Rhapsody delivered a three day of over 51M, in its second weekend, the film dipped just 39%, grossing over 31M; Currently, the film has topped 214M domestically after 122 days in release.

Genre: Drama/Musical

Age Rating: 14+

Lemonradar: 50/100 "sour"