Parents Need to Calm down About The Good Dinosaur.

WARNING: CONTAINS SPOILERS.

The Good Dinosaur, while not as critically well-received as Inside Out, has still received a generally positive response from critics and audiences. The film, which was released last week, currently holds an "A" rating on Cinemascore as well as a 76% on Rotten Tomatoes. The general consensus being that it is a predictable yet pleasing adventure for people of all ages. On the other hand, not everyone was pleased by it.

British newspaper The Daily Mail recently reported that Pixar's newest film is facing social media backlash from parents. Several parents claimed that their children were left "in tears" from the film's violent scenes, as well as its depiction of death.

A scene where the main characters Spot and Arlo hallucinate after eating fermented berries didn't sit well with parents either.

Such comments include these on Twitter:



NFL Journalist Rich Eisen even tweeted:

On Common Sense Media, a content-advisory website targeted to parents, several more parents were disappointed in the film's perceived inappropriate content.

The following are quotes from user reviews on Common Sense Media:

My 6-year-old said "Well at least someone didn't die, " and then "Nope, I was wrong." There's lots of violence throughout the movie with various injuries, animals getting attacked and eaten, and near-drownings. My 5-year-old announced "This whole movie is terrifying." She was right!

Two of our children in our group were crying. When the main character was hallucinating from the fermented fruit, we decided to collect our belongings and head for the exit. What was Disney thinking? I will no longer trust Disney and blindly take my children to their movie without closely checking the movie plot first. Is there a hotline to request a refund for these tickets?

The movie is not bitter-sweet. Rather, it fixates on the tragic. It seems to almost revel in it. I didn't appreciate that. More importantly, neither did my 6-year-old (3 months shy of 7). You may want to think twice before taking younger kids to see this movie!

One has to wonder where these parents were when Mufasa was trampled to death in The Lion King, or when Littlefoot's mother died in The Land Before Time. What about when Pepe Le Pew attempted suicide in the short For Scent-imental Reasons? Why didn't those moments result in this much outrage? The answer is simple: online social media hadn't been invented yet.

It's easy to suggest that "parents these days" are too over-protective of their kids, and that kids are coddled way more than they should be. While there's no objective way to prove that suggestion, it's easy to see what would cause someone to think that.

We live in an age where the internet is used by people of all ages and social classes. It is quite simple for parents who are more sensitive than others to get on Twitter and slam Pixar for upsetting their children while the more passive parents move on with their days. Unfortunately, this results in more and more people (including the higher-ups in Hollywood) assuming that "kids movies" should be as tame and sanitized as possible to avoid offending an assumed vocal majority.

Couldn't you just see the same thing happening with The Land Before Time or An American Tale? If Twitter existed in the 80's, there would absolutely be droves of parents complaining about how dark the films are and how upset they made their children.

It is also entirely possible that our internet culture has led to people being more sensitive; as they are more exposed to real-life acts of violence, drugs and sexual activity, some parents may instinctively expect a "kids movie" to be an escape from reality and not expose their children to how harsh the real world is.




Ultimately though, this kind of coddling is honestly not best for the kids. So what if the kids cry during a movie? Exposing children to mature themes is an important part of growing up. Maybe some kid who lost his dad will be able to relate to Arlo's struggle to pick up the slack on the farm and in his life. Perhaps kids will learn a lesson in teamwork from Arlo's initially reluctant friendship with Spot.

Sure, the film is pretty violent at times, but it is rated PG for a reason. Several websites like kidsinmind.com provide content descriptions that can help parents decide if they want their child seeing a certain movie or not. Parents who don't do the research and blame Pixar for their child being upset are simply misguided.

Overall, parents should calm down about The Good Dinosaur's content and absolutely be more open-minded to exposing their kids to more mature "kids movies." Some kids may come out of the theater in tears, but the potential life lessons they could learn should take a much higher priority than misplaced outrage on the internet. And as for the "hallucination" scene, it's highly doubtful that kids are going to start looking for dealers because of a Pixar movie.

In Defense of Jeremy Renner's Wage Gap Comments.

You can't say anything without catching heat for it nowadays. That's the first thing I thought when I heard about how the media handled Jeremy Renner's latest comments on the gender-wage issue in Hollywood.

All over the internet, I've seen headlines like these:




Now the first thing you may be thinking is: "what did Jeremy Renner say that was so offensive?" Well, in order to truly understand a story, one must look beyond the headlines.

In an interview with Business Insider, Renner was questioned on the topic of how women in Hollywood (and in general) are often paid less than men for the same jobs. Here is the exact blurb from Business Insider that is causing the controversy:

Business Insider asked Jeremy Renner, who also starred in "American Hustle," if he would also be willing to negotiate alongside his female co-stars on future projects. He also was paid more than Adams and Lawrence for his role in the film, according to a Sony email leaked during the hack on the company. 

"That's not my job," Renner said, while taking part in an intimate press day on Tuesday for the new "One Life/Live Them" campaign he's doing for Rémy Martin Cognac. "I don't know contracts and money and all that sort of stuff," Renner went on to say. Adding he fully supports actresses receiving equal pay as actors, he said he's more focused on his craft than what everyone is making. 

"I'm a performer and I know human behavior. When it comes to that sort of stuff I let other people deal with that," said the two-time Oscar nominee. "I do what I'm good at, that's what I focus on."

It should be noted that actors and actresses are rarely involved in the negotiating process and leave the deals to agents, managers, and lawyers.

The headline of the piece is: "Jeremy Renner, who starred in 'American Hustle' with Bradley Cooper and Jennifer Lawrence, says it's 'not my job' to help female co-stars negotiate higher salaries." A long headline indeed, but it certainly does reflect the piece's subject matter...right? Actually, no, it doesn't.



When Jeremy Renner said "that's not my job," he was referring to the job of deciding how much actors should get paid. He's referring to the "contracts and money,"which he feels that he doesn't have enough knowledge of to actively support equal pay. For many to imply that he said such a blunt statement like "not my job" in regards to supporting equality for women based on the headline alone is simply irresponsible.

According to the piece itself, Renner actually supports the idea that women should receive equal pay for the same job. He's just more interested in focusing on his career instead of actively participating in a campaign that he feels he isn't fit to support. Perhaps he doesn't have the time for participating in these campaigns, or perhaps he would rather focus on other things in his life.

It's not like Renner doesn't care about helping any important causes either; he has donated his time to several charities in the past. Just to prove this, here is a list of charities he has given to according to the website Look to the Stars:

• American Foundation for AIDS Research
• Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
• DonorsChoose.org
• Entertainment Industry Foundation
• Exceptional Minds
• Feeding America
• Got Your 6
• Motion Picture and Television Fund Foundation
• Sherry Lansing Foundation
• Stand Up To Cancer
• The Lourdes Foundation
• UNICEF

He also participated in Soccer Aid, a British charity event where celebrities play soccer to support the children's charity UNICEF.

.

Complaining that Jeremy Renner isn't interested in womens' rights is like complaining that someone who spends all of their time in a soup kitchen doesn't care about police brutality. Renner isn't going to become a gung-ho activist for equal pay, but that certainly doesn't mean he isn't all for it.

When it comes to sensitive subjects, there are three kinds of people in the world:

1. The trolls who want to offend people.

2. The overly-PC crowd who wants to be offended.

and the one that is often overshadowed on the internet:

3. The people who give calm and honest opinions.

The media is subtly portraying Renner as a member of the first category while twisting his words to enrage the second category. In all honesty though, Renner truly belongs to the third category. He simply wanted to be honest, and the media warped his words to knee-jerk reactions of anger from feminists.

Look, we all know how upsetting the situation is with equal pay for women. Real, hard-working women are being mistreated by clueless executives and not getting the appreciation they deserve. At the same time though, it is important to respect the opinions of others who would rather partake in other activities. Like Renner said, there are many people fighting for equal pay, but that doesn't mean that we should expect every single person to just drop what they're doing and go actively support it. Our time on this Earth is limited, and we have the right to spend it how we want to. The same certainly goes for Jeremy Renner.

5 Reasons Why I'm Actually Looking Forward to the Last Witch Hunter.

The internet has mixed opinions about The Last Witch Hunter. Admittedly, we have had a lot of misfires with fantasy films over the years. Recent fantasies like Seventh Son, Jupiter Ascending, and I, Frankenstein were poorly received by critics and audiences alike for being bland and repetitive. On the other hand, The Last Witch Hunter looks like something much more worthy of being excited for. While the jury's still out on whether or not it will be good, The Last Witch Hunter (at least for me) still has quite a few elements that make it worth checking out.

1. The visuals are promising.

A movie's visuals don't make it good, but The Last Witch Hunter still looks to have some impressive effects up its sleeves. Unlike other urban fantasy films, this movie won't be strictly limited to a New York City backdrop. Sure, you'll get the city setpieces that come standard with the sub-genre, but you'll also get snowy tundras and ancient forests to break up the monotony.We've seen quite a lot from the trailers: a frozen wasteland,

candle-lit caverns





swarms of cerulean butterflies





and of course, Kaulder's epic flaming sword.





Even if the script doesn't end up living up to the hype, it's easy to expect this film to at least deliver on an aesthetic scale.

2. Breck Eisner is directing.



Breck Eisner is one of those directors that not many people know about, but has certainly shown his talent in previous movies. The 2005 film Sahara, while being a financial failure at the box-office, was still an entertaining and competently-made adventure film that delivered exciting set pieces on a grand scale.





His 2010 film The Crazies, which I still think is one of the better horror films in recent years, showed that Eisner is more than capable of handling a horror film. With a brooding atmosphere and an incredible use of makeup, The Crazies stands as one of the rare examples of a horror remake that was done well.

Having dabbled in both horror and action/adventure, Breck Eisner certainly has the experience to work on a fast-paced supernatural film like The Last Witch Hunter. One can expect him to bring the same thrills he brought to Sahara and The Crazies to his newest movie.

3. Vin Diesel is playing the lead.




Vin Diesel has a certain charm and appeal to him that makes even his worst movies worth watching. His smooth voice and slick delivery make him a perfectly capable leading man, and his likable personality has given him quite a following.


Diesel has a knack for playing the tough-guy-with-a-heart-of-gold that is often difficult to pull off in a performance. In addition to Dominic Toretto in the Fast and Furious movies, he brought equally lovable performances to Groot in Guardians of the Galaxy and the titular character in The Iron Giant. Even though the latter two performances were voice-overs with not that much dialogue, It takes a lot of talent to make a memorable role out of a characters who don't even talk that much.

Based on his previous roles, one can easily be optimistic about his performance in The Last Witch Hunter. Based on the trailers, Diesel seems really into the part, and the character looks to be a badass with a sense of humor. The scene in the trailer where he playfully scares another character trying to take a selfie with him is a good sign that Kaulder won't be a boring fantasy character like Adam in I, Frankenstein. There's a good possibility that Kaulder could end up being another great character to add to Vin Diesel's resume. 

4.The supporting cast is impressive.

Besides Vin Diesel, The Last Witch Hunter has quite a cast. First of all, Lord of the Rings star Elijah Wood is playing an important role as Kaulder's partner. Even after the Lord of the Rings movies, Wood has still managed to impress audiences with his exceptional acting talent. In the 2012 movie Maniac, his performance as a disturbing psychopath even won him some awards. After a hiatus from big Hollywood movies, Wood will hopefully make a triumphant return in The Last Witch Hunter.

Veteran actor Michael Caine will be in The Last Witch Hunter as well, playing the 36th Dolan. Despite being in the business for over half a decade, Caine's career is still absolutely huge. Over the past five years alone, Caine has appeared in such hit movies as Inception, The Dark Knight Rises, Now You See Me, Interstellar, and Kingsman: The Secret Service, and has delivered an excellent performance in each film. With all of these big names attached to The Last Witch Hunter, it's quite easy to be excited for it.

5. There is passion behind the project.




Vin Diesel is no stranger to fantasy, as he is a massive fan of the game Dungeons and Dragons. He wrote the foreward to 30 Years of Adventure: A Celebration of Dungeons & Dragons, and recently revealed to Hitfix that the game inspired him to take the lead role in The Last Witch Hunter. In fact, he says that he had a discussion with the film's writer (who is also a huge D&D fan) about a character that Diesel created for the game.


Diesel said to Hitfix:

About four years ago I met with a writer name Cory Goodman and we started talking. Someone put us together because he was a D&D player. [Afterwards, Cory] went off to write a whole film around my character Melkor. Just the very fact that I’d be playing a witch hunter speaks to how nerdy I was about the game, how committed I was to D&D because witch hunter [wasn’t a] class by TSR at the time.

The fact that Diesel at least partially inspired his own character is a very good sign. A lot of times, an actor will be contractually obligated to a role without much enthusiasm for it and turn in a lackluster performance as a result (such as Channing Tatum in G.I. Joe: Rise of Cobra). With Diesel though, his love for D&D and the witch hunting class could really elevate the material. It certainly helps that one of the film's writers is just as much of a fan of the game as Diesel is. It really is a good sign when the people behind a film are passionate about it, which is something that Hollywood needs more of.

There's not telling yet if the movie will amaze or disappoint. After all, fantasy films are often hit-or-miss nowadays. On the contrary, this film looks like it could be an entertaining romp that fans of witchcraft and urban fantasy could get a kick out of. Consider checking this one out during the Halloween season.

The Walk Tanked at the Box Office. What Happened?

Before its theatrical release, The Walk seemed to have everything going for it. The dramatized retelling of Philippe Petit's harrowing high-wire act across the Twin Towers seemed like the Imax event of the year. In addition to the star power of lead actor Joseph Gordon-Levitt and director Robert Zemeckis, it received positive early reviews from critics, and the Imax 3D effects were insanely hyped up by the media. Countless stories of people getting severe vertigo during screenings were arguably the film's biggest selling point. BoxOffice.com at one point predicted a $16 million opening. However, any hope of this movie doing well in its wide release was shattered this weekend.

After being released exclusively in Imax 3D on September 30th, The Walk had a wide expansion last Friday. In its first weekend in wide release, The Walk grossed a paltry $3.6 million, making it one of the worst opening weekends of all time for a movie released in over 2,000 theaters.

Just to give you an example of how bad of an opening that was, here are a few notorious flops that had bigger openings than The Walk:

Movie 43 - $4.8 million opening.
Vampire Academy - $3.9 million opening.
Gigli - $3.7 million opening.
Legends of Oz: Dorothy's Return - $3.7 million opening.

All of this just begs the question: what happened with this movie? While there's no way to ask every person on Earth why they didn't see the movie, we can always come up with theories. I recently posted a discussion on Reddit about The Walk's underwhelming performance, and many of the theories presented made a lot of sense.

The 2008 Documentary: Man on Wire.

One theory is that Philippe Petit's story was already adequately told in the documentary: Man on Wire. James Marsh's documentary was one of the most acclaimed movies of 2008, appearing on several critics' top ten lists of the year. One could argue that audiences would rather see the true story (complete with footage of the actual event) told by the people who were actually there instead of a dramatized version of it. Moreover, those unfamiliar with Petit's walk could have had no interest in seeing the movie, as the story may not be notorious enough to be known by the average modern moviegoer.

In addition, while big names like Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Robert Zemeckis are attached to the film, that never necessarily guaranteed getting audiences to come see the movie. Joseph Gordon-Levitt, as good of an actor as he is, isn't as big of a box-office draw as someone like Chris Pratt or Denzel Washington (who starred in Zemeckis' more successful movie Flight). He's had several supporting roles in big movies like The Dark Knight Rises and Inception, but he has yet to headline a big blockbuster movie. It didn't help that his attempt at a French accent in the trailers may have made audiences weary of his performance. Again, audiences may have been more willing to see the documentary with the real Philippe Petit than a movie starring an actor playing him.

Joseph Gordon-Levitt in The Walk

Oddly enough, others say that one of the biggest things that hurt the film was something meant to promote it: the stories of people vomiting in the theaters. Being a movie theater employee myself, I can tell you that audiences are often hesitant to sit through 3D Imax movies because they get nauseous. While The Walk isn't only being shown in Imax as of last weekend, it was heavily promoted as an Imax experience. Those who read headlines like "Joseph Gordon-Levitt's Movie The Walk Is Literally Making People Throw Up," may be even more reluctant to see the movie than they would with other Imax 3D releases. Even those who regularly see Imax 3D movies may give The Walk the cold shoulder at the perceived possibility of vomiting while seeing it. This may be one case when the extra ticket money from Imax 3D sales did nothing to help the film.

There's no way of knowing the real reason why The Walk flopped so badly, but these theories are certainly reasonable. Whether it's the superiority of Man on Wire, or the lack of audience interest, The Walk is another example of a film that tanked badly despite its good critical reception. Hopefully, the movie will fare much better on DVD, and possibly earn a few Oscar nominations. Joseph Gordon-Levitt is still a rising star, and Robert Zemeckis is still a great director, so it's entirely possible that nobody's career will be hurt too badly by this film. Still though, opening with less money than Legends of Oz is quite an unfortunate accomplishment.

My Three Biggest Problems With The Green Inferno.

Recently I had a chance to see Eli Roth's newest gore-flick: The Green Inferno. Unfortunately, while it did have its moments (seriously, Daryl Sabara's character Lars stole the show), there were quite a few disappointing elements to it.

The premise sounds simple but promising; a bunch of inept college students go to Peru to save the rainforest and end up being picked off by a tribe of cannibals. It isn't the most original idea ever, but given Roth's previous projects, it still could have been an entertaining gore-flick. Unfortunately, the execution leaves a lot to be desired. 

With its inconsistent script and misguided themes, what could have been a gleefully gory horror film just ended up becoming another bargain bin title to add to the pile. On the other hand, it didn't have to end up like that. Here are five things that I personally felt should have been improved.


1. The film's message.

Eli Roth said in multiple interviews that the film was meant to be a jab at today's "slacktivist" internet culture. In addition to making another gory horror film, Roth wanted the plot of The Green Inferno to satirize the internet culture's habit of lazily getting behind important causes by doing as little as they can behind their computer screens.

In an interview with the L.A. Times, Roth said:

I see that a lot of people want to care and want to help, but in general I feel like people don’t really want to inconvenience their own lives...and I saw a lot of people just reacting to things on social media. These social justice warriors. ‘This is wrong, this is wrong, this is wrong.’ And they’re just tweeting and retweeting. They’re not actually doing anything. Or you see people get involved in a cause that they don’t really know a lot about and they go crazy about it. I wanted to make a movie about kids like that...I think there’s a lot of great things, obviously, about activism: people commit their lives to it. But I wanted to make a story about kids who don’t really know what they’re getting into. Get in way over their heads, and it actually works. And then the irony is on their way home their plane crashes and the very people they saved think that they’re invaders, and just dart them and eat them.

It seemed like Roth wanted to make a film about internet-obsessed college kids getting in way over their heads when they actually go to help a cause they know little about. The problem with that concept is that it contradicts itself. From what I understand, "slacktivists" are the kind of people who don't want to take any offline action for a cause they believe in. Just a few years ago, I recall several people on the internet wanting to raise awareness for child abuse by changing their profile picture to a cartoon character instead of donating money to a charity like Childhelp. That, by definition, is slacktivism.

On the contrary, the characters in this movie actually take their time to fly out to Peru to take action against deforestation. When the main character Justine finds out about female genital mutilation in third world countries, she actively tries to find a group that takes action against it. She doesn't show any signs of being a slacktivist, and she and the other characters are rarely seen using social media. Even after they find out how violent Peru's militia is, they still want to fight for the cause. They make extremely stupid decisions when they get there (such as triggering explosives at logging areas and chaining themselves to trees), but at least they are actually doing something. After implying that his movie would be about punishing slacktivists, the only characters that are punished for their actions are the actual activists.

I think a better plot would have involved the college students being on their way to a fancy resort. A half-hour into the film, their plane ends up crashing after they risk their lives protesting deforestation. Their plane should have crashed on the way to a comfortable place with wi-fi where they could continue their slacktivism. This would have made the message of slacktivism more clear, and it would have been more interesting to see how characters who spend most of their time online react to actually being in a real world situation.

As it stands though, the film's message ends up coming across as more of a cautionary tale against actual activism than slacktivism. It's a missed opportunity, plain and simple.

2. The use of its characters.

Most of the characters in this film are either cartoonishly evil or just kind of bland. In an Eli Roth film, one would think that the most unlikable characters would get the most brutal deaths. In this film though, the most unlikable characters get off easy, and the bland characters are the ones who get horrifically murdered. 

Throughout the whole film, I expected the character Alejandro to have the most violent death scene. He is rude to the other students, knowingly deceives them, is willing to let them die to save his own skin, and even masturbates in front of them after one of them dies. So how is he killed off? He isn't. At the end of the film, it's revealed that he escaped off-camera and is still alive. Why even bother to have such an obviously villainous character if you're not going to kill him off? It's just a wasted opportunity.

Moreover, the character of Kaycee (seen above) is even more of a waste. Kaycee is Justine's roommate, and is portrayed as a bitter person who thinks actual activism is "gay." She scoffs at a janitors' strike and doesn't care about anybody but herself. Her character is a much more likely candidate for being eaten by cannibals, but she doesn't even go to the jungle. Again, it would have been much more entertaining to see anti-activists like her end up in a real world situation. Instead, she barely appears in the movie and is an entirely pointless character.

The main character and the rest of the characters are just bland activists that don't do anything but make dumb decisions. There's no reason to hate or love them, so I was indifferent when they were killed off. With the exception of Lars being a funny stoner, nobody did anything interesting to make the audience care about their deaths.

So by the end, the characters in this movie were either wasted opportunities or wastes of time.

3. The story's structure.

Although the message of the movie ends up falling flat, this film could have been passable as a mindless gore film. Sadly, it doesn't really deliver in that department either. The goriest death in the movie (Jonah's death) is shown about halfway through, and every other death after that is either off camera or quickly cut.

Eli Roth is infamous for the high amount of gore he puts into his movies. In The Green Inferno, there isn't that much gore besides Jonah's death scene. One could argue that an R rating only allows for so much gore, but Eli Roth himself recently said that the film was barely cut, and that working with the MPAA was quite easy. He said to IGN:

They were amazingly open-minded and cool about letting me make the movie I wanted to make. And I’ve never had that experience with any other organization in any other country. I feel like the MPAA understands you guys way better than you think. They know what the horror fans are paying to see, and it was very little back-and forth. It was a totally cool experience, and what you just saw was the R-rated cut.

Showing the most brutal death in the film so early makes the rest of the death scenes look tame in comparison. If Eli Roth wanted to leave a bigger impact, he should have saved the most gruesome kill for the end of the movie. It makes me wonder if Roth willingly cut the goriest death in the movie. I went through the whole movie waiting for another death scene to top Jonah's. Although Lars had a pretty humorous death scene, none of the deaths after Jonah's were anywhere near as over-the-top. It was a pretty big let-down considering all of the hype for this movie saying how gruesome and disturbing it was.

At the end of the day, The Green Inferno suffered heavily from these three problems. The message was vague, the characters were misused, and the story was structured poorly. While The Green Inferno is nowhere near being the worst horror movie I've ever seen, it certainly is one of the biggest missed opportunities for a horror film in quite some time.

Angel Heart Had Some of the Best Editing in a Movie. (Contains Spoilers)

*Contains Spoilers*

The Following is an essay I wrote four years ago in college:

The 1987 Alan Parker film, Angel Heart tells the story of a detective supposedly named “Harold Angel” searching for a murderer named “Johnny Favorite” who sold his soul to Satan. Unbeknown to the detective, he is actually searching for himself the whole time, and Harold Angel is the name of the guy he sacrificed to Satan. It is also revealed throughout the film that Louis Cypher, the man who hired Johnny to search for “Mr. Favorite” is actually the devil himself. He has been toying around with Johnny and his amnesia, making him unconsciously murder people while sending him on a chase for himself. This ironic plot point of a detective hunting down himself makes up the main theme of the film. The way that the filmmakers establish this theme is through the film’s editing and its soundtrack. It uses different editing styles like thematic montage and classical cutting as well as the use of light motifs and music cues in terms of sound.

In terms of editing, Angel Heart doesn’t simply rely on classical cutting or thematic montage alone. Instead, the film uses both types of editing to present the theme in the course of the plot. Whether it’s classical editing’s continuity between cuts or thematic montage’s lack of continuity, the film’s theme is still heavily implied through both editing styles.

A great example of this takes place during Johnny’s first meeting with Louis Cypher. The scene starts out with a simple medium shot of Johnny talking to Louis. However, as soon as Louis brings up Johnny, the scene cuts from Louis to a much tighter shot of Johnny talking to him. As Louis gives more details on Johnny and his past, the camera mainly stays on the same shot of Johnny. This sudden change in the tightness of the frame gives a subtle hint that Johnny, who at this point in the film thinks his name is “Harold Angel,” is the man Louis is talking about.

Mickey Rourke as Johnny

In addition to this scene, the scene where Johnny discovers Margret’s disembodied heart includes a rather clever use of classical cutting. Outside of the house where Johnny murdered Margret in another one of Louis’ inflicted blackouts, children are shown tap dancing. After Johnny first discovers Margret’s corpse, he searches around the room for clues as to who murdered her. As he looks around the room, the scene constantly cuts to one kid tap dancing outside the house. The tap dancing sort of acts as a ticking clock, as the film cuts to it more often as Johnny gets closer to the heart. Once Johnny discovers the heart, the film once again cuts to the child, who has finished his dance. The child finishing the dance signifies the heart being discovered and Johnny getting closer to finding out he, himself is the culprit.

Thematic montage is also used to present the theme throughout the story. One scene where this type of editing is put into use is the scene where Johnny sees his reflection, reminding him of how he stole Harold Angel’s identity and soul. This in turn reminds him of how he killed Harold and sacrificed him to Satan. To signify this, the film flashes back to Harold’s kidnapping by Johnny and the outside of the building where he was murdered. Moreover, it also flashes forward to the ending scene where Johnny is sent on an elevator to hell. Since thematic montage shows no regard towards continuity, flashbacks and flash-forwards are permitted.

Later in the film, the blood-drenched sex scene between Johnny and his daughter Epiphany is another thematic montage worth noting. Before Johnny has sex with Epiphany, he places a bowl on the floor to catch the rain leaking through the roof. This bowl is the exact same type of porcelain bowl that was used to clean the blood off the walls after Harold’s murder. As the water from the roof drips into the bowl, it suddenly turns into blood, signifying another montage inside Johnny’s head. Even more detail from Harold’s murder is shown, including the blood spatter onto the wall and Margret scrubbing the blood off the walls using a brush and the same bowl. Once again, it also flashes forward to the elevator at an even lower position than it was in the last montage, signifying that Johnny is getting even closer to the revelation that he is the one he’s looking for.

Robert De Niro as Louis Cypher

The use of light motifs is another thing worth noting about the film. Throughout the movie, the song “I Cried for You” is played whenever Johnny finds out more about his forgotten past. However, only one specific part of the song is really showcased. This is the part of the song that goes: “I cried for you darling, now it’s your turn to cry over me.” This specific line symbolizes how Johnny took Harold’s soul, but in the end, Satan will have Johnny’s soul. This song is first played is right after Louis tells Johnny to “find Johnny,” and is last played when Johnny realizes who he and Louis really are.

In addition to this light motif, the film uses specific sound effects to emphasize Johnny getting closer to finding out who he truly is. One of these sound effects is a scream, which is played when Johnny discovers both Margert’s heart and Margert’s father burned to death in a pot of gumbo. Both of these are shocking pieces of physical evidence that Johnny committed both murders in trances caused by Louis. Also, the suspenseful music cue containing the sound of water dripping in a pan is played while Johnny is remembering his past rather than when he sees concrete evidence. This sound is played when Johnny gets to New Orleans and finds Margret, when he reminisces during intercourse with his daughter, and when he drives to the house where he finally finds out the truth about him and his satanic deeds. Clearly, this ominous but heart-pounding sound is meant to create suspense for the inevitable, and it certainly is a fine way to do so.

Overall, the editing done in this film really makes a truly incredible film even better. Not only was the acting, writing, and directing flawless, but the editing makes it even more recommendable. Out of all horror films, this is by far the greatest I have seen; it manages to be frightening and intelligent at the same time, something modern horror films struggle to be.

My Top 5 Most Anticipated Movies of September/October 2015.

This summer was certainly a big one for movies. In the past few months, we've gotten smash hits like Avengers: Age of Ultron, Inside Out, Jurassic World, Minions, and much more. While this summer is drawing to a close, the upcoming early fall movie season is nevertheless still exciting. While there won't be nearly as many blockbusters, the amount of promising features coming out in September and October is still worth getting excited about. The hype train is still going strong as we get into awards season.

5. The Martian

Sure, Ridley Scott hasn't had a good track record recently, but that doesn't mean he still can't make a good movie. I know it's kind of an unpopular opinion online, but I actually liked Prometheus. I admired that wasn't afraid to introduce new elements while bringing back the underrated fusion of sci-fi horror that the first Alien film was famous for.

I'm hoping that after the failure of Exodus, Scott will bring his sci-fi prowess back to The Martian to give audiences a hypnotically beautiful sci-fi drama. Plus, with Drew Goddard of Cabin in the Woods and the Daredevil TV series writing, things are certainly looking up for The Martian.

4. Everest

In the past few years, movies like Gravity and Interstellar have delivered visually outstanding Imax experiences with their outer-space settings. While Everest indeed takes place on Earth, it looks no less stunning. 

With beautiful establishing shots the Himalayan mountains, I'm anticipating Everest to remind me of those field trips I used to take to the Aquarium to see immersive nature documentaries in Imax. On the other hand, with the involvement of Slumdog Millionaire writer Simon Beaufoy and A-list talent like Jake Gyllenhaal and Josh Brolin, Everest looks to be much more than just a film about nature. 

How the characters interact with each other in the face of disaster and survival could lead to an excellent and heart-wrenching story. Such a story would blend perfectly with the awe-inspiring cinematography this film is sure to give us. Here's hoping that Everest not only delivers a film that's beautiful to look at, but also ties in a story that truly makes an impact.  

3. Crimson Peak 

The last time Guillermo Del Toro directed a fantasy-horror film was 2006's Pan's Labyrinth, a film which I consider to be one of the most creative and ambitious films of all time. After something as insanely entertaining as Pacific Rim and his hit series The Strain, it's clear that Guillermo Del Toro hasn't lost his touch since then. With Crimson Peak, it is possible that Guillermo Del Toro could breathe some new life into the hit-or-miss library of modern horror films.

Horror films such as The Gallows and Sinister 2 have failed to do the horror genre justice, relying on cheap jump scares and lazy writing, While great horror movies like Oculus and It Follows have made it to the big screen recently, they are few and far between. From what I've seen so far, Guillermo Del Toro seems to be delivering a horror film that focuses on atmosphere instead of lazy scare tactics. Crimson Peak boasts gothic imagery and atmosphere, and its Victorian era setting only adds to how potentially unsettling and dream-like this movie could be. 

2. Black Mass

So Johnny Depp has not had a good past few years. That doesn't mean he can't still make a comeback. With the help of the director of Crazy Heart (and the underrated Out of The Furnace), Johnny Depp looks to finally make that comeback.

In Black Mass, it looks like Depp is going to trade in his recent shtick of playing eccentric, quirky characters to play a sadistic, menacing villain. Based on several documentaries I've watched on the subject, the story of Whitey Bulger is ripe for a film adaptation. Whitey Bulger was a violent, sociopathic individual, and yet had a soft side for his family. Getting to see how the violent and peaceful aspects of his life affected him as a person is sure to be fascinating to watch on screen.

The last time I remember a mainstream movie focusing on a villain was 2013's The Wolf of Wall Street. It was a fascinating character study bolstered by excellent direction by Martin Scorsese and featured a stellar lead performance by Leonardo DiCaprio. I'm optimistic that director Scott Cooper and Johnny Depp can deliver a film that's just as captivating. September 18th seems like a long way away.

1. Sicario

Emily Blunt is perhaps the most underrated actress in Hollywood. She may not have legions of fangirls like Jennifer Lawrence or Emma Stone, but her sheer talent and likability make her just as enjoyable to watch on screen. Having previously showcased her acting prowess in Edge of Tomorrow and Into the Woods, Blunt plays the lead character in Sicario. Sicario is a crime thriller centered around an FBI agent (Blunt) sent by the government to aid a task force on the hunt for a drug lord in Mexico.

In the wrong hands, this plot could easily succumb to cartoonish stereotypes and generic setpieces. However, with Prisoners' Denis Villeneuve directing and the excellent Roger Deakins on cinematography, I expect a beautifully shot and ominously suspenseful film that will keep me guessing throughout. The always welcome presence of Josh Brolin and Benicio del Toro just adds to the hype, and I'll be checking this one out on opening night.

2016 Razzie Award Predictions.

It's only August, and yet with all of the bad press surrounding certain films, I found it quite easy to make my predictions for the Razzie Awards. While I can't guarantee which of these films will be nominated, I have a pretty good idea of what the nominees will be.

Note: this list doesn't necessarily reflect my opinion on who/what should be nominated, but who/what likely will be nominated. I base the predictions on popularity and notoriety, which is what the Razzies usually go by.


Worst Supporting Actor

• Ninja - Chappie
• Josh Gad - Pixels & The Wedding Ringer
• Kevin James - Pixels & Little Boy
• Jai Courtney - Terminator: Genisys & The Divergent Series: Insurgent
• Eddie Redmayne - Jupiter Ascending

Worst Supporting Actress

• Sofia Vergara - Hot Pursuit
• Michelle Monaghan - Pixels
• Yolandi Visser - Chappie
• Stefanie Scott - Jem and the Holograms
• Amanda Seyfried - Ted 2

Worst Screen Combo

• Jamie Dornan & Dakota Johnson - Fifty Shades of Grey
• Ninja and Yolandi Visser - Chappie
• Kate Mara, Miles Teller, Michael B. Jordan and Jamie Bell - Fantastic Four
• Sofia Vergara & Reese Witherspoon - Hot Pursuit
• Adam Sandler & Michelle Monaghan - Pixels

Worst Prequel, Remake, Rip-Off or Sequel

• Alvin & The Chipmunks: Road Chip
• Terminator: Genisys
• Paul Blart: Mall Cop 2
• Vacation
• Poltergeist

Worst Screenplay

• Kelly Marcel, Patrick Marber & Mark Bomback - Fifty Shades of Grey
• The Wachowskis - Jupiter Ascending
• Tim Herlihy - Pixels
• Jeremy Slater & Simon Kinberg - Fantastic Four
• Kevin James & Nick Bakay - Paul Blart: Mall Cop 2

Worst Director

• The Wachowskis - Jupiter Ascending
• Josh Trank - Fantastic Four
• Chris Columbus - Pixels
• John M. Chu - Jem and the Holograms
• M. Night Shyamalan - The Visit

Worst Actress

• Reese Witherspoon -Hot Pursuit
• Dakota Johnson - Fifty Shades of Grey
• Kate Mara - Fantastic Four
• Mila Kunis - Jupiter Ascending
• Cassidy Gifford - The Gallows

Worst Actor

• Adam Sandler - Pixels
• Miles Teller - Fantastic Four
• Channing Tatum - Jupiter Ascending
• Jamie Dornan - Fifty Shades of Grey
• Kevin James - Paul Blart: Mall Cop 2

Worst Picture

• Pixels
• Jupiter Ascending
• Paul Blart: Mall Cop 2
• Fantastic Four
• Fifty Shades of Grey

Top 5 Least Anticipated Films of September/October 2015.

They always say to get the bad news out of the way first. Well, before I reveal my top 5 most anticipated movies of early autumn, I figured I'd list the ones that you'll least likely catch me watching. So here they are in all their dull, rusty glory.

5. The Transporter: Refueled

Even ignoring the fact that Jason Statham is not starring in this, I honestly do not see the hype for this. Nobody I know is talking about it, and after seeing the trailer, I can understand why. It just looks like a run-of-the mill action movie with girls, cars, fights and explosions. Everything looks pretty much par for the course for an action movie and nothing really stands out.

4. Hotel Transylvania 2.

Hotel Transylvania was pretty much the best thing Adam Sandler was involved with in the past decade. It wasn't perfect, and did suffer from a few bad jokes, but I found it to be thoroughly enjoyable due to it's often snappy screenplay and its flawless direction by Genndy Tartakovsky (creator of Dexter's Laboratory). While Tartakovsky did return to direct the sequel, there are still some major red flags that may keep me from seeing Hotel Transylvania 2.

First of all, Adam Sandler is officially on the writing team. In the past few years, Sandler has written such films as Bucky Larson: Born to be a Star, Jack & Jill and Grown Ups 2. All of these films emphasize crude and cringe-worthy jokes that serve no purpose to the plot except to make the teenagers in the audience giggle. He does have his talents as an actor, but he is pretty much unbearable as a writer. This is in addition to the backstage issues involving co-writer Robert Smigel giving Tartakovsky a hard time and micromanaging the film's production. Even with Genndy directing, Sandler and the demanding Smigel may have had too much of an influence on the film for it to be as good as the first.

3. Paranormal Activity: The Ghost Dimension

Just when you thought the Paranormal Activity series was dead and buried, in comes the sixth film in the series to make you say: "nah...I'm not seeing that." Ever since the success of the original Paranormal activity, the found footage genre has been milked to death and dragged through the mud. Films like The Devil Inside, Devil's Due and The Gallows showed that the genre had pretty much run its course. With the new Paranormal Activity film, you'd think that Hollywood would know this and add something new to the aging series. Unfortunately, what they added only makes the newest installment even less appealing

Where the earlier Paranormal Activity movies focused more on subtlety than cheap scares and special effects, the newer installments seem to be focusing on the latter. With Paranormal Activity: The Ghost Dimension, any hope of clever scares or atmospheric tension is dashed with the addition of dark cgi blobs added into the film to represent the titular ghosts. Audiences who constantly complain about horror movies "not showing enough of the monster" will likely be won over, but everyone else is just out of luck here. Expect to sleep well after seeing this installment (if you don't already fall asleep while watching it that is).

2. Goosebumps.

After something like Pixels, who would have any faith in Sony to make a good movie to honor a childhood pastime? Pixels took the video games that its intended audience grew up playing and enjoying and drowning them in a bucket of awful jokes and insufferable characters. Goosebumps, to no surprise, looks to do the same thing.

The film's trailer revealed that R.L. Stein (played by Jack Black) is not actually the main character of the film. Instead, it stars the cliched good-hearted teenager with a single parent who just moved in from another town. He is joined by an equally cliched annoying goofball friend and obligatory female love interest. As if the cliched characters weren't bad enough, the dialogue looks shrill and unfunny, and the plot is just another "Sealed Evil in a Can" story that has been done too many times to count. Perhaps if there was more of a horror element in the trailer, it might have looked more appealing. Unfortunately, the film just looks like yet another goofball comedy fueled by shallow nostalgia like Pixels.

1. Jem and the Holograms

This film, along with Ouija, is proof that Hasbro's film division is incredibly pointless. Where Ouija was a generic jump-scare fest with high school students getting killed off one by one, Jem and the Holograms is a generic rags-to-riches story where the lead singer gets into a conflict with the rest of the band. Besides Jem and the Holograms having a shallow and dull plot, the movie doesn't even seem to stay remotely true to its source material.

The original series was based on a flashy 80's rock band. The characters played 80s pop music, dressed up in flashy outfits, and infused their hair with plenty of hairspray and mousse. On the contrary, the film adaptation takes place in modern times. As seen in the trailer, things like YouTube and Photoshop are mentioned, making it clear that the studio wanted to modernize something whose fans fondly remember it as being a piece of 80's nostalgia. What's the point on banking on 80's nostalgia if you are going to take everything remotely 80's out of it? Even if it was faithful to the source material, would you really want to see the 80's equivalent of Hannah Montana on the big screen?

If Nintendo Wants to Make Movies, Here's What They Should Do.

In a recent interview, Nintendo head designer Shigeru Miyamoto (宮本 茂) said that the company may finally start taking their beloved franchises to the big screen. Miyamoto said:

We’ve had, over the years, a number of people who have come to us and said ‘Why don’t we make a movie together—or we make a movie and you make a game and we’ll release them at the same time?’ Because games and movies seem like similar mediums, people’s natural expectation is we want to take our games and turn them into movies… I’ve always felt video games, being an interactive medium, and movies, being a passive medium, mean the two are quite different….As we look more broadly at what is Nintendo’s role as an entertainment company, we’re starting to think more and more about how movies can fit in with that—and we’ll potentially be looking at things like movies in the future.

Shigeru Miyamoto

In summary, Nintendo realizes that taking something interactive like a video game and turning it into something more passive like a movie is a challenging process. However, expanding Nintendo into different forms of entertainment is still something that the company is interested in doing.

If Nintendo wants to make movies, the first thing they should understand is that they must be animated and not in live action. While one could argue that the Legend of Zelda characters could work in live action, cartoonish characters like Mario, Kirby and Star Fox simply would not look right. Gritty live action versions of colorful characters are often the subject of parody, and should not even be considered by Nintendo. Would you honestly want to see something like this...

Mario in a Japanese Mercedes commercial.

or this?

A satirical live action Pokemon poster.

Moreover, perhaps the most important thing that Nintendo should (and hopefully will) understand is why previous game-to-movie adaptations failed. Previous adaptations took only the bare basics of the source material and put them into an unfaithful and shallow product.

King Koopa and the Goombas from Super Mario Bros.

The last attempt at a movie based on a Nintendo property was 1993's Super Mario Bros., a disastrous attempt to make a gritty, marketable film for general audiences. Bowser/King Koopa was portrayed as a bleach-blonde Dennis Hopper and the Mushroom Kingdom was a grimy, dark city. It ended up failing with critics and audiences and is still known as being one of the worst and most unfaithful game-to-movie adaptations of all time (as if most video game movies were ever faithful to begin with).

Even to this day, studios like Sony Pictures and 20th Century Fox are pretty much incapable of making a good video game movie, as evidenced by this year's Pixels and Hitman: Agent 47 respectively. Studio higher-ups could care less about making game-to-movie adaptations respectful and memorable and more about giving them flashy aesthetics hoping that they could gross enough money from casual crowds. Most of today's current studio executives did not grow up with video games, and thus do not have an interest in them to begin with. This leads to them hiring writers and directors who don't understand what people love about video games or how to put that love into a film.

How not to do an adaptation.

Pixels was a mashup of awful jokes and unlikable characters mixed with the occasional video game character and/or 80s song to trigger knee-jerk nostalgic reactions. The effects were nice, but the film treats its licensed characters with no real respect or understanding. Instead, it just throws the characters on screen and hopes that enough people will go "hey, I remember that" and forget about the poor overall quality of the script. It was the film equivalent of fruit stripe gum; it gives gamers a short burst of nostalgia before making them indifferent with an overall lackluster film.


Hitman: Agent 47 took the slick, stealth-based elements of the video games and traded them in for generic wannabe-matrix-style setpieces, guns and explosions. Once again, the people behind the film took no interest in what people love about the games and instead slapped the licence onto an easy-to-write action film to wring a few bucks out of audiences.

It's obvious that the creators of the games had little to no involvement in these movies. Therefore, it would be interesting to see what Nintendo could do if they themselves produce their own films. Hopefully, the movies will be much more faithful to the beloved games that inspired them and really give a reflection of what drives fans to play them.

Someone who loves the property should be involved.

Conversely, while it is important to stay faithful to the source material, Nintendo should still be willing to take a few creative liberties. Like Miyamoto said, without the interactive elements of the games like smooth controls and engaging gameplay, turning them into movies can prove challenging. For example, the typical damsel-in-distress storyline, while being a staple of the Mario and Zelda games from the beginning, is a dated plot element in film.

That isn't to say that Nintendo's movies should win over people like Anita Sarkeesian, but they should still be open to give the traditional stories of their games a twist. Much like Peter Parker getting bit by a radioactive spider, audiences have already seen Mario/Link save Peach/Zelda, and without the ability to interact with the characters on screen, audiences need a reason to keep watching.

Just look at The Lego Movie; its detailed animation and numerous references were nostalgic enough, but it also had well-examined themes of fatherhood and creativity. The character Emmet represented every child who wanted to look past the instructions and try their own ideas. Some may scoff at how "weird" something like a double-decker couch sounds, but it could still end up being a great idea after all.

How an adaptation should be done.

A Super Mario Bros. movie could explore themes of leadership. On the surface, it could still be the classic tale of Princess Peach being kidnapped by Bowser, but it could still be more than just that. Just like in New Super Mario Bros. U, perhaps Bowser could take over Peach's castle and hold her and her entire staff hostage. Much like the president in Olympus has Fallen, Peach must prove that she is a competent leader in a hostage situation, and could even help out Mario by sending him secret notes and health powerups like in previous Mario games.

Instead of a one-dimensional bad guy, Bowser could be a somewhat misunderstood father who wants to give his son Bowser Jr. a mother. This plotline was previously explored in Super Mario Sunshine and the Super Mario Adventures comics, and could certainly be carried out in the film adaptation. Again, the theme of leadership can come into play here, as Bowser learns throughout the film that he could be a competent single parent on his own. He could still be a villain by trying to destroy the Mario Brothers and having an overall bad attitude, but he could still be a fun villain like Captain Hook in Disney's Peter Pan.

Bowser can be funny but still threatening.

As for the Mario Brothers, Mario could be more than just a mild-mannered and likable Italian stereotype. He could be like Fix-It Felix Jr. in Wreck-It Ralph and be a good-hearted guy but slightly naive at the same time. In Wreck-It Ralph, Fix-It Felix Jr. is a good guy, but doesn't understand how Ralph truly feels about his status as a villain. Perhaps Mario tries too hard to protect his younger, more timid brother Luigi from danger and doesn't realize he's holding back Luigi's true potential. At the end of the movie, Mario can finally stop being overprotective of Luigi and let him contribute his own ideas to defeat Bowser's evil plans.

Note: Mario's dialogue must be carefully written to avoid lines like "all toasters toast toast."

There are several possibilities for other Nintendo movies. A Star Fox movie could be a humorous, witty and somewhat dark sci-fi tale in the vein of Guardians of the Galaxy.

Can you see the possibilities?

A Pokemon movie could be about Ash and Pikachu forming a friendly bond to defeat Team Rocket like Hiro and Baymax in Big Hero 6. A Legend of Zelda film could be a grand fantasy adventure like The Dark Crystal where Link and Zelda work together to defeat Ganondorf's reign of terror. The possibilities are more endless than the 1up trick in the original Super Mario Bros.

All of these films could even be a part of a Nintendo Cinematic Universe that fans have been craving for so long. Super Smash Bros. could be like The Avengers and see all of the heroes (and perhaps even villains) combining their strengths to defeat the evil Master Hand.

While nobody can predict what approach Nintendo will take with their movies (or if they'll even get made), one can only be optimistic that Nintendo will make the right decisions with what to do with their property. Just as long as they keep Happy Maddison far, FAR away from it.