Reason for the Season- Twilight Zone (2019)

    A couple years ago, I did a piece on this very blog lamenting that science fiction anthologies were not as common (relegated to season long anthologies at that time). In that piece, I mentioned that they shouldn't do another *Twilight Zone*, because there were at least two others before it. Well, they went and did it anyway, so that's why I decided to review it: to see if this lives up to any of the previous incarnations and to see how the anthology format holds up now. Just a reminder, these are more free-form, stream of consciousness than my typical reviews, and I include spoilers with abandon.  Also, I want to make this an official series, so there's a title. (Get it? Because TV series are organized into seasons and... you get it.)


    Okay, of the three version of this show, this is easily worst. I've said this for weeks as it has been released. For a long time, I regarded the 2002 version as the weakest one. Even that had some highlights and some good episodes (especially the sequel to "It's a Good Life," with Bill Mumy himself). This, however, has the weakest set of episodes so far. And it starts off fine. The Comedian episode with Kumail Nanjiani was pretty good, with a Twilight Zone-esque twist and very universal themes. It goes downhill from that almost immediately with the second episode, a very loose remake of Nightmare at 20,000 Feet called Nightmare at 30,000 Feet, which had... a podcast, I think, and Adam Scott running an airplane. Honestly, I don't remember a lot of it, and that's the problem with a lot of these. They don't really have those clincher moments that the standard Twilight Zone episodes do. Like, take the classic episode *Time Enough at Last*, of course about a dude who just wants to read, but is constantly distracted by the people in his life. At the very end, he has the time to read all the books he wants, since everyone else was wiped out by the apocalypse, but just he is about to, he breaks his glasses. That is a very iconic and very memorable moment. That is largely absent from this new incarnation, and in its place is... attempting to comment on modern social issues. Like, in the least subtle manner possible. The worst offender is "The Wunderkund", about John Cho as a political advisor who gets an 11-year old elected President. It is very clearly about Trump, and it is so painful to watch. Like, imagine all those hacky Trump jokes from like, Jimmy Kimmel and Bill Maher, and make them into a *Twilight Zone* episode and here's what we've got. "Not All Men" could've been interesting exploration of toxic masculinity, but doesn't really demonstrate that and has an ending that just contradicts itself. "Point of Origin" could've been as biting as an episode of the original, with a focus on the current immigration crisis. Again, though, it doesn't really explore these issues or really makes a point about them. It's just "yep. This is happening." People have defended (correctly) that the Twilight Zone from the 60's was political, but it always felt complete, and further more, held up as stories in their own right with universal themes. "The Monsters are Due on Maple Street" could be held as a commentary on McCarthyism and the Red Scare, but could be seen as a simple story about mass hysteria and the dangers of paranoia. Hell, the 2002 one had an update that was pretty good, while also commenting on the hysteria following 9/11. A lot of these, beside being unsubtle, are just not really good or memorable. Okay, there is one, and it's the best one of this season "Replay". There is a strong undercurrent about police brutality and racism, but it never feels too attached to that. Instead, it has more of an overriding theme about changing the past and trying to build a future. That makes it work a lot better, since it combines contemporary themes with more universal ideals. Aside from that, it just isn't very memorable. I've heard "Six Degrees of Freedom," was touted as a highlight, but I didn't care for it, especially the end. I can't tell you anything that happens in "A Traveler" or "Blue Scorpion". The very last episode of the season "Blurryman" is also pretty mediocre for the most part, though its message about how people ought to explore and expand art in all different directions and explore new ideas and worlds, and that something can be both good art and good entertainment was decently handled in the closing narration (the episode leading up to it was decidedly less adept at this message). That narration reminded me a lot of how Rod Serling, a long suffering TV writer who had scripts regularly censored by sponsors for their too-close-for-comfort stories, was able to use SF/Fantasy to explore contemporary themes and new ideas. (They might've also taken influence from the old Tower of Terror ride in Disney California Adventure with their TZ homages) The thing with this is that it has potentially good ideas and has a stellar cast and crew. Thus, none of it is really bad per se, but at that point, it just doesn't reach the level of being good. It's solid mediocrity, and that's probably the worst part. It just doesn't evoke an emotion within you. I'll probably never see any of these episodes again, and I've rewatched plenty of the *Twilight Zone* from all its incarnations. It is revived for a second season, and hopefully, it does get a lot better, because I do see potential in this series, if they can look at what didn't work for people and fix it, this could be a great show. Finally, Jordan Peele does a decent job as narrator. I honestly preferred Forrest Whittaker during his short stint, or even the unseen narrator from the second season of 80's series. 

Well, with that out of the way, join me in a little bit as this year sees the next Summer of Terror with the Nightmare on Elm Street series.

Marvel Cinematic Universe: Ranked!

      Okay, a little history lesson: In 1996, after about a decade of corporate wrangling and increasingly desperate attempts to bulk up sales in the wake of a generally declining industry, Marvel Entertainment formally declared bankruptcy. To save it, they merged with their subsidiary Toy Biz, and was able to reemerge from bankruptcy. To help do so, they sold the film rights to their stable of characters to multiple studios and co-produced the films under "Marvel Studios". This worked out well enough starting with 1998's Blade, and continuing with the Sam Raimi Spider-Man trilogy and a certain unmentionable director's X-Men trilogy. However, with these successes, many others were stillborn, and the rights reverted back to Marvel. With Iron Man's rights reverting back from New Line Cinemas, they teamed up with Paramount to make Iron Man in 2007, with plans to make a film based on the premier Marvel comics superhero team The Avengers. Flash-forward today, Marvel Entertainment is now an arm of the all-powerful Disney corporation, and the Marvel Cinematic Universe is the biggest thing in movies right now, for good and for bad. With Endgame on the horizon, and as a lifelong Marvel fan, I figure I might as well rank these before going into Endgame. I rewatched a lot of the MCU over the past few weeks in order to prepare for this list. Mostly Phase 1 and Phase 2. Not really in order and I did skip some because I had seen them recently enough to remember what I thought of them. I'll do these like the year-end list, where I'll rank it worst to best, and have every film in there, with a short explanation as to why. This quiz here (https://sorta.app/q/1016/frosemqiantjlcugpdbkh) was very useful in helping formulate this list. So, without further ado:

Thor: The Dark World

The only one of these that was legitimately bad in its own right. Confusing, dimly light, way too serious, with some glimmers to a better film here and there (most notably Thor and Loki making their escape). It was the only time watching that I didn't at least have some good time watching. Worse, a few days out from seeing it, I barely remember what happens in it.

Avengers: Age of Ultron

You may recall I put this at the very bottom of one of my first year-end lists. It is easily the weakest film that isn't necessarily bad. A few things save it: James Spader as Ultron, Andy Serkis as Klaw, the opening fight scene, the second half of the climax. However, its main problem is the action scenes, which aren't well-shot, and feel too long to have any actual impact.

The Incredible Hulk

There appear to be three films being made here. One is "Jerry Bruckheimer does The Fugitive". The second is a Michael Crichton SF thriller. The other is a monster movie with the Hulk. The one-third that has the Hulk is pretty good, but it is bogged down by the other two-thirds. I heard Ed Norton rewrote the script heavily, so that might account for this problem.

Thor

For a while, I knew I didn't care for this film in comparison to the others, but I couldn't quite put my finger as to why. After rewatching, I think that I feel disappointed that the film is not more over-the-top. It feels too reverent and constrained, and Marvel's Thor was always larger-than-life. I suppose it comes down to: it took itself too seriously.

Spider-Man: Homecoming

Decent. Decent action, decent character moments, decent story. It is basically a good film, and I enjoy it. That said, with better Spider-Man movies (Spider-Man 2, Into the Spiderverse)  it pales in comparison to those. I think I was kind at the time because it was a good palette cleanser for the obscenely bad Amazing Spider-Man 2,  and it eschewed being another origin story. Again, I like this film, but it was weaker on the rewatch

Iron Man 3

It was an interesting turn they took with Iron Man's signature villain (I won't spoil it for those who haven't seen it), and just as a Shane Black movie, it's pretty good. It has his signatures: a sprawling conspiracy involving a well-known industry, a little kid who helps the hero, Christmas. It's not one of his best, but if you like his films, it'll satisfy even non-Marvel fans.

Captain Marvel

It was a good decision to actually lean into some feminist themes (however surface level it may have been), as opposed to merely having a female protagonist and just leaving it there. It helps elevate to more than another origin story. It also had decent enough action to back it up, and the reinvention of the Skrulls was a superb twist that worked very well for comic fans.

Iron Man 2

I was a big defender of this one for many years, but it was a while since I had seen it, and yeah, it hasn't really stood the test of time. It's still fun, and it does do a different story than the first, but a lot of the story feels half-baked and underutilized, and the climax was just too bombastic without any sort of motivation or understanding.

Ant-Man

This is generally a lot of fun. A good sort of superhero heist film, with tons of witty dialogue, character banter and pop culture references to really engage an audience, along with some excellent visuals taking advantage of its size changing hero. Makes sense, given Edgar Wright, Joe Cornish, and Adam McKay all wrote the film. Yeah, apparently it's considered one of the weaker films, but it is a lot of fun for me (even if its villain was a bit boring.

Guardians of the Galaxy

Also a lot of fun, but director James Gunn manages to imbue it with a very personal touch. Focusing on the characters and how these misfits and outcasts slowly grow to become a family, with some dark moments and some great action. It is sort of amazing how well the balance of emotion, action, and comedy really work out to make this entertaining. And of course, I'd be remiss if I didn't mention the soundtrack, which I still listen to frequently.

Ant-Man and the Wasp

Even more fun, even more visuals, even more comedy. A good sequel always takes what works about the first, and ups the ante, and with this films extensive exploration of the Quatum Realm, and Ant-Man becoming Giant Man, it really ups that ante. It also fixed the biggest problem of the first one, by having an interesting villain (but a bland secondary one)

Doctor Strange 

You might recall I put this in the "okay" category the year it came out. I think I was just affected by the negative buzz of it being yet another origin story. Now with some distance, it is an origin story, but it is very well done, with the character actually growing into the role and having to actually let go of his own ego. Also, I don't think I gave the truly impressive visuals or the inventive use of magic in the plot the due it deserved. So, call this a repentance for my previous evaluation.

Iron Man

This was actually a favorite of mine for many years, and I've seen it a dozen times. It holds up well after 12 years. There are flaws and indications of its age (most notably the Bush era focus on terrorism and the glamor of Tony's life, and the start of Marvel's obsession with making a villain a dark reflection of the hero), but its well-crafted plot and ingenous scheme of incorporating comic storytelling to the silver screen deserves a lot of credit.

Captain America: The Winter Soldier

Taking more influence from 70's political thrillers and Steve Englehart's run of the character during that same period, this manages to take the character of Cap and deal with his commitment to freedom in a world that increasingly and slowly chips away at that freedom, as well as him having to fight a very personal threat. With more intense, up close action and a bzyantine conspiracy that completely derails the MCU as previously known, this was the first that really helped mature the franchise beyond the standard superhero film.

Thor: Ragnarok

Much has been said about the political subtext of the film being about the legacy of colonialism, much of which can be attributed to the half-Maori director Taika Waititi. However, I want to give props to the film for capturing the look of the Marvel Cosmic, and with that, finally getting Thor right as a bombastic hero, and adding some humor into the film. Combined with an excellent supporting cast, and it makes for a good film viewing experience.

Captain America: Civil War

Really more of an Avengers centerpiece, this features a strong, dense story that never collapses or feels too complicated or confusing. The slowly rift between Cap and Iron Man just grows and festers with each scene before it climaxes in a dark, brutal finale that is very hard to get out of mind. It was a good gut punch of a film and had enough seriousness without going over-the-top with (*cough* Batman v. Superman *cough*)

Captain America: The First Avenger

This was the highlight of the Phase 1, hands down. Joe Johnston's affection for the media and culture 1930's and 40's (used to great effect in his other Disney produced superhero film The Rocketeer) give the film a sense of both nostalgic, and modern sensibilities.  The gloss and charm of the style help give the story and the character of Cap more reverence and urgency, especially in dealing with a threat that even surpasses the Nazis. This was the kind of film that really does justice to the character. (Given the 40's serials actually produced during the war got his identity completely wrong, that's really saying something)


Avengers Infinity War

This is how a big crossover event should be done. Enough time is given to each character, there is a lot interplay between them, and there is enough action and character to move the plot along. It manages to balance out the more fantastic and the more mundane elements from each film, and has comic book fun without becoming pure camp or pure edge. What really makes this good is Thanos, who manages to be both a cruel, but fundementally human villain who is given life by Josh Brolin's performance.

Guardians of the Galaxy, Vol. II

I'll just reiterate the points I made in this film's entry in my 2017 list. It is both a fun film with tons of well-done action, comedy, and visual that all work very well in their own right in making it feel like a Bronze Age Marvel story, but what really makes this extraordinary is how it manages to also be about the often complicated, contradictory nature of family and the nature of the relationships that tend to arise from that. It is sometimes a bit hard to watch because of that. And it easily has the best ending of any of these. I always tear up when I see it.

Black Panther

I think the theme of these last few entries is balance. Black Panther has a couple of minor flaws, sure, but what makes it the sort of film that can be nominated for an Academy Award is how it manages to be both a great superhero movie with great action and effects and have a strong sociopolitical streak, with themes of racism, colonialism, and isolationism being explored and utilized in the plot with powerful moments that stick with you for a long time. Neither side ever overwhelms the other; in fact, they compliment each other. It is the kind of superhero movie for people who don't like the genre.

The Avengers

Whilst not having any sort of political message or theme, this is easily the best of this cycle for just doing what sets out to do in the best possible manner. It manages to bring together these characters, develop them, have them interact, and have some really excellent character, before going into the action moments, where they could have some impact. It is sort of a perfect blockbuster in that sense. A pure action-adventure story that never forgets what it is, but tries to be what it is to the best of its ability. It really is sort of a modern classic.

-----------------------------

So, that's my rankings. You may think this is building up to an Endgame review. Well, maybe, but that will be hard to do, given that spoilers are a big thing going around and that there will be more than enough reviews going around that I won't have anything to say that someone else hasn't already.

So, join me in a few days, as I look at a much hyped auteur indie feature from indie darling corporation (often to the point of outright worship) A24, that was dumped onto VOD this week, Under the Silver Lake. 

Masterpiece of Horror Theatre- Q: The Winged Serpent

        Before I discuss this, I will briefly discuss its writer and director Larry Cohen. Originally a TV writer and creator of shows like Coronet Blue and The Invaders, he would transition to directing in the 70's, and would have a smash with It's Alive, a horror film about a killer newborn, and followed by God Told Me To, a science fiction thriller about mass killings. The film mostly originated from Cohen's desire to see a King Kong style monster movie for the Chrysler Building (which he had admired in terms of design), and figured the Aztec god Quetzelcoatl (described as a feathered serpent in most accounts) would do as the big bad. After getting fired off another project, he decided to move ahead with this idea He was able to get big stars like David Carradine (who he had served with in the army), Richard Roundtree, and Michael Moriarty to sign on (a young Bruce Willis auditioned, but was ultimately rejected by Cohen). After multiple rejections, the film was able to be shot on location in the Chrysler building, and the special effects team of Randy Cook (who would later win three Academy Awards for his work on Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings trilogy) and Dave Allen was contracted to make the stop motion creature based on Cohen's designs. The film was released in 1982 to mixed critical reception, but relative box office success and later cult classic status.

       Something is picking off people in New York! From a window cleaner to sunbathers to just people standing on rooftops, someone-or something is killing off many New Yorkers. Investigating this strange turn of events are Detective Shepard (David Carradine) and Sergeant Powell (Richard Roundtree). Wow, two Die Hard references in two reviews!). The former soon finds a connection between the seemingly ritualistic killings and ancient Aztec sacrifices. Sure enough, a cult has brought back the god Quetzelcoatl back through human sacrifices, who is now killing multiple people. Eventually, Shepard deduces what is happening, and needs to find their hideout. Luckily, small time criminal and part musician Jimmy Quinn (Michael Moriarty) came across a strange lair while escaping a botched robbery, with a large egg in the center.

         The creature design was very well done, as was the stop-motion. At first I was a bit iffy on it, due to the fact the viewer doesn't see much of it, but once it can be shown in its full glory, it is very impressive in its scale. I like that it combines the look of a bird and a dragon, a more realistic look for a being shown in Aztec paintings as a serpent with wings. The stop motion is well done, and as a bit of an homage to King Kong, the stop motion is supplemented by larger effects for its head during the climax. Many people bring up Michael Moriarty as the highlight, but honestly, Carradine was the best actor for me. He brought an edge and seriousness to the character that makes him more credible as he realizes the true nature of what's happening.

       The main problem with the film is mostly its length. The first 40 minutes could be condensed easily into 20 or even 10. Most of what happens could easily just fit into 10 minutes without losing anything significant. It would've worked better had the build-up been shorter, since more of the film could be focused on the creature itself and the attempts to stop it. As is, it meanders a lot, with the creatures various killings, Shepard investigating, and Quinn getting into trouble with his fellow robbers. This is not just restricted to the first 40 minutes. Most of the film has filler to it to pad out the run time. Had they leaned in more to the creature, it might've helped cut down much of the filler.

       This felt more like an extended television episode of an anthology show or an action show than it did a feature film. Not to say it was bad. It was entertaining and interesting enough to have kept me watching. If you want a film to watch in the background or just want to see some monster shenanigans, I recommend this. Honestly, though, it was a bit of a disappointment.

     Next week, we move to one of the most influential horror films of the modern era: The Blair Witch Project

Masterpiece of Horror Theatre- Re-Animator

      HP Lovecraft "Herbert West-Reanimator" was originally published in Home Brew (a small fanzine run by a friend) in 1922. Centering on the titular character resurrecting the dead (as well as a satire of Mary Shelly's Frankenstein), Lovecraft was dissatisfied with it, having only done it for money. (Reading the story makes that clear, with how much of it seems to have been written on auto-pilot), and is generally considered one of his worst. Accordingly, unlike many of Lovecraft's other story, it was not republished at first. Chicago playwright Stuart Gordon first came across the story after a discussion with friends lamenting the number of Dracula movies and not a lot of Frankenstein ones, whereupon a friend recommended it. Gordon had been a fan of Lovecraft for years and after reading, decided to try to adapt it: first on stage, then as a TV pilot. Originally wanting to emulate Lovecraft's setting, they ultimately decided to update to modern day Chicago for budgetary concerns, and later expanded it to an hour. Eventually, special effects director Bob Greenberg (known for John Carpenter's Dark Star) convinced him to make it into a feature film, and introduced him to producer Brian Yuzna, which allowed the production to move to Hollywood. Special effects director John Naulin would use both morgue shoots and books on forensic pathology to help make many of effects used as bodies and make-up in the film, using 25 gallons of fake blood in the process.  The cast would themselves spend time in a morgue and insane asylum to fully prepare for their roles in the film. The film was largely shot over 18 days, with Richard Band composing the score over three weeks (having to spend money due to overtime). It was released to financial success and critical acclaim, and continues to be a cult classic, though Lovecraft fans (despite the story being considered one of his weakest) are split on it.
     Herbert West (Jeffrey Combs), a medical student is kicked out of the Swiss institution he was studying at, after a mishap with his Professor Hans Gruber (sadly, not Alan Rickman, but Al Berry) ends with Gruber walking and acting strangely while bleeding out of his eyes. He moves into Miskatonic Medical School, where he bonds with Dan Cain (Bruce Abbot), and clashes with Dr.Carl Hill (David Gale), whom West accuses of plagiarism. Cain is dating Megan (Barbara Crampton), the daughter of Miskatonic Dean Alan Halsey (Robert Sampson). Cain allows West to room with him, over Megan's objections, where he conducts strange experiments. Sure enough, one day, Megan discovers their cat in West's fridge. West says the cat had died due to an accident, but Cain and Megan are skeptical. Then, Cain finds West attempting to find the cat and seeing him kill it, even though it was explicitly dead earlier. Cain is upset, before West reveals a formula that brings the cat back to life. Megan is understandably horrified, and her father subsequently bans Cain and West from campus. Undeterred, they sneak into the campus morgue (do medical schools have those?) at night to test the formula on humans. The dean hears about it, and tries to stop them, only to be killed by a corpse they were able to resurrect. Hill hears about it, and now wants to hear their secret....
     This film is pure schlock. How is this a good thing? Well, it's shlock, but it decides to fully embrace it. It is a messy, gore-filled, supernatural enfused B-movie, and it is incredibly fun, helped by great effects that make it as disgusting and revolting as needed Not to mention, it is incredibly earnest. The acting and writing take every moment very seriously. It takes Lovecraft's worst story, excises a lot of it, and leaves the bare bones story to play around with. Probably the best way to adapt material like that. It is very entertaining, in the way it was intended. I like that the villain, previously shown as a bit of a snobby, cantankerous fellow, to become a depraved monster, unhinged by traditional morality, after his own death and West resurrecting ....his head. No, really, West resurrects his head after beheading him, and it is still able to control his body. Once again, this is a hell of a lot of fun, and I really enjoyed watching it.
      There was a couple of minor problems following the narrative. Mostly, sometimes things happen off-set or just not explained, and some scenes were a bit hard to follow. Similarly, it is quite short at only 86 minutes. I feel more could've been explored.
     It might be hasty to say this, but I think this is one of my new favorite horror films. I really loved the experience of watching it, and it is truly an underrated classic, like I've heard from many sources. This is a true Halloween movie, with various horror elements put together to make a great viewing experience. As such, I highly recommend to horror fans of any stripes.
    Tomorrow, we go back to gods and monsters with Q-The Winged Serpent.

Current Film Review: A Wrinkle in Time

         It's rare I'm blindsided by something like this. Sure, I read and watched the reviews, which said that this ranged from disappointed to terrible. However, this truly was... I don't know how to describe it. I could not have imagined something like this. It was not good, but it was not good in a very interesting, creative way. It was fascinating in its weirdness and, perhaps because of that, I was invested in it. It is still severely flawed, but it's interesting. A lot of reviews say that this will probably become a classic for kids today, the same way something like Neverending Story or Hook was for my generation. I tend to agree. I bet that in 10-20 years, this film will be regarded by some as a classic.

        Based on the seminal young adult novel by Madeleine d'Engle, the film follows Meg Murry (Storm Reid), a young woman in Los Angeles, who lives with her mother, Dr. Kate Murry (Gugu Mbatha-Raw) and younger brother Charles Wallace (Deric McCabe) (who is constantly referred to by his full title for whatever reason). She has become more temperamental and rebellious after the disappearance of her father, astrophysicist Dr. Alex Murry (Chris Pine). One night, Meg and her mother find Charles Wallace playing with a strange woman, who introduces herself as Mrs. Whatsit (Reese Witherspoon), who foreshadows events to come. After another encounter with Mrs. Who (Mindy Kaling), Meg and her new companion Calvin (Levi Miller) note the strange behavior of Charles Wallace. Finally, Mrs. Whatsit and Mrs. Who unite with their leader, Mrs. Which (Oprah Winfrey), who explain their appearance: They want to help find where Meg's father is. Soon, Meg, Calvin and Charles Wallace are brought on a literal intergalactic journey, where they confront their inadequacies and the power of love (I think, something like that)

       This was creative and interesting to look at. It has a wide color palette, and utilizes a diverse range of settings and backdrops to give a more whimsical atmosphere. It has a number of interesting (if underexplained; I'll get to that) ideas, and visuals to convey these ideas.  It's very nice to look at, and very unusual for a blockbuster. The performances mostly work, and the actors appear very invested in the material. It has some emotional scenes and some occasionally funny moments. Like I said, a kid now might be very charmed and enchanted by the scenes in this, even if I was mostly uninvested in them.

    The biggest problem with this is that it is underexplained. So many confusing things happen in this. Some ideas are brought up, and never mentioned again. Some ideas just come out of nowhere, and you're left confused as to how the sequence of events eventually led to this moment. I certainly was left at times wondering why things happened, and how things were resolved. It feels like stuff was cut from this that would've clarified and fully explained the events that occurred. That hypothesis is supported by the fact that a prominent part of trailer is not in the film, suggesting scenes were cut from this. The characters also feel underdeveloped and react to things in a manner normal people don't. Mrs. Whatsit's first appearance in their home is mostly shown as if a nosy neighbor had stopped by, and not a mysterious woman had just broken into their house. At no point do the characters ever question what's happening or think that they are dreaming. Finally, the villain of the story is underdeveloped. Once again, probably something that was cut, since there is a scene at the end that suggests that the villain's defeat was part of a larger philosophical battle, or something. This film left me baffled as to what it was trying to do.

       Once again, I feel that this might become a sort of classic when elementary and middle school teachers put it on during  recess or breaks, or if they are studying the book itself in school.  And, honestly, while I didn't like per se, I don't hate either. It is far too interesting and creative for me to really dislike. While it is very flawed, as I have detailed, I recommend this, especially if you are young and interested in seeing this.  Probably as a matinee, though, there are probably better movies out now.

      Next time, I will be tackling the nostalgia fest of Ready Player One.