It's been nearly a decade since a new Baz Luhrmann film graced the screens of cinemas. The last time was in 2013 with his glitzy, raucous adaptation of The Great Gatsby . The film had originally been slated for a winter 2012 release but was later pushed back to the following summer--signaling a studio that didn't have confidence in its awards chances. When Gatsby finally came out, it was greeted with mixed reviews from critics, but generally warm reception from general audiences. I was beginning to wonder when we'd see another Luhrmann picture and what he could possibly do next. During Luhrmann's absence, the Hollywood trend of making biopics about famous people for Oscar bait purposes grew rapidly. In the past few years, it seems that biopic films are never-ending. Oscar voters can't help but nominate them because they over-rely on the comparison between an actor's imitation and their subject to determine whether or not someone has given a good performance. So they keep getting made, and they each seem more and more "by-the-numbers" each time. Frankly, I'm weary of the genre. When I heard Luhrmann was helming an Elvis biopic, I thought that he was one of the few directors I could think of who could get me interested in a biopic again. Baz Luhrmann's Elvis chronicles the famed career of Elvis Presley (Austin Butler) and the complicated relationship he had with his manager, Colonel Tom Parker (Tom Hanks). The story begins in 1955 when the Colonel witnesses a young unknown Elvis perform on stage and instantly sees the raw talent he possesses. The Colonel knows that in the right hands, Elvis is bound for stardom, and he wants to be along for the ride. He also sees dollar signs in his and Elvis's future and he plans to do everything he can in his power to protect his investments...even if it isn't in Mr. Presley's best interests. Elvis yearns to be his authentic self, but his naivete allows him to be taken advantage of by the Colonel time and time again. Elvis is a tale of two performances--one that is a star-making revelation in Austin Butler's turn as Elvis, and the other is the distractingly bad portrayal of Colonel Parker by Tom Hanks. Butler is electrifying as Elvis and completely loses himself in the role. He's an absolute joy to watch and brings both charisma and a raw physicality necessary to believably step into the shoes of such an icon. The magnetic Butler shares the screen with Hanks, who wears a fat suit and speaks in a ridiculous, phony accent. It's jarring, to say the least, but somehow under the assured direction of Luhrmann, it is able to work against the odds. Baz Luhrmann has such a singular style and voice, and it's a completely welcome one in days when daring filmmaking feels so scarce. He's able to make something as stale as a biopic seem fresh and fascinating, even if it felt at times overly long. While I would have liked to see some more insight into who Elvis was apart from being an amazing performer, I still totally appreciate what the film was going for. At times, I totally felt transported into the era, actually feeling what it might have been like to attend these concerts and being able to see these larger-than-life performances in person. For that, I can't help but admire the film. Elvis is without a doubt one of the better biopics to come out in years due to an outstanding lead performance by Austin Butler coupled with Baz Luhrmann's over-the-top direction. While Luhrmann didn't seem like an obvious choice to direct this film, it turns out he was perfectly suited to make the King's story as epic in scale as it deserved to be. RATING: 8.5/10

Director Jordan Peele's much anticipated third feature film Nope is out in theaters today. Nope follows in the footsteps of Peele's first two critically acclaimed horror hits Get Out and Us. With the release of Nope , all eyes are on Peele to see if he can continue his streak of instant horror classics, or if he has his first misfire on his hands. Early buzz has been positive, comparing the film to M. Night Shyamalan's Signs and Steven Spielberg's Jaws and Close Encounters of the Third Kind , respectively. Will Jordan Peele's first foray into sci-fi be as successful as what he's done so far? In Nope , a pair of siblings named Emerald and Otis Junior or "OJ" (Keke Palmer and Daniel Kaluuya) seek to obtain definitive proof of the existence of aliens after they have a few close encounters. They know that ultimately their word to the public means nothing--but a picture, on the other hand, is worth a thousand words. So the two make it their goal to get the perfect money shot of these camera-shy aliens, by whatever means necessary. The two set up cameras all over their property, and start tracking every movement, whatever danger comes their way. Jordan Peele does an incredible job setting up the tension in the first half of the film, and I found myself having a lot of fun seeing where the story would take the audience. There are a few sequences where one or both of the siblings are checking around the farm after hearing unusual noises (as one does in a horror/sci-fi film), that are expertly crafted and perfectly executed. Daniel Kaluuya and Keke Palmer share an easy rapport and make their sibling dynamic incredibly believable. Kaluuya is excellent as the introverted half of the duo, grieving his father's recent passing and acting closed off to sharing his feelings. Palmer, on the flip side, provides a contrast to her film brother with levity and charisma. Disappointingly though, we never delve too deep into their relationship with each other or their recently departed father. It feels odd to set up such a loss without fully addressing it or using it to strengthen their bond. The film definitely could have used more heart-to-hearts to open the two characters up and make the audience care more about them. Instead, Peele leaves the character development on the back-burner and chooses to focus solely on the plot. As such, the ending doesn't pack the emotional punch it was set up to deliver. Unfortunately, the missing emotional component isn't the only issue the film has with delivering a satisfying payoff. The problem with Nope is its commentary gets in the way of common sense and stakes for the characters. The idea of spectacle above all else is fascinating, but it's really hard to suspend belief and buy the idea that not one of these characters thinks their safety is more important than their mission. Another frustrating loose end is Steven Yeun's character whose backstory feels built up to signify great importance to the story and ultimately goes nowhere, leaving the viewer wondering what exactly was the point in focusing so much time on it. Much like the emphasis placed on the rabbits in Us , you think that Peele will eventually bring everything all together by the end, but unlike that film, this time we're left hanging and scratching our heads. Those issues aside, Nope is undeniably a fun, fresh, and unique take on horror sci-fi that features a much stronger first half than its second. It's refreshing to see films from a filmmaker with such a distinct vision and style, and Jordan Peele is certainly a fun talent to watch. Peele really does a tremendous job putting all the pieces into place, I just wish it came together more in the end to stick the perfect landing. RATING: 7.5/10

Barbarian is a difficult film to write a review for because on the one hand, I have SO much I want to say. On the other, I want to say absolutely nothing to preserve the experience of going into this movie with as little knowledge as possible. I went into this film having seen no trailers or advertisements of any kind--with no other impressions aside from some good word of mouth and a brief synopsis. If you are a lover of the horror genre like I am, do yourself a favor and see this movie and form your own opinion before any and all hype. As soon as people see it there are bound to be strong opinions and the best way to experience this movie is with none of that. With all that said, my recommendation to any readers of this review is to stop here at this paragraph and know that I did immensely enjoy this film and do suggest you see it as soon as possible. But since I do have a review to write, I'll be as vague as I can though it's impossible for me not to reveal a little in attempting to discuss the merits this film has to offer. The premise here is simple, and I won't go into plot specifics other than what I myself had heard before I saw the film-- Barbarian follows a woman named Tess (Georgina Campbell) who discovers the Airbnb she planned to stay in has been double booked. The fear of something going dreadfully wrong at an Airbnb seems to be a common one nowadays as we've had quite a few of these films now (ie The Rental , Superhost ) but Barbarian finally does the idea justice because unlike previous attempts, Barbarian never aims to be purely conventional. For someone well acquainted with horror tropes, you have a certain idea of what to expect when watching one--and Barbarian brilliantly turns all those expectations on their head. A big reason this film works is because of its pitch-perfect casting. This isn't some big ensemble piece, rather it relies on three roles that if cast any other way may not have worked as perfectly as the film did. Georgina Campbell makes for a perfect modern horror lead, cautious and no-nonsense...but trusting enough to be vulnerable. Bill Skarsgård who plays the other renter of the Airbnb, is crucial here and pretty much the only actor I can think of who could make this part what it needed to be. Then there's Justin Long, who I honestly don't even what to say about him without giving anything away, but I will say this might be some of his best work to date and I only wanted more screen time with him. In fact "wanting more" was really my only complaint with the film. Wanting a little more setup between some characters and wanting a tiny bit more backstory of others. I'm definitely hoping there's a Directors' cut in store for us someday from writer/director Zach Creggor who, it must be said did some excellent work here. So while I may have a few nitpicks here and there, it doesn't take away from how solid Barbarian is as a whole. It's one heck of a fun ride and easily the best horror film of the year. I have so much more to say, but I have a feeling I'll be talking about this one for a while, so I'll save it for later after some more people can get in on the fun. RATING: 9/10

When Olivia Wilde’s sophomore directing effort Don’t Worry Darling was announced to be a horror film off the heels of the wildly popular Booksmart back in 2019, I was both intrigued and excited. But when Florence Pugh was cast and I was sold. For Pugh, this seemed like an excellent choice after her major success in the genre previously with Midsommar, and for Wilde seeing her tackle another genre after succeeding with a coming-of-age comedy felt exciting. The film's first trailer was mysterious and compelling, with glimpses of Pugh giving another mesmerizing performance amid the backdrop of a picture-perfect mid-century, suburban utopia. And then came all the drama leading up to the press tour surrounding the film's release. A supposed beef between director and star. An infamous loogie. The love triangle drama between Olivia Wilde, her ex Jason Sudeikis, and her lead actor Harry Styles. And of course the Chris Pine of it all. Don’t Worry Darling had to be downright amazing to rise above all its pressure. Don’t Worry Darling centers on Alice (Florence Pugh) a 1950s housewife who is very in love with and devoted to her husband Jack (Harry Styles). As with all women in the neighborhood, Alice stays home and keeps house while her husband works at a job so secretive, that he's not allowed to tell his wife about the details of his day-to-day life. Alice unflinchingly accepts this is the way of things and spends her days with the other trophy wife women of the neighborhood as they fill their days with dance classes and gossiping by the pool. One day, Alice’s perfect world begins to unravel when another woman in the community starts voicing that they’re all being lied to. Alice initially trusts the patriarchal system over her friend’s claim, but once weird occurrences start happening to Alice, she can’t ignore that everything feels off. Don’t Worry Darling wants to think it’s an important film giving new commentary on misogyny, but it really isn’t saying or doing anything new. It’s a reinvented Stepford Wives but feels a bit more basic. Florence Pugh holds the whole thing together but gets little help from her supporting cast, particularly a woefully miscast Harry Styles. Had this role gone to a more capable actor, we might be more invested in this relationship--which is pretty important for a third-act revelation to work (which it doesn’t). So while Pugh certainly tries her hardest to make this film great with her stellar performance, the film requires a strong supporting performance from the Jack character to truly come together. She just doesn’t get that from Styles. But let's get back to that aforementioned third-act revelation which gives the viewer way more questions than answers. The film tries so hard with its commentary that it overlooks making any narrative sense. The plot holes abound. But hey, at least it’s pretty to look at! Along with Pugh, the costumes and production design were the best things the film had going for it. All in all, Don’t Worry Darling is fine but definitely not as smart as it thinks it is and certainly not worth all the fuss. What will be more interesting at this point is seeing how all of the players come out of this. Pugh will be fine of course since the film’s failings are no fault of her own, but Wilde and Styles had a lot more riding on this and will certainly take the blame for the press tour shenanigans. They might have cause to worry, darling. RATING 5.5/10

Only a year after Halloween Kills debuted in theaters, its sequel and concluding film of the Halloween (2018) legacy reboot trilogy, Halloween Ends, premieres today. 2018's Halloween was a direct sequel to the original Halloween (1978) ignoring any other canon storylines that already happened. It achieved what felt like an impossible task-- it somehow felt like a fresh beginning to tell new Michael Myers stories, while still being a great film to honor the legacy of the original. It was announced soon after Halloween 2018's release that the film would be a part of its own trilogy and the hope for more great movies featuring Laurie Strode and Michael Myers felt happily inevitable. Then Halloween Kills happened. Without rehashing all of my thoughts on that messy film (you can read my review HERE ), needless to say, my expectations for the final film were brought way down. So can Halloween Ends get back to what 2018's Halloween did right, or is it more of the same that Kills had to offer? The answer...is surprisingly neither, because Halloween Ends does something uniquely peculiar and perplexing. A film called Halloween Ends decides to neither be about Michael Myers nor Laurie Strode at all. For a final film in a trilogy, this is just a baffling move. Let's get back to Halloween 2018 for a moment just to really emphasize how puzzling the decisions in this film are. That film re-introduced us to a Laurie who had channeled her post-traumatic stress disorder into a ball of paranoia, preparation, and rage. She was the type of person who was okay with straining relationships because she knew Michael Myers and what a force to be reckoned with he was. Halloween 2018 was advertised as an epic showdown forty years later and it delivered on that. But it's not a Halloween movie unless Michael gets away, so sequels are always a given. And when you've got a sequel, you've got a rematch right? Again, setting aside Halloween Kills which makes the terrible decision to sideline Laurie to a hospital bed for the duration of the film, Halloween Ends has no such excuse yet also underutilizes the character. Early in the film, we're shown Laurie four years on from the events of the previous two movies writing a memoir and moving on with her life. While character growth is certainly a thing, the events from the last two films (including losing her own daughter by Michael's hands) should only reinforce her beliefs not soften them. While the character feels refreshingly light acting like the carefree high schooler she never got to be, it also makes no sense for her to suddenly have found peace with Michael still on the loose after all. Halloween 2018 set up that this trilogy was supposed to be about Laurie, her granddaughter, and the generational trauma she's caused. So to conclude that story in a final film, the only natural thing to do would be to...check notes...introduce an entirely new character, and make the movie all about them. You see Halloween Ends is Corey's story. Who is Corey you might ask? From the cold open of the film, we learn he's a twenty-something guy with really terrible luck. With a town desperate to point their hate at someone, Corey finds himself as the new pariah. Until he has a run-in with Laurie who takes him under her wing and introduces him to her granddaughter Allyson. The two hit it off right away, but Corey still can't shake his unhappiness or anger for what he's been through and it is clear he's headed down a dark path. And in this franchise, all dark paths lead to Michael Myers. The idea of a new individual taking on the mantle of Michael Myers isn't a bad idea--and honestly, some of Corey's storyline is actually quite compelling. I loved the first scene and how it really sent into motion how Corey was such a victim of circumstance. I thought it was interesting seeing the effect that this town has on people since it in a way has become poisoned by the evil Michael spread and now that evil trickles down in other ways. It just all makes zero sense to be telling this story now during the last film of a trilogy that claims to tell the ending of Laurie and Michael. Had Corey's story been introduced in Halloween Kills or even Halloween 2018, it would have been a great time to bring in the character and set up the final film. But as told the way it is, it just is baffling. Throughout the film, it's hard not to repeatedly wonder if you're actually watching the right movie. Where is Laurie? Where is Michael? Apart from the Corey of it all, the film is also frustrating with how utterly stupid its characters are--Allyson in particular. It's pretty much a given that characters in horror movies make stupid decisions, but the film does her absolutely no favors and it's hard to watch. But hey, at least it's got some good kills even if the movie is about some rando and all the characters surrounding him act like dummies. What a way for a franchise to go out. That is...until its next reboot. RATING: 4.5/10

With the release of Marry Me , Bros and now Ticket to Paradise studios in 2022 are hedging their bets that the romantic comedy genre isn't dead, it's just been dormant. Ticket to Paradise casts two of Hollywood's biggest stars in Julia Roberts and George Clooney to sell this second-chance love story of a divorced couple uniting with a common goal-- to prevent the whirlwind wedding of their daughter (Kaitlyn Dever). Can the two make this destination worth the trip, or is this a one-way ticket to disaster? Now that I have my vacation puns out of the way, let's get to the movie! Roberts and Clooney star as Georgia and David, a pair of bickering exes who share an incredibly booksmart daughter named Lily (see what I did there?). For the past few years, she's dedicated her life to law school and finally is allowing herself to have a little fun after she graduates by spending some time in Bali on a girls' trip with her best friend Wren (Billie Lourd). But Lily's plans of pursuing a career change when she's swept off her feet with love at first sight by a charming local named Gede (Maxime Bouttier). She informs her parents by email that she's going to marry her new beau and invites her family to Bali to meet him and attend the wedding. Determined to stop their daughter from making the biggest mistake of her life by throwing away her career for a guy she barely knows, her parents make their way to Bali to do what only Julia Roberts can do best: ruin a wedding. Ticket to Paradise treads well-worn territory. It feels very familiar which makes the viewer feel a bit at home. It doesn't so much feel like a 2022 new release, but rather a movie we've seen a dozen times that came out in 2002. Its stars fall back on their reliable charm, and along with its stunning location (and therefore lovely cinematography), it's a very breezy watch. Movie comfort food that doesn't get made quite as much anymore (at least for big-screen viewing). But does that make it a good movie? Ticket to Paradise is an enjoyable watch, but definitely not without its flaws. At its core, the film is basic and predictable though absolutely elevated by its charming performances--so it's hard to be too mad at it. Honestly, it's just fun to see Clooney and Roberts in these types of roles again and bantering off one another, even if they deserve to be in a better movie together. Supporting performances here are also good with Billie Lourd and Lucas Bravo adding some nice moments of levity, though both could have been written to be a little less one note. Kaitlyn Dever and Maxime Bouttier didn't really sell me on a burning connection that would inspire a complete life change in a matter of two months, but were fine otherwise. Ultimately, Ticket to Ride left me with a lot of questions. Do I think that their daughter still is going to end up regretting her life one day? Yes. Do I think some things happened too fast between Clooney and Roberts without enough proper build-up of chemistry? Also yes. Am I still glad that people are making movies this wholesome and that big stars are agreeing to be in them, even though it's not perfect? Definitely, yes. All in all, it's a decent enough, if unmemorable bonne voyage. RATING: 6/10

When I first heard the news of Daniel Radcliffe's casting in a Weird Al biopic, I tweeted something to the effect of "Hollywood must really be scraping the bottom of the barrel for biopics if someone out there is making a Weird Al movie." Foolishly, I hadn't considered the possibility that Weird Al himself might be in on the joke. If Weird taught me anything, it's that it's never wise to count out Weird Al. Weird Al Yankovic saw the sea of endless musician biopics and decided to do what he does best--he chose to spoof them. Weird tells the story of the unparalleled rise to fame of the aforementioned Al Yankovic, better known to the world as simply Weird Al. We first meet Al as a young kid, whose parents just don't understand him. Young Al dreams of pursuing his passion of rewriting the lyrics to popular songs with a comedic spin, but Al is told in no uncertain terms by his parents that they do not support this path. Instead, Al is expected to follow in the footsteps of his father and work in a soul-crushing factory for the rest of his life. But the trajectory of Al's life changes forever when a door-to-door accordion salesman stops by and introduces him to the instrument that would change it all. There is a perfect genius to Weird and it all just works. Al and his career are the perfect foil to all the iconic musicians whose stories are told in biopic after biopic, all in the hopes of baiting that Oscar gold. His story makes for the perfect parody because he himself is the perfect parody. The movie reflects that and the humor throughout feels as familiar as any one of his songs. There's a real earnestness to the jokes and the characters that somehow make every aspect of the film funnier. Radcliffe gives a hilarious performance--not so much portraying the real Weird Al Yankovic--but rather the Weird Al of an alternate universe where Al became one of the biggest recording artists of all-time, performing concerts shirtless and catching the eye of fellow pop-star, Madonna (Evan Rachel Wood). He's kind of preposterous in the role, but he's supposed to be. Meanwhile Evan Rachel Wood as Madonna is absolute perfection. Her Madonna is a toxic siren leading Al to the brink of destruction. In addition to Radcliffe and Wood, the film boasts numerous cameos of comedians eager to show their love and pay tribute to Al. Weird Al himself who also co-wrote and produced the film even has a small part as well. My only issue with Weird: The Al Yankovic Story is its length. The film seems to run out of steam towards the end and you start to feel that runtime. Sometimes one can have too much of a good thing, and in the case of Weird , a more streamlined climax would have been beneficial in strengthening the film as a whole. Still, comedies this funny are increasingly rare these days, so I can't help but sing its praises to the tunes of Michael Jackson's greatest hits. RATING: 7.5/10

Coming-of-age films for girls are few and far between. Movies that tackle this specific age in a girl's life are basically non-existent. Lucky for girls and women everywhere, Judy Blume's novel explores just such a time from the young female perspective in Are You There God? It's Me, Margaret , and after fifty-three years since its publication, it has finally gotten a film adaptation. Writer/Director Kelly Fremon Craig ( The Edge of Seventeen ), bravely takes the task of bringing this story to the big screen and does it so effortlessly, that it feels like an instant classic. Are You There God? It's Me, Margaret follows a pivotal year in the life of our young heroine Margaret (Abby Ryder Fortson) as she adjusts to several new changes. She's just been uprooted from her familiar life in New York City to the suburbs of New Jersey following her father's new job. Marget is quickly welcomed by her neighbor into a very exclusive girl's club where they make silly rules like "no wearing socks" and spend lots of time gossiping about anything and everything. She confides her innermost thoughts and hopes to God, even though she was intentionally raised by her parents without a specific religion since they each have their own. Her teacher suggests she spend more time examining all religions as a research topic, to help her come to her own conclusions and she soon learns what a complicated topic it can be. For a story written in 1970, its themes are so timeless for young girls navigating their adolescence. Margaret is such a relatable heroine, due in large part to such an earnest performance by Abby Ryder Fortson. Seeing her journey play out feels so natural and true to life; it's so easy to recognize ourselves in her. She's aided by an amazing supporting cast with Rachel McAdams playing her mother Barbara, Benny Safdie playing her dad Herb, and a scene-stealing Kathy Bates as her Grandma Sylvia. McAdams, in particular, gives one of her most striking performances as a mother handling all of her daughter's changing wants and needs. All the young actresses playing her friends are stellar too, particularly Elle Graham as the too-eager-to-grow-up Nancy Wheeler. There's not a false note in the cast and they have a fantastic director working to get the most genuine performances from them. I really loved Kelly Fremon Craig's last directorial effort, The Edge of Seventeen , and once again (this time with the help of some fantastic source material,) she authentically creates the world of a young girl trying eagerly to fit in. Though the last time was through the lens of an older teenager in high school dealing with her own set of problems, this time we're taken back to all the growing pains of that age where we're not quite grown up, but we wish we were. Craig balances the innocence and curiosity of this age so perfectly, that it feels like you're reading the very real thoughts inside of a middle schooler's diary. Honestly, Are You There God? It's Me Margaret's existence feels like an actual miracle. I would have adored a movie like this to relate to growing up, but I'm so happy it exists now both for mothers and daughters alike. There's such a warm feeling of sisterhood to it--a rite of passage in growing up and understanding a more complex world than the comfortable one you were used to. It's not easy to leave that world behind and enter a new scary one, but it's so much easier when we know we're not alone and others have felt the exact same feelings we're feeling. RATING: 9/10

Disney's latest live-action offering, The Little Mermaid , finally swims into theaters after having been announced what feels like a lifetime ago. Rob Marshall helms the musical adaptation, telling the story we all know and love of a curious mermaid (Halle Bailey) who makes a deal with the evil sea witch Ursula (Melissa McCarthy) for the chance at human life with her beloved Prince Eric (Jonah Hauer-King). The quality of Disney live-action remakes seems almost impossible for people to fairly quantify. This is because these particular films are made in a way not to be judged on their own merits, but only by comparison to something else. On the one hand, everyone knows they very rarely (if ever) can improve upon the original, so often instead they're compared by the metric of the previous live-action remakes (an admittedly low bar). The one time Disney got the formula right was with 2015's Cinderella , which instead of remaking the animated version of the movie, felt much more like just another adaptation of the famous fairy tale. Why they haven't continued to go this route and make completely new interpretations of these stories in live-action form, doesn't exactly elude me (they're trying to cash in on nostalgia, not showcase any type of creativity here), but it's disappointing all the same. I'd love to be writing a review about a live-action Little Mermaid film where she doesn't have the same old sidekicks, and instead has new characters and deals with a completely different sea witch altogether. She doesn't even need to be named Ariel! But alas...Disney doesn't take risks--they make reproductions, so there's no way to look at the film objectively without comparing it to how it was done first. Halle Bailey is a fantastic new Ariel, who doesn't feel like a carbon copy of her animated counterpart which goes a long way to the film's benefit. Unlike past live-action Disney princesses, she can actually sing (I'm looking at you Emma Watson) and she has a very charming presence. You can tell the camera just loves her, and considering how much she's working against blue screen, it's truly impressive what she achieves here. But unfortunately, she cannot carry the film alone and she gets almost zero help from anyone else (save Hauer-King's Eric with whom she does have some nice chemistry). The supporting cast is really what lets this film down and the performances range considerably. Jacob Tremblay as Flounder is fine and generally inoffensive, but barely there. You could cut his character and the story wouldn't change a bit. Melissa McCarthy tries desperately to give her best impression of Pat Carroll's performance, without any of the gravitas. And the less said about Awkwafina's Scuttle, the better. But for me, the most glaring casting choices to really negatively affect the film are Daveed Diggs' imitation crab Sebastian (see what I did there?) and the complete misfire casting of Javier Bardem as the coldest King Triton ever. So many of their scenes together are just reciting the animated scene's dialogue word for word, without any of the warmth or humor that made the original lines work. In the original animated film, aside from her romance with Eric, it's with these two characters that Ariel actually has relationship arcs. We know the animated Triton is too hard on Ariel, but deep down is a softie who deeply loves his daughter and is just trying to do what's best for her. He has to learn to let go and give his daughter the freedom to live her life and do what she believes is best for her. In this version, their reconciliation feels so empty because you never felt anything between them in the first place. Meanwhile, animated Sebastian goes from being an overly strict watchdog to a true confidant and friend. Diggs' Sebastian just is there for bickering with Scuttle, not to provide any sort of meaningful relationship for Ariel. Characters of course aren't the only things recreated though, because we all knew we'd be getting new versions of all the film's beloved musical numbers. Halle soulfully belts Part of Your World , and while I wouldn't really say I prefer her version to the original, it was the only new rendition of these songs that came close to competing. Under the Sea feels completely lifeless in its first few verses, and when it finally does try to pull out all the stops, it just looks like a CGI eyesore. Poor Unfortunate Souls felt like a bland karaoke performance, while Kiss the Girl was absolutely dreadful. So what does the film add, or improve upon? Well, in terms of runtime, it adds a lot...including expanded action sequences and new songs, which makes the film feel unnecessarily bloated. But few of these additions actually improve anything. But, I did enjoy the extra scenes with Eric that really help build up their romance. Their new interactions are definitely one of the film's highlights and welcome additions. For a few moments, it feels like the film gains its own personality, before falling back on its mimicry. So yeah, compared to those other terrible, soulless Disney remakes it is indeed better than most! But compared to the original animated film, it is far inferior. And as a film on its own merits, it can't stand on its own two legs...try as Halle Bailey might. RATING: 5/10

There was a good long while when I wondered if The Flash would ever see the light of day. The film suffered numerous delays for a plethora of reasons, including the troubling actions of its star. It seemed inevitable the film would be canned, yet studio heads persisted in insisting that not only would it be released, but it would also be one of the greatest comic book movies of all time. Sure enough, the early buzz from advanced screenings was glowing and it seemed DC was sure to have a hit on their hands. The Flash catches up with Barry Allen (Ezra Miller) sometime after the events of Justice League (or Zack Snyder's Justice League , depending on your own personal headcanon,) living an everyday life as a superhero, doing his best to save those in need. He's also hard at work looking for evidence to overturn his father's conviction in his mother's murder case with the help of his good friend Bruce Wayne (Ben Affleck). When it seems he's finally come to a dead end, he can't help but wonder, what if he ran so far and so fast that he could turn back time and prevent his mother's death? Bruce warns him not to tempt fate, but Barry yearns for his father's freedom and to have his mother back alive and well. He plans to just go back and change one thing to keep her alive, but before he knows it, he's stranded in another timeline, without powers and now face to face with a younger version of himself who just gained his own powers. When he goes find his Justice League friends to help, he realizes more than just his parents' fates have changed. Bruce (Michael Keaton) looks very different here and a looming threat must be faced immediately or mankind will be doomed. Here's the thing. If you spend months hyping up a movie til Kingdom come as one of the best superhero movies of all time, you darn well better have the movie to back that kind of claim up. The Flash is not that movie. While its core story is good, it is so bloated and bogged down by inexplicable choices. Most distractingly, it's a very ugly movie. For some reason, the CGI is purposefully crude, looking like it came from a movie twenty years ago. Why Anthony Muschietti, or whoever above him ordered it wanted the movie to look so hideous I cannot possibly understand. It's the type of effects that really take you out of the movie and break the suspension of disbelief you're willing to allow. Ezra Miller pulls double duty playing two versions of Barry. One of those performances is pretty good. Unfortunately, the other happens to be incredibly obnoxious. It doesn't make for the most pleasant viewing experience. Meanwhile, Michael Keaton is a fun addition reprising one of his biggest roles, though it admittedly feels like it amounts to about as much as a celebrity repeating their old famous movie character catchphrases for a Superbowl TV spot. The Flash hopes to distract with its flashy cameos but is best served when it actually focuses on Barry's story. The heart of what the movie is about--letting go of the past and accepting that the hard parts of life are what make us who we are, are themes that are worth focusing on in greater depth. The movie is better off when it does, but too often gets distracted with what toys it can be playing with inside the DC sandbox. RATING: 5.5/10