American Vandal

It has been a hot second since I have straight up binge watched a show all the way through. I've been watching a lot of shows lately and a lot of them have a lot of episodes in it or multiple seasons. I still binge but I'll binge a couple episodes at a time and maybe finish a 12 episode season in about 2 weeks or so. It's definitely binging but it's not the instance where you sit down and watch something and don't get up till it's complete. Sometimes it all comes down to opportunity, some times it comes down to the show itself. With American Vandal, it was a little bit of both.

American Vandal is a true crime mockumentary set in a high school in California. It follows the incident that happened at the school where 27 penises were spray painted on 27 cars that belonged to the faculty of the school. Everyone immediately believes it was the resident stoner burnout, Dylan Maxwell (played by Johnny Tatro). There is an eye witness and the teachers say there is motive. Dylan is suspended from school and everyone believes it was him.

Then a pair of Sophomores in the AV club decide to make a documentary to look into the mystery of the penis drawings. These sophomores are Peter (played by Tyler Alvarez) and Sam (played by Griffin Gluck) and they spend 8 episodes investigating every single angle of this story to find the truth and determine the true perpetrator of the dick drawings.

And yeah if it sounds ridiculous that's because it really is. This show sets out to create a satire of the true crime fad that has really hit the United States by storm with things like Serial, and Making a Murderer. And they do a really good job at it.

I like both those shows and that almost makes it better because the show really delves into the investigation into things that are connected but are very loosely connected and all the narrator has to do is say, "Is this connected? I'm not really sure", and it's totally validated. And the show takes an incident that in all reality would not be that big of a deal and blows it into a huge conspiracy. And it. is. hilarious!

Seriously, it takes a lot to make me laugh out loud if I'm alone. I watched this show by myself and I was laughing really hard at the jokes and humor in this show.

A lot of the humor comes from the situation itself. This is a true crime show about a bunch of spray painted dicks. A lot of the humor comes from the characters and how seriously they take this situation. And a lot of the humor goes into the way they take a stupid situation like this and blow it up into a huge conspiracy with all the models and diagrams, all being executed by a high school sophomore.

The main characters are really fun characters because they take it so seriously. They see themselves as investigators and Jimmy Tatro's character is your lovable but flawed victim. He could be guilty, but he could also be innocent. And that's the other weird thing. The show actually draws you into the mystery and you really start to question, did Dylan draw the dicks or not? And if he didn't, who did?

A lot of credit goes to Jimmy Tatro. This is a guy that I don't really think is the funniest guy in the

world but I really have to respect his journey and the progress he has made from his beginnings. He started as a Youtube Personality and has since made it into pretty huge movies like 22 Jump Street, and Divergent. It's still a little weird seeing him in movies like 22 Jump Street because he started out so simple and blew up with YouTube.

Now I would say that Tatro is not the best actor in the world. This role is basically the same role he's been playing his entire career. He played it in 22 Jump Street and he will probably end up being cast as that burnout stoner douchebag again in the future. But it seems like he's working hard taking his career from the angle that works for him and I have to give him props for that.

They use the formula from Serial and Making a Murderer so well that you're drawn into this totally made up case. So much that the second google search for American Vandal is: American Vandal True Story.

The other fun element of the show are the people they interview. While there are some pretty funny characters in this show like the history teacher who just wants to be liked or the stereotypical overachiever, it's almost funnier when the supporting characters are straight and actually point out how ridiculous this whole scenario is.

There's a great scene that I laughed hard at when Dylan and Peter are on the phone with Dylan's lawyer and Peter speaks up. When the lawyer asks him who he is, he says he's the documentarian doing a true crime documentary on Dylan's case like Serial. The lawyer is almost in shock and says what we're all thinking, "That is a horrible idea".

It's humor like that and the timing that really makes this show a lot of fun.

The show takes a little bit of a serious turn, especially towards the end. This is kind of to be expected these days. A lot of comedies, especially the good ones will inject a little bit of drama and bring the audience in for a couple seconds throughout the series to reinfuse the tragedy so when the comedic elements tap into that tragedy it is funnier.

Now I will say that the dramatic moments, especially at the end don't always land. This is a show that had a diagram of what could be potential vantage points of a girl giving a guy a handjob after all.

However, it does bring in a little bit of heart to the whole situation and I thought that it was done pretty well.

My only question with this show is what is the total impact going to be? This is a pretty fun quick binge. It is only 8 episodes and you will go through it very quickly. I'm not sure if this show will go down as one of the best Netflix shows out there but I definitely am putting it above a lot of originals, especially some of which I've seen recently.

I really hope they don't do a sequel to this. What worked about this show was how fresh it felt and the satire of the true crime dramas out there. If we get an American Vandal season 2, they would have to find a totally different situation, probably in a totally different location with different characters and at that point you're jus creating the same thing you've already done pretty well.

However, I feel like American Vandal is a show that might slip past a lot of people. I'll admit, it didn't look that great to me at first and I didn't expect to binge watch it. But once you're past the first episode, it's very difficult to quit, especially for the people who were obsessed with Making a Murderer, another show I really don't think they should make a sequel season for (but that's a different post.

I really enjoyed American Vandal. It satirized where it needed to satirize. Was genuine where it needed to be genuine, and was just down right funny overall. It concerned me a little when Netflix said that they want to go 50% original content. I get worried that they are just gonna start throwing whatever they can at the wall and see what sticks. But if everything is as well made and well thought out as American Vandal is, I think I'll continue on this Netflix original binge I've been working on (or at least I feel like I have, I don't know if it reflects in what I've been reviewing).

But what did you think? Do you think Netflix is doing the right thing putting all their money in original programming? What kind of movie or show genre would you like Netflix to tackle next? Comment and Discuss below! You can also send me your thoughts on Twitter @MovieSymposium as well as send me your requests for what you think I should put on the blog next. If you follow me, you can get updates as well as live tweets from the shows and movies I'm watching at the moment.

I'll leave you with this. It only felt right to put something from Life According to Jimmy on here. Enjoy!

The Man in the High Castle Season 1

I love the fact that streaming services are making their own content. In a world where Netflix is in insurmountable debt and the reality is that streaming services are never going to be as good and have as many quality shows and movies than they do now, it is great to know that there are original series and that this is most likely going to be the future moving forward. 

The Man in The High Castle was a show that I wanted to check out the minute that I got access to Amazon Prime. However, it took me quite a while to watch it as I had other shows that I was interested in. But the other reason was that I tried to start this show at the beginning of the year and it didn't really work out too well. 

The Man in the High Castle takes place in a reality where Nazi Germany and Japan won World War

2. They dropped an atomic bomb on Washington DC and invaded the continental United States. If you look at the map to the right, Nazi Germany controls the East Coast and the majority of the Eastern half of the United States. The Japanese control the West Coast, while the middle of the country is what is called, The Neutral Zone.

The show takes place in an alternate 1962 so the United States has been under Axis control for about 10 to 15 years now. People are settled into the way of life and while there are still people who talk about the war and the atrocities that happened, or that they were on the losing side, there has come a sense of resignation to the situation the United States finds itself in. There are pockets of resistance and in the first season we see both sides, the resistance, and the powerful SS hunting down that resistance.

Right off the bat without any characters or real plot, this is already an intriguing and dark premise. I mean the first scene in the show is a kid standing up and reciting the new pledge of allegiance and Siech Heiling in school while wearing those horrible Nazi youth uniforms.

It's freaking dark!

And then you add the characters and the plot.

There is a pretty big cast in this show and it doesn't do me a lot of good to go down the list and name off every single character. I'll stick to the main ones that the story follows the most.

Mainly Julianna (played by Alexa Davalos), her boyfriend Frank (played by Rupert Evans), and Joe (played by Luke Kleintank).

Through a series of circumstances, both Joe and Julianna find themselves in possession of a reel of film. I'm just gonna say it here, the films are the most intriguing parts of the entire show. These film reels show clips from actual history and show the United States winning the war. They say that the films are created by The Man in the High Castle. Because what is show in the films are not reality in this show, these films are very confusing and valuable. The resistance wants them, Hitler wants them, and the Japanese want them.

Joe and Julianna, two people from opposite sides of the country start a journey to bring these film reels to the resistance while being hunted by Nazis, bounty hunters, and other dangers... but that is really only the start of everything that happens in this season. That really only covers the first few episodes.

All the while, Julianna's boyfriend Frank is caught up in the fallout of Julianna going off with the film and Frank has to face the Japanese secret police.

And man, does this guy continue to be kicked when he is down. Holy crap. I don't want to say everything that happens to him but damn he does not have a good time this entire season. Rupert Evans does a really good job portraying this character, especially since this could have been a really boring character.

He sticks around Japanese occupied San Fransisco the entire time but he gets caught up in the entire thing and he probably has the most development as a character just due to the things he experiences, the people he meets, and the turmoil he gets put through. Also I should mention that he's half-jewish and that doesn't really fly too well in this universe.

Then you have SS Obergrupperfuher (That is the last time I will be spelling that word) John Smith (played by Rufus Sewell).

So Rufus Sewell is an actor who I know has been in some not so great things like Dark City and yet is still a pretty big name actor. While he's been pretty hit and miss in the past, I really enjoyed him in this show. He is the head of the SS in New York City and he is very efficient at his job. He is also incredibly loyal to the Third Reich. He is an interesting character because he was born in the United States and fully embraced Nazism when they took over. I won't give away some of the other conflicts that he faces in this show but they might be one of the reasons I continue watching this show into the second season. His character has the potential to really make some interesting drama and he brings a lot to this show.

I think the overall consensus is that this show has a great premise, it has really good actors in it who give really good performances... So why is this show so boring?

That might be a little bit of an oversimplification but man did this show take me a while to get through.

This show has so many things that I like. It takes an alternate look at history which I love, it has a little bit of a supernatural time travel aspect to it, the film reels themselves are the main reason I pushed through, so why does this show drag on so much!

Maybe this was just an introductory season and the next one will pick up quite a bit but that doesn't really explain how long it takes things to really get moving in this show. A lot of the attention is put into the drama and the struggles these characters go through but it also goes into the politics and the Game of Thrones-like moves for power. Japan and Germany are the supreme powers and instead the United States and Russia getting into a cold war, it is Japan and Germany. And that sounds great, but why did I fall asleep during so many episodes? Why was I bored even during parts of the finale?

This is not to say the show is bad. But the pacing is definitely an issue and the main action of the series is a lot of talking in dimly lit surroundings. And yeah it is really bad to the point where I was considering not watching the second season...

Until I saw the last scene of the last episode. Again I don't want to go into spoilers because I do think it is something new and unique and something people should probably check out, however I do need to give the disclaimer that this show is very, VERY slow. There is a lot of talking and a lot of plot points and characters that might be difficult to all remember.

Watching this season has really made me want to read the book. I haven't read it yet and I have a lot of things on my snail moving reading list at the moment. But if you have read The Man in the High Castle, please drop a comment or drop a line on Twitter because I haven't read any reviews of the book, just the TV show.

Overall, The Man in the High Castle is a very unique show and an accomplishment for Amazon to release a critically acclaimed show. However, if you are looking for something high paced, this is not the show for you. The Man in the High Castle provides and interesting premise and great characters but the execution of those great elements still needs work. I don't know when I'll be starting the second season, there are a couple of things I'm working on at the moment and trying to watch. On top of that, we're moving into October and I will be watching a lot of stuff in preparation for Stranger Things Season 2. But I will definitely make it known on Twitter so give me a follow to get updates on that and other things I'm watching.

But those are my thoughts on The Man in the High Castle Season 1. What did you think? Did you think it dragged as much as I thought it did? Comment and Discuss below! You can also send me your thoughts on Twitter @MovieSymposium as well as send me your requests for what I should be reviewing next. If you follow me on Twitter you can get updates on future movie news and reviews coming out of this blog.

I'll leave you with this. So the opening credits to this show are great. They utilize the song Edelweiss from The Sound of Music and it has kind of inspired me to watch that movie soon. Expect a review. Enjoy!

The Dead Zone

Stephen King is really all over the place. One minute he writes about killer clowns, then he's writing about killer laundry machines, then he writes half way decent premises like this one. This might be the closest performance from Christopher Walken that I feel was actually sincere. I know this was early in his career probably before he became a running joke, but it was strange seeing Walken in this role that I was supposed to be taking seriously.

The Dead Zone follows the story of an English teacher named Johnny Smith (Played by Walken). Despite him having the most generic name that reminded me of Tommy Wiseaus character in The Room, Johnny is your pretty typical nerdy teacher. The only thing we really learn about him in the beginning is that he is dating a woman named Sarah (played by Brooke Adams).

But after a horrible car accident, Johnny ends up in a coma that lasts 5 years. When he wakes up Sarah has moved on, got married, and had a child with another man.

But more importantly, Johnny finds that he has psychic abilities and can see events as they occurred even when he wasn't there. He does this by grabbing the hand of the people he runs across. He sees how they might die or if they do something horrible.

The strange thing about this movie is that Johnny doesn't really want these powers at all. He's so heartbroken over his girlfriend leaving him and marrying another man that he really just wants to retreat to seclusion and be left alone. But his psychic abilities don't exactly go under the radar and the entire town of Castle Rock (Maine of all places) knows that Johnny has this power and many people want his help, including Sheriff Bannerman (played by Tom Skerritt).

Bannerman recruits Johnny for a short time to help him solve murders with his psychic abilities. I wish that that was the entire movie but really that only goes for a short while then he moves out of Castle Rock and other things happen and all the while his girlfriend is being a little bit of a tease and there's obviously still feelings there and overall the movie is a little bit of a mess.

I will say this about the film, the cast is actually pretty good. I thought everyone contributed to the film pretty well and everyone performed pretty well. For a film that probably didn't have much of a budget and one that was kind of all over the place, the actors performed it pretty well and I was invested in the story.

Oddly enough this is probably the best performance I've seen from Christopher Walken. The only other performance that has been this sincere was the one he gave in Catch Me If You Can and even that is used for jokes every once in a while, especially his line about the 2 little mice in a bucket of cream. But here, while I don't think he's the only person who could have played this role, I thought he actually did a pretty good job. Something about his face and his acting really worked in this film and it didn't feel like a joke or something anybody could really make fun of. Yeah he delivers lines in his typical Walken way, but I'm only aware of that after years of silly Christopher Walken performances and gags.

Then you've got the supporting cast. I thought Brooke Adams did an okay job playing Johnny's girlfriend Sarah. The character is really kind of all over the place and really only exists to provide some drama for Johnny as a character. She's not particularly well written but again the actors in this movie carry out a good performance despite that, and Adams does as well.

I wish Tom Skerritt had had a bigger role in the film. If this had been a TV show (which I think it was eventually made into one) it would have been Walken and Skerritt going off and solving mysteries and that would have been amazing. I haven't seen the TV show but I know it didn't have those two and that makes me sad.

Something about Tom Skerritt and his performances really make you like him. I don't know if it's his mustache or what but I haven't seen a lot of Tom Skerritt movies and I still get excited whenever I see his name on top billing.

Again, he's not in the film for long. I think Anthony Zerbe playing a wealthy man who hires Johnny to be his son's tutor actually gets more screen time than Skerritt. He does a good job, I just wish Skerritt was in it more... personal preference.

And then there's Martin Sheen playing Greg Stillson.

So Martin Sheen has played a lot of good guys, including a very good politician and President, Josiah Bartlet in The West Wing. You sometimes forget that he actually has the ability to play very evil characters and it's movies like this that remind you. Sheen is pretty young in this movie (43) and he plays a slimy corrupt politician running for senate in hopes to one day become the President of the United States.

I won't give away the true role he plays in the film and how he relates to Johnny but he was probably the most fun character in the movie. Probably the only thing that holds the performances in this movie back is the reputation these actors had later on in their career. For example, Christopher Walken gives a pretty sincere performance in this movie but because of his reputation later in life, it took a while for me to take him seriously. Same thing goes for Sheen in that he's supposed to be playing this corrupt politician but all I can see him as is the good hearted politician in Josiah Bartlet from The West Wing. And Tom Skerritt... well he's Tom Skerritt. 

But the main problem I have with this film is the plot. You've got a guy who has psychic abilities. The biggest problem I had coming into this movie was asking the question, "And?"

I don't know how much of it was following the source material because I haven't read the book, but the movie seems all over the place. First its Johnny solving mysteries with Tom Skerritt. Then it's him trying to avoid using his powers and being a tutor for a kid, then it's everything that happens with Martin Sheen's character. But then you have the ongoing thread of Johnny and Sarah and their weird infidelity after she's married.

I feel like I would have really enjoyed this movie if it had a more traditional set plot. Instead this feels like the premiere, the mid season, and finale of a miniseries all crammed into a two hour movie. Maybe I need to check out the TV show, I mean it did run for six seasons. That isn't a bad run.

Overall, The Dead Zone provides an interesting premise and some surprisingly good performances from unexpected places. However, the plot of the show is pretty jumbled and not exactly clear. The movie does not flow as much as it should and at times it can be a little bit boring, so much that I actually fell asleep multiple times during this film and had to rewind to see what I missed. It's not a bad movie, but it's just a mess.

But have you seen The Dead Zone? What did you think? Comment and Discuss below! You can also send me your thoughts on Twitter @MovieSymposium as well as send me your requests for films I should review in the future. If you follow me on Twitter you can get updates on future movie news and reviews coming out of this blog.

I'll leave you with this. I'm not sure how Fat Boy Slim got Christopher Walken to be the center of their music video back in 2003 but I remember this when it came out and it just kind of pushed the whole, Christopher Walken is a little bit of a weirdo isn't he? Enjoy!

Ex Machina

Ex Machina is a film that really slipped under mine and a lot of people's radars from 2015.

Let's be real, 2015 was a pretty strong year for movies. The very fact that this movie came out the same month as Furious 7 says something. I'm not putting those two movies on the same level, I'm just saying there were a lot of strong movies that came out and it must have been tough for this small independent movie about Artificial Intelligence to really shine. However, I am kind of kicking myself for not checking this movie out sooner because it is really flipping good.

Ex Machina follows the story of a programmer by the name of Caleb (played by Domhnall Gleason). Caleb is chosen in a lottery to travel to the remote estate of the CEO of his company Nathan Bateman (played by Oscar Isaacs).

Nathan is your eccentric billionaire and he needs Caleb's help to test his new breakthrough, actual artificial intelligence. This AI comes in the form of Ava (played by Alicia Vikander).

Caleb's job is to ask Ava questions and perform what Nathan calls the Turing Test. It is a test to determine whether or not Caleb can tell if he's talking to a human or a computer when he's having conversations with Ava.

This movie takes place in a very isolated environment. In total, the three main characters, Ava, Caleb, and Nathan are really the only characters in the film. Sure there is one other robot but she is not nearly as important.

The main action of the movie comes in the conversations Caleb has with Ava and the manipulation that occurs between all three. Is Nathan manipulating Caleb? Is Ava manipulating Caleb? Is Caleb manipulating anybody? For a really condensed film there is a lot of drama going on between the three of them and it is actually really psychological.

And that psychological element really only works if the cast is good and this cast is phenomenal. All three of these actors are people who have built a pretty good career over the past 5 or so years and I keep seeing them and really enjoying them. Of course Isaacs and Gleason are in Star Wars now, Vikander is showing up more and more and is slated to be the new Tomb Raider.

They all do an excellent job in this movie because they play off one another incredibly well.

The whole movie is pretty twisted and its a thinker. I think the thing that I liked about the film was that it made me think about artificial intelligence, about consciousness, and all the while it didn't feel pretentious at all. I haven't seen Darren Aronofsky's movie mother! yet, but I have heard that it is a little bit pretentious in the moments where the director is basically yelling, ASK ME WHAT IT MEANS! I never felt that way during Ex Machina. It makes me wonder why I haven't heard of the director, Alex Garland until now and why he's not getting more movies these days. I really hope he does more because he did a phenomenal job with this movie.

I think one of the only criticisms of the film is that it is a very quiet film. Maybe it had something to do with the TV I was watching it on but I had to turn the volume all the way up to hear what the hell was going on in the movie.

Whatever you do, don't watch this movie when you are tired. If you are anything like me, you will probably fall asleep and miss some pretty important parts of the film. I was watching it last night and I had to turn it off because I was dozing off, not because it was bad, but because the lighting is so dim, the dialogue is so quiet, and a lot of the conflict happens in silence. But it's done very well.

I do get why this movie went under the radar for a lot of people though. While it is a pretty great movie, it is pretty self contained. Like I said, there are really only three characters in the film and it all happens within the confines of Nathan's house. I bet the money that they saved by keeping this in one location helped pay for the incredible visual effects they used in this film, especially for Alicia Vikander's character.

Holy crap...

Overall, I really enjoyed Ex Machina. It showed off the acting chops of three really good actors in Gleason, Isaacs, and Vikander. I thought the ending of the film was phenomenal and incredibly chilling overall. The movie didn't feel pretentious at all and it also didn't feel like a really important movie. You know how some movies you go into it feeling like this is super important? (I felt that way about a movie like Moonlight or 12 Years a Slave). Ex Machina never felt that way. If you're just a casual movie goer, you might actually really enjoy Ex Machina. Lastly, the visual effects and the entire atmosphere of the film was great. I wouldn't consider this movie a horror film at all, but having just watched The Village and then watching this film, I can honestly say I was more haunted by this film that I was The Village. Obviously this movie is leaps and bounds better than that film and I'm really glad I checked it out. Please if you have Hulu or Amazon Prime, check out Ex Machina, you will not be disappointed.

But those are my thoughts. What did you think? Comment and Discuss below! You can also send me your thoughts on Twitter @MovieSymposium as well as send me your requests for the next film I should review on this blog. If you follow me on Twitter, you can get updates on future movie news and reviews of what's next we can talk about.

I'll leave you with this. Alicia Vikander is just a stunningly beautiful actress. I could listen to her talk all day. Enjoy!

The Village

So The Village was actually the first M Night Shyamalan film that I really was exposed to. The Sixth Sense came out when I was too young and movies like Unbreakable and Signs never really intrigued me enough to see them. The Village came out and I think Shyamalan had a good enough reputation with one great film in the Sixth Sense and two pretty good films (based on reviews) that people were excited for The Village. I saw a little bit at a friends house and from the little I expected it to be super scary.

Years later, I've read the reviews, I know how this movie did not do well critically and I was trying to remember what exactly about this movie was actually that scary the first time I watched bits and pieces of it. Also it's the only M Night Shyamalan movie I have instant access to so I thought it would be a good movie to go with.

The Village takes place in, you guessed it, a village. The village is Covington and the year is 1897. It's a very isolated village but that doesn't really stop the movie from having a lot of characters. There are the village elders with a lot of familiar names, at least for me. William Hurt plays Edward Walker, the head elder of sorts. Sigourney Weaver plays Alice Hunt. Those are the two main elders, and then you have Jayne Atkinson who played Catherine Durrant on House of Cards and Cherry Jones who played the President on 24, as well as a couple of other elders like Brendan Gleason.

You see this village is isolated because it is surrounded by Covington Woods. In the woods there are  dangerous creatures that will kill anybody who goes out into them. The elders say there is a truce between the Village and the monsters in the woods and as long as nobody goes into the woods, nobody will be hurt.

But then animals start to be killed, skinned, and displayed for the people of the village to see. People are wondering if the truce is at risk.

All the while, a young man by the name of Lucius (played by Joaquin Phoenix) the son of Alice (Sigourney Weaver's character) requests to go into Covington woods to go to "the towns" and get medicine for the village.

You would think this would be the main story but it really isn't. While the monsters in the woods are very important to the story, they kind of take a backseat for the majority to the younger characters in this village falling in love.

You've got Lucius but then you've got a blind girl by the name of Ivy (played by Bryce Dallas Howard). Then you've got her sister Kitty (played by Judy Greer, and if you're a fan of Arrested Development you found that just as funny as I did), and a mentally challenged boy by the name of Noah (played by Adrien Brody). And yeah the entire movie is more focused on these weird love triangles between all the characters and their intentions to fall in love with one another and the heart break that comes along with it.

Seriously, I'm actually a little bit embarrassed that I used to think this movie was scary because A LOT of the movie is just these characters pining over one another and having really sappy dialogue with one another because its supposed to be 1897. Like there is a part where Joaquin Phoenix talks about how he really cares for Bryce Dallas Howard's character. I have never been a fan of Joaquin Phoenix, I don't think he's very good of an actor, but I've seen him do a lot better and that scene was just terrible. Even Sigourney Weaver had some dialogue that I was like, "Sigourney... c'mon, what's going on here? Your delivery of this dialogue is really bad"

The dialogue is horrendous by the way.

The main character really is Ivy. I think I get why M Night wanted the character to be blind, but I'm not sure why he made her Daredevil blind. Seriously, especially in a time where Daredevil came out a year before this movie, it was kind of odd that she was "blind" and yet looked directly at people, walked around barely needing a cane, and can tell exactly who someone is without them actually saying that they're there.

I like that M Night decided to make his main character blind but find a better actress that can actually play a blind person. Not Bryce Dallas Howard.

On a funny note. Did you know that Jesse Eisenberg was in this movie? He has a very small part, but yeah he's in this movie...

There he is.

So why was this movie advertised as a horror film? Well, I don't want to misrepresent this film. There are moments in this film that I guess are supposed to be scary. A lot of the scary elements of this movie come in the fact that there is a lot of mystery. You don't totally know what is going on in this village and it's not totally clear if it's a supernatural element or not. 

The problem is, it is really undercut by both the romantic elements of this film and the filming choices that M Night makes. 

There was one part in this movie that I actually thought was suspenseful and was done decently well. I'm not gonna give anything away, but Ivy is in the woods and she comes across one of the monsters. Now the first thing I will say is that this scene would have been a lot scarier had it been at night, but hey it was kind of suspenseful during the day so I'll give it a pass. 

Ivy is running away from the monster and for some reason M Night just keeps on cutting away to shots of the trees. Then he'll cut back to the action. It's just sloppy cinematography and it kind of took away from a scene that I will admit had me on the edge of my seat unlike the rest of the film. 

And then there is the twist. 

M Night... NOT ALL YOUR MOVIES NEED A TWIST!

I know that this movie came out in 2004 and he really hasn't stopped making twists in his movies, but I think this was the point in his movie career that it was just starting to become a joke. 

This twist is pretty easy to pick up on but honestly the more I think about it, it probably could have made for a better miniseries rather than a single movie. I'm not saying I want to see that, but I'm thinking about it the same way I think about Wayward Pines. 

Yeah I'm kind of in an M Night Shyamalan mood lately and I have been checking out his show on Fox. 

I haven't decided yet if I'm a fan of Wayward Pines yet but I could see another show developing like Wayward Pines in the same environment as The Village. Do I want to see that? No. But in an alternate timeline, I would have suggested M Night go with that route instead of this movie because this movie is extremely dull. 

I'm hoping I can do a review for Wayward Pines sooner or later but we'll see if I actually get through it or not. 

Overall, I think that there was something there in The Village. It is kind of an interesting concept and I think the ending, while you could see it a mile away, is kind of intriguing. But the movie get caught up in what I think M Night thought was character development but instead was just really boring dialogue and a weird love triangle. The scary moments in this film are pretty few and far between and that's coming from somebody who gets scared pretty easily. I know that there were at least two movies in between this and The Sixth Sense, but this was a pretty far drop from the quality of movie The Sixth Sense was. 

I'm really looking forward to checking out the apparently "good films" Shyamalan put out, but I'm also really looking forward to the bad ones. While The Village isn't the worst film M Night has done, (that definitely goes to Last Airbender... for now), it's definitely one I probably didn't need to see. If you haven't seen The Village, you can probably skip it.

But those are my thoughts on The Village. What did you think? Comment and Discuss below! You can also send me your thoughts on Twitter @MovieSymposium as well as your requests for the next film I should review on the blog. If you follow me on Twitter, you can get updates on future movie news and reviews coming out soon.

I'll leave you with this. One thing I will give this movie credit for is the music. I think it actually won an Oscar for the music and I totally understand why. Enjoy!

The Orville Pilot

So I haven't done a pilot review in a while and I don't have a lot of time at the moment to watch full movies and write reviews that I'm proud of on account of work. This came at a great time though because Seth Macfarlane's new show, The Orville just aired and if you're a fan of the blog or follow me on Twitter, you can probably deduce that I am a fan of Seth MacFarlane and used to be a bigger one.

 In my opinion there is a lot to love about Seth MacFarlane. I agree that there are a lot of things to dislike about him but in a way I admire the guy because of his humble beginnings, his very unique take on comedy, and the heights that he has climbed to point to a very prominent career in Hollywood.

And up until about 2014 he did it all with the power of animation and his voice. It is something actually pretty impressive. He even released Jazz albums and they are actually pretty good. I have some of his songs and I actually really enjoy his voice.

However in 2014 and probably before that, MacFarlane started branching out and trying to do things a little bit different. No longer was he relying on his voices and animation alone, he decided he was going to try out his live action acting chops in his comedy, A Million Ways to Die in the West.

Although I personally like aspects about that film, the general consensus is that it did not go well.

On top of that, in past years Family Guy and his animation empire at Fox has seemed to leave a lot to be desired. While I'll still throw on Family Guy for something to watch in the background, it definitely doesn't have the laugh out loud moments it used to have and it has definitely suffered. And my theory is that MacFarlane is burnt out on Family Guy and wants to do something different.

Enter The Orville.

Now when I saw this trailer, I can't say I was overly excited for it. The effects and CGI environments didn't look that great and the humor didn't totally land. However, I've come to give MacFarlane the benefit of the doubt when I probably shouldn't so I thought I would give it a shot.

What I got was not totally what I was expecting.

The Orville is legitimately Seth MacFarlane recreating Star Trek. I'm not saying he's doing a parody of Star Trek or that he created something similar to Star Trek but gave it a fresh new take... No he made Star Trek as if it would be made in 2017 by Seth MacFarlane.

Now MacFarlane is a self proclaimed nerd and it's not surprise that he wanted to branch into something to pay homage to Star Trek. And in many ways, that's what The Orville is.

It takes a lot of the classic Star Trek tropes, I imagine it's going to take a lot of the same stories and conflicts but all the while there are some MacFarlane-isms inserted into the show for some comic relief. However, this is not a comedy or at least not a straight up comedy.

I think what people really liked about Family Guy, especially in the early days were the parodies of 80s nostalgia and really absurdist raunchy humor. The Orville has neither of those things. While it is trying to recreate Star Trek, it's not parodying it to point out the nostalgia for the show and make you laugh and it is actually a pretty tame comedy-wise. They're not going to be making people grabbing for their pearls that same way Family Guy did.

Now I want to be fair. There is no reason that Seth MacFarlane needs to stick to same old schtick he has been sticking to for the past two decades. This doesn't need to be a raunchy parody. If he wants to delve into science fiction I have no problem with him doing that. There are actually some elements of this pilot episode that had some promise. He's not bad at writing science fiction.

But the part that is weird for me and I think for a lot of audiences was that the trailer and the entire feel of the show feels like this is a parody. The Orville looks a lot like The Enterprise but it has a goofy name. All the cast members are wearing really generic looking Star Trek uniforms and you're expecting there to be a joke about it the same way MacFarlane joked about cowboys in A Million Ways to Die in the West. MacFarlane is the Captain of the ship but he's the loser who has to share the bridge with his ex wife (played by Adrianne Palicki). At best it sounds like a sitcom premise, at worst it sounds like a satire. And yet the entire episode takes itself just a tad too seriously and its trying to be this space epic like Star Trek.

I give credit to MacFarlane for trying to blend comedy and science fiction but he's had a history of writing comedy, not writing Star Trek. I can feel the humor in this show really holding back because MacFarlane was probably holding himself back from putting in a lot of raunchy cut aways. But in the process you just get a really weird Star Trek fan fiction written by MacFarlane where he put himself in the Captain's Chair.

I won't talk about his acting because... it really hasn't gotten any better but hey it's prime time television, I have actually seen worse. The cast is fine. It's the pilot episode so everyone feels pretty fresh out of the box and underdeveloped but I'm sure that's going to be the focus of future episodes. I didn't hate the pilot and I felt like there were some things to like about it. Overall though it just felt weird and generic.

Star Trek was famous because it leaned into the science fiction and the cheesiness of everything. William Shatner and Leonard Nemoy and everyone in that show took the concept so seriously that it worked. The Orville doesn't really lean into the science fiction part of it enough so I don't feel like they're taking it seriously so why should I? On top of that, it feels like MacFarlane wasn't leaning into the comedy elements of it, which is definitely his stronger genre, so it doesn't feel funny or entertain the audience in that way.

I want to give The Orville another shot. I know a lot of shows need a couple episodes to get on their feet so I really hope that MacFarlane is able to find his footing with this because this could be a really funny show. I guess I never did a review of the Tim Allen movie Galaxy Quest but I feel like this show could be in the same vein as that movie and that would not be a bad thing. Galaxy Quest is hilarious! It doesn't have to be a full on parody like Galaxy Quest was, but it feels like MacFarlane was trying to make the fake TV show from Galaxy Quest, not something new or original or even properly pay homage to Star Trek.

But those are my thoughts on The Orville pilot. Did you watch it? What did you think? Are you going to continue to watch the show? Comment and Discuss below! You can also send me your thoughts on Twitter @MovieSymposium as well as send me your requests for films and TV shows I should review in the future. If you follow me on Twitter, you can get updates on future movie news and reviews coming out of this blog.

I'll leave you with this. In case you all forgot, there is already a new Star Trek coming out this year. It just seems odd to launch two Star Trek shows when one isn't even Star Trek. Enjoy!

IT

So if you follow me on Twitter, you'll know that I have been looking forward to this movie for quite a while. It wasn't really on my radar until earlier this year when the trailers came out. If IT didn't do anything right, which they definitely did, one thing they did completely right was trailers. This movie could have been absolute garbage but the trailers were spot on and were the only reason I became so interested in IT and honestly a lot of Stephen King stories recently. I mean a part of it I contribute to Stranger Things, which I will talk about later, but the trailer gave the vibe that they wanted to capitalize on everyone who liked Stranger Things and man did they capitalize on that in the film.

IT is the story of a group of kids who live in Maine. The town Derry is a pretty messed up town where children go missing and there is definitely something wrong. The group of kids are called The Losers Club. The name is pretty self explanatory, they're all kids who are bullied and are not the popular kids. They all come together and you have a bit of a Stand By Me group that forms. The team is made up of Bill Denbrough (played by Jaden Lieberher), Ritchie Tozier (played by Finn Wolfhard) Ben Hanscom (played by Jeremy Ray Taylor) Eddie Kasprak (played by Jack Dylan Grazer), Beverly Marsh (played by Sophia Lillis), Stanley Uris (played by Wyatt Oleff) and Mike Hanlon (played by Chose Jacobs).

And yeah, these kids were picked spectacularly to play each character. I know every person who has reviewed this movie has raved about the kids but they're not wrong. Even though the focus is definitely on some of them more than others, I thought that even if they didn't have a lot of screen time, these kids were a lot of fun and utilized really well.

Now, everyone is going to point towards Stranger Things with this film. I already have. I mean they got Finn Wolfhard, the star of Stranger Things to play a quintessential role. And yeah, they definitely watched Stranger Things and were like, "You know how we used IT and other Stephen King stories to inspire Stranger Things, well how about we use Stranger Things to inspire IT." What I do like is that while everyone is going to point towards Stranger Things, the truth is that this story is actually pretty close to the book. I really liked the great blend of the grittiness of the story, the atmosphere of Stranger Things, and it even took some elements from the Tim Curry miniseries, especially the use of Pennywise the Dancing Clown.

Bill Skarsgard plays Pennywise or "It" and he does a really, really good job at it. That doesn't necessarily mean that he was terrifying but he was good.

It is kind of a hard thing to explain and the explanation delves into spoiler territory so I'll just say he uses these kid's fear to haunt them. And what I like about this Pennywise as opposed to Tim Curry's was that this one actually felt like he would kill you if he got his hands on you.

Tim Curry had a lot of moments where he would just appear and kind of mess with the kids. He wouldn't do anything, he would just act like Tim Curry and we were supposed to be afraid. If Pennywise from this film got close, he would bite your head off or straight up murder you. And Skarsgard does a really good job. It's not gonna be Curry, nobody can do Curry. But I think it is done better actually.

The other interesting aspect of Pennywise is the fact that he is able to change shape. Now I've heard some criticism that the CGI for his change is not done incredibly well and while I do disagree, I do think that it probably made Pennywise a little less scary when you were thinking about how fake the CGI looked. For me CGI is often not about that looks real as opposed to that looks creative and the way they used CGI in Pennywise was actually really creative and used well in my opinion.

But here's the thing... Pennywise wasn't that scary.

I think the ideas of clowns are scarier than scary clowns. Lets be real, if you watch Tim Curry's IT now it's just funny. Bill Skarsgard's IT is an interesting character and he is threatening, however he's more threatening the less you see of him. Once he's on screen, especially when he has dialogue, he really starts to lose the scary factor of him. Instead he's just weird and sometimes even comical.

Again, he's not bad and he's scarier than Tim Curry's Pennywise was. But if you're thinking he's going to be some kind of horror icon, I'm not a huge horror fan and I know that's just not true.

And that kind of goes into the biggest issue I had with the film. It had a little bit of trouble totally defining what it was as a story. Was it a horror film? Well if it was there have been better. It set up an environment and there were definitely jump scares but all those things could have been done better. Was it trying to be Stranger Things? Well if it was there have been better. As many good moments of character development there were also a lot of scenes that only existed to scare you and not to really contribute at all. Was it trying to be a true to form Stephen King adaptation? I would probably say this is the closest thing but even though I haven't finished the book I know it left a lot of things out and for good reason.

IT by nature is a weird story. It's basically Stand By Me if there was a killer clown thrown in there. It's also a difficult movie to because there is so much in it happening and again, a lot of it is pretty weird. While it probably wanted to stick close to the novel, there is no way it could because that's not going to be profitable for the audience (or audiences) they're going for.

I think this movie made the understandable mistake that those who loved Stranger Things and those who love horror films are the same people. While there are some overlap, I don't think most people went into Stranger Things hoping for more scares and I don't think the horror fans went into IT looking for more Stranger Things vibes.

Luckily I think the movie capitalized on both enough that people, $117 Million to be precise, like the combination of the two and can find enjoyment in both sides of what they're trying to pull off here. I am one of those people.

I think while this movie was a little confused on what it wanted to be, it definitely had good characters, it had emotional moments, it had funny moments.

I am not a horror movie fan.

This movie actually gave me a little bit of anxiety minutes before I started to watch it because I knew there were jumpscares in the film and I don't like jump scares. I like scary stories but I don't like the only thing to be scared of is the loud noise or the quick camera cut. I prefer environments and ambiance rather than being surprised.

And that's what I hope they focus on more in the second film.

From what I know of the book and what I've seen in the miniseries, I know that if they do a sequel for this movie it will be when the kids are all grown up. There have been rumors so far and the ending does set up for that possibility. However, I think they are going to have to do a lot of work to get that film done correctly. I might do a spoilers review of this film where I can talk about specific moments that I liked, scenes that I thought were silly, and predictions for the next film.

But overall, I'm sure this review was a little bit confusing. The overall is that I liked this film. I will more than likely be buying this on digital. I would like to revisit this film sometime soon to get a true picture of what I liked, what I disliked and if this is going to go down as one of my favorite films of the year or if its just a good film.

But what did you think? Did you like it? Are you a hardcore horror fan? Did it live up to expectations? Comment and Discuss Below! You can also send me your thoughts on Twitter @MovieSymposium as well as send me your requests for films I should review in the future. If you follow me on Twitter you can get updates on future movie news and reviews coming out of this blog.

I'll leave you with this. Hopefully you understand how terrifying Mike Meyer's Cat in the Hat is, now put him in the context of IT. This almost would have made a more terrifying movie. Enjoy!

Clue The Movie

So we definitely live in a world where weird movies are made every year. This very year alone there was a movie called The Emoji Movie. I had absolutely no interest in seeing that movie but it's kind of amazing how a movie like that was made. I used to think that we were just in a time where Hollywood was just making movies for the hell of it and anything could be made into a movie. Apparently, that has been a thing since 1985 at the earliest.

Clue, based off the board game follows the story of six strangers who are led to a mysterious mansion. Each one of them has a secret and are tied to the host Mr. Boddy (played by Lee Ving) in one way or another. Mr. Boddy's butler, Wadsworth (played by Tim Curry) welcomes them all and a night of murder and deception continues. Think of the board game Clue or a murder mystery party or dinner theater, everyone is a suspect and everyone has the motive. The movie is a pretty self aware comedic mystery and overall a pretty good time.

I was actually a little bit surprised on how entertaining this movie was because it was really a split decision. I wasn't feeling well and all I wanted to watch was something random and something to take my mind off the headache I had.

Instead I got this classic mystery comedy that really kind of came out of no where and nobody really seems to talk about. I've heard some people mention that it's an underrated classic film but I guess I never really figured it was that good.

Now I won't jump on the cult classic train too quickly because the reality is, I will probably forget about this movie very quickly. It's a fun movie while you're watching it but I can't really think of a reason I would want to watch it again or what about it is really that memorable.

The cast is really what makes this movie work.

The really funny part is that with the exception of Christopher Lloyd playing Professor Plum, and Tim Curry, not a lot of these actors are really well known today. Maybe they were in 1985, but as someone who wasn't born around that time I don't know any of these people besides Martin Mull who played Colonel Mustard who was Gene Parmesan from Arrested Development.

Apparently Carrie Fisher was originally going to play Miss Scarlet but the role went to Lesley Ann Warren when Fisher had to go into rehab. While I think Warren does a good job I can only dream about Carrie Fisher playing the owner of an escort service...

Michael McKean played Mr. Green, Eileen Brennan played Mrs. Peacock, and Madeline Kahn played Mrs. White. Those are the big players. There are a couple of others in the film including the sexy maid Yvette (played by Colleen Camp) but overall those are the people with the most focus in the film.

It's kind of hard to describe this movie exactly because it's not totally a satire and its not totally a straight comedy either. There is a lot of absurd humor in the film but it kind of jumps around with the kind of humor and how exactly self aware the film is.

The other interesting part of the film is that it is written like a pretty straight forward murder mystery. If you've ever gone to a murder mystery dinner theater, you've probably seen set ups like this and they're full of red herrings, suspicion and of course, Clues.

But the downside of that is that as well written as those murder mysteries are written, they still are not very memorable. I would say its because its been done before but I'm not totally sure that that is true.

I think what works best for this film is the writing and the cast and how they use that script. The one thing I can recommend about this film is the humor. It is definitely a unique movie going experience. Especially the ending(s).

I'm guessing that not too many movies have done endings like that but even if it was a trend setter, I've seen endings like this done better and even with the multiple endings, once the mystery has been solved, besides the humor I can't really think of why this is a movie I would ever revisit.

But what do you think? Does this movie get better every time you watch it? Should I check it out when I'm sick again? When did you first see this movie because I really only heard about it a couple years ago. Send me your thoughts in the comment below! You can also send me your thoughts on Twitter @MovieSymposium as well as send me your requests for films I should review in the future. If you follow me on Twitter, you can get updates on future movie news and reviews coming out of this blog.

I'll leave you with this. I don't remember ever really playing Clue and I really don't remember the rules... Well here's some Private Investigators playing it. Enjoy!