Author: Adam

After several months of constant back and forward on whether or not Elon Musk will buy Twitter, the infamous millionaire is now the direct owner of Twitter. And as one of his first acts as owner of Twitter, Musk has recently announced that a monthly subscription fee will be charge to accounts who are verified. For now own, verified accounts will have to pay $8 a month to continue to have a blue check mark right next to their name on Twitter and keep their status of their accounts verified. Not only is this move beyond stupid, greedy, and manipulative, but it contradicts the entire point of a verified Twitter account in the first place.

Why did Twitter make verified accounts a thing in the first place?

Back in 2009, Twitter launched their own “verified accounts” program. After receiving numerous complaints from known celebrities such as Kayne West (who I pray is NOT in the running for president in two years) and being sued by longtime baseball manager Tony La Russa over unauthorized accounts by impersonators, verified accounts became a thing to counteract the accounts being created by trolls or impersonators. It’s very existence was to make sure all the “important” people out there on the website can show everyone else that the account they are running is in fact their legit account and not one made by a troll or a impersonator. That way, Twitter could address the criticisms of fake accounts and famous people who used Twitter can let their audience know of the tweets they put out on the account that is actually there’s. However, with this new subscription fee that Musk was implemented, the whole purpose of a blue check mark is now useless.

Not only do you know have to pay to keep your check mark next to your name on your account but that also means you have to pay to let all your followers know that the account you run is in fact yours and no one else’s. Wasn’t the entire point of a verified account was to cut down on the baiting spam and trolling with other accounts? Wasn’t it suppose to act as a solution for the site and avoid any future complaints and law suits on this exact matter? Why test your user by forcing them to pay up to 60 bucks a year to keep their name on their site clean and not allow others to impersonate them? Musk has always talked about freedom of speech as a big thing but in the case of Twitter, I guess speech on verified accounts will now cost you eight bucks a month.

You Can Now Make Your Twitter Account Verified By Just Paying A Subscription Fee

What makes matters even more complicated is that there will also be a new Twitter subscription titled, “Twitter Blue”, that will allow users to get verified without any hard effort or viewership needed. Yes, you read that right! If you pay eight bucks a month for Twitter Blue, then you are automatically able to get a blue check mark on your account just like that no matter what. I can’t recall a owner in recent memory that has actively missed a point of the thing they actually known and why it has been as successful as it has been before they took over, outside of a sports commissioner of course.

Not only is this the equivalent of paying Musk bottled air, this is basically opening the door for more spamming and trolling in the near future. Because if some loser decided that he is willing to fork over eight dollars a month and wants to make a parody account of someone famous, then they are able to be verified and can easily deceived and manipulate the audience of that famous person. Not only does it goes against what verified account stood for since the program got made but this will most likely lead to even more backlash and possibly even lawsuits against Twitter for impersonation accounts. I mean if I’m a troll, why not do just that? I now have the power and resource to do just that if I’m able to fork over a couple of dollar signs even if I only want to do it for one month. Not that I don’t think Musk and Twitter can’t afford to get sued for it but why even make that a possibility by making accounts verified all willy nilly without needing to do much except pay a monthly fee. You are just opening up Pandora’s box here.

Will Elon Musk destroy Twitter?

Back in April, I did a piece when it was confirmed that Elon Musk has bought Twitter and I claimed that despite inevitable changes to come, it won’t completely destroy the site. While I still stand by those claims as of right now, I do think this was a big change I was afraid we would get. Granted, I’m not verified on Twitter and don’t plan to be for the near future but this is only gonna alienate a certain group of the audience that been on the site for so long and only attract a certain other group filled with losers who have no lives and likes to troll because they have nothing better to do. Unless Musk makes a paid subscription permeant for all Twitter users in general, I think the site will remain the same and won’t be wrecked, at least until someone one else is able to make a Twitter copycat that’s successful. And even then, that will probably take a LONG ass time before that happens.

Nevertheless, I do not see this new verification subscription working well at all whatsoever. Hopefully, this will eventually go the way of say Google Plus, where a company trying to force fed a feature that nobody wants down our throats will backfire so badly that will just give up on it after a year or two. Even then at least when Google and YouTube did that, they weren’t forcing their audience to pay a subscription for it. Just yet another big greedy rich asshole move by a big greedy rich asshole.

I’ll still be on Twitter for now but who knows for how long if this subscription feature actually becomes a success? I sure can’t wait a year from now having to pay 20 dollars a month just to make a tweet about how much the Mario movie sucks. I would certainly make that a tweet made for 20 dollars a month.

Believe or not, Black Adam has been a movie that has been in development for the better part of 15 years. He’s a character based off the DC Comics character know as Captain Marvel, who would later be renamed Shazam! due to legal issues. It was then that Dwyane “The Rock” Johnson had expressed interest in playing either the character of Black Adam or Shazam in a future DC movie staring one of those two! He of course took the role of Black Adam, one of the most successful fan casting in recent memory. Its been reported that Black Adam has been in development since around 2014 after being put on hold on 2009 with Johnson’s casting confirmed around that time time. With all of that time and development that has gone into making Black Adam, it makes me wonder how exactly the whole thing turned out to be so “meh”.

For a superhero movie that has caused such a divide between critics and fans yet again, I would have at least expected the movie itself would be more interesting or worthwhile. Black Adam is by no means terrible and is certainly watchable, but what in the world is with this movie that is causing comic book nerds to bend over backwards yet again and defend it like it’s some misunderstood gem. At least with Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice, I could see some admiring it for it’s ambition and the way it attempts to tackle it’s themes and subject matter, even if I found it came across as mostly aimless. With Black Adam, there’s no ambition to admire, no interesting themes worth addressing, and contains nothing you haven’t seen before in any superhero movie in recent memory. Not exactly bottom tier DC like Suicide Squad or Justice League (2017) but more mid-tier DC.

Premise: In ancient Kahndaq, Teth Adam (Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson) was bestowed the almighty powers of the gods. After using these powers for vengeance, he was imprisoned, becoming Black Adam. Nearly 5,000 years have passed, and Black Adam has gone from man to myth to legend. Now free, his unique form of justice, born out of rage, is challenged by modern-day heroes who form the Justice Society: Hawkman (Aldis Hodge), Dr. Fate (Pierce Brosnan), Atom Smasher (Noah Centineo) and Cyclone (Quintessa Swinell).

(I’ll admit I mostly just copy and pasted the premise that appeared on Google but I don’t care for this movie nearly enough to give that much forethought on my own.)

The thing that sticks out the most with Black Adam is just how ridiculously close it sticks to the conventional superhero movie tropes without any attempt to break from it or do something new with it in any way, shape, or form. There’s the all powerful god who needs to learn about Earth and how to live and connect with the people on there, there’s that special McGuffin that both the heroes and villains want, there’s a big battle that takes place in a small town that causes mayhem, there’s a kid or a female character that is in danger and needs to be saved, there’s a bad guy who turns into final boss video game form at the end, there’s some half-assed moral about the importance of superheroes and responsibility, and there’s that special mid-credit scene that you see coming from a mile away. While there are some hints of different ideas and doing a spin on some of those tropes, none of it is fully utilized and comes across as a check list of things that need to be in a superhero movie instead of doing it’s own thing.

The one thing that the movie does try to differ from other superhero movies is the idea of Black Adam himself being an anti-hero and someone that kills. While that’s an idea that might have worked back around the time this movie was first in production, in the year 2022, it comes across as fairly date. Just about nearly every superhero in the DCEU such as Batman, Superman, and Wonder Woman has killed people regardless of the regret or remorse they may have for it. For a cinematic universe that have had no problem with their superheroes killing people good or bad to then start questioning that element of a superhero comes across as very misguided.

It also doesn’t help that Black Adam himself doesn’t really kill anyone worthwhile aside from one-dimensional bad guys. Perhaps if it dive deeper into that aspect such as Black Adam accidentally killing innocent human beings, then it could work. However, not only does the character do nothing like that in the movie but the movie itself never really address anything else that Black Adam could have done to those crooks. He just either zaps them into oblivion or rip them apart like a fighter from Mortal Kombat. That’s not complex, dark, or shows a side of a superhero like we’ve never seen before, it’s all just naïve and neglectful.

To be fair, there are plenty of superhero movies nowadays with tropes that is easy to predict and notice. Most of that could be forgiven as long as the movie is entertaining with enough colorful characters and exciting action scenes to be invested in. Unfortunately, aside from a few occasions, Black Adam doesn’t really offer much of any of that.

Most of the characters are well casted and look cool such as Pierce Brosnan as Doctor Fate, Aldis Hodge as Hawkman, Quintessa Swindell as Cyclone, and Noah Centineo as Atom Smasher (who tbh I thought was played by Ryan Reynolds when I first heard his voice) but they all come across more as action figures than fully realized characters. None of their backstories are very well explored except for an occasional flashback scene or line of dialogue, not nearly enough time is spend with them as superheroes, and about every one of them could be seen as interchangeable to plenty other superhero sidekicks out there. They are fun to watch when they actually get a chance to work together but those scenes are few and far in between.

The main bad guy Sabbac, played by Marwan Kenzari doesn’t appear much on screen until near the tail end of the movie and even when he does arrive, he doesn’t leave much of a impression either and has probably the most hilariously out of place design in the entire movie. Almost as laughable as the way that Ares looked at the end of Wonder Woman. And speaking of not leaving an impression, there’s also Dwayne Johnson as Black Adam himself.

There’s no doubt that Black Adam is a character that Johnson was very passionate about and The Rock has proven plenty of times that he is a man that is just loaded with charm and charisma in everything he is in, either good or bad. Here though, he plays this character completely down, with a very stiff and stotic performance that doesn’t resemble The Rock we all know and love. Even if that is an intentional directing choice with the performance or fits the character, I don’t think it’s one that fits well with Johnson’s talent. It’s like they were trying to do something similar to Dave Bautista’s Drax in Guardians of the Galaxy but Bautista brought more energy and enthusiasm than Johnson is able to do here as Black Adam. You do get a bit more emotion and depth out of him later on with his tragic backstory being revealed and gaining a sense of humor but for the most part, Black Adam himself just isn’t particularly interesting or engaging. He’s also strangely absent for a good portion of the third act, the act in which we are suppose to be the most invest in a superhero movie and he has just as much screen presence as he does even when he’s on the screen.

Funny enough, the best part of the actual movie is the mid credits scene themselves. Not just because that was when the movie was over (Although, that certainly helps!) but it does give a hint to a potential sequel/crossover film in the near future that has a chance to give redemption arcs to two characters at once. However, since I have not seen the movie that the mid credits scene teased so I can only be optimistic about it for the future, at least until a certain toxic group doesn’t shut up about it for the next couple of years.

It might seems like I’m trashing this movie but it’s just that what’s good or at least functional about the movie is the things you all come to expect with a superhero movie. The movie is loaded with action, with the standout being the one at the end of the first act with all of the heroes the movie coming together to take down the villain in a town, and features plenty of courage and violence that is actual quite brutal for these kind of movies. It’s still PG-13 don’t get wrong but they go as far with it as they can.

The special effects are obvious and CGI heavy but at times are pleasant to look at, the score by Lorne Balfe works well enough despite hearing Baby Come Back a few too many times, and checks off all the boxes as something a superhero must have without trying to convince anyone it’s doing something more than that. However, I just can’t get the shaky feeling that there was something more the filmmakers were trying to get across here and either they didn’t want to or weren’t allowed to by the studio.

Black Adam isn’t the worst movie in the DC Extended Universe but that says more about the inconsistent quality of the universe than Black Adam itself. While it does feel quite comforting to see DC going back to cracking out a solid picture every now and then and even their shortcomings are now mostly just an average C- as a oppose to a straight on D or F, it still is worth addressing the shortcomings when they happen so it may help in the near future. I’m sure The Rock will be back once again as Black Adam along with the other characters that were introduced here. I would like to see the Justice Society working together more in future movies, like how Shazam! is mostly likely gonna do with Fury of the Gods next spring. Hopefully then the character themselves will be more interesting. You can certainly do worse but you can also do a whole lot better.

Other comments:

• Sorry this review took so long! I wasn’t able to see the movie until today because of work over last weekend. I also plan to do a ranking of all he movies in the DC Extended Universe! Be on the lookout for that soon.

• I think I would have rather have seen a Doctor Fate movie than a Black Adam movie tbh.

• Let’s be honest, you all thought Atom Smasher was actually Deadpool when he first appeared. Hence why I said I thought it was Ryan Reynolds for a split second when the character first spoke.

• Ironic how just after I got home from seeing the movie and starting the review that it’s been confirmed that James Gunn and Peter Safran are now in charge of DC Comics. That’s awesome but I sure hope David Zaslav doesn’t get in their way. I got a feeling he’s gonna have his fingerprints all over them.

The new DC movie, Black Adam is set to hit theaters this weekend. While it’s most certainly guarantee to do big at the box office come Saturday, the reviews haven’t been very kind. As we speak, it is currently rated at a 55% on Rotten Tomatoes based off of 84 reviews. And just like every time a new big anticipated movie comes out and gets a negative critical reception, you have people going on and on again about how worthless critics are and that Rotten Tomatoes sucks because the movie they are looking forward to is getting bad reviews. This of course follows up about how a certain movie that folks don’t like got a higher Rotten Tomato score than a movie the general public hasn’t even seen it yet and is proof that the website is rigged.

Although it is not my place to tell you how to feel about Rotten Tomatoes as a whole, I do want to describe how the system ACTUALLY works and how people CONSTANTLY misinterpret it entirely. I’m not the hugest fan of that site but it actually can be resourceful and reliable if you use it the CORRECT way. What is the correct way you may ask? Well, allow me to explain.

ROTTEN TOMATOES DOES *NOT* REVIEW MOVIES!!!!!!!!!!!

Let’s get this out of the way, Rotten Tomatoes DOES NOT review or grade the movies themselves. All they do is take a collection of reviews from approved critics from the site and grade the percentage of it based on the amount of good reviews that are submitted. And just like Roger Ebert did when rating movies on a curve with a “thumbs up/thumps down” approach, Rotten Tomatoes uses a rotten or fresh rating to determine if the individual critic believes the movie they are reviewing is worth your time or not. All they do is report the numbers of positive and negative reviews and the overall percentage the movie received depends on the amount of fresh scores that is submitted through the system. Let’s all please stop with the notion that the website review movies at all when it doesn’t.

The Rating Percentage

The one thing that 99% folks always look at with Rotten Tomatoes is the overall rating percentage that is received. Again, this percentage is determined about how many fresh scores there are compared to negative scores that determines the exact percentage each film receives. However, just because a movie receive a high percentage does NOT mean critics think the movie itself is the next Citizen Kane or some game changing masterpiece.

When a movie receives a high percentage somewhere between 80 or 90%, that just strictly means that the majority of critics would recommend the movie, not that they think it’s the next best thing. A movie can get a 100% Rotten Tomatoes rating and still have an average critic score of a 6 or 7/10.

For example, Spider-Man: Far From Home might have a 90% rating but the average critic score for it is 7.4/10. That doesn’t mean that every single critic who gave that movie a positive rating think it’s amazing. They just thought the movie was good and enjoyable enough to warrant a fresh tomato. The exact rating percentage for a movie does not always match the average critic score for a movie. Speaking of which!

The Average Critic/User Reviewer Score

Here is the one aspect of the Rotten Tomatoes system that is always overlooked by the huge majority of folks that log on to the site to look up review scores. Either because they are too lazy to search it themselves or they just don’t know about it.

Whenever a movie has an official rating percentage for either critics or users, you are given the option to click on the exact score themselves. When you do that, the exact Tomatometer will appear. Not only does it give you the exact percentage among all critics who reviewed the movie AND top critics, but you are able to view the overall average critic score for the movie. Down below the display of the rating percentage and amount of reviews that have been submitted for the film, you can see the average rating that critics gave it along with how many total fresh and rotten ratings the movie received.

As it is stated directly from the site whenever you click on the notification from the Tomatomater, the meter itself is the percentage of approved Tomatometer critics who have given the movie a positive review. There’s the option to click between the Tomatometer from strictly the top critics or for all the critics. The meter doesn’t determine the average critics score from each individual review but the amount of critics who gave said movie a fresh rating.

When clicking on the score of the movie, you are also given the option to view the score from the audience with both verified audience AND all audience. When clicking on it, you are able to see the overall rating percentage AND the average scores from audiences themselves.

There is one distinct difference between the audience rating percentage and the critic rating percentage. The audience rating percentage is determined based off of the percentage of users who rated the movie a 3.5 stars or higher. If an audience user rates the movie a 3 stars or lower, then it is considered to be a rotten rating.

The difference between verified audience and all audience is that the verified audience members are the percentage of users who made a verified movie ticket purchase. The audience rating percentage that is shown is strictly based off of the verified audience rating as oppose to all audience. You are able to click on all audience to see the rating percentage that they gave it but it’s the verified audience rating percentage this is shown on the website.

For example, Lightyear has a 84% rating with verified audience with a 4.2 out 5 average rating. However, the rating with all audience is actually down to a 62% rating with a 3.3 out of 5 average rating.

In a nutshell, that is basically how the whole system operates. There are multiple different ways to view the average critics/users scores that doesn’t just resort to a fresh or rotten rating.

The Proper Way To Use Rotten Tomatoes

A part of me understands why most look at Rotten Tomatoes the way they do. Plenty of people are busy with their everyday lives and only have a limited amount of money to spent for going to the movies. It’s perfectly understandable to go to the website, what the overall rating percentage is for whatever movie you are wanting to see, and have that determine whether or not you should spend your time and money to go watch it. However, for those every day moviegoers who always go to the site to check movie ratings on a daily basis should really consider using in all the ways it was designed too.

Don’t just look at the overall rating percentage. Take a look at the critic and audiences actual review scores, read the individual reviews themselves and not just one random quote, see the difference between the top critics/audiences and all of them, and most importantly, follow the reviewers you trust the most and ignore the ones you don’t.

I can guarantee you there’s no hidden agenda from the majority of critics and audiences from the site, aside from Armond White, Doug Walker, Grace Randolph, and the obvious trolls who live to review bomb movies. All these people are doing is sitting down in a comfy theater or their own couch, watch a movie for two hours, and then inform everyone else if they think it’s any good. It doesn’t get more obvious than that.

I promise you Rotten Tomatoes isn’t worth all it’s controversy and discourse if you are just able to use the RIGHT way!

*Warning! This article contains MAJOR spoilers for Halloween Kills! If you haven’t seen the movie yet and don’t want anything spoilers, then you might want to click off the article right now! You have been warned!*

Halloween Ends arrived in theaters and on Peacock last weekend. Much like the last Halloween movie, Kills, it has gained a rather mixed response from fans and critics alike. It also doesn’t seem to be doing quite as good at the box office as early projections claimed it would. That is not exactly how you want a franchise movie to be received, especially one that has been stated repeatedly to be the final movie of the franchise. However, saying a new Halloween movie has gotten a polarizing or negative reception is actually nothing out of the ordinary.

Every since the original Halloween came out in 1978, it has been followed up with 12 other entries. Of those 12 entries, the only one that received generally positive reviews is Halloween 2018. Every other one has fell victim to either a muddled or negative reactions at the time each one came out. Although a handful of them such as Halloween 4: The Return of Michael Myers and Halloween H20: 20 Years Later had developed strong cut followings since their releases, I’m not sure Halloween Ends will be as gracious many years down the road.

The main reason I don’t see Ends being more well-liked in the future mostly has to do with the number of interesting choices made in what is suppose to be the overall conclusion of the Halloween series. The main one of course being that the movie seems to put most of it’s focus on a brand new character never before seen in the Halloween franchise named Corey Cullingham, played by the admittedly quite handsome Rohan Campbell (who I hope to God is not on social media).

Despite most of the marketing focusing on Ends being about Laurie Strodie and Michael Myers’s final showdown in the series, that’s not actually the main focus of the movie. As a matter of fact, that basically feels like a footnote to the whole thing. If it wasn’t for the fact that the trailers and posters put so much emphasis on that one aspect and the overall climax, I would be hard pressed to discover that this is in fact a Halloween movie that took place in the same timeline as 2018 and Kills. Instead, it focuses on a young man named Corey Cullingham and his tragic life spend in Haddonfield.

On a Halloween night in 2019, Corey Cullingham was a 21-year old babysitter and was put in charge to look after a young boy named Jeremy. During his time with him, Jeremy pulls a prank on him by making him think Michael Myers has arrived and locking him in the attic. Just when the parents got home, Corey kicks the door of the attic so hard that it knocks Jeremy over a staircase (in a comedically over-the-top sequence) and plummets to his death. Corey is accused of intentionally killing Jeremy and spends some time in the slammer until he became clear of manslaughter.

Despite three years passing by and being cleared, many folks in Haddonfield still believes him to be a killer. After coming home from work at his stepfather’s salvage yard, he gets picked on and bullied by a group of high school seniors, sustaining a severe injury to his hand. Laurie witnesses this and helps take Corey to the emergency room to treat that hand injury. It’s at the hospital that he meets Laurie’s granddaughter, Allyson, who now works as a nurse. The two begin to fall in love with one another and start dating. As the two start to go out together in public, the public doesn’t take so kindly to Corey’s appearance.

At a Halloween party at a bar, he runs into the mother of the dead child who chews him out and telling him he knows that he killed the boy on purpose. After going home from the party, he once again gets bullied by those same high schoolers, who beat him up and throw him down a bridge. This leads to Corey waking up after being unconscious and headed down the sewers where he runs into Michael Myers himself. After Michael has his arms around Corey’s head and about to kill him as he has done to many of his prey, he takes a good look into Corey’s eyes and sees he got killer in his eyes just as he does. Once he is let go from Michael, Corey is confronted by a homeless man who he stabs to death and flees, which gains him that killer instinct he may have had when he killed the boy three years ago.

After constant more public appearances not being approved by the public such as Allyson’s ex-boyfriend/cop at a restaurant, the couple decide they want to leave Haddonfield together and go somewhere more peaceful. Laurie, who had been skeptical of Corey since he started dating her grandfather, wants to break the two up but neither one of them approves, which leads to potentially alienating Allyson.

This lead to Halloween night in 2022 where Corey decided to spend the last night at Haddonfield by killing anyone that dares get in his way such as his parents and Laurie herself. After going back in the sewer to steal Michael’s mask and with some help from the same clumsy high schoolers, he’s able to murder his stepfather, mother, and a few others who wronged him. Just as he goes to kill Laurie herself, she makes a call to report a suicide which at first seems like it’s for herself but it ends up being for Corey herself.

After baiting Corey with her false suicide attempt, it’s then that Corey slices his own throat because if he can’t be with Allyson, then no one can in an effort to frame Laurie for killing him, just like he got framed for killing the boy. After being still half alive, Michael Myers comes out of nowhere and finished the job for Corey by killing him and taking back his mask that he stole. This leads to one last confrontation between Laurie and Michael themselves, with Allyson eventually getting in on the action, making the climax have to do with the two main leads that the movie promoted itself with instead of the one character who was actually the main focus all along.

So, yeah! Apparently someone involved with the production of this new Halloween movie decided that the only way they could justify a trilogy’s worth of movies in this timeline with the final installment is by creating a new origin story of a character who thought he was destined to be the next Michael Myers until he wasn’t. While prior Halloween movies have hinted at an idea like this, this is the first one to have that be the main point. The problem with that isn’t necessarily just that this is the last one in the trilogy and focusing on a new character disconnected from the main Laurie and Michael story makes this timeline feel uneven (although that doesn’t really help) but that I don’t think the film 100% commits itself to that idea as a whole.

First off, there really isn’t enough information giving in the movie as to what kind of person Corey was before the tragic incident with the kid who he was babysitting. While I know he didn’t mean to kill that kid, was he really that much of a good person to begin with? Maybe he got along with kids and his parents but there isn’t much else aside from that. The movie keeps beating down on Corey after the accidental death he committed in an effort to make us feel sympathetic. However, I don’t really think there is anything making him truly worthy of sympathy. Yes, it sucks to see him be viewed in the public eye as he is but we need to actually like something about him aside from the fact that everyone hates him because he killed someone by accident.

This also makes the relationship between Corey and Allyson even more awkward as it is hard to tell how we are suppose to feel about the two being together. For what I understand, Allyson is completely unaware of all the killings Corey had done in the movie aside from the kid he babysat or that he is basically Michael Myer’s apprentice. But the way Corey is always acting so strange and defensive around her when he is in public makes you wonder why Allyson isn’t bothering to question dating a potential killer and run away with him. Again, this does seem to hint at an idea of a member of the Strode family turning into her own Michael Myers but the film never commits to it. It makes you wonder why Allyson want to so badly go away with this boy who could just (literally) stab her in the back at any given moment.

The worst of this all is how this storyline ends. I almost want to believe that the original idea here for Corey was how one tragic incident could lead to a innocent young man turn into pure evil and chaos just like Michael Myers. How Michael has impacted Haddonfield so hard that not only does everyone fear him but want to become him. How there will be more insane folks like Corey that will haunt this corrupted town for many years to come. However, just about all of that is flushed down the toilet after Corey is unceremoniously killed off by himself and Michael Myers. Once it gets to the actual climax of the movie and the one character we spent the most time on is killed off just like that, it makes the whole thing feel like a lot of build up to not really all that much.

Despite Allyson acknowledging that Laurie was right about Corey, the Strode family seems to be the only ones to acknowledge him. Everyone else just seems to focus on Michael Myers, the antagonist who only shows up for about ten minutes in the actual movie, and not on Corey, even with all the violent crimes he committed the same Halloween night. It makes you wonder why the filmmakers bothered to go through the amount of trouble they did to create a villain origin story only to cop out at the last second by killing the villain off. That just basically goes back to the problem for doing this in your final film.

When you are making a concluding chapter, then it’s best to tell a story that is able to wrap up the plot threads of all the previous movies instead of inserting in new ones and have that be the main point of the narrative. You can add in new elements if you like but it should not derail from the main story that has been focused on in the preceding two films. It’s like trying to plug a puzzle piece from an entirely different puzzle than the puzzle you are currently trying to solve. There are things that just don’t fit.

When thinking about Halloween Ends, I can’t straight up say I hate it or even think it’s bad. I’m more conflicted and frustrated than anything else. I’m honestly had a point with films where I find the ones that set itself up to be the most safe, disposable, uninteresting piece of media imaginable to be more offensive than the ones that swing for the fences and doesn’t quite succeed at it. However, I’m just not sure this was the right film to swing the fences with. If it was a beginning or middle chapter, I could see it working more as it would lead to more room for character growth and exploration of the choices made. As a final chapter, where everything has to be resolved by the end, it makes it come across as rather iffy in execution.

I would say the Halloween franchise should have worries for the future but there has been much worse that has come from this series that it was able to overcome and I don’t see this one being any different. Guess we’ll have to wait and see ourselves!

Even so, the legacy of Laurie Strode and Michael Myers will always live on. Even if Corey Cunningham doesn’t.

Boy, this is a tough one to review. Not necessarily because I can’t decide how exactly I feel about it as I most certainly do but be able to review it in a way that is able to get you the conscious on what to expect going into the picture that doesn’t reveal any kind of plot details that the trailers and marketing haven’t shown. In the case of Halloween Ends, the overall premise that Universal has been pushing from the beginning with this being Laurie Strode and Michael Myers’s final confrontation. While that is technically true, it’s not really the main focus of this movie, or at least not as much as you would expect for the final film.

I imagine that is going to play a MASSIVE role as to how fans and audiences will response to this latest installment of the Halloween franchise, which even then is a series that’s no stranger to divisive or not well-liked features, save for the original and 2018. There is plenty of the plot synopsis, narrative turns, and surprises that the marketing has completely glossed over that does in fact make Ends more than just the 14th episode of the Jamie Lee Curtis and Michael Myers show. As a matter of act, it makes it a complete different show entirely.

If that sounds off putting to you, then I’m pretty sure you are going to leave the movie with a sour taste in your mouth and probably hate it. If not, then you might find yourself fascinated and intrigued as to what is easily the strangest and most subversive of the Halloween movies since the Rob Zombie ones and H20.

Regardless, I will discuss briefly the actual plot synopsis of the movie that won’t reveal too much past the first act, including what the actual central main story is along with the actual central main character. If you want to go into the movie completely blind, then I would advise you click off of this review now and go watch the movie before reading the rest. Again, these won’t be any major spoilers but I can’t promise you won’t read in between the lines with what I describe.

Final warning for potential spoilers! Now, onto the actual review.

Halloween Ends is a movie with quite a bizarre goal that it’s trying to accomplish. It’s ambition is to try to wrap up a series of films that have consisted of multiple different entries, multiple different continuities, and multiple different endings. This is a franchise that has been constantly rewritten it’s own rules, logic, and continuity for what seems like an eternity now that ending it seems like a taunting task. Even so, having Halloween end doesn’t make much sense for the franchise since that practically goes against the moral of the original.

With the way John Carpenter wrapped up the original 1978 masterpiece, it did it in a way that felt abrupted but also open-ended in a very intentional way. It makes it statement about how in the end, Michael Myers will also be how there, literally or figuratively. Evil will always find it’s way and there wouldn’t be much good without it. That is something that the majority of the sequels, both good or bad, has missed the point of and making the franchise keep fighting a never ending battle that they can never win.

In the case of the new Halloween trilogy with David Gordon Green behind the camera, it started off in 2018 as a love-letter to the fans to get Jamie Lee Curtis back in shape transforming the character of Laurie into her Sarah Connor form and have her take on Michael Myers head on. With the sequels on the other hand, it seems to have handcuffed itself after delivering all the goodies they had left and now leaves themselves going, “Okay, now what?” What else can we do with the series that we haven’t done already other than countless gory bloodbaths and Michael Myers reeking havoc on a haunted town over and over again?

As much kills and thrills Kills did provide, it didn’t seem to add much in terms of narrative or any sort of character progression aside from seeing past characters older either being killed off or in their PTSD form. With Ends, it basically has the exact opposite problem. There’s plenty of bold swings and new ideas it wants to tackle upon but it seems like the wrong movie to do it with. I certainly admire it for that and I would be lying if I said I wasn’t engaged the whole way but I can’t say for certain if it actually worked in the end.

Premise: We start off with a shocking opening sequence in 2019 where a young man named Corey Cunnigham (Rohan Campbell) is babysitting a boy on Halloween night. That night takes a sudden turn when a tragedy happens that Corey is accused of being responsible for which ends up turning his world upside down. Fast forward to another three years, four after the events of 2018 and Kills, we see Laurie (Jamie Lee Curtis) who now lives with her granddaughter, Allyson (Andi Matichak) and has moved on from her obsession of Michael Myers. She has gotten over the death of her loved ones, most notably her daughter Karen (Judy Greer), and has made peace with her life by trying to make her remaining years on Earth a happy one. However, people still remember Laurie and blame her for the terrorism of Michael Myers. This eventually leads to Corey connecting with Allyson, who is now a nurse, after an accident, which Laurie sees a bit of Michael inside him. It’s then that the characters must discover who they really are deep inside and whether or not the impact that Michael Myers has had in Haddenfield has affected their clouded mindset.

That might see like an awful lot of plot for the premise to describe but trust me, I barely scratch the surface on it. The filmmakers behind Ends knew damn well that strictly having a entry with just Laurie and Michael Myers duking it out one last time is as thin of a premise as you can get with an hour and 45 minute long feature film and needed to find something that can fill up the runtime and connect to the franchises overall themes. I can’t say for certain how much of this was planned for the beginning or made up on the fly but it is quite distinct for not just the entire franchise but especially this trilogy of films.

Thankfully, Jamie Lee Curtis gets much more to do here as Laurie than in Kills and seems to be having more fun here than ever before. While the previous two movies felt too wrapped up in the depressed mental state that Laurie was in along with some ham-fisted, preachy dialogue in the form of Shakespeare, she is allowed to be more expressive and joyful here. She seems like the fun-loving, care-taking mother (or in the movie’s case grandmother) that she has always wanted to be but never allowed herself to be until now. You can clearly see this is a version of Laurie that is clearly able to move on from her depression and trauma and only got back into that mental state if she had too, which she unfortunately has to later on. When it comes to her granddaughter, Corey, and Michael Myers, oh boy!

I won’t go too deep into Corey’s role in the story as I plan to have a spoiler piece for that sometime next week but I found myself intrigued but also baffled by the way his character is presented here. It seems to be flirting with the ideas of a poor young boy being misunderstood, no one believing you, and have the whole turn against you because of it. It even seems to hint of the idea of how the effect of Michael Myers can turn good folks into psychopaths and turn them into their own version of the Boogeyman. Those are very intriguing ideas and concepts that hasn’t been brought up much in the Halloween franchise. Unfortunately, none of them worked as well as they can because I don’t think it’s ever clear what we are suppose to feel about Corey as a whole. The film never gives us a good indication as to whether or not Corey was an actual good person before performing these dreadful actions and if he is a character worthy of sympathy.

This all makes matters more complicated when he is in a relationship with Allyson. Again, the movie hints at the idea of a potential member of the Strode family turning into her own version of Michael Myers but it doesn’t amount of much of anything aside from creating some drama between Laurie and Allyson. It makes Allyson come across a kind of a creepy weirdo by hanging around with a guy who may or may not have killed a child. Are we suppose to be on her side or against her? I’m not quire sure and I don’t think the movie does either.

And if you are wondering why I’m hardly talking about Michael Myers himself in the movie, that’s because there’s not a whole lot with him in the movie. His role matters more in a thematic and literary sense than it does with the amount of screen time he has. His purpose amounts to how the folks of Haddonfield have had to deal with him over the years and how his presence has brought the worst out of anyone, including Corey himself. He’s still fine and scary here but you would think he would have more of a role in what is suppose to be the last official movie with that character.

For those that come to a Halloween movie for the genuine scare and the sloppily, brutal kills, you get enough of those here but I don’t think they stand out as some of the particular best in the franchise or even of this new trilogy. Mostly consists of the kind of bloody kills that you’ve seen in nearly every single Halloween movie or even just slasher movies in general. The final fight between Laurie and Michael Myers is brutal and intense in the moment but it’s goes by faster than you can say, “Happy Halloween!” It doesn’t quite compare to the showdown between the two in 2018 or even is as impactful (albeit abrupt) as the one from Kills as well. It’s all serviceable here and gets the job done but they often feel like an afterthought here as Green and his crew are clearly more interested in thrown whatever batshit crazy idea they can think off.

In the end, Halloween Ends, much like a good chunk of the sequels, is a movie that seems destined for intense discourse and mixed responses. It takes the kind of chances that you normally wouldn’t expect for a movie that was intended to be a crowd pleasing finale. For that, I respected it and was mostly intrigued by it. However, I can’t say it all worked because of how muddled it is in it’s execution, how there isn’t much resolution to those ideas, and how it’s quite strange to have this being done in the literal last movie where the main storylines from the previous two movies has to be wrapped up. Much like the kills in this franchise, it’s sloppy, brutal, and all over the place but still can be seen as effective.

Overall, I probably give this a 2.5 stars. That might be a bit generous just for the risks it takes but yeah. Now, enter the discourse!

Other comments:

• Film buffs are no doubt gonna find strong Christine vibes with this one!

• The remix of the Michael Myers theme here is kinda off, especially compared to how bleak and angry the 2018 remix sounded.

• I would NOT want to be on social media for the next couple of months if I’m Rohan Campbell.

• I can’t be the only one that had Anakin Skywalker’s vibes with Corey’s arc in the movie.

• You should check out Christine btw.

• Also, this movie is on Peacock now for those that don’t want to go to the theaters.

Last week, Illumination Animation released the first official trailer for The Super Mario Bros. Movie, the brand new movie adaption of the extremely popular video game series from Nintendo. It’s expected to contain a voice cast of incredibly well-known actors such as Chris Pratt, Jack Black, Charlie Day, and Seth Rogen and even have a role of some sort for the long known Mario voice in Charlie Martinet. Despite the controversy surrounding Chris Pratt as Mario, the overall reception to the initial trailer seems to be fairly positive, with most praising the stellar animation and Jack Black as Bowser. While the debate whether Starlord can work well as his own version of Mario is one worth discussing, I think another debate that is worth bringing up is whether or not a Mario movie can actually work.

And I’m not just speaking of the sense that this is from Illumination, an animation studio that despite it’s financial success, aren’t really know for crafting genuine kids movie that rivals the best of Pixar or even Dreamworks outside of (maybe) the original Despicable Me. I’m also not speaking of the sense that this is yet another video game movie adaption, even if they have gotten a bit better as of late with the likes of Tomb Raider, Rampage, Detective Pikachu and the two Sonic the Hedgehog movies. Even taking all of those things into account, it’s going to be interesting to see how exactly a Mario movie can work as it’s own thing since it’s a franchise that isn’t really well known for it’s complex plots, superb character development, or stellar voice work.

Mario has been a franchise that been known for being very simplistic and straight forward with it’s storytelling but also incredibly imaginative and creative when it comes to the actual gameplay, level design, lore, world building, and music. While there definitely has been a handful of media with Mario that tried to go deeper with it’s story, characters, and script such as the hilariously awful 90s live-action movie and that 90s cartoon that no one remembers, none of them has really stood out as anything that proves that Mario can work on any one of those mediums. Even with the games tried to go deeper outside of the gameplay, it resulted in quite mixed results with the black hole of the franchise that is known as Super Mario Sunshine.

Say what you while about Sonic the Hedgehog but at least that is a franchise that is constantly driven by more than just it’s gameplay. There have been multiple stories involving cartoons, comics, and the actual games themselves that is given a huge amount of focus on along with the voice work, dialogue, and character work. It’s understandable to see how Sonic is able to carry his own movie since he’s already proven to be able to carry other forms of media with his own lore, characters, and world building with his tv shows, comic books, and now his movies. That something that Mario hasn’t really been known for.

Whenever someone talks about the plot of a Mario game, it’s usually follow the exact same beats in every single game. Bowser kidnaps Princess Peach and Mario has to save her from him! Throw in a handful of side characters such as Luigi, Toad, Yoshi, Daisy, Rosalina, Wario, Waluigi, Bowser Jr.etc.., and at least seven different world for Mario to go through and you basically got the traditional formula to an absolute T. Things are added every now and thing but they really don’t go much further than that.

Mario never really undergoes an arc or and kind of character development, there’s never really any moments of emotion or hard hit drama, there’s no shocking twist or story turns, and it tends to be very minimum in terms of dialogue exchanges and voice work. Sure, every once in a while there’s a genuine surprise, like say Peach’s independent turn at the end of Super Mario Odyssey, but it’s usually just the animation and visuals that do all the talking with not much else walking. However, that is something that will have to change with this upcoming Mario movie.

While no doubt Illumination is going to take the safe route with the Mario movie making it the most straight forward kid friendly/family movie possible, they will have to add elements that the Mario series isn’t really accustom too. They will have to put more focus on the story/plot then before, more on the character arcs/development then before, more on the dialogue and voice work than before, and more on the drama/emotional beats then before. While there will still be plenty of room for visual storytelling/gags that the games are known for, those elements are a requirement if Mario is going to function in any way, shape, or form as a motion picture.

In the end, I guess all we can do is wait and see. The movie no doubt will be a big hit at the box office strictly based off the Mario and Illumination Animation name alone. In terms of overall quality, that certainly remains to be seen whether it can hold up with the more recent video game movies.

Regardless, it will definitely be interesting to see how exactly Mario can hold his own movie since it’s the kind of medium that the character isn’t really familiar with. Whether the movie is good or bad, it’s an experiment that is certainly worth testing out as it could determine how the Super Mario brand can progress and evolve for the near future.

Mushroom Kingdom, here we come!

The Super Mario Bros. Movie will be released in theaters on April 7th, 2023.

Other comments:

• For anyone wondering, this is NOT a response to that one Polygon article of how a celebrity voicing Mario is impossible to make work and that Mario has never been an actual character. I haven’t read it and already had this piece in mind even before the trailer came out.

• This better have plenty of Yoshi in it.

• I’m quite curious to see how Seth Rogen will sound as Donkey Kong.

• Isn’t it weird how Super Mario Odyssey will be turning five years old this month?! Why must time always move so fast?!

• Speaking of which, when are we gonna get info on the next main Mario game? We still haven’t got one since Odyssey. An Odyssey 2 perhaps?!

• That’s all I got!

• Also, don’t forget that Chris Pratt is also voicing Garfield the Cat as well? I can honestly seem him fitting that role more than Mario tbh.

• Okay, that’s really it! Have a good day everybody!

There has been a couple of major announcements about the upcoming and anticipated Marvel sequel that is Deadpool 3. Not only did we get a confirmed release date of September 26th, 2024 but it’s also been confirmed that the mighty Hugh Jackman will reprise his role as Wolverine, just five years after retiring from the role in 2017 with Logan. While there are still major plot details that have yet to be revealed, at least it’s confirmed that the movie is in active development and is expected to come out less than two years from now. There are plenty of fans out there that are excited about this news, other folks…..not so much.

Ever since this announcement was made a week ago, there have been plenty of folks on social media platforms that have had no problem in voicing their displeasure of this news. Many of have complained that this cheapness the ending of Logan, the last movie with Hugh Jackman’s Wolverine where *SPOILER ALERT* he dies. Jackman had stated repeatedly he wanted to end the story of his iconic character on a high note which is why he initially wanted to retire from the role with Logan. Now, that he’s back, it makes the whole movie feel like it was for nothing and is yet another example of Hollywood refusing to leave a property well enough alone after it has been giving finality.

Folks such as Bailey here:

no ending is sacred when there's money to be made. pic.twitter.com/zVA6hUmrHG

— BAILEY (@loverboymedia) September 28, 2022

disney nostalgia trapping audiences with old actor's iterations of chracaters across different franchises in movies like no way home, multiverse of madness and now this is truly the bleakest indictment of where corporate filmmaking is at right now.

— BAILEY (@loverboymedia) September 28, 2022

they are training you to not want new things.

— BAILEY (@loverboymedia) September 28, 2022

While I can understand a reason or two for those claims, I think people are REALLY overexaggerating over this news.

First off, I’m fairly certain that the Wolverine we will see in Deadpool 3 will not be the same character as we saw in Logan or maybe not even the prior X-Men movies. To be honest, it’s hard to really tell whether or not if Wolverine is supposed to be the exact same character in each of those movies because of how messed up the continuity is in the Fox universe. Even if it is suppose to be one of the version from the movies, I’m fairly certain it will take place in a time period far removed from Logan, long before the events of that film even happened. Especially if the newest update from Ryan Reynolds and Hugh Jackman themselves is any indication.

That in of itself should have been obvious to anyone with half a brain. Ryan Reynolds has voiced his praise for Logan multiple times and I highly doubt he wants to mess with that movie. I also don’t believe Hugh Jackman would have returned if it meant it would screw with the perfect epilogue he was given in that movie. Even taken away that sense of pride and accomplishment from Logan directly, I still don’t think Hugh coming back one more time as Wolverine does any sort of harm.

One thing you have to keep in mind is that Logan and Deadpool are two completely different kinds of movies. While both are R-rated with plenty of blood and gore, they both have very two distinct tones and tackles different subgenres of it’s own. Logan is a dark, bleak western that also happens to have comic book elements to it that can be enjoyed by those who aren’t even a fan of superhero movies. Deadpool is a goofy, lighthearted, over-the-top action flick with comic book elements and very episodic-like storytelling that can be perfectly enjoyed by fans of superhero movies or even good comedies. They both have two completely different goals for their respective movies and able to succeed at them in completely different ways. While Logan would have still been perfect as Hugh Jackman’s last go-around as the character, Deadpool 3 allows him to take part of what I would imagine being a perfectly enjoyable buddy cop-kind of flick with two of the most beloved actors in Marvel canon bantering and quipping off each other for two hours, just like they have always wanted.

This also helps deliver something that fans have wanted to see for years, especially with a Deadpool movie. That being Ryan’s Deadpool and Hugh’s Wolverine coming together in an R-rated action flick where they claw, slice, and dice bad guys in the most bloody and brutal way possible. We got glimpse of that in Origins: Wolverine but that will be on full display in Deadpool 3. Not to mention, we might at long last get to see Hugh Jackman in that iconic Wolverine costume, something we never got to see once in the Fox X-Men movies aside from a brief deleted scene in The Wolverine. As long as Hugh was perfectly finding coming back for one more round, I don’t see how his return ruins anything in Logan or prior X-Men movies.

All of this basically means is that you can get two different endings of the Wolverine character. You got the sad but bittersweet ending of Logan while you will likely get a more fun, uplifting ending in the form of Deadpool 3. If the movie is able to deliver on the goods that fans have wanted to see with Ryan and Hugh together along with doing more comic-accurate things like the Wolverine suit, then it’s basically a win-win situation for everybody.

While I can understand concerns about Hugh Jackman returning once again after initially stepping down from the role as Wolverine, I do think this is a very different case than with most franchises out there who tend to bring back older actors who had previously moved on from their most famous roles. The Fox X-Men movies and Deadpool movies have such distinct tones and feels that it’s hard for me to imagine getting upset over it since it most likely won’t even feel like the same version of the character. It’d be like getting mad over the Toy Story shorts that came along after Toy Story 3 and claiming that ruined the perfect ending of that one (Yes, I know Toy Story 4 is a thing but I’m mostly talking about between 3 and 4 and how there were folks complaining about the shorts because it ruins the ending of 3.). The Deadpool movies feel so different, more episodic, and more inconsequential to the other X-Men movies that I’m puzzled why folks have tended to have such a vital reaction to this news.

Heck, no matter what, this whole thing can be seen as a win-win for both those who are excited for Deadpool 3 and those who are not. If the movie is good, then you get another good movie and ending for Hugh Jackman’s Wolverine. If the movie is bad, then you can just pretend Logan was the true last movie with Hugh Jackman’s Wolverine.

Life is that simple. Enjoy what you like, ignore what you don’t like. If this announcement has really annoyed you so much that you believe it ruins Logan for you, then there’s a good chance you probably didn’t think that movie was really that good at all, now realizing that, and are just lashing out at the movie because of it. Might want to think on that before rendering something as meaningless.

Regardless, Deadpool 3 is set for a September 6, 2024 release date with Ryan Reynolds reprising his role as Wade Wilson/Deadpool and Hugh Jackman returning as Logan/Wolverine.

Today, I discovered some very tragic news for myself. The main movie theaters that I’ve gone to the most for at least the last decade has now been closed. That theater I’m talkin about is Regal Gravois Bluffs Stadium 12.

It was a theater that opened in December of 2008 in the Gravois Bluffs area, which is surrounded by multiple shopping markets. It was the second time that Great Escape added a theater in the St. Louis area and was eventually taken over by Regal in 2012. It contained upwards of 12 screens and 2,150 seats, all in crisp black leather, with digital sound and production both in 2D and 3D. It was a theater that mostly consists of the very big blockbuster pictures that were set to come out during those exact initial weekends with an occasional smaller film release a week or two after being out in other, bigger theaters. By no means was it the biggest or greatest theater ever but it was one I could rely on to see the newest big movie with the cheapest price, and that’s not even including Regal Unlimited subscription.

However, that seemed to have come to an end. It’s been reported that the theater itself closed to the public on September 25, 2022. If the information I read is accurate, it’s because Gravois was one of the 20 Regal theaters that was approved from the higher ups for lease relief in a bankruptcy maneuver by the Regal company. Most of those theaters were closed a week or two prior but some remained open in the hopes of a miraculous turnaround. That never came to pass and there was virtually no chance of theater operations heading into October.

What is oddly strange about this though is that there was an early screening of The Greatest Beer Run Ever played at Gravois Bluffs on September 26th, the day after it closed to the public, which I attended. My best guess is that was most likely approved by Regal since that was a mostly booked screening where all the seats were filled a few weeks prior. Because of that, Regal decided to allow one more screening and avoid giving out refunds. After that, I don’t think there has been any more theater showings since then.

I don’t know if all of this information is accurate but I do know the fact that the theater is closed. They stop showing screenings for that theaters on the Regal App and a drive up there today showed a place that looks deserted and everything was taken down. I can’t say for certain that this will remain permeant but I’m willing to be it is and aren’t likely to see that theater re-open anytime soon. It was a miracle to see it opening again after Covid but now, it’s likely gone forever.

I still do have at least two other theaters in my area close to me that I can go to for future movies. However, it will be a longer drive to get there, usually taking another extra five to ten minutes for me after passing Gravois Bluffs. Also, since they are both Weinberg theaters and not Regal, that would make it more expensive for me since I won’t be able to use Regal Unlimited and Weinberg doesn’t have a subscription system like that I’m aware of. They still have great deals with morning screenings and half-price Tuesdays along with a handful of early advance screenings but going to theaters will be more expensive for me than the past two to three years. Because of that, I will most likely have to limited my budget for seeing movies in cinema and reserve them for ones that I really want or have to see in theaters.

Granted, these are two movies that I still go to on occasion. They are mostly ones I reserved for smaller films that aren’t being showing at Gravois or ones that look like could use some extra money for me. And I’m even willing to admit I enjoy the seats, concession, and experience more than I did of the previous theater. But, I always found the Regal theater to be more cheaper, advanced, and more reliable than the other two theaters I go too. However, that is all about to change.

I still plan to see movies in theaters and even do reviews/articles on ones that I see. But, I don’t think movie theater going can be as much of a hobby for me as it is was before or something I can have the same nostalgic feeling of now that the theater I’ve gone to the most times is now closed.

Guess all good things have to come to an end.

So long partner!

RIP Regal Gravois Bluffs

December 17, 2008-September 26, 2022

And here’s some brief into I read about the theater and why it closed.

• http://cinematreasures.org/theaters/27266/photos/161376

Other comments:

• I wanted to take a picture of the closed theater for this article but I was honestly too sad too and just decide to take one last drive past there and try to soak in all the memories I had at that local theater.

• I remember writing a post about Regal Cinema closing on here for my writing course back in 2020. I went into detail about how the theater closings due to Covid could eventually lead to certain movie theaters closing for good. Why did the cinema gods let me be right for once?

• Here’s link to that btw: https://adamr.website/2020/10/08/all-regal-cinemas-across-the-united-states-closed-on-october-8th-until-further-notice/

• I still think my overall favorite movie going experiences there had to be Avengers: Infinity War, Avengers: Endgame, and Spider-Man: No Way Home. They might be all Marvel features and not necessarily my all-time favorite movies but I’ll never forget the experience I had watching those on opening nights with a packed crowd and witnessing all of the reactions from those all around me. That is what going to the theaters is all about! I’ll certainly miss that there!

During yesterday’s Thursday Night showdown between the Miami Dolphins and the Cinncinati Bengals that was shown live on Amazon Prime, a very scary scene happened. The young and talented quarterback for the Dolphins, Tua Tagovailoas, had to be removed from the game after being slammed hard into the ground, suffering from a possible concussion. This was only shortly after last Sunday’s game where after getting knocked down, he lost his balance and fell down, also giving potential signs of a concussion. Despite that, he still continued to play in last Sunday’s game and was clear from concussion protocols for last night’s game. But was he really ready to go back out there after getting hit and knocked down hard? Well, why don’t you just watch him trying to get back up last Sunday and see for yourself.

*Fair warning to readers! I will show the incidents from last Sunday and yesterday of with Tagovailoas. If you find that disturbing, then you might want to click off the rest of this article. I apologize in advance but my point has to get across about how much of a serious matter a player’s health and safety is and that NFL needs to place more accountability on that front for the sake of the sport. Again, you have been warned!*

#Tua will be ruled out for @MiamiDolphins vs @BuffaloBills.
Outward signs of head injury means ruled out even if clears the concussion protocol. pic.twitter.com/Lj2AKO5D1A

— David J. Chao – ProFootballDoc (@ProFootballDoc) September 25, 2022

Once again, that was last Sunday’s game against the Buffalo Bills, less than four days away from the next game against the Bengals. Despite him stumbling to the ground and having a hard time getting backed up, he was allowed to play the next game. Despite having potential signs of a severe concussion, he was allowed to play the next game. Despite the fact that Tua is a young kid with superstar potential and a more severe injury like that could permanently damaged his career, he was allowed to play the next game.

So, what exactly happened to him in the very next game, you may ask? Well, again, see for yourself!

*Again, fair warning of potential graphic content!*

⚠️CONTENT WARNING | GRAPHIC VIDEO⚠️

Just days after sustaining a serious neck/head injury, Tua Tagovailoa has suffered additional head trauma and displayed the fencing response.

Tagovailoa was stabilized and stretchered off the field. Very scary sight. pic.twitter.com/ks52j4Cs2P

— Prime Time Sports Talk (@TalkPrimeTime) September 30, 2022

That’s right! The worst possible thing that could have happen to poor Tua the very next game did in fact happen! It’s been reported that he suffered from severe head and neck injuries, even demonstrating a fencing response (go look that up if you don’t know what that means), and have to be taking off the field on a stretcher. With those reports, you would think that he would have to miss some time on the field and spend some time on a hospital bed undergoing treatment, right? Well, you would be wrong!

Just mere hours after being checked in at the University of Cincinnati Medical Center, Tagovailoa was discharged and was given the complete clearance to fly home to Miami and starting preparing for the team’s next game against the New York Jets.

Tua Tagovailoa is expected to be to discharged from the hospital soon and travel back with the team pic.twitter.com/2byddtdnKj

— Bleacher Report (@BleacherReport) September 30, 2022

Despite suffering from a possible concussion not once but TWICE in the same week, he is still considered good enough to keep playing. Something about that just seems so off and I imagine a lot of people agree with me.

How in the world can he be given the clearance to keep going after going through those injuries? How could they think he would be okay to go the next game right after having to be taking off the field on a STRETCHER that he is good to go? I may not be a doctor but I’m pretty sure a simple eye test from the last two games shows that he is clearly not ready to go.

Of course, this is clearly not the first time something like this happened in football where big players are forced to play through injuries in the hopes that they don’t get so bad and can just wait until the offseason to deal with it. However, the matters are made worse when it involves young players like Tua Tagovailoa. A 24-year old with a good heart and sportsmanship with the potential of a superstar level career.

Imagine if this could continue to get worse. Imagine if next week that something even worse happens to him that it not only hurts the rest of the season for him but the rest of his career. All of it tarnished because the medical staff didn’t bother to be more careful and give him the rest and treatment he needs that will benefit him in the long run.

Football is already a hard enough sport to stay healthy in with how tough and aggressive the whole thing is. Every single game involves players getting shoved, tackled, and sacked with tons of bodies flying to the ground in the hopes that they don’t hit it hard with their head, neck, or back. Those that are able to push through those games are brave and noble athletes. However, it is not worth jeopardizing the life of a single player by allowing them to play games they shouldn’t be. I get teams don’t want to lose their star players but if they are not on top form, then that won’t help them much either. That and everything involved with Tua Tagovailoa this week is why NFL needs to look deeper into the player and safety protocols and start holding those who aren’t doing a good enough job accountable. Thankfully, they might just be doing that according to latest reports!

Dr. Allen Sills says on @NFLNetwork that as soon as the investigation on Tua Tagovailoa is finished, it'll be released to the public. "We want to be as transparent as possible."

— Ian Rapoport (@RapSheet) September 30, 2022

NFL is in complete hot water right now! And that will continue until this investigation is complete and consequences start coming to those involved who gave the okay for the young quarterback to keep playing through his injuries. I predict to see people fired, lawsuits filed, and the league being sued for this disgusting matter! It’s only when accountability comes for endangering the players where the NFL will win back their respect to the fans and public.

This is going to be quite a different review than usual. Since this movie still has yet to come out until this weekend in theaters and Apple+, this is going to be a more brief review and not necessarily one that goes too deep into the actual film itself.

For those who may not know, Regal Cinemas hosted a Mystery Monday movie night this week where there was an early screening for an upcoming movie that had yet to be released everywhere but would not reveal what movie you were actually watching until the actual movie itself started playing. The movie that I got to watch Monday was no other than The Greatest Beer Run Ever, the upcoming feature staring Zac Efron, Russell Crowe, and Bill Murray with Peter Farrelly returning to the director’s chair after his infamous best picture winner in Green Book.

Just know in the future if I’m able to see movies early, I will probably make reviews similar in this format so I don’t give too much away but give enough to express my opinion as to whether or not I believe the movie itself is worth seeing. Now, let’s actually jump into the actual movie.

The Greatest Beer Run Ever is based off the book of the same name by Joanna Molloy and tells the true life tale of John “Chickie” Donohue (Zac Efron), a young veteran who sneaked into the Vietnam War to deliver the soldiers beers as a means of showing his appreciation and gratitude to those fighting in the army for America’s freedom. Along the way, he runs into civilians such as Arthur Coates (Russell Crowe) along with getting into the action a bit with his fellow comrade soldiers as he discovers the consequences of war and how everyone in and outside the media responds to it.

I’m going to be straight and upfront here, this story feels so bizarre and baffling to be considered true. It’s so odd how we are suppose to see and view Donohue as some kind of hero despite putting himself and many others lives in peril along with committing illegal acts (including personating a CIA agent) just to deliver beer to his buddies. I understand he wanted to show his respect to those who fought on the battlefield but I’m pretty sure, even in 1967 (which is the year this movie is set in btw), there were other, much safer methods to get that message across. Couldn’t you just sent a postcard or a package that included beer to the army? This feels like the mindset of a child, one that thinks they can just go and do whatever they want without realizing you could get yourself and others killed. I can’t say for certain this is how everything played out in real life but if this movie made me want to think of Chickie as some saint, then it failed spectacularly.

Speaking of the actual movie itself, it more or less, comes across with the same level of quality as Green Book, widely considered to be one of the worst movies to every win best picture. By this I mean, that it’s a safe, surface level picture which has a warm enough tone and great performances that it might be enough for the movie going audience to have a good time with but handles it’s bluntly obvious themes in a very straight forward and problematic way that it will likely make film bluffs roll their eyes. Just like how Green Book didn’t have much to offer other than stating “racism and homophobia are bad”, the central message of The Greatest Beer Run Ever doesn’t amount to more than simply “war is bad” from the point of view from both sides.

If there is one saving grace that ultimately saves the picture from being completely insufferable, it’s Zac Efron’s clearly passionate performance as Chickie himself. Efron has shown to be a proven charming talent with enough comedic and dramatic chops to carry anything and it’s definitely on full display here. He is able to add more likability and presence to his character than the script gives him any right to have and provides most of the best laughs in the movie. Russell Crowe is also a solid presence here as a civilian photographer who becomes more important in the second half in the film while barley having any presence in the first half. The other cast members are fine here as well but none of them really stands out in any meaningful way since there are only really a handful of scenes dedicated to them, mostly speaking to Chickie himself about what he should if and when he goes to Vietnam.

The direction and feel of the picture also feels all over the pace from Peter Farrelly. While it has a tone that is lighthearted and warm enough that it fits well for a crowd pleasing entertainment, many of the dramatic and intense bits fall flat as there are times where it’s unclear how the audiences are suppose to be feeling during certain giving moments. An example of this is when Chickie is out on the battlefield with his buddy from home, what should consist of an intense and emotional moment is undermined by inappropriately placed music and camera movement that doesn’t so much seem as if they are running through No Man’s Land itself but on a theater stage. Farrelly is clearing aiming for a comedy-drama vibe here, while he may have excels at the former half of that, he fails spectacularly at the latter half of it.

In the end, while I can’t say I hated myself watching this or that I didn’t get some amusement and chuckles out of it, The Greatest Beer Run Ever makes for a rather uneven experience. It’s lighthearted nature and a good lead performance by Zac Efron helps carry the picture to the finish line that I would expect audiences might have a good time when they are watching it. However, the further they get away from the movie, the more they’ll see the overall faults with the movie with it’s inconsistent direction, flat dramatic and emotional beats, simplistic messages executed in the most simplistic way possible, and it’s real-life protagonist that really shouldn’t be seen as a hero or a saint in any way.

Unlike Green Book, I can’t imagine this gaining much controversy come Oscar time as I highly doubt that Farrelly will be able to make lighting strike a second time with the Academy. However, if you are looking for a night out with your buddies, it can actually make for a good time…..if you’re drunk.

Other comments:

• And yes, I did just blantaly steal that last line from Jeremy Jahns! Come at me!

• That’s all I got!