Blade's Review

Here we are at the end of all things. It’s been over a decade with over 20 films leading to this, Avengers: Endgame. Starring Robert Downey Jr., Chris Evans, Mark Ruffalo, Chris Hemsworth, Scarlett Johansson, Jeremy Renner, and many, many more Avengers: Endgame hopes to bring the Infinity Saga as it is known now to a satisfying climax.

It’s a lofty goal but if anyone has a chance to pull it off it is Anthony and Joe Russo. These two directors have now become Marvel stalwarts thanks to their impressive skills with Captain America: The Winter Soldier, Captain America: Civil War and the adored Avengers: Infinity War.

I can’t go any further without stating that there will be spoilers in this review as I have to discuss some aspects of the plot so be wary going ahead. I will also state though I won’t bring anything in that is from the third act of Avengers: Endgame.

Plot!

With the opening of Avengers: Endgame we see the team and the world is still reeling from the events of the “Snapture”. There is however a glimmer of hope with the arrival of Captain Marvel (Larson) and some new leads on Thanos (Brolin). So the gang assemble (as you do for one of these big films) and head out ready to finally make Thanos pay and possibly save the victims of his action.

Unfortunately, revelations are revealed and everyone is broken even more so than the previous battle. Fast forward 5 years and the world and the universe are vastly different. Our remaining heroes are scattered to the four corners of the universe and people are trying to move on. That is until Ant-Man (Rudd) shows up.
Here we are at the end of all things. It’s been over a decade with over 20 films leading to this, Avengers: Endgame. Starring Robert Downey Jr., Chris Evans, Mark Ruffalo, Chris Hemsworth, Scarlett Johansson, Jeremy Renner, and many, many more Avengers: Endgame hopes to bring the Infinity Saga as it is known now to a satisfying climax.
It’s a lofty goal but if anyone has a chance to pull it off it is Anthony and Joe Russo. These two directors have now become Marvel stalwarts thanks to their impressive skills with Captain America: The Winter Soldier, Captain America: Civil War and the adored Avengers: Infinity War.
I can’t go any further without stating that there will be spoilers in this review as I have to discuss some aspects of the plot so be wary going ahead. I will also state though I won’t bring anything in that is from the third act of Avengers: Endgame.

What did you do!?
Avengers: Endgame is a love letter to fans of both the Marvel comics and the MCU. This means it has all the power of the 21 films behind it. Unfortunately, it also has several of the trappings that have been in each of those films that are amplified by such a major event film.
For example, this film is one part a sequel to Avengers: Infinity War but it is also a continuation of Thor’s narrative from Thor: Ragnarok. These two elements do not mix as the choices that the Russo brothers make in regard to Thor are laughable and easily could have been handled better. I can see where they are going with how Thor is handling himself after the events of both Ragnarok and Infinity War but they fumble here and Thor is not the only one who suffers.
Hulk and Captain Marvel are also mishandled in my opinion. Captain Marvel is a plot device not a character in this film. Reports came out recently that Brie Larson filmed this before her solo outing and it shows in how the Russo brothers utilise her. With regard to the Hulk and Bruce, their whole character narrative is fanservice with no real depth to it. It’s a shame because I was looking forward to where Hulk and Bruce were going.
On the positive side Captain America (Evans), Iron Man (RDJ) and Black Widow (Johansson) are handled far better. With Cap and Tony, it’s again further fan service but with Widow, there is a journey and it’s impressive. It’s a combination of great acting on Johansson’s part and interesting narrative choices. In the end though there are two MVP’s in Avengers: Endgame and it’s Jeremy Renner and Paul Rudd. Their respective character arcs are emotionally charged and I loved it. They have quiet scenes that bookend the big brawls and it’s greatly appreciated.
On the topic of the big brawls there is a fair sense of scope and grandeur. The cinematography is decent and there are several moments of awe-inspiring shots that look ripped straight from the comics. They are splash pages in every meaning of the word.
Avengers Assemble!
There are many moments that fans will cheer over. Moments that will have them in tears clutching their significant other and that is wonderful. I myself cried at multiple points in the film but I am a sucker for these tropes.
I can say hand on my heart I will cry at the end of Supernatural when it comes to its conclusion at the end of season 15 but I know that it’s not all been award winning. This is the same fact for Avengers: Endgame.
There are payoffs to many narrative elements for almost every character across the MCU and some of them are great but there are also payoffs that are just jokes and they clash with the tone of what is supposedly an end of an era.
There’s even a section in this 3-hour “epic” that comes across like a victory lap of sorts. Where the cast seems to be like – Hey remember how great this was? It’s unfortunate and it felt like something out of a long-running television series.

Whatever it takes
Avengers: Endgame is a tough film to dissect. In one hand I adored the emotional beats, and several of the character arcs were engaging. However, there are so many issues. The clashing of tones, the misrepresentation of characters from this film as opposed to the last film we saw them in.

There is no doubt in my mind that Avengers: Endgame is going to make a ton of money that fans will eat it up but it is by no means a perfect film.






                                🎖️3.75 🏆







Note : Gambar Signatures nya lagi ga Ada di hp, so pake itu dulu 😁

J.K. Rowling is back. As in really back. If 2016’s Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Themexpanded the universe she first introduced with the Harry Potter stories, then The Crimes of Grindelwald takes things not just wider but deeper. Given this is part two of a mooted five-movie series, Rowling - who again scripts - isn’t even halfway done yet.

It begins in 1927, at the American Ministry of Magic, where the dark wizard Gellert Grindelwald (Johnny Depp) had been held for six months since his capture at the end of the original Beasts. He’s had his tongue removed in order to curtail his powers of persuasion, but that doesn’t stop him mounting a dramatic escape. Cut to London, three months later: Newt Scamander (Eddie Redmayne) arrives at the Ministry where his brother Theseus (Callum Turner) works, along with Leta Lestrange (Zoë Kravitz), Theseus’ fiancée.

Sibling rivalry notwithstanding, Newt is there hoping to overturn the international travel ban imposed on him after his role in the events surrounding Grindelwald’s arrest. If talk of such bans brings to mind Donald Trump’s actions at the start of his presidency, it’s not the only time Rowling evokes real-world events. Grindelwald, it transpires, is gathering followers to create a new world order ruling over all non-magical beings.

Key to this is the disturbed Credence Barebone (Ezra Miller), now ensconced in a freak show in Paris as he seeks to find his real lineage. “Desperate for family, he’s desperate for love,” coos Grindelwald, all too willing to exploit Credence’s power for his own ends. But Grindelwald is not the only one looking for him. Unbeknownst to the Ministry, Newt is asked to track down Credence by Hogwarts’ very own Professor Albus Dumbledore (Jude Law).

Joining Newt is his no-maj friend Jacob (Dan Fogel), who arrives in London with Queenie (Alison Sudol). Jacob’s memories of their earlier encounters have been restored (or “un-obliviated”) but he’s now under an enchantment. Soon enough, they’re all off to France, with Queenie’s sister Tina (Katherine Waterson) also in pursuit of Credence, for an adventure that comes vividly to life in the hands of director David Yates, who relishes bringing ’20s Paris to the screen.

Notching up his sixth Rowling-inspired film, Yates truly understands what makes the Wizarding World work. Each frame is filled to the brim with detail, whether it’s goblins cleaning windows on floating lifts or a contraption hoovering round the Ministry of Magic (well, someone has to do it). Nor are the ‘beasts’ forgotten, from baby Nifflers cheekily popping champagne corks to the beautiful seaweed-skinned Kelpies, some Japanese water demons, and one lion-like creature that can travel 1,000 miles in a day.

And, of course, Potter fans will get a huge kick out of the scenes that return us to Hogwarts, long before Harry et al got to roam its corridors. Heralded by a blast of John Williams’ original score, shots of the Great Hall and classrooms produce a shiver. And it’s beguiling to see Law’s twinkly eyed Dumbledore giving a lesson. Needless to say, this is no nostalgia trip; Rowling has good reason for going back to school – especially when she cues up flashbacks to the time when the picked-upon Leta and Newt were classmates.

Yet the film really hits its considerable peak in its revelation-heavy final third, with a showdown at Père Lachaise. In a film about brothers and sisters, surrogate or otherwise, the Beasts family tree gets all the more thorny, as hitherto unknown - and complex - relationships are unveiled. Meanwhile, the leather-clad Grindelwald’s rally - cut to images of world war and even a mushroom cloud - weaves threads to our own Muggle world. It’s not hard to link this bleached-blond madman’s rise to that of the far right. While the original cast led by Redmayne pick up easily where they left off, the newcomers fit in seamlessly. Law is spot-on with Dumbledore, making a character so indelibly played by Richard Harris and Michael Gambon his own. As for Depp, he plays Grindelwald with sinister menace, but never overcooks it. Credit Yates, too, for ensuring darkness is seasoned with light. “I think this might be the best moment of my life,” says Newt, as his brother gets zapped. Even in the bleakest of times, there’s reason to smile.

I was going to give this a silly review, but due to a lack of genuine reviews on letterboxd, I'll give this the serious review that it deserves. TLDR: Don't let subject matter of it being about a boyband turn you away; 'Burn the Stage' was a brilliantly executed, edited, and directed documentary and I think certain non-fans would enjoy watching it for it's music history/pop cultural relevancy.

Long version: Most of BTS's documentaries/series thus far have always been lighthearted and humorous, meant to give viewers laughs and cheap entertainment with challenge games, silly animations, and general antics from the members. Most of these docuseries are quite shallow in that BTS and their producers only ever show us a very... staged portrayal of the members and their lives. Things like clips of the members without makeup or bedroom tour vlogs are shown to create a sort of false sense of intimacy, but these series and videos are in actuality quite shallow and leave much to be desired.

'Burn the Stage' completely subverts this precedent and shows us a much more contemplative and introspective portrayal of the members that finally treats them seriously as subjects and profession and less so as objects for entertainment or products to be consumed.

(Spoilers? if you can call it that? below)
Some scenes were almost uncomfortably invasive into the personal matters and crises of the members, such as when Jimin needed to be talked down from a panic attack after his voice cracked during a live performance; or when Taehyung and Seokjin got into a fight with each other minutes before a concert and Taehyung was visibly shaken and crying. The scene where Taehyung and Seokjin try to talk out their fight after the show felt like I was stepping in on a something very private and intimate that you really shouldn't be a part of, kind of like being in the room when your parents are fighting.
I... do have to admit that there's something deliciously, sickeningly voyeuristic about witnessing such personal, sensitive moments; especially in contrast to all the artificial and staged docuseries we've gotten from them in the past. There was definitely a big 'fly on the wall' feeling with a lot of the scenes, and I really liked that a lot.

I think the two things that hit me the most about 'Burn the Stage' are 1) the physical strain/pain the members go through for the sake of their careers 2) the psychological impact of being so famous at such young ages. For point 1, I don't have much to say other than it was gut-wrenching to see things like Jungkook blacking out from exhaustion mid-concert, or Jimin having to sit in a chair for the Macau concert due to muscle pain/injury, or Yoongi hiding his injuries from a car accident to avoid any potential consequences from his company (such as getting fired for being unable to dance). These moments were definitely the most distressing for me personally to watch as a fan, but I'm glad we got to see them.

For point 2, Namjoon's interview where he says (I'm paraphrasing) that he feels like he missed out and will forever miss out on living a life as Kim Namjoon and that he feels like he's permanently stuck with this identity as RM, the idol rapper, and he wishes he could have more a normal life was one of the most personally stirring scenes in the documentary. I don't think he meant to make viewers feel bad per se, especially when he emphasizes how grateful he is that he's able to make a living off of his greatest passion, but when paired together with Jungkook's interview about how his own self-perception and identity have been completely shaped by idol life since he was 13, it definitely makes me question the ethics of supporting a band/industry that denies these seven young men (and thousands of other idols) of a normal life from where they can't travel or have romantic/sexual relationships or go to the grocery store without being questioned, harassed, and mobbed.

Specifically with the case of Jungkook, (he's only about 2 or 3 weeks older than I am, so we're essentially the same age and I do feel somewhat of a kinship with him because of that) knowing that when I was 15, my biggest stress was literally just acne. Maybe it was my mile time for PE class? While I was doing that, Jungkook was debuting officially with the rest of BTS; performing on TV, doing interviews, touring, photoshoots, video shoots, being treated as a product. Realizing that just made me feel like a giant question mark emotionally. Since watching 'Burn the Stage', I can't really stop thinking about what kind of psychological damage has been done to this poor guy by grooming him and molding him into a object for visual consumption since he was 12 or 13.

Anyway! 'Burn the Stage' was an absolute treat. I'd love to see BTS create more serious documentaries and programs like this, but if they don't, I'm very grateful that we got this. I think beyond BTS's fanbase, I think fans of documentaries would get great enjoyment out of watching this; it was masterfully produced. With their slew of records such as being the most discussed celebrity on all of social media in 2017, to their Billboard Music Award wins, to their multiple #1 albums in 2018, BTS are unquestionably some of the world's biggest and most impactful celebrities/musicians of the 2010s. For that, 'Burn the Stage' is also well suited for fans of music history and pop culture history.

I can't yet say if BTS is here to stay or if things like their looming mandatory conscription for the South Korean military and/or their 2020 contract renewal discussions are going to serve as their undoing. (Edit 10/18/2018 LMAO DISREGARD THIS ENTIRE PARAGRAPH THEIR CONTRACTS GOT RENEWED UNTIL 2025 HELL YEAH) But for now, BTS is contemporary and relevant and blazingly powerful in music and media right now, and this documentary captures this moment in time brilliantly. It is... well worth watching.

While collecting junk one day, best friends Sonny and Sam meet Slappy, a mischievous talking dummy from an unpublished “Goosebumps” book by R.L. Stine. Hoping to start his own family, Slappy kidnaps Sonny’s mother and brings all of his ghoulish friends back to life — just in time for Halloween. As the sleepy town becomes overrun with monsters, witches and other mysterious creatures, Sonny joins forces with his sister, Sam and a kindly neighbor to save Sonny’s mom and foil Slappy’s plan. Kids First! Film Critic Zoe C. comments, “The movie is funny and spooky in equal amounts. There is mystery and discovery all combined in the storytelling.” See her full review below.
Goosebumps 2: Haunted Halloween is spooky, fun and creative! It is very engaging and entertaining throughout the whole film.

The story is about a young boy, Sonny (Jeremy Ray Taylor) and his best friend, Sam (Caleel Harris) who finds a book. When they open it, a doll called Slappy comes out! The boys lose the book, but keep Slappy. The friends are very surprised and a bit scared when they discover that the doll can talk. He seems nice at the beginning. He wants to have a family. But later, the boy, his sister Sarah (Madison Iseman) and his best friend realize he is strange and don’t want him to be part of their family anymore. Slappy has his own personal agenda and decides to create his own family.

He makes Halloween come to life as he invades the whole town with monsters and all the creatures as allies. This is a very scary Halloween for the town of Wardenclyffe, where the story takes place, as all creatures make real chaos. Sonny, Sam and Sarah team up with neighbor Mr. Chu (Ken Jeong) to find the book that Slappy from to figure out how to stop him. They discover that the book can suck up monsters and they are determined to save the city.

The story is based on R.L Stine’s books. This is where Jack Black comes in as he reprises his role from the 2015 film, playing the writer who came to help. His performance as the author is excellent. I love his voice work giving life to Slappy the Dummy.

The movie is funny and spooky in equal amounts. There is mystery and discovery all combined in the storytelling. There’s kind of a homage to horror films, as we see some classic monsters. My favorite scenes are the ones with the Halloween decorations coming to life in the store and the fight with the gummy bears that become real and attack Sonny and Sam.

The effects are very well done. This story focuses on the 3 main characters and the actors did a good job carrying the film. There’s a tribute to the books and literature. There’s a beautiful metaphor with the blank pages in the book which is powerful. It is so interesting and kind of reminded me that reality is scarier than fantasy and there will be more stories to be written. The message of this film is, “when we face our own fears we learn how not to be scared.”

After years of waiting for a Halloween sequel that felt like it did justice to John Carpenter’s original masterpiece of slasher horror, David Gordon Green has brought us a vision of terror that gives fans what they’ve been craving.

The remarkable true story of the Moon landing proves to be another giant leap for director Damien Chazelle’s career, whose star has been on a meteoritic rise for the past few years. The Oscar winning director behind La La Land and Whiplash takes a keen eye and a novel approach to portraying this expansive story, deciding to focus on the man rather than the mission. The end result is a heartfelt and utterly engrossing account that leaves a captivating mark on you.

That’s not to say that First Man isn’t about the nuts and bolts of the Space Race and the plight of the USA to beat Russia to the Moon.It’s all there, but the narrative chooses to explore in greater depth the life of Neil Armstrong – the first man to walk on the Moon – and the struggles and challenges he and his family had to overcome to make history.

Neil Armstrong (Ryan Gosling) is drafted into a high priority NASA mission to reach the surface of the Moon. With the Russians making leaps and bounds in their space program, the race is on to get there with the best minds in their respective fields working overtime to make this dream a reality.Relocating with his wife Janet (Claire Foy) and his kids, Neil must handle the pressures of the job at hand, with setbacks, complications and tragedy poised at every juncture.

What initially grabs you is First Man’s unwavering determination in telling the human interest story first and foremost. There are a lot of milestones and big moments to cram into this story but First Man always has Neil Armstrong’s journey at its core, and that’s why the film works so effortlessly. Ryan Gosling hands in a fantastic performance as a determined man who is challenged daily and who can be fearless in every aspect of his day job, but who struggles to convey the gravitas of the situation to his young children.

A film like this, and especially one that is set in this era (1961-1969), could have taken a lazy approach to the character of Janet Armstrong, just painting her into the background as dressing. Josh Singer’s screenplay, adapted from the book by James R. Hansen, thankfully never lets this happen. Her character is real and integral to this story. Claire Foy is a revelation here and gives the film a real balance and strength with her powerful portrayal. Her exchanges with Neil are a cornerstone to the film’s success.

The supporting talent are all superb too with a who’s who of great character actors all lending their considerable talents to this gem of a film. Jason Clarke, Kyle Chandler, Olivia Hamilton, Patrick Fugit, Ciaran Hinds, Ethan Embry, Shea Whigham, Corey Stoll (as Buzz Aldrin), Lukas Haas and Pablo Schreiber all hand in note-worthy performances that collectively leave a mark on the story. First Man is exceptionally efficient in its storytelling, utilising these actors well in a 2hr 21min movie that never lags or feels superfluous at any point.

The film is blessed with a stellar cast and wonderful creatives behind the scenes, but it also has to succeed in a visual sense. Having the lunar surface scenes filmed in IMAX gives First Man a ghostly beauty that really places you on the Moon. It’s immersive in conjuring its atmosphere and expansive in its scope and grandeur to make this sequence truly breathtaking. Throughout the film you get a very real sense of the physicality of the things that these astronauts have to endure. The movie opens with a staggeringly effective fighter-jet scene which conveys speed in a way that I’ve never seen realised on film before. There are more than a few scenes that will cause a bit of motion sickness too – it’s not pleasant, but vitally important in telling this story.

US Republican’s recently took to bashing First Man, calling the film unpatriotic. It’s anything but that, and their narrow-minded opinions (from people who hadn’t even seen the film in the first place) has certainly taken focus away from what an incredible piece of filmmaking First Man actually is. Their complaints stem from (what they see as) a political statement by Chazelle by not featuring a direct scene about the planting of the US flag on the moon.But the American flag is front and centre of this entire film, and it was an artistic choice to focus on the story of the man behind the moment.

First Man is breathtaking cinema told by a true auteur that is fast becoming the voice of a new generation. Chazelle’s choices behind the lens are staggeringly beautiful and chronicle one of the most incredible stories of human endeavour in a way that leaves a lasting impression on the soul. With Ryan Gosling once again leading the line exceptionally well, First Man lands as one of the finest movies of the year, and one that deserves a huge audience – if just to remind modern society that working together, rather than causing conflict and division amongst ourselves, is the key to our existence and growth as a species.

Ruben Fleischer’s Venom has many questions to answer. Can it do justice to one of Marvel’s most iconic antiheroes, an alien symbiote that can run, leap and swing like Spider-Man but likes to bite off people’s heads? Can it survive on its own merits and successfully launch its own franchise while Spidey is otherwise engaged in the MCU? Will it compromise 1993 source series Lethal Protector as the PG-13 certificate – 15 in the UK – suggests (Logan and Deadpool dared to go hard-R)? And the two biggies: might it, please God, erase memories of Tobey Maguire dancing in a jazz club, and can Tom Hardy muster up a villainous voice that is in some way intelligible.

The answers are sort of, just about, sadly yes, hmmm, and you betcha – with the help of an industrial sub-woofer. The plot is your standard origin story, as investigative journalist Eddie Brock (Hardy) aims to take down billionaire Carlton Drake (Riz Ahmed), whose Life Foundation has launched a space programme to find cures for the Earthly ills of overpopulation and climate change. As the film opens, we see a homeward-bound shuttle carrying four alien organisms that could possess the key to staving off humankind’s inevitable extinction. Only the ship crashes in East Malaysia and one of the ETs hotfoots it from the wreckage, working through various human hosts while the other three specimens are duly delivered to Drake at his foundation in San Francisco, ready for experimentation to begin.

It’s no spoiler to say that Brock, whose snooping into Drake’s affairs loses him his job and his fiancée (Michelle Williams), finds himself hosting a symbiote. “I am Venom,” it growls after revealing itself in its full seven-foot, toothy, Gene Simmons-tongued glory. Brock spends the rest of the movie engaged in bicker-banter with the voice in his head and fighting off Drake’s henchmen courtesy of all manner of CGI gymnastics.

Tonally, Venom leaps and stretches like the symbiote itself, hopping from ‘edgy’ character piece (shots of a hunch-shouldered Brock walking the San Francisco streets are Taxi Driver minus the porno theatres) to multiplex-friendly body horror, to riotous buddy-com. Hardy might have been joking (or not) when he said the best 40 minutes of Venom are on the cutting-room floor, but it certainly feels rushed and gutted. The action is solid at best, the computer effects very, well, computer-y, and Williams is granted a role so thankless it makes one of the world’s best actresses seem ordinary.

What saves Venom is Venom. And Brock. Meaning Hardy, who here exhibits a knack for physical comedy that anyone unfortunate enough to see McG’s This Means War could hardly credit. Throwing himself, literally, into the action, he also unleashes a series of yip, yowls and yelps that put Tom Cruise’s Mummy memes to shame. It’s a jerky, whiplash-inducing ride to get there, but come the final act, Venom and Brock have found the perfect symbiosis, and the movie’s found its tone.

First appeared in the movie The Conjuring 2, and had a cameo at Annabelle: Creation, Valak, or the devil in the form of a mysterious nun this time got special attention through The Nun.

Action and looks creepy. Director Corin Hardy (who once made The Hallow) gave many surprises through unexpected scenes and surprising music throughout the film.

The continuous shock effect then makes the audience will be at one point to not stand not laughing because of it. Laughing at yourself and how nervous and stupid the characters in the movie are who like to walk alone in the midnight grave.
Incidents in the old church

The Nun was opened with a scene in a castle building that was transformed into an old, scary church in Romania, in 1952. Two nuns carrying only a teplok lamp as lighting was in infinite fear. They stopped at the door that said 'God Ends Here' or 'God stopped here'.

One of them then suddenly 'disappeared' behind the dark because of a mysterious figure. Another nun ran frightened to save herself and then died 'hanging herself'.

This incident became a case which was later investigated by Father Burke (Demian Bichir), and Sister Irene (Taissa Farmiga) sent by the Vatican church of Rome. Both met with Frenchie / Maurice (Jonas Bloquet) who witnessed the discovery of the corpse of the dead nun hanging himself.
For the sake of the investigation effort, the three were then 'forced' to enter the scary and feared old church to find out what was the cause of the incident. Investigations that make them trapped in various strange and creepy events.

Irene, like Lorraine's character at The Conjuring, has the ability to see 'the invisible with the naked eye'. The vision he had was related to the figure of Valak (Bonnie Aarons), the devil was in the form of a nun, which was dangerous and took many victims. In his vision he also met other nuns, Sister Victoria (Charlotte Hope) and Sister Oana (Ingrid Mute).

In the last half of the film, the three main characters must survive among strange events, from being buried alive, whipped, thrown into the air, and or hit hard objects.

The Nun film gave a relentless shock effect.