DEADPOOL 2

DEADPOOL 2: B+

On par with the original DEADPOOL with the laughs, although not as humorous and more clever. Once again Ryan Reynolds is perfect in a role that calls for a self aware character, that battles inwardly between being sensitive and insensitive.

The story was simplistic, while at the same time intriguing. It borrowed rather heavily from X-MEN: THE LAST STAND, only using collars to render mutants powerless rather than injections. Intolerant humans, cruel and abusive Vs a mixture of mutants, some vindictive, some liberated. A story that explored nature vs nurture, taking a strong stance with the latter. The Tongue in cheek film even references how it was also similar to TERMINATOR.

Structuring the story to where you never had a chance to react to touching or depressing moments, because they were immediately followed with a joke was a rather clever technique. Only at the end of the film was enough time allowed for you to absorb what happened on screen and for you to react to it. Only you felt afraid to feel, as you waited with anticipation for the next laugh.

Lastly Josh Brolin was an excellent addition to the film. The deep complex character he played was rather enjoyable.

Good film. Excellent sequel.

LINCOLN

LINCOLN: B

The first thing I do when watching a film like this, and what I do throughout the film's entirety is question its historical accuracy. I'm not schooled enough on the subject to make many comments on it, although I know from various history courses in both high school and college that Lincoln's push for the 13th amendment as well as his announcement of the Emancipation Proclamation in the first place was a strategy of tactic, much more than it was one of integrity.

Yet it makes for a better film to romanticize through a moral struggle both inwardly and outwardly, than it does to strictly go by the facts of strategical politics.

A who's who cast of Daniel Day Lewis, Sally Field, Jared Harris, and Joseph Gordon Levitt accompanied by an assortment of underrated actors. Quite the juxtaposition to see in the same scene the actor many consider to be the best of our times Daniel Day Lewis, to who I consider to be one of the most underrated of our times, Bruce McGill.

Even Raynor Schiene makes a brief appearance.

The script was written beautifully, although it was much more appealing to the ear than it was to the eye. This would have made a good radio piece that I could have easily listened to on a drive from Des Moines to Iowa City.

THE WOMAN WHO LOVED ELVIS

THE WOMAN WHO LOVED ELVIS: B

A made for television film that was much better than it looks. On the surface it appears to be about a loony woman infatuated with Elvis Presley, when in fact it is a much deeper film than that. It's more so about a woman who has had to deal with an assortment of heartbreaking and disappointing moments in her life, and the one solace she finds in life is to escape into the music of Elvis.

Roseanne as she usually is, does a great job in the film. She nails the dramatic scenes with precision. Danielle Harris shows tremendous growth since her HALLOWEEN days and even Tom Arnold has a few moments on screen that are rather good considering his scale.

I've never seen Sally Kirkland play such a role before, and it was fun to see her in something other than what she usually plays.

Cynthia Gibb did a pretty good job here too.

On a personal level, there is something magical about watching a film shot a half hour from where I grew up. To see roads that I've driven on hundreds of times. To see neighborhoods that I've delivered pizza in. To see Danielle Harris running on a track that I've ran on.

I have a novel I wrote two years ago, "THE 0 and ALL HARRIS BULLDOGS" that I'm wanting to turn into a screenplay one of these days. I've always thought that Ottumwa would make a perfect spot to shoot the film. After seeing this film, I feel even more so that way.

Last thing I'll say is that I feel Bill Bixby was really underrated as a director. One of my favorite actors ever, a man that I would have liked to have known. Read that cast and crew stayed at the Hotel Ottumwa while filming. Having stayed at the hotel Ottumwa before, I can't help but wonder if maybe, just maybe I might have stayed in the same room as Bixby or Harris or Kirkland. It's fun to imagine.

THE EYE

THE EYE: B

A decent flick that is best categorized as a horrordrama. While the film had a compelling, suspenseful story, it took nearly an hour of unneeded setup before the action began. Film's like this often work best intertwining between mystery and reveal. A question is asked, and then answered. The formula repeats itself to keep its audience wrapped up in the mystery, while allowing them along with the protagonist solving clue by clue.

This film instead decided to ask all of the questions first, one by one, in a slow antagonizing hour before finally getting around to answering them in the last 20 minutes of the film.

It's commendable to see a film try a new approach to the art of storytelling, and if you're able to sit through the full hour of redundancy, the ending is rather satisfying.

Movie gives a bit of a false impression that what you are watching is a true horror. Hints of the "shadows" "phantoms" being the antagonists pop up frequently throughout the middle of the film, only to be revealed to not only be overshadowed, but completely forgotten by the film's ending. We never do find out what they really are, nor is it made a point to once the film reaches its conclusion.

In fact by the film's ending, the horror element has all be disappeared and suddenly her eyes feel more like a superpower than they do a curse. As if you started out watching an episode of ALFRED HITCHCOCK PRESENT'S and it somehow turned into an episode of EARLY EDITION.

In many ways THE EYE is sort of like THE RING meets THE SIXTH SENSE. Only it lacks the scares of THE RING and it lacks the emotional investment of THE SIXTH SENSE.

The acting was ok, but nothing special. The score was unnoticeable.

The story spent way too much time on building the mystery without any leads and might have fared better with better development into explored plausibility.

I've seen better horrordramas and I've seen worse.

Also note an actor I haven't seen since BORN TO BE WILD is in this film. Considering it is 14 years later, he looks the same.

VERONICA

VERONICA: C

A horror film done in a classical style that suffers greatly by relying way to heavily on its "based on a true story" connection. Mediocre, outdated plot devices told in a straightforward unoriginal voice. It's not so much that any one thing hurt the film be it the writing, the acting or the directing. It is simply a matter of we've seen this 1,000 times before and furthermore done the exact same way 1,000 times before. There was nothing new or noteworthy that made this film standout.

If anything it seemed to lack in comparison to similar films even twenty years its elder. While some visuals helped to enhance the tone of the film, others took away from it. If left confused trying to figure out what Veronica was looking at through her window, whether she saw the present or future events, then one is distracted from the encompassing essence of fear the film builds. It was rather counter intuitive to the film's goal of creating scares

No one is going to walk away from this film feeling like they've seen a modern day THE EXORCIST. Yet no one is going to walk away from this film thinking that it's the worst horror film they've ever seen. There are far better and there are worse.

This movie is simply ok.

SPIDERS

SPIDERS: D

I have seen worse but this was pretty awful. Not sure what all to say about it. Lackluster script. Mundane acting. Special effects made me laugh out loud a few times.

A modern day ARACHNOPHOBIA, I think is what they were going for but it sucked way too much to compare it to that.

47 METERS DOWN

47 METERS DOWN = D+

Not that impressed with this weak written, weakly acted film with weak special effects. The script was too conventional, melodramatic and predictable for my taste. The only praise I can find to give the film is that the concept itself is quite unique. A great idea, simply a piss poor execution. The film builds on tension, and for what? A false ending that relapses into an anticlimactic one? Not impressed.   Visually may be worth a view. For any other reason, don't waste your time.