Scary Movie 3 (2003) review

(3/10)

     The Scary Movie series hasn't been good since the first installment, which this addition proves. Though it is an overall improvement over the previous sequel, Scary Movie 3 still falls to the same juvenile and ridiculously unfunny standards. The movie does succeed, though, in its laugh-out-loud moments and some decently clever jokes. It's like everything's the same, but more polished with more experienced writers.

PLOT: Since the events of the previous installment, Cindy (Anna Faris) has become a newscaster on a sexist TV network, and Brenda (Regina Hall) has become an elementary school teacher. As usual, strange things have begun happening in town, from alien crop circles popping up out of nowhere to a killer videotape circulating around town. Cindy finds her way into this tragedy when she watches it herself. Now she must battle the forthcoming evil with her new love interest, an aspiring rapper named George (Simon Rex). The plot is just as typical as the previous movies. The filmmakers take the main plotlines of several films, add a few jokes, then blend them together. In this one, Signs, The Ring, and 8 Mile are primarily being spoofed, causing their plotlines to intermingle together. Had the films been evenly parodied and the jokes been more well written, this would have been a great piece of satire. However, only a few moments are able to bust through the hilarity barrier.

ACTING: The performances in this movie were about the same as the first for the most part. Anna Faris and Regina Hall returned as their original characters and did about as well as usual- just as sarcastic and dim-witted. A couple of characters were introduced in this addition that were decently humorous. These characters were Mahalik (Anthony Anderson) and C.J. (Kevin Hart). The duo played well off each other and their running gag was quite humorous. Other decent performances come from the likes of Charlie Sheen, Queen Latifah, and the late George Carlin.

SCORE/SOUNDTRACK: The soundtrack was pretty much rubbish ultimately. A few obscure rap songs, a couple original rap battles, and a few sheds of composed score make up the entirety of the soundtrack. Nothing much can be said about this one other than the fact it's bland and mediocre.

OTHER CONTENT: Most of the movies in the series are pretty terrible, but this one was kind of in the middle. This one wasn't the worst but it definitely wasn't the best. This one had almost as many juvenile, unfunny, and awkward jokes as the last one, but this one also actually had a few laugh-out-loud moments. A couple of well-timed one-liners and cleverly parodied situations keep this addition from being entirely devoid of laughs. Most of the running gags failed, but the select few that didn't were definitely worth the screen time.

     Scary Movie 3 is a parody not entirely devoid of laughs, but very sparse. A few jokes with good timing, clever spoofing, and quotability made their way past the hilarity barrier, but for most jokes, everything was so juvenile and underdone that it came off as unfunny. This, however, is in no way the worst in the series or the best. This one simply didn't do anything truly significant or entertain well enough to be considered satisfying. It's not bad enough to kill you within seven days of viewing it, but it might want to make you be abducted by aliens to flee.

Vacation (2015) review

(4/10)

     Some things in life just can't be replicated, as proven by the lackluster, Vacation. The movie fails at all of the standards Chevy Chase and his original crew set back in the glory days. The jokes are more generic, crude, and unfunny with little cleverness to them compared to what could've been. However, the movie didn't completely miss its mark, with a few one-liners, cameos, and perfromances that prevented it from downright sinking.

PLOT: Rusty Griswold (Ed Helms) is all grown up with a wife named Debbie (Christina Applegate) and two children. One day, due to the apparent family's falling apart, Rusty decides to take his family on the age-old trip to Wally World, though no one really wants to go. Regardless, the family packs up in a foreign rent-a-car and begins the worst yet most eventful road trip they'll ever have. Along the way, the family comes runs into many obstacles including old sorority games, a "hot spring", and an intimidating trucker tracking them the whole way as well as many other comedic misfortunes. Through this road trip, Rusty helps to restore the family's happiness as well as his dying love life with his wife. The plot is the same as the fist National Lampoon's Vacation but executed with a less creative and less clever way. The twists and turns are just as crazy, but not nearly as funny or original in comparison with most raunchy comedies of the modern age.

ACTING: The performances at heart weren't too bad. The lousy writing is what made them seem sour. Ed Helms actually does a pretty great job as Rusty Griswold, giving it his all to channel his inner Clark Griswold. Helms tries but is let down by a bad screenplay. Same goes for most of the actors. However, one additional aspect that helped save the movie was the brief cameo appearances by Chevy Chase and Beverly D'Angelo reprising their classic roles as Clark and Ellen Griswold. They didn't completely save the movie, but they made it a little less low quality.

SCORE/SOUNDTRACK: There's nothing too special about the score or the soundtrack, which consists mostly of pop and rap songs with a few different covers of the National Lampoon's Vacation, "Holiday Road."

OTHER CONTENT: This movie was just a cheap attempt at re-capturing and re-vamping movie magic of the past. The Vacation movies were great in their time, instilling clever laughs into each themed vacation. This addition is the exception, as expressed even by the intentional fourth wall break near the beginning. This movie is supposed to be treated as its own entity, and that's what made it truly fail. Everyone goes in expecting a new Vacation adventure but instead gets another raunchy comedy with gross humor and more mature jokes. The movie does have its occasional one-liners that inspire a chuckle or two, but for the most part, the movie is a crude and generic mess trying to take the place of something more clever. It's not bringing honor to the franchise, just changes that no true fan wanted. It's all hit-or-miss at best.

     The new Vacation is anything but a break from the norm. The jokes are adapted to a more modern audience and the majority fail due to over-raunchiness and bad screenplay writing. The movie tries to retain its name by replacing old traditions with new events but fails to do anything but sink into the predictable field of modern comedy. So much acting and story potential is just squandered, as way more could have been done. I guess some people just don't get the point when told to leave something like this alone. Its time is now clearly passed.

Star Wars VII: The Force Awakens (2015) review

(Warning: MILD SPOILERS AHEAD)

(8/10)

    The Force Awakens is a film worth the hype built for it. The thrilling action keeps the audience on the edge of their seats, almost making up for the ambiguous backseat given to more specific detail of story. The film is in no way bad, but lacking, if not even separate from, the same spirit of the previous original Star Wars films. The Force Awakens feels more like its own film than an addition to the franchise, recapturing as much of the previous magic as it could through sly references and familiar faces.

PLOT: Without going into too much detail, the plot and story revolve around the First Order (a. k. a. The Empire) searching for BB-8, a droid with the map to the hiding place of legendary hero and Jedi Luke Skywalker. The Resistance (a. k. a. The Rebel Alliance) is the only group of opposition aside from the modern new hope, a scavenger named Ren (Daisy Ridley) and a rebel stormtrooper nicknamed Fin (John Boyega). However, with a new hope comes a new evil: a power-hungry Sith named Kylo Ren (Adam Driver), whose primarily in charge of the new First Order. This is as far as I'll go to prevent spoilers for the desperate fans. The plot's actual story was well intended, but not very well thought out. I was left with so many questions as so many aspects of background development were missing. The audience, like in most Hollywood action films, is dropped in a situation they know nothing about and are expected to pick out the main characters and guess their motives and backstories. The audience is delivered with little character development and explanation, even with the opening credits recapping past events. No one knows or seems to want to explain why things have become the way they are. However, if one neglects the finer details of the story-line and focuses more on the plot's execution (a. k. a. the action and comedy), one will have a more thrilling time indeed. The plot's execution is stellar, with nail-biting action keeping the audience awake and ready for anything and clever references to the previous films keeping the nostalgic viewers laughing. Though lacking in a developing story, the plot finds its saving grace in its enthralling action and well-spread references.

ACTING: The performances in this film are pretty stellar. One aspect where there is little room to be picky in is the casting and performances. The newer lead roles of Daisy Ridley as the intelligent scavenger, Rey, John Boyega as rebel stormtrooper, Fin, and Adam Driver as the evil Sith, Kylo Ren are excellent. Each puts a piece of his or her own self into the role, which is clearly evident by the real, quirky, natural, and serious dispositions of the film's characters. Other shining members of the new cast were Andy Serkis as First Order Supreme Leader Snoke, Oscar Isaac as rebel pilot, Po Dameron, and Domhnall Gleeson as the First Order's chief-in-command, General Hux. Each of these actors portrayed their new roles just as excellently as the main characters. Another positive thing about the cast is the cameos of some of the classic cast, including (SPOILER WARNING) Harrison Ford as Han Solo, Carrie Fisher as Leia Organa, Peter Mayhew as Chewbacca, Anthony Daniels as C-3PO, and a very brief Mark Hamill as Luke Skywalker. The old cast feels like a sight for sore eyes, knitting themselves snug into the story just as if they never left, especially Ford and Fisher, who seem just as playful and loving as in the original trilogy.

SCORE: The score is just as memorable and classic as in the original films, done by none other that the great composer, John Williams. Williams, being a veteran of the Star Wars franchise, weaves a score so perfectly preserved and high-energy that even the most skeptic fans tilt their ear to the sound and smile.

EFFECTS: The special effects are definitely well done. One thing I appreciate about this film in relation to other action and sci-fi films of its time is not strictly using computer graphics for all its visual effects. Aside from the explosions, space fights, and wild creatures, most effects are done with make-up and costume design. The more intelligent aliens look real and just as tangible as they did in the days of the original trilogy. In attempting to preserve the classic film feeling, the directors did right with the special effects.

OTHER CONTENT: The Force Awakens is all a casual film-goer could ask for: nonstop action, clever references, and enough tragedy in the story to drive it. However, this film isn't a hundred percent what the true Star Wars fans could ask for. We have plenty of action, wit, and hype, but it falls not only in the story as I mentioned earlier, but in its structure and intent. The Force Awakens is so caught up in the Hollywood hype that it follows its typical formula: a thrill ride of action with little droplets of story leaking through so the watcher actually comprehends what's going on. The film tries so hard to reconnect with the past movie magic of the original trilogy that it almost falls flat in trying. In fact, the film feels like its own separate entity. In trying to reconnect with sentimentalists of the franchise's magic, the film's makers and writers distance the film so that it feels more different than even the prequels. There are many familiar faces and clever references in the film, but it almost feels self-satirizing, as if this weren't another chapter to the famous franchise but its own spin-off. Even in the film's imagery, showing the classic craft and characters old and dust-covered just symbolizes how this is an entirely new entity. Now don't judge me wrong, the film is nowhere near bad. To increase the emphasis on this point, I'm going to repeat again THE FILM IS NOWHERE NEAR BAD. The driving action, new additions, and clever references are still a breath of fresh air into a franchise once dead. The film isn't all the true Star Wars fan could want, but its just enough for us to be satisfied in our complex fandom. Who really knows though? This could just be the A New Hope to another Empire Strikes Back, which would clarify all we need to know in grave detail.

     Star Wars VII: The Force Awakens is definitely worth the hype, but nothing too much more than that. If one goes for nail-biting action, clever references to the old films, and a simply nostalgic breath of life into the series, one would be greatly satisfied. However, for the picky Star Wars fan, this seems like a tad over subpar to the movie magic in the original trilogy. The character development and inner story is greatly lacking, leaving several questions of why and how and losing them in the monotonous formula for a blockbuster Hollywood film. The new Star Wars is not bad at all. In fact, it's super stellar. The force is with this one, though it is but a padawan, having much to learn.

A Nightmare On Elm Street 5: The Dream Child (1989) review

(3/10)

   This is perhaps the strangest and weirdest addition to the famous horror franchise. A Nightmare On Elm Street 5: The Dream Child is a mix of hit-and-miss performances, terrible effects, and a weird, overly-cheesy tone. It was as if the filmmakers decided to make a fan film rather than an actual installment.

PLOT: Alice (Lisa Wilcox) has been living her life peacefully with a loving boyfriend, Dan (Danny Hassel), and also has a baby on the way. Until recently, notorious nightmare-killer, Freddy Krueger (Robert Englund) had been destroyed and cut off from the real world. However, Krueger eventually finds a new way, using her baby's dreams to access the real world and kill more teenagers. Even worse, Krueger is "feeding" these souls to Alice's baby in the womb, brainwashing him to be Krueger's apprentice. Krueger has a more obvious weak spot this time, as he's afraid of his mother, Sister Amanda Krueger (Beatrice Boepple), who appears in the nightmares as well. Sister Krueger wants to capture her son back and keep him from killing anyone else. Somehow, Alice has to get Krueger away from her kid and quite possibly in the hands of Sister Krueger. The plot in itself is preposterous and executed in an illegible, illogical (at least in terms of the series) way. I'm starting to think the series should have ended with the previous installment. Because of this execution, nothing can even be taken seriously, for one would just laugh and queston how any of this makes any sense at all.

ACTING: The performances in this strange installment were mainly hit-and-miss, with Englund and Wilcox being the lead performances. They both did decent job, but in truth, all performances were rather messed up due to an awkward, unfunny script. Most people laughed at Krueger's cheesy kill jokes in the previous movies; however, the script is so bad in this addition that Krueger's lines couldn't even inspire a chuckle. A couple of other performances were decent, including Nick Mele as Dennis Johnson and Danny Hassel as Dan. They weren't exceptional, but definitely tolerable.

SCORE: The score in this one is way over-dramatic and unnecessary. It makes the movie feel like it's taking itself way too serious.

EFFECTS: The special effects in this movie, for the most part, were complete garbage. Everything looked goofy, fake, and just plain embarrassing for any horror movie in general to have. The only effects that were fairly decent would be the few claymation and digital effects. They were cool, but buried beneath the stinking heap of effects preceded by them. If you laugh at anything in this movie, laugh at how bad the effects are.

OTHER CONTENT: Nightmare On Elm Street 5: The Dream Child is just a strange, unnecessary installment to a franchise that would have been better left alone. Everything feels weird, preposterous, and exhausted, as no variety is added to the franchise. If Krueger even fails to satisfy, the movie shouldn't have existed. The only emotions one could leave this movie with are embarrassment and confusion, for that's what this attempt at a horror movie is: a confusing embarrassment.

   A Nightmare On Elm Street 5: The Dream Child should not exist. There was no reason to make the movie except the possibility of making money off of trash. Terrible script, goofy special effects, and a preposterous plot pull this movie down to the bottom of the barrel. I suggest if anyone's a Freddy fan, skip this installment. None of it is even necessary.

A Nightmare On Elm Street 4: The Dream Master (1988) review

(5/10)

   In almost every major horror franchise or series there's a singular film within that certain series that is neither really bad nor really good. For the Freddy films, A Nightmare On Elm Street 4: The Dream Master fits this description. The movie's performances and overall quality falls, but not too far, as Freddy's nightmares are more fun-to-watch than they've been thus far. The scare factor isn't totally lost, but it is barely there as compared to the previous films that were actually good.

PLOT: Taking place several years after the last movie, Kristen (Tuesday Knight), now released from the mental facility, has been having reoccurring nightmares where she finds herself in Freddy's house, but with no signs of life. Kristen still pulls her old friends, Kincaid (Ken Sagoes) and Joey (Rodney Eastman), who are also out of the institution, into her dreams. They begin the get annoyed with this and try to reassure her that Freddy's dead for good. However, Freddy Krueger (Robert Englund) is resurrected and begins to appear in the Elm Street teens dreams. Freddy has grown more powerful than ever, killing the original Elm Street kids. However, before she passes, Kristen makes a friend from class named Alice (Lisa Wilcox), whom she pulls into her dream and gives her "dream powers" to after Freddy kills her. Now, when Alice dreams of Freddy, she pulls a classmate in by accident and gains the skill of whatever that person was good at when Freddy kills them. Alice alone is the only person who can stop Freddy from taking the lives of the innocent teens on Elm Street. The plot is very well thought out, but relatively flat. After the old Elm Street kids are killed (which is early on in the movie), not much changes. In fact, the plot is forgotten and rushed into a kind of way where there's a nightmare/kill every ten minutes. The movie is mainly made up of kills with a premise but nothing else. The plot is trashed for stylistic killing.

ACTING: The performances in the movie aren't the best but aren't the worst either. Englund, Sagoes, and Eastman come back to reprise their roles, which they do fine job of. In this addition, Freddy is seen more throughout the movie and more of his character is shown, displaying for the audience how clever and sadistic Krueger can be. Switching out Patrica Arquette for Tuesday Knight was an overall bad choice, for she didn't give off the same effect as Arquette in the role. However, she wasn't the worst person they could've chosen.The only newer performance that was worth any significance was Lisa Wilcox as Alice. She was definitely a good person to give the lead role to, as she didn't show it any dishonor or cruelty. None of the other performances are really good or worth remembering. The rest of the cast just played their roles and fairly flatly.

SCORE: The score in this addition is creepier and more prevalent, led by lesser-known Craig Safan, who went on to score more movies. This nightmare also, like its predecessor, had a few original songs. However, they weren't as good or memorable as those in Nightmare 3.

EFFECTS: The special effects are pretty well done overall in this Freddy movie. The effects aren't the very best, but they definitely are quite remarkable. A gruesome roach transformation, a soul-sucking kiss, and even a peek inside of Freddy's collection of souls make this movie feel like an underrated special effects marvel. Though reeking of B-movie madness, the effects do their job well.

OTHER CONTENT: A Nightmare On Elm Street 4: The Dream Master is neither a dramatic fall or triumphant rise from its predecessor. In fact, you could say this one was made strictly to entertain without completely sucking it up. This idea is evident in adding more scenes with Krueger and speeding up the kill frequency. The movie does feel like it was made in a hurry, but it doesn't deter it from being any less entertaining. The blood flows freely and the audience is left to laugh at or uncomfortably watch Freddy's many antics and stylish kills. This one was purely made for entertainment and giving the general audience what they want: more Fred and more violence.

   A Nightmare On Elm Street 4: The Dream Master is truly an underrated B-movie as compared to the series; it's actually entertaining but nothing to take seriously in any way, form, or fashion. The performances and plot (or lack thereof) failed, but the entertaining antics of Krueger and his stylized torture is enough to numb a horror fan's mind and entertain the masses.

A Nightmare On Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors (1987) review

(7/10)

   Indeed an improvement from its predecessor but not topping the first, A Nightmare On Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors revives the franchise from the death it was previously put in. Improved performances, cooler special effects, and an even balance between hilarity and terror earn this addition respect within the franchise.

PLOT: Once again on Elm Street, infamous nightmare serial killer, Freddy Krueger (Robert Englund), is terrorizing the teens that reside in the area. He tricks young, misunderstood teen, Kristen Parker (Patricia Arquette) into slitting her wrists resulting in her admission to the local youth  mental hospital. Within the institution, she meets several problematic teens with the same common problem as her: Freddy Krueger coming to kill in their dreams. The problem has hopes to be remedied, though, when older Nancy Thompson (Heather Langenkamp) becomes the secretary at the hospital and ways to help remedy the teens worries with their nightmares. However, Freddy seems to be getting more and more powerful as he takes the lives from the last of these Elm Street children. He gets harder to beat, and harder to try and conquer as the chief staff in the hospital disagree with Nancy and allied Dr. Neil Gordon's (Craig Wasson) methods in helping the tormented teenagers. The plot is very interesting and well executed. Putting Krueger in a mental hospital with a bunch of teenagers is similar to letting a hungry Rottweiler in a house full of cats. It's brutal and entertaining to watch, but expected. The many twists and turns of this plot, also, are very effective and very well done. The story is very much alive in this Nightmare.

ACTING: The performances in this Freddy film are very much improved than in its predecessor. Veteran actors Robert Englund and Heather Langenkamp reprise their roles as Freddy Krueger and Nancy Thompson with a certain chemistry. The two characters approach as age-old enemies though we feel these two have been each others age-old foil, for they both possess similar qualities but are very much the opposite. Langenkamp has even improved from the last one, establishing a character outside of the intense segments. The rest of the performances are excellently done, especially those of Patrica Arquette as Kristen, Ken Sagoes as haunted teen Kincaid, Jennifer Rubin as former junkie Taryn, Bradley Gregg as sleepwalking Phillip, Ira Heiden as paraplegic Will, Laurence Fishburne as orderly Max, and special appearances by John Saxon as Mr. Thompson and Zsa Zsa Gabor as herself. The cast here, though some are young, are very well played. Everyone plays their respective parts as though they had been that character their whole life.

SCORE: The score is very well done and as familiar as the first Freddy score. This soundtrack is different, however, with the addition of two songs ("Into the Fire", "Dream Warriors") by hair metal band Dokken. "Dream Warriors" lives to be a memorable track still, especially around this season.

EFFECTS: The special effects in this one are miles better than its predecessor. The effects are still used for a cheesy type of appeal, but this time they don't look as cheap or crudely made. From the Freddy-snake to Philip's puppet walk to each individual characters death scene (for those who do die), the effects are noticeably better but still used to get a kind of cheesy, B-movie effect.

OTHER CONTENT: The third Nightmare is miles better than its attempt at a predecessor. The story is thicker, along with the performances, and the balance of funny and scary is yet again in place. However, this one just feels funnier than the first, as the kills get increasingly more specific and ridiculous. However, this is not bad. We find ourselves laughing at Freddy, as if he were a clown performing for our entertainment. It is in this Nightmare movie where Freddy starts to feel like less of a serial killer and more of a stylish murderer. Freddy entertains and thrills, inspiring a few devious chuckles from the horror-loving audience it intends to please. Nightmare 3 is definitely a true horror at heart, however. Though Freddy comes out as funny, he still thrills us in this film, as we still think inside of how gruesome each way would be to die.

   Nightmare On Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors is definitely the revival of a long-lost franchise. Everything has improved tremendously, from the cast's performance to the special effects. The balance of scare and fun factor is successfully brought back, showing its fun face more often than it ever has. Freddy Krueger is an entertainer for his devoted audience, but a tremor for all of those who take his kills seriously. With a more developed story as well, this flick rises to an enjoyable Freddy feast.  

A Nightmare On Elm Street 2: Freddy's Revenge (1985) review

(3/10)

   Compared to its legendary predecessor, the first sequel to Wes Craven's memorable franchise is quite terrible. Everything is a major fall from the first film. Most of the performances are very hollow and inexperienced, the mechanics of the movie are very ridiculous, and instead of scares, we have unintentional laughs. In comparison to the first, A Nightmare On Elm Street 2: Freddy's Revenge falls into so-bad-it's-good territory, and is in no way a worthy addition to Craven's horror canon.

PLOT: After his family moves into the old house on Elm Street, young and awkward Jesse Walsh (Mark Patton) starts to have terrifying dreams of former serial killer, Freddy Krueger (Robert Englund). Even more terrifying than that is the fact that Freddy wants to recruit Jesse as a type of apprentice. Though Jesse doesn't want anything to do with it, he finds out over time that he can't control his decision to kill, for Freddy's begun to control him. With only the support of his best friend, Ron Grady (Robert Russler) and his girlfriend, Lisa Webber (Kim Myers), Jesse must fight his urge to kill and get rid of Freddy for good. The plot sounds like a good idea, but ends up just being preposterous. There's no boundaries between dreams and real life in this Krueger movie; Freddy attacks and effects the scenery almost everywhere, not limiting to dreams anymore. This throws off the whole concept of the movie and pretty much ruins the movie and makes it confusing. The plot is overly ridiculous and preposterously executed.

ACTING: The performances were not so great in this Freddy "film". The only performance that showed a spark of effort was, of course, Robert Englund as Freddy Krueger. Englund stays true to the attitude of his character. No one else in this movie even showed a hint of experience. Mark Patton is almost completely unfitting for the part of Jesse and Kim Myers is actually as wooden as a tree. Had this cast had a bit of experience, this movie may have had a bit more potential.

SCORE: The score is really nothing special and fantastic in this one. It enhanced the few moments of unease, but it wasn't anything truly significant.

EFFECTS: The effects in this Nightmare movie are hit and miss with most being misses. The strange part is that the effects in the movie seemed to slowly deteriorate from decent to terrible and cheap. The blood is still true, but the means of killing and the more grotesque scenes are just plain cheap. It feels like they squandered every dollar they had on everything else, unsuccessfully, and settled for cheap props and visual effects.

OTHER CONTENT: The only good things about this sad attempt at accompanying a classic are the hilarious one-liners and the unintentional humor. This movie is funny in places it shouldn't be. It takes itself too seriously for what it really is, which is a simple attempt at milking a franchise too early. However, the actually funny one-liners help save the movie from sinking into complete stupidity. In every other aspect, however, this movie fails. Had Craven been in the director's chair this round, Nightmare 2: Freddy's Revenge would have been an excellent addition to the franchise.

   Nightmare On Elm Street 2: Freddy's Revenge falls far from the original classic its concept came from. Except for Englund, none of the performances were worth anybody's time. The special effects aren't so special and the main idea is shattered in a preposterous change in plot mechanics. This whole movie is a horror experiment gone wrong. As a matter of fact, I'd call it the true "nightmare" after falling so far from the classic predecessor's quailty.

AC/DC: No Bull - The Directors Cut (1996) review

(9/10)

   For any true AC/DC fan, this concert film is a wild treat. It's not as fantastic as their show at Donnington, but its definitely a close second with the band putting on one hell of a show.

This concert film covers the entire show in Madrid, Spain, from the 1996 Ballbreaker tour, from the opening notes of "Back in Black" to the closing rock frenzy of "For Those About to Rock (We Salute You)". The band definitely puts on one of their best shows to date, with Angus, Malcolm, Brian, Cliff, and Phil at their wildest. In this show, clearly, Angus is the star of the show, letting out some monster solos, acting crazy as he can, and sweating himself to near death. Not to say the others didn't rock out, with Brian's wrecking ball stunt (long before Miley trashed the idea) during "Ballbreaker" and Phil's constant smoking through all of his best beats. The show is clearly one of the best they put on, falling barely short of their concert performance, Live at Donnington. The only reason this didn't reach the same heights as Donnington is because they focused more on the outward show and a little less on their sound. If Donnington hadn't come first and set their performance standards, this would have definitely been one of their best performances.

   It doesn't reach the same heights as their show at Donnington, but it's still a damn good show with the band at their near-best and Angus at his wildest.

Godzilla's Revenge (1971) review

(3/10)

   As with most older Godzilla movies, this addition to the franchise is not to be taken seriously. The plot twists, voice dubs, and overall motion of the movie is cheesy and laughably bad. However, with the older Godzilla movies, that is only to be expected. The traditional monster effects and monster fights were pretty entertaining to watch at the least.

PLOT: Young schoolboy Ichiro (Tomonori Yazaki) has been dealing with a couple pressing struggles in his school life, such as his parents always being busy and bullies teasing him on his way home from school. Ichiro also idolizes the monsters on Monster Island, including the great Godzilla. After a rough day at school, Ichiro takes a nap in his older friend's, toymaker Inami (Eisei Amamoto), office. While asleep, Ichiro fantasizes himself on Monster Island seeing the many monsters fight each other. He also meets in his dream Godzilla's son, Minilla, who is also dealing with bully troubles from the other monsters and he can't quite get brave enough to face them. Ichiro has these dreams constantly, encouraging him to be brave, and with the local bank robberies going on, that may be just what he needs to avoid danger. The plot is very juvenile, but if done right, might have been fun to work with. However, the execution of the plot was very poor, with awkward dialogue, the traditional, over-dramatized fight scenes, and unnecessary plot twists that make very little sense. Something could have been made out of this, but instead, it leaves its entertainment factor up to laughter.

ACTING: The performances in this movie, both physical performances and the voice dubs, were quite terrible. With unrealistic motions, unfitting voice dubs, and annoying performing vocals, the performances literally create the stereotype of the old Godzilla movies to be off-sync. There was no saving this section of the movie.

SCORE: The score, though unfitting, was actually quite nostalgic. It gave one the feeling of watching an old monster movie, which this was. I didn't have too much of a problem with the soundtrack/score.

EFFECTS: The special effects were cheesy, as usual, but not too awful. If you like Godzilla and its lore, then it would be satisfying to see all of the many monsters, no matter how unrealistic or cheesy the costumes may look. I thought the all of the monster effects were actually pretty good except for the costume for Minilla. Godzilla's son should have looked more threatening and a little less like a worn-out Barney costume. If Minilla wouldn't have been so lazily done, I would be completely satisfied with the visual effects category.

OTHER CONTENT: Everything about this movie proved that the generic Godzilla movie has bad voice-overs and cheap costumes. However, the one thing that inspired a bit of pure entertainment value from this movie was the many monster fights not including Minilla. It's always fun to watch Godzilla beating up another clueless monster, usually brutally to a pulp. This movie is laughably bad and fun to watch only as ridicule. If you're a die-hard Godzilla fan, maybe this movie would fit you. Otherwise, prepare for a terrible treat.

   Most Godzilla movies are cheesy and only entertaining for a laugh. This movie is no exception. Awkward, juvenile and cheesy are just a few words to describe the feel of this movie. Though pretty terrible, I would rewatch this movie just to laugh or to mindlessly drool over the Godzilla fight scenes. My only source of real hate in this movie: Minilla.

Jurassic World (2015) review

(8/10)

   This breath of fresh air to the once-dead franchise was a fun, surprise-filled trip into a modern look at the Jurassic Park premise. Skilled performances, killer special effects, thrilling fight scenes, and an overall feeling of nostalgia almost overrule the movie's slight predictability and uneven pace.

PLOT; Scientists have attempted to revive the dream of a living dinosaur park, as attempted many years in the past. Young dino-enthusiast Gray (Ty Simpkins) and older, unenthusiastic brother, Zach (Nick Robinson), are sent to this new park to spend some time with their Aunt Claire (Bryce Dallas Howard), who is a big boss over the park. Claire informs the supervisors of the park that they have genetically engineered a new dinosaur, crossbred between a T. Rex and a classified dinosaur. The new dino is terrifying, intelligent, and fierce. As expected in a Jurassic-themed movie, the dino breaks out and starts to wreak havoc on the park's staff and guests. It's up to the staff, including Claire and dino-trainer, Owen (Chris Pratt), to contain the situation and save the people and the park, but twists and turns are around each corner. The plot contains the same beloved premise as the rest of the Jurassic movies, but adds some fresh, thrilling cliches and styles to help modernize the franchise. Though exciting, some parts of the movie seem utterly predictable. Though still fun, these cliches run the movie straight into summer blockbuster-popcorn thriller territory.

ACTING: The performances in this movie are pretty great. Though the characters themselves are of a stereotypical type, the performers themselves are excellent at what they do. The best performances in this movie would have to be from Chris Pratt as raptor-trainer Owen, Bryce Dallas Howard as Aunt Claire, Omar Sy as raptor-assistant Barry, Vincent D'Onofrio as conniving Vic Hoskins, and Irrfan Khan as big boss Simon Masrani. All performances, even the extras, were pretty well done, but these few stood out in securing their roles. 

SCORE: The musical score to Jurassic World is pretty epic and nostalgic, bringing back the traditional Jurassic Park theme music and adding some intense action music to the thrilling fight scenes. The great Michael Giacchino steps up to compose the music for this movie, and as usual, he does a fine job of the sort.

EFFECTS: The special effects in this movie were fantastic. The CG dinosaurs in this movie looked awesome and very close to real in detail. From the T. Rex to the raptors all the way to the water dino and the new dino, every one looked awesome. Even the aftermath of the fights and attacks looked amazing thanks to the modern effects.

OTHER CONTENT: This is probably going to be one of the best summer blockbusters of the year. Aside from the previously-mentioned pros, the movie contained thrilling scenes of high-energy dinosaur fights, twists and turns around every corner, and an overall feeling of nostalgia for the fans of the beloved franchise. The fight scenes had me on the edge of my seat, as well as all of the unexpected twists. This movie sparked a bit of nostalgia for myself by referring to the previous films in all the right places. However, the movie had a couple of minor flaws that deterred my viewing experience, such as the predictability in some scenes I mentioned earlier and the uneven pace. One minute, everything's moving in fast, high-energy fashion, while the next, it's dragging out every little step or precaution taken. It's not a major problem, but it is noticeable. The movie, overall, was pretty great, but still a standard Hollywood blockbuster.

   This movie was still really great to see. The acting, plot execution, effects, feelings of nostalgia, and high-energy action scenes definitely drew me in, but the movie is still just your standard Hollywood blockbuster, with some predictability and an uneven pacing. Recommended!

Evil Dead 2 (1987) review

(9/10)

   Watching this film is literally the equivalent of walking into a carnival funhouse. The scares, many perks and execution of the film itself just ensue hilarity, and overall feeling of glorious camp, and a good spirit for the world of horror film. From the performances to the amazing yet cheap effects, this film will sit you down, crack you up, and quite possibly even scare you, but not too much. Unlike it's predecessor, it's not meant to be as serious. 

PLOT: Ash (Bruce Campbell) and his girlfriend, Linda (Denise Bixler) decide to take a trip to an abandoned cabin in the woods to spend some time together. However, things start getting strange when Ash discovers a recorded message reading off details of a race of demons and performing an indication to summon them. Soon after, Linda gets possessed by one of these demons and Ash must kill her off and stay the night in the cabin alone, for the one road out has been destroyed by the evil. Meanwhile, Annie Knowby (Sarah Berry), the daughter of the voice on the message, has found certain pages of the involved book: the Book of the Dead, and plans to bring them back to the cabin to research and preserve. Up until the point Annie and her party meet with Ash, and even past that point, chaos ensues in and around the cabin, from possessed corpses roaming around to laughing furniture and even to a possessed hand. The plot is excellently executed, with the execution mixing it up anyway it can be. If predictability would be your worry while watching this film, I can guarantee it won't be a problem. This film's plot execution goes in so many different directions that you would swear it's a staged show of a sort. The plot in itself is pretty nice for a horror film: a young couple having to fight demons in a cabin in the woods. It might be a bit general, but it's definitely interesting. 

ACTING: The performances in this film were all done very well, with Bruce Campbell being treated as the shining star as Ash. Campbell's performance in this film is known as one of the most iconic in the history of horror film-making. From a highly-quotable script to key scenes emphasizing the emotion of insanity and pure exhaustion in Ash's character, Campbell definitely cleans house with a truly campy performance of a new horror icon. Aside from Campbell, the other performances were also very well cast. Denise Bixler , Sarah Berry, Kassie DePaiva, and Dan Hicks all fit their parts well as the sultry Linda, the wise Annie, the roughneck Bobby Joe, and the redneck Jake. Their performances would have probably been a little different had they not been cast just right for the character they were willing to play. 

SCORE: The score in this film is very well done, but nothing too special. It enhances the drama, horror, and intensity of the moments, but it doesn't introduce any truly memorable themes to the horror world. 

EFFECTS: The special effects in this film are very well done. To get the special effects just right, director Sam Raimi went from having make-up effects, to digital effects, and even to claymation effects, just to have the mood and image just how he wanted it. The make-up effects are definitely well-thought out but full of camp. Some pretty freaky-looking monsters are introduced throughout the movie, from a deadite Frankenstein to a large, madman of a creature. The digital effects were very cool and enhancing to the film, such as the clouds clearing out of a possessed one's eyes. The claymation effects had to have been my favorite variety of effects Raimi used. The creepy style of the effects and also the camp mood they gave off made the film ten times better than some would believe it to be. 

MISC. THOUGHTS: This film is like a horror film funhouse in several ways: you never know what's going to happen next and it's always going to make you laugh. This film is a creative trip through horror camp that's meant to be fun and unpredictable as well as memorable, which it is without a doubt. However, the sequel's added length of humor takes away a key aspect that its predecessor, Raimi's original Evil Dead, had. The original Evil Dead actually had the potential to be scary. The way it was shot and how vague it was in how it was meant to be taken seriously or not gave the original an accidental potential to actually be frightening. This sequel doesn't have near as many opportunities to come off as scary as its predecessor had. This, however, is the only flaw in this film filled with B-movie camp and glorification. 

   The sequel to Raimi's original horror classic holds up, with fun situations to watch around every corner and an awesomely-played lead to crack the audience up, as well as amazing, lower-budget effects to enhance the film's mood. The film is full of camp and B-movie glory, much like its predecessor, but it doesn't have the potential to be truly scary, as its older sibling had.  

Shock Treatment (1981) review

(8/10)

This movie may be an overall fail as compared to its brilliant predecessor, but it succeeds in putting out great music, some meaningful dialogue, and an overall fun, weird, and spectacular time.

PLOT:Brad Majors (Cliff De Young) and his wife, Janet (Jessica Harper), return to their home town of Denton for help with their failing marriage. However, they find out that their whole hometown has been turned into a giant TV station, ran by a fast food founder, Farley Flavors (Cliff De Young). After having Brad committed to a phony mental hospital for his "condition", Janet meets up with her parents and the doctors for help. In a little while, Janet notices she's being pushed to be Flavors' new star on this station's prime time programs and the new show Fantasy Factory. However, the whole existence of the TV station seems to be out of a lust for power and love for a certain person, with dark pasts leading up to the result. It's a great plot executed very well.



ACTING:The performances in this movie are pretty well done overall. I enjoyed most of them for their balances of humor and seriousness. Jessica Harper and Cliff De Young both did a great job as the leads Brad and Janet Majors, also Farley Flavors. Some parts seemed over-acted, but it all went with the movie. The best performances aside from Harper would have to actually be from Richard O'Brien, Patricia Quinn, Charles Gray, and Barry Humphries as Dr. Cosmo McKinley, Dr. Nation McKinley, Judge Oliver Wright, and Bert Schnick. These few really captured the movie's essence and performed their parts extremely well overall.

SCORE:The musical score in this movie is rockin' and high-energy at most parts, with the ballads being beautifully done. The score in this movie as compared to its predecessor is a bit different a toned down with some pitchy voices and cheesier songs, but overall, the score is well-written and well-performed, from "Bitchin' in the Kitchen" to the title track and even to "Anyhow, Anyhow."



OTHER CONTENT:This movie is a completely different change from its predecessor, Rocky Horror, but the wild-and-wacky tone of insanity stays just as it originally was. The movie itself is a deep, rockin' ride into the insanity of stereotypes of television and the world itself, with metaphor after wacky metaphor. However, the plot twists near the end seem preposterous and unnecessary, with the movie making less and less sense in the end. It may be a cult classic, but lightning never strikes in the same place twice. This movie doesn't reach the same satirical heights as Rocky Horror, but it does attempt to put on an entertaining show, and entertain it does.

OVERALL,a great musical cult classic with a great plot, well done acting, rockin' score, deep study of stereotypes, and wacky fun, however, the plot twists just seem preposterous near the end, and the heights of its predecessor aren't possibly scaled.

Star Wars VI: Return of the Jedi (1983) review

(8/10)

This last installment of the original Star Wars trilogy is very entertaining with great original effects, some very well done dialogue, and a great bit of emotion from the performers. However, this one feels less serious as compared to its predecessors.

PLOT:After Han Solo is frozen in carbonite and given to alien gangster, Jabba the Hutt, newly-trained Jedi Luke Skywalker (Mark Hamill) plans to trade Jabba his droids, C-3PO (Anthony Daniels) and R2-D2 (Kenny Baker) for Solo's life. However, Jabba takes the droids without releasing Solo. Soon after, Leia (Carrie Fisher) sneaks in undercover as a bounty hunter and ends up getting captured herself. Young Skywalker is forced to break into Jabba's palace and rescue Leia, Solo, Chewbacca, and the droids. After the group reunites, they have to worry about the newly-rebuilt Death Star, targetting the rebel base on the forest moon of Endor. Aside from that, Luke has to, as told by Yoda (Frank Oz), confront Darth Vader (David Prowse/James Earl Jones) and defeat him along with his master, the evil Emperor (Ian McDiarmid). Luke must learn the Jedi way of overcoming hate and being strong to truly become a Jedi master, all the while saving the galaxy from the Imperial Empire. It's a great plot executed greatly.



ACTING:The performances in this film are very good. They're almost better than the work done in this film's predecessor. The best performances would have to be from Mark Hamill as Luke Skywalker, Carrie Fisher as Princess Leia, David Prowse and James Earl Jones as Darth Vader, Ian McDiarmid as the Emperor, Frank Oz as Yoda, Tim Rose as Admiral Ackbar, and Toby Philpott as Jabba the Hutt. I really liked the speech between Hamill, McDiarmid, and Jones in the final scenes, as well as the speech between Oz and Hamill earlier on in the film. All of these performances are very well done overall, with only a couple falling performances, like that of Billy Dee Williams as Lando. He didn't seem to act as well in this one.

SCORE:The score in this Star Wars film actually has to be my favorite out of the old trilogy's. The score here appeared to be John Williams' best of the old trilogy. More harmony and ensemble-like pieces enhanced the emotion way more than any of the previous films' scores did.

EFFECTS:The effects in this film (that weren't added in for the new trilogy edition) were really cool and well done for their time, as well as fairly realistic. The effects of Jabba and his crew of creatures like Bib Fortuna and the Rancor looked fairly cool for the time being. Also, the Ewoks and speeder effects on Endor looked pretty decent too. I really like what they did with all of the explosions in this one. They seemed way more hyped-up than usual. The new effects, however, of the new Anakin, the band in Jabba's palace, and the alternate ending made the film feel more fake and not as authentic as it originally did. The alternate ending itself was pretty okay, but it just didn't feel the same.



OTHER CONTENT:This film was a very good ending to the original trilogy, but it wasn't as well crafted as its predecessor, with more entertainment value than cinematic excellence. I found myself entertained throughout the whole thing, but the stops in the middle with intelligent dialogue and meaningful moments seem a little too far out of place as compared to the rest of the film. It seems that this second sequel adds more action to substitute for the meaningful, true cinematic charm. The film, nevertheless, is a fitting end to the trilogy, putting a good feeling in the viewers perspective.

OVERALL,a great Star Wars film with a great plot, very good performances with some falling, more emotional score, cool original effects with okay new effects, plenty of entertaining moments, and intelligent dialogue, however, the dialogue and cinematic charm the film's predecessor had is replaced with entertainment value.

Star Wars V: The Empire Strikes Back (1980) review

(10/10)

This sequel to the first Star Wars installment is much more developed than its predecessor. More character development, visionary direction, nostalgic and iconic moments, and a more involving story leave the viewer more stunned as they get sucked into the world of Star Wars.

PLOT:Since the rebel base has been found on Yavin's moon, Luke Skywalker (Mark Hamill) and the other rebels move shop to the snowy planet of Hoth. However, a probe finds the rebel base, causing the remainders of the Empire and the surviving Darth Vader (David Prowse/James Earl Jones) to invade and attack Hoth. Han Solo (Harrison Ford), Princess Leia (Carrie Fisher), Chewbacca and the droids load up in the Millennium Falcon and head for safety, with an idea of peace in Cloud City. Luke, however, takes R2-D2 and heads to Dagobah, a swamp system as foretold by the spirit of Ben Kenobi. Ben tells Luke that a retired Jedi warrior will be there to teach him. Luke finds short, green, and old alien Yoda (Frank Oz) as his mentor. While Han and the rest find solitude, Luke must train with Yoda to be a great Jedi warrior and defeat Darth Vader. However, some evil plots are going on in Cloud City, and more seems to be behind Luke's family history than he even knew. It's a good plot executed brilliantly.



ACTING:The performances in this film are great and even more improved over its predecessor. Mark Hamill, Harrison Ford, and Carrie Fisher all play excellently improved parts as Luke Skywalker, Han Solo, and Princess Leia. Everybody did an improved job, from Prowse/Jones as Darth Vader to Anthony Daniels as C-3P0 and even to Peter Mayhew as Chewbacca. The introduction of new characters Yoda, Lando Calrissian and Boba Fett are also pleasant, excellently played by Frank Oz, Billy Dee Williams and Jeremy Bulloch. The performances in this film are just much more improved overall.

SCORE:The score in this film is about as great as its predecessor. John Williams borrows some themes, like the title, from the original and adds a few new in the middle. "The Imperial March" also seemed to be a nice touch throughout the film.

EFFECTS:The effects in this one aren't as well done or realistic, as stop-motion Taun-Tauns and puppet Yoda prove, but the set designs and other effects really made up for it. The set designs were pretty well crafted, as well as the effects for Luke's hand near the end of the film. Most effects were a fall, but the sets and latter effects made up for it.




OTHER CONTENT:This Star Wars film doesn't even need effects to keep it good and interesting. The added character development, love story, and many twists make the film work out even better. Much more character development is added from Luke and Vader's relationships to Yoda's relationship with Ben. A lot more is found out, causing some major twists. Even without the character development, several unexpected twists take place, swinging everything out of proportion. Also with the character development, a love story takes place between Solo and Leia that escalates into pure chemistry. Aside from all of this, the film also contains many iconic scenes and lines that make it nostalgic and memorable. Not one year has passed for me where I haven't heard an "I am your father" reference. This is one of the most well known Star Wars film in content, also accompanied by visionary direction by Irvin Kershner. Kerhner really took the film and put it on a different course, and I loved it.

OVERALL,an epic Star Wars film with a brilliant plot, great and improved performances, nice classic and new themes, mixed effects, more character development, many unexpected twists, a love story with great chemistry, iconic scenes and lines that everyone remembers, and visionary direction that improved the film.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - Part 1 (2010) review

(8/10)

This first addition to the Harry Potter conclusion is a very deep character study with impressive direction and brilliant performances by the leads. However, the film picks up a little slower than the rest in certain parts.

PLOT:Harry (Daniel Radcliffe), Ron (Rupert Grint), and Hermione (Emma Watson) are not returning to Hogwarts this year with intent on finding the remaining Horcruxes, or parts of Voldemort's soul stored in an item, and destroying them. However, finding these objects aren't easy, especially when they possess life-changing dark power. Also, Hermione notices a strange symbol in every place they end up that might be connected to finding the Horcruxes and the mysterious Deathly Hallows. It's a great plot executed excellently.



ACTING:The performances in this film are brilliant, especially by the main three. Radcliffe, Grint, and Watson really outshine their classic roles of Harry, Ron, and Hermione with more emotional character interaction than ever before. We see some of the true personalities of the characters flow more outward in this film. The other performances in this film were just as brilliant as well. The other shining performances that really kept me entertained and complimented the film well were Helena Bonham Carter as Bellatrix, Ralph Fiennes as Voldemort, Bonnie Wright as Ginny Weasley, Alan Rickman as Snape, Rhys Ifans as Xenophilius Lovegood, Timothy Spall as Peter Pettigrew, Brendan Gleeson as Mad-Eye Moody, and Toby Jones as Dobby. All performances were good as usual, but these were my favorites of this film aside from the main three.

SCORE:The score in this film was very intense and beautiful composed by the great Alexandre Desplat. I believe every theme is loads darker and more beautiful in this one. Desplat has great skill in this film.

EFFECTS:The effects in this one weren't as broad as the others have been, but they were still pretty cool. I enjoyed the snakes, wand battles, and Disapparations. The wand battles were really great I'd say.



OTHER CONTENT:This film was under the fine direction of David Yates and seems even more finely-tuned than its predecessor by Yates. This film, in reality, is a slow-boiling character study of the main three with a added mystery of the Horcruxes and Deathly Hallows. The chemistry of the characters in this one is really well shared and emotional altogether. However, I believe this one is a bit slower in the middle than its predecessors have been. The middle consists more of character study and mystery than of action or eventful twists. It almost seems like a shock when the end comes with so much eventful action. The slow parts aren't unecessary, but they're not to overlap the action. Overall however, this film is pretty great and a good prelude to the final chapter of the Harry Potter films.

OVERALL,a great Harry Potter film with an excellent plot, brilliant performances, beautiful score by Desplat, cool effects, fine direction, and an intriguing character study, but this film doesn't pick up as fast as its predecessors have and it seems a bit too reliant on its next part.

Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (2009) review

(9/10)

This Harry Potter film was made under fine direction with outstanding performances, excellent execution, and an even balance, but does it have as much spice as its predecessors' had?

PLOT:Harry Potter (Daniel Radcliffe) returns to Hogwarts this year with knowledge that Voldemort and his followers are going to strike the school soon, as they've already started making disturbances in the Muggle world. Dumbledore (Michael Gambon) acknowledges this fact and hires one of the best colleagues, Horace Slugworth (Jim Broadbent), at school to take over the Potions program and watch out for these things, pushing Snape (Alan Rickman) up finally to Defense Against the Dark Arts teacher. Throughout all of Voldemort's evil and the new suspicion that Draco (Tom Felton) is soon to be a Death Eater, the teens still seem to find a time to work on love and relationships, especially Ron (Rupert Grint) and Hermione (Emma Watson). Also, secrets seem to uncover that could lead to the final defeat of Voldemort. It's a great plot executed excellently.



ACTING:The performances in this film are outstanding. Every performance in this film is top-notch. There are so many good ones that I'm afraid I can't mention them all. Radcliffe, Grint, and Watson all played their stellar recurring roles as Harry, Ron, and Hermione, acting with even more human emotion than I've seen in a while. The best, shining performances in this film would be Michael Gambon as Dumbledore, Tom Felton as Draco Malfoy, Jim Broadbent as Horace Slughorn, Alan Rickman as Snape, Helena Bonham Carter as Bellatrix, Bonnie Wright as Ginny Weasley, and Robbie Coltrane as Hagrid. These few really showed a shining performance of emotion that convinced me and stood out from the rest. All the performances in this film are really excellent.

SCORE:The score in this one is very well done with touching themes and beautiful sound by Nicholas Hooper yet again.

EFFECTS:The effects in this Harry Potter film are actually even better, mainly near the end. In the ending scene, the effects are way more astounding than I expected to have seen. Overall, the effects in this one were really cool.



OTHER CONTENT:This Harry Potter film was done just really well. The direction by David Yates stood unique and visionary, the performances stood as outstanding, and even the jokes stood as fairly mature. The only "flaw" I saw in this one was that the plot wasn't as cleverly thought out as the others have been until near the very end. Most of the film is focused on relationships, Slughorn's secret, and Draco's secret until the very end with less twists as compared to a couple of previous additions to the canon. Don't get me wrong; the plot and its ending were amazing and executed brilliantly by the actors. I just thought this one to be a bit more "closed" than some of its predecessors' have been. Overall though, this is a very well made film.

OVERALL,an awesome Harry Potter film with an excellent plot, outstanding performances, touching score, cool effects, visionary direction, and fairly mature laughs, but the plot wasn't as broad as some of its predecessors' have been.