The 4K restoration of The Exorcist is absolutely stunning. Every frame has been enhanced to reveal richer textures, making the eerie details of Regan's demonic possession even more unsettling. The colours in key scenes are now more vivid, adding depth to the already tense atmosphere. Iconic moments, such as Father Merrin's arrival under the streetlight and Regan's head spin, have been revitalized, making them feel even more intense. The film's haunting interiors, from Regan's dimly lit bedroom to the unsettling atmosphere of Father Karras's moments of doubt, now have a newfound clarity that enhances the immersive terror.

**Shocking rather than frightening.**
Friedkin's The Exorcist is a film that shocks rather than scares. A well made film that achieved notoriety via pea soup. A slow and intelligent film with strong performances - yet also a mostly disappointing one for those who dare to go beyond the hype and actually _experience_ it for the first time.
For a film that _does_ succeed in frightening the audience and with none of the hype - I recommend The Changeling starring George C Scott. Now **THAT** is a scary movie.

The 2 weirdest cops are back again. This one is way better then the 1st and funnier.

**From a review written in 2014:**
I’m sure if I really thought about it, I could easily fault _22 Jump Street_, second in the recent reboot of the 1987 TV series. But I don’t want to think about it, ‘cause I had a good time and that’s how I choose to remember it.
To Hell with what so-called “professional” critics are saying, _22 Jump Street_ is not dumb. It’s actually pretty bloody smart. It’s not particularly deep. Or thought-provoking. Or fresh. Or original. Or mature. Or cultured. Or subtle… But it is smart! And funny. Which for a comedy is more important than anything else.
_22 Jump Street_ is very aware of itself, and that can be a tough line to walk, but I think it just managed to get right, brining in some serious meta-humour rather than coming across as arrogant or lazy.
Just.
I’m not particularly big on comedies, and American comedies are certainly pretty low even on that list. But I have been known to come across the odd pleasant surprise. _21 Jump Street_ was one of them (especially considering I assumed it would be akin to the original series, which was a straight laced procedural crime drama…) and now 22 Jump Street is another I can add to that list.
_75%_
_-Gimly_

Sing is about as good or bad as you would expect it to be. For me, it was a disposable yet entertaining flick where cartoon animals sing Glee-style renditions of popular songs to a plot that is pretty much American Idol meets The Muppets (2011). It follows the feel good, "can't we all just get along?" formula to a T.

**Music is the key!**
It was one of the most watched trailer by me. Yeah, I liked the trailer and teaser, those beautiful songs and characters made me watch this film. Maybe because of that, I thought the trailers looked much better. I enjoyed the film, it had depth in characters than what I saw in the promotional videos. Though it is a simple story, and that worked so well.
Its neither Disney or Pixer, but awesome. The good thing is the others as well getting there with par. It got nominated for the Golden Globe, but missed out the Oscars. A film for all ages. The musical is very common in animation, especially from Disney. This was a little different, a music genre. And the characters are the very special to this film to clinch the success.
It could have been easily added to 'Zootopia' universe, since the two films are from different productions, that idea was ruled out. The selection of voice-over cast was excellent, particularly in the singing perspective. Recently Dwayne Johnson sang one for 'Moana'. I know the real life actors brought in for the marketing purpose, but anyway they all were so good.
I liked a couple of tracks, but most of them are not original. Even the theme song from 'Zootopia' by Shakira had a small part in it. So this film is surely suggestible for anyone to try at any time in any mood. It only cheers, definitely worth spending time for it. Now bring it on a sequel. As per the latest news, they have announced which is going to hit the screen in 2020. That looks too long, I need it even before that. Meanwhile, you guys enjoy it if you'ven't watched it yet.
_8/10_

QUALITY
Featuring appealing covers of hit songs and an all-star cast, this cute animated comedy capitalizes on the craze for both talking-animal adventures and talent competitions. The movie may not have the substance of Inside Out or the overt messages of Zootopia, but, like Trolls, it's simple, with catchy pop music and jokes that are likely to make kids laugh. (Unlike Trolls, its take-aways aren't quite as thoroughly positive -- see below.) The musical numbers are by far the best part of the movie, including Jennifer Hudson-voiced renditions of "Golden Slumbers/Carry That Weight" to the piggy duet of "Shake It Off" (by Witherspoon and comedian Nick Kroll as a German boar called Gunter) to Kelly's show-stopping version of "Hallelujah."
The music is what makes Sing worth the price of admission, because, story- and theme-wise, there are a few missteps that keep it from greatness. Like, say, the depiction of Rosita's home life. She does everything for her 25 piglets, and her burnt-out husband (Nick Offerman) barely registers her. He's so checked out that he doesn't notice when she sets up a Rube-Goldberg contraption to keep the household working when she can't secure a babysitter to participate in the contest. And then there's poor Johnny, who desperately wants his criminal father's approval. A child wanting a parent to see them shine is wonderful, but did they have to make the father in question a bank robber? But if what you want is a bubbly diversion you''l find yourself singing along to after the credits roll, then Sing hits the spot. Just don't think about it too hard.

‬⁩‬⁩Groundhog Day is one of those movies that never really gets old, no matter how many times you watch it. The premise is simple yet brilliant, a man finds himself reliving the same day over and over, but what makes it so engaging is how well the story unfolds. The pacing is solid, with a decent start that smoothly transitions into the second act, keeping things interesting without dragging. The buildup leads to a heartwarming and satisfying climax that feels well-earned rather than forced.
Bill Murray absolutely owns this role, delivering a performance that perfectly balances sarcasm, frustration, and subtle character growth. His comedic timing is spot-on, making the humor feel natural rather than overacted. Andie MacDowell is a great counterpart, bringing warmth and sincerity to the screen, while the supporting cast adds to the charm without feeling like background noise. The script is sharp, filled with witty dialogue and comedic moments that don’t rely on cheap gags. It’s a rare comedy that manages to be both entertaining and meaningful without losing its fun.
The directing by Harold Ramis is excellent, keeping the repetition from feeling repetitive. Each cycle through the day is presented with enough variation and energy to keep the audience engaged. Cinematography isn’t flashy, but it does what it needs to, capturing the small-town setting with just the right balance of warmth and dreariness, depending on the mood of the scene. The framing and editing make the time loop feel seamless rather than repetitive, which is key for a movie like this.
The score complements the film well, though it’s not the kind of soundtrack you’d find yourself listening to on its own. It enhances the mood, subtly shifting as the story progresses. Sound design also plays a crucial role, reinforcing the sense of déjà vu without making it tiresome. Overall, Groundhog Day is a well-crafted movie that blends comedy, heart, and an engaging story into something truly timeless. It’s the kind of film that reminds you why some classics stay relevant, and honestly, I miss seeing more movies like this today.

_**Going ’round and ’round the mountain with Bill Murray and Andie MacDowell**_
A curmudgeonly weather reporter from Pittsburgh (Bill Murray) has to report on the Groundhog Day festivities at Punxsutawney, Pennsylvania, for the fifth year in a row. He soon finds himself in some kind of strange time warp. Andie MacDowell plays a new producer for the network who joins him on the trek, along with Chris Elliott as the cameraman.
“Groundhog Day” (1993) is a dramedy/fantasy with some romance about a person who has lost the joy of living and become a cranky, arrogant jerk. Is he too far gone to change? The movie’s equal parts amusing and profound. The theme revolves around getting stuck in a rut in life and desperately trying to find the way OUT. Meanwhile the woodchuck is cute.
Beyond MacDowell on the female front, Marita Geraghty plays a potential date for Murray’s character; you might remember her from the Seinfeld episode “The Big Salad” as Margaret. But it’s the stunning Sandy Maschmeyer as his ‘French Maid’ date at the theater that steals the show in a brief scene.
The film runs 1 hour, 41 minutes, and was shot in Woodstock, Illinois, which is just northwest of Chicago, and points nearby: Algonquin (opening scene), Rockford (quarry), Waukegan and Cary (interiors). Some stuff was done in the backlot of Universal Studios, along with establishing shots of Pittsburgh.
GRADE: B-

Fantastic watch, will watch again, and do recommend.
Bill Murray carries this time-shift-loop adventure in hilarious form. The writing is excellent with a "redeemable protagonist" trope mixed in.
The movie is creative with it's divergent time lines and even manages to maintain proper story arcs as Phil continues to loop.
The supporting cast is wonderful in each of their roles, and manage to do repeat acting excellently.
This was a popularizing (if not a birth) to a genre, everyone should have watched this movie at some point.

**The Future is Not a Given**
_Groundhog Day_ sets out to accomplish the inconceivable, where few comedies, or movies of any kind, or art forms of any device dare to tread. It is determined to ultimately answer: How does one find true happiness. The kind of baby that might have been hatched by crossing Woody Allen and Dali Lama. What's truly amazing is that it pretty well achieves this without being pretentious or portentous. Its humble, pedestrian style coincides with it's charitable message. Furthermore, it's a riot!
What do you do when the snowstorm of life traps you into a place you don't want to be? Self-destructive anarchy is an option: drinking, stealing, screwing, lying, joyriding and suicide. But this is a big storm so long-term solutions are required. The good news if you're lonely and unhappy? You probably have more time to dedicate to self- improvement (music lessons, ice sculpturing).
But challenging the self must have worthwhile outcomes. Phil, believing he's magical, challenges himself to get Rita to sleep with him within 24 hours. He's being dishonest, still playing games and ends up getting slapped in the face repeatedly. It appears that Phil's obstinate pattern of narcissistic behaviour is the cause of this inert existential loop, and one that traps everyone he is in contact with. When he finally realizes that while money, sex and immediate self-gratification might have their perks, they are short-lived and vastly overrated, and a major personality overhaul will be required to escape this Kafkaesque nightmare. An endless, insanely frigid winter is bound to contain him (them (us)) unless new strategies are introduced, alternative energies adopted, the shift away from a self-serving paradigm sustained.
To his credit, Phil refuses to be cornered into the status quo and become one in a million zombies chanting “it is what it is”. Phil actually starts to recover when he gives up trying. When he dismisses the quick fixes (sex, booze, anger, lying and fighting), when he relinquishes his ego and lets go of his smarmy King Joffrey-Justin Bieber juvenility, when he learns to be himself, like himself, settle into his own skin so he can thrive in and, in turn, improve his surroundings. In a reversal of _It's a Wonderful Life_, rather than Bedford Falls being worse off from George's absence, Punxsutawney is better off with Phil's presence. Routine days require routine acts of kindness and Phil and the entire town collectively benefit from it. Phil is a born-again humanist, one who rescues himself from himself, escaping a solipsistic rotation of mutually-destructive behaviour simply by being a good Samaritan. The forecast: many rewarding days of sunshine.
I always had a bit of a problem with the ending. That the cycle of unhappiness only ends when the guy gets the girl. But now I see that getting the girl was coincidental (and symbolic). Before he gets the girl he has to get himself. That's how you put a reverse spin on a downward spiral. The girl is now able to love the boy because he is love-worthy. The boy could be anyone. A politician. A corporation. You.

I can watch this movie again and again and again. Just trying to imagine what I would do in such a situation. And who doesn't like groundhogs?

Funny story done to fit on Bill Murray's shoes.
It is good enough and with a moral for the family but I don't get it what this is such a famous movie.

This is my favorite movie from Miyazaki. The visuals are great. The characters are great. The voice acting (English version) is great. The animation is great. Music is great. The story is good. Everything about this movie is so cool and it's just really fun to watch.

When a village is tormented by a wild boar, it falls to the young "Ashitaka" to sort it out. Turns out though, that it isn't an ordinary beast - and in the fight the man is afflicted with a curse that requires his journey to the great tree god to put right. His travels lead him to the unscrupulous "Lady Eboshi" who has developed a smelting process that enables her to make guns - giving her not only advantage against the other local clans, but also helping her on her quest to kill the gods and the wolves lead by the Princess Mononoke whom they have raised from infancy. The story is great, the colourful and detailed animation moves the fable along well and excitingly with plenty of solid characterisation and action a-plenty. As ever with Miyazaki, there is a moral to the story - and the last twenty minutes exemplify that beautifully. The English language dubbed version has a good cast injecting personality and an extra degree of emotion to the characters too. I did find the forest sprites just a bit too twee, but otherwise this is a great marriage of creativity and legend - and I really enjoyed it.

Original title: Mononoke Hime
The film is set in the 14th Century during Japan’s Muromachi Period.
Young Prince Ashitaka, the last royal of his line, slays a wild boar that is about to attack his village. The boar, demonised because it was consumed by rage and hatred, infects the young Prince, who will eventually become demonised too.
He leaves the village to find a cure in the form of Shishigami, a deer-like god. On his journey he realises that the latent rage and hatred within him, when it surfaces, gives him enormous power – proven when he slices off the arms of a Samurai warrior and decapitates another one.
On his journey, he sees a travelling group of people attacked by a wolf pack. He saves two of the men who, it turns out, are from Irontown, run by the Lady Ishobi. He brings the two men back to Irontown, which is peopled by women who do the foundry-work and chores, and men who provide the security and protection, although even that is not cut and dried as the women are capable of defending themselves with guns being manufactured especially for them by the lepers to whom the Lady Ishobi provides food and dignity. There is much humour when the women verbally chastise their menfolk. I found those scenes hilarious.
When Ashitaka brings the men back to Irontown he is welcomed by the Lady Ishobi. He also discovers that the wolf pack was led by the wolf god Moro, and the strange girl he saw help the wolves was San, the adopted daughter of Moro. San has the ability to talk to the nature spirits, and she is therefore known as Princess Mononoke (“Spirits of things”).
Ashitaka is concerned that Ishobi is destroying the forest. It turns out that the Lady Ishobi and Moro are in battle because of the damage being done to the forest.
To add to this, Ishobi has also recruited Samurai to help her in her fight, but the Samurai have two motives: one is to take the head of the Forest Spirit back to the Emperor, who believes it will give him immortality. The second is to take Irontown from the Lady Ishobi.
That is an abstract of the plot.
Miyazaki used computer-generated graphics in this for the first time, but most of the film was generated by hand. This I think is to its benefit. The drawing is breathtaking in places, and the depiction of such supernatural events as the Forest Spirit changing into the Nightwalker and the scene of the demon-possessed boar when it emerges from the forest for the first time are spectacular.
I think it’s too scary and bloody for children, but a friend assures me that this sort of film is par for the course for children in Japan.
The film is over two hours long, and it does pack a lot into that two hours. I found this film very interesting and watchable. I wanted to know what happened, and the plot was certainly not predictable. I believed in the world it depicted. I think in any film you have to allow it to draw you into its world (up to a point, some films are ludicrous and expect too much, this isn’t one of them).
Part of the reason for the film’s ability to keep me interested is because the characters cannot be labelled “goodies” and “baddies.” Yes, Moro and his pack are attacking helpless workers, but they are destroying the forest and he needs to protect his way of life. Yes, the Lady Ishobi is destroying the forest, but she’s making a living for herself and is helping others: she has removed the women from servitude in brothels, given them security, work, and a home; some have found husbands or companions. She has provided shelter, home and work for the lepers, normally outcasts. Neither side seems particularly vindictive; Ishobi’s attempts to rid herself of the wolf pack are for self preservation, and her coalition with the Samurai to destroy the Forest Spirit is her attempt to remove the constant threat of attack. One can argue that if she took a more conciliatory view, maybe some sort of truce could be reached, but time and again members of the wolf pack merely say “they are humans, they must be killed” – to the point that even Ashitaki, who has helped the animals – is threatened with death if he does not leave the forest. In fact, one could argue that it is the animals who show a “racist” attitude here – demanding the death of the humans because they are humans. None of the humans in the film demand the death of the animals simply because they are animals. Their deaths, and the destruction of their habitat, are an unfortunate side-effect of the humans’ industrialisation, not a deliberate act.
I hope that what you see from my analysis above is that the film is not goodies v. baddies. It’s nature v. industrialisation, and the compromise to that is not an easy one, and the film reflects that.
You’ll be happy to know the film does have an upbeat ending, but thankfully it’s not entirely predictable, in my opinion.
I thoroughly recommend the film.

Hayao Miyazaki's arts have always something to remember us that we are naturally harmonized with mother earth and existences. There is still a bond, if one is hurt another, it means the one suffer itself as well.

Probably the best movie from Miyazaki. A mixture of old Japanese traditions with the story about the conflict between the industrial human being and the preservation of the Nature.

Forgive this forward, but I literally watched all 31 seasons because I was sick and have never understood what the fuss was about the Simpsons.
I really have to conclude that the appeal of the Simpsons was a simple lack of options when it first came out, and then it just grew in power by simply existing for so long.
For this movie:
Uninspired watch, probably won't watch again, and can't recommend, unless you're already a Simpsons fan.
It's really just a lot of the Simpsons being Simpsons, but that also means that the overall story writing is actually pretty good, even if the character writing is rather repetitive.
I did enjoy the introduction of Ploppers, Spider-Pig, but it doesn't really even out everything else.
The big adversity is an "under the dome" scenario, which is actually interesting enough to explore, but because it's the Simpsons, we know that nothing ultimately interesting is going to happen, and that everything is going to resolve like its TV counterpart. Now, that said, the TV show does drop unexpected, unexplainable shifts, like the death of characters. I don't think Fox was brave enough to put such a thing in the movie, which would have completely changed the gravity of the movie.
It's fine, it's well produced, it's just not very interesting, and I don't think I'd ever watch it again unless I was binging the Simpsons again, and wanted to watch it in order.

I've never been particularly invested in _The Simpsons_. This movie didn't turn me around on that. I could stand watching it, Hell, this was actually the **second** time I've seen it, but I assure you, it was not for my own enjoyment I did so.
_Final rating:★★ - Definitely not for me, but I sort of get the appeal._

I'd struggle to recall any other of Judd Nelson's films, but in this he really does shine. He's the obvious recalcitrant amongst five teenage youths who have been dragged into school on a Saturday for some seemingly rather pointless detention. This is manna from heaven for their headmaster "Vernon" (Paul Gleason), who takes pleasure in exercising his gradually dwindling authority over his charges. Whilst he leaves them to work, they set about assembling and disassembling each other's character. Nelson ("Bender") is the outlaw: loud, brash and a pain in the neck. "Andrew" (Emilio Estevez) is the high-school athlete; "Claire" (Molly Ringwald) the slightly aloof of the group; "Brian" (Anthony Michael Hall) is the swat and "Allison" (Ally Sheedy) - well she's the enigma of the group, rarely deigning to contribute as "Bender" begins an hour and a half that allows each of them to expose - sometimes more willingly than not, some of the more private and contentious aspects of their personalities. Whilst their supervisor becomes distracted in the basement with caretaker "Carl" (John Kapelos) this erstwhile disparate group of reprobates start to realise they have way more in common than they'd initially thought and thanks to a really quite potent script and some very natural performances, we begin to see something far less predicable emerging from these folks. Sure, there are some traditional stories of failed families or outrageous parental aspirations or rebellion, but they are presented here with plenty of humour and more of a degree of plausibility than in many films that just trot out the same old story arcs as if they were college lectures. There's little off limits, but nothing at all graphic as they try to find a new focus for their lives. John Hughes mixes the comedy with the more earnest engagingly here and these actors deliver something just a bit different.

An absolute classic, and no mistake. If you disagree, sorry, you're wrong. John Hughes was an utter genius.

_**Forced, artificial dialogs with eye-rolling character arcs**_
Released in 1985 and written & directed by John Hughes, "The Breakfast Club" is a teen dramedy about five high school students from five different sub-cultures during an all-day detention over the weekend at their suburban Chicago school. Molly Ringwald plays the popular girl, Emilio Estevez the jock, Anthony Michael Hall the Brainiac nerd, Judd Nelson the dope-smoking rebel and Ally Sheedy the neurotic misfit. Paul Gleason and John Kapelos are on hand as the host principal and janitor respectively
This movie has a big reputation as an 80's teen flick, but I was wholly disappointed. Most of the discussions between the five students from different cliques come across contrived and unconvincing. Some of the dialog is actually cringe-inducing.
The hoodlum could've worked as a character, like the Fonz or Vinnie Barbarino, but he's such an annoying, loud-mouthed jerk that he loses all sympathy, particularly when he verbally rapes the redhead on multiple occasions for no ostensible reason. *** SPOILER ALERT*** The fact that the two end up together at the end adds insult to injury. ***END SPOILER*** Not to mention two others that unrealistically couple up.
It's strange that "The Breakfast Club" is billed as a comedy because there's very little that's funny, although it's occasionally entertaining, like some of the music sequences. Unfortunately, Hughes wasn't into the heavier side of rock and so the soundtrack consists solely of bland 80's new wave bands, like his other 80's teen flicks (e.g. "Sixteen Candles," "Pretty in Pink" and "Ferris Bueller's Day Off"). Don't get me wrong, there are a couple of quality songs, like "We Are Not Alone" by Karla DeVito, but where are the heavier popular bands of 1984, like Van Halen, Scorpions, Judas Priest, Ratt, Dokken, Queensryche, Def Leppard, AC/DC or Motley Crue? Is it asking too much to have ONE song that actually rocks?
But the music is the least of the movie's problems (and isn't really a problem at all, except that there aren't any heavy tracks). The actors are fine, but Hughes' dialog is unconvincing. As such, you don't buy the characters. The script needed a serious rewrite.
The movie runs 97 minutes and was shot in the suburbs north of Chicago.
GRADE: C-

Click here for a video version of this review: https://youtu.be/tCnm1BN1iAs
The brain, the athlete, the princess, the basket case, and the criminal - yes we’re talking about _The Breakfast Club_. It’s been dubbed as a seminal film of the 1980s and takes a place as an intergenerational classic.
_They were five students with nothing in common, faced with spending a Saturday detention together in their high school library. At 7.00am they had nothing to say, but by 4.00pm they had bared their souls to each other and become The Breakfast Club._
Directed by John Hughes and starring Judd Nelson, Molly Ringwald, Emilio Estevez, Anthony Michael Hall, and Ally Sheedy it rightly deserves that spot as a revered movie. It's very much a comedy-drama and is surprisingly deep in parts, like the scene toward the end where they are all explaining what they did to get the detention. The acting is brilliant, and even though there is a very small cast, its basically the five members of The Breakfast Club and the Vice Principal, they hold your attention because they are so good.
What I particularly liked was how they took the standard college stereotypes and then slowly deconstructed them over the course of the movie, and showed that they actually all had a lot in common. They all had their loves and hates, their sensitivities, and the burden of expectation from their parents, the school, and society as a whole.
It's funny, it's sad, and by the time it concludes, it's quite uplifting, and if it's been a while since you saw it, it might be time to load it up for another look. If you've never seen it, then I suggest you check it out for a great time capsule of a movie that has themes that still resonate today.

**Overall : Predator’s mastery of suspense and action cements it as one of the most iconic alien thrillers of all time.**
Predator takes typical 80s action and mixes in Jaws-style horror to create one of the greatest creature features ever made. Arnold Schwarzenegger matches wits with the ultimate alien hunter along with his team of highly trained but in-over-their-heads mercenaries. As the body count rises, so does the improbability that anyone will make it out alive. John McTiernan raises the bar of action movies by delivering one of the best sci-fi thrillers filled with suspense, fear, action, gore, and one of the most iconic creatures in cinematic history.

It takes it's time to get going, this film - but once it does, it's amongst the best cat and mouse action adventures I've ever seen. Carl Weathers "Dillon" convinces his former commando mate "Dutch" (Arnold Schwarzenegger) to join him on a perilous rescue mission deep in the jungle. Once there they find themselves the prey of someone, something, that has ninja skills to die for - and, well, they do! Slowly and brutally picked off one by one, it becomes the ultimate battle for survival. This is my favourite from John McTiernan. He manages to use well, the claustrophobic environment; the heat-sensitive camera work is effective and the ascending sense of menace as these hardened men gradually realise that they are out of their depth is gripping. It builds tensely to a denouement that even has a degree of honour to it. Nope, of course the writing is never going to win a Pulitzer, nor is the acting offering us interestingly nuanced or delicate performances. It's just an out-and-out adventure film with a fair degree of horror, a slice of grown up/black humour and I quite enjoyed it.

_**Schwarzenegger vs. "the demon who makes trophies of man" in the Latin American jungles**_
An elite squad of commandos is enlisted for a mission to the jungles of Central America to rescue some VIPs after their helicopter is downed. They soon discover that they are hunted by some kind of predator… not of this world. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Carl Weathers star.
“Predator” (1987) mixes jungle action with otherworldly sci-fi for satisfying adventure/horror. The macho cast is superb, counterbalanced by Elpidia Carrillo as Anna. The flick’s iconic and uber-“cool” with exceptional jungle locations and cinematography, as well as F/X that hold up. Unfortunately, there’s little depth. It’s enjoyable as a popcorn movie, but also forgettable. Catch “Apocalypse Now” (1979) for the real deal in jungle adventure/horror.
The film runs 1 hour, 47 minutes and was shot in southern Mexico.
GRADE: B-/B

Ball busting Vietnam allegory McTiernan style delivers wholesale.
I will start this by giving my ratings, yes plural because to me as a sci-fi/action film fan the film has few peers, it is 100% pure suspense testo explosive fun that along side John McTiernan's other action template Die Hard, stands the test of time to the point that it will be thrilling viewers long after we have left this earth. So with that I give it a personal rating of 10/10, it's faultless for my needs in a genre I indulge and lose myself in on a frequent roster. For any other movie fan aware of the genre's traits and peccadilloes without being a fan of sorts, then I rate the film easily at 7 or 8 out of 10, what's not to like here?
The film is without a shadow of a doubt another allegory of Vietnam, a crack unit of soldiers are stuck in a central American jungle being killed off by an invisible enemy, the soldiers are there after being lied to by the powers that be, tactics are paramount but the enemy that stalks them holds all the aces. This crack special rescue team are a testosterone fuelled band of beef, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Carl Weathers, Sonny Landham, Bill Duke & Jesse Ventura, these five alone have a combined muscle weight heavy enough to have sunk the Titanic, and McTiernan uses the beefcakes to the max in a series of joyous ball busting sequences.
The dialogue is sharp and funny with Schwarzenegger quipping his way thru the first reel, and the score from Alan Silvestri pumps the blood at just the right time, whilst the effects crew have done sterling work to bring this "hardest man in the world versus bad ass alien predator" to life, none more so than when viewing POV heat seeking infa-red shots as our deadly alien killer. The end throws up some interesting thoughts, that have for better or worse? Been fleshed out with further films involving the predator of the title, but one should judge this film as a single entry because it sits at the top of the tree as one of the best of it's kind; so truly this is a benchmark for the genre that will take some beating as far as I'm concerned.
Enjoy 10/10

From about 1996 to about 2009 (roughly ages 4 til 17 for those playing at home), this was my all-time favourite movie. It was the first non-pirated VHS I ever owned, and it probably informed more of my youth than I'm comfortable with admitting. _Predator_ is the sort of movie that somehow both encapsulates and transcends the 1980s, I implore anybody who unlucky enough to never have seen _Predator_ to watch it, just to fulfil the life experience.
One of only five movies that I've ever given a 5/5 star rating to.
_Final rating:★★★★★ – Transcendent entertainment! An all time great._

**Too late to come out to impress its fans!**
It was not my most anticipated film of the year. Like usual for any film, I just wanted to see it and enjoy it. The film was fine, but that does not mean so good. From the visuals to the performances, it sounded great. But the story wasn't. When the original concept was created nearly 30 years back, it fascinated people for being something new and powerful. But for the current world, for the current generation, it is just an ordinary sci-fi. All I say is it just came out at least 15 years late. So the 90s kids would have loved it!
The storyline was nothing, but a self-discovery of a half human, half machine. This has been the plot of hundreds of robot films. But it's just differently told. One of only kind, a human brain was saved after the severe accident and given an artificial body. Now she's known as Major fights the crime. But some day later, she's haunted by glitches in her vision which directly connected to her past that she does not remember. The rest of the film was finding the truth and other consequences, before it all ends.
Visual effects were the only advantage for this film to come out in the present era. The rest of the film was simply okayish. I don't know what the original source fans say about it, but it is a one time watchable film. Otherwise, there are plenty of similar good films, like this is nothing much different than 'Robocop'. Or the recent TV series 'Westworld'. Scarlett Johansson could become a reason for some people to peek into it. The writing and direction were average. Watch and forget kind of film.
_5/10_