Waited so long for this movie to come out and I was loaded with anticipation.
When it finally landed I was so excited to watch it!
I must say, it didn't go in the direction that I was expecting (based on the on the other solo movies)... but I was very pleasantly surprised, and it was way better than I was expecting it to be.
I thoroughly enjoyed this movie, and it was a fitting tribute yo one of my favourite Marvel Universe characters.

Black Widow is worth seeing for Florence Pugh, the free-fall action sequence, and anything involving Taskmaster before it’s revealed who is under the mask. Everything else about Black Widow feels like it was done better by the films it was supposedly influenced by and mostly feels like a diluted imitation of Captain America: The Winter Soldier. It’s fantastic that women are getting more opportunities in big summer blockbusters like this one, but it’s also disheartening since their filmmaking skills are shackled to formulaic superfluity that obviously stands in the way of creating extraordinary cinema.
Full review: https://geekshavegame.com/black-widow-review-espionage-exhaustion/

It's crap, really. Nothing works in this movie.

It was okay

Honestly, if Black Widow opened Marvel’s Phase 4, I would have been even more impressed. However, after seeing the deep dives into characters that had been on the sidelines for years, this movie felt very surface level of the complexity of Natasha Romanoff. She was taken as a child to learn how to be an assassin, she had to sacrifice her morals to leave her past behind, she basically remained an assassin for a different organization that turned out to be run by similarly bad people as those she left, and she is now on the run from the government that once hailed her a hero because she didn’t fall in line. Oh, and she is reconnecting with her past fake family that gave her and Yelena back to the Red Room as soon as the mission was over. The trauma this character endured would’ve been better explored as a mini series, rather than a movie that’s trying to simultaneously remind us of where Natasha was five years ago and also trying not to acknowledge that Natasha has no risk posed to her in this movie because we know she lives on past these events. However, very excited to see where Yelena goes in the future.

Subpar Bond that believes it has emotional stakes isn't exactly a very winning formula. Far too much bad MCU banter to go with something that wants to be grounded and quite frankly none of the actors are quite adapt at those sitcomy whedonisms that these movies made mainstream (Pugh in particular is terrible at those bits). Some of the mid section action is better than average as far as those movies goes but anything with Taskmasker is very bad and the big end is terrible. Winstone villain made me miss when people like Lonsdale and Lee made lousy Moore Bond plots half watchable. The major limitation is that far too much of the emotional beats depend on what characters talk about their time together when they were a pretend family and altough Johansson and Pugh have good chemistry and Weisz and Harbour do as good job as possible under the circunstances of selling their regrets, there just isn't enough downtime between plot needs to anything of it truly land. I can get what Shortland was hoping to import into one of those but little actually works even with the benefit of a far more standalone movie than most of them. Also, strange how after a decade of postponing giving Johansson her movie, they did one in which she so often feels like a witness/connective MCU tissue for the main supporting characters family drama that they had to give her an extra subplot with her guilty over "killing" Winstone's daughter so it can feel like she has more material to work with. She is both the lead and the most extraneous part of her own movie

**This Is A Thrilling , Beautiful & VERY , VERY , VERY FUNNY Journey . . . BUT ALAS 😢 . . . It Will Of Course, -{ _INEVITABLY_ }- Be A " Short-Lived " One For S.J⚘. Welcome To The Age Of The Super🦸 ♀️ ANACHRONISTIC , Er , " Prequel "**
A "Good, Old Fashioned" **-{ _B I G_ }-** Screen Full Length Review .
____________________________________________________
Yelena Belova : { about Natasha Rommanoff.. and in -JEST- } " ... You're such a _Poser_❗" ⬜⬜⬜⬜
____________________________________________________
**1. " I Absolutely, Positively Loved It " :** And I'm going to say that right off the bat. For what it's worth, I actually had to go see Black Widow, ( 'B.W' for short ), -twice- as I wasn't able to catch the beginning the first time around . . & ended up appreciating it -{ So }- much more the second time ; because, being a person with a difficult past myself . . the -Superb- , Intricate, ( and often super - Hilarious 🤣🤣🤣 - ) drama between the lead characters -{ Really }- hit home for me. So much so . . . That inasmuch as ( - I - ) was concerned atleast, just about the -{ Only }- flaw with this film for me, if any, was the altogether "glaring" fact that it is now all but -Certain- . . . That we -{ Won't }- see Scarlett Johansson ( 'S.J' for short ) . . . Reprise her fascinatingly complex, and truly "Glorious" role as -{ _THE_ }- Black Widow. No spoiler here b.t.w ...this "Prequel"-movie's place in the overall 'M.C.U' ( Marvel Cinematic Universe ) timeline has always been made -{ CRYSTAL 💎 }- clear by 'MARVEL STUDIOS'... from the very Get-go. I invite you in earnest, { -Especially- if you're somewhat new to the whole "M.C.U-thing" }, to view one particular -Official- trailer by them, the one -still- entitled "New Trailer", ( YouTube, Apr.03, 2021 ), where the, 'rationale' ( -if you will- ) for B.W is explained, um, "Super"-well . . and is narrated by -none- other than, you guessed it, the "Hopelessly-Vivacious and yes, genuinely-Affable . . Ms. Johansson herself .
**2. " Loose Ends Are Tied Nicely " :** Here's a small { but undeniably significant } example. The 'aforementioned' Ms. Johansson's seemingly -{ "Random" }- & generally inexplicable "Suddenly-Blonde" hair in 'Infinity War' . . . . . { a look that frankly, I never -Could- quite warm up to at the time, having ...( along with Millions-&-Millions of -Other- 'M.C.U afficionados', I'm sure )... come to entirely -Adore- her trademark " Fiery Red-tresses Look 🔥 " , over the years } . . . . . Was " Finally " explained to us. Looking to the 'bigger' things : Basically, the picture filled in a -{ Whole }- bunch of gaps and 'story-holes' for me { that would often -totally- have me headscratching for "Answers" in the unbearably -Long- spells between each successive new ( & 'ever More Madly' ) anticipated "Massive" New Marvel-release. And it managed to -Achieve- this by essentially showcasing a "Wide", ( frankly ), and previously -Unknown- array of intertwined " Backstories 📚 " ...( not to mention giving us a satisfyingly -thorough- insight into the smattering of "badly damaged relationships left in the B.W's wake" )... that occurred -{ Well before }- & indeed, leading up to, her "very, very, very" high-priced and hard-won "Formal-entry Into Shield" { and concomitant defection from the Russian Secret Service, the 'F.S.B' ( formerly the 'K.G.B' ) }. Hence, a big, loud { " Kudos " } to the wonderfully gifted -Miz- Jac Schaeffer and Ned Benson ( the story-writers ), as well as Eric Pearson ( the movie's screenwriter ) .
**3. " A Veritable -Explosion- . . . Of Talent " :** A HUGE 👊💥, HEARTY PAT on the back is -{ Completely }- in order for **CATE SHORTLAND,** the Australian Directress of this U.S.D 200 Million cinematic 'Powder-keg". Although she may have been "hitherto" -{ Relatively }- unknown to -many- , this tremendously accomplished native of Temora, New South Wales actually has, get this -{ Two Full Decades }- of both T.V, as well as Film direction Credits under her belt, with 2012's War-romance-drama 'Lore' being her highest earning movie to date ( until -Black Widow- of course, that is to say 😉 ). Not only has she very successfully managed to bring together a tremendously -Cohesive- Principal Cast just 'gushing' with absolutely -{ Stellar }- Talent, let's be clear ...( a quick, special "Mention-of-note" is altogether warranted here for the -Charmingly- bubbly & ever "tenacious" ( newcomer to -MARVEL- ) Florence Pugh, who well & truly excels in her portrayal of 'Yelena Belova' )... but the film-crew that she's "assembled" have -{ Also }- well & truly outdone themseves in -Every Single- aspect of the Production . . . With the mega-Stylistic & "Dazzling" fight choreography employed in the "Widows training scene", ( -trailers, also- ), featuring an F.S.B 'mini-battalion' of " Spectacularly Luminescent 🖲 " Black-&-Red clad 'elite Girl-assassins' . . . Being the one that stood out for me -{ Visually }- , more than -any- other, in the film. And last, but most definitely -Not- least ; a quick 'Special-mention' of the fact that the 5 -Individual- Russian accents performed by 5 of "most" important Principal actors, ( -each to its Very specific, varying degree- ), were pulled off, rather -{ "Immaculately" }- I might add, by 5 different actors from, well, -get this- **. . . . _the U.K, & the U.S.A_ { 👏❗ } .**
**SUMMATION : -{ JUST AS LONG }-** as you go and see Black Widow with a "Free and Open-mind", prepared to be _Really, Really_ -{ Entertained }- . In 'my-specific' case, the ( obvious ) "Anachronistic" aspect of said movie . . . -{ _D I D_ }- . . . in fact make the prospect of watching it ( in the days leading up to B.W's release ) feel a tad bit strange, if you will. However, once I was actually -{ in }- my seat, the -"fabulous, Even Bond-esque"- intro sequence started to work its 'Insta' magic on me . . . . and then . . . . when that ever familiar, ever Dramatic, and yes, ever -Beloved- Marvel theme roared through the massive cinema hall I was in, it all just "Snapped" into place . An -Unabashed- , "Explosive" **13.00 MARKS OUT OF 10.00 MARKS** From Me . Oh and yes, Scarlett Johansson, you will be " sorely , but Surely , & Dearly " . . . _M I S S E D_ . . . as " _T H E_ " Black Widow . **->-{ • W • O • W • }->- , "1 POST-CREDITS APPEARANCE" , AND 8 "FULL-BLOWN" STARRING ROLES LATER ( A WHOPPING -_NINE_- FILMS IN TOTAL ) . . . . WHAT A " _SPECTACULARLY MEMORABLE_ " JOURNEY IT'S BEEN ❤❗.**

The first half of black widow was very strong and emotional. Florence Pugh was stellar in this movie. She was brilliant in action sequences and I like the fun elements in her character. Yelena and Natasha's chemistry was too good. David Harbour also performed very well.
The action sequences were good but CGI was too weak in the 3d act. Also, I didn't like the changes in Natasha's character. She has no superpowers like other avengers. Her strong brain and mind combine to make her a lethal weapon but they showed her over powerful in this movie.
The inner wounds of Natasha were beautifully delivered in this movie. I liked the movie but because of Florence only.

FULL SPOILER-FREE REVIEW @ https://www.msbreviews.com/movie-reviews/black-widow-spoiler-free-review
"Black Widow beautifully honors the iconic Natasha Romanoff, who finally receives the respectful, worthy solo film that her unforgettable legacy always deserved. Cate Shortland and Eric Pearson put together an MCU installment that doesn't really compare to any of the other origin flicks, profoundly examining the protagonist's dark past and her complex "family" through distinctly compelling storytelling. Scarlett Johansson shines one last time, interpreting the most impactful role of her career, but Florence Pugh comes close to stealing the spotlight by giving an absolutely phenomenal display. Boasting highly entertaining, mostly well-filmed action sequences, the main narrative follows a path with no surprises, as well as a generic villain, but the emotionally investing storylines regarding Natasha's personal motivations and Yelena's complex feelings keep the film remarkably captivating. The ending is as satisfying as I could have ever wished for. A loving farewell to a hero that inspired millions of viewers."
Rating: A-

After a delay lasting 19 months; the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) has returned to the big screen with “Black Widow”. The film takes place between “Captain America: Civil War” and “Avengers: Infinity War”; audiences get more of the backstory of Natasha Romanoff (Scarlett Johansson), as we are introduced to her early life before the Red Room.
This is not to say that the film is an origin story as it uses her backstory through a clever introduction that establishes her “family” as sleeper agents in Ohio before they escape and she and her cover sister are tuned over for conditioning and training.
Since Natasha is on the run from the authorities; she finds a remote location in Norway to bide her time. This does not last as a dangerous adversary known as the Taskmaster arrives and sets a chain of events into motion.
Natasha has been sent a package from her cover sister Yelena (Florence Pugh) who also went through the Red Room and became a top assassin in the years since she and Natasha last saw one another.
Despite her mixed feelings; Natasha ventures to Budapest and confronts Yelena who in turn reveals the package she sent her contains a compound that can free the other Black Widows from the control of the Red Room which despite Natasha’s insistence is still very much alive as is the head of the institute which she is convinced she killed long ago.
With Taskmaster and other Widows hot on their trail, Natasha and Yelena are forced to seek the help of their former “Father” the imprisoned hero Red Guardian (David Harbour), and their cover Mother Melina (Rachel Weisz), to find the location of the new Red Room; free the Widows, and end the program once and for all.
What follows is an engaging story with solid action and effects that remains at its core a character story as Natasha attempts to reconcile her cover family with her new Avengers family and the pain of her upbringing and conditioning.
Marvel resisted calls from some to release the film on Disney+ last year when the Pandemic caused multiple delays to the planned release dates. This decision to me was very wise as this is a film that needs to be seen and heard on the big screen as it is an experience that is best experienced in a cinema with others.
While many attempts were made over the decades to adapt comic heroes to film and television; most of them came up lacking and disappointed fans of the source material. Marvel for over a decade has continued to succeed as they have a clear plan, cast well, and have engaging characters that develop over time.
“Black Widow” fills in a missing gap of time in the MCU well and also sets up future adventures as a scene in the credits clearly links two of the live-action Disney+ series and shows that the long-term plan for the MCU continues and incorporates the film and television series well.
From the moment the Marvel intro and music appeared on the screen until the very end; “Black Widow” was a very enjoyable and engaging blockbuster adventure that shows Marvel at the top of their game; and why they continue to set event-level movies not to miss.
4 stars out of 5

At the start this reminded me a little of “Jumper” (2008) as it delivers a cleverly crafted idea of how murder might look in the 22nd century. It’s the ruthless “Joe” (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) who is in the employ of the mob and is routinely and lucratively waiting for their troublemakers to be sent back a few decades in time so he can eliminate them and leave no modern day traces of the crime. The snag with this operation for the “looper” is, though, that sooner or later they themselves have to get rubbed out and so as they age, they (now Bruce Willis) have to anticipate that they will be attacked. It’s Bruce who has well prepared for this eventuality and manages to thwart the attempts of his younger self - thanks to some well placed gold bars - and that leaves them both playing a deadly game of cat and mouse so as not to earn the enmity of their maniacal boss (Jeff Daniels). This is one of my favourite time travel action movies with an on form action hero in Willis looking like he is enjoying himself being chased by his own heroin addicted alter-ego, and each time the story resets it does so with additional information about not just these characters but also of the world that they are indirectly helping to create in the future. This helps stop this becoming a repetitive recycling of events and the arrival of the young “Sara” (Emily Blunt) and her own son (Pierce Gagnon) who has his own form of superpower adds a familial dynamic to the mystery that augments rather clutters up the mystery. There are visual effects but they are used sparingly, and despite a slight dry spell in the middle whilst the story seems to recalibrate a little, it’s held together well by two stars who enter into the spirit of the things and by a plot that’s eerily realistic (in a “Dr. Who” sort of fashion). It’s not perfect, but it is quirky, imaginative and I enjoyed it.

'Looper' is entertaining!
I had a fun time with this one. I guess that would come as little surprise given I do like basically everyone onscreen from other flicks, while that is true that isn't the sole reason for my enjoyment. The story is intruiging and is presented nicely by the filmmakers, I found it to be well paced too.
Joseph Gordon-Levitt gives a strong performance, even with make-up that occasionally makes him look just like Sean Connery's 'disguise' in 1967's 'You Only Live Twice'. Bruce Willis is solid throughout, as are Emily Blunt and Jeff Daniels. There are a few other noteworthy faces in there too, like Paul Dano and Garret Dillahunt.
Well made and well worth a watch. Recommended.

**Half-baked and weak genre mix with a pale Bruce Willis**
The main character is an anti-hero and isn't able to win the viewer over story emotionally - that would be OK if the story were at least coherent - but it isn't. The time travel logic doesn't work. The telekinesis nonsense seems incredibly pointless. The love story(s) is or are hardly comprehensible. And many plot elements are started without being brought to a meaningful end. Too bad - there was potentials there. So the whole thing is nothing more than a solid ordinary movie, despite all the genres that are (unnecessarily) mixed up in it.
The only ray of light for me in the movie: The mask and facial expressions by Joseph Gordon-Levitt, who manages to give a fun impression of a young Bruce Willis.

neither here nor there
Time travel can be an exciting plot device - if the writers take time to check and get everything right. Unfortunately, with Looper, they did not. Nor did director or producers choose a clear direction what this movie was supposed to be, what its pace and atmosphere should be like. So it turned out to be full of wasted potential. Good ideas, characters, situations, plot elements it all had at some points - but none developed, really.
That's more disappointing that if it had had no potential. Wasted opportunities... in a loop.

The plot is full of flaws. Quite like a even worse inception.

I am normally fairly hesitant concerning time-travel movies because it is next to impossible to get them right. They more or less always become very unrealistic and full of paradoxes. I would almost go as far as to say that producers making serious (non-comedy) time travel movies are the ones that are scientifically too stupid to realise that it is just going to be a mess, or they do not really care about the issues hoping that the audience also will not care.
This movie is really proof of this. It is full of paradoxes and annoying “but if this happened now then that couldn’t have happened then and vice versa”. Maybe some people can force themselves overlooking these things but I have some difficulty doing so. I fully agree with the statement that one of the characters in the movie was making: “"This time travel crap, just fries your brain like an egg…".
Anyway, trying to pierce through the cloud of time-travel issues and enjoy the movie, it is not a bad movie. Given that it really had no chance of succeeding in the science area, or have a plot which didn’t defy all logic (time travel you know) it does indeed make a valiant try to entertain. It is not one of Bruce Willies standard all-out action-filled roller-coasters. That is not to say that there is no action but there is also plenty of time for trying to actually tell the story in the movie. The movie is actually quite dark and melancholic. The future seems to be fairly dirty, run down and ridden with criminal organisations.
As if time-travel itself wasn’t bad enough the story also involves 10% of the population having developed psychic powers. Most of them good for nothing except cheap show tricks like levitating small objects. Most of them…except our future crime lord which of course is found to have super-psychic powers. Also, of course, the kid had to behave like a spoiled brat with anger problems which was somewhat annoying.
The ending, which I will not divulge here of course, was not very surprising and left quite a few open questions. On the whole I would say that the movie was entertaining but it is far from going on my top ten list.

movie was a little slow and drawn out. action was ok but story was little weak.

Russell Crowe and Ron Howard make for quite a formidable partnership in this biopic of the acclaimed mathematician John Nash. Like so many folk with an acute scientific ability, his social skills bordered on the wrong side of inept and a combination of his good looks and his superiority complex soon lead him to a life that vacillates between the extremely happy and the downright depressing. There are maybe two people in his life whom he has made some sort of connection with. His Princeton college "Charles" (Paul Bettany) and the exceptionally patient "Alicia" (Jennifer Connelly) whom he met whilst teaching her and whom he eventually marries. Meantime, his brainpower has attracted the attention of Uncle Sam, and that's when he meets "Parcher" (Ed Harris) who embroils him in a plan to crack some top secret Soviet codes. The enemy also knows he's been drafted in to help and so he is soon a target for their assassins and their network of fifth columnists too. A combination of his own inherent insecurities and this way more palpable threat lead Nash to a paranoia that threatens to destroy himself and everything he holds dear. It's also a testament to Howard's direction that he manages to create quite a menacing character from the usually charming Christopher Plummer, whose "Rosen" is a dab hand with an hypodermic. Crowe is at his best here, his portrayal of this frankly rather selfish and obnoxious man is almost perfect and though I can't say I ever liked the character, nor felt especially sorry for his predicaments, I did feel invested in just how he could emerge from the internal conflicts he faced unsure of what was true and what was not. A bare minimum of romance to clutter it up and both Harris and Connelly contributing well to a story of a flawed yet brilliant human being makes this well worth a few hours.

"Daley" (Ben Stiller) is struggling to find a job that will allow him to keep his apartment and in contact with his young son "Nick" (Jake Cherry). Even the job finders have given up on him until, that is, there is a potential opening as a night watchman at the Museum of Natural History. His application is presented to the ostensibly kindly old "Cecil" (Dick Van Dyke) and his two cohorts "Gus" (Mickey Rooney) and "Reginald" (Bill Cobbs) and he gets the job! First night, doing his rounds, all fine until things start to move, to come alive, to chase him, attack him - he's terrified! His colleagues arrive for work in the morning and alert him to a few, now rather obvious, facts and next night he has to try and assert himself with his congregation of native Americans, Roman legionaries, megalomaniacs, dinosaurs, lions - yep, just about everything that you might expect to find in a museum like this. He's making progress - discipline is creeping in as he manages to manage his charges a little better each evening. He even feels confident enough to introduce them all to his lad. The scene is set, the lights are dimmed, and the time comes - but on this night there is nothing. They remain statuesque. What's occurring? Well that's where the mystery and a wee bit of comedy bring this amiable film towards it's denouement. Shawn Levy has assembled a decent cast for this Ben Stiller vehicle. The humour is gentle with some "creative" history interwoven into the characterisations of Teddy Roosevelt (Robin Williams), curator "McPhee" (Ricky Gervais) and of course the three mischievous co-wardens. It's a smashing advertisement for just what museums can show us and if it encourages kids to go explore our past, then it will probably have done a more memorable job than the film itself ever will - but it's still an enjoyable enough watch.

I'm made of wax, Larry. What are you made of?
Night at the Museum is directed by Shaun Levy and jointly written by Robert Ben Garant & Thomas Lennon who adapt from the book by Milan Trenc. It stars Ben Stiller, Carla Gugino, Dick Van Dyke, Mickey Rooney, Bill Cobbs, Ricky Gervais, Robin Williams, Owen Wilson and Steve Coogan. Plot sees Stiller as a newly recruited night security guard at the Museum of Natural History, who discovers that an ancient curse causes the animals and exhibits on display to come to life and wreak havoc.
Not really one night at the museum, but three nights, it's a film that's enjoyable enough if expectation is set at the level for standard family action/comedy fare. All the elements for such are within, protagonist with something to prove to his son, magical animals and historical characters coming to life; and of course the general malarkey that comes with such a premise. Trouble is is that the premise is stronger than the execution. Sure it's energetic and Stiller makes for a likable loser-cum-hero type, and the effects will no doubt dazzle the kids, but it comes over as an excuse for the latter. Is it fun? Yes, yes it is, when it's in flow, but it does grow tiresome towards the run in and the pay off is as formulaic as it gets. It garnered enough coin to warrant a sequel, something that firms up the belief that the market for action/adventure/family movies is currently starved of portions.
It's hoped that better directors, and better films, are forthcoming in this genre, so as to show the latest generation of fun seekers that efforts such as this are not high points. 6/10

Jim Carrey is the drippy bank-clerk "Ipkiss" who is always looking for love but who never seems to make much progress. Then one night he spots something floating in the river. Thinking it's a man, he goes to the rescue but it turns out to just be a mask that we know has recently been released from a locked casket deep beneath the waves. He takes it home, and whilst inspecting it soon realises that it can attach itself to his face and turn him into a suave and witty character (albeit with a bright green face) who has no difficulty exuding the charm. That's handy because we are now introduced to the charming "Tina" (Cameron Diaz) so maybe the mask can help him woo her? The thing about this mask, though, is that it has a mischievous streak - it's enables it's users desires both good and bad, too, and of course it isn't long before the police "Kellaway" (Peter Riegert) are on the case as the mask brings out the conflicting side of it's owner's personality and some trouble beckons. It's an adequate vehicle for Carrey and he owns the show from start to finish. He's charismatic and entertaining but I just never found him funny. His presentation of humour is just too brash and in your face. There's nothing remotely subtle or sophisticated about it, and though it is lively and really doesn't hang around at all, I found it just a bit too repetitious and after about twenty minutes it reminded me of "Bugsy Malone" (1976) only without the custard pies. Like Steve Martin, Jim Carrey's style of comedy just didn't hit the spot for me, and though this is certainly one of his better efforts and Diaz adds a star quality to the affair, it's all just a little too pantomime slick for me.

Not as good as I remember, still an amusing watch regardless.
It's been many, many years since I last watched 'The Mask', hence why I hadn't had it logged on here before now, and while it isn't as funny or as quotable as I thought it would be (I remember really liking it as a kid), there is still enough in there that I got much entertainment from.
Jim Carrey's performance is superb, without him you'd have a very cringe and ultimately disappointing flick. Interesting to note that he did this, 'Ace Ventura: Pet Detective' and 'Dumb and Dumber' (which I gotta see at some point!) all in 1994 - quite the year! Peter Greene and Peter Riegert are also involved, though it's very much the debuting Cameron Diaz that is the best of the rest behind Carrey.
Apparently this had a sequel released in 2005, 'Son of the Mask'. On paper it should be awful, so therefore I gotta go check it out!

Fun fantasy-comedy that utilizes Jim Carrey's physicality, and comedic timing, to the extreme and while some of the jokes didn't land and the mask himself (both Stanley and Dorian) was a bit ridiculous, even within the confines of this universe, still found it to be entertaining enough, plus it is Cameron Diaz's feature debut... **3.5/5**

Nonstop mindfu#k journey through the eyes of Harley Quinn. So much fun to see her character arch. Margot makes it so much fun with putting so many little details like facial expressions, the way she delivers lines, and sometimes just her total awkwardness in the moment. Fun film.

Birds of Prey starts off incredibly strong, with a fantastic introduction to Harley Quinn and her downfall post Joker break up, but the story starts to fall off the rails towards the end. It was hard to stay engaged in the movie with it jumping around so much due to the unreliable narrator that is Harley Quinn. Even though I get the direction they were going for, it just did not work for me. I really did not care about a couple characters in the main cast and found myself on really liking Harley and Black Canary, the other two felt underdeveloped. Ewan McGregor did a fantastic job as the villain in this film, every scene he captivated me with calm demeanor quickly spiraling into insanity, he stole the show. The fight choreography in this film was top notch too, with plenty of creative kills and interesting visuals to boot. I found myself mixed, where I like a part and got bored at others. Definitely inconsistent, but a fun watch none the less.
**Verdict:** _Good_

Full review: https://www.tinakakadelis.com/beyond-the-cinerama-dome/2021/12/28/fly-away-home-birds-of-prey-and-the-fantabulous-emancipation-of-one-harley-quinnnbspreview
_Birds of Prey (and the Fantabulous Emancipation of One Harley Quinn)_ is one of the few comic book movies that really gets the spirit of its source material. Director Cathy Yan understands that it should be a chaotic Technicolor feast of action and adventure, and her love letter to Harley Quinn (Margot Robbie) is a blast.

Sorry, but this is a really poor attempt at an action film. Margot Robbie is Ok as the feisty heroine from the title, but the rest of the cast are instantly forgettable. I am guessing that Ewan McGregor - the dastardly villain of the piece - was only available for a few filming days as his appearances are pretty shallow from a characterisation perspective and add little to the plot. The interminable fight scenes reminded me of "Bugsy Malone" (1976) only without the custard pies.

About 'Birds of Prey' writing a lot in principle illegally and unnatural! Tape this clearly does not deserve! After all, the authors and producers completely forgot that people love not only with their eyes but also ears, soul, and brain. And with this love here is clearly stress.
Total: an empty bright one-time little interesting cocktail with two famous actors, flat jokes, absolutely not exciting plot.

Harley Quinn: Birds of Prey is DC entertainment's latest effort to conquer the territory of film-adapted comics, a different effort with a really interesting idea at its base. Making Harley Quinn the main character in your own movie after shining on the terrible Suicide Squad makes perfect sense, ridding her of the Joker’s abusive control makes the idea even more interesting (although I’m of the opinion that Joker should have been the great villain of this film).
Sometime after the events of Suicide Squad, and after ending his relationship with the Joker, Quinn breaks up with the factory where he gave himself up to his former crush, announcing to Gotham the whole time that he was no longer under the protection of the feared Crime Clown . Of course, in doing so, Quinn makes herself a target to shoot down, due to all the evil she had done in the past, inspiring the villain Roman Sionis (played by an eccentric Ewan McGregor) to chase her, that and a missing diamond causes Harley to cross paths with the group of women whose title the film refers to.
I would say that the biggest problem with Harley Quinn: Birds of Prey is the combination of several elements that do not always make the most sense. There are times when the film seems to want to put Harley in the midst of a new team such a Suicide Squad, other times when it is only concerned with focusing on it, as if it were trying to follow a plot in which, in the end, it would face Joker (Since Joker doesn't even make any appearance in the film, being replaced by Roman Sionis).
In my opinion, Harley Quinn: Birds of Prey doesn't really know what he wants to be, and I can't help feeling that Joker was supposed to be part of the film, but due to the drama with the negative reception of Jared Leto's interpretation, it was excluded completely from the project. However, McGregor's interpretation gives Ronan Sionis an aura of threat, of terror, as he really seems to be dangerous and we still feel his ferocity emanating from the screen.
That said, all the interpretations are really excellent, Margot Robbie is enthusiastic on paper, her character is highly memorable and the only one in the film that is really 100% developed. Mary Elizabeth Winstead is incredible in the role of Huntress, despite the little material given to her, and brings a natural charisma to the character that makes her really special, without her this would be an easily forgotten character. Jurnee Smollett-Bell as Canary is also extremely convincing, and brings to the paper a special magnetism that leaves it as one of the most memorable parts of the film.
Harley Quinn: Birds of Prey, on the whole, is not a bad film, although thematically confusing, it is extremely fun and will certainly get a lot of laughs from the audience. Again, Harley Quinn is also the piece that really makes this project so unique, and seeing it on the screen is something that will leave any audience member with a smile on their face.
It is also important to note that the film contains incredibly well choreographed action sequences, which become a visual delight as they become crazier. Their performance is delusional and fiery, as in the rest of the film, giving it a very extravagant and remarkable style.
So, while Harley Quinn: Birds of Prey is no Wonder Woman (2017) and contains a host of problems, it's also extremely fun, a good time spent in the cinema without the obligation to think about the general problems of life. I can't say that I loved the movie, but I didn't hate it either, it's a decent guilty pleasure and a decent hour spent in front of the big screen.

If you found yourself internally screaming for Ryan Reynolds to shut the hell up during Deadpool, then the relentless, zany narration of Margot Robbie’s Harley Quinn will likely send you gibbering and ruined towards the emergency exit after, oh, 23 seconds.