"Dalton" (a competent effort from Ty Simpkins) and his dad "Josh" (Patrick Wilson) have a strained relationship as they come to terms with recent family upheaval and that pressure is beginning to unravel the hypnotism that is protecting them from even more ghastly memories from nine years ago. At college, he quickly befriends the quirky and outgoing girl "Chris" (an overpowering Sinclair Daniel), who is wrongly assigned to be his room-mate. Before long the pair are mired in a series of mysteries that seem to emanate from his imagination - a comatose state sets in and another dimension - and it's perils - arrives to terrorise the family via an ominous looking painting that he has instinctively created and hung on the wall. Can they unite, put their differences behind them and rally to defeat their nemesis and close the portal for ever? Well, sadly I didn't really care. This is really just a revamp of the first "Insidious" (2010) film with some added teenage angst, familial discord and little enough by way of contributions from the other siblings to give any depth to this routine father and son drama that save for the slightly livelier denouement was really rather predictable and dull. There are a few jump moments mid-way through the drama, but for the rest of it it seems that Wilson was perhaps too preoccupied with both of his roles here to focus properly on either, and that leaves us with a rather unremarkable muddle of a film that I'm afraid is just instantly forgettable.

I didn't mind the first film and I don't actually mind its sequel.
These feel like the sort of flicks that should be getting 6/10 (or lower) from me but when the credits have rolled on each film I can't deny that I didn't not like what I had just sat through and watched. I haven't really got that many positives either, but rating it lower just feels off to me for some reason. It's a decent murder mystery (ha! I said the thing!)
Adam Sandler and Jennifer Aniston are a passable pairing, as a duo I don't think they are all that effective but do do the job and individually I'm evidently content to watch them act; esp. Aniston. Mark Strong, Mélanie Laurent and Adeel Akhtar are some of the others that are involved and, again, they give what's required. Akhtar's character is initially annoying but ends up being fine, and I like the actor from 'Four Lions' and (the quality) 'Utopia'.
I didn't need a secondary installment of this, yet I clearly hold nothing against it. I do hope that they don't make 'Murder Mystery 3' though... ah crap, who am I kidding - I'd probably find enjoyment with that too.

Murder Mystery 2 made me laugh. What more do you need from an Adam Sandler Netflix original?
Murder Mystery 2… It won't dazzle critics, but for people who enjoy a good laugh and Adam Sandler fans, this movie will be a blast! This marks the third film pairing Adam Sandler with Jennifer Aniston, and their chemistry takes Murder Mystery 2 from ridiculous to charming and entertaining. If you enjoyed the first movie, the sequel continues all the dynamics and hilarity that made its predecessor successful with a little more polish and experience. The fight scene in the van had me laughing so hard my wife judged me a little 😆. The cheese bit and other reoccurring gags were undoubtedly immature… but pretty funny and exactly what you would expect of an Adam Sandler film. Don't compare this movie to Knives Out or Glass Onion. Instead, compare it to Happy Gilmore and The Wedding Singer with a little more murder. Murder Mystery 2 is a Netflix streaming sequel, so don't set your expectations high, but Adam Sandler fans and people that just want a good time will enjoy it.

Ghosted has been the target of internet criticism since the first scenes were published on social media, and while the film is not good, it is not nearly as bad as some make it out to be.
The direction and visuals were all fairly good. The visuals looked fine for the majority of the film with no complaints whatsoever, including Ana de Armas’ wig. The direction was good, with some decent action choreography that was filmed pretty well, although there were a few scenes that suffered from too many jump cuts. I thought the intimate scene towards the beginning of the film was very stylistic and done really well. It was not just your standard grunts and moans that you see in so many films today.
The story was very oddly paced. The beginning section was really rushed, and the romantic build-up did not feel genuine in the slightest. Due to a poor script, their chemistry was non-existent in some sections, as the dialogue was atrocious. While there are some laughs to be had for sure, the majority of the comedy did not work for me. There was heavy use of modern songs throughout the entirety of the film. While some sections were complimented by the tracks, many others felt really out of place.
The performances were decent, but I think were hindered by the poor script. Ana de Armas was fine, although I never really liked her in anything since "Knives Out" as her performances always seem a little dull. Chris Evans played a character he's played many times before, which was entertaining, but he could not alone save the terrible dialogue he was given.
Overall, Ghosted is not a good film in the slightest, but I cannot deny that I had a pretty good time watching it, and that deserves some credit.
Score: 43% ❌
Verdict: Poor

The film fails to live up to its very alluring cast.
Given the trailer, you might be intrigued to find the answer to the question "is there more than what I just saw?". Let me answer that for you: no. This is another braindead action movie that fulfills most of the tropes it has to. What's on the package is what's in the package.
The only reason this didn't up a closed tab within 20 minutes was the cast and my inability to lift my lazy butt from the couch, which is what this film is good for: a lazy, braindead evening on the couch.

**Ghosted’s comedic moments bring some good laughs, and its action entertains, but its indecisive tone gets distracting. Still, a decent entertaining spy comedy that won’t blow your mind but isn’t a bad way to pass the time.**
Ghosted wrestles with its tone as it decides whether it’s a goofy rom-com or a more serious spy thriller. While very much in the vein of Knight and Day or The Killers, Ghosted doesn’t stay committed to comedy throughout. The jokes come and go, with Chris Evans taking most of the comedy side and Ana de Armas taking most of the action. The tone might be conflicted, but the fun never stops. Solid action sequences, car chases, exotic locations, and elegant gowns and suits - Ghosted has all the essential elements of a classic spy film. The jokes land better than The Gray Man’s quips, and the action is better than Red Notice’s set pieces giving Ghosted a slight edge over its streaming adventure competition. It’s a flawed movie for certain, with an out-of-place soundtrack and identity crisis, but what it does well makes it interesting enough for a watch and possibly even a sequel. …maybe

FULL SPOILER-FREE REVIEW @ https://insessionfilm.com/movie-review-ghosted/
"Ghosted is a tremendous catastrophe. When the only memorable moments of the entire film are the myriad cameos totally disconnected from the story itself, little else can be said about it. Visual effects, action, and script are a seriously shocking mess, to the point of affecting the performances and chemistry of a renowned cast. One of the worst editing works in recent years. One of the most prominent, frustrating wastes of talent in front of and behind the camera. Very far from the “so bad it’s good” status."
Rating: D-

Good little adventure for this young man who... has a bit of a strange situation with his dad. What a crazy bugger his dad is and what kind of family dynamic is going on? Is the younger sister pregnant with the dad's kid? Maybe it's cultural and I'm not sure why the old man changes intention so quickly or what the bird motivations are. Perhaps will read a book about it one day.
It's fun. There's cool animation. I like to watch these in Japanese with subs but I went back to listen to the English track for certain scenes. Dafoe kills it as the dying stork.

Maybe it's sacrilegious to say, but I didn't love this latest from the marvellously imaginative mind of Hayao Miyazaki. It follows the adventures of "Mahito" who arrives at the home of his factory-owning father amidst WWII. We appreciate quickly that his mother has died and that he is to have a new, expectant, mother in "Natsuko". When she mysteriously disappears and "Mahito" finds his presence "requested" by an enigmatic and beautiful grey heron, he strays into an old abandoned tower on his family estate and is soon embroiled in a world inhabited by people who are alive and, well, not! It seems the heron is not quite what it seemed, either, as he must explore rooms within rooms and endless doors that open into new scenarios. Pursued by giant pelicans, how can "Mahito" find his stepmother and return safely to their home? Luckily, along the way, he encounters the benevolently spiritual "Kiriko" as he finds himself the subject of some clever manipulation between the outwardly benign "Grand Uncle" who draws the power of life from a giant sacred stone he wishes to leave in the custody of our young explorer and the ambitious "Pelican King". You simply cannot fail to admire the vivid imagination of Miyazaki - the ideas and apparent randomness of the threads that gradually come together is hard enough to follow sometimes even when you have seen the denouement, and that's what makes these intricately drawn and characterised stories usually more intriguing and enjoying. Somehow, though, this was just a little too unstructured and meandering for my little brain. I've seen it twice now and maybe I just didn't engage with "Mahito" in the way I did with "Howl", "Totoro" or 'Chihiro" or, indeed, with the story. It's still a glorious watch on a big screen and is certainly well worth watching. Just not sure it is in his top five, though!

MORE SPOILER-FREE MINI-REVIEWS @ https://www.msbreviews.com/movie-reviews/mini-reviews-2023-edition
THE BOY AND THE HERON is a visually captivating film that struggles to balance all of its storylines and themes. Technically, no faults. The visuals are nothing short of breathtaking, with each shot meticulously detailed and rich in storytelling. The animation is a true work of art, drawing viewers into a world of wonder and magic. The sound design and score complement the visuals beautifully, enhancing the overall viewing experience. And finally, the film retains the typical Ghibli humor that fans have come to love, sprinkling lighthearted moments throughout the narrative.
However, Hayao Miyazaki succumbs to his ambition. The filmmaker tries to incorporate too many ideas, resulting in a somewhat confusing, messy narrative, particularly in the transitions between different characters, locations, and story arcs. THE BOY AND THE HERON stumbles in its attempt to juggle multiple ideas, but overall, it still manages to deliver a delightful, enchanting experience for fans of the studio's work.
Rating: B-

I didn't know what to expect from 'Asteroid City', yet I got exactly what I expected from this director... Wes Anderson, that!
As usual: love the aesthetic, the exquisite colour palette and the usual Wes vibes. Always fun seeing a bunch of known faces appear throughout. Jason Schwartzman and Scarlett Johansson are the standouts. A fair few others do well too, namely Bryan Cranston and Jeffrey Wright. Steve Carell is amusing in a small role, also.
I've enjoyed some of Anderson's other works much more ( 'Fantastic Mr. Fox' , 'The French Dispatch' ), the story didn't totally hook me here if I'm honest, but this one is very much still a good film in my opinion.

Top tongue-in-cheek directors: Wes Anderson and Wen Jiang. Asteroid City isn't my favorite Wes film, but it's surely tongue-in-cheek and pretty damn funny.
This movie reminds me a little of Tennessee Williams, the all-time master of damaged and traumatized human psyches. I see this work as a treatise on human issues, especially the labels given to us by others and those we give ourselves, and how they affect one's life and relationships.
The partial view of the "Confessions of a Narcissist" marquis that showed up in the background of the tet-a-tet between Augie and his almost-onstage-wife is a clue. The term "narcissist" didn't become popular psychology until the 1980s. There were other anachronisms, but this one is particularly striking in context.
And what's with that song and dance number in the middle of the show? The band that showed up in this desert had no other raison d'etre!! Did Wes just reference the Time Warp from The Rocky Horror Picture Show??

Most critics have their personal favorite directors, and it’s sometimes a challenge to keep strict objectivity when reviewing one of their projects. That’s why it pains me to write about “Asteroid City,” the sluggish, smug, exasperating new film from co-writer and director Wes Anderson. In what is unquestionably his worst film by a mile, Anderson leans too heavily on his ordered, signature visual symmetry, saturated color palate, and A-list cast while completely forgetting how to make an entertaining movie.
The film takes place in a tiny desert town (famous for their giant crater) where the Junior Stargazers and Space Cadets are holding their awards convention. The event brings together students and their parents, all oddballs in their own right, from all over the country. When a UFO is spotted, the visitors are quarantined until the government deems it safe for them to return to the real world.
The plot is thin yet confusing, as the film simultaneously depicts the events of the convention in the form of a stage play, the creation of the play, and the actual events in a retro version of 1955. With so much going on, you’d think it would be at least mildly interesting, but the movie is sluggish and packed with conversational and head-scratching filler that lends nothing to the story.
There is a wacky cast of (too many) characters, and only a handful turn out to be memorable. The expected roster of Anderson regulars make an appearance (Jason Schwartzman, Edward Norton, Adrien Brody, Tilda Swinton, Jeffrey Wright, Scarlett Johansson) as well as big names that are new to working with the director (Bryan Cranston, Tom Hanks, Maya Hawke, Matt Dillon, Steve Carell, Liev Schreiber, Hong Chau, Jake Ryan). It’s a dream of a cast list, but this film goes to show that a talented roster doesn’t always result in a gem. There’s nothing wrong with any of the performances, but it’s the source material that needs a lot of work.
“Asteroid City” may be visually delightful, but it is filled with a detached, hipster indifference that’s off-putting. This is one of the biggest failures of the year, and it’s not because the film is “too Wes Anderson-y,” nor is it because of the general Anderson fatigue: this movie is a series of flagrant missteps that cause the project to flounder and fall.

Well Wes Anderson has certainly assembled a formidable cast here, but I'm afraid I found the whole thing very much a case of style over substance. It all happens in an one-horse town in Nevada where a meteorite crashed aeons ago. Every year the town awards those youngsters who have achieved something especial in the field of science, so they - and their families - gather together for the awards ceremony presided over by "Gen. Gibson" (Jeffrey Wright). The "Steenbeck" family are prominent with father and acclaimed photographer "Augie" (Jason Schwartzman) and his geeky son "Woodrow" (Jake Ryan) suffering the terminal breakdown of their car that necessitates the arrival of the boy's grandfather "Stanley" (Tom Hanks) who arrives in his Cadillac to witness this gathering of enigmatic characters staying in tiny chalets in what looked very much like one of the demonstration villages built near nuclear testing sites. "Augie" takes a shine to the glamorous actress neighbour "Midge" (Scarlett Johansson) and his son to her daughter "Dinah" (Grace Edwards) and whilst these romances build in the quirkiest of fashions, we are introduced to some of the other quaint characters who inhabit the place - leaving me, unfortunately with a sort of bemused who cares sentiment. The photography is intense, intimate, intrusive almost and features more than it's share of whip pans and rolling panoramas and the dialogue is not without some pith - but I couldn't help but leave the cinema after the second viewing of this not such masterpiece cinema wondering if it were all just a case of emperor's new clothes. It wasn't that I felt that I missed something, it was that I felt that there was nothing to miss. The story - insofar as there actually was one - could hardly have been more incidental to this whimsy of a film that I would certainly agree looks great, but whose sum of the parts did not add up to much of an whole. I readily acknowledge that I don't do surreal particularly well, but for me this didn't amount to anything at all worth writing, let alone raving, about. Sorry - unremarkable.

Even though the film has a fair share of chuckle worthy moments, _Asteroid City_ shamelessly rolls around in its eccentricities and unapologetic blundering demeanor with no real depth or character development whatsoever. The gathering of extraordinary talent draws you in yet _Asteroid City_ doesn’t deliver a story that’s fully worth telling.
**Full review:** https://boundingintocomics.com/2023/06/24/asteroid-city-review-wes-andersons-charmless-comedic-drama/

Writer-director Wes Anderson has lost his way, and this film proves it. I realize that the auteur’s signature style of filmmaking is an acquired taste, and, to his credit, he’s made some fine pictures over the years. But this one is not among them. In fact, contrary to many of the inexplicable claims that this is his finest release, I’d contend just the opposite. It’s arguably his worst, a meandering, cryptic, unfocused piece that’s so muddled you’ll need the assistance of a search party to find your way out of it (that is, if you even care by the time the end of this overlong mess rolls around). The director appears to have become so enamored with his own eccentricity that it doesn’t even seem to matter to him whether or not viewers are on the same page as he is. Admittedly, this offering once again captures Anderson’s singularly stylish look with a stunning production design and gorgeous cinematography. But that’s all it has going for it, and that’s unfortunate given the phenomenal cast he has available to him. What’s more, despite his proficiency in creating superb visual style, he’s forgotten about pairing it with meaningful (or even interesting) substance. Its incomprehensibility and inclusion of bits that are there just for the sake of their own whimsy seriously undercut any effort to make this an intelligible work. In short, “Asteroid City” is yet another major disappointment in what is turning out to be a dreadfully dismal summer movie season. It’s likely to appeal only to diehard fans of the director (and maybe not even a lot of them this time out). If you’re on the fence about this one, consider the following two telling tipoffs: (1) when no one in the theater is laughing at what’s been billed as a comedy, that should speak volumes about it (as happened at the screening I attended); and (2) when you consider how aggressively and ubiquitously the distributors have been promoting this film in ads on TV and the internet, it’s obvious they’re trying awfully hard to peddle shabby, substandard merchandise. This is a huge waste of time and money; don’t squander yours.

FULL SPOILER-FREE REVIEW @ https://insessionfilm.com/movie-review-asteroid-city/
"For fans of Wes Anderson, Asteroid City doesn’t disappoint, offering exactly what was expected from it. For viewers who don’t exactly appreciate the filmmaker’s style, I don’t think this film will convert you.
Personally, it’s nowhere near the level of The Grand Budapest Hotel, but it’s a considerable improvement over The French Dispatch."
Rating: B-

#AirMovieReview #MichaelJordan #ViolaDavis
We initially hesitated to watch this film due to the lack of positive buzz surrounding it, leaving it at the bottom of our watchlist for some time. However, when we finally made it to the theater to see it, we were pleasantly surprised by what we found.
"Air" turned out to be a fantastic movie that was well worth our time. I found myself completely engrossed in the story from start to finish. I appreciated how the film focused on Michael Jordan as a brand rather than just a person, allowing the concept of the movie to shine through.
The film's humor, cleverness, and overall storyline were impressive, and Viola Davis delivered a stellar performance as a mother. I highly recommend this movie, and if you missed it in theaters, be sure to catch it on a streaming platform.

MORE SPOILER-FREE MINI-REVIEWS @
"Air soars with a chemistry-filled cast, offering lively performances across the board, with Matt Damon standing out in particular. Alex Convery's excellent script showcases some of the sharpest writing in recent sports biopic history, blending humor and drama seamlessly, despite not breaking any new ground within the subgenre, adhering to familiar tropes and overall structure. The kinetic dialogue keeps every scene incredibly entertaining, making the almost two-hour runtime fly by. Ben Affleck continues to prove his talent as both director and actor. Surprisingly engaging even for non-basketball enthusiasts. A highly enjoyable, well-executed original story about how one shoe changed the world."
Rating: B+

Slightly forced 1980s aesthetic/nostalgia trip aside, 'Air' is quality!
The 80s was before my time, so I guess I'm not best placed to talk about it, but the constant shots of 80s things with 80s music with extremely 80s enviroments did get a tiny bit tiresome to me. I recall people saying similar-ish with 'Stranger Things' season 3, though I found the mix of it there to more befitting. I'm nit-picking, I know, but it just was super noticeable to me here.
Anyway, enough of that unimportant stuff. The film is great. The whole cast do terrific work, particularly Matt Damon, Viola Davis (the phone call scene between those two is excellent), Jason Bateman and Ben Affleck. I'd say the secondary portion of the almost 2hrs is the stronger, prior to that I was intrigued but not invested... by the end I was both. It's a predictable story, but that doesn't make it any less enjoyable.
The decision to practically not have a Michael Jordan character in a movie about Michael Jordan is an interesting one. It feels a tad awkward when he is in a scene and they intentionally 'hide' him. I get why, and it mostly works, but it does feel dorky at a point or two.
Overall, very good. To be honest, ignore my above nit-picks - it's most definitely worthy of a watch.

A staggering tale of an unhinged perseverance which is backed by a captivating screenplay.
Air is a story so frivolous and flat , that the courage of Ben Affleck should be lauded with our hats down. A simple plot which would fit within 3 lines of a page is magically presented to us as a fascinating and appealing peace of history which changed the strature of business in sports in America and revolutionized a global culture, Nike's collaboration with the greatest basketball player in the history of the game, "Michael Jordan". The 2 hours doesn't feel long when you have a dazzling screenplay & a marvelous ensemble cast with their pragmatic conversations. Ben Affleck really puts in a fine effort to yield such sensational performances for the star studded cast.
Brilliant is an understatement for the ensemble cast. I have never seen a better grounded performance of Matt Damon than this. He is sensational. Jason Bateman and Viola Davis add the much needed spark with their magnetic performances. Good to see Chris Tucker back and boy he just gets his sense of humor right each time. The banters between Matt and Chris Messina is the highlight for me. Ben Affleck is a master in terms of direction, the way he manages veterans into building such a collaboration is astounding.
Overall, If you believe in uplifting stories behind sports and redefining moments of history which changed the world we live in today then Air is a great addition to your watchlist.
Instagram @streamgenx

“Air” is a sports marketing drama that delivers satisfying entertainment with a feel-good, universal appeal. Never would I have guessed that a film about business deals and shoe marketing would be so engaging, but this true story about the game-changing partnership in 1984 between an NBA rookie named Michael Jordan and the athletic apparel company Nike is gratifying on all levels. You don’t have to be a basketball fan or even know anything about Jordan to enjoy this film. It’s a biopic all right – but of the men behind the Air Jordan sneaker line, not the superstar athlete.
Directed by Ben Affleck (who also co-stars), the film explores the history of how the legendary Air Jordan sneaker line was birthed into existence, telling the story of the high-stakes business gamble that had the potential to make or break Nike.
When scout and basketball division lead Sonny Vaccaro (Matt Damon) sets his sights on the talented UNC rookie (who has recently been drafted by the Chicago Bulls) to be the athlete that Nike needs to boost their shoe line, he is met with resistance from his team of reluctant colleagues. They’re skeptical at first, but eventually find Sonny’s passion to be contagious and hop on board.
Much of the narrative is focused on the behind-the-scenes company men, discussions about money, and valid concerns about taking a huge risk on Sonny’s gut feeling that this kid has the potential to become an international sports superstar. There’s a lot shown about the creativity process, brainstorming sessions, and outside-the-box marketing that helped Nike sell their shoes to an up-and-coming NBA player. Although it may sound like it, this isn’t a dry business story, but an enjoyable film filled with casual charm.
Affleck includes a who’s who of Nike in the 80s, from Peter Moore (Matthew Maher), Nike’s Creative Director and the man who designed the Air Jordan sneaker (and also had the brilliant idea to put Jordan’s silhouette on the product line), Howard White (Chris Tucker), who influenced the basketball player to sign with the company, Marketing Director Rob Strasser (Jason Bateman), and Nike co-founder Phil Knight (Affleck), who credits the Air Jordan as the product that saved his company.
A secondary plot line involves Sonny’s efforts to convince Jordan’s bulldog agent David Falk (Chris Messina) and family, in particular his smart and savvy mother Deloris (Viola Davis), to sign with Nike over the more popular competing brands Converse and Adidas. Discussions between Sonny and Deloris deliver the film’s most powerful scenes, especially when you see a tenacious mother who knows her son’s worth and has no problem holding her own in a room full of corporate suits. It’s unusual to find a film that keeps the audience invested in the story from both sides, and I found myself hoping for Sonny to land a great contract but also for Deloris to get the best deal possible for her son and family.
To reveal more about the story would constitute major spoilers, especially if you are unfamiliar with the history of the shoe, but Affleck’s storytelling is so engaging that it will keep you emotionally invested even if you know the eventual outcome.
As a director, Affleck has an enviable, natural flair for telling true stories. His casual style and instincts are on full display here. The film is an example of one of those instances that are few and far between, where the subject matter is the perfect match for the director. This is a story that obviously is close to Affleck’s heart, and it’s reflected throughout the film.
“Air” is a well-made movie about the American Dream from two different sides of the equation. There aren’t many missteps here, and everything from the direction, lively screenplay (written by Alex Convery), and warm performances all flow together in perfect harmony.
**By: Louisa Moore / SCREEN ZEALOTS / WWW.SCREENZEALOTS.COM**

Matt Damon is on strong form here as the out-of-shape Nike basketball executive Sonny Vaccaro. At the usual routine selection meeting at the start of the season he realises that their paltry $250k budget isn't going to enable them to sign anyone with enough impact to lift his company from a distant third behind Converse and Adidas in the market. A bit of lateral thinking and some convincing of marketing VP Rob Strasser (a good effort from Jason Bateman, too) takes him before the bare-footed, grape coloured Porsche owning, Phil Knight - the CEO (Ben Affleck) with an off-the-wall plan to put all of their eggs in one basket and go for the upcoming Michael Jordan. Scepticism abounds, not least because the man's agent (Chris Messina) makes it clear that Jordan has no interest at all in signing with them. Vaccaro is not a man to take no for an answer and what now ensues demonstrates how his unorthodox methods, his honesty, determination and his ability to coax, cajole and persuade managed to create something that is not just the stuff of sporting history, but of visionary commercial history too. A few potent appearances from Viola Davis illustrate that Vaccarro was not the only shrewd individual at the negotiating table and there are some lovely, almost head banging, appearances from Messina as the deal edges ever closer (or does it?). Affleck also appears infrequently, but he is effective - indeed his one set piece scene with the Jordans is actually quite cringeworthy to watch. It's a well known story so the plot hasn't any jeopardy. That said, though, Affleck manages to create a sense of will they/won't they that sustains this characterful and entertaining drama for just short of two hours and puts the engaging dynamic between Damon and Bateman to good use. The script is quickly paced, frequently pithy and has a natural flow to it that - save for Chris Tucker's portrayal of Howard White which I found just a bit too Jesse Jackson for me - all works well. I am not sure this is a film you will remember down the line, but I did enjoy it.

I am sure you can read all the other reviews to get your spoilers, but I don't like to do that. So...
The movie takes place during the time John is still trying to deal with the news of his impending death, and going through treatment options of his cancer. Finding a "common soul" in his support group, who shows "miracle" signs of conquering his cancer, John seeks out the same solution. The "miracle" could be to good to be true, and as the movie progresses, John and Amanda may have underestimated the group they are currently testing, to the possible death of John in his own trap.

** fantastic film loved it realy interesting love all the Saw films hope there going to make more **

Great movie in a "Saw" franchise. Probably one of the best in my opinion.

Wonderful

If it sounds too good to be true then it probably is. That's what "Kramer" (Tobin Bell) ought to have thought when he was presented with a miracle cure for his terminal cancer by "Cecilia" (Synnøve Macody Lund) for a mere $250k. Anyway, off he goes to Mexico and then quickly discovers that it was all a con. A really cynical con at that, and so he decides that some gruesome revenge is due on the team that dreamt up this atrocious scheme. What now ensues is one of the best horror thrillers I've seen for ages. The assembled "medical" team find themselves tracked down, apprehended and then attached to some fairly ghastly devices in a sort of brutal version of the "Adventure Game". Great sacrifices are going to have to be made if any of them are to survive! Further complications follow when another victim of their scam - "Parker" (Steven Brand) turns up bent on his own kind of revenge... It's violent and brutal, this film, but we are spared the very worst of the graphic imagery and that actually helps us to do our own visualising as limbs start coming adrift. There's not a great deal of dialogue, which is good, and the score doesn't resort to the creation of jump moments for us - that's all left to our eyes and our imagination. There's a twist at the end but it's rather weak and does rather let the thing down a little. All told, though, this is very much at the better end of recent films in this genre and in a dark cinema is well worth two hours.

Some good death sequences aside, 'Cocaine Bear' largely bores.
I do like how many of the characters go out, in ways that are quite creative in fairness. The rest of the 95 minutes though? Underwhelming. There are a few minorly amusing moments scattered in there, though for the majority it kinda just meanders through its run time; whilst watching, I could feel myself losing interest fairly regularly throughout.
The cast didn't do anything for me, either. Keri Russell and Brooklynn Prince are alright, though they and the rest don't provide anything worth remembering. They, naturally, aren't assisted well by the rest of the movie, the comedy is quite weak and the characters aren't made all that intriguing.
It just has enough about it that I can see it working for some viewers in terms of mindless entertainment. I'm all for flicks that do that, but this one didn't really work me personally.

This movie wasn't great. Had a good sequence with the ambulance, but other than that it was pretty overhyped and was just trying to cash in on a provocative name. The ad campaign for this movie was successful so congrats to them on that.