It’s always a pleasure to come across a film that surprises, and writer-director Gene Stupnitsky’s second feature outing does just that. When this edgy romantic comedy was released earlier in 2023, I must admit that it didn’t strike me as terribly interesting or engaging, coming across as yet another piece of starry-eyed amorous fluff (albeit a tad more suggestive than most) that could nevertheless be easily dismissed. However, in light of the picture recently earning a Golden Globe Award nomination for Jennifer Lawrence’s bawdy yet uproarious performance for best lead actress in a comedy, I decided to give it a look. And I must admit I was favorably impressed to have watched a rom-com that’s genuinely laugh-out-loud funny, full of ample unexpected moments of hilarity. This delightful, delicious cinematic nugget tells the story of a pair of wealthy, overbearing helicopter parents (Laura Benanti, Matthew Broderick) who have coddled their 19-year-old intelligent, sensitive son (Andrew Barth Feldman) into becoming a virtual social hermit. They’re concerned that, as he prepares to enter college, he’s unprepared for life in the real world, so they place an ad on Craigslist to find a woman who can help bring him out of his shell. They end up hiring an energetic, quirky yet drama-prone and financially strapped 32-year-old (Lawrence) who’s down on her luck and could use the work to help keep her from losing the home that’s been in her family for years. Thus begins an unlikely but hilarious relationship between a pair of obviously mismatched “partners.” While the film falls prey to some sappy, sentimental rom-com tropes, it successfully manages to counter those trite trappings with an array of improbable but rib-tickling surprises that enliven a genre that all too often is far too predictable for its own good. “No Hard Feelings” may not break new ground in the world of cinema, but it’s a fun way to spend a few hours stretched out on the couch in your PJs with a big bowl of popcorn, one that’s sure to put a smile on your face without having to force it and maybe leave you a little worn out from all the belly laughs.

This was a good little romantic comedy with good comedic timing. It did fall short on some parts of the film but overall a great time

Something Something Grooming... yeah, I didn't really get that vibe from this movie.
But it was creepy that a kids parents would basically pay someone off to... doink... their son.
unfortunately it doesn't work, Jennifer Lawrence is just a horrible person in this. From pretty much start-to-finish she is a horrible human being, and in order for this story to work she needs to be likeable. She needs to be relatable. She needs to be someone that the male protagonist would actually fall for...
... and instead she's the type of person that you don't want to know. She's not even a rougish charmer. She's not a lovable con artist. She's just completely unappealing. And that is why the film doesn't work.
Andrew Barth Feldman comes across as legitimately socially awkward, but he also comes across as someone that doesn't want to be around her, and doesn't like her because of her completely toxic qualities.
The script is at least aware enough to include that... but then does a 180 where he has to pretend that, after dealing with her, he actually wants to be around her... because the plot requires it.
For some reason he doesn't want to have sex with her because HE is awkward, not because she is awful. Which makes it a little unbelievable.
I suppose in their effort to show that Jennifer don't need no man, they forget that they were making her into someone no one would want to be around long enough to bang. If they wrote her as someone that at least hesitated to ruin the fun of little kids.... they could have had a win. Instead they went for completely charmless.

There’s a sweet life lesson at the heart of “No Hard Feelings,” the supposed “raunchy comedy” from co-writer and director Gene Stupnitsky. What a shame that it’s buried under a heap of dreadfully unfunny attempts at humor, dumb pratfalls,and tired sex jokes that fall flat one hundred percent of the time. No bones about it: this is not just a really terrible comedy, it’s an awful movie all around.
Bartender Maddie (Jennifer Lawrence) just watched her car get towed from the driveway, and needs wheels, fast. While browsing the want ads, she stumbles upon an intriguing job listing: wealthy helicopter parents (Laura Benanti, Matthew Broderick) are searching for someone to “date” their introverted 19-year-old son, Percy (Andrew Barth Feldman), before he leaves for college. The pay for sleeping with their son? A used Buick. Maddie decides to take the job but in the process, she gets far more than she bargains for.
It’s a decent premise for a movie, but Lawrence is horribly miscast in the role. She’s too old to play the part of Maddie, which makes her relationship with a teenager feel a little icky. Lawrence is also called on to do a lot of comedy work and as talented as she is, she simply lacks the knack for comedic timing (she’s especially awful at physical comedy).
It’s also a problematic message to send to young men: if you haven’t slept with a woman before venturing away from home and off into adulthood, then you aren’t much of a “man.” Just think if the roles were reversed here, and it was a 32 year old man trying to force himself on a 19 year old woman so she could get “experience” before heading to college. The standard needs to be the same regardless of the sex of the main characters.
The majority of the story consists of ridiculous situations where Maddie is aggressively trying to seduce Percy, none of them funny and all of them growing old, quickly. Stupnitsky (and co-writer John Phillips) go for the lowest hanging fruit every time, and the only laughter I could muster while watching this dreck came from forced chuckles.
And that’s the major problem with the movie: everyone is trying so hard to turn it into a wacky, racy comedy that they miss the actual heart of the story.
The relationship between Maddie and Percy is somewhat charming, and the way they grow individually while together is actually heartwarming. All of that is overshadowed by the lame attempts to make it a raunchy, sexy, adult comedy. In struggling to be both, it succeeds at neither.
“No Hard Feelings” is best when it stops trying to be something it’s not.

OK, so the underlying premiss here is pretty daft. The "Becker" parents - Matthew Broderick and Laura Benanti are concerned that their teenage son "Percy" (Andrew Barth Feldman) is just a little bit shy, and so they are seeking a willing gal to help get him out of his bedroom. Meantime, "Maddie" (Jennifer Lawrence) is struggling to make ends meet as an Uber driver with only a pair of roller-skates to her name. She spots their ad, they meet and next thing she is chatting to the young man who volunteers at an animal sanctuary. He thinks she's weird, she thinks he's weird - but she needs a car, and that's her prize if she can get him laid! That's what works about this film: right from the double entendres of the title, it's a sex comedy that doesn't actually shy away from nudity (albeit sparing) and from the fact that the parental goal here involves their son and cherries - and not those in bowl. Lawrence is on good form and she brings out the best in Feldman who is also quite effective as the scared-of-his-own shadow young man who would rather seek the comfort of four legged friends than people. It moves along quickly, the writing is enjoyably earthy at times, there are some fun, lightly comedic scenes and though no, there isn't really a lot of jeopardy to the plot, it's surprisingly easy to watch. It also can't but elicit our own memories of being a cack-handed teenager with raging hormones that we didn't understand nor know how to control. A fun soundtrack and I found it flew by. Television will be fine, though, no need to shall out for a ticket.

MORE SPOILER-FREE MINI-REVIEWS @ https://www.msbreviews.com/movie-reviews/mini-reviews-2023-edition
No Hard Feelings doesn't avoid the genre's formulas, and it could have taken better advantage of its Rated-R rating, but it’s surprisingly much more compelling than expected.
Jennifer Lawrence and Andrew Barth Feldman share palpable chemistry in a raunchy, accurate comedy about letting go of the past and coming out of our shell. It truly flew by. Really enjoyed it!
Rating: B

Movie had a solid start, but got bogged down in the last half. Kind of a waste since it looked pretty cool.

The ensemble cast delivers commendable performances, with standout moments from supporting actors like _**ken watanabe**_, who portrays a father of AI developer, and Madeleine Yuna Voyles, who brings a magnetic presence to the role of Alphie. The chemistry among the cast adds layers to the characters, grounding the film in a relatable human experience amid its futuristic setting.

"The Creator" is a new film directed by Gareth Edwards, whose credits include 2014's "Godzilla" and "Star Wars Story 1". Will his new work go down in the annals of sci-fi cinema in gold?
"The Creator" begins with a newsreel informing us that in 2055, a nuclear warhead was detonated in Los Angeles by an artificial intelligence. This prompted the US to ban the use and development of AI. However, not every country approaches AI in the same way. In Asia, AI is not banned. Fifteen years later, the military is on the hunt for Nirmata, the mysterious creator of artificial intelligence, who has now developed a new weapon that could turn the situation against America. Sergeant Joshua Taylor (John David Washington) is sent to the Republic of New Asia in search of Nirmata and the weapon, but is more eager to find his lost love Maya (Gemma Chan). Accompanied by soldiers, he finds neither Maya nor weapons - only a 'simulant' (the most advanced form of AI) in the form of a child with unique powers. Despite his hatred of AI - his family were killed in the LA explosion - Joshua has no choice but to pair up with this young girl, whom he calls Alphie, in the hope that she will lead him to his beloved Maya.
Watching The Creator, if you have experienced sci-fi cinema before, you will quite often have a sense of déjà vu, as the filmmakers have stitched together elements from numerous previous works of the genre. You will therefore find the spectre of plot ideas from such productions as Blade Runner, Akira, The Terminator, District 9 and even Apocalypse Now, Leon the Professional and Terrence Malick's The Thin Red Line. And these are just a few examples. At the same time, the authors of "The Creator" have managed to put these elements together in such a skilful way that the whole is an independent, original achievement, although every now and then it is reminiscent of its great predecessors.
What we have here is a war with AI, road cinema, the story of a chosen one who is to save the world, or at least change the fate of the conflict. In the background, tragic love. Along the way, there is no armchair-pressing twist waiting for us, so 'The Maker' is, for all intents and purposes, a basically predictable work. But also fresh enough to hold the viewer's interest. At least in theory. The visuals are excellent (although too many of the spectacle scenes were shot in the dark - a constant problem for Hollywood, which thus solves the problem of costly fine-tuning of CGI effects). Edwards and the team have created a world of the near future that looks realistic. The action is largely set in Asia, which also adds to the exoticism of the whole thing and takes us away from the standard sci-fi cinema images. There's a kind of visual poetry and sensibility in 'The Creator' that you don't often find in this genre of cinema (and watching it on big IMAX screens, if you have the opportunity, only enhances this). The problem begins, however, when we get to the script. Because skilfully piecing together a script from classic sci-fi tropes (and more) is one thing, but creating an engaging and full-blooded story out of it all is another. I, unfortunately, did not find great layers of emotion in The Creator, although the filmmakers were clearly trying to emotionally engage the viewer.
I am sorry to say that I did not care about the fate of the main character. The problem lies partly in the script, but also partly in John David Washington himself, who plays him. Denzel's son may not be a bad actor, but he doesn't have even half the charisma of his father, on top of which his roles so far have been waspish every time, even when his characters weren't meant to be that way at all. I don't believe him when I see him concerned, scared, angry, loving. For me, he's an actor fit to play cold mercenaries in war films. There is a kind of indifference, an absence in his gaze. On top of this, the heart and soul of 'The Creator', as I understand it, was supposed to be in the forming relationship between Joshua and Alpha, but unfortunately I found it hard to believe in the emerging bond between them, as it was presented unconvincingly, rather rushed and a bit more along the lines that the viewer is just supposed to believe at some point that the two have taken a liking to each other, although we don't really see on screen when this happened or why. Also, the finale, while most impressive, feels chaotic, rushed and not entirely satisfying. Other than that it was easily predictable.

A dystopian sci-fi set into 2065 directed, written and produced by Gareth Edwards (Rogue One, 2014's Godzilla) were AI already a part of humany sets a nuke warhead to explode in LA in 2055, causing a world division into the West and New Asia (far Asia and southern asia), were AI robots, humans, ans hybrids cohabit in peace.
To counter against this threat US military develops a suborbital station called USS NOMAD (North American Orbital Mobile Aerospace Defense). The movie moves around John David Washington as Sergeant Joshua Taylor, that haves a prosthetic robotic arm and leg lost in the nuclear explosion.
Back then he involved himself with an asiatic woman called Maya (Gemma Chan), that the learns to be the one called Nirmata (Creator) the founder of the AI of New Asia, through the daughter that they had together, a robotic simulant called Alphie that possesses powers toward machines.
The positive: the visual both at scenes, characters or settings are just EXPLENDID, well done CG - just imagine Rogue One, but into this Asiatic setting that mixtures basic living and hi tech. All this was done with $80 million (box office: $101.8 million) a low budget compared to most of todays movies.
The visual effects were provided by Industrial Light & Magic, SDFX Studios, Yannix, Virtuos, Weta Workshop Folks VFX, MARZ, Misc Studios, Fin Design + Effects, Outpost VFX, Lekker VFX, Crafty Apes, Jellyfish Pictures, Proof, Territory Studio, Atomic Arts and VFX Los Angeles are top notch, and surely must have an indication for an Academy Award.
The negative: thought it have a good base to work with, the story is just too weak - the inspirations from "Blade Runner' and 'Apocalypse Now', with a bit of "Avatar" thought other movies, just turned to be too shallow and predicable and we don't engage so much with the characters till the very near end. It's just...isn't developed enough. At some moments it even reminded me of "Elysium". Don't be fooled by the names cited here, they just shows what could be done.
The music is by Hans ZImmer - good, but not outstanding, and the cinematography by Greig Fraser (Dune) and Oren Soffer are good, but outshined by the visual effects.
The movie had a great potential, but was broke in the ain point, the story. But I consider that it is something to be watched because of the digital effects and production, as a basic that no movie must cost more than $ 100 million to have stellar visuals.
For me the score is 6,0 out of 10,0 / B - C+. The stars are for visual effects only.

Perhaps the greatest thing this remarkable film brings to the table is value of love and life, over war and death.
I am surprised this film was made, in so much, as it shows exactly what the US military industrial complex, stands for. That is callous cruelty, violence, intolerance and death.
In a sense then this film could be said to be set in any of the battlefields, in any Asian country, the US has invaded. The fact it has a futuristic overlay, does not detract from powerful and often moving, anti-war, pro peace message, it compellingly conveys. It could not be more timely either, given the US's attempts, to light wars across the world.
I rarely call a film "inspired" in its honesty and its humanity, but The Creator meets that definition, in every sense. A truly emotional, compelling watch.

Right, well I was really disappointed with this. It's like a precursor to the "Terminator" films with "Joshua" (John David Washington) charged with tracking down and destroying a super-weapon being devised by the AI that mankind developed to keep it safe, but that turned the tables on us all and now robots are ruling the Earth. Sound familiar? Well, the whole thing is pretty derivative with only a few, fleeting, scenes from Gemma Chan and a frankly implausible effort from the usually reliable Allison Janney sporting a militaristic haircut as "Col. Howell" - the soldier charged with managing our hero on his trek to eliminate whom we quickly learn is "Alphie" (Madeleine Yuna Voyles) who has a whopping great hole between it's ears. It's just all been seen and done before and though this does introduce a degree of humanity and sentiment as the story progresses, it is all just a bit, well - been there, seen that and got Will Smith to sign my T-shirt. To be fair, it does move along well enough with plenty of pyrotechnics, explosions and lasers but the story is thin and predictable and the denouement could have been on the drawing board after about ten minutes. Bet it cost a fortune, but it's all just a bit forgettably lacking.

The subject of artificial intelligence has been all over the news in recent months, with much of the coverage (save for what’s in the business/finance pages) presented in an often-troubling, cautionary light. So, from this, it’s easy to see how it didn’t take long for this topic to make its way into the world of entertainment, as evidenced in writer-director Gareth Edwards’s latest feature offering. This tale about a brutal war between Asia and America over the future of this controversial technology leads to a series of epic revelations, including some that shift the prevailing view of the evils of AI (most notably exposing where the real source of concern about this technology lies). It also serves as a poignant metaphor for the nature of East-West geopolitical relations, the underlying tensions of the conflict represented by the superficial reasons cited as the cause of combat. And all of the foregoing considerations grow progressively stronger and more impressive as the story plays out. However, in the film’s prologue and opening act, the narrative comes across like an uninspired amalgamation of sci-fi tropes culled from an array of other movies and TV series, including “Blade Runner” (1982), “Edge of Tomorrow” (2014), “Oblivion” (2013), “I, Robot” (2004), “The Terminator” franchise and the rebooted version of Battlestar Gallactica (2004-2009), among others. Also, the story, much of which consists of an involved high-stakes pursuit, is overly stretched out at times, a quality that could have been improved upon with some judicious editing. To its credit, though, the picture features excellent special effects, a fair amount of smartly written comic relief and a surprisingly good cast for a sci-fi release (particularly protagonist John David Washington and youthful newcomer Madeleine Yuna Voyles, despite a seriously miscast Allison Janney in a supporting role as an overwrought member of the military brass). “The Creator” is indeed more insightful and thought-provoking than what many of its detractors have said, though it’s understandable how its periodic lapses in originality and inventiveness may be seen as undermining these strengths. Nevertheless, these shortcomings should be taken with a grain of salt, and the film should be given a fair shot for what it has to say about something that’s becoming an increasingly more significant aspect of our lives, something that we had better to learn to understand and live with if we hope to make friends with it as part of our existence going forward.

The Creator is one of the most visually stunning movies of the year, and created on a relatively modest budget, but the story leaves something to be desired. Or maybe not.
Listen to the Awesome Friday Podcast for more:
- Home: https://awesomefriday.ca/2023/10/podcast-flora-and-son-the-creator/
- Apple: https://podcasts.apple.com/ca/podcast/awesome-friday/id480100293?i00629874981
- Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/episode/5th1Yd7u4tfly0gO8FUMto?si=4T-qXU8VQ-yyUHAWLBV84w
- YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=om0s1ymsJAc

MORE SPOILER-FREE MINI-REVIEWS @ https://www.msbreviews.com/movie-reviews/mini-reviews-2023-edition
THE CREATOR is an incredibly immersive cinematic experience, packed with captivating audiovisual elements, and featuring a powerfully cathartic conclusion that will leave no one indifferent. Gareth Edwards delivers a story about AI that's more timely than unique or thought-provoking, lacking a better tonal balance, thematic depth, and impactful dialogue.
That said, it's an epic sci-fi blockbuster that deserves to be seen on the big screen, if only to witness the best child performance of the century by Madeleine Yuna Voyles.
Rating: B+

I love it.
It's visually stunning. Not just the cinematography itself, but everything you see in the frame: the characters, the real locations, the visual effects (A.I. robots, simulants, the NOMAD, etc.).
The acting is great across the board – especially, especially by Ms. Madeleine Yuna Voyles. I have no idea how she did it. I was moved to my core. I have not been so rocked by an actor's performance since Mckenna Grace's performance in _Gifted_. Speaking of...
It's emotional and moving. And it's thought-provoking. This is one of those movies that sat with me afterwards.
And Hans Zimmer's score? Phenomenal.
Also, the sound design team did an amazing job as well. I thought the sound effects for the variety of fictional weapons, ships, etc. were visceral and natural and (I'm not sure the right words, but) unique and perfectly fitting.
I'm 100% sold on this movie. I was moved the first time I saw it, and even more so this time.

As contemporary horror films go, I’ll freely admit that this is a genre about which I couldn’t care less. I find most of these films boring, predictable, stupid and not especially scary. In fact, the only ones to which I’ll even give a second look are smart horror films (like “Get Out” (2017) or “Annihilation” (2018)) or campy romps (like “Renfield” (2023)). So the fact that I somehow managed to sit through this trash heap is quite an accomplishment. (Actually, the only reason I watched was because I was channel surfing and there was nothing else on, so I decided to give it a chance (I would have been better turning on the radio).) This pointless parade of endless blood and gore is a prime example of the decline of the mainstream movie industry (how projects like this get greenlighted is beyond me, except, of course, for the obvious box office considerations). It’s so utterly ridiculous that the picture plays like something that was made up as the crew went along. I’ll admit that there was some modestly cheeky humor here, but not enough to make it a genuine camp fest. Writer-director Lee Cronin’s latest is an assault on the art of filmmaking, the kind that should carry fines and other punishments. My goodness, what has this industry come to?

Okay supernatural horror and entry into the long-running franchise that really takes off during the blood-drenched finale. Can't say I loved it and it was far too dark at times to even tell what was going on, but thought it was on par with Evil Dead 2013. **3.5/5**

**"Evil Dead Rise"** (2023) is a captivating and bone-chilling horror film that left me on the edge of my seat. From the opening scene to the final credits, the movie delivers a relentless onslaught of terror and gore. The practical effects are outstanding, creating some truly gruesome and memorable moments that will haunt your nightmares. The performances are top-notch, with the cast fully committed to their roles and delivering intense and believable performances. The direction by Lee Cronin is masterful, as he expertly builds tension and suspense throughout the film. The setting of an urban high-rise adds a unique and claustrophobic atmosphere, amplifying the sense of dread. "Evil Dead Rise" is a must-watch for horror aficionados who crave a thrilling and visceral experience. Brace yourself for a wild ride that will leave you both terrified and exhilarated.

Evil Dead Rise puts a creative spin on the classic franchise while also remaining faithful to the core experience.
The story is not overly complex and admittedly somewhat generic, as the main characters find the Book of the Dead, read it, and all hell breaks loose. But the conditions surrounding this plot are what truly set it apart. For one, the high-rise setting was brilliant and created a very claustrophobic environment that worked really well. I found the earthquake to be an original idea not only for the discovery of The Necronomicon but also for the entrapment of our main characters.
Speaking of our cast, this film does a really great job of setting up these characters. I genuinely liked all of them, which made it difficult to see some of them go, unlike in Evil Dead (2013). The familiar bond between them was palpable, and this could not have been done without a fantastic cast. Alyssa Sutherland is by far my favorite Deadite in the entire franchise. Her motherly connection was haunting, her facial expressions, and mannerisms are nightmare fuel. Lily Sullivan was genuinely fantastic as a final girl. Her badass nature to defend the children is incredible, and she had some really great moments to stand out in the film. The kids overall did fine, nothing that was too amazing but nothing that took away from the film either.
The direction was my favorite part of the film by far. Lee Cronin did such a fantastic job with haunting camera work with subtle tilts and use of reflections. The action was top-notch, and the practical effects were amazing. So many scenes had me physically wincing with some insanely creative violence mixed with stomach-churning blood and wound effects. It is definitely a worthy successor to Evil Dead (2013) in the gore department.
Overall, this may not be the best in the franchise, but I think it is one of the most refined. The story lacks in some areas, but the direction, performances, and violence really cement this as one of the best horror films of the year.
Score: 84% ✅
Verdict: Great

This is certainly a triumph for the visual and audio effects folks. Otherwise, I found it all a bit derivative and frankly a rather classless rehash of the much more entertaining original. It's tough to just keep on re-inventing these themes - they do tire, and as I reckon with the recent updates of the "Halloween" franchise, they maybe just rely too heavily on a current generation who were not around to see the originals in the cinema first time round, and who maybe just don't appreciate that the acting and the writing - though never exactly crucial to these plots - did have more of a role than just relying on well made-up (virtual) demons spinning around the ceiling emitting threatening shrieks. It's not terrible - it moves along quickly for ninety minutes and might just put you off a bath anytime shortly afterwards, but there just isn't any real sense of menace or jeopardy and to be honest I wasn't entirely sure that the family weren't nightmarish enough - before their visitor arrived. Perfectly watchable on the telly around Halloween with a drink in your hand, and it's a sort of gift that keeps on giving because you'll be able to watch it again the next year without the faintest recollection of what is going to happen!

_Evil Dead Rise_ is mostly entertaining as a new entry of the _Evil Dead_ franchise, but it’s got some hiccups that should be ironed out in any potential sequel.
The cast’s performances are all strong, with Sutherland masterfully making the most of her character with spine-tingling body language and unnerving dialogue, but as a fifth film in a well-known horror franchise, it’s disappointing to see that its most memorable moments are throwbacks to previous films.
Ultimately, _Evil Dead Rise_’s biggest flaw is that it simply isn’t as good as its ten-year-old predecessor. Nevertheless, the film is fun, blood splattering carnage that will hopefully take the _Evil Dead_ franchise in a bold and exhilarating direction.
Full review: https://boundingintocomics.com/2023/05/02/evil-dead-rise-review-new-mommy-demon-look-same-great-chainsaw-taste/

If you are expecting an Evil Dead movie... well, I guess it depends on what generation you're from. If you are expecting Evil Dead, Evil Dead 2, Army of Darkness, the films of the unholy trilogy... you are going to be gravely disappointed. This isn't Sam Raimi's Evil Dead.
This is, well, this is the Conjuring just like almost every other Horror movie past 2014.
It doesn't really breathe "new life" into the franchise, instead it takes the Evil Dead and breathes the PG-13 Neo-Horror Movie breathe into a franchise that used to be a heck of a lot of campy immature fun.
Here you get the same as everything else.

Evil Dead Rise Gives Series Fans A Fresh Take And Plenty Of Gore
Usually when a film series is embarking on a fifth outing the challenges
of keeping things fresh and original yet being new and creative can be a
massive obstacle.
Horror series ranging from “Halloween” to “Friday the 13th”, “SAW”, and
“A Nightmare on Elm Street” all faced issues with moving the series along
yet trying to stay true to the original film that inspired them and in
every case; failing to fully capture what made the original film a hit.
“Evil Dead Rise” is not only the latest entry into the series but a bold
take on the cinematic series as it abandons the remote cabin setting of
the first two films and the reboot in favor of an urban setting.
The film does open in a remote lakeside locale before jumping a day
earlier to California where estranged sisters Ellie (Alyssa Sutherland)
and Beth (Lilly Sullivan) reunite. Beth has been working as a guitar
technician and bristles that her sister refers to her as a groupie.
Ellie is raising three children after their father left and informs her
sister that the building they are living in is scheduled to be demolished
so they will have to move soon which is a shock to Beth as she has learned
that she is pregnant and is trying to figure out her life all the while
seeing what she thought would be a source of stability for her upended.
The arrival of an earthquake allows access to a hidden area in the parking
garage of their building and since the locale was a former bank; the kids
soon find a hidden book and records which the only son Danny (Morgan
Davies) hopes he can sell despite his sister Bridget (Gabrielle Echols)
admonishing him constantly to leave it alone and return it to where it was
found.
The book turns out to be a Necronomicon or “Book of the Dead” and as fans
of the series know; nothing good ever comes from one and thanks to playing
old records left by a Priest describing his thoughts on the book; a
summoning incantation is read and this causes Ellie to become possessed
and unleash grotesque carnage and terror on her family.
What follows is a gory and at times intense game of cat and mouse
punctuated by moments of levity as the demonic infestation knows no end.
The film has the over-the top- gore that is expected of the series and the
makeup and effects are very effective. Writer? Director Lee Cronin has done
a great job capturing the tone of the series while moving it forward as he
cleverly incorporates lines and nods to the series without making them
seem forced.
Some may find the excess of blood too much but the series has always been
known for taking things to the extreme as the blend of horror and comedic
parody is what made the original film such a success.
In the end “Evil Dead Rise” does enough to keep fans of the series happy
and hopefully, we will be seeing a new entry in the series in the future.
3.5 stars out of 5

I genuinely had a blast with this!
I also had much fun with the original 2019 'Shazam!' so I guess the aforementioned isn't too much of a surprise, though I actually think this as entertaining in differing ways... and I'd class it as an improvement. The first film is more funny, though the story and characters are more interesting here in my opinion.
Big fan of the special effects throughout, the whole look of film in general is pleasant and I like how bright it all is for the vast majority; as opposed to the dreary darkness that superhero flicks seemingly tend to bring, especially in the DCEU. The score is excellent, not necessarily one I'd add to my movie soundtrack playlist but with the context of what's onscreen it's great.
The cast bring noteworthy performances. I wouldn't actually put anyone as a true standout, naturally Zachary Levi sticks out most but as a bunch of characters I had an enjoyable time watching them all in truth. It's fun seeing Helen Mirren and Lucy Liu in their respective roles, while Rachel Zegler is a positive addition and Djimon Hounsou is pleasing. Jack Dylan Grazer spearheads the rest of them well.
The only real criticism I have is a couple of bits of dialogue, namely the product placement ones... that certain sweet brand and its slogan in particular. Otherwise, I can only say I found a lot of enjoyment with 'Shazam! Fury of the Gods'... my favourite flick from this universe, though a quick glance at the average rating suggests I should whisper that quietly!

Passably entertaining sequel that lacks the charm of the original to go along with the over-acting from Lucy Liu as the primary antagonist; really miss the great menace Mark Strong brought to his role. Still Zachary Levi was still great as Shazam and there were some fun scenes between Djimon Hounsou and Jack Dylan Grazer. Not great but still decent enough especially for families. **3.25/5**

Shazam! Fury of the Gods is a run-of-the mill superhero sequel that doesn’t progress the genre forward, but delivers two hours of pure entertainment.
This film does not do any one thing great, but it was still a pretty decent watch. The plot is average—nothing we have not seen on the big screen before. Our villains have no development; their motivations are sound, but there is nothing further that develops them into something greater.
This movie starts off incredibly strong, with a fantastic first act that had me laughing hysterically. The comedy hits more often than not, which was a surprise for me. There is a bridge rescue scene that is electric. The combination of "I Need a Hero" mixed with all of the heroes showcasing their abilities was amazing. I think superhero films have dropped the ball by not showing heroes rescuing everyday people. The stakes have gotten so high outside of the everyday troubles that this art is lost. I really enjoyed that aspect of the film, but unfortunately, after the first act, this story becomes inflated to a point where it is indistinguishable from many other superhero blockbusters.
The final act is overly long and bloated with a plethora of CGI monsters for our heroes to defeat. I think the CGI actually looked pretty good, but it just was not an engaging conclusion for me. The stakes were high, but not built up properly for me to be genuinely interested. The action is pretty decent, but I couldn’t care less. The finale did have emotional beats in terms of the family connection, which worked surprisingly well. That is when this franchise works best. When the focus is on family and not on god's attempts to destroy Earth,
The performances overall were pretty good. Zachary Levi is fantastic as Shazam; he has mastered the art of playing a child in a man's body. Jack Dylan Grazer is hilarious; his comedic timing is brilliant. Grace Caroline Currey is a queen. Rachel Zegler is a standout, and her chemistry with Grazer is top notch. The rest of the Shazamly do a great job as well. I think Helen Mirren and Lucy Liu are fine as antagonists but were wasted with a lack of screen time and development.
Overall, this might not be good, but it is entertaining. That is a lot more than can be said for some of the recently released superhero films (Black Adam and Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania).
Score: 65%
Verdict: Decent

The movie is decent enough, although formulaic and predictable. But the 12 year old level humor has long since worn out its welcome.

Ok, so I know I shouldn't have - but I did enjoy this. "Billy" (Zachary Levi/Asher Angel) and his gang of rather hapless super-heroes locally lauded as the "Philadelphia Fiascos" find themselves pushed to the very limits when the daughters of the legendary "Atlas" manage to breach a magical boundary between their world and our's and are soon on the hunt for the magical staff that "Billy" snapped in two at the end of the last film (remember?). The daughters are led by the menacing "Hespera" (Dame Helen Mirren) with her potent sidekick "Kalypso" (Lucy Liu) and the slightly more humane "Anthea" (Rachel Zegler) making up this dangerous triumvirate. What now ensues are some genuinely entertaining set piece battles that unlike so many from the MCU, are based on creatures from mythology and do not drag on interminably. Levi is as much an anti-hero as you can imagine, his tongue firmly in his cheek - though not so much as Dame Helen's - as he and his gang look hopelessly - and continuously - outgunned, outmanoeuvred and outwitted. Can they rally and save the day before carnage ensues and mankind is wiped out? Nope, not a shred of jeopardy here - but the two hours just flew by. It's fun. It's not trying to offer us any grand philosophies, or complex time-shifting science. It's a lightly comedic adventure film that rarely stops for breath, uses state of the art special effects to enhance the story rather than dominate it, and by the end I was ready to remember why I quite enjoyed the original from 2019. All of this said, I fear they will try to squeeze a third from the franchise and think that would be an error. This works because of some charismatic performances - particularly from the rather engaging Jack Dylan Grazer as the lovestruck "Freddy"; a great big dragon and an at times quite pithy script. Please let's leave well alone now?

FULL SPOILER-FREE REVIEW @ https://www.firstshowing.net/2023/review-shazam-fury-of-the-gods-falls-into-the-typical-sequel-trap/
"Shazam! Fury of the Gods is *almost* saved by the incredibly charismatic, energetic cast, as well as by a truly thrilling third act. Unfortunately, the movie falls into the trap of exaggerating what worked in the original, excessively tackling every narrative aspect, and losing authenticity along the way. Way too long, boringly generic, and lacking a clearer direction, namely in the treatment of its family themes. Comedy is far from the efficiency of its predecessor. I recommend it to the vast majority of fans of the genre, who will certainly enjoy the lightness still present in this sequel."
Rating: C