Best of the Decade Part 1: DrogeMiester's Top 50 Movies of the 2010s

It's crazy to think that we've recently completed a whole decade. While 2020 has not been kind to us so far, there's certainly a lot to look back on from the 2010s. This particular post has been in the works for some time. My initial idea was to get this out at least a month ago,but diving in was quite the daunting task and became quite stressful. Then the world got put on pause with the outbreak of the coronavirus. This has been an absolutely horrific period of time in our world's history and I want nothing more than for it to be over with so that we can all go back to normal. But until then, we sit in our homes and wait. With theaters all closed and everything through June being currently postponed, I've been taking advantage of the extra time to finally finishing this list, which has included necessary rewatches of a lot of these movies in order to get the placement right. And, sure, while the exact order of some of this could be a bit malleable, I'm happy with the final 50 films that I've included. And hey, perhaps this is good timing on my part. While we all patiently await the green light to get back to our normal lives, I've now created a list of 50 films that are definitely worth watching. You're welcome. For multiple reasons, I've decided to split this in half. Here's part one!

50- The Martian

We begin this mega list with a good old fashioned trip to space. And actually, we got a lot of those last decade. The movie "Gravity" in 2013 started a trend of an annual trip to space. And I'm not even talking about the likes of "Star Wars" or "Guardians of the Galaxy." I'm talking about these attempts at realistic space travel. Of all these trips to space, "The Martian" definitely stood out as one of the more enjoyable journeys. Yeah, sure, you can act like a pretentious physicist if you want by pointing out all the horrible inaccuracies to this movie, like Matt Damon's Iron Man theatrics at the end. But I don't really care. Honestly I think you're missing the point if you let yourself get caught up on all of that. This movie is a lot more than just a silly sci-fi trying to accurately portray what a trip to Mars would be like. In addition to being a wildly entertaining survival epic, there's actually a lot of profound themes here, like learning to take things one step at a time in order to solve a giant problem or realizing that laughter is often the best medicine to keep yourself sane when you're stranded by yourself. In fact, as I think about it, there's a lot that this movie can teach us about how to manage our current situation. It's"Cast Away" meets "Apollo 11," which is a solid combination.

49- Life of Pi

Shortly after the release of "Life of Pi" in theaters, I used the movie to start a new tradition. Eat pie and watch "Life of Pi" on Pi Day! I've slacked off in the last couple of years in regards to that, but it's been a fun tradition nonetheless. Does this movie really have anything to do with the digit Pi? No, not really. Pi is the name of the main character. Although there is one scene towards the beginning where he goes off listing a whole bunch of digits of Pi. Really it's just an excuse to watch a good movie with a strong message. We start off with a rather stunning visual treat. It was one movie that actually worked quite well in 3D and was beautiful on the big screen. In terms of it being a survival movie, the pacing is rather impressive. It's just a boy on a boat with a tiger for most of the movie, but it manages to keep you engaged the whole time. The payoff, though, is the message at the end that completely transforms the movie on repeat viewings. The movie is narrated by the adult version of Pi as he attempts to convince an atheist to believe in God and he uses this particular story to do the trick. Pi presents two different stories as to what happened to him on that boat, then he poses the question, "What's the better story?" It's been a rather profound parable for myself this past decade.

48- The Hunger Games: Catching Fire

I'm not much of a reader. Not that I have anything against reading books, it's just hard for me to focus on an endless amount of words over the course of hundreds of pages. Some have mastered the skill of reading large books in mere hours. For me it takes weeks if not months to get through some books. Given that time commitment it takes me, I usually choose to do other things with my life. But "Catching Fire" was a book that I sat down and read in a day. It was just so captivating and intense. I absolutely loved it. Very rarely does a movie adaptation of such a great book ever live up to the hype, but the movie adaptation of "Catching Fire" was nearly perfect. Yeah, sure, Suzanne Collins rushed the ending of the series as it could've been a five to six book series. And yeah, the final movie completely crashed and burned. And that coming from one who liked the ending of the "Mockingjay" book. Yet despite all of that drama, that doesn't take away from the magical experience of reading a near perfect and seeing it perfectly adapted on screen. With this genre of YA dystopian movies having completely died out, "Catching Fire" reigns supreme as the gold standard of the genre. And it's a crown that I don't think any movie will take away from it. Because at the moment, no one cares to try.

47- The Gift

I'm willing to bet that most of you will at least recognize the majority of the movies on this list, even if you haven't seen every single one of them. There's a couple of movies here, though, that I feel flew right under most people's radars. The 2015 thriller "The Gift" I feel is one of them. There's a few movies and shows called "The Gift," so if you're checking this one out, as it is on Netflix at the moment, make sure you catch the right one. This is directed by Joel Edgerton in his feature-length directorial debut, while starring him, Jason Bateman and Rebecca Hall in a story about an old high school acquaintance who comes back seeking a bit of revenge for his fellow classmates not treating him too well. And man, talk about a directorial debut. This is a movie that convinced me that Joel Edgerton had the potential to be the next Hitchcock because the execution of this pure Hitchcockian thriller was darn near perfect. Unfortunately the only other movie Edgerton has directed was a little movie called "Boy Erased" that was in a completely different ballpark than this in regards to tone and genre, but oh well. This individual project still stands a marvelous achievement. It's also a movie that clued us all in, prior to "Ozark," that Jason Bateman is an excellent drama actor.

46- The LEGO Movie

EVERYTHING IS AWESOME!!! And now that you hate me for getting that song stuck in your head again, let me just say that who would've thunk that a movie based on the little LEGO bricks could be so fantastic? When this was announced, most people thought that this was a terrible idea. And they have every right to think that since movies based on toys, games, or apps with no inherent, built-in story have a really bad track record. But "The LEGO Movie" goes to show that with good writers and solid execution, you can take any premise and work miracles with it. This is definitely one of the movies that launched Lord and Miller into superstardom. What could've been a complete disaster ended up being a fantastic animated film that's perfect for all audiences. Not only is the fun, quirky, comedic nature of the film the perfect thing to distract young audiences, but the attention to detail made this a nostalgic journey for anyone who grew up building LEGOs. On top of that, it taught a loud and clear message that ordinary people can do extraordinary things, which is a very good thing for kids learn. And the idea that the whole movie is simply a kid playing with his dad's LEGO set is pure genius, which completely transformed the movie upon repeat viewings.

45- Hacksaw Ridge

I'll try not to get too personal with this one, but out of all the religious films that came out last decade, or films with religious themes in them, it's impressive that a Clint Eastwood war film was the one that affected and inspired me the most. With that being said, a quick disclaimer that I'll throw out is that if you don't have a strong stomach for war and violence, this is not your movie. The first half is tame. But then as the soldiers are walking up to war in the second half, suddenly the dread hits that you are a Clint Eastwood film. And he doesn't hold back when it comes to violence. Sure enough, this film turns into an outright horror film in a way as the battle begins, which doesn't allow you to even breathe for the longest time. But through it all, it's the perseverance and dedication that Andrew Garfield's character has that shines through it all. After the dust has settled and the armies have retreated, he sticks around with the intent to save as many lives as possible. And it's his faith and God that helps him through. Before he runs out into the battle field, he kneels down and says a prayer, "Please God, help me save one more." I don't think you even have to be a Christian to appreciate this story, but how do we save the world? One life at a time. And having God's help doesn't hurt.

44- Little Women

One theme that you will see throughout this list is that movies about life often had a strong impact on me. We call them "slice of life" films. When executed properly, these types of movies really hit home because they become very personal thematically. While certain superhero movies or action movies can be a lot of fun, there's a level of escapism that comes with them where you're entering into a reality that's different than your own. That can be therapeutic at times when you want to forget about your current situation and have some simple fun. But for me, when I come across a film that's a reflection of what I've personally gone through, that often cuts deep and sticks with me a lot longer. Greta Gerwig did that twice to me last decade. We'll get to the other one much later, but this most recent happening is when she took a classic novel and created a very powerful and poignant adaptation that had me reeling. When Saoirse Ronan's character cried out about how lonely she was after trying so hard to be strong, that just hit me on another level and I found myself sobbing with all the other girls in the theater with me. And that happened several times throughout. This is not a sappy chick flick. So if you're a guy and you skipped this, man up and go see it.

43- Manchester by the Sea

If you're in the mood for a good, solid punch in the gut, then "Manchester by the Sea" is your must-see movie. I mean, when you're bored out of your mind in lockdown right now, watching a movie about the miserable tale of a man's life falling apart might be just the remedy! OK, that's a bit tongue-in-cheek there, but the fact that "Manchester by the Sea" is only in the 40s on this list is a good indication of what's to come because this made it as my No. 2 movie of 2016. I say it's an indication of what's to come because I completely threw out my end of year lists when creating this decade list because I wanted to come up with a fresh ranking of the movies that truly stood out this decade rather than being married to old rankings that most people probably forgot about. Creating these lists is a snapshot of what I feel in that individual moment and I want this list to be a snapshot right now rather than a collection of snapshots from the past. Don't get me wrong, though. "Manchester by the Sea" is an excellent film. One of the more emotionally heavy films of the year with a lot of real life themes. But if I'm bored on a Saturday night, "Manchester by the Sea" is not necessarily the movie I'd pop in to pass the time, if you know what I mean. It's a great clinic on acting, though. 

42- Creed

The Rocky franchise has always been a favorite of mine. I have lots of great memories watching the Rocky movies with my dad and brothers. I honestly can't remember what my specific thoughts of this Rocky spin-off leading up to it, but I do remember being absolutely blown away at the final result here. "Creed" not only justified its existence as a member of the Rocky franchise, but it was somehow able to elevate itself onto the same level as original two films in terms of overall quality. A huge round of applause to Ryan Coogler for knowing what makes a good Rocky film and being able to deliver a near perfect result. Yeah, the boxing scenes are massively entertaining and intense, but a good Rocky film is more about the characters and the development rather than being just about the boxing itself. Michael B. Jordan as young Adonis Creed did a fantastic job of making you really care about his journey as he wanted to be successful as a fighter, but not because he was the son of a legend. And Sylvester Stallone gives a performance of a lifetime as an older Rocky struggling with declining health while also trying to figure out how to help Adonis. The fact that he lost the Oscar to Mark Rylance still makes me mad, especially since he was winning everything else.

41- A Ghost Story

Here's the other movie that I'm betting you haven't heard of. No, this is not a horror movie. It's not even a suspense/thriller. It's a very unique and unconventional drama about a ghost. He starts off as a man, being happily married to his wife, but then he dies and gets stuck having to watch his heartbroken wife live on without him. She can't see him, but he's portrayed as someone with an old-fashioned sheet over his head with two holes for the eyes. That's what signifies that he died. And he can't talk or make any noise. He just has to sit there and watch. But then as his wife moves on, he's still stuck at that house, thus "haunting" it. But in reality it's just a movie that's filled to the brim with emotion and you fully understand his frustrations as he lashes out. The individual scenes are long and drawn out as it squeezes every ounce of emotion out of every scene. And much of it feels all too real. The scene I always tell people about is a scene where the wife is so depressed that she just sits on the floor and eats a whole pie. Because that's what happens when you can't handle life. And we as an audience sit there for about five minutes while she eats this pie. As I said, unconventional. It might break every rule of filmmaking, but that's what makes it so fascinating. And it's on Netflix, so go watch it.

40- Rise of the Planet of the Apes

I'm going to play spoiler here real quick in regards to other entries on this list. When it comes to the recently rebooted Planet of the Apes trilogy, "Rise" is the lesser of the three. And that's not a knock on this movie individually. It's some high praise for the trilogy as a whole. They made a fantastic film with "Rise" and then they just kept one-upping themselves, creating a trilogy that has to go down in history as one of the greatest trilogies ever made. Not from this past decade. EVER. So I'll have plenty to say about all three of these movies. But in terms of this introductory chapter, the thing that fascinates me the most is that I have no idea who I'm supposed to be rooting for. It's not a situation where these evil humans are abusing these apes, so the apes rebel and take over. Our lead human, played by James Franco, is simply trying to help his father's medical condition and his experiments get out of control and cause a global pandemic. But the apes certainly aren't the villains either, even though they start to rebel against the humans. And man, speaking of global pandemics, trying watching this during this coronavirus scare. I'm now expecting to turn on the news and hear a story about an army of apes that started taking over a city. It adds a unique level of terror.

39- Wonder Woman

The beginning of this decade was a rather dark time for me as a DC fan. Granted, I'm no respector of comic book films. The whole MCU journey has been a marvelous ride. But I grew up a DC fan and it pained me to watch Zack Snyder and co. fail so miserably in trying to create a new DC cinematic universe. Everything about what makes DC great, they were getting WRONG. But then came 2017, when Patty Jenkins delivered us a Wonder Woman movie. And it started out being solidly entertaining. But then when they were in the trenches and Chris Pine was trying to get Diana to hurry up and not worry about this situation, yet she decided that it was her personal battle that she was going to help these people, the movie elevated and became something else. Then she stepped on that battle field and I got chills. I became so happy that I was on the verge of tears. The DC that I grew up loving was back! While Zack Snyder did everything wrong, Patty Jenkins did everything right. Except for maybe that final battle. But we forgive her for that because the rest of this movie is fantastic. And I've loved that Warner Bros. and DC have learned from this movie that they need to stop trying copy Marvel and just focus on making good individual movies.

38- The Great Gatsby

It's funny, when you dive into the archives of my blog and find my original review of "The Great Gatsby," I wasn't convinced that it was that great. And if you look at the mixed critic scores for the movie, it would seem like I was in the majority. But that was all the way back in 2013, when this blog was in its early days and I was still figuring things out in regards to my taste in film. It was later that year where I really discovered the brilliance of this movie, that being via a rewatch on DVD followed by an analytical deep dive into all of the characters and story with a roommate of mine. And yeah, there's a reason why the original novel is considered classic literature. It's such a fascinating character study as it looks deeply into a cast of flawed characters who come together to essentially ruin each others' lives. Who's the protagonist? Who's the antagonist? Well, there really isn't one on either side. Events just sort of happen. I think this modern adaptation does a fantastic job of capturing the tone and themes of the classic novel. Led by Leo DiCaprio, Joel Edgerton, Tobey Maguire and Carey Mulligan, this is a beautifully acted film that combines with some fascinating visuals and musical choices that ultimately do a great job of adding to the scenery and symbolism of it all.

37- Marriage Story

Another hard movie to watch that might hit a bit too close to home for some. This is a movie that's about on the same level as "Manchester by the Sea" in terms of the raw emotion that dives into the harsh realities of real life. Although this being a much more recent example, so I can't yet speak to what I will think of this several years from now. Yes, we all love a happy, feel good movie where the beautiful couple works out their differences and lives happily ever after. But sometimes the Cinderella story is just not what happens. There could be a man and a wife who are the absolute perfect match, but for whatever reason, they just aren't able to make it work. Adam Driver and Scarlett Johansson are absolutely oozing in chemistry and are the perfect match, but they also kinda hate each other because they didn't put enough effort into making it work, and thus we as observers get continually punched in the gut as we are forced to watch this spiral out of control. Like Casey Affleck and Michelle Williams in "Manchester," Driver and Johansson put on an absolute clinic when it comes to their acting performances. Said performances are the driving force of the film. Speaking of Scar-Jo, she needs to go make a happy movie because 2019 was a rough year for her characters.

36- Annihilation 

Well, you might not sit down and watch "Manchester" or "Marriage Story" when you're bored and need to pass the time. "Annihilation," though, would be a great choice. It's not necessarily a relaxing, feel good movie, but it's a movie that requires multiple viewings and plenty of discussion to truly appreciate. As we passed the 50th anniversary of "2001: A Space Odyssey" last decade, there were still a plethora of sci-films that continued to try to replicate that movie's success. "Annihilation" was one of the best efforts in attempting to replicate that. It's not a space adventure by any means, but it's a slow moving movie that keeps you absolutely captivated with its sound design, musical score and visuals. But it also does a good job of slowly building the world around you as step by step you learn what exactly is going on. I don't want to give away too many details for those who actually haven't seen it, but there's a scene with a bear that might be the most terrifying and haunting imagery I've seen in a movie recently. The final sequences are something absolutely glorious. The movie got its fair share of negative response and a lot of reaction made me wonder what people were expecting. This is no action/thriller. But if you have patience, this will evolve into something great.   

35- 12 Years a Slave

Every once in a while an important historical film comes around that I feel everyone needs to watch once, but no one really needs to watch twice. In terms of movies that you won't turn to if you're bored on a Saturday night, this falls into the same category as the likes of "Manchester" and "Marriage Story," but for much different reasons. This is brutal and hard to watch as it dives into the dark reality that was slavery in this country in the 1800s as it tells a story of a free black man who was kidnapped and sold into slavery, wherein he spent the next 12 years of his life. Nothing in this movie is sugar-coated, yet it's also honest in the fact that some slave owners were nice to their slaves. But when we get to the extreme slave owners who treated their slaves like inhuman dirt, this movie makes you want to sit and your corner and cry at the monstrosity. And if I was in Michael Fassbender's shoes, I'd want to go home, throw up and take a nice long shower at the end of each night for having to play that awful slave owner. This is also a movie that introduced us to Chiwetel Ejiofor and Lupita Nyong'o, and for that I'm definitely grateful. But yeah, in terms of comparisons, this was last decade's "Schindler's List." Both movies should be watched. But you only need to once.

34- Black Swan

Do I have any happy movies on this list? Like, wow. I'm not sure what it says about me if I gravitate towards all the dark, dreary and depressing movies. I'm promise I'm a happy person who enjoys feel good movies. But this is not one of them, either. I didn't watch "Black Swan" back in 2010 when it was released. Before the release of "mother!," I went through a binge of Darren Aronofsky's films. Or at least some of them. I'm realizing now that I didn't get to "Pi" or "The Fountain," but man, talk about a director. Polarizing is definitely the best word to describe him and I think he feeds off of that. When your filmography includes "Requiem for a Dream," "Noah" and "mother!," then other movies like "Black Swan" and "The Wrestler" feel safe and happy comparatively. Out of all his films, "Black Swan" is one that I really enjoyed. And I rewatched in the midst of compiling this list so that I could have it fresh on my mind. It's a movie about ballet on the surface, but it's more or less about the dangers of striving for absolute perfection when the cost happens to be your relationships and your mental stability. Yeah, sure, Natalie Portman's character gets what she wants, but was it worth it? Maybe the phrase, "I just want to be perfect" is something we should be careful with. 

33- Spotlight

No, we're not going super happy just yet, although this is a step in the right direction, I suppose. I can't call this a "happy" movie, per se, when the subject matter is the child molestation problem of the Catholic Church, but this is a movie that was very personal to me as it vindicated my career choices at the time. Yes, the Catholic Church scandal is the subject matter, but the heroes who uncovered it didn't wear capes and have superpowers. They had their pens and notebooks to go along with a desire to uncover the truth. Of course I'm talking about journalists. It was a rough journey for these people, but their passion and persistence led to some monumental investigative journalism that saved lives. And when I stumble upon a movie like this during the latter portion in the pursuit of my journalism degree, that can go a long way in helping me feel like I'm doing a good thing. Granted, my path to become a successful journalist hasn't really turned out quite like I had hoped or planned, but that's a discussion for another time. Nevertheless, that doesn't change the fact that "Spotlight" was a very influential film for me that inspired me continue down the path I was headed. And for that it most certainly deserves this high placement among the best films of the decade.

32- Scott Pilgrim vs. the World

OK, if you wanted happy and fun, I finally have your movie. "Scott Pilgrim vs. the World" most definitely wins the award for the most unique and quirky film of the decade. The movie isn't based off of a video game. The movie IS a video game. Granted, the audience member is not in control of the main protagonist, but you get what I mean. Scott meets a girl and suddenly he finds himself in the middle of a war against her seven evil exes. He has to fight them off retro video game style. When he wins, they turn to coins. If for some reason you haven't introduced yourself to Edgar Wright, this is a great movie to start off with as it showcases his very unique, personal style. In addition to being off-the-walls entertaining and hilarious, Edgar Wright has a very sharp editing style with a very smart execution. Yes, tip of the hat to "At World's End" and "Baby Driver," two other great movies of his that missed the cut, but "Scott Pilgrim" is his shining jewel. It's an absolute shame that it made close to nothing at the box office, but I feel it has achieved cult status as it has become a very popular film. And for good reasons. Edgar Wright FINALLY got his much deserved box office smash with "Baby Driver" and I feel it's movies like this that helped build him up to achieve that.

31- Gone Girl

Well, we had our fun with the happy movie via "Scott Pilgrim." Now it's time to bottle up those rainbows and butterflies for now because we're back to the dark and twisted realm. This one isn't necessarily depressing, this goes into the thriller realm. And it is one that I'd definitely watch again, albeit under the right circumstances when I'm in the right mood because this movie is insane. I'm going to be vague about the plot here and the specifics of why this is so crazy, but nevertheless the disappearance of a man's wife leads leads us down quite the rabbit hole. My jaw practically hit the floor halfway through this film and I was left in a stunned silence for the remainder of the movie is it never let up. The craft of this movie is done to perfection and the acting by Ben Affleck and Rosamund Pike is top notch. Of course, when it comes to David Fincher, I'd expect nothing less because he always delivers perfection when it comes to the craft of his films. Oddly enough, he started his career directing music videos for the likes of Madonna and Paula Abdul, but then broke away and delivered things like "Se7en," "Fight Club" and "Zodiac." So yeah, if you ever say David Fincher thriller, I am 100 percent on board. The man is a master of the genre. And pretty much any genre for that matter.

30- Now You See Me

If ever the question is posed as to what my favorite movie is that has a rotten score on Rotten Tomatoes, this is my answer. Granted, if you look closer into what a 50 percent score means on Rotten Tomatoes instead of just looking at the green splatter, you'll figure out that half of the critics who reviewed it did like the movie, but still. The fact that this movie got so much hate completely baffles me. First off, it's a lot of fun. It's a heist movie with magic that provides non-stop energy from start to finish and a cast that has perfect chemistry that makes for an exhilarating ride. But also, the movie preaches to you from the beginning that magic is all just a matter of misdirection and a sleight of hand. Oftentimes the secrets to the trick are right in front of the audience's faces. They're just not paying attention. As such, the movie itself is a magic trick. You're so focused on all the shenanigans of the four horsemen and the magic heists that you're not even paying attention to the ACTUAL plot of the movie that's right in front of you the whole time. The movie literally transforms into something completely different upon a second viewing when you actually know what you're supposed to be paying attention to. And that's a pretty darn genius concept for a film.

29- Whiplash

When young Damien Chazelle graduated from film school, he moved to Los Angeles with high hopes of making it big in the film industry. He initially had an idea to make this movie he called "La La Land," but it was such a bombastic idea that no one would take him up on his idea given that he was a new filmmaker without much of a resume, so he struggled to make by. Eventually he had to abandon the idea of "La La Land" and in doing so he came up with this little thing called "Whiplash." Long story short, "Whiplash" gets a best picture nomination at the Oscars and suddenly he has everyone's attention. And finally he's able to to make "La La Land." How do I know all of this? I interviewed the man. Remember the whole journalism thing? More on the "La La Land" stuff later, but man. What an introduction to a career. Miles Teller plays a drummer trying to make it in the world and he has Band teacher from Hell in J.K. Simmons as his "mentor." To impress this teacher, he goes to great lengths to prove his worth, dumping Supergirl (Melissa Benoist) in the process. The movie had, like, 10 different endings, each of which increased the intensity to the point where I was in a state of dumbfounded shock when the movie ACTUALLY ended. It was literally breathtaking.

28- Nightcrawler

No, not the X-Men character. The Jake Gyllenhaal movie. I feel that this is another movie that's more or less slipped under the radar, but those who know of it really love it. And I'm one of those people. How Gyllenhaal didn't get an Oscar nomination for this is quite baffling because he puts the whole movie on his back with an absolutely chilling performance. This is kind of a journalism movie, but not really. Gyllenhaal is out each night getting videos of crimes and other graphic scenes in order to sell the footage to news stations for a few quick bucks. He plays a character who doesn't have much of a soul to begin with it or any sense of boundaries, but by the end of it he's completely lost his whole soul to this freelancing business of his. So this is less of a journalism movie and more of a character study of a man who progressively loses all sense of morality due to his obsession of trying to make a name for himself. If you haven't seen the movie in a while, or at all for that matter, it's currently free on IMDb TV. I learned that when I was about to type this paragraph up. I went to search for the cast and crew and IMDb told me that I could watch the whole movie right there on their app. So I did. If you're in for a crazy, twisted, dark adventure, check this one out.

27- Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance)

The best way I can describe "Birdman" is that it's the perfect movie to study in film school. Like, seriously. If you want to feel all artsy and fancy, go watch "Birdman" and then start bragging about all the fancy filmmaking qualities that are on display. Your friends might all call you a film nerd, but hey, that's not necessarily an insult, right? OK, fine. If you're wanting to sit and relax while watching something entertaining, a pristine and prestigious movie that highlights the art of filmmaking might not be your cup of tea. But if you're in the mood to simply appreciate film, then "Birdman" checks every single box. It's very deep thematically. It'll make you spend a lot of time pondering on all the mysteries of life. It's about an actor who used to be a huge deal and is now more of a has-been trying to make a comeback. And it puts on an absolute clinic in acting because most of the scenes are very long, so everyone on board had to be at the absolute top of their game. And this because it pulls off the trick of giving the illusion that the movie was made in one shot, so all of the technical aspects of the film of the film are top notch work as well, with the camera work, cinematography, editing, as well as things like visual effects and sound design. I mean, there's a reason why this won best picture.

26- Shutter Island

And the final entry on the first half of this list is a movie that sometimes I forget actually came out last decade. For some reason when I think "Shutter Island," I think of an early 2000s Scorsese movie. But nope, this is 2010. But like with a good number of movies on this list, this is another dark and twisted thriller that completely transforms itself upon a second viewing. I won't dive too deep into all of that, but even the surface level stuff is right down my alley. Two U.S. Marshals, played by Leo DiCaprio and Mark Ruffalo, are visiting a mysterious mental institution for the criminally insane where one murderer completely vanishes from her cell. And, of course, this place is all on this remote island where the only way on and off is through a certain ferry that is controlled by the people who run the place. In the meantime, Leo's character is convinced that the man who killed his wife is secretly locked up in one of the darker places on the island that no one is allowed into. The cold and chilling atmosphere of the movie does an excellent job of setting the tone. Specifically I'm thinking of the film's lighting, as well as fantastically put together soundtrack (no original score, just a collection of classical pieces) and sound design that really does the trick in hitting this home.

Onward Review

After a bit of a sequel run as of late, Pixar is back doing what they do best. Original animated films. Prior to “Onward,” four of the last five movies that Pixar released were sequels. In fact, this whole past decade was quite sequel heavy for Pixar, which is in stark contrast to what they did during the beginning of their tenure as an animation studio. Starting with “Toy Story” in 1995 and going to “UP” in 2009, they made nine original films and one sequel, that of “Toy Story 2” in 1999, which itself was initially envisioned by Disney as a direct-to-video sequel. But in the 2010s, Pixar made 11 movies and seven of them were either sequels or other franchise continuations (“Monsters University” was a prequel, which is why I make that distinction). When you look at this whole picture, generally speaking, Pixar does much better with their original films, at least in terms of quality. Outside the “Toy Story” franchise, their sequels just aren’t quite up to par in comparison, which is why I’m glad they’re starting the 2020s with two original films, “Onward” right now and “Soul” in June. Is this going to be the beginning of a trend for Pixar? I don’t know. Pixar has announced dates for their upcoming slate of films, but have yet to reveal what any of those projects are. I hope it is, though.

Normally when it comes to Pixar, awareness is super high and I don’t have to spend much effort convincing people to go see their movies. The discussion is more or less centered around us comparing notes as to what we all thought of it, since a large percentage of people have already ran out to theaters. However, box office results from this past weekend suggest a slightly different story. Without adjusting for inflation, “Onward” came in just below “The Good Dinosaur” in terms of opening weekends with $39.1 million, and only ahead of “Toy Story” in 1995, which opened to $29.1 million, and “A Bug’s Life” in 1998, which opened to $33.3 million. As you might guess, ticket prices were much lower back in the 90s, which means Pixar did indeed suffer their worst opening weekend in their studio’s history with “Onward” in terms of the number of tickets sold. There’s probably a wide range of reasons as to why this happened, all combining together to hurt “Onward,” but I honestly think the awareness of this movie just isn’t as high. Those who are aware of this movie’s existence also just might simply not be as interested as they usually are when it comes to Pixar movies, so I need to put a little more effort into getting you out to see this, so long as you aren’t quarantined.

When I first saw advertising for “Onward,” I immediately thought of Netflix’s 2017 film “Bright,” the movie where Will Smith starred as a police officer and his companion was an orc. Essentially that was a fantasy movie where the fantasy creatures had lost their magic powers or chose not to use them and began to live normal, human lives. The premise for “Onward” is very similar, albeit without the heavy-handed political themes or the bizarre nature of pretty much everything involved. It’s almost as if people at Pixar watched that movie and decided they could do something similar, but much better. The only thing that throws a wrench into that theory is the fact that this was announced at D23 in July 2017, five months before “Bright” came out. Writer and director Dan Scanlon claimed his inspiration for the film came from his own personal history of his father dying when him and his brother were younger. He wrote the story after hearing an audio clip from his father. That makes too much sense to be false, but I still like my theory because “Bright” and “Onward” are awfully similar. Like “Bright,” our world here is also full of fantasy creatures living normal lives like humans or animals. Although their reason for transitioning away from magic is that technology made more sense than magic.

That idea of technology overpowering magic is an interesting parallel to reality. One could argue that constant flow of technology via all of our electronics and devices has hurt creativity. If “Onward” helps inspire more adventure and creativity, I certainly think that’s a great thing for the younger generation. However, that specific setting is used more of a backdrop to the current adventure rather than being a main focus. The movie’s driving force is precisely what I alluded to earlier with director Dan Scanlon’s personal experience with his father and brother. “Onward” is primarily focused on the two brothers, voiced by Chris Pratt and Tom Holland. Holland’s character, Ian Lightfoot, has never met his father as his father died before shortly before Ian was born. Ian’s older brother Barley Lightfoot, voiced by Chris Pratt, does remember their father, but was really young when he died. On Ian’s 16th birthday, he is given his father’s magical staff as a present with a spell included that will bring their father back for 24 hours. However, they fail in their execution of the spell, only bringing their father’s legs back. This immediately sends the two brothers on an adventure as they try to figure out a way to complete the spell properly before the 24 hours run out.

The first thing that I want to say about this is that it’s a lot of fun. I’m not one who has ever played Dungeons and Dragons, but “Onward” very much has the structure of a Dungeons and Dragons style of adventure. The end credits of the movie is what specifically clued me in on this as it mentions that there are specific elements of this movie that were taken directly from early Dungeons and Dragons games. When I saw that in the credits, it immediately connected with me that the movie I just watched was essentially Pixar’s “Dungeons and Dragons: The Movie.” The two brothers are on a quest to find a stone that will help them complete the spell. And there’s a lot of obstacles along the way that they have to overcome. The older brother, Barley, is super nerdy about all of this with his cards and games that he insists are historically based. Barley is also super outgoing and carefree, so the idea of risk excites him rather than scaring him. Ian, on the other hand, is a lot quieter. He’s working on his self-confidence, but isn’t sure of a lot, yet he’s the one that the staff works with. He’s also unsure of his brother’s plan, but he decides to go along with it. This sort of chemistry with the brothers adds a significant dose drama and excitement that propels the movie forward.

To go along with this high-octane adventure that doesn’t slow down, giving this a fairly unique flavor for a Pixar film, this is also a movie that has 100 percent of the Pixar touch. Every time you go into a new Pixar film, a high dosage of emotion is pretty much the expectation. Rarely, if ever, do they make your cotton candy style of kids film with a fun adventure and no depth. They always try to pack a huge, emotional punch. If you don’t walk out of the theater on the verge of tears or being deeply affected in other ways, then Pixar essentially didn’t do their job. With “Onward,” the second you hear that this is a Pixar movie where the plot centers around the death of a father and two brothers trying to bring him back for 24 hours, you know exactly what this movie is going to try to do at some point and thus you brace for impact and try to be strong through it all. This is why, in my initial Facebook reaction last week, I turned the word Pixar into a verb. “Onward” is a movie that you know is going to Pixar you, or hit you with a strong dose of emotion. Even though I was braced for impact, it Pixared me anyways, leaving me an emotional wreck. The reason why it was so effective is that it Pixared me in a way that I wasn’t expecting to get Pixared.

I don’t want to get into a whole lot of details in regards to the specifics here. The obvious reason is that I don’t want to give out any spoilers or even hint at any so that the experience for you is ruined. But I also don’t want to dive into my personal reasons as to why this affected me so much because that might be a backdoor way to give spoilers. If I tell you my personal experiences, then you might be able to connect the dots as to what happened in this movie. But nevertheless, this movie hit really close to home for me, which means I might value it slightly higher that some people because of that. And that’s OK. Pixar is really good at getting personal with their audience, which means the movies of theirs that you like the most are most likely determined by your own personal experiences. That said, I have no idea exactly where this movie ranks for me when it comes to Pixar’s filmography. I need to sit down and figure that out. I will say that the more movies that Pixar releases, the harder it becomes to get my exact ranking nailed down because we’re at a point where it might be difficult for a new Pixar movie to even make my top 10 due to the consistent quality that they put out. At this point, my top five might be set in stone given how many near perfect films Pixar has released.

Despite where this movie may end up on my Pixar ranking, one thing is for sure. This didn’t deserve to have the label of Pixar’s least attended opening weekend. And I don’t think the panic in the United States of the coronavirus is strong enough at the moment to convince enough people to stay away from theaters this past weekend to give it that label. In terms of the worldwide gross, of course it makes sense for Asia and Europe to not show up in huge numbers, but in the United States I wouldn’t say as much. I honestly think that a large percentage of the reason why the numbers were so low is because either the awareness wasn’t super high or people saw the trailers and weren’t too terribly interested. In which case, I’m here to tell you that, at the very least, this movie is fun and exciting. There’s never a dull moment. If you’re a Pixar fan, which most of us should be, I’m confident in my claim that you will at least find this to be an enjoyable ride that’s well worth your time. I can’t guarantee that the movie will effect you in the same way it did me due to how personal it felt, but it might. If you’re not in the mood to go to a crowded venue, go on a weekday night or a matinee showing. Or wait a week or two. But go see this. I’m giving “Onward” a 9/10.

Movie Preview: March 2020

The second month of the year has come and gone and, without any sort of "Black Panther" around to light the box office on fire, it was again a normal February, which is historically one of the lowest grossing months of the year. "Sonic the Hedgehog" was the big story this time around as it broke out in a big way, making $123.4 million in the month of February, but that was pretty much it. In second place was "Birds of Prey" with just $77.7 million in February, a total that "Joker" flew past in just three days back in October. "The Invisible Man" ended the month on a good note, but it only had two days to work with when it came to February. Moving onto March, this is the month in recent years that has often signaled the beginning of an early summer. And while this month has the firepower to do so with several big titles, this might be a difficult month to predict. The coronavirus has rightfully dominated the news this year and has just recently began to spread in the United States. Because of this, crowded movie theaters might not be people's favorite place to be. Some studios might decide to postpone certain movies altogether, like was just the case with the latest Bond movie "No Time to Die." With all of that in mind, this is what the current schedule looks like.

March 6th - 8th-

Leading the charge in March will be Pixar with their 22nd animated feature in Onward. After releasing two straight sequels, and four sequels in their last five movies, “Onward” is the first of two original animated films that Pixar is releasing in 2020, with “Soul” currently scheduled for June. Whether or not this is the beginning of a trend for Pixar returning to making more original films is yet to be determined as Pixar has scheduled dates for their slate of films from 2021 to 2023, but hasn’t given any information as to what they are. “Onward” is a movie that takes a page from Netflix’s 2017 film “Bright” as it is a movie full of fantasy characters who now live like normal human beings or animals without magical powers. However, two brothers whose father has passed away find a magical staff and have the opportunity to live with their father for one more day, but the staff only brings back his legs, sending them on a magical adventure. In terms of the box office, Pixar has been on a roll with their recent sequels, three of which have opened above $100 million, but their original films open more down to Earth. Even so, anything less than $50 million for “Onward” would actually be considered a disappointment for Pixar standards, even when it does come to their original films.

Continuing on that financial side of things real quick for “Onward” before moving onto our other film of the week. We’ll find out here really soon exactly what “Onward” is going to do, but the last two Pixar films that were released were 2017’s “Coco” and 2015’s “The Good Dinosaur.” Neither would make the perfect apples-to-apples comparison due to their release on a Wednesday during the week of Thanksgiving, but “Coco” had a three-day opening of $50.8 million and a five-day opening of $72.9 million. “The Good Dinosaur,” Pixar’s lowest-grossing film, had a three-day opening of $39.2 million and a five-day opening of $55.6 million. In 2015, “Inside Out” opened to a massive $90.4 million while “Brave” in 2012 surprised a bit with $66.3 million, both of those opening on a regular three-day weekend. Taking a quick look at one Pixar sequel in 2017’s “Cars 3,” which was another film that opened on the lower end of the Pixar spectrum, that one even landed a $53.7 million opening. The tracking for “Onward” isn’t necessarily through the roof and the reaction is a bit lukewarm, but it does have strong enough reviews at an 87 percent on Rotten Tomatoes. That combined with the Pixar brand should, in theory, help it get high enough to at least hit par for the course.

After that slight deep dive into “Onward,” the other movie on the wide release schedule is The Way Back, which is not to be confused with 2013 film “The Way, Way Back.” Only one “way” here. This movie is a sports drama, perhaps leaning a bit more on the drama side of things, starring Ben Affleck and directed by Gavin O’Connor, who previously directed movies like “Miracle,” “Warrior” and “The Accountant.” So O’Connor is familiar with this specific genre and has a good resume there of quality films. Even though “The Accountant” has nothing to do with sports, that re-teams him with star Ben Affleck. In “The Way Back,” Affleck plays a former basketball player who turned down a scholarship to Kansas and is now struggling with alcoholism that is ruining his life. However, his high school alma matter offers him a job to coach their basketball team, which in turn gives him an opportunity to turn his life around. The movie is currently tracking to open in the $6-10 million range, which feels about right. In 2011, O’Connor’s “Warrior” opened to $5.2, while 2016’s “Eddie the Eagle” opened to around $6 million. On the higher end of the spectrum, a pair of Disney sports movies, “McFarland, USA” and “Million Dollar Arm,” opened to $11 million and $10.5 million respectively.

March 13th - 15th-

Barring a colossal failure on the side of Pixar or a huge surprise with one of these new films this weekend, "Onward" will claim a second week on top of the charts. But there's going to be four new wide releases this week all fighting for a spot somewhere in the top five and early indications seem to favor the Christian film I Still Believe. This movie comes from the exact same team as "I Can Only Imagine," who are looking to catch lightning in a bottle twice after "I Can Only Imagine" ended up earning $83.4 million domestically, which is one of the highest totals for a Christian film. The thing here is that Bart Millard and his band MercyMe are a bit more widely known than Jeremy Camp, the subject of "I Still Believe." Nevertheless, with Easter coming on April 12 and no other Christian film in the way, this is poised quite well for Christian audiences as it tells the story behind Jeremy Camp and how his first wife Melissa was diagnosed with cancer shortly before they married, which led him to write the song "I Still Believe." Christian films can be hard to predict at the box office and while "I Still Believe" probably won't hit as high as the $17.1 million opening of "I Can Only Imagine," a large sample of other Christian films suggest that $10-15 million is in play.

On a wildly different note, we swing from the uplifting Christian film to the movie that might be the most controversial film to be released as of late. That movie is The Hunt. Loosely based on a 1924 short story titled "The Most Dangerous Thing," this is a Hunger Games style of movie where a bunch of strangers wake up in a clearing only to learn that they are being hunted by a group of elites. The movie obviously does not shy way from the extreme politics of it all with the hunted representing the conservatives with the elite that are doing the hunting are representing the liberals. All of this being done in a very violent and comedic, tongue-in-cheek sort of way. Back in August, President Trump actually tweeted about the movie, accusing it of made solely to inflame and cause chaos, which might not necessarily be wrong. Although Mr. President may have not realized that the conservatives are actually the heroes of the movie while the liberals are the villains. Either way, the movie was pulled back in August following the El Paso and Dayton shootings, but Universal decided to eventually throw it back on the schedule while implementing a very self-aware advertising campaign that highlights the controversy and invites the moviegoer to come and decide for themselves.

The third movie of the weekend is the year's next superhero movie, Bloodshot. Although this is one of those superhero movies that many people may not realize exists or even realize is a superhero movie. And the unfortunate reality is that this is the case because "Bloodshot" is not Marvel or DC. It comes from Valiant Comics. Haven't heard of them? Well, they were founded in 1989. Sold in 1994 to Acclaim Entertainment, which went bankrupt in 2004. The company was restarted in 2005 by a pair of entrepreneurs in 2005. So yeah, it hasn't been all rainbows and butterflies for Valiant. Bloodshot is a character who got assassinated along with his wife and brought back by a team of scientists who use nanotechnology to turn him into a superhuman, biotech killing machine. When he slowly gets his memories back, he escapes and goes on a revenge mission to kill the man who killed his wife. Bloodshot is played by Vin Diesel, which is the biggest thing that this movie has going for it. Although as popular as Diesel is, he's not been known to carry a new franchise on his back based on his name alone. Because of that, one of his solo outings, that of "The Last Witch Hunter," might be a good comparison. That movie opened to $10.8 million back in 2015.

While it's true that comedies have a tendency to randomly break out and thus become a bit unpredictable, it nevertheless seems that My Spy is destined to come in last place out of the new wide releases this weekend. Although it's certainly not without its own bit of star-power as it's led by Vin Diesel's "Guardians of the Galaxy" co-star Dave Bautista, who is trying his hardest make a name for himself outside his beloved Drax role, but that hasn't exactly worked out lately, with the most recent failure being last year's "Stuber," which could only muster $8 million in its opening weekend, despite seeing Bautista team up with Kumail Nanjiani. "My Spy" has Bautista teaming up with 11-year-old Chloe Coleman, playing a 9-year-old girl in this movie, as he plays a CIA agent who is getting one last shot to prove his worth and thus becomes at the mercy of said 9-year-old girl who figures him out after he gets assigned to surveil her family. The movie seems like it's directed at a family audience, but went with the PG-13 rating, meaning it might awkwardly fall in the range of not pleasing families nor adults. The movie is directed by Peter Segal, whose last two movies, "Second Act" (2018) and "Grudge Match" (2013) opened to $6.5 million and $7 million respectively.

March 20th - 22nd-

After a weekend that had four new wide releases, the final two weekends in March both only have one movie each. This third weekend belongs solely to the release of A Quiet Place Part II. As I've mentioned a couple times this year when doing monthly previews and reviewing "The Invisible Man," 2020 has been a year where a whole bunch of horror movies have been dumped. But if "The Invisible Man" was the first major horror release, "A Quiet Place Part II" is the second one. And this could very well be the biggest three-day opening of the year so far, which currently belongs to "Bad Boys for Life" at $62.5 million. In 2018, "A Quiet Place" became quite the phenomenon as it opened to $50.2 million, which is practically unheard of for an original horror film based on no previous material. In fact, under those qualifications, it could be argued that "A Quiet Place" set that record, depending, of course, on what you qualify as a horror film. Said record was taken away by last year's "Us," which opened to $71.1 million. Given how popular "A Quiet Place" was, how recent it was released, and how it demands to be seen with a large crowd in a theater, "A Quiet Place Part II" is positioned to soar at the box office, potentially matching the range of "Us" or 2018's "Halloween," which opened to $76.2 million. The all-time horror record is "IT" in 2017 with $123.4 million.

March 27th - 29th-

The final wide release of the month is the movie in the most awkward position at the moment and that is Disney's Mulan. While Disney has been somewhat hit and miss with their live action remakes in terms of the box office success, the three times that they have dove into their classic 90s renaissance films has delivered massive results, with "Beauty and the Beast," "Aladdin" and "The Lion King" all delivering $1 billion worldwide. So naturally it makes sense financially to explore other 90s remakes, which is why we have "Mulan." However, Disney has decided to go down a slightly different route with this one, which has produced mixed results in terms of fan reaction to the trailers. Instead doing a direct remake of the 1998 animated film, Disney is ditching the musical element of this, as well as some beloved characters, like Eddie Murphy's Mushu. Why? Well, Disney has decided to be more true to the original Chinese lore here. Even though "Mulan" is arguably one of the more beloved Disney animated films, it was a situation where Disney took a Chinese story and "Disneyfied" it by completely changing everything and making it their own thing. While the Americans liked the results, the Chinese people arguably hated "Mulan," which leads us to the unfortunate elephant in the room.

Disney's goal with this "Mulan" remake was to first and foremost please the Chinese market by creating a "Mulan" movie that honored their culture and traditions. If they had to piss off a few bitter Americans in the process, that seemed worth it financially given how big the Chinese movie market is. But yeah, in case you've been living under a rock the last few months, the whole country of China right now is essentially quarantined due to the coronavirus. There is no Chinese movie market at the moment. And while some movies might be able to survive momentarily without China, "Mulan" is not one of them. The movie has a reported production budget of at least $200 million and an American fan base that is not too happy. Also, said fan base is realistically just not as big as "Beauty and the Beast," "Aladdin" and "The Lion King" in the frist place. Some circles are predicting "Mulan" to open in the $40-60 million range and finish with a domestic total of $120-150 million. That just won't cut it. Without China, Disney is heading straight for disaster at the moment. Disney is claiming that they are moving forward, but honestly they might be better off by pulling a James Bond and putting "Mulan" on the shelf for now until the coronavirus pandemic dies down.

The Invisible Man Review

We’re just beginning the third month of the year and there have already been… wait for it… eight horror movies released in theaters. And of the eight, “The Invisible Man” is the first one I have saw. Of the other seven, we’ve had “The Grudge,” “Underwater,” “The Turning,” “Gretel & Hansel,” “Fantasy Island,” “The Lodge” and “Brahms: The Boy II.” I saw “The Lodge” a day after seeing “The Invisible Man” and that review is coming soon. It was a Sundance horror film from 2019 that had been waiting over a year for and was finally released. I enjoyed “The Boy,” so I am curious about what the heck they’re doing with “The Boy II.” And “Underwater” I hear was fairly decent, so I might check that one out eventually when it hits streaming. The other four I have little interest in. But “The Invisible Man” is the first major horror film that made a significant impact at the box office last weekend. It’s also based on source material that is well over 100 years old as H.G. Wells’ original novel was published in 1897. The title character was then brought in as one of Universal’s classic monsters in 1933 and has been a staple in monster lore and cinema ever since, right alongside the likes of Dracula and Frankenstein. The number of movies he’s appeared in is quite the long list.

This current adaptation of “The Invisible Man” has been in production as early as 2007. Production kicked into gear in the mid 2010s when Universal had the idea to reboot their classic monsters in a shared universe they called the Dark Universe. Said Dark Universe lasted approximately one movie following the financial and critical disaster that was the 2017 Tom Cruise remake of “The Mummy,” which is a movie that I personally didn’t hate. There were some interesting pieces in place and I liked Sofia Boutella’s Mummy portrayal. The problem is that the movie spent so much time setting of the Dark Universe that they forgot to stop and make a good individual movie. Every studio is trying so hard to copy “The Avengers” that they forget that Marvel began by simply making “Iron Man,” “Thor” and “Captain America” as individual movies before later bringing them together in 2012. The process shouldn’t be rushed. In order to make people care about a cinematic universe, people first need to be emotionally invested in the individual players. Hence is why the Dark Universe crashed and burned. However, during this aftermath, Jasom Blum decided he wanted to still make “The Invisible Man” as an individual movie not connected to any sort of cinematic universe.

And thus we have this current Leigh Whannell directed remake of the popular story, produced by Blumhouse and distributed by Universal, with a production budget of just $7 million, which is why its $28 million opening was a huge success. Compare that to 2017’s “The Mummy,” which opened a tad bit higher at $31 million, yet was a disaster because it had a production budget in the range of $125-195 million. It did make up ground overseas with a worldwide total of $410 million, but the $80.2 million domestic total was just not enough for Universal to move forward with the Dark Universe. Quite frankly, if Universal wanted to create a new cinematic monsterverse, focusing first on individual movies that don’t have gigantic budgets is exactly how they should’ve gone. Because I like the idea of doing modern takes on old monster movies. The execution just needs to be there, which is why I really enjoyed this remake of “The Invisible Man.” Leigh Whannell was definitely the right man for the job. Not only did he have plenty of experience with the horror genre as he helped write movies like “Saw” and “Insidious,” but he also showed off his directing prowess with the 2018 film “Upgrade,” a movie that I never reviewed on this blog, but one that I really enjoyed.

What makes "The Invisible Man" so effective is that it manages to get under your skin and becomes quite unsettling in a very unique way. The movie follows a girl with a psychotic and abusive boyfriend who does not take kindly to her finally running away. He tries to chase her down, but she just barely escapes his grasp and hides with a friend of her's. She becomes paranoid and basically lives like a hermit for an extended period of time, only to finally start gaining peace and comfort when news comes out that he has committed suicide. But given that everyone should've seen the title of the movie when they walked into the theaters, and most likely also watched trailers, we all know that he didn't actually commit suicide. He simply faked his death and found a way to become invisible. Not via a failed science experiment, but some sort of optic technology that he was working on. And because the world thinks he committed suicide, he becomes invisible both literally and in terms of his status in the world. And now when he finds his former girlfriend and starts slowly ruining her life, she's the one who everyone thinks is going crazy. And it's actually pretty tragic because the second she starts to get better is when he shows up and ruins everything.

In terms of the horror elements, this movie is quite genius. It doesn't rely on jump scares and loud noises to try to scare people. In fact, it's quite the opposite. This movie is slow and quiet, but it's those quiet moments that become extremely uncomfortable because the guy shows himself fairly early, then disappears. Thus we as an audience know something is up even before the girl does. Because of that, we spend every scene trying to figure out where exactly he's standing and when he's going to strike. Or is he going to awkwardly watch her sleep or disturbingly watch her take a shower? Thus very normal scenes that would otherwise be quite boring become super intense as the audience is dying in anticipation of something terrible on the horizon. It's also quite genius in terms of the budget. They didn't have to spend anything on fancy visual effects, scary monsters, or elaborate makeup work. The monster literally doesn't exist. Most of the craft involves fancy camerawork as the camera pans around or focuses in on a certain spot, thus cluing in the audience that he is probably standing right there. Then the camera plays mind tricks on the audience as it zooms out, making the audience guess where he is. We often don't know if she's about to get attacked.

Not only is this extremely intense and wildly entertaining if you are a horror fan, but as I eluded to before, this movie has a surprising amount of emotion. Despite this girl going through a horribly traumatic experience with an abusive relationship, she has a good support group and several great relationships. The acting across the board with the movie's visible characters is excellent and you're rooting for this girl to succeed. But then the invisible man shows up. We see him. She sees him. But no one else does. Thus when she tries to go to her friends and explain what's going on, they all think she is crazy because this is not some sort of fantasy world. It's a modern, realistic portrayal of a guy who created the technology to become invisible without anyone knowing. Because of this, these solid relationships start to slowly deteriorate due to what's going on. Things that the guy is actually doing get blamed on the girl because that's the only logical explanation. The domino effect here becomes the most damaging to the girl, who is slowly starting to lose her grasp of her mental state and spiral psychologically out of control. You can tell based on the chain of events happening that she is about to completely break down.

As I referred to in the opening of this review, there is a large amount of horror films thrown our way, mostly because they are so cheap to make and easy for studios to make a quick buck. Because of that, a large majority of them are lazily put together, generic pieces of trash. I know I haven't seen a whole lot of the ones that have already come out this year, but based on reviews from critics and audiences alike, the majority of them are horror films that fall into these lazy tropes, which makes it refreshing when a horror movie comes around in "The Invisible Man" that, not only is out to do something unique and different, but a lot of care is put into the craft to truly make it something that stands out. In many ways this reminds me of "A Quiet Place" from the other year in that both movies are unique horror experiences (yes, I consider both as horror films, not thrillers) that use a lot of technical craft to present the movie's scares while also making sure to have a solid foundation of solid acting, character progression, and human emotion rather than relying on cheap scares and gory images. This is also a great example of a remake that justifies it's existence as something unique and different than it's predecessor. Instead of retreading old ground, they made something new.

If you're a horror fan and you're looking for something good to satisfy your needs, "The Invisible Man" is definitely a movie that you need to see. But also, if you are one that claims you hate horror, this is the type of horror film that you actually might enjoy as I believe this will be a movie that will do a good job of expanding beyond the typical horror crowd. I can see a lot of people that will claim that this is a thriller, not a horror, and say they enjoyed it because of that despite them usually not liking horror. That's a comment that usually bugs me because there's a lot of people out there, in my opinion, who probably like the horror genre a lot more than they will allow themselves to internally accept. But it's whatever. Regardless of what you decide to call it, if you like horror and/or thriller, this is a must see. No, it's not on the same level of some of the independent horror films that I love, but it didn't need to be. Again, like "A Quiet Place," this is an excellent horror film made for mainstream audiences. It didn't need to be super deep and thought-provoking. It's just an excellently done, well-crafted, mainstream horror film. If Universal or Blumhouse decide to do more classic monster films this way, I'm 100 percent on board. MY grade for "The Invisible Man" is a 9/10.

The Call of the Wild Review

From 20th Century Studios… not 20th Century Fox… comes another confusing production with “The Call of the Wild” that Disney inherited when they purchased Fox. We’ll get to all of the confusing production stuff here in a bit, but the first thing that caught my eye was that name 20th Century Studios. I was hearing buzz that Disney was rebranding Fox, but to see that new logo caught me off guard. If I’m not mistaken, “The Call of the Wild” is the first movie to officially display the new name and logo. Disney has also switched Fox Searchlight to Searchlight Pictures, so I guess the idea is to phase out the Fox name since the two studios are no longer affiliated with the current Fox Corporation that’s not owned by Disney. So I guess that makes sense, but my brain is going to have a hard time getting used to that. I never used the full name of 20th Century Fox. It was just Fox. But now that Disney is phasing out the Fox name, am I supposed to use 20th Century as the short name? Or simply use the full name of 20th Century Studios? Neither of those are connecting in my brain at the moment, so I will apologize to Disney for being rebellious and still call this Fox. Sue me. But whatever name you want to call this studio now, they have a movie out and it’s time for us to discuss it.

“The Call of the Wild” started off as a novel by Jack London, published in 1903. The novel takes place in the late 1800s, during the gold rush. The central character is a dog named Buck that is a St. Bernard-Scotch Collie mix. At the start of the story, he is a happy dog living with an owner in California, but after a series of events, he gets stolen and sold as a sled dog in Alaska. It’s one of those stories where the dog passes hands through several different owners as he slowly becomes adjusted to living solely in the wild rather than in a domestic situation with an owner. But that’s the book. For me personally, I wasn’t 100 percent sure what this specific adaptation was doing based on all of the trailers because the marketing focused heavily on his time with Harrison Ford and I wasn’t even able to determine what the time period of this was. So I’m not sure what Disney was really thinking with this marketing or if they really cared much for this adaptation. “The Call of the Wild” is a book that I have read. I don’t know when. My guess is that I read it during grade school at some point, possibly for school. The details are vague in my mind. I just know that when I saw it on the schedule about a year ago, it piqued my interested because it sounded like something that I was familiar with.

 The pleasant surprise for me when I actually dove into the movie was that they actually did follow the novel fairly closely. Yes, my specific experience with the novel is a bit vague, but thanks to the fact that the internet exists, I familiarized myself with the story, thus reminding myself why this actually is considered a classic novel. So the fact that this is a movie that follows the source material is a positive thing. It’s not just a random thing with Harrison Ford hanging out with a dog in the wilderness. The movie is about this dog named Buck and his experiences being taken from his home and learning to adapt to his circumstances. Harrison Ford shows up briefly in the first half of the movie, but isn’t really part of the story until the second half of the movie. Now in compared to the novel, this is a more condensed version of the story. In the novel, Buck goes through several different hands before being united with John Thornton, who is played by Harrison Ford in the movie. But in this movie version, there’s a few different characters that are combined into one and thus there’s less owners that Buck has throughout the movie. And I thought that worked just fine. The writers here did a great job of cutting out what they needed in order to write a story that flowed well.

A perfect adaptation of the novel, in terms of including everything, would be something that would either be really long or would be one of these 8-10 episode Netflix miniseries. And that could be fun if the execution was done well, but I think this was a solid adaptation from book to screenplay. There was just enough stops along the way for the journey to mean something and for there to be progression for Buck, but at the same time it was concise enough to flow well as a solid movie. I also think that each point along the way came with great acting that really sold the drama and emotion here. And I’m not just talking about Harrison Ford, who was fantastic in this movie, but Buck’s other owners were also really well acted. I especially liked his sled dog team owners, Perrault and François, played by Omar Sy and Cara Gee. In fact, as great as Harrison Ford was, I personally enjoyed this first half of the movie a bit more. Omar Sy as Perrault was such a loving and caring owner. With Buck being in such a rough transition period in terms of just being taken from his home, Perrault did a fantastic job of helping him reach his potential and that’s the point of the movie where there was the most character development.

There was also some interesting drama among the team of dogs at this point. The lead sled dog was a Husky named Spitz, who was mean and aggressive. Once Buck got settled in as a member of the team, he slowly gained more respect among the other dogs, which caused Spitz to get jealous that Buck was starting taking over as the leader of the dogs. Eventually it builds up to a confrontation between Spitz and Buck which was fairly intense. However, there is a giant elephant in the room here that I’ve dodged because I’m not really that interested in writing up the same exact review as everyone else on the internet. But the drama between the dogs isn’t as intense as it could be because all the dogs are CGI and the CGI is quite bad. This has been a popular point of conversation surrounding this movie and I’m personally a bit conflicted. I think this is something that adults and critics will be bothered by, but in terms of this being a movie directed at family audiences, I honestly don’t think family audiences, especially younger kids, will care at all. Younger kids might have more of a problem with the movie keeping their attention as this is not necessarily a movie directed at kids specifically, but if they enjoyed all of the other recent dog movies, then they’ll probably love this one.

Me personally, I was more distracted with the fact that Buck had a lot more human qualities than he should’ve. If the filmmakers are going to decide to use CGI dogs, they should make them all act like dogs. Buck’s facial expressions, many of his reactions and a lot of his actions were very human. The biggest example of this came in the second half of the movie when Buck seemed to be super concerned about Harrison Ford’s drinking problem. And he took his bottle of alcohol away from him towards the beginning of their partnership, which made no sense. A normal dog wouldn’t have any knowledge about what that drink was or why it was bad for a human to drink it. Little things like this happened the entire movie. Thus Buck reminded me a lot of Scooby-Doo in the way he acted. Granted, Scooby-Doo’s humanlike characteristics work because it’s a comedic take of a dog that is not going for realism. So it works. Everyone loves Scooby-Doo. But “The Call of the Wild” is trying to be a serious drama about a dog going through a lot of hard experiences, so it becomes tonally conflicting when you have a cartoonish, humanlike dog in a movie that’s otherwise trying to be super realistic. And if they hadn’t relied so heavily on CGI, they wouldn't have had that problem.

The other thing that makes this super confusing is that the decision to have such a CGI-heavy production rose the price tag on their movie significantly. The reported production budget is $125-150 million, which is insane because this movie was never going to come close to that. In looking at our recent four dog movies, “A Dog’s Purpose” was the biggest earner with $64.5 million domestically and $205 million worldwide. The other three, “A Dog’s Journey,” “A Dog’s Way Home” and “The Art of Racing in the Rain,” averaged $30.3 million domestically and $62.1 million worldwide. “The Call of the Wild” is off to a great start compared to all four as it opened to a surprising $24.8 million when it was expected to open to $10-15 million, but still. The general rule of thum is that a movie needs to at least double or triple its production budget given that said budget doesn’t include marketing costs and the studio doesn’t get back 100 percent of the box office earnings, especially not internationally. So “The Call of the Wild” might need to make at least $200-300 million worldwide to be a success after their choice of using CGI. The other four movies used real dogs and their production budgets averaged out to be $18.5 million.

Yes, I realize that this movie has a higher percentage of dangerous scenes included in it, so I feel like the filmmakers decided that they weren’t going to even attempt to put their trained dogs in any sort of peril in order to avoid any sort of controversy. And when you have dogs leading sleds, dogs fighting other dogs, and dogs going up against bears and wolves, that all makes sense. But I feel like there are filmmaking tricks with these animal movies that allow them to pull off scenes that appear to be really dangerous, yet the animals were never in any sort of harm. I don’t know what these tricks are, but I do know that animal movies have been made for a long time. Heck, this exact book has been adapted several times throughout history, beginning as early as the silent film era in the 1920s, and all of those adaptations didn't have the technology available to CGI all of the dogs and they made out just fine. Rather, my conclusion is that they felt a bit lazy and didn't want to put in the effort of training dogs doing the necessary filmmaking tricks to pull this off, so they just CGI-ed everything, which was an expensive lazy decision. I think they saw movies like "The Jungle Book" and decided to follow suit. And that's an unfortunate decision that compromised the quality of this film.

Did all of the CGI dog stuff ruin this film for me? No, it didn't. As I said, this is a well-written, well-adapted movie with some great sequences, great acting and great character arcs. I think it captures the spirit of the novel in an appropriate way that makes for an enjoyable experience. And all that makes this a bit frustrating because this could've been a great movie that lived up to the legacy of a lot of the excellent animal-led movies that have graced the screen over the decades. But that lazy decision to CGI all of the animals holds back this movie's potential and also cost them big time in terms of profitability at the box office. And I think it's funny that they decided to play it safe and not figure out ways to film certain sequences with real animals, because they also played it safe in terms of the danger in the movie. The original novel is a lot more intense and honest with what happens to certain dogs in the story. The movie could've portrayed that brutality since all the dogs were CGI, but they decided not to. They also changed the novel's villains in the final act from Native Americans to a mustache-twirling white dude who had significantly more depth and character progression in the original novel. So there's plenty of kinks in this movie's armor, but I'm still giving it a 7/10.