This is going to be a very short review because I can’t really review BETTER WATCH OUT without ruining the entire thing. In fact, the only part of the plot I can tell you about is the log line on almost every single movie website which is, “On a quiet suburban street, a babysitter must defend a twelve-year-old boy from intruders, only to discover it’s far from a normal home invasion.” I bet you NOT to watch the trailer to this movie if you have any interest to this at all. I’m going to recommend you either pay the $6 to rent it video on demand, or illegally download it, and just start watching. If I were to describe it based on comparing it to other horror/thrillers I would say it is The Cabin In The Woods of home invasion thrillers.

If you have seen one home invasion thriller you have seen them all. Except this one, this flips it on it’s head about a third of the way through the movie, and never lets up, leading to one sadistic, clever, and disturbing thrillers I’ve seen over the years. I actually bought the movie on iTunes for just three dollars more (I had credit that was about to expire), and I have already watched it twice, and loved it just as much both times.

I can’t really describe the acting without giving anything away either. I’ll just say that it mostly has kid actors in it (the boy and girl from The Visit, and Peter Pan from the recent Hugh Jackman version of Pan) and they are all freaking terrific. Patrick Warburton and Virginia Madsen are in it too and even though their roles are really small they are good in this too.

There is everything in this thriller/horror film, genuine jump scares, genuine creepiness, genuine insanity. It’s a quick 85 minute film too, and it doesn’t let up at all. If I had one complaint, and I have to be vague here, but I would have liked the movie to have planted more motivation to one of the characters earlier in the film to make some insane things that happen be a little more believable.

That’s all I can say. In fact, that is my review. I loved this movie, and I can’t fathom why it wasn’t released in theaters between Halloween and Christmas (it’s more of a Christmas film in the vein of Krampus). And other critics can’t fathom it either, it is sitting on a well deserved 88% on Rotten Tomatoes right now. If you like horror films and thrillers, go watch this immediately. It is one unique wild ride.

What is the point of doing a FLATLINERS reboot if you aren’t going to have Kiefer Sutherland play his original to help the new kids out? Instead, you are basically Ghostbusters where he’s there, plays a completely different character, and doesn’t help out in the slightest, relegating to a obligatory nostalgia cameo? Also, why the hell would you *MINOR SPOILER ALERT* kill off a character mid way thru the film for shock value, when that character was the least deserving to be killed off? *END MINOR SPOILER ALERT* While it doesn’t deserve to be 0% on Rotten Tomatoes, because the film isn’t terrible, but it isn’t good, I couldn’t help but think the entire film, “I would rather watch the shittiest episode of Grey’s Anatomy than watch this again.”

Flatliners is basically a REMAKE, not a REBOOT, of the 90s film. It’s about a group of medical students who kill themselves deliberately for several minutes to experience the afterlife and then wake themselves up. When they wake themselves up they have huge moments of clarity, brain rewiring, intelligence, and are horny as fuck. They also start to see disturbing visions that may or may not be linked to a shady past. Several cheap jumps scares and horror film cliches later, you have yourself a plain Jane of a movie, where you would rather just pop in the original, which at least had some integrity, where it didn’t treat the audience as if they were idiots and weren’t trying to make a straight up horror film.

The one thing that this film tries to bring into the fold and have an “ace up their sleeve” is the *minor spoiler alert* killing of one of the main characters half way thru the film. I am not going to reveal who it is here. Suffice to say, I thought the movie did it for plain shock value, and not to advance the plot in anyway. The character they should’ve killed off first, has the big climatic battle with their demons at the end, should’ve switched with this other character, and narratively it would’ve made a whole hell of a lot more sense. It is hard to explain without getting into spoilers, but both of these characters have sort of the same predicament, and I did really care about the character who it was happening to at the end, because this character had absolutely no character development. The other one did, and I felt completely cheated out of a well rounded story line, because this one actor/actress is hotter than the other.

If you’ve seen the original *MAJOR SPOILERS FOR THE 90s FILM*, what is happening to them is that their past misdeeds come back to haunt them in a hallucinating/demonic fashion, and they have to find the people/things they did wrong and ask for forgiveness not only from them, but from themselves. In the original, none of the characters die, and one of the main ones at the end has to do something unique and thought provoking to get rid of his/her demons. Well basically, the same thing happens here, except they do the cliche horror shit of killing off characters, where it wasn’t warranted in the slightest. I guess that wanted to be different, but if you are doing a remake, isn’t it basically just a copycat but with better effects? *END MAJOR SPOILERS FROM FIRST FILM*

It would’ve been better if Kiefer played his character from the original and was involved in the plot to help them. He’s just here as a doctor that could use a hair cut. He looks like Jack Bauer is in hiding from the Russians at the end of 24: Live Another Day. Involving him could’ve brought something cool to the film, and actually have him advance the plot more naturally, then the kids just randomly figuring shit out themselves. Also, the situations here that they need forgiveness from are kind of dumb compared to the ones in the original. I didn’t really care here at all. The acting here is okay, Ellen Page, Diego Luna, and Kiersey Clemons doing adequate with the only questionable acting coming from James Norton and Nina Dorbrev. Norton wasn’t all out terrible, but a couple of scenes I couldn’t help but think, “Hmm, they could’ve used another take on this one.” And at this point I just think that Nina Dorbrev is just a pretty face who I eventually would like to see nude. Was she even that good on Vampire Diaries?? Someone who watches that show please explain her appeal other than her looks.

But yeah, Flatliners is a quick rental or a Netflix watch, nothing more. It’s not terrible, but it is the plain Jane of horror films of 2017. If you want to watch something better, search for the original, which has a lot more integrity, heart, and a decent directing job from Joel Schumacher, who would later do the terrible Batman & Robin. This is a straight up remake, with just better effects, and some character killing, and completely not worth your movie theater money. This film wasn’t DOA, but you can’t feel its pulse at all, just paralyzingly pale.

Yes, we know Tom Cruise is a fucking psychopath with that Scientology bullshit and all the crap he has done in the past to have been extremely off putting in his public life since 2005. But ladies and gentlemen, you cannot deny that he is one hell of an actor that you can rely each and every movie on. The guys brings his A+ game to every film that he does. Every single film. Even the fucking new Mummy movie. He feels like he wants to be there, he does his own stunts, he is just an incredible actor. And he in incredible in my favorite movie of the weekend by far, AMERICAN MADE. In fact, I am willing to bet that the movie wouldn’t have worked as well as it did without Cruise.

Well, I sort of take that back, because the story in this is one hell of an awesome tale, an extremely entertaining two hours. It plays off the whole narration way of telling movies, where we have the main character speaking almost the entire film, a la Wolf of Wall Street, Goodfellas, Casino, and it completely works. I love narration movies. I’m a sucker for them as much as I’m a sucker for repeat a certain amount of time/day movies (yes, I can’t wait for Happy Death Day). Sorry off topic. The movie is about a pilot named Barry Seal, who worked for the CIA, and after smuggling drugs for the Medellin Cartel on the side, became an informant for the DEA. This guy got away with so much shit it was astonishing how much of the story was actually true.

The movie is fast paced, and quick, even for two hours. The time flies by with how much electricity this film shocks into your theater going experience. The direction is perfect, loved the aerial plane shots. The supporting acting is also perfect, with Domnahall Gleeson showing that he is destined to eventually become a star. I also loved that the film didn’t give us a Tom Cruise Hollywood ending and took a chance (even though I realize they were just retelling what really happened but you never know, I just expect a Tom Cruise kind of ending when I see a Tom Cruise movie).

But yeah, it is a shame a lot of you will not see this because you think Tom Cruise is crazy and hate his guts. But it isn’t like he is a murderer, or child molestor, or forcefully packs fudge, or something truly unforgivable. He is just in a hokey religion that is a little obsessed with control. This is where you need to separate the actor, his personal life, and his craft. If you do that, you are more likely to have a better time with this. Because this film deserves to be seen. It is that well made, and makes for a great time at the movies. Cruise to your local theater and give this a chance. I beg you. I won’t beg you by jumping on a couch but I will normal human being non Vishnu beg you.

Emma Stone will for sure get a Oscar nomination for BATTLE OF THE SEXES. She is quite brilliant in it. However, something about the movie was off for me where I quite can’t recommend it as the best version of the Billie Jean King and Bobby Riggs tennis match that was so much more than a match. It was probably because the movie tried to focus on another big issue in King’s life than the actual match and what it meant for women around the world, where it feels like two separate movies crammed into one. This power struggle of storytelling gets in the way of showing a little more of Bobby Rigg’s life up to the match and relegates a lot of his antics to montages that should’ve been their own longer scenes. I was really hoping to love this movie and proclaim it a masterpiece, instead, it’s watchable, but I know it could’ve been so much better.

Why could’ve there have been a separate film about the life of Billie Jean King, her struggles with homosexuality, her life after the world found out, could’ve made a great biopic film. With maybe a couple of minutes with this sliced into it. Heck, they could’ve focused on events surrounding this tennis match for this film, and hire Emma Stone again to do a complete biopic tale of King. But the fact that they try to do two movies in one, just makes everything feel…well bloated. The focus on getting ready for the actual tennis match, and the match itself starts in the last 30 minutes of the movie, and the movie is two hours long.

Not that there was anything wrong with the Billie Jean King discovering her sexuality part. It was handled well and acted with perfection, I just thought tonally it was in the wrong movie and should’ve been on its own. I think that because of this storyline being in there it kind of gave the shaft to Steve Carrell and his portrayal of Bobby Riggs. I went into the movie wanting to know more about Riggs, and had questions, and I left the theater with not one question answered. I thought the movie would give equal time to both players, but nope, I felt Carrell wasn’t in the movie all that much. He was even short changed in the epilogue I thought as well. So I thought the something missing from this movie, was Bobby Riggs, even though the Battle of the Sexes match was supposed to be 50% about him.

You could argue that discovering her homosexuality fit in the storyline with women’s lib and the pursuit of equality. I thought the scenes of her basically quitting the tennis league because they were paying men more than they were woman completely belonged and worked in this film, When it which to her realizing she was a lesbian, it just felt tonally off. Like I was watching a biopic of just her, and not of the tennis match that defined a generation and not digging into the persona of Bobby Riggs. Also, the final match wasn’t shot too terribly exciting. Instead of doing some great sports shots directors have been known to get in these films, I felt bored and that I was just watching it on television. Nothing inspiring.

So in essence, two decent short films, but combining them, a feature with a lot of narrative problems. Incredible acting, directing, and the film had that great 70s feel where it feels like it was shot on film. It’s a decent one time Netflix watch, but not the film that it should’ve been. It should’ve been one of the films for feminism to watch, study, and celebrate. Instead, it will be lost in the queue, with other films more than deservedly being remembered for it in its place.

 

I vote Victoria & Abdul the most charming movie of 2017. I’m not saying it is one of the best, I’m saying it is one of those royalty/period piece movies that doesn’t take itself too seriously, it is quite funny, and has a lot of rewatchable value. Thank of The Prince & Me or Ever After: A Cinderella Story. If you’ve seen and love those you know exactly what I am talking about. The movie marketing company has kind of undersold this film. It is quite fun and while has some serious issues, isn’t the snooze fest anti-climatic drama you are probably thinking it is. Judi Dench at this point can act out of a paper bag, and I think she gives one of her finest performances here too, and gets to cut a little loose at the same time.

The movie is based on the real life acquaintance between Queen Victoria of the United Kingdom and her Indian muslim servant Abdul. He goes to India with a companion to deliver this ceremonial coin the the Queen, and when he gives her this coin, he looks at her when he isn’t supposed to, and the Queen gets curious. They become fast friends and she gives him a lot of responsibilities and the other English staff (especially the Queen’s son) doesn’t like what is going on too much. Basically their friendship has to overcome all of these outside hardships. It is a quick hour and 40 minutes of their charming time together.

Like I said, Judi Dench is always great, and will always be great, and this film is no exception. The gentleman who plays Abdul, Ali Fazal, is great as well. And if it weren’t for the chemistry between these two actors, the film wouldn’t have worked at all. Everything else about this film is quite good. The direction, the cinematography of the castle and the land around it. The acting from all the supporting players and the staff that doesn’t like what is going on is great as well. The film is a lot funnier than you think it would be. And it knows when to switch tones when everything needs to be a little more dramatic.

The film isn’t perfect. The narrative is a little clunky and the message is a little frayed when trying to get its meaning across. But this film has a ton of rewatch value. I was surprised how much a liked it. If you like these period piece movies, and maybe even the ones with a little more flair, humor, and fun, you’ll really like it too. Don’t go in expecting Pride & Prejudice, but something more akin to Ever After.

STRONGER features a different side to the Boston Marathon bombing than was featured in the film Patriot’s Day. Instead of the event and the hunting of the bombers, we have the inspiring story of Jeff Bauman, a man that was right by one of the bombs, ended up losing both of his legs in the blast. Here, he is portrayed by Jake Gyllenhaul in another powerful performance that begs the question, “why in the hell hasn’t Gyllenhaul won an Oscar yet?” HE is honestly going to be the new Leo DiCaprio in about 10 to 15 years, where he’ll end up winning one for a performance that is still strong, but less than his previous work.

The movie itself is very decent, although for me there was a little something missing, and I can’t quite figure out what it is. Maybe it is the fact that I didn’t like Jeff Bauman for most of the film, considering him very lazy and too privileged, and only after losing almost everything other than his legs he starts to get his ass into gear. I thought that the story of his ex girlfriend Erin, played fantastically by Tatiana Maslany, was the more inspiring story, on how long she had to put up with his ass acting the way he was. Maybe I was a little bored throughout the movie, and it was just that the story didn’t uplift me as it was probably supposed to.

So although it is a good movie, very good in fact, I wish it was more. But if it was, I have a feeling the movie wouldn’t be as real, as I’m told that the real Jeff Bauman saw the movie and said it was pretty damn accurate. I am glad that the real Bauman turned his life together after being involved in that terrible tragedy. Just wanting to live the next day after that takes courage in and of itself. I don’t think that anything missing was any of the screenplay or direction by David Gordon Green’s fault, I just think it would make a more interesting hour documentary than a 2 hour character study.

But it is like I’m saying the movie is bad, which I’m not. Most of you will find that missing something in it and love the heck out of this film. Everything about the movie is top notch. I would probably revisit this on Netflix but it isn’t something I would buy or something I would watch over and over again. I honestly think that out of the two Boston Marathon bombing films, that Patriot’s Day is still the more harrowing of the two. It’s the performances here that does take the movie out of mediocrity, as Jake Gyllenhaul can basically spit on anything and make it about 20% better.

Well, I don’t know what to tell ya. I have no idea how the hell you are going to see this movie or when you are going to see it, considering it was just in theaters for one night and that night was last night, but I’m going to review it anyway, so that when it eventually pops up in that $5 Blu-Ray bin, or is available to rent from a streaming service, or available as part of your Netflix subscription, that you might want to leave the first and second films as a good distant memory, and pretend JEEPERS CREEPERS 3 never even existed.

When you have a third film in any kind of franchise, you usually have to go all out, even in horror, where you know there are several sequels yet to come. Scream 3, Dream Warriors, Child’s Play 3, Friday the 13th part 3, Saw III, Paranormal Activity 3, even though we know there are still more sequels to come, the films double down on its hand just in case there isn’t. There are certain rules, one must abide by in order to successful create a sequel to a horror film, and continue the franchise. It still has to follow horror film rules in general. Jeepers Creepers 3 breaks every single one of these rules, and then some.

I think we should go over some if not all of these rules shall we? Should make for an interesting and different review:

Horror Rule Number 1: Never, ever, show your monster in the daylight.

And that is all that Jeepers Creepers 3 does. I don’t remember the Creeper at night until the very, very end of the film. There is a reason for this which breaks one of the horror rules mentioned below, and this could’ve been completely unavoidable is this whole plot was scrapped, but they went with it, so the creeper is only shown during the day. What’s the problem with this? 99% of the time if your monster is shown during the day, it isn’t scary. The 1% of the time goes to IT and the original Halloween, because with IT the kids being out at night wouldn’t have made a whole bunch of sense (wait until they are adults, it will just be midnight scary madness then) and Halloween works because we needed to see Michael Myers stalk these babysitters on the way home from school. But the Creeper, being almost completely at night in the first two films, is in complete daylight here, and isn’t scary at all, and unfortunately very comical.

Horror Rule Number 2: DO NOT EVER make a third film where the story takes place between two others.

You can go all the way before, or you can go all the way after. If you go all the way before,  or if for some reason you fuck up this rule like Jeepers Creepers 3 does, you have to reveal vital information on the monster/situation at hand. Final Destination 5 went all the way before, and it’s plot twist worked. Paranormal Activity 3 went back to when the terror started for the sisters, and it worked because it gave us new information. Jeepers Creepers 3 takes place in between films 1 and 2, which is why it is set mostly during the day. The movie seems like it is about to give us new info (like the original of the creature and how to really kill it), but it never does, it just hints at it and instead it gives us a very stupid cliffhanger that promises all will be revealed in #4 when the timeline finally goes back to after part 2. Stupid. Because of this story, we get the creeper in full daylight, making him not frightening at all. Plus, if you have the film between two others, you know that the menace likely survives, so all your would be tension goes straight out the window.

3. Horror Rule Number 3: Keep it simple, stupid.

Controversial writer/director Victor Salva, who helmed the other two, tries to put in way too many characters, and hints at way too much lore about the Creeper that is ultimately never revealed, making everything too confusing for the audience to care. With horror films, unless you are a film like Saw. Keep it simple, even when you actually have a plot, keep it simple. Scare your audience, not confuse the shit out of the them with too much crap put in. There are so many characters in this, none of them had any development whatsoever. And there are backstories hinted at, that are never truly revealed, which is a big no no here. I don’t care if you think there is going to be a #4, reveal what you hint at or promise. Or at least reveal most of it, and then it would be okay to keep a few things for later. Prometheus had that problem of asking too many questions and not answering them. Jeepers Creepers 3 literally tells Prometheus to hold it’s beer.

You can tell this film was cheaply made, in my eyes it is not even worth a Netflix release. This is straight up Sharknado, Sci-Fi channel only territory. Part of the fact is probably that Victor Salva had a small as fuck budget and this is the best he thinks he could’ve come up with. I disagree, I’ve seen some even cheaper Sci-Fi channel shit that had more heart than this. This was just lazy. Long takes to make the film longer than it needed to be. Horrible, terrible, CGI that was painful to watch. Terrible, laughable acting around every corner. The only good part of the film was that the Creeper’s truck was outfitted with some cool booby traps that would’ve looked fantastic with a huge budget. With what they had…it all looked terrible.

In the end, it completely looked like a student fan made Jeepers Creepers film. And with the original writer and director on board, no matter how controversial he is, is a big, big, no no. This movie was absolutely terrible and definitely one of the worst of the year. I bet the film Friend Request had more balls than this film (even though I am not going to see Friend Request until it hits a free market). My theater was packed and sold out with Jeepers Creepers fan and every face coming out of there told me that they were extremely disappointed by what they saw. Jeepers Creepers 3 makes Jeepers Creepers 1 and 2 look like The Exorcist and A Nightmare on Elm Street. If there is a 4th, Salva will have to try extremely hard to get more peepers, including mine, interested in ever seeing it.

BRAD’S STATUS is a quirky little dramedy that is one of Ben Stiller’s best performances and decent movies in awhile. It is also screenwriter’s Mike White’s best film in awhile too, considering that I hated the film that he wrote earlier this year called Beatriz at Dinner. In fact I related to this film quite a bit, not that I’m having a mid life crisis or anything. But the movie gives certain thoughts to, what is it to be successful? Does money make us successful or is it who we are, or a little bit of both? What do we truly value? Granted many films have done this, and to judge a film like this now you would have to consider the journey and the way the film tells the message. And for the most part it does a really good job.

I’m not saying this film is a masterpiece, far from it, but it is a very very good Netflix watch. The film is about a dad, played by Stiller, who takes his 17 year old son to college campus’s including Harvard, seeing where his musical prodigy son would like to go. Along the way he has a minor mid life crisis, finding out who is really is, what friendship truly is, and what is his purpose. The film, throughout the whole thing, has a very calm and insightful narration by Ben Stiller that really drives the movie. If it didn’t have it I don’t know if the movie would’ve been as good. The conversations that Stiller has with his wife, son, himself, and others feel real, and feel like we could be having them with the people we know, which is always a good thing in any movie.

Throughout the film, Stiller wonders why he isn’t as successful as his successful and rich friends played by Michael Sheen, Luke Wilson, Mike White, and Jermaine Clement. All of these roles are mostly glorified cameos, but each does a good job with what they are given, especially Luke Wilson who has displayed more emotion in a phone call with Stiller than he has in his last 5 films. The one that gets the short straw is Jenna Fischer, however not because of her performance, which I have a feeling that if it were expanded she’d be the most interesting character in the film, it’s because she isn’t given that much to do. Which is a shame because I really like Pam and think she could do great things beyond The Office.

The films is short, just over 95 minutes, and doesn’t overstay its welcome. It doesn’t try to wrap everything up in a nice bow either, which I usually always appreciate. I wouldn’t buy this at all, however I would put it as background noise again, or watch it again with someone that actually is having a mid life crisis, and whose life isn’t so bad as they think it is. So the status of this film for me? Good. And sometimes good is all you need.

The first thirty minutes of THE LEGO NINJAGO MOVIE plays out like The Lego Movie and The Lego Batman Movie. Zany fun, with some dry humor, huge sight and sound gags, and very smart storytelling. Then when that thirty minutes is over, it skids into a tad boring film that is less about ninjas and what they do into a cliched parent neglect and redemption story. A story you’ve seen a thousand times before done by better films. If the Lego humor was still there, it could’ve worked, but ultimately, it was a little disappointing. I think if it would’ve entirely focused on Ninjas with an actual Ninja like storyline, instead of the father son thing while trying to take over a city, it might’ve been another Lego hit. Instead, it is my least favorite of the Lego movies, and one that will probably never enter the Blu ray player again. But I have a kid now so I might have just eaten my words in three years.

The voice acting in this is incredible though. Dave Franco and his team of Ninjas played by the likes of Abba Jacobson and Kumail Nanjiani, all do great work in this. So does Olivia Munn as Lloyd’s mom and Jackie Chan (who is in the flesh here as well and is just as charming as ever) as their Ninja master. But it is the villain, Garmadon, voiced by Justin Theoroux, who steals absolutely every scene he is in, making the best Lego villain yet, unfortunately in a film that doesn’t equal the characters potential. It is the voice acting and the first 30 minutes, especially with a awesome cat gag, that save this movie from ultimately being completely boring and unwatchable.

When a movie is called Ninjago, I expected an awesome Ninja storyline with Ninja sights, sounds, and gags filling every minute of the screen. They still could’ve put the dad and son storyline in the movie, but it be a Plot B type of thing while have a Ninja quest plot A.  But it focuses too much on the dad and son storyline, and I knew how it was going to end, and even the journey to get there was not inventive enough, leaving me unimpressed. Plus, this needed more Jackie Chan. The Lego animation is still incredible here, but the humor after the first 30 minutes kind of disappears and the movie plays it too straight. It should be 100% zany Lego fun. Not 35%.

Hopefully this is just a misfire all the franchises have and they take their time making The Lego Movie 2. I feel like Ninjago might’ve been a rushed product after the success of the original first movie, and rushed it into production without much of a script. Since the first two movies were so enjoyable, I can let this one slide. But if the next movie almost puts me to sleep, there could be fast franchise fatigue on Lego’s hands. The saddest part of this film? I probably would’ve rather watched a kid play an hour and 30 minutes with his Lego’s than have ever watched this. This should not happen.

 

Did mother! leave a lot of bad tastes in critics mouths where the toxic waste from the film last week carried over into their screening of KINGSMAN: THE GOLDEN CIRCLE? I mean, these reviews from mainstream “critics” are confusing to say the least. Not that they truly hated it but a lot of people are automatically giving this thing sequelitis and calling it ‘meh.’ I personally loved it. I thought it was fun, entertaining, and has extreme rewatch value, just like the first movie. Is it better than the first movie? Of course not, but just like 22 Jump Street, it came extremely close. You can’t go wrong if you are looking for an adult action entertaining romp where its long 2 hour and 20 minute runtime is done within a snap of your fingers.

Not that I don’t have some complaints about the film. For instance, Matthew Vaughn tries too hard to duplicate the church scene from the first film in every single action scene in this one. A lot of the CGI location shot look kind of phony and some of the scenes go so over to the top bordering on cartoonish. And the fact that they bring back Colin Firth from the dead was a little bit weird and wrong. Colin Firth dying in the first film was a huge shocker that took the movie in an unexpected direction and this movie undoing his death to me was sort of a cheat. Granted they do make up for it by doing multiple expected deaths in this film, but none of them truly hit home like the first one did. But Colin Firth is so good in this series and the reason why he is still alive makes sense in the bigger picture so all that was completely forgiven quickly.

Especially since this sequel was so much fun. Taron Egerton as Eggsy is as great as ever, I can’t believe he isn’t a big star yet. I loved the fact that he and the anal Princess from the first film were still together in a very committed relationship. Their story arc was really cute here. Mark Strong, just like Colin Firth, is the heart of the series here too. Even though Channing Tatum and Jeff Bridges aren’t in the film all that much they are really good here. Hopefully we see Tatum in the third film more. Halle Berry was good. And a lot of critics didn’t like her, but I loved Julianne Moore as the villain Poppy. I thought she played it to her strengths making the character quirky, weird, yet ruthless. And I loved her evil lair. Definitely as memorable as Samuel L. Jackson as Valentine from the first film. Unfortunately she doesn’t have a memorable sidekick like Sofia Boutella was with her sword legs in the previous film.

And uh, yeah singer Elton John is in this film and he is the funniest and best part about it. Just something about a celebrity you don’t see cursing much, cursing is hilarious to me. I don’t know why. The action I thought was kinetic, and even though each scene tried to replicate the church scene from the first, I was highly entertained and was never bored with it. The plot is better left unsaid, but while highly predictable was also unique and fun.

I really loved Kingsman 2. Just like the first film I feel like I could watch this over and over again. Was highly entertained and that’s really all I ask sometimes with the movies that I go and see. There is a balance to the force in movies I think. You get really really really shitty film like mother! (yes, I’m still on that, the whole damn movie was do you get it? No? Well let me shove you obvious bullshit in your face for you to get it) and then movies like this come out the next or same week where it completely lets you just get lost in what you came to see. Where mother! is the disease, Kingsman The Golden Circle was definitely the cure.