Reviews

For those who don't know, this TV series is an adaptation of a comic book written by the mad genius Garth Ennis. The comic book is nothing short but a masterpiece, with some of the most memorable characters ever put on paper and a history that is provocative but delightful. As a fan of the comic book, I was skeptic of a TV adaptation, because most of the comic just cannot be adapted for multiple reasons (mainly because of the extreme violence and tabboo themes presented on the source material). Knowing beforehand that I would not be able to see a page-by-page adaptation, I decided to give the series a chance. The first episode let's you know right off the bat that the series will be a very, almost extremely loose adaptation, changing most of the plot points just as it starts. The diferences at first may seem odd and unnecesary, but as the first season progresses, you become more enchanted with the idea of something different, parcially because of the amazing cast, and mainly because of the great blend of humor, horror, drama and fantasy aspects of the show. Overall, Preacher starts very strong, with a promising great first season, that if not for some filler stuff, it would be a 10. Unfortunately, as the series goes on, the charm and quality deflates, and not even the characters can save the series from exhaustion. The problem, in my opinion, is that because they wanted to go on such a radical direction, they ran out of ideas and had to: fill the episodes with plot lines that go to nowhere and doesn't have any purpose, create new characters and change existing ones just to create conveniences for the different direction the series wanted. The second season lacks focus and goes nowhere, to the point is almost unnecesary to watch. Yeah it is still entertaining and fun, but doesn't do anything for the history. On the third season, the writers and producers tried to connect the show with the comics, adapting one of the most beloved archs of the source material: Angelville. It was a good idea as we got to see some of the greatest characters of the comic (like Jody). But the problem of the third season is that it has to merge with the changes that the show made before, resulting in a lack of cohesion. Also, the series lacks even more focus, as it tries to cover more ground than it should, making half of the season pure filler (especially the Cassidy arch, it really sucks). The only great aspect of the 3rd season is T.C., that manages to become such a sympathetic character on the show; and also that we got to see more of Herr Starr. After the 3rd season, Preacher got cancelled, as it never trully found it's audience. But a last season had to be made. And oh boy what a disaster that was. The last season has to be one of the worst endings for any TV show ever. It tried so to cover so much, but it didn't succeed in anything. Watching the ending was such a sad experience, because the series had so much potential and somehow ended horrendously. With more focused and cohesive writing and more ambition, this series could have been amazing. Sadly we got just a great start and nothing else. Maybe someday Preacher will get the adaptation it deserves and more people will get the chance to discover such an amazing story. On the meantime, I'd recomend you to pick up the comic book and give it a read, I promise it is a better ride than what the series depicted.

Watching an anthology movie is like playing the russian roulete: you can get killed (watch a terrible piece of trash) or you get to survive (watch something thats actually worth your time). Mostly, you shoot yourself in the head with this kind of movies, and unfortunately this first installment on the v/h/s franchise is no exception. That's such a shame because out of the 6 shorts (if we count the tape 56 one, because it only serves as the frame narrative), only 2 are worth it. Those two are the first (Amateur Night) and the last (10/31/98), as they are entertaining, clever and actually use the found footage technique in a meaningful way. It's such a shame that the other ones suck so badly, none of them are worth checking out. You may say some try to do some interesting stuff, but man, why would I care if everything else is so poorly constructed? If you want you can watch this with some friends to make it a more bearable experience, but don't expect to get thrills out of it.

*Review for season 1* When Garth Ennis said that The Boys would "out-Preacher Preacher"... well, he was right. Maybe not in quality, but The Boys sure was a sick series, amazing and crazy also. The Boys was a different (but not that original) take on superheroes, presenting them as a bunch of psychos ('cause Ennins hates them), with an underground CIA team ready to take them off the map if they cross the line. The series managed to be horrifying and hilarious at the same time, developing a great history through it's almost 100 issues; and for me, a must read to all comic book readers. So I was quite amazed when this TV adaptation was announced because the trailer was pretty bad, and certainlly they wouldn't be able to be really faithful to the source material (because of the dark nature of it). Well, I certainlly was right... but also wrong. No, this is not a faithful adaptation, maybe not even a good one. One thing the show mantains is the name, but not that much else. The characters are different for the better (Hughie, the Female, the Deep, A-Train) and unfortunately also for the worst (Stillwell, Butcher, Homelander, MM, Frenchie, Queen Maeve...), with some of them being totally erased (the Legend, Terror, Jack From Jupiter). Not blaming the actors, all did a great job (especially Karl Urban and Antony Starr), but most of the characters were great from the start, so why change them that much? Maybe because this shows differs totally story wise from the comics. Now, I admire the risk of taking a different path, and so far this 1st season the history is great, but man, how tf they're going to continue it? They closed all the doors they could take if they followed the comic arcs, I think none of them will be used in the 2nd season (as almost none were used in this one), so i'm really worried for how the show is going to continue. I'd also like to mention how this show is lacking some blls. One of the hallmarks of the comic was the extreme violence. The show has some, but not really that much. Some people may say is better because the violence is the comic was pure shock-value... well that's true, but it was also used for a bigger impact in you, and for making you laught. The characterisic sick humour of the comic is also totally gone, maybe laughed 3 or 4 times, could they change that? Don't let my complaints intimidate you, this show is quite great. The timing for this to be released is perfect, considering we're living in a time were superheroe movies are the most successful and 90% of them suck, this show is a breath of fresh air, just as the comic was back in the day. Still hyped for season 2, let's see if they manage to not ruin this. 1st season rating: 7.8/10

If you expect this to be anything more than another failed attempt to remake a classic horror franchise... then you must be kinda dumb, sorry. This tried to be an updated version of the original, taking out the paranormal aspects and making Chucky just a malfuntion product. This makes the movie worse because: a) Chucky is not a character anymore. The original one was a charismatic killer that gave us a bunch of good laughs... the new one is just an ugly robot. Not even Mark Hamill's voice acting gave this doll a soul. b) The wrong doing's of the doll doesn't make any sense. In the original it was comunicated that the doll was super strong because a real man was "inside" it; but in this remake he's just a doll that can control technology devices, no real threat there. c) With no supernatural stuff here, this just seems like a bad 'parody' of Black Mirror. Everything else is bad, bad and bad. Everyone's acting here sucks. Aubrey Plaza is so miscasted that ends up being funny, maybe that's what she was going for. The child's are merely stereotypes, not even our main character is interesting. The movie tried to be more like a comedy; just like the original, but it just doesn't work, is not funny. What's actually funny is the aspect of Chucky; he's just extremely ugly, not scary at all, so I can't take the doll suriously (like I was supposed to?). Give this thing a 2 'cause is at least entertaining at some moments, some aspects are quite nice but not fully exploted (like Chucky learning violence because of watching movies), and Mark Hamill does a decent job. But yeah, skip it and just watch the original.

Summary: a group of kids get haunted by a bunch of awful looking monsters, all because they took the book of a pissed girl... sounds bad, right? First of all, I don't know the original books, so I can't tell if this is a faithful adaptation or not. But I don't think that matters, because this film sucks. The acting sucks hard; the script is something a teen would wrote, not an experienced writer like Guillermo; and omg the creatures look horrible (and not in a good way), even Eric Bana's Hulk looks better than they do. Don't really know why they didn't make an anthology film, because I have read that the original stories in the books are like 2 pages long, so this could've been something ala V/H/S or Black Sabbath or Creepshow, that way maybe the movie would've made more sense. Nonetheless, I can tell some heart was put into this project, and kudos to everyone involved because they tried to do something a little bit different... but that doesn't save this movie from being as bad as the Conjuring Universe ones.

Mike Flanagan did the unexpected with this film: he managed to take the basis of one SK worst novels and addapt it into something great. The novel itself has only one good thing going: the premise; wich itself is great but only for a short story, not a 300 page book. Also, the main character sucks hard; and the ramblings on her mind are boring, stupid and drag on for too long. Somehow, this film manages to cut most of the crap of the book, mantaining the same premise but not that much else. Carla Gugino gives a passionate career-defining performance, carrying the whole movie by herself... both Bruce Greenwood and Henry Thomas also do a fantastic job, being some of the stronger support characters of a recent horror film. My favorite aspect has to be the screenplay. It gives the movie a great flow, jumping from present to past much more smoothly than the novel did. The dialogue is fantastic, loved the scenes with the 'dual-characters', being that a very big change from the novel (in the book the aparitions are like 5 crazy woman). Unfortunately the film is not perfect. As every other Mike Flanagan movie, the cinematography is great, but some scenes look pretty awful and some of them are even out of focus. And also the CGI is pretty awful, would've been better if everything was practical, because the makeup is good. But the major complaint from everyone is the ending. The last 15 minutes are honestly bad, they feel rushed and don't connect with the style of the movie at all, and don't give the closure the viewer wants. Still, Gerald's Game manages to break the rule of "source material>adaptation" and is one of the best horror movies of 2017. A high 7 for this one, well done Mike Flanagan, well done.

The problems with Hush is that it lacks originallity (this premise has been seen before) and an intelligent antagonist (even I could do a better job) . What goes for it is a decent performance by Kate Siegel, some great use of sound and a short-lenght. Instead of being a full-lenght project, it should've been a short movie because the script doesn't give much of itself. Don't really recommend it, but it's on Netflix so you can give it a try, at least is not as bad as every other slasher out there.

If you love anime or you're sadomasochistic (think those things are the same) then go ahead and watch Batman Ninja because you'll love it. But if you actually appreciate a good story, then stay as far as you can from this thing because the script may be the most laughable one you can find in an animation movie. The 2/10 rating is only for the animation, wich in some times was quite good, but I personally don't like the japanese reimagination of the Batman universe.

You know the infinite monkey theorem? If you don't, it's a theorem that states that a monkey hitting keys at random on a typewriter keyboard for an infinite amount of time will almost surely type any given text, being Hamlet the most notable example. I actually think that such thing it's entirely possible, but let's not go as far as saying they could write Hamlet, no no no, I think that this thing is true because this giant piece of s*** exists. If you haven't watch The Purge, please don't, it's not even funny bad, it's enfuriating bad. If you have and if you're more intelligent than a monkey, then you know this thing has the most stupid premise, characters and dialogue than most of the films you have watched on your life. That's why I give this monstrosity a 0/10.

P.S.: Maybe the only good thing that happened because of the release of this movie, is that my mom found a cellphone at the end of the screening... not even that made her happy after seing this thing.

Using the mockumentary format and taking an unusual complex and long style for the genre, Noroi narrates the journey of a documentary filmmaker as he explores a series of events connected by the legend of a demon. With this very simple premise, Moroi manages to be a hypnotic film that seems realistic thanks to some great lead performances and smart editing, even with some unexpected twists along the way that keep the story interesting enough. Unfortunately this movie doesn't really kill me for a couple of reasons: The lenght of the film is a little bit too long, or at least it doesn't take advantage of the 2h runtime to cover all the unanswered question left on the viewer. Talking about unanswered question... what's that ending? It happens out of nowhere and it doesn't make that much sense; it's actually quite laughable if i'm being honest. And cheesy moments is something this film has, mostly some scare scenes and the tin foil character (really?), sometimes breaking the eerie mood of the movie. Not gonna complaint about the 'complex' approach this film took, I think it works great here (although there's not a real mistery) and I also think other movies of the genre could work so much better if constructed in a similar way. If you're looking for something to watch in a cold rainy morning, Noroi has to be one of my recommendations, an unknown j-horror movie that might give you some chills. Or at least it would give you a nice idea for a halloween mask.

If you liked the first Creep, then go ahead and give Creep 2 a try, because you'll find it around the same level of quality as the original. But if you think otherwise like me, then avoid this film because it's the same movie but with the roles inverted. Nothing more, nothing else. Still, Mark Duplass gives a great perfomance, the only reason why you may want to watch Creep 2.

Creep starts promising, but ends up being another half baked found footage movie but with good intentions. Mark Duplass is a blast to watch, playing so perfectly the charismatic psycho, making you keep till the end. The weirdness of his character helped to create some tense moments throught the film, especially those with Peachfuzz. But, as almost any other films of the genre, Creep falls in the obvious clichés: stupid jumpscares (they seriously don't make any sense), the character keeps filming when he shouldn't, etc. And my complaints don't end there. Unlike Mark Duplass, Patrick Brice (also the director) just can't act, his character is extremely unbelievable because he makes the most odd decisions. But still, Creep manages to be not a total waste because of Mark Duplass and some great tension scenes. Also the movie is very short, so you may want to give it a try, but you most likely be letdown.

Bandersnatch is essentially a 'choose your own adventure' game translated into a movie. The concept is not something new, we have those TellTale games and even other Netflix productions for kids had used the same presentation concept. But something as big as Bandersnatch was never attempted before. Under the label of Black Mirror, this movie tells us the story of a young programmer who's reality falls apart as he tries to adapt a novel into a videogame. First of all, i've never watched an episode of Black Mirror, but considering this has some quality, I would say this is a great start to get into the show. The movie is good? Yes, but it could've been better. I really dig how you can make decisions and that they influence the path the history follows, but these elemtens are not fully exploited. They could've introduced more decisions, more consecuences, more plotlines. Some people may say the experience would be more boring or more complicated, personally I don't think so, that way it would've been more satisfacory. The message of the movie is pretty on the nose, some consecuences are quite predictable and the flow of events is not that smooth. So there's some presentation elements that are not so great, but it would be very dificult to kinda amend them. Other than that, this movie is pretty great. Still, I don't think this way of telling a story should be popularized, because we have better ways of implementing it: videogames. Leave the formula for them, that way it can be taken to work on it's full potential, unlike with movies. So, I would recommend Bandersnatch, but if you don't connect with the movie at the first 10 minutes, or you don't have that much patience, or you hate those TellTale games...you can skip it.

P.S: Will Poulter rocks

Has visto X-Factor? Yes, unfortunately you have. And have you seen any animals? Stupid question, of course you have. Then don't waste your time with this garbage. Not only this movie is not original in it's concept, but in everything else as well. The characters are just stereotypes, so everyone is represented. Illumination is known for their horrendous character desings, and here they continue with that tradition; if the desings in Pets were awful, here they're worse. Also, you noticed they repeat the exact same models throught the entire movie? Look it up, they made like 8 models only. The messages this movie is attempting to communicate to children are: don't lie and don't give up? Seriously? That's like something you understand when you're 2 years old, very original Illumination, very original. The biggest crime for me is that they ruined Golden Slumbers, that is something I can't forgive. And the other music... 95% is pure pop trash that everyone knows. For me, this is the laziest movie Illumination has ever made (next to Minions, ugh). Can people stop watching their movies, please?

Yes, "It" did to clowns what "Jaws" did to the ocean. But being honest, I can't comprehend how people were scared by this thing... The first part with the kids is decent, the kids actually did a great job, quite a surprise if you consider 99.9% of child actors are atrocious. What I would call this first half is a (very) discount version of Stand By Me (also written by SK) + a "scary" clown. The part with the adults...ugh. 90 minutes of nothing. Atrocious acting and pacing and writing and...a large etc. Also that ending...even I, that I suck in handcrafts, could made a better spider with playdoh or something. If anyone actually cares about this movie (or miniseries, whatever), should be because of Tim Curry. This man can convert the worse piece of garbage ever into something amusing when he is in it. He transformed a silly looking clown into a horror icon, man, hats off to that. He's not scary, though; he mades you laugh for sure, maybe a standup special would fit him better than be eating kids in the most inefficient way possible. If you ask me what version of It is better, if this one or the new one, you can watch both, neither are good. But It certainly has a nostalgic charm that keeps me from hating it. See it, but with some coffee and Red Bulls next to you.

The only reason for this thing to exist is so more spin-offs about a possessed object that appears here for two minutes can exist. I can picture it, two years from now we will have "The Haunted Samurai Armor" and "The Man with Coin-Eyes" and "The Wolf made of Gas" and "The Haunted Board Game"...i'm not even joking. At least the little girl does a decent job and surprisingly there were very few jumpscares. Better than La Cucaracha for sure.

I refuse to watch this again. I watched this a couple of moths ago and i'm still mad over the fact that two hours of my life were thrown on the garbage because of this giant piece of s... Forget all the other movies I rated 1/10, most of them are masterpieces compared to this. Aurora is easily the worst film of 2018. Why? I don't have words (except insults) to describe how poorly made this film is. Let's do quick math here...what's the result of garbage acting + a script only a monkey could've written + the effects of the Spawn movie? Well, the sum is a 0/10. Seriously, this is one of the worst movies of all time.

Originally made back in 1968, The Rolling Stones Rock And Roll Circus remains a product of it's time. Shelved until 1996 because the Stones were disastified with their performance, something I can't understand because (except for Jumpin' Jack Flash and Parachute Woman) they did an amazing job here, more if you consider they played a day after full of rehearsals and exhaution (and drugs). Clearly inpired by the Beatles TV specials, Mick got the idea of do one too for promoting the upcoming Beggars Banquet. Recorded in a sound stage decorated as a classic british circus in front of an invited audience with stellar sideacts, this TV special remains a lost (semi) gem. Presented in a classic circus way, right at the start you know you don't have to take this very seriously. Unfortunately there's 6 minutes of classic circus acts like a flame eater or a trapeze artist...the Stones should've been ashamed of that, not their performance. If you want to skip those you can pick the album, that wisely cuts the cr@p off. Things kick off with Jethro Tull. Though Ian Anderson was the only one that wasn't miming, this rendition of Song for Jeffrey is pure bombastic fun and a great way to start the concert. Fun fact: a then unknown Tony Iommi appears here (he only lasted two weeks in the band). Rumours had circulated that this show wasn't aired because the Who outperformed the Stones in their own game...I mean, they do a great job here but c'mon, that's just not true. I'm not a big fan of them and I don't enjoy A Quick One that much, but I recognize that their performanc here is stellar, and IMO the 3rd best of the Circus. I never heard of Taj Mahal, and that's very weird because of how much of a music sucker I am, but oh boy what a surprise it was to discover this man. Totally blown away by the blues rocker that was Ain't That a Lot of Love. I don't want to hate on Marianne Faithfull, but she's the worst of this special by a long shot. I respect her music career and I know she's a great songwriter but man, I just can't stand her voice. She was brave though, because just a couple of weeks before the filming, she had a miscarriage. Nevertheless she performed, and that's something I applaud, and she's not bad here really, is just unspecial. But something truly special followed. The one time only supergroup The Dirty Mac, conformed by John Lennon, Keith Richards, Eric Clapton and Mitch Mitchell, went on stage and totally blew everyone away. The not only stoled the show, but they also made the best version of Yer Blues, an almost imposible task if you ask me. Then they got joined by Yoko Ono and violinist virtuoso Ivry Gitlis to perform the Ono penned Whole Lotta Yoko. Some people will hate me for this, but I love this jam...yes even with the shrieks of Yoko. And finally, the Stones would hit the stage with 4 songs of the upcoming Beggars Banquet + Jumpin' Jack Flash and an early version of You Can't Always Get What You Want. The first two songs (Jumpin' Jack and Parachute Woman) actually show the band exhauted and playing without that much energy...however, their performance starts to get better with a beautiful rendition of No Expectations, and they totally skyrocked with You Can't Always Get What You Want, don't know what Mick did but he seems to have all the energy and pasion in the world from this song onwards. Jagger turns into a madman in what may be the best live version of Sympathy for the Devil; shirtless and covered with silly tattoes, he goes totally berserk and gives a demonic performance, proving why the Stones were the best band to see live. The concert finish in a both beautiful and orgasmic note with Salt of the Earth, that though the vocals were the only thing live, you can't help but want to dance seing the crowd go nuts. People waited for 28 years to see and hear this, and you know, totally worth it for them, because the Rock and Roll Circus remains one of the best moments in rock history and something every music enthusiast should experience.

Not even the Beatles music could save this garbage. "Yesterday" is about a mediocre musician that, after an accident, is the only person that remembers the Beatles. Why's that? We don't receive any explanation. The film, instead of focusing on the cultural impact on such an event, decides to be another awful romantic comedy. Our main character is a whiny little biatch, that complaints about not being recognized for his "talent", and that only rise to success after stealing the Beatles songs. Let's face something, if the Beatles were formed today...no one would pay attention, that's the sad truth, because everyone is a normie that only listens to trap or reggaeton or garbage like that. And people would care less if the Beatles were only Himesh Patel (ugh). This man is the most uncarismatic person ever, my toe has more personality than him. All the music of the Beatles is butchered, literally the man can't sing, and the arrangements for the songs are atrocious or mediocre. But the biggest problem of the movie is a woman called Lily James. Her character is the worst person ever put on screen. I can't describe how horrible she is, you have to watch the movie, all i'm going to say is that she's basically the antagonist. Lily James>Hitler, yes she's more evil, that's all. At the end of the day, what Yesterday teaches us is that: a) If you have talent for something, you're a bad person that should only live in mediocrity. b) If you have a dream, forget about it, because you should not be successful. c) You can't have ambition, because you would be greedy. d) A crazy woman should control your life. e) Ed Sheeran needed promotion for his music. f) Danny Boyle has lost its touch.

Yes, Flash Gordon is campy, and chessy, and trashy...it may be a lot of things, but most importantly, it is fun. You have to take in consideration what the movie tries to be: a homage of the original 1930's comic strips. And while I haven't read them, I totally get the vibe and I know it succeeds wonderfully. Knowing that, I can't really criticize the cardboard characters, the stupid premise, the hilarious effects..because that's the only approach a movie like this should have. Flash Gordon is the most innocent and likable hero ever, and an unrecognizable Max von Sydow gives a terrific performance as Ming the Merciless; everyone else is pretty much terrible, but they were having fun, and that's what it matters to me. I have to also praise the soundtrack, made by no other but Queen. Can you think of a more appropiate band for a job like this? Queen itself it's campy and self-aware, that's why their music fits so perfectly with the film. Flash theme is even more memorable than most of their songs from the 80's and 90's. I have to admit that the movie don't always overcome it's silliness and that the pacing suffers a lot throught, those being my only real complaints. Flash Gordon is far from being perfect, but it has a lot of heart, and I can't help but love it.

Though Megamind may not be that original, the visuals and the voice cast turn it into something great. It has a level of rewatchability few animated movies have, and that's because it makes the most out of it's concept, throwing really funny jokes throught that'll make even adults laugh. Unfortunately the movie drags a little bit in some instances, making it tedious in some parts. Wasn't really a hit back in the day, so I hope more people have seen it since it was released. Overall, I give this a strong 7, and I truly recommend it.

Let's get this clear, both this new adaptation and the 90's miniseries suck, sorry but that the truth. Now, why this movie didn't live up to my not-even-high expectations? Well... First of all, the casting. We all love Tim Curry, his portray of It is amazing, truly memorable and funny. While he's obviously not scary, it's a blast everytime he appeared on screen in that old movie. Here, Bill Skarsgård tries to fill the shoes of Curry, in a not so successful way. Why's that? Because he makes you laugh. This is not like the miniseries, so why go for another not-threatining clown? Don't get me wrong, I love Skarsgård as Pennywise, but his performance doesn't fit with the tone of the movie at all. But the biggest letdown were the kids. Only the girl does a great job, everyone else are just whatever (except the stranger things kid, he's really bad here). No one but Bev has any development, they're just token characters: the fatty one, the black one, the jewish one...they had time to do 1000 jumpscares but no time for writing actual characters. Every modern Hollywood "horror movie" has to rely on jumpscares for scaring the audiences, but in It they took it to a new level. Like the Conjuring movies, every scene starts and ends the same way: a character walks in some place, we get some "silence", the cue for the scare comes, and then the monster appears doing a loud scream. That's every attemp to scare you, i'm not joking. While I get that the movie has a "low budget" of 35 million, I can't understand why every creature looks like s*it. Remember how goofy the giant spider at the end of the miniseries looked? Here is the same, but for every monster except the clown. Instead of being bored, I was having a blast everytime they appeared, no joking even a claymation youtube video has better effects than this crap. Loved the desing for Pennywise anyways, no hate for that one. And my biggest complaint is the music. Both the OST and the soundtrack suck af. I can't believe the music irritated me even more than the jumpscares. There's not a single second of actual silence, or you're listening a trashy generic horror score, or you're listening cheesy 80's pop songs. Seriously that's the laziest aspect of this mess. It (the book) is a mature and kinda fcked up history about kids for adults, here...pfff, this is like the Goonies with 2 gory scenes.