Reviews

Justin King is a con artist with a criminal record who has been putting on an act in the last five years to create a popular reputation as being a voice on progressive political viewpoints. His accent is fake, it is an exaggeration of his actual speaking voice, he intentionally releases videos of lackluster video quality to make it seem like he's an everyman but has more money than he leads some to believe, many of his personal anecdotes are lies to justify the rhetoric he wishes to reinforce, and he is so desperate for attention he will make multiple videos in the same day with just about the same exact talking points.

Wish is yet another example of how the Walt Disney company has lost sight of what made their brand so special for so many people. The disappointment in its quality can even be argued as disrespectful when you consider that this was designed specifically to honor 100 years of American culture that Walt Disney and friends had left a major impression on through their inventive storytelling, memorable characters, and revolutionary animation that still entertain and impress today.

Everything about the picture is so underdeveloped - the premise does not excite, the characters are by and large one dimensional, the songs are not memorable, the humor generally misses, and the all the references made to past animations come across as both very forced and poorly thought out. Probably the best thing the movie has going for it is the voice acting, but there is only so much you can do with little substance to work from.

The Marvels is exactly the sort of movie that critics and trolls would dismiss the output of Marvel Studios back when the Marvel Cinematic Universe was in its second and third phases - shallow, childish nonsense with empty spectacle. The actors and director try but ultimately the story is too undercooked with not enough heart and soul put into it, and it rushes everything that there is just not enough time to properly invest into the characters.

Since the terrible box office run, I have come across many attempts to defend this motion picture, and I have also seen some people try to justify their argument that the reason why its performance was terrible was a result of an atypical situation. Each and every one I must say has not been either compelling or sound in logic, so to save a reader the trouble, I am going to list the most common ones you may run into, and my reactions towards them.

"It's not a perfect movie." Well, no movie is. Even the top 10 movies of the Internet Movie Database's Top 250 list have technical and continuity errors listed for them, so while one can argue they are perfect in various ways, evidently they are not in all ways. Statements of this sort are just empty ones if we're being honest, because it admits that there are issues within the picture that cannot be completely defended and spun around to appear of great quality.

"I didn't hate it." Well, aren't you being kind. Here's a newsflash for you though, you are not supposed to hate it. 99% of films are designed with the intention that the audience will come away liking the picture, even if the filmmakers did not set out to entertain or excite the viewer with spectacle and pretty colors. The people who constructed this very movie were hoping to draw enough favorability from the general population to bring in amazing profit. These statements are neither a compliment or a very good endorsement if you ask most people.

"It's just a fun movie, do not overthink it!" This argument would probably work if the film was not built on the foundation of a cinematic universe that has been up and running since 2008, which has a history of producing content regarded as some of the best in superhero cinema in particular and blockbuster filmmaking in general. A silly, no-brainer yarn is a step-back for Marvel Studios after all they have accomplished in the past, and they shouldn't settle for it, either. Furthermore, the movie asks a lot from the viewer, if you did not see either WandaVision or Ms. Marvel on Disney+ you will be very lost, but to make matters worse there is a lot of plot mumbo jumbo that is introduced in the film that is too shy in detail that you feel another movie or series is missing for better context. The plot is just not as simple as it wishes to present itself as, and rather than coming across as complex, it is coming across as complicated nonsense.

"People who didn't like it are allergic to having fun at the movies!" This is such a strawman argument. Sometimes the problem lies with the filmmaking itself than of the individual, who may (for all you know) have come in wanting to very much enjoy it.

"It bombed at the box office because society rejects female led movies." Yet the very same year, Barbie was a major box office success. The original Captain Marvel picture also performed good in theaters in 2019. Other female led films and television series also have performed well, why this movie underperformed is the same reason why many male led films underperformed - lack of interest and lack of faith in the product.

"It bombed at the box office because of the strikes." Yet Barbie and other movies released in the year did fine despite of the strikes.

"Just you wait, in a few years it will be regarded as the Blade Runner for a new generation." I genuinely question if the people making this argument have even seen at least one version of Blade Runner or really understand why it went from a box office failure to an acclaimed work of science fiction filmmaking.

Such a disappointment, I was hoping Marvel Studios would aim higher for a follow-up to Captain Marvel, I liked the Ms. Marvel series quite a bit, and while I had issues with WandaVision I did think Teyonah Parris was quite good as Monica Rambeau and thought the conflict between her and Carol Danvers could have played out very interestingly on screen, but it is dealt with fairly quickly.

The worst Marvel Studios has made to date? No, but it is not far from holding the title.

The mission statement of Mr. Josiah Swanson's YouTube channel has always been reaction and commentary on the goings-on in the entertainment industry, but in the last few years the channel has been nothing but click bait and playing far too strongly in one side of the culture war to the point of exhaustion. Almost every video he releases now has the title of "*Insert celebrity* EXPOSES Hollywood! Elites Panic!" with a title card featuring an over-the-top reaction of a famous person with text reading either "the truth is out" or "he/she got caught", and if there's enough room on the screen, a random tweet that expresses a reaction that not very often is actually in reference to the topic of the video.

I am sure these kinds of videos are giving his channel good views and whatnot, but I have to ask if there is anything else Swanson has to offer his subscribers these days. As an old one, I miss it when he was more relaxed and wasn't demanding everyone look at his videos for clicks.

The premise is fairly familiar - parents switch bodies with their children, and the structure is exactly what you would expect it to be, but what separates it from the films it references such as Big, 17 Again, Freaky Friday, and 13 Going on 30 (also starring Jennifer Garner) is that they gave room to let its characters breathe and apply a degree of verisimilitude to buy into the concept and the conflict. Right from the start, it appears that the people who worked on this had the mindset of either to go big or to go home, as a lot of it is fairly over-the-top, and comes across desperate to get a laugh from the viewer. The humor has its moments of attempted cleverness, but there is a lot of lowbrow comedy that diminishes the efforts to be smart. What doesn't work in the favor of the picture, is that the premise is presented three times in the story, and because the pace of it is very fast, and they're constantly trying to go for big laughs, there is not a clear enough focus and not enough time to invest in the relationships and conflict. I have not read the story this is based off of, so I cannot judge it as an adaptation, as a motion picture though I would have to describe this as being average at best, I probably would have rated it lower had it been released in theatres and I had to pay more than I do for Netflix monthly to watch it.

If it ever came to light that the screenplay was originally pitched to Lifetime and somehow, someway, it found itself in the hands of some Hollywood heavy hitters I would definitely believe it. There is effort to try and elevate the material, but in the end the plot is too predictable, and it is so over-the-top it can't even pass as being average at best. You can see it in the performances of the cast; Jennifer Lopez is really trying to apply the kind of edge she displayed in her earlier work in better productions, Ryan Guzman is really trying to be on the level of Lopez and to give credit he manages to do so for the most part, but unfortunately the writing and character he is working from is not of good quality.

Unless you enjoy late-night thrillers on the Lifetime channel, I wouldn't say this movie is for you.

Once upon a time, Arnold Schwarzenegger was going to star as Robert Neville in Sir Ridley Scott's adaptation of Richard Matheson's iconic story I Am Legend. It would have been very different from the sort of parts Schwarzenegger was known for, because the characterization of the protagonist was far and away from the hardcore heroic archetype and was rather flawed and had endured several years of suffering that transformed him from prey to a survivor. Alas, the film got shelved, but another script found its way to Arnold - End of Days. Originally hoped to be a Tom Cruise vehicle, Schwarzenegger signed onto the apocalyptic action thriller with the hope of regaining the faith in consumers after the likes of Batman & Robin came by and stunk up the cineplexes. Arnold would put a lot of what he was going to do as Neville in Scott's I Am Legend into the character of Jericho for End of Days, but unfortunately despite his best efforts, the movie's script was nowhere as good as what had been written for that production, and it was received unfavorably by critics and audiences weren't too enthusiastic about it, either.

If you were around in the 1990's, you will remember how big of a deal Y2K was, and how much conversation was being made about it, and for those that were born after 2000, it was very much like how people were hyping up the year of 2012. Naturally, the entertainment industry capitalized on the whole ordeal with various books, television, and feature films centering around it, End of Days was really no different, but it came close to the very end of the year and most people were well over their concerns for the start of the new millennium. It largely took on the more religious approach to the topic, and tries to marry the suspense and haunting imagery of classic thrillers such as The Exorcist and The Omen, and the action spectacle Schwarzenegger had made a career out of. To an extent, it kind of works, but for the most part it feels the filmmakers were uncertain of what sort of movie they wanted to make.

The storyline is pretty predictable, and full of holes big enough you can drive a car through. Arnold tries and delivers one of his best acting efforts, Robin Tunney is fine, and as one can expect Gabriel Byrne is a scene stealer. The real star as far as I am concerned is the musical score by John Debney - very haunting and intense. I wish I could say something positive about the directorial work of Peter Hyams, but I do not. There is not enough passion on display, the lighting is too dark in places that the colors feel too muted, and the scenes of horror and action feel pretty dull. A different director, plus a rewrite, would have substantially improved this picture.

Sound of Freedom is the sort of film Hollywood used to make but doesn't anymore. When the news failed to cover important stories and topics, filmmakers sought to use motion pictures through the Hollywood system to bring light to them. In recent years though, that isn't often the case, and the motion pictures that attempt to do so are in the independent market that do not receive very much mainstream attention.

It is not an all-around great film, but it is a technically good motion picture that handles it subject matter as best as it can and has fantastic performances by its cast of actors. Throughout my viewing experience, I was on the edge of my seat. It is honestly one of the most intense PG-13 thrillers I have seen in recent years, and the tension, the drama, the suspense, is all executed superbly.

So far, this is one of the best films I have seen this year, and I have seen a lot.

I will be honest; I wasn't really too enthusiastic about this when it was announced. Not necessarily because I don't think the original series (which I grew up on) should be touched, or because I didn't like any of the changes made to the new series, but rather because nine times out of 10 most reboots or revivals of television series don't work out very well.

To my surprise though, this one actually is pretty good. I actually was interested in watching the whole first season on MAX. It is definitely different from its original series in more ways than one, but the people involved seem to really have done the work to justify and execute the concepts for this new production while still retaining the zany and optimistic spirit of the original. Most if not every joke lands to a degree, and there are actually pretty good messages that will resonate with most people.

The new voices are also pretty good, and I have to say the animation is for the most part very expressive and creative.

Here is hoping they don't drop the ball come the next season.

Since 1999, many networks have tried to find their answer to Viacom's chipper sea sponge but they have all been unsuccessful. With their new series Kiff however, it seems like Disney may have finally cracked the code.

This is a pretty neat and sweet little animated sitcom with a diverse cast of likeable characters, good and creative humor, and offers some pretty good messages that speak universally so no one feels left out.

Hopefully, Disney realizes they have something gold on their hands and doesn't drop the ball anytime soon, this could be a very big win for the company if they play their cards right.

There is really nothing new here that the series presents to the viewer, virtually every topic that is covered has been explored better in other documentaries in the past, some which have been made by actual customers for little to no money at the comfort of their own homes. Too many things do not receive enough attention like the impact of the Comics Code Authority, the influence of the characters on culture, how the competition played a role in the redevelopment of the company and its properties, the rise of Milestone Media and WildStorm, the DC Animated Universe that started with Batman: The Animated Series, and the disregard of certain characters and motion pictures dedicated to these classic heroic figures.

This series is only three episodes long, and each one feels more like an ego stroke than an honest projection of passion for DC Comics, with the third and final episode dedicating a section to criticizing its own consumer base and categorizing them in what they think the only opposition represents - it was so pathetic and ignorant, it left me hoping there is a major regime change for the company in the near future.

All that being said, Rosario Dawson's narration is great.

I thought 2018's Bumblebee was a step in the right direction for the franchise on film and was happy to hear that Rise of the Beasts would be building from the events of that movie, and being someone who grew up in the 1990's finally getting the Maximals on the big screen had me very intrigued.

Rise of the Beasts is not on the same level as Bumblebee, but comes close to the same level as the very first Michael Bay helmed feature from 2007 and is still pretty solid entertainment. It isn't overly long, overly complicated, and the action set pieces are pretty energetic and exciting. This is most characters interaction between the Transformers that we have seen to date on film, and the voice acting talent do great with what they have to work with. The new human characters are fine and engaging, and there is plenty of heart to the film's story, where it comes short is the long set-up in the first act and the humor misses the mark once or twice. I think at least one more revision of the screenplay would have done the film a lot of good, but as is it is an entertaining popcorn muncher.

I am very interested in where things may go given the ending of the movie. I hope Paramount doesn't drop the ball going forward.

Despite being one of the fastest traveling superheroes in the medium of comic books, it has taken a very long time for The Flash to receive the big screen treatment. Attempts to bring the character to the cinema go as far back as the late 1980's, but while some approaches almost came to be ultimately it was not meant to be. We might've seen a movie earlier in the last decade if Warner Bros. Didn't drop the ball as hard as they did with their attempt at a DC Cinematic Universe and mishandled Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice and Justice League and made a mess out of everything, but finally in 2020 things started coming together and cameras started rolling in 2021. It was looking smooth but change in management at Warner Bros. Led to serious retooling of the plot that resulted in extensive reshoots and different endings. As a result, the budget became ridiculously bigger, and to make matters worse its star became a source of much controversy with many wondering if they would recast to make sure it had more commercial appeal, but too much was already spent on the production.

People were unsure if the movie would be any good, but surprisingly several key figures in the entertainment industry from Tom Cruise to Stephen King showered the film with praise after seeing a version of it and encouraged everyone to get their tickets as soon as possible. Having seen the movie, I have to wonder if they saw an early cut because what has been released in theatres, I would say it is...Just fine. However, nothing to write home about.

This film is a loose attempt at the Flashpoint storyline that ironically also reset the DC Universe, only it is a bit more complicated, lighter in tone, and does away with some key elements from the comic book that would've served the movie better. While there are some pretty solid dramatic moments here and there, it largely plays out as a comedy, and even though most of the jokes work there are a number that do not. Most of the humor comes from the younger version of Barry Allen from the new timeline The Flash has created by going into the past, and Ezra Miller overdoes the silliness to a point where the character's intended annoyance is taken to an irritating level. Miller still does fine as The Flash, even though it is still a more Wally West version of the character than Barry Allen.

Michael Keaton, Ben Affleck, and Sasha Calle are all great in what time they have, they make the most of what they can do and you do wish there would've been more time spent with them. Seeing Michael Shannon and Antje Traue back as Zod and Faora was also a plus.

There is some pretty fun spectacle and engaging action set pieces, but the storytelling is largely pretty sloppy and various plot threads do not end very satisfyingly. A lot of the "wow" factor tends to be lost in the very poorly rendered CGI, which honestly feels like you are watching a cinematic from a PlayStation 2 video game.

In the end, The Flash (2023) is a "coulda, woulda, shoulda" type of motion picture, some joy can be had with it but most likely you will come out not feeling disappointed in some way. It is a shame, because The Flash is a great character that has many exciting stories to pull from for a movie, and in 2023 the money and effects are there for something fantastic.

To give credit where it is due, Leigh McGowan (PoliticsGirl) is a pretty good actress. Her videos are not of particularly impressive quality from a production standpoint, but her commanding presentation of thought makes up for that. Perhaps somewhere in the multiverse she is an Academy-Award winning performer, but in this universe her professional acting aspirations did not lead to very many career opportunities, so making political commentary for the internet became her bread and butter.

Unfortunately, her arguments very often are not logically sound and commit one too many fallacies, as a result they come across as very biased, childish, unfair, and dismissive of other perspective. She relies too much on appeal to emotion than factual data, and it lessens credibility, the approach of giving every talking point the Meryl Streep treatment might work some of the time, but not if later data proves argument to be false. You just need to be more careful with presentation, politics isn't theater, or the cinema and it isn't sports, either.

20 years ago, something like a Gotham Knights probably would have a bigger audience and be better received. Back then, something like Smallville was considered the high point for a live-action television series based on / inspired by a superhero / comic book property. However, it is not the year 2003 it is the year 2023 and something like a Gotham Knights just doesn't cut it anymore.

After the impressive stunt choreography and staging in Marvel's Daredevil, the method of forcing the camera to shake and cut quickly in an action sequence just fails to deliver the same impact and comes across as cheap and ineffective. With superhero / comic based television like The Boys, The Umbrella Academy, Legion, and most of Marvel Studios' output on Disney+ presenting visuals that are on occasion worthy of the big screen, seeing a low budget affair set in an iconic location like Gotham City focusing on Batman's space in the DC Universe is just not going to amaze any eyes. And, with there being already plenty of live-action versions of Batman in recent memory, and with interconnectivity between feature film and television universe becoming more of a thing with Marvel Studios and Star Wars leading the charge and DC planning to follow in the same footsteps, a series centered around Batman with no Batman in it and having no ties to anything larger does anything but intrigue.

I will be honest, I didn't really have any hope for this series as soon as I had read about it when it was announced, and the trailers and other promotional material didn't change my mind, and after seeing the premiere out of curiosity and with nothing else to do in the evening, my thoughts are exactly what I had anticipated what it would be. It isn't good, it offers nothing new to the marketplace, but to make matters worse, it is just very dull. Why should I, a life-long fan of the Batman character, spend time with a series where he is not present and even a presence, hasn't even done battle with Two-Face (Who is still Harvey Dent in this series) and most of the story is centered around an adoptive son of his that doesn't originate from the comic book mythology? Why create a "Turner Hayes" when you have characters like Dick Grayson, Jason Todd, Tim Drake, and Damian Wayne to choose from? The rest of the Knights are actually from the comic books, however, they're really the characters in-name-only and definitely watered down. It feels like the people involved never read the source material and went by information on Wikipedia. Most of the acting is fine, but there is only so much they can do with such material.

Still, I can't bring myself to hate it, because I pity it more. I pity the creators who thought this kind of approach would still get substantial viewership, I pity the executives who greenlit this program believing it could be a crowd-pleasing success, and I pity that this is yet another smear on Batman's history in culture.

If the best praise you have online is Supernatural fans showing excitement for Misha Collins just being in a new show, you're not doing very right, I'm just saying.

And no, I am not at all exaggerating for the sake of getting attention from the reader here. I have seen virtually every iteration of Scooby-Doo, and experienced its highs and its lows as a franchise, and this is an all-time low. A complete misunderstanding of the property, terrible writing, horrid characterization, and a sense of humor which is so cynical you feel it is giving you the middle finger every minute.

This is a series I honestly cannot see really appealing to anyone. There is nothing for a fan of the property, there is nothing for the average member of the audience who just wants to laugh, there is not even anything for very progressive viewers who just need to see social justice on screen to scream "yaas queen, slay!"

BEWARE. See at your own risk.

Black Panther: Wakanda Forever has ambitious goals but does not manage to meet them due to its overlong and sometimes unfocused screenplay that often feels very first draft level in craft and trying to have one too many political conversations to streamline linearly. It has its moments, with some very solid dramatic acting work by its performers, but on the whole it is an admirable effort but also a major step down in quality from its predecessor. I personally feel they should have waited on a sequel, and take more time to figure out what to do with the Black Panther and Wakanda as the Marvel Cinematic Universe was progressing post Endgame and after the unfortunate passing of Chadwick Boseman. The loss of T'Challa is seriously felt in this story, and I think most would have been fine with a recast just a few years later, the new actor might not have been on Mr. Boseman's level, but they could have still performed the part well and carry the franchise further. As is, the mantle gets passed, and its executed just okay, but it would have more impact if the story were more focused. Namor is a nice addition to the Marvel Cinematic Universe, and is adapted fine, I would certainly like to see more of him in later installments. Still, you feel that the character probably should have come into the picture a lot earlier on, like in Phase Two or Phase Three at the least.

How the mighty have indeed fallen, from 2008 to 2019 Marvel Studios was delivering content that changed the game for cinematic superhero storytelling and raised the bar for blockbuster filmmaking, at their worst the movies were still entertaining popcorn munchers. Now, we are in 2022 and Phase Four of the Marvel Cinematic Universe has been seen as directionless, lackluster, and not as engaging as it once was. To date, only Spider-Man: No Way Home appears to have been universally well-liked across the board and its astonishing box office return really proves that point (It stayed at my local cineplex from December all the way to April if you can believe it), all other content has been viewed largely as "just fine", to "middle of the road", and largely divisive amongst consumers with profits and streaming numbers that have often been described as "could have been a lot better" by the trades.

Personally, I would place myself in the camp of people who feel Phase Four has been underwhelming and pretty lackluster, Spider-Man: No Way Home was excellent and pure fun from start to finish that delivered fan service with substance that celebrated the character's cinematic legacy - I would place it in the category of "excellent" and among the best of the entirety of the MCU catalog of work. Shang-Chi was good, but not great. Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness had its moments but was a bit messy in its storyline. Black Widow came close to greatness but fumbled, and the engagement wasn't as strong as it could have been simply due to it being released too late after Endgame. Eternals was fairly dull and at times frustrating. Thor: Love and Thunder was...A movie. Taika Waititi shouldn't have returned to the director's chair, and they shouldn't have set out to approach things like Ragnarok all over again (You can't always strike lightning twice, and the movie is good evidence of that). On the TV side of things, WandaVision started out strong but went out on a whimper, The Falcon and the Winter Soldier felt too stretched out for its storyline and didn't know how to present its political messaging particularly well. Loki was largely okay, it had some interesting ideas but it broke the Marvel Cinematic Universe's much established verisimilitude in the process. What If...? Had some good installments but also some pretty lackluster ones that didn't really do much service to the parent continuity of the MCU. Hawkeye started okay, got strong, but took a very wrong turn in the end that was unsatisfying. Moon Knight was pretty strong for the most part, but its excellence was diminished with too much filler, looking back to it, the episode order should have been fewer. Ms. Marvel was actually pretty good I thought, very fun, and very stylistically unique for Marvel Studios, its energy became a bit deflated in the middle of things but it bounced back. Werewolf by Night was also pretty strong, a very interesting experiment that paid off well. She-Hulk: Attorney at Law I am sorry to say has been the worst television installment of Phase Four, and the worst piece of content thus far as well.

The series had a lot of potential, Jennifer Walters is a fun character, and it shouldn't be hard to adapt the comic book to live-action, but life finds a way, to quote the great Jeff Goldblum. The filmmakers do not know how to approach the series' humor, the mission statement for the program goes undefined throughout, and you do not feel any of it will benefit the larger Marvel Cinematic Universe in the long haul. There is rare occasion when it looks like the producers have found their footing and cracked the code, only to lose it the next scene. The politics of the show are also tedious, feel unearned, and do not feel right in relation to the universe's continuity and history.

Very disappointing.

The series premiere of "She-Hulk: Attorney at Law" is neither a strike out nor a home run. It is honestly a mystery how difficult it appears for the filmmakers to really crack the source material for a proper screen treatment, when they have decades worth of stories to look at that would make their jobs easier. As it is, this episode unfortunately sets the stage for largely the majority of the rest of the series, in that it has an apparent identity crisis, switching back and forth in tone and uncertain about what its premise is to deliver the promise on. What is the series about? Well, Jennifer Walters aka She-Hulk, that's obvious, but what is its mission statement, exactly? Struggling to be a lawyer whilst managing her Hulk-side? Embracing her Hulk-side as a lawyer? Understanding she needs to be a superhero? Or, try to find the right man in her life? Or, smashing down the patriarchy (to the point where it comes across as fairly misandrist I would add)? We're thrown all of this, but it never settles down with one path, then you have the fourth wall breaking which is used not very well. Tatiana Maslany is an excellent actress but can only do so much with the material given, Jennifer Walters as a character starts off as not very likeable on debut, and doesn't have much self-reflection going forward. Marvel Studios seemed to try to recreate the arc Tony Stark had in Iron Man, and cast a very talented and likeable performer to deliver the lines charismatically, but the storytelling approaches are night and day, towards the end of Iron Man you see Stark grow and you find yourself becoming attached to him at the end, with Jennifer Walters it is the same. She barely grows as the storyline progresses and you feel whatever attempts at likeability the filmmakers set out to present does not feel earned and makes the whole affair come across as cynical.

Maybe She-Hulk should have come along in the second or third Phases of the Marvel Cinematic Universe? It's a right idea for a series, but it is not the right time - in terms of political and sociological climate of today and that Marvel Studios still is struggling to figure out what the goals are for Phase Four.

I thought the actual pilot episode was a mixed bag, neither was it very good nor was it very bad, either. The second episode of She-Hulk feels more in tune with what you would expect a series pilot to be with a lot of its set-up, character introductions, and world building. They unfortunately do not manage to crack the code to present the series in the direction they appear to want it to be, and unfortunately, they don't till later on with episode eight. The humor doesn't land very well, to be perfectly honest, I may have chuckled once or twice throughout the entire episode. The set-up for the third episode is okay, but you really do wish there had been a Hulk movie or two for the premise and its seriousness to feel earned.

This episode might've been more engaging and rewarding if we had actually seen Emil Blonsky grow as a character since the last time we saw him in 2008's The Incredible Hulk (In Shang-Chi it just a cameo that didn't touch base on anything, so my point still stands). Needless to say, a half hour is not enough even for the casual viewer of Marvel Studios content, if anything, you could have stretched the storyline out by another episode or two. As it is, a lot of the filmmaking feels pretty flat in execution, and you ponder if they really thought this thing through before filming started? It is nice to see Tim Roth return, but you wish they could respect the characters more.

The idea of this episode is pretty good in concept, but the delivery ultimately creates a very unsatisfactory result that you are left to wonder how could Marvel Studios, a company known for consistently presenting strong quality, allow it? The whole episode feels like it was being written on the fly and they tried to stretch the idea out to just make it to its determined runtime, and as a result, you see a character like Wong be made into a bumbling fool and overuse a supporting character named Madisynn (Played by Patty Guggenheim) who starts off a little amusing but because pretty annoying the more they keep going back to her.

I think I may only have laughed once or twice throughout the entire installment, and I think the one thing that I liked most of the episode was the inclusion of HBO's classic series The Sopranos.

At this one in the series, you are left to wonder what kind of series it's trying to pay homage to...Ally McBeal? Night Court? Boston Legal? Malcolm in the Middle? It doesn't commit to one direction and puts all into a blender and hopes it all comes out fine.

The premise of the episode is fine, and sounds pretty interesting and could be very entertaining to watch, but it's rather jumbled and doesn't balance its variety of humor well, or even making the attempt to stick to a general approach to the humor. Jameela Jamil is entertaining as Tatiana, but honestly this is Tatiana in-name-only, assuming they intended to use her in the future I find it hard to really take this character that seriously enough if they're called for a heavier sort of story in the Marvel Cinematic Universe in the future.

...Only, not as entertaining or as interesting as you would probably think it would be on the screen.

The episode's A Story feels pretty random in terms of set-up, the B Story feels like filler - but somehow manages to be more interesting that what is going on in the A Story, if you can imagine that.

Chances are, you have seen just about every sitcom centered on the concept of a wedding in a movie or television series, everything from high-brow to low-brow going back to the earliest days of motion pictures, or, if we're being general, storytelling to the days of ancient myth. The idea of having a Marvel hero in that kind of setting sounds like it could be funny, even to the male members of the viewing audience, but unfortunately the jokes play out like something you would see in a work that was heavily criticized on release, i.e. Bride Wars, and just about as cringe to watch I would also add.

I just cannot really recommend this episode in the series.