Jessica Purdy

Weapons is a crap one for me. On the surface, it has everything going for it — a solid cast, a creepy and ambitious premise, and moments that are funny or well-executed. The acting is actually really strong across the board, and there’s clearly an attempt to do something different and “deep.” But in the end, it doesn’t land the way it should, and it definitely doesn’t have the staying power or craft of someone like John Carpenter, Wes Craven, fuck me, not even Robert Wiene. The main issue is that the film feels more like a showcase for performances than actual storytelling. Instead of drawing me into the characters and the horror, it kept bouncing between styles and perspectives that looked interesting but didn’t give me much to hold onto emotionally. The structure — different chapters from different points of view — sounds clever, but a lot of it felt hollow, like it was trying too hard to be stylish rather than making me actually care. Even when the actors do a great job, the characters themselves don’t really stick. I never felt truly invested in them, which makes the film come across cold and detached. And when the big reveal finally comes — with the witchcraft angle — it felt messy, under-explained, and nowhere near worth all the buildup. Instead of being scary or satisfying, it felt silly and left me disappointed. That’s not to say all horror has to be scary, but at least all horror can be designed to make you think! Leave a lasting impression, stand out for all sorts of reason. For instance, The Kurt Russels, The Thing, stood out for its amazing craft of old school prosthetics and special affects and created a chilling atmosphere from that alone! This film does not leave you with questions that makes you crave more. It doesn’t reward you for sitting there for almost 2 hours taking in the build-up. Instead we have a gag at the end and that just made me feel personally empty, and disappointed because it’s been done before. By the final act, the tone is all over the place. It flips into dark comedy and absurdity at points where the film should’ve doubled down on horror. That shift completely undercut the tension, and I left feeling like the film wanted to be more than one thing but didn’t commit to any of them properly. In short: Yes, there are great performances and a cool concept buried in here, but as a horror film it doesn’t work. It prioritises actors and moments over real storytelling, and for me that makes it fall flat. I don’t want “performances and bullshit” when I sit down to watch horror — I want something with proper weight, atmosphere, and story. Weapons just doesn’t deliver that.

Just amazing. Legit can’t put into words, but I enjoyed every moment of it.

I grew up playing the games, and watching the classic tv shows. You don’t need to know the content to appreciate the fact this is a brilliant family film. The casting was perfect. The first movie was a bit rocky, but since sonic 2, it has improved which you don’t see happen often these days with franchises. The more the sequels, usually the worse it gets. The fan service, the improvements they have put in to make it fresh and exciting for each installation of this franchise so far, demonstrates the passion the creators have for adapting these nostalgic and fantastic games.

It was fun - and it was nice to see more of Tim Burtons work shine !

Andy is cute. That’s all I’ll say

This film was ok. I do think this film possible had more depth to it that other reviews have looked into, but I also sense in other reviews a lot of personal grudge and hate for this film. Often their emotions and personal judgment against the director clouds their overall judgement of the film. Now my film review: Like I said it was ok. It was visually breathtaking and sent my ADHD through the roof. Artistically speaking in terms of filming and set design, cinematography, make up and costume and hair yes it was fantastic. That’s the good stuff. I didn’t like how hollow and misplaced the story line felt at times. Beneath the surface Gerwig explores a few themes, but she doesn’t full dive in. I just felt she was biting too all at once for the entirety of how long it was. The satire was deliberate and the stiff acting was deliberate. They’re literally living dolls the equivalent to pure children, or that version of that deranged Willy wonka in Tim burtons take. I liked this but also hated it. The more she becomes human, the more insane she seems, which I don’t think Barbie was giving the right story structure to really progress her character into what got her so far in her journey to begin with. This film isn’t necessarily about identifying with the characters, it’s watching them, to me, realising how big the world is Barbie’s eyes, and how small and dull Barbie land had become. That was impacted by the woman who played with her, sure. But Barbieland is safe, spectacular haven us women don’t have. I think that was what Greta was sorta playing with too but it’s boring. It’s not something I haven’t seen before in terms of story telling. It just makes me feel and think that this is a cry for help for feminism, for that mom character to express the anger and toxic patriarchy that still overshadows us. I don’t think sexism will ever seize to exist, but rather than represent it poorly amongst toys to replicate a sense of reality she should’ve really explored the stupidity of both sides of both genders or all gender for that matter. The world and adults act like a bunch of bumbling children fighting politics they don’t quite understand. Sorry if my review was messy, but to say this is a masterpiece and homage to womanhood, I’d say no, it’s a movie that reminds me how artistic films can still be at some degree, and how nostalgia can also be a wonderful thing to witness still.

Excellent. Best thing since Moon Knight which as good but not amazing like this. Wish there was more!

If you are upset because of the lore aspects of things best you read the books. By today's standards this is truly entertaining especially if you overlook minor errors. May I remind you The Rings of Power was created from Tolkiens notes, the Silmarillion and his other stories within the large world building of which is middle earth - so ofcourse his notes hold different accents that the early hobbits could have spoken with, different armours, which the show runners have made mistake off. Galadriel is a likeable character and definitely not a Mary Sue. She's not so different from Kate Blancehetts Galadriel who also smiled I may add at Frodo when they had an encounter. The acting is on point and she's a blunt straight to the point elf. 100 years for elves feels more like 5. As elfond quoted in episode 2 and even in the Tolkien trilogy when he confronted aragon about Arwen that once they seel the deal time goes by differently for her and thus much faster because of their way of life and mindset and age span. Seriously. Dissapointed with the fans. Overall I'm thoroughly enjoying it and the inclusion of different races.

I loved this movie. It was a bit misplaced and the story line was jumbled but it was worth it. The comedy and the directing of Taika really does blend well with Chris Hemworths portrayal of the titular character. The cringe moments were also beautifully funny. If you're not a fan of wierd/awkward humour this movie isn't for you. I like how this movie is setting up a next power up for Thor in Thor 5 since Jane is now Thor, like the comics chris will inherit the Odinforce making him a massive level up of all powerful being. He did get the odinforce in the ragnarok movie but it was a deleted scene since it didn't work with the multiverse that's being built cinematically. I LOVED IT. All this sensitive melarchy is coming from snowflakes. We get it you wish Jane and Valkyrie hit it off - well you first have to fight the comic fans since Jane and Thor remain an item from the rough comic story lines the MCU is molded from. I'm so sick and tired of defining interesting characters, like Val, by her sexual orientation. Get over it.

Johnny was ok and Gelert but honestly Mads fitted the character so much more ! His performance was very good and had a more realistic approach. Johnnys version of the character was entertaining but less believable within the world building of this prequel series. This movie isn’t about magic it’s about relationship and romance drama. Just take a moment to think about it and the amount of times Newt is missing Tina and how Dumbledore (who in my mind was actually a lot more wiser for his age then) didn’t bother to confront Grinds before hand. “Oh but love makes us do dumb things”. Eff off the representation of this Middle Aged Dumbledore goes completely against how his character actually is within the original HP books and yes lots of retcon going on here to make this whole movie in line with todays tropes. Surely the elder wand would’ve been more powerful in this movie too but nah. The issue I have with this new franchise is that it’s titles are further from the truth. The first movie is about the beasts, the latter include a few magical creatures, but of course it’s not really about them it’s about the political warfare that’s taking place within the magical world. “Fantastic Beast: the secrets of Dumbledore” yeah what is his secret exactly? Because I mean it was pretty obvious he was helplessly in love with Grindy back in the awful sequel. There is no secret and if there was they don’t do a good job of representing that metaphorically within the set designs and overall script. Also, you would’ve thought Tina would play a main role in getting Queenie back in this sequel but no she only appears later on and then there’s a cliffhanger for a god awful fourth movie. This movie has some humour but over all the birthday party I took to see of 12 year olds was almost fast asleep by the first half hour into the movie. What an awful experience that was and it really wasn’t as magical as I thought it’d be. There were better ways to set up a political battle. I was expecting an actual war of some kind and I knew it’d be one that uses brains than wands. The biggest disappointment yet. Just another movie minced out of Warner Brothers bottom, to make fast and easy money. They’d rinse more out of a wet flannel than out of the hogwash screenplay written by JK Rowling and some other person who co wrote the screenplays and by god it’s a poor excuse of a comeback. A good story takes time to meticulously make, such as Tolkiens middle earth. I noticed the world building was slightly displaced and overall the books and movies were rushed apart from the first which was decent at the time. If you call this a good movie then you don’t notice how all over the place the plot is. It doesn’t make sense or give any indication of how much time has gone by since movie 2 and yeah duh it’s obvious it’s months later but young children won’t understand that. The lack of continuity with characters and introducing new ones to replace them in the whole movie makes zero sense. Surely Tina should’ve been more present.