Reviews

It's November 1st, 1971, I'm sitting here with Carolyn Perron, who with her family, has been experiencing supernatural occurrences. The key with The Conjuring is not that it has freshness on its side, as evidenced by the ream of horror fans arguing on internet sites about "nothing new on the table" , but while those fans will be going hungry for a very, very long time, The Conjuring does everything right for the splinter of horror it deals with. There's a lot to admire about a horror film that in this day and age stands tall and proud against the ream of remakes, sequels and teen friendly slashers that "haunt" the multiplexes with all too much frequency these days. Free of gore and sex, this was automatically going to alienate a good portion of the lustful members of the horror fan base, but for those who like their horror served with appetising scares and a cauldron of suspense, then...

The online manosphere was attacking this movie online well before it was ever released in theaters. Feels like there is probably significant crossover with the people who bemoaned Barbie & The Little Mermaid. It's an action packed movie with a lot of heart. If this same plot was a Superman movie the dude-bros would be praising it... Don't listen to the chatter. Embrace your individuality and check it out for yourself.

A frustrating mess of a movie that never figures out what it wants to be or who it’s for. The story is paper‑thin and strangely unfocused, drifting from one generic fight scene to the next without any real emotional weight or clear narrative purpose. For a supposed origin film, it does a poor job making Kara Zor‑El feel compelling, coherent, or even particularly likable. Milly Alcock’s take on Supergirl is part of the problem. Instead of giving us a hero with depth or charisma, the film leans into a moody, often inebriated drifter who spends more time sulking in space dive bars and cleaning up after her chaotic dog than actually growing as a character. The attempt to make her “edgy” ends up making her feel shallow and oddly off putting. It doesn’t help that Alcock has publicly gone out of her way to antagonize the very demographic most likely to show up for this movie 13 to 17 year old...

When one watches a movie and leaves the theater wondering who the picture was supposed to be made for, it doesn’t bode well for the film. Unfortunately, that’s very much the case for one of this summer’s most anticipated blockbusters, the latest effort from director Craig Gillespie. So why the confusion over the target audience? It’s simple: this action-adventure superhero release is all over the map, an offering that decidedly feels like it was put together by committee (and probably a marketing/product development committee at that). The picture includes a little of this, a little of that, and, ultimately, a whole lot of nothing. “Supergirl” plays like yet another cookie-cutter release in this genre, except that it also can’t really decide what it wants to be. From what I could tell, this is supposed to be an introduction/origin story (told in flashbacks) about Kara Zor-El (better...

Check out my full review @ https://www.manuelsbento.com/supergirl-2026-a-fierce-gritty-cosmic-awakening-hampered-by-familiar-trimmings/ Rating: B- SUPERGIRL is a beautifully gritty, visually striking cosmic adventure anchored by a powerhouse performance from Milly Alcock, who perfectly captures the raw vulnerability and fierce strength of Kara Zor-El. While the film shines brightest when diving into the somber depths of survivor's guilt and features a scene-stealing Jason Momoa as Lobo, it gets dragged down by a bland villain, an inconsistent emotional anchor in Eve Ridley's Ruthye, and incredibly frustrating, mood-ruining needle drops. Still, I found it a highly personal origin story inserted in a space western worth experiencing on the big screen.

Extremely conflicted on this one. On the one hand, this has (in my opinion) some of the best scenes of the franchise so far, especially towards the end. Brendan Gleason and David Tennant gave fun new performances, and overall I liked how high the stakes were. Buuuut there was also a ton of stuff that annoyed me. Ive liked seeing what shenanigans the Dursleys get up to at the start of each movie, so I was kinda sad to see them entirely cut from this (plus they cut a seemingly fun-sounding scene from the book, where the Weasleys suddenly appear in the Dursleys fireplace), and having it open with both Harry and Hermione staying at Ron’s house was kinda confusing. Speaking of Ron, his behavior (and his haircut) in this kinda ticked me off. Everything involving the Yule Ball was pretty whatever. And that bath scene was pretty uncomfortable. And it’s disappointing that they skipped the...

Possibly the weakest of the series, this one, for me. Our trio start by visiting the Quidditch World Cup which is invaded by the evil "Death Eaters" who reduce everything to ashes in their search for "Harry". Shortly afterwards, the "Tri-Wizard Cup" comes to Hogwarts - a good excuse to introduce some new characters amongst them Frances de la Tour as the enormous "Madame Maxime" and Roger Lloyd-Pack as "Barty Crouch" as each school chooses their champion to take part in the potentially lethal games. "Hogwarts" chooses "Cedric Diggory" (Robert Pattinson) but the goblet also chooses our "Harry" and so four go into the competition. As this description, so far, probably indicates - there is an hell of a lot going on here and not surprisingly the adaptation to the screenplay starts to leave out detail and characterisation. To do the story justice, it ought to have been two films - we spend way...

Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire is an absolute spectacle. I am a huge sucker for tournaments in films and this hit every single note for me; intensity, stakes, creativity, it is all there. Our main cast is doing some of the best acting of the series, Daniel Radcliffe really raises his performance up a notch and establishes himself as the lead of the franchise. His acting is refined and mature and he does an excellent job portraying his emotions with not only his line delivery but his facial expressions and body language. He really broke through here and it was a joy to see. Rupert Grint and Emma Watson were great, but they had a slight decrease in screentime and really were sidelined during this film. The introduction of Robert Pattinson as Cedric Diggory brings an interesting dynamic to the story, as Harry Potter has somewhat of an older brother figure to contend with. The...

Do not do so lightly! If chosen, there's no turning back. As from this moment, The Triwizard Tournament has begun! Year four at Hogwarts for Harry Potter and his chums, and it's a time of change, chance and danger. The prestigious Triwizard Tournament is being hosted and the applecart is turned upside down when Harry, unqualified and underage, is selected by the Goblet of Fire to be one of Hogwarts' competitors. If the thought of competing in such a dangerous tournament wasn't scary enough, Harry also has the worry of finding a date for the Yule Ball to contend with! The Prisoner of Azkaban set the marker for a darker, more grown up Potter picture, a high standard that Goblet of Fire, and new director Mike Newell, arguably had no hope of attaining. But it's not for lack of trying, and in fairness Newell and the team have managed well enough to blend the blackness that comes with the...

The best Halloween-party choice in this series, not because it has the biggest feast, but because the whole world seems to have changed seasons. Cuarón lets the grounds feel damp, windy and slightly unsafe. The school is less a display case of magical objects than a place people actually move through: across bridges, down slopes, past windows with weather pressing against them. Even the comic touches have an awkward little edge. The Knight Bus is funny, but hardly comforting. The strongest contrast is between the promise of warmth in Hogsmeade and the cold that follows the Dementors. That makes the eventual turn toward friendship and chosen family feel earned rather than decorative. The time-travel construction is satisfying because small details return with a different meaning, not simply because the plot gets clever. For a themed evening, this is the one that asks for cider, sweets...

I recall the controversy as this was released. Alfonso Cuarón consciously decided to darken this film, and the light-hearted stories of the first two are replaced by an edgier approach to this tale for our wizarding trio. The world's most wanted wizard "Sirius Black" (Gary Oldman) escapes from "Azkaban" allegedly bent on the destruction of "Harry". The script has more by way of addition to the original book, but in a complementary - not detracting way. As the children grow into young adults, we are exposed to a scarier side of their existence - the "Dementors" that are supposed to protect the innocent and the "Boggart" all serve to introduce a physical fluidity to this shape-shifting environment of peril in which they now exist. The presence of "Valdemort" becomes more omnipresent and there is so much more substance to the stories now. Sir Michael Gambon takes over the role of...

Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban is fantastic! This entry is another drastic step up from the previous film and the tone takes a dramatic shift in terms of seriousness. The quality and cinematography are simply brilliant in this film. There are so many amazing shots and sequences that just had me completely enamored. These films are ahead of their time for sure. Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban has the best plot of the series so far. There is a constant threat looming in the background throughout the entire film that is known from the opening minutes. Sirius Black's menacing posters and headlines create a real sense of danger, and he truly seems mad. The dementors also deliver a serious threat on screen. Their introduction is terrifying, and their presence is felt in every scene. One of my favorite things about this film is the conclusion, the time traveling elements...

Having survived the 74th Hunger Hames, "Katniss" (Jennifer Lawrence) and her on-screen beau "Peeta" (Josh Hutcherson) now expect to live a life of luxury in their victor's village - but nope, devious president "Snow" (Donald Sutherland) has other plans for them. Having dispensed with the services of poor old Wes Bentley, he brings in Philip Seymour Hoffman ("Plutarch") to create a sort of Champions League affair with previous - supposedly forever exempt - winners to come back for a "quell". It's a good excuse to bring in some old blood two help out the youngsters - Jeffrey Wright ("Beetee") probably most notable amongst them, and we pretty much repeat the perilous escapades of the first film. This time, though, the threads of an uprising and a more collaborative approach to resistance start to win through; we see our combatants start to use their heads more, to thwart the divisive aims...

Good watch, would watch again, and can recommend. This is a great survivalist story in a horrible setting (wonderfully set, written to be a horrible world). We get all the great fun that we got from the original movie, and then we add in the whole (spoiler) element. It's really what makes the movie and leads us into the next arc, but I won't mention it. With Snow just on an angry tantrum spree (literally using childish tantrum words) you can tell very early that he's defeated himself, it's just a matter of time. Jennifer Lawrence is a big enough personality to carry the movie and she does with everyone else playing support roles centered around her. It was fantastic to see Jena Malone come on board as I feel she adds something special to everything she's in. If you can stand the battle royale concept, this this is a good watch for you.

More of the same stuff. Lawrence is not bad and I think Josh Hutcherson is a great discovering but that's mostly it.

I still do not agree with the 9 and 10 star ratings but I feel this movie is slightly better than the first one. This is primarily because Jennifer Lawrence’s character is more mature and she seems more comfortable in the role. She is no longer an immature, naive and lost child. At least not most of the time. The entire setup is still as ludicrous as before. It is a silly and depressing background scenario and it is definitely not my cup of tea. The people running around in ridiculous hair-do, makeup and showing a severe lack of intelligence is not making things better. The enjoyment of this movie comes when the games finally start. These parts are definitely better than in the first movie. The various dangers are well done, the effects good and there is an interesting overall theme to the arena and the dangers instead of randomly throwing new menaces at players that seemed to be the...

Great! All the more impressive given offscreen events. The awful behind the scenes stuff with lead Brandon Lee was all that I knew about 'The Crow'; I only learned it was a superhero flick in the lead-up to watching it, I had always assumed it was a straight up horror. No better time to watch it, what with the reboot out now... gotta see the sequels first! There is a strong performance from Lee in there, Ernie Hudson is also someone I enjoyed in this. The rest of those onscreen are all positives, namely Rochelle Davis and Michael Wincott. I don't have any real complaints with this as a film, the feel is aesthetically, audibly and tonally spot on - plenty of Evanescence/Bring Me to Life and Gotham City vibes.

This is my first viewing of The Crow and it is a great, dark comic book adaptation that at times reminded me of Batman and moments that seemed to later inspire The Dark Knight, in particular with The Joker. It's a shame about Brandon Lee as he is amazing in the lead and this could've led to a great career. There are some poignant scenes and a genuine heart at its core. Just a home run from Alex Poyas. 4.25/5

Well if you though it was wet on "Blade Runner" (1982) then welcome to a ruined city where the torrential rain never seems to stop. A series of flashbacks tells us that two graves hold the bodies of a young couple about to be married. That's before local kingpin "Top Dollar" (Michael Wincott), who had designs on their building, sent his henchmen to "coax" them out. A year after this tragedy a crow alights on the grave of "Eric" (Brandon Lee) and enlivens his corpse so that he may avenge the brutality visited on his fiancée and himself. What now ensues is a dark and menacing revenge thriller that, though fairly predictable, sees this former rock musician develop some astonishingly lethal ninja skills as he identifies and then rather entertainingly despatches a variety of drug dealing undesirables whilst retaining a sense of the decent by befriending local cop "Albrecht" (Ernie Hudson) and...

The Crow (1994) I hadn't seen it for about ten years and as the full moon came beaming through my apartment window late last night, it just felt right to indulge in some Proyas Gothic excellence. The question still taps away at all our doors, namely would the film be the cult classic it became without the Brandon Lee tragedy? That's a tricky one to answer because we all deep down have a morbid curiosity about us, especially with films and their stars. This is why I got a lot more from re-watching the movie after a very long period of time, namely that it may have drew many of us in years ago because of the tragedy and heart aching back story to writer James O'Barr's birthing of Eric Draven the character, but it can now enthral, thrill and shatter emotions of its own accord. The Gothic art design and the soundtrack are emo personified before such a label was invented, Lee is lithe...