From the visionary director that brought us Pan's Labyrinth comes another creepy and yet heartwarming film.  The Shape of Water is a lovely portrayal of a forbidden love between a creature and a human.  The plotline is spectacular, balancing the heavy-hitting politics of communist Russia and the United States in the 1960s and the science-fiction creature that drives the love story forward.  The tone is classy, with a jazz-inspired score that brings the audience back to the 60s.  The story is relatable to any time period, but the 60s backdrop makes it even more interesting.

Guillermo del Toro (Pan's Labyrinth, Hellboy, Pacific Rim) never ceases to create beautiful effects for his visionary films.  The imagery throughout The Shape of Water is consistently fluid and spectacular.  There is one scene where we get to see two raindrops dance around on a bus window, acting as a metaphor for the story unfolding on screen.  There is blood and gore involved, but only the necessary amount for us to enter the world that the screenwriters have created.  This is not a film for children, but for a mature audience that can handle the darkness of a spy thriller and the nudity that comes with a full love story.  To gently push the audience through the film, Alexandre Desplat (The King's Speech, Argo, The Queen, Philomena) contributes a smooth score that juggles between intensity and charm.  The orchestral score fits with every single scene, settling and unsettling the audience at certain times.

I would go amiss without acknowledging the cast members that bring the story to life.  Sally Hawkins (Blue Jasmine) easily gives the best performance of the year with her portrayal of a mute janitor.  While she cannot talk, there is emotion behind every sign that she gives.  Alongside Hawkins, Doug Jones (Hellboy, Pan's Labyrinth) plays a fantastic sea monster.  Rounding out the cast, Michael Shannon (Midnight Special) is a scarily bigoted villain.  This is the big bad role that Shannon has perfected throughout his career.  Finally, the support for the main roles are brought to the screen by three well-seasoned actors.  Octavia Spencer (Fruitvale Station), Richard Jenkins (Step Brothers), and Michael Stuhlbarg (Call Me by Your Name​) are all great additions to the film.  Overall, this is a top-notch cast brought together to create a top-notch film.

The Bottom Line: The Shape of Water certainly deserves all of the Oscar-buzz that it is receiving because of its tender and yet unsettling approach at a love story.

Score: 9.7/10

Image credit: ​By Source, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=54631984

After 18 films, Pixar still continues to release it's greatest content yet!  When I first heard about Coco, I admittedly had extremely low expectations for the film.  None of Pixar's recent films had felt fresh, original, or great since Inside Out.  However with Lee Unkrich at the film's helm, Coco transcends the recent films to become a masterpiece from the studio that started it's animation dominance with Toy Story.  

Coco is beautiful and full of detailed animation that is hard to fully admire through the constantly progressing storyline.  Taking place during Dia de los Muertos, the animators are burdened with creating intricate costumes for many of the characters.  With all of the pressure, the animators do a great job of creating smooth transitions and glorious settings.  One of the highlights of the artwork was the spirit animals.  These neon and often glowing animals are vivid and full of imagination.  Aside from that, the movements of the characters are fluid and there never appears to be a slip up in the film that probably took many years to produce.

Similarly to Inside Out, the storyline for Coco is full of heart and empathy.  The film centers around a young boy struggling to find himself between his passions and his family's values.  Of course, there are multiple twists and turns along the way.  We meet sensitive characters and awesome creatures that help guide Miguel towards the correct path.  While the film is formulaic, it still feels fresh because of the revelations that occur.  A nice addition to this Latin film is the soundtrack which includes mariachi tracks and orchestral Latin compositions.  For a film that centers around music, the original and compilation soundtracks mesh together well.

The Bottom Line: Coco is the greatest Pixar film to be released since Inside Out, revolving around a young boy's journey in finding himself.

Score: 9.5/10

Call Me by Your Name is a slow-burning coming-of-age story with bold direction and stunning performances.  Luca Guadagnino (I Am Love) brings out the best of Armie Hammer (The Social Network) and Timothee Chalamet (Interstellar, Lady Bird), with this realistic and yet unique love story.  The first half of the film flies by with a clever script that plays Oliver and Elio off of each other perfectly.  These two intelligent characters are fun to watch when they are alone and together.  As they often try to outsmart each other, they notice their similarities.  There is a purity in their relationship that is hard to describe on paper, but Hammer and Chalamet create the relationship with gravitas.

Focusing on passion, the film also uses an interesting soundtrack to progress the storyline.  A blend of classical music and modern indie tunes composed by Sufjan Stevens tie character thoughts to the audience perspectives. The characters are deeply intellectual and the music brings us into their world at certain instances.  The soundtrack also gives us sweet and haunting melodies to portray the romance that unravels over time.

While I enjoyed this movie, I think that there is a drop-off point between the first and second half.  The first half has a fun script that kept me engaged with the characters during my first viewing of the film.  However, the second half slows down to focus more on the intimate relationship between Oliver and Elio.  We no longer get a good amount of the crisp and engaging commentary from Elio and Oliver, which is what really built their relationship.  There is one scene towards the end between Chalamet and Michael Stuhlbarg (A Serious Man​) that is powerfully written, but aside from that there is a dramatic change in tone for the second half.  Yet, there is plenty to enjoy with these characters and I look forward to the Oscar nominations that the film will clinch.

The Bottom Line: Call Me by Your Name is a pure film filled with intimate detail and engaging characters.

Score: 9.3/10

Image credit: ​By Franz Richter (User:FRZ) - Own work (taken with Nikon D60 SLR), CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=56267295

When the Marvel team developed their cinematic universe, a lot of thought went into the order of the films and different phases for the storylines.  Five different solo hero films came out leading up to the release of Marvel's The Avengers.  Iron Man kicked off the cinematic universe with a fantastic storyline, setting up success for the future films.  The films following Iron Man were not all critically acclaimed, but the audience at least got to know each character before the mega team-up film that came out in 2012.  Unfortunately, the DC universe has only led us into a disorganized world of heroes that we hardly know anything about.

Before Justice League, the audience only got to connect with Batman, Superman, and Wonder Woman.  That leaves out three crucial characters on the team.  Certain steps had to be executed in Justice League to introduce The Flash, Aquaman, and Cyborg.  However, the runtime is too short to flesh out each of these new characters.  Sure we have comic books that we can read, but this universe hardly even relates to the comic books because of the liberties that the filmmakers have taken.

Another problem with the new film and its characters is that the only good DC film to be released for this universe was Wonder Woman.  Man of Steel showed us the potential that Superman has in the franchise, but the character was bogged down with a poor storyline.  I still believe that Henry Cavill (The Man from U.N.C.L.E.) and Ben Affleck (Argo, Good Will Hunting, Gone Girl, The Town) have potential in their superhero roles, but viewers have not been given a good movie to display their potential yet.  We can only hope that the franchise can pull itself together from here.

One of the standout newcomers has to be Ezra Miller (The Perks of Being a Wallflower, Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them).  Yet, it still feels as though Marvel beat DC to this character.  Miller's portrayal of The Flash is reminiscent to Tom Holland's Spider-Man.  He is goofy and brings light to the dark situations that Zack Snyder (300, Watchmen) has dragged the heroes into.  Ray Fisher (Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice) is also an interesting addition as Cyborg.  Personally, I do not know much about Cyborg (aside from my experience with Teen Titans), but I am intrigued to learn more about the character's origins and background. 

As a standalone film, Justice League is what I expected it to be after seeing the trailers and filmmakers involved.  It is slightly better that Batman v. Superman, a lot better than Suicide Squad, and a whole lot worse than Wonder Woman.  The storyline is dull, formulaic, and bogged down with CGI effects.  Anyone who has seen a recent DC film knows what to expect from the franchise at this point.  The heroes are interesting, but never fully explored.  One of my biggest problems with this film was the bad guy.  Steppenwolf was a pretty lame character to choose for the first real team-up film.  Hopefully the next DC team-up will give us something that makes the franchise worth it.

The Bottom Line:  Marvel still holds the upper-hand in the current superhero cinematic landscape, and Justice League shows us all of the reasons why.

Score: 5/10

Image credit: ​By Iphonedon890 - Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=48706570

This film is truly special and unique to Martin McDonagh's (In Bruges, Seven Psychopaths) well-crafted genre.  McDonagh's films are hard to compare with others because they come with a full serving of drama and a good amount of comedic sides.  While it might be hard to digest everything going on upon a single screening of Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri, there is plenty left for our cinematic tastebuds to indulge in this film many more times.

It takes really smart writing to create such deeply dumb and interesting characters.  The trio of McDormand (Fargo, Almost Famous), Harrelson (No Country for Old Men, Zombieland), and Rockwell (The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, The Green Mile) brings acting perfection with some of the most underrated actors of our time.  After Fargo, it seems as though McDormand had been forgotten for a while.  Yet, her portrayal of Mildred is spot-on with the dark tone of McDonagh's direction.  After the death of her daughter, Mildred has a hardened heart and is looking for her own definition of justice.  One of her targets is the police chief of the town, played by Woody Harrelson.  Harrelson brings the only respectable character to life with twists and turns that will surprise first-time McDonagh-ers.

While Harrelson and McDormand are great in their roles, my favorite part of the movie would have to be Officer Dixon (played by Sam Rockwell).  Rockwell is fantastic in his role as the dumb and conflicted officer.  His character is relevant to modern news stories, and is a portrait of many issues with America's police force.  Without going into too much detail, I will say that there are a lot of interesting aspects on this character's journey.

Of course, it wouldn't be a McDonagh movie without a thin balance between darkness and comedy.  While the script-writing is not quite as solid as In Bruges, it is damn-near close.  One-liners often dominate the film, creating an uncomfortable awkwardness in the theater.  Personally, I love when directors drag audiences into an uncomfortable tone.  Good filmmaking does not have to be happy and joyous, as long as the audience is able to ponder what they are watching and the message being sent through the medium.  

The Bottom Line:  So far, this is my favorite film of 2017 because of the solid screenwriting and intriguing tone portrayed by every single character.

Score: 9.8/10

Image credit: ​By Dixiekin - Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=49330101

In Gerald's Game, what starts off as a relaxing get-away for a middle-aged couple turns into something completely unexpected.  The trailer for this film had me intrigued for the new Stephen King (The Shawshank Redemption, The Green Mile, The Shining, Pet Sematary) adaptation.  I cannot relate to the book since I have not read it, but either King's writing is crazy or Mike Flanagan's (Oculus) adaptation is weird as heck.  For most of the film, I was on board with what was going on.  However, there are some parts that are a bit too fake to be scary.  In fact, I found a lot of the horror aspects to be funny.  Gerald's Game is very similar to Misery, but with more paranormality and a less believable storyline.

There are two main characters in this story, Gerald and Jessie.  As Gerald, Bruce Greenwood (Star Trek) creates an interesting character that is hard to judge at times and has some depth throughout the whole film.  As Jessie, I found that Carla Gugino's (Night at the Museum, Watchmen, Sin City) performance was too exaggerated.  In the situations that she is put through, I don't think that anyone would have reacted in the same way that her character does.  Certain parts of her role are believable, but the first half of the film feels overacted.

Overall, Gerald's Game has ideas that are hard to figure out at first.  The ending has twists that are not easily resolved through a first viewing.  I'm glad with some of the choices that Flanagan executed in his direction, but there is some CGI that is inexplicably bad.  I understand that the film would be a complete bore without some of the horror conventions used, but I wish that more of the budget was spent on them.  This is the first Mike Flanagan film that I've seen and I believe he still has some potential for growth as a horror filmmaker.

The Bottom Line:  Don't expect to be jumping out of your chair throughout the film, but there are some ideas that might keep you awake at night pondering.

Score: 6.5/10

Image credit: ​By "Pinguino" - "Pinguino's" flickr account, CC BY 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=1774637

Tom Cruise (Top Gun) breaks away from his Mission Impossible franchise to bring us a film that probably didn't require the dangerous stunts that his fans are used to.  Even without him hanging off of the side of a plane, fans can enjoy this brisk-paced action/drama flick.  From the very get-go, this film flies by without any stop in the action.  The opening credits prepare us for the winding journey that we are about to take with Barry Seal.  I was completely unfamiliar with this story going in and found every twist and turn to be surprising and, for the most part, unpredictable.

Something even more unpredictable about this flick is Doug Liman's (The Bourne Identity, Edge of Tomorrow) superb directing.  Liman's past filmography is wishy-washy, and mostly includes shallow action films.  Liman's creativity behind the camera helps to progress this story, with varying shots and photography.  The film goes from extreme close-ups to landscape shots in an instant, never ceasing to bring a spectacular image to the viewer.  Found footage brings unfamiliar viewers (such as myself) into the past time period.  So far, this is my favorite of Liman's films because the direction clearly leads the storyline.  While we are constantly thrown forward in years, it's hard to get lost or confused about the plot.

In terms of acting, Tom Cruise and Domhnall Gleeson (Ex Machina, The Revenant, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2) give bring the energy to their respective roles.  Cruise may be typecast as this point, but I'll be damned if he doesn't play the action hero part well.  Even without huge stunt productions, it's hard to avert your eyes from Cruise piloting a plane.  I will admit that it is still hard for me to take Domhnall Gleeson completely seriously because of that one big franchise he was in as a child, but he is definitely maturing into more serious roles.  I foresee more big roles being thrown Gleeson's way after his success this year.

The Bottom Line: Liman brings on the action at a fast pace and a time period that many moviegoers weren't alive to witness.

Score: 9.3/10

Blade Runner 2049 takes place in the future, a desolate and yet overcrowded time period.  This follow-up to the first film stands out as a wholly original film, requiring minimal prior experience with the storyline.  Of course, you will be able to understand a bit more if you view the first film, but it is not crucial to Denis Villeneuve's (Arrival, Prisoners, Sicario) creation.  There are a few characters that return from the original film, including Harrison Ford (Star Wars: Episode IV - A New Hope, Raiders of the Lost Ark) and Edward James Olmos (2 Guns).  They stay true to their character forms that were first introduced by Ridley Scott (Alien).  

While the returning actors are important to the story's progression, there are quite a few newcomers to the franchise that stand out with bold performances.  Ryan Gosling's (Drive, La La Land, The Big Short) third team-up with Villeneuve might be his best yet.  Gosling's character is reminiscent of Ford's character, but with more twists and turns right off the bat.  Ana de Armas (Hands of Stone), Robin Wright (The Princess Bride, Beowulf), and Sylvia Hoeks (The Best Offer) are fantastic female characters that Hollywood often overlooks with blockbuster casting.  Jared Leto (Requiem for a Dream, Dallas Buyers Club) is also thrown into the casting mix as a haunting and creepy villain-esque personality.  Blade Runner 2049 is full of brave performances that sequels often lack.

This follow-up to the original film is even richer in content and digital effects.  The landscapes are eerie and yet shockingly beautiful.  CGI constantly graces the screen, but still feels like real life is being portrayed in front of us.  The technology is a paradise for gamers, with effervescent screens everywhere.  The land is dull, but everything that is built on top of the land is architectural perfection.  Clearly these are updated effects from the original, which was expected for a film coming out 35 years later.

I was more shocked by the actual content throughout the film.  I argue that no scene is wasted in Blade Runner 2049.  Every single scene holds meaning for the overall storyline, which is hard to admit for a film that has a runtime over two-and-a-half hours.  This is a film that can reveal new ideas every time I rewatch it, which will undoubtedly happen.  For some reason, the storyline reminds me of Christopher Nolan's (The Dark Knight, Inception, Interstellar) mind bending filmography.  I highly recommend watch the film and then having dinner with friends to discuss it's meaning.

The Bottom Line:  Villeneuve once again displays his mastery of filmmaking with this effervescent follow-up to the original Blade Runner.

Score: 9.5/10

Before I say anything else, I will admit that the Kingsman franchise has found a unique form of action that is fluid, fun, and cheesy.  These are good qualities for the spy spoof, even if the second installment falls flat at times.  After Kingsman: The Secret Service came out, I was fully onboard for a sequel.  Taron Egerton (Eddie the Eagle) as Eggsy and Colin Firth (The King's Speech) as Harry Hart were fun to watch as spy protagonists going head-to-head with an oddly hilarious Samuel L. Jackson (Pulp Fiction, The Hateful Eight, Django Unchained, Captain America: The Winter Soldier) villain.  Mark Strong (Sherlock Holmes, The Imitation Game) was also the perfect sidekick to throw into the mix.  Unfortunately, something went wrong in the second installment and the script was not as clever.  Neither was the storyline.

In Kingsman: The Golden Circle, Eggsy has matured a bit.  He seems to know what is at stake with the new villain, and yet has a seemingly more immature sense of humor.  A lot of the jokes are sexualized, causing viewers to question if the movie as a whole is more immature than it is clever.  Some new characters pop up to join the mix ranging from Channing Tatum (21 Jump Street) to Julianne Moore (The Big Lebowski, Children of Men).  Moore's portrayal of Poppy is very enthusiastic, which came off as a bit too overblown for my taste.  Channing Tatum, Jeff Bridges (The Big Lebowski, True Grit, Iron Man, TRON: Legacy), Halle Berry (X-Men: The Last Stand, Cloud Atlas), and Pedro Pascal (The Great Wall) act as American counterparts to the Kingsman with a decent southern attitude.  The Statesman are fun to watch, and we might see more of them if the franchise stays alive after this film.

As with the original, the technical aspects of the film are still fresh and near-perfect.  Some audiences have complained about the use of CGI, but that was the fun part of the original.  There are new weapons and action sequences that start from the very beginning of the film.  The score is once again a mix of original and compilation soundtrack, creating a constantly moving blockbuster.  While the action sequences are enjoyable, the film is about 20 or 30 minutes too long.  If some of the scenes were cut shorter, the attention span wouldn't have dwindled towards the end.  While this film was nowhere near as good as the original, I still hope for a third installment!

The Bottom Line:  Don't go in expecting to see the same solid story and performances as the original film, but enjoy the style that the franchise has developed.

Score: 6.5/10

Image credit: ​By Kubrick 574 - Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=49224480

Once again, Christopher Nolan (The Dark Knight, Inception, Interstellar) reminds us that war is a very scary thing with his new feature film.  Of course, it would not be a Nolan film without a few twists and turns in the storytelling method.  Rather than focusing on a perfectly linear storyline, Nolan chooses to give the audience bits and pieces of multiple events that are going on at roughly the same time.  While his method is effective in creating the chaos that war ensures, the film often feels cluttered and somewhat hard to follow.

Each character has a role in the war, but we are never given much development or background for any of them.  There are quite a few notable actors that are capable of grand performances, but the script seems to hold them back at times.  Kenneth Branagh (Valkyrie), Cillian Murphy (Inception, The Dark Knight), Mark Rylance (Bridge of Spies, The Other Boleyn Girl), and Tom Hardy (Mad Max: Fury Road, Inception, The Dark Knight Rises, The Revenant) round out the star-studded cast.  Former One Direction member, Harry Styles, also joins the acting realm in Dunkirk​.  However, none of them give a jaw-dropping performance for audiences to connect with.    It seems as though Nolan really wanted to focus on the action, rather than the characters.  I can understand his direction in terms of creating a war film, yet it feels weaker than most (if not all) of Nolan's past films.

Technically, this film is a fantastic addition to Nolan's filmography.  The action is intense, with unpredictable war sequences and constantly evolving events.  While I have never been through a war, I imagine that this film portrays what it would be like very effectively.  To add to the intensity, Hans Zimmer (Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl, The Dark Knight, The Lion King, Inception​) creates another score for Nolan.  Similarly to the score of Inception, Zimmer cleverly meters his score so that it swells with the action.  The pomp and circumstance of the score also reminds us of where the events are taking place.  This is a truly symphonic composition that fits into a classical film score genre.  Surely, we will be seeing an Oscar nomination for the constantly running film score. 

The Bottom Line:  As a war film, Dunkirk is a masterpiece for the eyes and ears.  Although, it does lack the intriguing character development that previous Christopher Nolan films have.

Score: 9.4/10

Image credit: ​By Photograph by Richard Goldschmidt, www.piqtured.comDerivative by Keraunoscopia - Derived from File:Christopher Nolan, London, 2013.jpg, CC BY 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=26638525