Frozen 2 - Better the second time around (mostly)

Back in February, I published my reaction to the Frozen 2 trailer, in which I briefly recounted my opinions on the first movie and my renewed interest in the series with the next film. The short version is that I liked the ideas and the characters within the film without actually enjoying the movie itself. I felt that it was a waste of potential and should have been better. Even so, I still appreciated many of the thematic elements within the story and also, like everyone else, fell head over heels for Elsa as a character. So much so that not only do I wish she had more time in her first movie, I was genuinely hoping for her to have a stronger presence in the next. That much, at least, has been made real in this movie, for which I am grateful. As for the rest of the film, while I cannot say that it is perfect on its own merits, I can say that I found it be a significant improvement from the first. If only because it has a much more coherent and satisfying narrative. Oh, and the creators of the film thankfully confirmed that Elsa is indeed what we all thought even though the movie itself will not. Let's just say I'm having Legend of Korra flashbacks. 

Taking place six years after the events of the first film, the story follows two sisters, Elsa (Idina Menzel) and Anna (Kristen Bell) as the Co-Queens of the Kingdom of Arendelle...or is Elsa the Queen and Anna is technically still a Princess?... I dunno! Anyway, They rule their kingdom with kindness and altruism and have settled down into a happy life, for the most part. Things begin to stir up when Elsa starts hearing a strange feminine voice that seems to be calling her to somewhere. Later, it's revealed that there is a mysterious and magical forest that was once an ally to Arendelle until an unknown event put the two at odds with each other, and the wood was sealed off by a magical mist. This particular forest is alive with the spirits of Earth, Fire, Wind, and Water (enter your own Last Airbender and/or Final Fantasy jokes here), and it is they who have suddenly awakened and called to Elsa. Now, to protect her home and her family, Elsa and Anna must venture into the unknown to find the truth, and in doing so, right the wrong that was made. 

For the most part, the film is relatively stable. It makes better use of its main characters, the story is better structured, and the general themes of self-realization and acceptance, as well as friendship, love, and the importance of understanding history are all well presented and always appreciated. I can honestly say, without a doubt, that I did enjoy this movie better than the first. Even so, Frozen 2 is still not without its flaws. 

For one thing, I had an issue with the songs. Not the amount of them or their overall quality, but their placements in the movie. There were moments when, much like the first film, the songs were too close together. A song number, at least in my opinion, should not be followed up with another one immediately after. This over-eagerness to get to the next song number has the potential to diminish their intended impact. Thankfully, that never really happens here, but it got pretty close. Also, some of the songs, while nicely composed and brilliantly performed, felt unnecessary. One song, in particular, titled Lost in the Woods, stands out. I understand why it was in the film, but for some reason, minor spoiler, they played it in such an over-the-top comedic fashion, that it didn't feel genuine. This specific moment was supposed to be about a man overcoming his fear and embracing his feelings, yet the actual scene felt like a cheesy music video on MTV...from the 80s. 

To be fair, not all of the songs share this issue. Elsa gets most of the songs in the film and, as performed by the unconquerable Idina Menzel, are fantastically radiant! Her two main melodies, Into the Unknown and Show Yourself, are the highest of highlights for the film's music. While they may not reach the level of acclaim as Elsa's song from the first movie, her new songs carry a charm of their own that will assuredly stand the test of time. I should note that I have always been a fan of Idina Menzel and her singing voice. I already own two of her albums and, the first thing I did after watching this movie, was to download her songs from the soundtrack. They are genuinely that spectacular and best showcase how much of a pleasing and resonating voice Elsa has. 

Another issue I had with the film is that it often felt at times as though there was stuff missing. In addition to a few scenes from the trailer that were not present in the film, as well as a number of songs featured in the deluxe edition of the soundtrack that were also not in the movie, it occasionally felt as though some scenes were meant to go on a little longer and possibly go into s specific direction, only to kind of forget about it in the end. I cannot point out a particular moment when I felt like this, but I still had that little feeling here and there while watching the film. It was never so massive as to be distracting or diminish narrative cohesion, but it was a bit strange, to say the least. If Disney releases an extended cut of this film when it comes out on BluRay, I just might have to check it out. 

Setting aside these issues I personally had with the film, it does still have several good points. 

The visuals, as you would expect from a Disney animated film, are absolutely breathtaking. The colorful landscapes, the character designs, the renditions of water, and the flying leaves are all gorgeous to behold. Despite having a stylized presentation, there were one or two shots that looked so convincing, for a split second I forgot I was watching an animated movie. 

The film's strongest point is the enhanced relationship between Elsa and Anna. Compared to the first film, not only is their chemistry more believable, but their relationship feels more genuine and even tangible. To the point that when they were separated at one point in the story, I was genuinely afraid that they were never going to see each other again. This time around, their love is indeed the heart of the film. 

The writing, for the most part, is a bit more intelligent, engaging, and plays around with fascinating themes and ideas. One, in particular, the idea that water can have memory, I personally found to be most intriguing. The concept is utilized in a smart way for the story as well as for some creative visuals. Though some of the jokes didn't totally make the landing for me, the kids I shared the audience with did get a good laugh, which I appreciated. All of the characters, especially Elsa and Anna, have more satisfying character arcs than before and are given more engaging roles in the story. While I was disappointed that Disney didn't jump into the "Give Elsa A Girlfriend" movement as I would have liked them to, I can still say that, at the very least, they're keeping that idea open and not making any effort to shut it down. Speaking personally, I think they should just set Elsa free entirely, but that's a discussion for another time. 

The MVP award must go to Bruni, the Fire Salamander. This little guy is so adorable and so much fun, especially when interacting with Elsa that he makes me wish he had more to do in the story. I have no doubt that he's most likely just there to give Disney a means of making more money with toys and merchandise, but I don't care! Just look at this guy! He's too cute to be mad or frustrated with! 

I cannot say that Frozen 2 is entirely a great movie, but I can say that I personally found it be a more satisfying and enjoyable experience when compared to the first film. Those who share my feelings on the first film can easily cherry-pick events from the first movie and jump right into this one, while fans of the first film are sure to appreciate the callbacks and expansion of the story. There may be moments when the movie feels like it's trying too hard or not hard enough, but it never feels like it doesn't know what it's doing overall. I stated in my blog, as mentioned earlier regarding my reaction to the trailer that one could easily view the first movie as an introduction to the characters and the world rather than a narrative, and jump right into Frozen 2 for a much more satisfying story. Having seen the film, I can hapilly stand by that assesment. This may very well be, for the most part, the Frozen movie I have been waiting for. 

Is this movie worth seeing? 

Mostly, Yes. 

Is it worth seeing in Theaters? 

Maybe. 

Why? 

Unless you have children and are therefore going to see this in theaters regardless, you may prefer to wait until video to check this one out. While I did enjoy watching it, and would gladly do so again, I would personally prefer to do so with the ability to skip specific parts. As I did find parts of the film to be unnececary and just a little annoying. 

Ladies & gentlemen, I am TheNorm, thank you all for reading, and have a Happy Thanksgiving. 

A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood - I like you just the way you are

Just last year in June, a documentary about the life and legacy of children's television show host Fred Rogers graced the silver screen. It showcased the achievements, philosophy, and impact that Mr. Rogers and his show had on the world at large. In the eyes of many children, as well as adults, he was a genuine hero and an incredible human being. Now, a little over a year later, Sony has released a narrative feature film starring Tom Hanks (regarded as the nicest man in Hollywood) that delves just a little bit deeper into the impact and importance of Mr. Rogers. Reminding us all how important it is to remember some things from childhood and what it truly means to grow up. This is, without a doubt, a special treat. 

The film makes the intelligent decision to not make Mr. Rogers the protagonist of the film. Instead, the story follows a professional journalist named Lloyd Vogel (Matthew Rhys), who apparently has a reputation for ticking off the people he writes about. His wife just had a baby boy, and, rather suddenly, his estranged father Jerry (Chris Cooper) reemerges trying to reconnect with him. However, Lloyd is not at all interested as he has some massive issues with his father that he has not forgiven him for. One day, his boss gives him the assignment to interview Mr. Rogers (Tom Hanks) as part of a particular collective article about heroes. Lloyd is skeptical at first, as he finds a man as genuine as Mr. Rogers challenging to believe. That is until he actually meets the man, and begins to discover not only how kind Mr. Rogers is, but also how much more growing up that he himself needs to find his true happiness. 

The most significant accomplishment this film makes, aside from a fantastic performance by Tom Hanks (more on that in a moment), is how much it understands Mr. Rogers and how relevant he and his ideals are even today. Many people assume that because his show was intended for children, there's not much there worthy of an adult's attention. That once you've grown up, you don't need nor should bother with stuff like this anymore. This could not be farther from the truth. Mr. Rogers was many things, but he was not exclusive to children. His ideas, philosophy, methods for emotional management, and emphasis of your own self-worth, applies to everyone, child and adult alike. We all have issues or times of frustration that we're not sure how to deal with, and it seems like no one else out there cares. But if you look in the right places, you just might find someone who can help you, in one way or another. 

The cast is lovely all around. Tom Hanks especially delivers his usual professional performance with an uncanny embodiment of Mr. Rogers. From his voice to his make-up, all the way to his mannerisms, Hanks has successfully captured the essence of Mr. Rogers. Not at all surprising considering that Mr. Rogers's widow was quoted as saying that Tom Hanks was the only man in Hollywood who could play him. Matthew Rhys has more emotional baggage to work through, thus getting more opportunities to show off his emotional range. Needless to say, he shines through. 

The production design is especially noteworthy. One of the trademarks of the original Mr. Rogers show was his use of miniatures. Model towns with moving cars usually used as transitions. The film pays homage to this aspect by utilizing models similar in style as establishing shots of new locations or cityscapes. They even change the aspect ratio to the old fashioned squared shaped 4:3 style for good measure. In fact, the whole film is treated like an episode of Mister Rogers Neighborhood, complete with the original opening jingle and occasional cutaways back to the main set. It's a smart way to showcase the classic style of the program. 

The cinematography is just plain gorgeous. Photographed by Jody Lee Lipes, the film has a 1970s style to the color and lighting, which I adore. I have always enjoyed the photographic style of the 70s for its perfect imperfection. How colors can be vibrant yet a little off. How the lighting seems to only be coming from natural sources. It's a kind of naturalistic style that I often find myself emulating in my own work. 

A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood is just the kind of film we needed this Holiday season. It's a warm and beautiful story about one man's inspiration and how it remains relevant to this day. It will, one way or another, enrich your life and just renew some of your faith in humanity. Please do not miss this one. 

Is this movie worth seeing? 

Yes. 

Is it worth seeing in Theaters? 

Yes. 

Why? 

It's a heartwarming experience that will make you feel like a kid again in more ways than one. 

Ladies & gentlemen, I am TheNorm, thank you all for reading. 

Holiday Special - Readers Choice

Hello everyone, 

Well, the Holidays are just around the corner. As you probably recall, the Holiday season is when movie studios put out a bunch of films they want to show up as contenders for the Oscars. It's also the most profitable time for movie theaters. Meaning they get incredibly crowded on a near-constant basis, making it difficult for me to see everything that comes out in a timely fashion for review. 

Therefore, I have decided that it's time for a new event. It's time to get a little more interactive with this Blog. Starting December 1st and going all the way to New Year's Eve, I will be taking Readers Requests for movies to review. It can be an old favorite, an obscure indie flick, or something random on Netflix. You name it, I'll watch and review it. 

If you have a movie that you would like me to check out for you, send me a request in the comments of this Blog. Alternatively, you can send me a request via email (the address is listed below) or, if you happen to have spotted this on my Facebook page, send me your request in the comments there. 

I look forward to watching and reviewing whatever you guys choose for me. Remember, you can make your requests now, but they won't start appearing until after December 1st. 

Ladies & gentlemen, I am TheNorm, Thank you all for reading. 

Send requests to: 

normanlucecinema@gmail.com 

Ford vs. Ferrari - Revving up for a good time

American car culture is something that I have always admired but only enjoyed on an incredibly base level. I am not what some would call a "Gear-Head" when it comes to cars. To paraphrase a classic comedian, all I know about sports cars is that if they go "VROOM" they work, and if they go "BONK" they're broken. This is why of all the films in my mental list of "Sports-related Movies I like," only a handful of them are about car racing if car related at all. Therefore, I am delighted to report that a brand new entry has made my list. Ford vs. Ferrari is a fun, energized, heartfelt, and entertaining story about friendships, ambition, and the joy of craftsmanship. Not to mention exciting when the engines roar.

The story follows race car driver & designer Carroll Shelby (Matt Damon), who is approached by the Ford Motor Company to design and build a car that can defeat Ferrari at the 24 Hours of Le Mans race. Shelby takes on the challenge and enlists the help of a man named Ken Miles (Christian Bale), a professional race car driver and master mechanic who is facing some troubling times and needs a break to support his family. Together, they make their way through corporate interference and political wish wash as they pursue their dream of crafting the best and fastest car possible. All the while, building up a meaningful friendship and reminding the audience that there is art in just about everything in life.

The film's best feature is its focus on the characters and their relationships to one another. Although the plot revolves around the design and construction of a new and powerful car, the story is more invested in the people who put their hearts into it all. Yes, there are a few shout-outs to the technology on display, and it does spend a lot of its runtime in the garage with lots of fancy cars, but they're all just props in service of the characters and their connections to each other. Not at all dissimilar to how The Social Network wasn't really about the founding of Facebook, but rather the relationships of the people. Regardless of historical accuracy to the events depicted, or lack thereof, the meat of the film is in the relationships between the characters. Making this a genuine human experience.

The cast is flat out remarkable. I have always been a massive fan of Matt Damon. In fact, I would say he is one of my heroes. His performance here is enhanced even further by his remarkable chemistry with Christian Bale, whom I am also a big fan of. Their dialogue, scene interactions, and characterizations make every second they are on screen together absolutely joyful to watch. Bale especially seems to be having the most amount of fun with his role. His depiction of Ken Miles is sympathetic, funny, engaging, and never delves into the stereotypical toxic masculine jerk typically seen in movies about race cars. From his very first scene onward, I loved this guy. At least, I loved the version of him, as depicted in the movie.

Director James Mangold, known for Logan, Kate & Leopold, and Cop Land, is a director I have come to enjoy a lot. His emphasis on character and story makes him on par with the likes of some of the all-time greats such as Frank Capra and Sidney Lumet. While I would not call every one of his films entirely great, I would say that he knows how to keep an audience engaged, even when the script doesn't.

I look forward to seeing his next project.

Regardless of how you feel about race car driving or cars in general, Ford vs. Ferrari is an absolute blast. It's entertaining, funny, has lots of heart, and tells a remarkable story that is, as I've said before, genuinely human. I will be rooting for this film at the Oscars.

Is this movie worth seeing?
Yes.

Is it worth seeing in Theaters?
Yes.

Why?
It's a fun ride all the way through with witty writing, textured characters, and a satisfying narrative. The racing cars are a great bonus. Check this one out.

Ladies & gentlemen, I am TheNorm, thank you all for reading.

Something Scary - What makes real horror?

What is horror is a question with which I often struggle. Growing up, I never watched a lot of horror movies, mostly because my parents were smart and didn't allow me to do so. As I got older, I started looking into some of the classics and began to build up an appreciation for the genre. Eventually, I discovered that there was more to horror than I had ever believed. Within this section of storytelling, I found stories of humanity, tragedy, and the fragility of our own consciousness. Yet, when I look around at the horror landscape, especially in recent years, I seldom if ever see a whole lot of movies that reflect the better qualities of the genre. What's more, at least in my opinion, it's giving genuine horror a bad name. 

Like any other genre of film or literature, there are many different branches commonly known as sub-genres. Stories that fall into not only a specific category but also a particular segment of said category. Example: a drama that happens to focus on the romantic exploits of the main characters is described as a "romantic drama" or "dramatic romance." A comedy that happens to follow two dueling police officers is characterized as "buddy-cop comedy." Horror is no stranger to sub-genres ranging from the fantastical and supernatural to the uber-realistic and gritty. These days, horror cinema is mostly associated (unfairly in my opinion) with gore, horrific violence, and cheap jump scares that do nothing but hurt your ears and annoy you to the point of aggravation. Speaking personally, I appreciate and enjoy horror when it's in the most creative and sophisticated way possible. Because anyone can don a cheap costume, cover it in fake blood, and scream "BOO" to an audience, but it takes genuine effort and talent to create something tense yet fascinating. So, allow me to share my feelings on what makes real horror. 

In my opinion, genuine horror can best be described in a single word, uncertainty. To me, real fear does not come from how much blood you can splatter all over the screen, or how many monsters you can fit inside the frame, and especially not how many times you can jumpscare the audience before they find it obnoxiously dull. It comes from how effectively the story can make the audience question what they just witnessed. Horror is one of the few genres where ambiguity is key to a successful presentation, especially when you consider how much most screenwriters and Hollywood producers don't like the very idea of uncertainty. Many mainstream and big-budget horror films and shows fail miserably not because they're gross and lazy, although that is a big part of it, it's because they're too cowardly to take risks with leaving unanswered aspects of the story. Sure, specific sub-genres of horror films like slasher killers and vampires don't require any ambiguity, but that's because they are not real horror movies, at least not to me. Instead, they are, as the term "sub-genre" should imply, rogue splinter cells of the genuine article. They're not horror but share enough similarities to the genre that they often come off as such. While you can make the argument that this explanation can apply to just about any other style of fiction, in my opinion, horror is the one that seems to have suffered the most from this lack of distinction. 

Perhaps one of the best examples for my position on horror is the film Oculus by Mike Flanagan. Released in 2014, the story revolves around an elegant, and supposedly haunted, antique mirror. Legend claims that those who have possessed the mirror have fallen victim to madness prompting acts of violence upon others and themselves. In the story proper, we follow two siblings whos partners were the last owners of the mirror. One of them is determined to prove that the mirror is evil and has been the cause of their personal tragedy, while the other remains skeptical, offering perfectly logical explanations for any mysterious circumstances associated with the mirror. Throughout the entire film, every single possibility is explored and examined, but never fully clarified. Meaning every single action on screen could be attributed to someone's unbalanced mental state or a supernatural entity. Both conclusions are possible yet inadmissible all at once. Thereby creating an experience that causes you to question the events depicted on screen continually. In other words, ambiguity in action. 

In comparison, take a look at the film Saw — specifically the first one and none of the sequels (we'll get to those later). For the record, I find the first film to be okay. It succeeds in being a character-driven thriller and provides a unique take (to put it mildly) on the human condition. Most notably, the dangers of self-destruction and the importance of embracing life. Now, with that said, I am not a fan of the series as a whole, nor do I consider this franchise to be a real horror story. Because even though the first movie at least tried to delve deeper into a more psychological and emotional narrative, it's still trashy blood & guts exploitation unable to escape itself. In all fairness, the first film was better purely because of how much it didn't show but rather implied, which in-and-of-itself is commendable, but that gets immediately overshadowed when you realize that all of the sequels that followed flat out abandoned all of that in favor of standard torture porn. Leaving the audience with no genuine impact other than how gross it all was. Each and every sequel was only interested in upping the ante with more gore and less character, not to mention coming up with more elaborate ways to mutilate the human body. Needless to say, this isn't horror. 

This comparison best describes the real distinction which has gone overlooked for far too long. That of horror vs. shock value. Both Oculus and Saw are categorized as "horror," but I argue that only one of them actually is such while the other is a shlocky shock & gorefest. Guess which one it is? 

You see, there's a reason why movies like Saw and its sequels, as well as any other film of the same bloody nature, dominate the horror landscape when they shouldn't, they're easy to sell. Films that challenge the mind and take the time to build atmosphere and narrative intrigue are difficult to pitch to a producer, but elaborate blood & guts movies easily marketed to teenagers sell like Hotcakes. For the most part, studios these days are terrified (ironically) to produce films only intended for adults, unless it's designed for Oscar bait. As a result, most of what tries to pass as horror these days are just jumpscare riddled haunted mansion roller coaster simulators meant to yank as much money out of teenagers with too much disposable income as possible. Meanwhile, the actual horror films with compelling narratives and genuine talent behind them are left in the dust for no adequate reason, other than the teenagers whining about the lack of monsters and/or gore. If you need an example, look no further than this movie. 

The Babadook is one of my favorite horror films of all time. Because it is the perfect embodiment of what makes the genre so universal and intriguing to me. The story follows a widowed mother trying to take care of her young son while dealing with the trauma of her husband's death. One night while in her sleep-deprived state, she reads a mysterious pop-up book to her son called The Babadook, the story of a strange creature that lives in your mind. As the film progresses, it becomes clear that The Babadook is the manifestation of trauma and the anger & fear that can stem from it. The visuals and plot points throughout the film serve as a metaphorical event in which the mother comes to terms with her loss and finds the strength to move on. The Babadook is a prime example of horror filmmaking as it showcases the power of metaphorical storytelling and how to best utilize physical embodiments of internal struggles. Despite becoming one of the most successful and beloved horror films in recent memory, many people who initially saw it became incredibly disappointed. Criticizing it for not having any actual monsters and coming off as a major letdown. Needless to say, they all completely missed the point of the film. 

The best horror films, at least to me, are the ones that explore human nature, especially its flaws. Films like Oculus and The Babadook forces us to question our reality and take a deep dive into our own inner self. They challenge us to embrace the parts of ourselves we find too terrifying to even acknowledge. Because by embracing the parts of ourselves we overlook, we can better discover and embody our true selves. Real horror films encourage you to face your own fears in one way or another. This is the real power of horror. This is what I look for in this particular genre, and why I believe it must be rescued from misconception. 

If you're interested in other perspectives on horror, check out these videos from the online show Extra Credits. The show that examines and comments on video games and how they impact people. 

Horror Symbolism 

Horror Protagonists 

I hope you found this examination of horror intriguing. Be you a veteran fan of the genre, or a casual admirer, or someone who doesn't understand what all the fuss is about, I hope this has enriched your perception on the subject in some way. 

Ladies & gentelmen, I am TheNorm, thank you all for reading. 

Doctor Sleep - Shine On

In 1977, renowned horror writer Stephen King published a book titled The Shining. The story of a small family taking on a job as the winter caretakers of an elegant and prestigious Mountain resort known as The Overlook Hotel. Which, as it turns out, also happens to be haunted. Further exacerbated by the fact that the family's young son, Danny, possesses strange psychic abilities (which he refers to as Shining), which allows him to observe and communicate with otherworld beings such as ghosts. Three years later, renowned filmmaker Stanly Kubrick released a film adaptation of the book starring Jack Nicholson and Shelly Duvall. Despite becoming one of the most acclaimed horror films over the years, Stephen King has continuously expressed his disdain for the film. Mainly due to the massive changes made to the main characters as well as specific plot points. Stephen King would go on to produce a three-hour television special of The Shining, which was more faithful to his book but significantly less entertaining. Then, in 2013, King published a sequel to the book titled Doctor Sleep. The story of Danny Torrance now grown up and dealing with the trauma he suffered at The Overlook. Now, six years later, a new and influential voice in horror filmmaking, Mike Flanagan, has presented audiences with a film adaptation of King's book, framed simultaneously as an adaptation of the novel and a sequel to Kubrick's masterpiece, and he's hit it right out of the park. Not only is this arguably the best possible sequel to The Shining we ever could have asked for, but it's also just a fantastic film in its own right. If this doesn't cement Mike Flanagan as the new King of Horror Cinema, I don't know what will. 

The story follows Danny Torrance (Ewan McGregor) as an adult dealing with a wide variety of issues. He's inherited his father's drinking problem and has been unable to properly cope with his past trauma. Not to mention, his Shining powers (his psychic ability to talk to ghosts and read minds) are occasionally hitting him over the head too hard. Things begin to turn around for Danny as he eventually finds himself a new friend named Billy (Cliff Curtis), who gives Danny a place to stay, enrolls him into an AA (Alcoholics Anonymous) program, and gets him a job as a hospice worker. Where, given his unusual talent for comforting the ones who are about to die, earns him the nickname Doctor Sleep. All is getting better. That is until Danny starts communicating with a young girl named Abra (Kyliegh Curran) who possesses Shining powers way more potent than his own. Making things even more complicated is the discovery of a group of what can only be described as Shining Vampires, lead by a mysterious woman named Rose the Hat (Rebecca Ferguson), who achieves near-immortality by eating the souls of those who Shine, especially children. Having just witnessed the gang commit their horrible deeds, Abra emplores Danny to help her stop them. Now, Danny must confront his past, in more ways than one, to save his friend and take down the monsters.  

What makes this such a great and entertaining film, at least to me, is how intelligent it is. None of the characters ever act recklessly or stupid for the sake of a scare or for advancing the plot. All the characters, especially Abra, are remarkably bright, which makes them feel more three dimensional and robust. All of which is commented well by the script which, without spoiling anything, succeeds in presenting a compelling narrative, utilizes each and every character's strengths & weaknesses and uses nostalgia in a way that doesn't feel contrived or forced. In this day in age, that's nothing short of miraculous. 

Director Mike Flanagan, who previously worked on Oculus and Netflix's The Haunting of Hill House (both of which are equally excellent and I highly recommend), clearly shows that he has a great deal of respect and admiration for both the works of Stephen King and Stanly Kubrick. In addition to employing his natural ability to create a genuinely creepy atmosphere and suspenseful tension, Flanagan took on the challenge of crafting a film that would both compensate for Stephen King's issues with Kubrick's film and honor what makes that very same movie so memorable. Needless to say, Flanagan succeeded with flying colors. What's more, he did so in a way while still making the film feel like his own. It's a near-perfect collaboration and understanding of artists spanning generations that could not have had a better outcome. 

The acting is superb. Kyliegh Curran especially, at age thirteen no less, delivers a performance on-par with the likes of some of the greats such as Meryl Streep. She showcases such a wide variety of emotions and characteristics and maintains so much conviction throughout that she could quickly put some of the more seasoned veterans she shares the screen with to shame. Her chemistry with Ewan McGregor makes her shine even more. Without a doubt, this young lady is unquestionably worthy of the MVP award for this film. 

Doctor Sleep is, quite possibly, the absolute best sequel to The Shining we ever could have asked for. Usually, having Stephen King's blessing on a film adaptation of his work isn't necessarily a clue of excellent quality, but in this case, it most certainly is. Even though there may be times when the movie feels just a little bit too long, it never really drags. The only real nitpick I have with this one is that they didn't think to release it right on Halloween.

I look forward to buying my copy of this film when it is released on disc. 

Is this movie worth seeing? 

Yes. 

Is it worth seeing in Theaters? 

Yes. 

Why? 

It's a brilliant film that has earned its place high on the mantle of the most tremendous psychological/supernatural horror thrillers ever made, especially The Shining. A worthy sequel to a memorable story. Please don't miss this one. 

Ladies & gentlemen, I am TheNorm, thank you all for reading. 

Harriet - Pretty good

The story of Harriet Tubman is one that has been long overdue for a feature film. Apparently, Disney had the rights to this script, but for some reason, they refused to produce it. It wasn't until after they lost the rights to it that it finally got made. It's funny to think that a studio which has been making bank on Superhero films would not be interested in creating a movie about one of history's greatest real-life heroes. Regardless, thanks to the folks at Focus Features, the script has finally seen the light of day. And if you ask me, Disney really missed a golden opportunity with this one. 

The film chronicles the early exploits of Harriet Tubman (Cynthia Erivo) as an escaped slave who makes her way North to freedom. Soon after, she decides to go back to rescue her husband only to find herself taking a few others along with her. After successfully escorting a handful of slaves to freedom, Harriet became one of the most decorated conductors for the Underground Railroad. She would go on to rescue over 800 slaves, lead a regiment of the Union Army during the Civil War, and became the first spy for the Union. She was, and remains, one of the greatest heroes in American history.

Her movie is, for the most part, pretty damn good. The acting is top-notch, the direction is fluid, and the cinematography is gorgeous. The script is where the film shines most, even though it can feel a little on-the-nose with how much it wants to portray Harriet as an actual superhero. According to history, Harriet suffered a head injury, which, apparently, gave her strange visions. The script chooses to emphasize this aspect of her by treating it as a legit superpower, allowing Harriet to foresee danger and determine the best course of action for most situations. It can come off as a little contrived, but in the modern age of superhero cinema, it makes sense to want to play up a possible superpower angle. While I personally didn't have a problem with it, as I actually liked the idea of a disability being used as an advantage in some capacity, I can understand how some audiences might find it to be a little far fetched. Even so, I thought it was well executed as it never felt utterly implausible.

Oddly enough, that's just about all I have to say about this film. There's wasn't anything about it I didn't like, and everything that is there is well presented. This may be one of those rare films that executes everything so well that you don't remember you're watching a movie. I would not go so far as to call it the highest achievement in cinema, but it does what it needs to do incredibly well.

Is this movie worth seeing?
Yes.

Is it worth seeing in Theaters?
Yes.

Why?
It pretty much does everything right. I almost feel bad for not having much else to say about it, but it is just really that good.

Ladies & gentlemen, I am TheNorm, thank you all for reading.

Terminator: Dark Fate - Unnecessary but inoffensive...also pretty fun.

The first two Terminator films are some of the most excellent action/science fiction works ever created. The first movie, The Terminator, was a near-perfect amalgamation of film-noir, horror, action, and science fiction. All revolving around a story of courage, fate, war, and humanity as a whole. The next film, Terminator 2: Judgement Day, upped the ante with better action, a more in-depth story, more robust characters, and a profound commentary on what it means to be human and alive. There was no possible way any other movie in this franchise could ever even come close to elevating, let alone matching, the nearly flawless execution of James Cameron's masterpiece. Even so, when Skydance bought the rights to the franchise, they tried their damndest to do so, and boy did they fail miserably. 

In short, Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines was aggravating, Terminator: Salvation was frustrating, and Terminator: Genisys was absolutely insulting! 

Every single Terminator movie released after Judgement Day were poorly made, overly advertised, and failed to understand the heart of the franchise. Worst yet, it seemed as if there would be no end to the onslaught of terrible movies, and no one seemed to care. That is until James Cameron re-acquired the rights to the franchise, and decided to produce and co-write a brand new film. Also, it would completely ignore all of the other movies and take place after the events of Judgement Day. Despite this, I still had some severe trepidations about this new Terminator film. Having sat through three uneventful and heartless movies baring the Terminator name, I had damn near lost all hope for this franchise and its future. Even so, I still bought my ticket and waltzed into the theater with the lowest expectations possible. To my delightful surprise, I left the theater feeling better than before. Terminator: Dark Fate may very well be the swift kick in the butt that the franchise has needed for a long time. I would not go so far as to declare it the new best film of the series, but I will gladly label it as the only good Terminator movie post-Judgement Day. 

The story follows a young girl named Dani (Natalia Reyes) who is suddenly attacked by a stranger, who turns out to be a Terminator from the future sent to kill her. Lucky for her, she has an assigned protector named Grace (Mackenzie Davis), a human soldier also from the future, who has also been augmented with cybernetic enhancements. Granting her super-strength & speed, enhanced senses, and more durability than a Tank. While fighting off the killing machine, the two of them are confronted with a familiar face, Sarah Connor (Linda Hamilton), who has been hunting down other Terminators all her life. Together, she and Grace must protect Dani for the sake of the future. 

Now, if you've seen either of the first Terminator films, this will all sound incredibly familiar. The good news is, even though it's more-or-less the exact same plot, it's still a different story. I don't want to go into too many details here because I don't want to give any spoilers that were, thankfully, not given away in the film's trailers. What I will say about the writing of this movie is, while I still think it doesn't totally work in a few areas, I greatly appreciated the amount of effort and passion that clearly went into the script by all parties involved. It's like your Grandmothers famous Chocolate Cake only it's been baked by your best friend: it's made with the same ingredients, but even though it doesn't taste quite the same, it's still enjoyable because it was, at the very least, made by someone who cares. Perhaps I will go into more detail in a later blog post with spoilers, but for now, rest assured that this is the best writing one can realistically ask for in a Terminator film post-Judgement Day. 

Director Tim Miller, who previously worked on Deadpool, seems to have taken at least one critical note from James Cameron: the action is more enthralling when you care about the characters involved and the stakes are sincerely high. The characters in this movie are three-dimensional, sympathetic, bad-ass when required, and emotionally charged when needed. Which makes the action all the more entertaining. Further enhanced by the Terminator antagonist, who is, appropriately, unstoppable. Everything our heroes throw at the machine simply slows it down as they narrowly make their escape. When compared to the villains of the last film, Terminator: Genisys, in which the Terminators are quickly dispatched with a single gunshot followed by an unfunny quip, Terminator: Dark Fate is massively superior. Also, the actions scenes taken on their own merits are pretty damn awesome. 

The cinematography by Ken Seng is a bit of a mixed bag. The colors are washed out but not hugely, and the framing and camera movement is stable, but the lighting in a few scenes is just terrible. There are a few scenes shot in the dark, and it becomes too difficult to make out what's happening. It's nowhere near as bad as say Slender Man, but it does occasionally feel like they didn't bother to light the scene once in a while. While dark scenes can work, there still needs to be some kind of illumination going on. 

Terminator: Dark Fate is a better movie than it has any right to be. While I would personally like to see more Terminator films set during the future war rather than in the present day, as I believe there are more opportunities for new stories there, I am impressed enough with this new entry to see where it goes from here. It is not the best Terminator movie yet, despite what the advertising would have you believe, but it is significantly better than any other film post-Judgement Day. 

Is this movie worth seeing? 

Yes. 

Is it worth seeing in theaters? 

Yes. 

Why? 

It's a brand new Terminator film that has heart and is a good step forward for the future of the franchise. 

Ladies & gentlemen, I am TheNorm, thank you all for reading.