The Freaking Film Fanatic Podcast

Movie Review: Wicked: For Good

unck42@yahoo.com (Nate) — Thu, 20 Nov 2025 16:13:00 -0800

The Freaking Film Fanatic with Nathan Unck

Wicked: For Good Rated: PG for thematic elements

So, I am a really big fan of stage plays and musicals. I have been in a lot of them myself over the years, but I am not exactly rich, so I only go to a Broadway touring company tour here in Salt Lake City. There are some really great shows I have seen, and there are ones I have never seen, but always wanted to. Wicked falls into the latter. I really enjoyed the first Wicked film, but Wicked itself falls into a category that I described when I reviewed the last Mission: Impossible film. When you see the first part, you are only seeing one half of the story, so I have to review the films on their own, but then after seeing both parts, I am able to review the films as if they are one continuous film. So, I will review this entry on its own, and then how I feel about seeing the films back-to-back, since I rewatched the first one a couple of hours before I left to see Wicked: For Good.

Wicked: For Good starts off a year or two after the last event in the first film. The Wizard and Madame Morrible are spreading propaganda that Elphaba is an evil wicked witch all over Oz. They are also trying to use Glinda to make everyone think that she is magical and to lift people's spirits, especially since Elphaba is trying to turn the tables. I don't want to give too much away, but we are then introduced to Dorthy, although we never see her face, and her traveling companions, and how they came to be, and go through the story of The Wizard of Oz that we all know.

From what I understand, Wicked: For Good has a few original songs that weren't in the stage play that help with the running time, which this one is twenty minutes shorter that the first part. The songs are good, and the characters are all great. The set designs and the costumes and practical effects are fantastic. The movie really does look incredible. There were twists and turns that I was surprised with, since I haven't seen the stage version, and they were really cool to see how they fit into the story, especially since Wicked is told as the wicked witch's story.

The performances from Cynthia Erivo and Ariana Grande are great, and this second half gives Ariana Grande more to do, even though she was in the first part most of the time, but she has more emotions and twists in the story for her character that make her feel like she is an equal star of the film with Cynthia Erivo, where as she was more of the supporting star in the first half. I have to say I actually really enjoyed Ariana Grande when I originally thought I wouldn't. Jeff Goldblum is one of my favorite actors, and he is great as the Wizard in both parts, as well as Michelle Yeoh as Madame Morrible. The rest of the cast, all of the singers and dancers are all great, and I feel that director Jon M. Chu nailed those big numbers with hundreds of dancer/actors.

At the end of the first film, they have the show-stopping musical number "Defying Gravity", where the music soars as well as Elphaba on her broom. I remember telling my wife that if the new Superman movie had Superman flying around like Elphaba in that scene, that it will be great, and I really enjoyed Superman. However, there is a problem with the first film ending on with that song and exhilarating action, Wicked: For Good starts off with a slow pace. The songs are nice and the look of the film is great, but the story's first 45 minutes are slow and not as interesting as where the first film pulls you right into the action. However, after those 45 minutes the film really starts to get going again and has a really entertaining conclusion, though I feel that the songs in Wicked: For Good weren't quite as great as the first half, but they are good.

So that is how I feel about Wicked: For Good, but here is how it felt when I watched the first film, and then left to go see the second part, I did that to see how it would feel to watch all five hours of the Wicked story together, and that's where it gets tricky. Like I said, the first half has the best songs, and when they ended part one with the best song in the whole show, and Elphaba flying on her broom at neck-breaking speed, and then the next scene going into part two, it hits a climax, but then you get that 45-minute slowdown time. It's not terrible, but it does feel a little bit disconnected. The first 45 minutes really do tell you a little bit about what has happened in the time gap between the two films. Together it just feels like a drag.

If you loved the first film, you will love Wicked: For Good. The new songs and the twists and turns in the plot, especially if you are like me where you haven't seen the stage production, are fun. The characters are still interesting, and you really care for both Elphaba and Glinda and how they are trying to have a friendship, but Gilinda is also being used by the Wizard to make everyone think that they are safe and in control of the situation. If you didn't like the first film, then you aren't going to be converted to the story and how it plays out, but it is a very emotional film, and I recommend seeing it in theaters.

Wicked: For Good is rated PG for thematic elements.

Movie Review: The Running Man

unck42@yahoo.com (Nate) — Wed, 12 Nov 2025 16:10:00 -0800

The Freaking Film Fanatic with Nathan Unck

The Running Man Rated: R for Violence and Language

Movies that are based on books by Stephen King kind of tend to be a hit or miss, there is hardly any middle ground. I have to admit, growing up I wasn't allowed to watch R rated movies until I was 17, and during that time, I would see movie posters and trailers for those movies, which were usually based on his horror films. However, I did see the TV version of It when it came out in the 1990s, and not only did I watch the TV version for The Stand, but it was filmed on the Main Street of the town I live in and drive past it almost daily.

Those old horror movies didn't do so well with critics, but there were a few good ones, like The Shining. After I turned 17 and was allowed to watch R rated films, I watched The Shawshank Redemption, and not only did I love, it's in my top ten favorite films. I didn't know it at the time, but it was based on a Stephen King short story. A few years later I saw The Green Mile, which is also a favorite of mine, and even though it was a Stephen King story, it was an allegory for Jesus Christ and his ministry and crucifixion. True it was rated R, but if you have seen the film, it's easy to notice the story being similar to the first few books in the New Testament.

Then there some of the action films that were Stephen King stories, and the one I am focusing on here is The Running Man. The Running Man was an Arnold Schwarzenegger action film that is actually pretty terrible, unless you are a huge Arnie fan. After seeing this new updated retelling of the story, I watched a bunch of clips from the 1987 version, and this 2025 "upgrade" does a great job of taking a bad movie and retelling it to make it better and will probably have a longer shelf life since the action and near future special effects that are great. So, what is it about in a nutshell?

There are some twists and turns in the film, so I will tell you the bare minimum. A man named Ben Roberts has a very sick daughter who needs medical attention, but his family is poor and needs to make money to take care of his family. In this near future time, there is a very popular reality show called "The Running Man". They chose three contestants and they are hunted down by professional hunters and regular people. If they survive, they win a billion dollars. Basically, they try to stay alive for 30 days for the money. If not, then a smaller amount will be given to their families. However, the show also pays people for information if they see the contestants, and get a bigger payday if it leads the hunters to kill the contestants. That's all I will talk about.

The film was directed by Edger Wright, who is an awesome director. He as made a lot of films I love like Shawn of the Dead, Hot Fuzz and Scott Pilgrim vs. the World. He was a great sense of what moods each film, and which scenes need to have to work just right. He's one of my favorites.

I had my wife, Lindsey, with me, and we really enjoyed this one. It's exciting, it has some great humor sprinkled into it, and the characters are fun and easy to like. Actor Glen Powell plays Ben Richards and is a lot of fun. There are other actors in the film that are familiar from TV or maybe another film, but not a lot that stood out. Although the premise seems kind of original, well, original for a remake of a movie based on a book by a popular author, but there were a few things and took away from the original factor.

The film has a lot of elements that are just like The Hunger Games, a TV show that everyone watches where contestants fight to be the last standing. Minority Report, the main character is running from everything and everyone and is spotted from here to there and has to fight to escape. Then it also feels almost like a Mission: Impossible movie with lots of stunts and a lot of the main character running a lot. Even though the movie feels familiar, it's actually still very entertaining. The movie is rated R for violence, and there is R rated language. It wasn't constant like in another Stephen King story film that came out two months ago, The Long Walk.

I feel the need to say this; movie theaters are raising prices on their tickets and concessions. Ever since the pandemic, not as many people are going out to theaters to see movies. They like to stay at home and stream them, which I feel goes against film as an art form. I feel movies were meant to be exhibited in theaters, but because they aren't getting as many people buying tickets, they are raising prices to try and make up for the gap, but it's also a dumb idea. I think more people would go out to the movies more often if they weren't so expensive. I am lucky to have a job as a film critic, but when I want to take my family of six to the movies, and we buy popcorn to share and drinks, it costs us at least $110. I feel that is a joke, and I can't blame people for not wanting to go the theaters, even when the films are really good and entertaining.

I feel the urge to invite people back to movie theaters because there isn't another experience for a film to be seen, but I get the prices. So, with that in mind, I just want to say, this film is a fun popcorn action flick with some humor that is legitimately funny, so leave the kiddos at home and go on an adult date night. It isn't exactly original, but it's fun and entertaining enough.

The Running Man is rated: R for violence and language.

Movie Review: Roofman

unck42@yahoo.com (Nate) — Sun, 12 Oct 2025 14:27:00 -0700

The Freaking Film Fanatic with Nathan Unck

Roofman Rated: R for language, violence, sexual situations and nudity

I remember a few years back about a man who escaped from prison and lived in a Toys "R" Us store for six months. I found that story fun, but I forgot about it over the years. Roofman is the "Based on a True Story" movie about Jefferey Manchester. While some exciting parts of the story are left out, probably for a shorter runtime, which is already two hours and six minutes long. What we do have is a drama about a man who is nice and kind but makes really bad life choices to support his kind behavior. Channing Tatum played this character really well.

The film opens up telling us that Jeffery was a very skilled Marine, especially for noticing details that most people overlook. Roofman is a reference to Jeffery who would sneak up on roofs of McDonalds restaurants, cut a hole in the roof and ceiling, wait for the morning crew to come in, and would drop down with an unloaded shotgun and kindly ask the workers to put their coats on, and get in the walk-in freezer, steal the money from the registers and safes, and once he had escaped, would call the police from a payphone and let them know the restaurant was robbed and the crew were in the freezer. He did this at least 45 times.

After getting caught, he was serving 45 years in prison, but successfully escapes, and after a very close call, ducks into a Toys "R" Us store and found a place in the store to hide out. These two elements are in the trailers. The film takes it's time to tell the story, and you really do come to care for, and even root for, Jeffery, especially when he meets and falls in love with a divorced woman, played by Kirsten Dunst, who is involved in her church and has two daughters. That's all I'm going to say about the plot.

There was so much to like in this film, and yet there were a couple of disappointing things that kept this movie from being great. First off, there was a character that used the "F" word, and hardly anyone else does, which begs the question, why did it need to be there in the first place. Number two, There was a funny, but sort of uncomfortable scene where Channing Tatum is completely naked, and runs into some trouble almost getting caught. The scene was fun, but it was thirty seconds long, which was a little uncomfortable, although I did tease my wife telling her that it was her favorite part, to which she rolled her eyes.

Another aspect that might harm the film a little bit is that the trailers and posters make the film seem like it was going to be a laugh out loud comedy, when it is actually a drama with some funny elements. The film is still a lot of fun, but it can be deceiving. If you go in understanding that it is a drama with some funny scenes, then I think you will have a good time.

As I said, it's kind of disappointing that they went for an R rated film because I think there is a valuable lesson for kids and teenagers. It doesn't matter how smart you are, if you make bad decisions, you will have to eventually face the consequences of those bad choices. Beyond that, Roofman is an interesting dramatic look with some funny elements.

Roofman rated: R for language, violence, sexual situations and nudity.

Movies I Don't Like, But Own on DVD and Blu-Ray

unck42@yahoo.com (Nate) — Mon, 6 Oct 2025 16:19:00 -0700

When I started this website for my movie reviews, I also said that I would use it to write about other things that are about film or certain films, but I haven't written anything besides reviews, and I thought of this fun idea to talk about the movies in my DVD and Blu-Ray collection that I don't like. If you like some of these movies, it's okay. These are just my opinions, just like a film critic review. Film is art, and art is subjective. So why do I have these movies in my collection if I don't like them? Here's why.

If you ask any teenager today if they know what a video rental store is, they wouldn't have that great idea of one. With streaming services and the internet, there is no reason to go to an actual store to pay three or four bucks to borrow a movie and then return the movie on time or else you would have to pay a late fee. There were a number of video and grocery stores that rented out movies. The ones I remember going to were Hollywood Video, Blockbuster Video, Reams (A local grocery store), and Top Hat Video. Blockbuster had the most stores, but Hollywood Video and the grocery store, Reams, where the closest video rental places by my house, so I went there more than the others, although when I was little, there was a Top Hat Video close to us in Magna. There were also other stores that I can't recall the names of, but they were there.

One of the most fun things to do was to go to a video rental store and see hundreds and hundreds of movies on the shelves. The stores were actually pretty big, and some of them even rented out video games, but that's a topic for another time. There were so many to choose from. They had a ton of old movies plus new releases. New releases were hard because if you went to the video store hoping that you could get a new release, they were always out, and you would have to put your name on a reserve list, and when people returned the movie, they would go on the reserve list, which was a first come first serve basis. The store would call you and let you know that your reserved video tape or DVD was in and reserved for you.

One of my favorite things about going to the video store is, you have to remember, the internet either wasn't a thing yet, or it was in its earlier stages, but there weren't any websites that would tell you what new releases were coming out. You would go to a video store, and they would usually have a poster board sign with what was coming out on video, and when. Also, again, there weren't any websites to go to that would have that information, so those poster boards were fun.

I think the release posters were so great because there weren't any streaming services, and VHS videos took a long time for the studios to make. Files weren't just burned onto a disc that was cheap and easy to produce. Videos had magnetic tape and a lot of plastic to hold the tape inside. Back when I was a kid, and even most of my teenage years, a movie would come out in theaters. It would play for a little while, and then when new movies came out in theaters, they would take the movies that had been playing at one theater would give the film canisters to "Dollar Movie Theater", which is, you guessed it, one cost one dollar for a ticket, but they had good popcorn and candy where they made most of their money. I bet I saw Jurassic Park fifteen times in theaters because of the dollar theater.

After movies were in theaters, they would be taken out, and it took a year before they were released on video. I have to also say, if you wanted to buy a movie, you could go to stores in their electronics section and buy them to keep, but I'm talking about the rentals. It was so exciting to go to the video store and see a movie you loved in theaters and the release date on the poster boards. Not only did they tell you they would be in stores to buy, but they were also coming to the rental stores on the same day. Those new releases were usually hard to get right away, so reserving them was the way to go. However, Blockbuster and Hollywood Video started to do something new when DVDs were starting to come out, and it was kind of a game changer for the new releases.

Blockbuster Video and Hollywood Video started ordering 100 DVDs of just about all of the new releases. They guaranteed that the new release would be in stock for you to rent on day one, and if they were all gone, they would put you on a reserve list, and you got to rent the movie for free. This made it fun knowing you could get the new release very easily, or you got to get the free rental. It was awesome. However, once the movies started getting less popular, they would put two or three DVDs on the regular shelves, which were organized by genre and then alphabetical order. For example, Jurassic Park would have been in the Action section, and then you would find it alphabetically. So, what happened with the rest of the DVDs that they didn't keep?

The best thing about the guaranteed in stock DVDs was that they usually were only used for three weeks, and then the video stores would sell the used copies of the DVDs, and not only could you buy them, but they were cheaper than renting it. They were also guaranteed to work, or you would get your money back, like if a DVD was scratched and wouldn't play. So, they were selling these used DVDs for $2.50 to $3.00. So back then before my film critic years, I wouldn't see quite a few of some movies that I was only about half interested in seeing. When the films came out, used for three weeks, and then sold for a really cheap price, I would just go down with ten to fifteen bucks and buy three or four movies instead of renting them since they were cheaper to buy the used discs than the rental charge.

Needless to say, I have a lot of DVDs and Blu-Rays in my collection that I really don't like. Most of my Blu-Rays were ones I bought myself because Blu-Ray disks weren't a thing until after the video store markets started fading away, so just about all of my Blu-Ray movies are ones that I liked and wanted. So, with that in mind, here is a bunch of movies I own that I don't like, in no particular order.

Stuck on You

Shallow Hal

Daddy Daycare

V For Vendetta

Shark Tale

Blades of Glory

Lady in the Water

Zookeeper

Yes Man

The Island

A.I. Artificial Intelligence

So, these are the ones that I have on my shelves right now, but there are still quite a few movies I have that are in storage at my parent's house. Like I said, you might like some of these movies, but I didn't. They were cheaper to buy than rent, so I bought them and then didn't care for them. If I get to them any time soon, I will either write another blog post or just update this one.

I really hope this wasn't a boring post. I wanted to explain the video rental stores in detail to show kids and teenagers that things weren't easy when it came to watching movies you want to watch, and not have instant access to it, and being able to watch them on day one. Movies that are in theaters don't go to a dollar theater anymore, and it only takes a maximum of 45 days after a movie opens up in theaters. If the movie isn't performing well, it can even be streaming at home to buy or rent in even less time. It's interesting to see how technology can be great, but it can also take away things you love to do. I love listening to actual vinyl records on a record player sometimes, even though I can stream my music easily. There's something nostalgic and magical about using physical media from the past to capture what made something so great, even when it was just a common place or thing that we took for granted at the time.

Anyway, I apologize about the length of this post, but I wanted to try and recapture that feeling of going into a video store to try and explain things to a generation of kids who will never know the joy of renting a movie from a store. I know that there weren't a lot on my list, but like I say, I do have more in storage that I am not exactly thinking about at the moment.

I hope you are all doing well and that things are going well for you and yours. Life gets busy and crazy, and I am so grateful to have people who take their time and enjoy what I have to say. I don't do it as much as I used to, but I really want to get back in the habit of writing more posts. Thanks again, and I hope you will read the next one.

Movie Review: The Smashing Machine

unck42@yahoo.com (Nate) — Wed, 1 Oct 2025 21:00:00 -0700

The Freaking Film Fanatic with Nathan Unck

The Smashing Machine Rated: R for Violence, Language and Drug Use.

In 2001 I was a huge fan of the first two Mummy films with Brendan Fraser and was excited to go see a spinoff of those two films, The Mummy: The Scorpion King. I found out that a popular WWE wrestler was going to become the Scorpion King. When I saw the film, I was so disappointed. Not only did the special effects look terrible, but the acting from this wrestler known to the wrestling world as "The Rock", was just as bad. However, Hollywood wasn't done with this wrestler turned "actor".

After a few films, it seemed that "The Rock" was becoming more popular in some comedies where he was a super strong man, but put into rolls like the Tooth Fairy, or a professional football player that learns he has a little daughter that he needs to take care of. These films weren't very good either, but they didn't use the terrible special effects, so that was a step up. However, thanks to the Fast and Furious films, "The Rock" came into the franchise and made it fun. I'm not the biggest fan of The Fast and Furious films, but "The Rock" made them better. At about this time, he wanted to go by his real name Dwanye Johnson, and not "The Rock".

Most of the roles Dwanye Johnson have either been action hero, or comedic action hero. I have grown to like him over the years. While I haven't ever felt that Dwanye Johnson was an Oscar caliber actor, I have enjoyed films he is in... until now. Before I say anything else about the film, I want to say that in this film, Dwanye Johnson delivers a killer performance of one of the original UFC Fighting pioneers, Mark Keff. Dwane Johnson, with the help of some prosthetics and a wig, Dwanye Johnson is able to transform into this fighter but broken human being.

Along with his performance, fellow co-star actress, the wonderful Emily Blunt, working together again after starring in Disney's Jungle Cruise movie, but the characters could not be any different. Emily Blunt is incredible in The Smashing Machine as well, but that's where the good stops.

The film follows the fighter, Mark Kerr between the years of 1997 through 2000. After winning challenge after challenge, Mark Kerr started fighting regularly in Japan in a competition called Pride. He lives with his girlfriend, Dawn, played by Emily Blunt while he trains, but their relationship is strained due to Mark's training diets and workouts. Mark is also addicted to opioids which numb his pain after a fight but also makes him numb to his relationship with Dawn.

The film follows Mark through his fighting career, his first loss, this drug addiction, rehab and return to the sport. It's not a complicated story, which makes watching the film a chore. The film feels very segmented and there are times when time passes, and you aren't made aware of it. A small example, Dawn and Mark get into a fight, and Dawn leaves Mark, but she reappears and they are back together. There wasn't one hint or clue that they had somehow fixed their relationship. It feels like someone was telling you a story and kept forgetting parts of the story, but then abruptly remembers something that happened and goes back and tells you about it. It doesn't even let you know that he is addicted to drugs until it is pointed out that he is high before a fight. The film is a mess.

Besides Dwayne Johnson and Emily Blunt's performances, the film is kind of hard to watch and follow, but there are two things that did make some of the scenes interesting. The first is a scene where the song being played for the soundtrack has a woman singing lyrics to the effect of, "take me in your arms and I will make you feel better". It's a romantic love song, but it's playing as Mark is shooting up his drugs, so the "take me in your arms and I will make you feel better" makes sense to the movie.

The other scene is after Mark has gone through rehab, Mark goes with Dawn to a carnival, and there is a demolition derby going on, so they go in to watch it, and it shows a car ramming into the side of another car, backs up, and rams into the car again, over and over, which makes Mark feel uncomfortable as he is reminded of the fight he lost where the other fighter kept hitting him over and over while he was on the ground. It's a shame that the movie is a mess because every once in a while, there are little pieces of a great movie in it. It's sad that the performances are so great, but the movie never really makes you feel an emotional connection in any way to any of the characters.

After all is said and done, I don't think I will ever watch this movie again unless I am teaching or taking a film class where you would need to study an actor playing and becoming a character where you are able to not see the actor, but the character. If you are a big fan of Dwanye Johnson and Emily Blunt, this film might be something you would want to see at some point, but I wouldn't suggest paying full price for a ticket. I would hold off until it is streaming somewhere. It's just frustrating that you know there is a better movie hidden under the confusion and bad storytelling.

The Smashing Machine is rated: R for Violence, Language and drug use.

Movie Review: The Naked Gun (2025)

unck42@yahoo.com (Nate) — Wed, 30 Jul 2025 22:46:00 -0700

The Freaking Film Fanatic with Nathan Unck

The Naked Gun Rated: PG-13 for violence, crude/sexual humor and language

So, I have always loved the old Classic films by the Zucker and Abrams team with Airplane, Hot Shots and The Naked Gun. They are full of hysterical jokes almost every five seconds. The word play and gags that make those movies are still hilarious today, so with a new Naked Gun movie, whether it's a full reboot or not, was something that interested me. Not only that, but with Liam Neeson in the lead role of Frank Drebin Jr., the son of Frank Drebin played by Leslie Neilson in the original three films, was interesting to me because I've never really seen Liam Neeson in a comedy, at least not from what I remember.

The key that made all of those other movies work was how serious the actors played through the comedy. The jokes aren't jokes to the characters, and that is what makes the movies so funny. Think of the line from Airplane, "Surely you can't be serious." then the joke said in a serious tone, "I am serious, and don't call me Shirly." The movies all needed that seriousness out of the characters to make them work. So did the jokes work or not? The short answer is "Yes", The longer answer is "Not all of them".

There were jokes that were very funny and gags that were done many, many times throughout the film, but there were some duds that weren't funny that the film kept referring back to. I hate to say it, don't think I am a pervert, but I laughed the hardest at a gag with a villain using a pair of thermal binoculars when Liam Neeson and Pamela Anderson are cooking a turkey, as some kind of form of foreplay, but they are positioned in a way where the thermal binoculars made it look like a super kinky love scene. I don't want to give away any jokes, and part of that thermal scene is in the trailer. There are some really good jokes in the trailer, but in the film, there are other gags in between those gags. The joke start in the beginning, and they never let up, which is what this kind of film needs to do to work.

The plotline, or "device" is good enough for the story to work all of the jokes. However, the film is very, very short. For press screenings, they never have commercials or movie trailers, so I turned my phone off right at seven, and when I turned it on, it was 8:19, and that's with the end credits being finished. By the way, there are a lot of funny jokes in the end credits as well, so they are worth watching. There is even an end of credit scene that has a certain celebrity that had a cameo in the very first Naked Gun movie.

I did take my wife with me who has never see any of the Naked Gun films, and she looked at me after the movie and said, "That was the dumbest movie I have ever seen!". I then proceeded to tell her, "That's the point!". It isn't meant to be a film that is going to win any big awards, but it doesn't have to. It does it's job. It has rapid fire jokes, a plot that makes some kind of sense, and if you leave having laughed a lot, even with the bad jokes that didn't work, it did what it was meant to do, so with that, it succeeds,

If you really like the original films, then this is a no brainer. Liam Neeson does a great job at being the serious character making all of the jokes with deadpan delivery, and even Pamela Anderson has some great moments. I particularly liked a scene where Pamela Anderson sings at a Jazz club. It's goofy, unsexy, and really funny. Another thing I found interesting, the language was really tame. The "thermal vision" scene is the worst the film gets.

Even though I did like the film quite a bit, with it's very short runtime, and the fact that it isn't going to be everyone's cup of tea, I would suggest waiting until this one goes to streaming services. I am sure the run in the theaters will be pretty short, and be available to purchase for less than the price of two movie tickets, or even waiting until it goes onto Paramount + after the $25 price tag of the initial streaming time. Like I said, it had a lot of humor that I find funny, but my wife didn't, and I am pretty sure a lot of people might be in that situation, but if you are a big fan and want to go out to the theaters and see it, then you will have a pretty good time.

The Naked Gun is rated PG-13 for violence, crude/sexual humor and some language.

Movie Review: Superman

unck42@yahoo.com (Nate) — Wed, 9 Jul 2025 16:37:00 -0700

The Freaking Film Fanatic with Nathan Unck

Superman Rated: PG-13 for language and comic book action violence.

When I was a little little kid, my dad bought a Betamax VCR machine, and I had two tapes that I watched all of the time. The first one had the original Rocky film and Rocky III. The other had Superman, Superman 2 and Superman 3 with Christopher Reeve. Ever since I can remember, I have always loved Superman. I was so excited 19 years ago for Superman Returns. I thought it was okay, but not great. Then 11 years ago, we got Man of Steel. I really liked Man of Steel, but it felt dark and bleak, and Superman comic books are not dark and bleak. Here I am today, 44 years old, and this new iteration of Superman made me feel like I was a little kid watching those Superman movies that I loved.

This movie is a complete 180 degrees from Man of Steel. I still really enjoyed Man of Steel, but James Gunn, who directed all three Guardians of the Galaxy films, wanted this new reboot of the DCU, to feel like you were reading an awesome silver age Superman comic book, and he succeeds to the fullest degree. The movie does feel a little short because it moves fast, and the two-hour nine minute felt like 90 minutes. There are a bunch of great secondary characters that should have had a few more minutes focused on them, but the movie is so entertaining, you kind of don't seem to notice until after the film ends.

David Corenswet was an incredible Superman, Rachel Brosnahan was perfect as Lois Lane, and their romantic chemistry is off the charts. Nathan Fillion's Guy Gardner Green Lantern character was hysterical. The other awesome characters in the film like Mr. Terrific and Hawkgirl was also great. Nicholas Hoult was so perfect for Lex Luthor and is a perfect supervillain that you love to hate. Even Jimmy Olsen's character in the film has a very fun and interesting side plot. Lex also has a couple of "Metahuman" villains that take their orders from Lex. The cast was just great. Even the CGI Krypto, Superman's dog has a lot of great laugh out loud moments.

There are a couple things I didn't care for. I already mentioned that some of the awesome secondary characters deserved more time. I'm sure the film was longer that the theatrical cut we get, and I would love to see it someday, but for now, I am good with this one. I heard someone complaining about the special effects in a certain part of the film. Without spoiling anything and also telling you what it entailed had to deal with a river. That's all I will say. I can understand those critiques, which is fair because that is what I am giving you right now. For my personal opinion, I thought those comments were a little harsher than they needed to be.

The other thing I love is there are some moments that are so funny. The funny doesn't take away from the action and drama, but it's in there, and most of it is great. There is a great scene where Superman and Lois Lane are having this really beautiful moment, and in the background is a window, and you see that Guy Gardner Green Lantern is fighting a big monster, and it's so funny, but it doesn't take away from the drama of the scene at the same time.

(I'm just going to jump in here really quick and say, if you don't know much about Green Lantern, in the comics, Earth has four humans that are Green Lanterns, which are like intergalactic police, and you have to be a person who faces fear, but doesn't get scared of fear, and the one Green Lantern we get in this movie is the Guy Gardner Green Lantern, and he's a total jerk. You don't have to be nice to be a Green Lantern. Also, the new DCU is already filming a show called Lanterns that will introduce you to what the Green Lantern Corps is, and hopefully way better than the Green Lantern movie from 2011 with Ryan Reynolds).

I thought that I might have to show my kids and wife a couple of character videos on YouTube so that they would know and understand the movie better, but the movie does a great job at setting things up for itself. In the very beginning of the film, it gives you information that set things up. For example, we learn that there are "Metahumans" or people with superpowers have been on Earth for 300 years before this movie's starting point. You don't get an origin story from anyone, which we already have seen three iterations of Superman's birth and spaceship ride to Earth. If you feel like you want to know more about the characters, a simple google search will help, but it's not needed. I do need to mention the language a little bit. There were quite a few "S" words, and no, I don't mean Superman. It's not too much, and I think kids eight and up will be okay.

All in all, I really liked this movie so much. It's not exactly perfect. Not everything in the plot is perfect and some of the jokes don't land, although most of these things do, and they do it enough to make this film a great time at the movies. It feels like not just a reboot of the old DCEU, but it felt a lot different than Marvel films, almost like it was planned to be more like a comic book instead of a movie based on a comic book. If you like superhero movies, you will really like this one, but it does depend on how much you liked Man of Steel. I still really like Man of Steel, I don't have to pick and choose which one I like better, but this new Superman film felt very comic book accurate. Not everyone will like this film, but this is what it made me feel like this.....

Superman is rated PG:13 for language and comic book action violence.

Movie Review: Jurassic World: Rebirth

unck42@yahoo.com (Nate) — Fri, 4 Jul 2025 20:06:00 -0700

The Freaking Film Fanatic with Nathan Unck

Jurassic World: Rebirth Rated PG-13 for action violence, scary images and language.

I was 13 when the first Jurassic Park movie came out. I saw it in a theater in Reno, Nevada because we were visiting relatives, and I cannot tell you how excited I was to see that movie. There have only been a hand full of movies that I remember being that amped up for. When The Lost World: Jurassic Park, I was super excited to see more dinosaurs and awesome action, and it really let me down. Then Part Three came out, and I liked it better than the second one, but still didn't match the awesomeness that was Jurassic Park. Then there was the reboot with Jurassic World.

I really liked the first Jurassic World, and it was well cast. However, Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom and Jurassic World: Dominion totally underperformed for both audiences and my personal opinions. I thought that the world has had enough of Jurassic Park/World movies, so when I heard that they were making Jurassic World: Rebirth, I thought "Great. Here is another reboot that's going to make more money than it should. I had no faith in this film, but I went in thinking if Jurassic World: Rebirth can be better than the last two, maybe it can help rectify an intellectual property just a little bit, then it may not be terrible. Then the movie started.

The first scene is a flashback to a facility on an island where scientists are trying to crossbreed different island we haven't been to yet in the franchise. They say that guests to the park will get bored and not come back to the park if they only see the same dinosaurs every time, so that's why they are crossbreeding. It's got a scary moment, but afterwards the set-up for the plot is a little slow. The film also has two separate plotlines running through it, but they never feel forced.

The basic plot is there is a pharmaceutical company is on to a new medication that can help save a lot of lives....if they can pay for it. Their representative is played by Rupert Friend, who does a good job as a scheming "Is he bad or not" character. He visits a woman who has worked on special assignments name Zora, played by Scarlett Johansson, and an archologist who works in a museum that has a lot of dinosaur skeletons, but the museum is going under, played by Jonathan Bailey. They are going on a mission to get DNA from three different types of dinosaurs so that they can complete the life-saving drug. They also need the help of boat captain, played by Mahershala Ali.

Next, we are then introduced to a father with two daughters and a boyfriend who seems to be an idiot. I was not excited with this character at all. It seems like he was only there for comical relief. The family are on a small boat when it is capsized by a large water dino, and our first team are able to rescue them, and they get to the island they are after, but the family gets separated from the scientists, which creates the two different plotlines. The new cast members are really good in this movie.

The film is very well paced after these events. The movie actually has a nice methodical progression story-wise. Each "act" is dealing with each vial the scientists need to collect the DNA. I am not going to say anything else about the story. What I have said is known from the trailers.

My final verdict is that it was a lot better than the last two. It still doesn't compare to the original Jurassic Park film, but it fits into the "better" pile. My son was with me at the press screening, and he really liked it a lot. So, if you have kids that love dinosaurs and a little bit of terror, this movie would be right up their alley, and the adults may have a good time too. It falls into the "Turn off your brain and enjoy the action and suspense.

If you are a fan of the franchise, then this is a no-brainer. You will enjoy it. If you are looking for a great return to form, It may be disappointing. It's a fun time at the movies, but if you still aren't sure if it's for you or not, or you want to spend a lot of money on tickets and concessions or not, it will be just fine for you to wait until it is available to stream in a couple of months.

Jurassic World: Rebirth is rated PG-13 for action violence, scary images and language.

Movie Review: F1® The Movie

unck42@yahoo.com (Nate) — Thu, 26 Jun 2025 18:13:00 -0700

The Freaking Film Fanatic with Nathan Unck

F1® The Movie Rated: PG-13 for racing action and brief strong language.

About 25 years ago, I was living in Michigan. The place I lived also had Michigan International Speedway. The town was small and quiet, but when NASCAR Weekend hit, there were hundreds of thousands of people came to either watch the races inside the track, or tailgating outside while watching the race on TV. I didn't know much about NASCAR racing, so I took to magazines, newspapers and the internet to learn how to watch a race besides watching the cars go fast in an oval. It was really exciting, but I have never really learned how Formula 1 racing works.

While F1® The Movie is all about Formula 1 racing, it has a pretty good story around the exciting racing action. The making of this film was crazy. They were posting tiny cameras all over and inside the racecar. The racing action in this film, especially when seen in IMAX with a killer sound system, is flat out exhilarating. These cars go up to over two hundred miles an hour, and you feel that you are in the car going that fast with the racers. On top of the visuals, the sound editing of what is happening inside and out of the car, as well as some awesome rock music, that make you feel the force of the races.

The races are neat, but the film goes the extra mile to show you what the teams are like behind the scenes in Formula 1 racing. Every company that has an F1 team has two drivers. They score points determined by their placements at the end of the race, and both drivers combine their scores to give the final score for the companies. There is the pit crew, where if you are changing tires and other parts of the car in a pit stop, and you aren't finished within three seconds, it's a huge mistake that can cost racers the race.

There are also eight people who are divided up by four and four who sit in front of four big monitors, and each screen as hundreds of sensors that are in the car, and they know very second if something in the car is broken, or the tires need changing, or whatever the case may be, so each car has that four person monitor throughout the whole race. We even get to see how F1 cars are built, tested and even driving simulators where the racers can practice on all of the courses throughout the season to memorize every little turn. This movie is awesome, and I haven't even approached the plot yet.

This film is directed by Joseph Kosinski, who previously directed Top Gun: Maverick, and it totally shows. This director knows how to direct incredible action scenes with a decent story that helps hold up the rest of the time they aren't racing. Speaking of time, this movie clocks in at two hours and thirty-five minutes, so make your own pit stop before the movie starts because you won't want to miss a second of the film

The story is simple. It's not going to win awards for best screenplay or anything like that, but the story is told effectively and it's good that the actors in this film are good enough to keep the story interesting when the cars aren't racing.

It stars a 61-year-old Brad Pitt, as a washed-up old racer that still has the, pardon the pun, drive to race, whether it's NASCAR or F1, but needs to be talked into by a friend who works for a company that has a team. When he arrives, he meets a new rookie driver who is conceded and thinks that because Brad Pitt's character is an old guy who has nothing to teach him, so they bump heads quite a bit, but it is fun. The movie also has some really funny moments. There is even a shortly told romantic subplot between Brad Pitt and one of the F1 car builders and race computer analysis. The story is predictable, but it doesn't matter when the races are so full of adrenalin and fun.

The only thing I didn't care for was the language was a tad strong. PG-13 rated movies are allowed two "F" words, any more would find a movie an R rating, but they do use their two uses, but they don't add to the film at all and I think it might make parents think twice about taking their kids to the movies, or even watching it at home. The movie is too good to have gratuitous language that might alienate people who see it.

All in all, I had a great time at the movies with this one. I wholeheartedly recommend this one, and it's a blast to see in IMAX if you are able to afford it, but if not, a theater will still have a bigger screen and a big sound system to pump you up for the ride.

F1® The Movie is rated PG-13 for racing action and brief strong language.

Movie Review: Karate Kid: Legends

unck42@yahoo.com (Nate) — Wed, 28 May 2025 16:42:00 -0700

The Freaking Film Fanatic with Nathan Unck

Karate Kid: Legends Rated PG-13 for violence and language.

I was five years old when the first The Karate Kid movie came out. I didn't see it in the theaters, but my dad rented the video tape, back when video rentals were still in its infancy. I loved it, and I remember seeing both the second and third movies in the franchise at the drive-in near our house. I really liked the second one, but didn't like the third one very much, but I still had the first two and watched them quite a bit.

Then a few years ago, Netflix announced that they were making a Karate Kid series bringing back all of the original cast, besides Pat Morita as Mr. Miyagi, Rest in Peace. It was interesting to watch that show and having my favorite characters back but also teaching a new generation of kids. My only complaint about the series is they go from a low PG-13 ratings guide to having R rated language in them. I thought it was inappropriate, but because they are swearing so much, as the show is geared towards tweens and teens, and the language doesn't even need to be in there, but I digress. The show actually turns enemies into friends, and the bad guys are even worse that they were in the films.

That brings us to Karate Kid: Legends. I don't know if this is a one and done, or the beginning of a new reboot, but taken on its own merits, the film is.... just okay. My wife attended the screening with me, and she thought it was fun, and it was, but there are plot holes, story elements that don't make sense where they assume you know what's going on. One example, the main character, Li Fong, played by Ben Wang, is competing in a Karate tournament called The Five Boroughs. You get to see some training montages, and chalk looking animations telling you how many days to the tournament, and it skips days 3, 2 and 1, and straight to the tournament, then after the first match, you go back to the training sessions again, but they don't tell you that the tournament is a multi-day event.

The story this time around is almost the same plot from the very first Karate Kid film, only this time, Li Fong, the newest karate kid, is from China, and is being trained by Mr. Han, played by the great Jackie Chan. His mother is a doctor and gets a job in New York City, so they move to the Big Apple. Li meets a pretty girl named Lia, who has a very jealous ex-boyfriend named Conor, who is also the best karate fighter, and bully, in New York. Obviously, Conor sees Li with Lia, and starts bullying Li.

We learn that Lia's father is an ex-boxer who owes some bad people some money, and it turns out, the bad man Lia's dad is in hot water with, is also the karate master at the dojo where Conor learns karate. Li helps fight off some of the henchmen, and then the film takes a half hour detour where Li is helping Lia's dad how to fight so he can box again so he can pay off the bad guys. The detour isn't terrible, but in a film that barely breaks the ninety-minute mark. I read an insider article that said that they cut 24 minutes of the film out, which makes me wonder if it would made the film better or not.

I think that the movie is fun, and kids and teens will probably like it quite a bit, especially if they are into the Cobra-Kai show on Netflix, or fans of the original films. It actually leaves out the bad language that makes Cobra-Kai divide kids and adults. Outside of that demographic, I don't think that it will be something adults would go see for date night or just going out to the movies. I had fun, but it also was plagued by a few things that take it down a couple of notches for me.

I hope I didn't mention too much of the plot details, but at the same time, I needed to show why the plotline is close to the same as the original Karate Kid film, and the weird detours and assumptions it has for you to understand everything that is going on. With the summer break upon us, sending your kids to the movies to see Karate Kid: Legends isn't a bad choice.

Karate Kid: Legends is rated PG-13 for martial arts violence, some fighting, and some language.

Movie Review: The Phoenician Scheme

unck42@yahoo.com (Nate) — Tue, 27 May 2025 23:25:00 -0700

The Freaking Film Fanatic with Nathan Unck

The Phoenician Scheme Rated: PG-13 for story elements, brief nude artwork and language.

It's no secret that I am a huge Wes Anderson fan. I have loved just about all of his movies, with the exception of The French Dispatch, which is the only Wes Anderson film where I felt that the film was slow, and his trademark sense of humor couldn't save it. Most of his films have a lot of deeper meaning behind his crazy plots and stories. If you take his films at face value, you get a silly film that is just weird. However, if you try to pull back the layers, there are a lot of great lessons you can learn or are a reminder of truths about family and feelings and how complex they can be.

I am happy to say that The Phoenician Scheme is a return to form Wes Anderson film. The story is about a man named Zsa-Zsa Korda, played by Benicio Del Toro, who is a wealthy man, who is tied up trying build a large infrastructure containing a dam, a railroad track and tunnel and a canal in a made-up European country called Phonesia. He is trying to work with other wealthy partners to get things built, but he is also trying hard to weasel his way out of having to put any of his own money in the project, which creates animosity with the other business partners. Not only that, but he also has nine adopted boys, and a daughter named Liesl, who is a nun. Zsa-Zsa goes to visit Liesl for the first time in six years and wants her to be the heir to his whole estate when he passes away.

When the film opens, we learn that Zsa-Zsa has had many assassination attempts and close-calls with death. He states that he is an atheist, but as the film goes on, and he has many attempts on his life, the film goes into black and white, and he is visiting heaven, and then being brought back to life. We see many scenes where he is trying to get out of paying for the large infrastructure. Liesl joins him on this trip, but there is a "tutor" for her, played by Michael Cera, who may or not be whom he says he is. The other businessmen, played by a long cast of very popular actors, such as Tom Hanks, Bryan Cranston, Willem Dafoe, Rupert Friend, Benedict Cumberbatch. and even a small cameo with Bill Murray.

The plot can be a little messy at times, but the individual scenes that make up the film are very funny and clever. While the story isn't Wes Anderson's best story, it hits all of the other points that make all of his other films work just right. It may not be The Grand Budapest Hotel or Fantastic Mr. Fox, but it's a fun adventure worth taking.

I think that when all is said and done, it's a fun film to watch, but there is a deeper meaning about family and legacy, and the way Zsa-Zsa interacts with Liesl really show how much he wants her to be his heir and legacy, especially with all of his near-death experiences. He goes from being an atheist to believing there is something more to life and death besides money and how rich and powerful someone can be, while at the same time trying to pass his legacy on so that he is never really forgotten, and I think it's a great thing to remember while you are busy laughing at the chaos that ensues.

As far as the PG-13 rating goes, it's mostly played for laughs, but the story is a little more adult, not in a dirty way, but just a story that children won't really understand. There is hardly any bad language in the film, but there is some, and there is a brief shot of a few renaissance art books with nude artwork on them, but it's a "blink and you missed it" shot, so there really isn't anything to dwell on.

I know that Wes Anderson's films aren't for everyone. Some people think he's brilliant, while others find him pretentious. I critique his films on a film-to-film basis, and for the most part, I really do enjoy his films. They are fun and silly, while at the same time reminding you of family and relationships, and how important they are in this life, and in the next. If you are a fan of Wes Anderson, you will have a good time.

Movie Review: Mission: Impossible the Final Reckoning

unck42@yahoo.com (Nate) — Wed, 14 May 2025 21:49:00 -0700

The Freaking Film Fanatic with Nathan Unck

Mission: Impossible the Final Reckoning

Rated: PG-13 for language, violence, and long sequences of peril.

Two years ago, I sat down to write my movie review for Mission: Impossible Dead Reckoning: Part 1. I talked about how I had only seen half of the story, since it was a "Part 1" movie. I said that I hadn't seen the full story, but I still liked the film on its own merits, although I didn't find the first part as much fun as Mission: Impossible Fallout, but I would reserve final judgement until after "Part 2". After a slight title change to Mission: Impossible the Final Reckoning, I now have the full story to critique, but I wanted to review this on both its own merit, away from both films together before I give you my final critique.

The film starts off a little further in the future after the end of Part 1. Ethan Hunt is still running around evading bad guys, looking for clues as to what to do with a special key that he completes in Part 1. He and his team are trying to figure out where and what the key actually opens, while still trying to run away from a major computer AI, The Entity that is threatening to destroy the world. Ethan's team does a great job in helping out to set up the mission to find whatever that key unlocks. They figure it out, but there are villains on his tail, especially Gabriel, whom the Entity has changed it's mind, putting Ethan in the hotseat.

There are a lot of callbacks to just about every film in the series, answering questions that originally had plot holes and making everything make sense, even from the first film. I remember thinking I knew what the object in the third film was called the "Rabbit's Foot", but how it never exactly says what the rabbit's foot actually is and why it's so dangerous. I really appreciated this aspect of the film, although the film runs pretty close to three hours long, which actually fly by pretty quick, but the explanations for the other films, made this film a little longer than it needed to be, even though I liked it.

The stunts and action sequences are breathtaking, although there were a few that I felt like we have already seen in the franchise, but in different locations. For example, Fallout had a helicopter chase through some snowy mountains. In this one, there is an airplane chase through some beautiful mountains in Africa without snow, but a pretty river and red cliffs with green vegetation. It looks different but feels a bit familiar. However, it still delivers on the thrill factor, and I had a great time with this one. One word of warning. If you have Epilepsy, this film has a lot of flashing sequences that could make it hard to watch. If flashing patterns give you a headache, just know there are a few sequences that use it.

Now, since I have seen both, and I want to admit that I watched Dead Reckoning Part 1 the night before our critic screening, so the story was fresh in my mind, I found that if you were to edit the two together, Final Reckoning is a little better than Dead Reckoning Part 1, but together, it makes a great film. All of the returning actors, especially Tom Cruise, do not look too old to be playing the parts. Simon Pegg offers some great comic relief, as he does in almost everything he is in. Ving Rhames is loveable, and Hayley Atwell, who played Peggy Carter for Marvel, were all great. Esai Morales, who played Gabriel, is a great villain, especially one who is trying to regain his trust with the Entity. Pom Kelmentieff, who played Mantis in the Guardians of the Galaxy films, is also a lot of fun.

The adventure is really great, and worth taking. The stunts and action sequences are great, and the long runtime doesn't seem really that long. Director Christopher McQuarrie has done a fantastic job with the past four films. This film wraps up all of the storylines from the franchise. However, I won't say how, but they did leave a small little window that might lead to another entry if the cast and crew, and Paramount Studios wants to make at least one more.

I have been looking forward to this film for, well, two years, and now that I have seen it, along with Part 1, It's a ton of fun, though I still think that Mission: Impossible Fallout is still my favorite of the series, although, it is a franchise that you really don't need to have a favorite because they are all a lot of fun, and yes, I am including the second film in the series. If you decide to see this movie, see it in the theaters, and not just the theaters, but IMAX is the best way to experience the scope of the film. Grab yourself some popcorn and a drink, visit the restroom, then go in and enjoy it. You won't be disappointed. Unlike the films, my review will not self-destruct in five seconds.

Mission: Impossible the Final Reckoning, is rated: PG-13 for language, violence, and long sequences of action and suspense.

Sonic the Hedgehog 3 Review

unck42@yahoo.com (Nate) — Wed, 18 Dec 2024 16:00:00 -0800

The Freaking Film Fanatic with Nathan Unck

Sonic the Hedgehog 3 Rated: PG for violence and brief language

We live in a world where films based off of video games are not great. That's not to say some are really good, but the bad outweigh the good most of the time. For the first Sonic the Hedgehog movie, I was happy to take my son who loves the video games, and I admit I am a gamer myself. I have loved the Sonic games since I was in seventh grade when the first Sonic the Hedgehog came out on the Sega Genesis. I had the Super Nintendo and my friend had the Sega Genesis, and when I was at his house, we loved playing the Sonic games. However, I know that sometimes films made about video games are terrible. (Take Borderlands for instance, It is terrible).

I took my son, and both of us really enjoyed the first Sonic movie, and when they announced a sequel, I thought it was just going to be a cash grab by the studios because there is no way that the sequel would live up to the first movie, and guess what? I liked the second one even more than the first film. Now we have Sonic the Hedgehog 3, and I have to be brutally honest, I really enjoyed it. I feel it's better than the two previous movies, and with a mid-credit scene, we are treated to a new character with a cliffhanger ending. There is also a ten second scene at the very end of the credits as well.

The story set-up is when we see a high-tech lab with some tubes with some kind of liquid in them and one of the tubes contains another hedgehog called Shadow. He has a sad backstory, but he has a neat power that the others don't have. When he fights people, he is able to teleport himself, a lot like Nightcrawler in the second X-Men movie. He also has a backstory that is kind of sad, so when he breaks out, this new hedgehog, named Shadow, starts to wreak havoc, and Sonic, Tails and Knuckles must travel and try to stop Shadow before he destroys everything. That's all I will say for now, but the plot was actually engaging and fun.

Jim Carrey pulls double duty, both as Doctor Robotnic and another character which I will not say here for spoiler reasons, but it's fun. The rest of the cast is okay, but Keanu Reeves as the voice of Shadow was a lot of fun too. The voice actors all around them good. The only thing I have a problem with the cast is that James Marsden and the rest of the humans that are part of 'Team Sonic" help in some parts of the film, but they aren't used to their full capabilities.

This is film that I have to critique using two different mindsets. The first is as an adult, I found some of the jokes or plot holes here and there, but having two of my kids with me, and there were a ton of kids in the audience were having a blast. The movie is good, and it's got some fun comedic jokes, although they don't work at times, but there is a lot of fun action. The PG rating is right, but there are a couple of mild swearwords, (Like ones you would say if you accidentally stepped on your kid's Lego bricks,).

The fighting scenes are really cool because of the teleportation moves that Shadow has. The violence in the film isn't graphic, and Sonic has bad guys he has to fight in the video games, and the same is for the movie. The violence isn't graphic, and it is just fine for the younger kids to watch.

If I was reviewing the film as a kid, I would probably love it a ton. The kids were going nuts, and even my two kids left the theater saying how much they loved it. I have to admit, this film is even better that the first two, which I thought were a lot of fun. It may not win any major awards, but it is still a great time at the movies, and with the holiday breaks coming up, I think this is one the whole family can enjoy together.

Sonic the Hedgehog 3 is rated: PG for violence and brief mild language.

Mufasa: The Lion King Movie Review

unck42@yahoo.com (Nate) — Tue, 17 Dec 2024 14:37:00 -0800

The Freaking Film Fanatic with Nathan Unck

Mufasa: The Lion King Rated: PG for thematic elements and animal violence

I have to admit that I haven't been the biggest fan of the live-action movies that Disney has put out, with the exception of The Jungle Book and Cinderella. The rest of them, like Aladdin, Dumbo, Pinocchio, Beauty and the Beast and the last one ties into this review, The Lion King. I have seen them all, and I have no desire to go back to watch those that I didn't care for. I know some people love them, and that is totally fine. Film is art, good or bad, but art brings different emotions out in people, so it is very subjective. I just didn't like those ones personally.

I feel like they are making the live-action films to grab as much cash as Disney possibly can. The reason I didn't like the first live action Lion King was the fact that it was almost a shot for shot remake of the beloved animated film. There was no reason for them to make it. It had a great crew at the helm to make a good movie, but it didn't surpass on how good the original film is. So, the question that comes to my mind is, "Why would Disney take a film that not everyone loved and made a prequel?"

The simple answer is that it doesn't need to exist. The more complicated answer is another question, did they have a legitimate story that they wanted to tell that they felt would make the first Lion King live-action film seem better. Well, I will get into the specifics, but I think that the film earns the right to exist. It may not be the greatest story, but it's interesting and is able to keep you engaged, at least for me. There are some great moments, but some of them are kind of distracting. Here are my feelings about the film.

The good things are the animal animation is pretty good. The film looks good, and that is a plus. The score, or the music in the background was awesome. The voice acting was done very well, and the characters are likable. There are interesting fight scenes where the characters are fighting another lion tribe. The movie is exactly two hours long, and it kept me interested with the exception of a couple of things I will mention in a little bit, so with the good down, let's move to the bad.

The bad things are something that if they would have been executed a little bit better, or where scenes took me out of the film's narrative. There are breaks in the story where Rafiki is trying to tell Mufasa's backstory to Simba's cub, and Timone and Pumba are there goofing off and telling jokes. The scenes are something to chuckle at, but those scenes break up the story that is being told just for comic relief. They didn't bother me too much, but there were times I was engaged with the story being told, and then they break away to those scenes.

Another thing that I was lukewarm about was that Lin-Manuel Miranda wrote songs for the film. Some of them are good, others not so much. I know how talented he is, which made the not-so-great songs pale in comparison to the good songs. Earlier, I mentioned the score, which is the background music, and those songs were really neat. I enjoyed them, but as far as the Lin-Manuel Miranda is concerned, they really should have taken more time to try and make all of the songs work.,

My personal favorite scenes are the ones with Rafiki. He tells the story of the film, but when his character is in the story, the nuggets of wisdom he speaks are really interesting and heart-felt. He was by far my favorite character, but Mufasa was great too. The potential of the things the film could have become keep it from greatness, but it's a great movie the whole family can enjoy, although the animal fights can be kind of scary for the little ones. I recommend this film if you liked the original or are curious about how Mufasa becomes king and the origin of Pride Rock.

Mufasa: The Lion King is rated: PG for thematic elements and animal violence.

Gladiator II Movie Review

unck42@yahoo.com (Nate) — Wed, 20 Nov 2024 14:33:00 -0800

The Freaking Film Fanatic with Nathan Unck

Gladiator II Rated: R for Strong Bloody Violence.

In the year 2000 we were treated to a wonderful film called Gladiator. Russel Crow, a somewhat newcomer to the world of mainstream film, as the film's protagonist. His name is Maximus, and he is an amazing war general, who has won the affection of the Emperor of Rome and chosen to be the next emperor over the emperor's son, Commodus. When Commodus murders his ailing father and claims himself to be the new emperor, Maximus is traded and made a slave, who works his way up to becoming a gladiator, a fighter to entertain the masses of Rome in the Colosseum, all while doing so to get close to Commodus to kill him for ordering a small part of his army to kill Maximus' wife and son. Maximus wins over the people, setting a former lover, the daughter of the emperor, Lucilla, and his son, Lucius, not knowing that Lucious is actually his son. Commodus is killed, and the senators of Rome are put in charge of the people, and Lucius and Lucilla are safe.

Got that? Good.

I have to be honest; I had only seen an edited version of Gladiator where the violence was edited. Basically, it would show Maximus go into the Colosseum, and then it would skip to after the violence and blood, making it a two hour long "chick flick". So, I had to rewatch the R rated version with the violence and blood, which make it a way better movie than the edited version. So watching that the day before my critic screening was awesome. I loved the first film, and while the second one doesn't quite reach the heights of the Colosseum itself, it's a very worthy sequel to a film that didn't really need one. However, I am glad that it exists because it's a very entertaining film, with a great plotline that most sequel films don't achieve with a sequel, although there have been sequels better than the originals, but this isn't the case here.

So, what's the story here? In flashbacks, we are shown how Luccia sent Lucius away to Africa to stay safe from the violent politics of the Roman Empire. We find Lucius, (Played by Paul Mescal.), as a grown man with a beautiful wife, but when they hear the horn sounds of the trumpets, they know that the armies of Rome are there to conquer their peaceful city, which happens to be the last free city in Africa. The film opens up with an amazing battle sequence where large barges are in the waters attacking the city. Lucius then loses his wife at the command of Marcus Acacius, (Played by Pedro Pascal). Lucius, who leads the small army trying to defend their city sees Marcus giving the order and is filled with rage and wants revenge. However, What Lucius doesn't know is that Marcus is the husband of his mother, Lucilla.

Lucius is then captured and made a slave, but almost immediately is thrown into a very small arena to fight a band of terribly animated baboons. Seriously, the worst part of the movie are those baboons. Nothing takes me out of a film quicker than bad CGI. However, the rhino and sharks, (You'll see.), are a lot better, but those baboons were forgettable after a few minutes after the scene. Lucius becomes a gladiator, like his father, Maximus. He is filled with rage and vengeance, and is able to impress a man called Marcinus, (Played incredibly by Denzel Washington.), and is promised that if he fights and wins in the Colosseum, he could have his revenge on his mother's husband who gave the order to have his archers shoot Lucius's wife.

However, we find that Marcus is tired of war and hates what has happened to the empire, especially with its Ceasars, who are twins. They are very creepy and nasty looking. They are characters that you like to hate. Marcus has a secret agenda to kill the young twin emperors and turn the empire into a republic. Lucius doesn't know about the plot until a little later, but as for now, I am going to stop talking about the plot. That's just the setup.

At nearly two and a half hours, the movie is thoroughly entertaining. They acting is on point, and Denzel Washington should garner an Oscar nomination for Best Supporting Actor. He is amazing. He is likeable, and is trying to help Lucius, but he has his own agenda that becomes clear later on. It's an amazing acting performance, and the film is worth seeing even if it's only for his acting, but the plotline is good. There are plot twists, schemes and a lot, and I am talking a lot of bloody gladiator action. This sequel has twice the blood and twice the action that the original has, but a lot of the plot is dependent on knowing the plot from the first film, which is why I added the lengthy paragraph to open this review. The more you know the events in the first film make this film more entertaining and easier to understand.

The R rated content is for all of the blood and violence, although there is a scene where there is girl hanging on the shoulders of one of the twin emperors who has an exposed breast, but has a golden trinket pasty over her nipple, so there's that, but it's barely noticeable and the scene is quick. There might have been two other swear words, but are only dang and heck real words. I have four teenage boys, and I let them watch the first film with me, but told them it's violent, but wasn't overdone to a point where I felt like it had a soft R rating. However, this one has the violence doubled, and I wouldn't be as willing to let my kids watch this one until they are a little older.

This is a film that really didn't need to be made, but Ridley Scott did a great job on making a story that pays homage to the original while also making it it's own thing and reason to exist. If I hadn't seen the first film, I would have been a little lost, but the story is well written, well told and well executed by the actors, especially Denzel Washington. If you are a fan of the original film, seeing Gladiator II is definitely a must-see film. Just ignore the terrible CGI baboons.

Gladiator II is rated R for Strong Bloody Violence.

Red One: Movie Review

unck42@yahoo.com (Nate) — Thu, 14 Nov 2024 17:27:00 -0800

The Freaking Film Fanatic with Nate Unck

Red One Rated:PG-13 for violence, language and sensuality

'Tis the season.....well, the holiday season isn't 'Tis quite yet, but this early November, we get a Christmas film, and while it seems odd to see a Christmas movie a full month and a half until Christmas, we must remember that Red One was filmed by the new buyout studio, Amazon MGM. The plan is for Amazon MGM to have people go see the film in theaters, and then when it's actually a lot closer to Christmas, they can then stream Red One on Amazon Prime. Now that we have that out of the way and it's understood, here is my spoiler free review of Red One.

When I first saw tailers for Red One, it looked really fun and silly, and I would say seeing the whole film that it was marketed right. It is fun and silly. However, there are some jokes that land flat, and there are great ideas that don't reach their full potential. It doesn't mean that the movie is terrible, but it's not without its problems.

We were allowed to bring our families to the critic screening of Red One, and so I took my wife, and two of my kids, one a 16-year-old, and the other a 12-year-old. My wife really enjoyed it, our 12-year-old really liked it, and our 16-year-old felt kind of lukewarm. This is a film that most film critics won't like, but I like to think that I review films as if I were the voice of the people. I quite enjoyed the movie, but as I said, it has its problems.

There were two issues I had. The film is an action comedy, but it has a hard time doing both at the same time, so there are scenes that are funny, and then it gets serious for the action sequences, but each of the sequences are a little long, so it kind of has a double personality. Is it a comedy, or an action movie with a little comedy? It's both, but it feels out of balance. Some of the jokes are really funny, but there are some that are not funny at all. There are ideas where you can see what the filmmakers were aiming for, that don't quite pan out.

I think my biggest complaint about the film is its PG-13 rating. This is a movie that kids of all ages will want to see, but there is a good amount of language, violence, (although the violence isn't PG-13 rated violence, it's more in the PG rated range.), as well as a scene on a beach where there are women in string bikinis, which exposes their whole backside. These are things that they could have easily taken out, but didn't, so I can't completely recommend this one for everyone in the family, unless you have older kids. It's still enjoyable for the most part, but I was disappointed that they didn't make this film for the whole family, no matter the age.

The actors do their best with what they were given. Chris Evans did a good job with being a big jerk who is a level four naughty lister, which is pretty bad. He even literally steals candy from a baby. Dwayne Johnson is his usual tough guy who is Santa's lead security bodyguard who wants to resign, feeling like he doesn't see the joy and magic of Christmas while seeing people fighting over presents in a store. I love J.K. Simmons, and he is a pretty cool Santa Claus. He isn't fat, he is in really good shape, and the new take on his suit makes him look a little like a superhero. (I really dug his Santa Costume.). He is great when he is in scenes where he is awake. The people who kidnap Santa keep him sedated, so there isn't a lot of him in the film, but he's great when he is. Bonnie Hunt is also a cute Mrs. Claus.

The special effects are impressive enough. I love the reindeer are huge and adorable. The elves aren't little people, but more like the house elves in Harry Potter. The sleigh flying through the sky looks really cool. I really enjoyed the fact that some of the characters in the movie who were monsters or minions of Krampus weren't done in CGI, but physical paint and prosthetics. The costume department really did a good job for this film.

Red One may not be an Oscar contender, but it's a fun Christmas movie, even if there are some flaws and content that keep it from being great. It's a fun time at the movies. However, It opens early because Amazon, who recently acquired MGM Studios, now as Amazon MGM Studios, is planning on having this film stream on Amazon Prime Video come the week of Christmas. If you aren't in the mood to watch a Christmas film a month and a half before Christmas, I would wait and just stream it around Christmas time.

So, there it is. My review for Red One. It's not perfect, and I am sure there will be people who won't like it, but if you are looking for a fun Christmas movie for the family, minus the little ones, Red One is a pretty good one to watch.

Red One is rated PG-13 for Language, Violence, and some Sensually.

Movie Review: Beetlejuice Beetlejuice

unck42@yahoo.com (Nate) — Tue, 3 Sep 2024 21:31:00 -0700

The Freaking Film Fanatic with Nathan Unck

Beetlejuice Beetlejuice Rated PG-13 for Thematic Elements, Violence, Macabre Humor and Brief Strong Language.

I have been a fan of the original Beetlejuice movie since I was in elementary school. It was released in 1988, and I think I might have seen it two years after its release, since I was only seven at the time, but I always found it very funny, especially all of the practical special effects, since CGI special effects were in their infancy. Now that I am....uhhhh, 43 and have gone back and rewatched the original while gearing up for the sequel, Beetlejuice Beetlejuice, (also, I wanted to mention, my wife, Lindsey, had never seen the original, and she wanted to go to this one with me, so we watched the original together.) She found it silly, and the sequel is more of that silliness, but doubled down.

My favorite element from the original was all of the makeup and costumes that the people in the afterlife waiting room, since they all resembled their deaths. For example, there is a guy that is char black, and he's smoking a cigarette, a diver with a shark attached to his leg, and my personal favorite, a man in a sleeping bag with a rattlesnake rattle sticking out of the sleeping bag. There is a lot more of that in this second outing. There is a lot more of the afterlife shown, so there is a lot of fun costumes and makeup again that made the original special.

The story isn't bad, but at the same time, there are four plots going on at the same time, and the one that you think will have the biggest payoff ends up being the weaker of the four plots, and literally ends within one minute. The basic storyline picks up thirty years after we left our characters who are happily sharing their home with two nice ghosts of the couple that lived in the house before the main characters in this one.

Lydia (Played again by Wynonna Ryder), who has her own "Ghost Hunting" TV show, but she is in a pathetic relationship with the producer of the show. However, as Lydia starts seeing flashes of Beetlejuice, (of course wonderfully played by Michael Keaton), and thinks they are just Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome, but it really is him just flashing himself so that she can't get rid of him in her mind and in real life. Lydia also has a daughter, (Played by Jenna Ortega) in this one who attends the same school for girls that Lydia attended at the end of the first film, but she is the butt of jokes and pranks. Even Lydia's stepmother, Delia, (Played great by Catherine O'Hara), is in the mix.

The characters are all brought together with Lydia finding out her father, Charles, has passed away, and a funeral is held. However, the man Lydia is dating, Rory (Played by Justin Theroux) doesn't really love, is trying hard to insert himself into the family, and Lydia is put on the spot with a proposal at her father's funeral, and reluctantly accepts. Upsetting Astrid, she takes off on her bike but crashes and meets a good-looking boy that she finds interesting, as they both are kind of into weird things in common. This is plot one and two so far.

The third plot has Beetlejuice working in an office, trying to come back to the land of the living, and is still in love with Lydia, who wishes she could completely forget. This plot thickens when there is an accident in the afterlife world, and we find out that Beetlejuice has been married before to a beautiful, but terrifying woman, Deloris, (Played by the gorgeous Monica Bellucci), and we find out she is what they call a "Soul Sucker", a person who can steal someone's soul by breathing it out of the poor person, which makes the victim cease to exist all together.

Plot four deals with how Lydia and Astrid lost their husband and father, and are sad and depressed about it, making the relationship with Lydia and Rory even more awkward. I won't talk much about this plot because the less you know of this one, the better.

The plots are a lot of unpack in an hour and forty-five minutes, but they all seem to come together just fine. My wife liked this one more because there were more stories and funny practical effects, makeup and costumes. The movie also has some interesting story telling gimmicks. The first is a stop-motion sequence about how Lydia's father passed away. Then there is a Beetlejuice scene where he starts telling the story about him and his soul sucking wife, but it turns into a black and white, French impressionist sequence. We also get another quick trip to the moon of Saturn where the Claymation Sandworms.

All in all, I really enjoyed this outing. It's been over thirty years since the first film was released, and even though it's been forever, and doing a sequel almost sounds like a quick cash grab by the studio and filmmakers, it actually takes the charm from the original, and like I said, doubles down on what made the first one so fun. I was thinking that even though so much time has passed, it made the storylines make more sense. Lydia is all grown up and middle-aged with an older teenager who also goes on the crazy adventures, and the characters were written and played to have that much time in between the two films.

I also have to say, I love Tim Burton, but it seems like it's been almost a decade since he has had a fun and entertaining outing, and this one brings back all of the charm that Tim Burton had, and still has when he has a passion project like this film to let loose and do what he does best. Also worth noting, pardon the pun, Danny Elfman is back as the composer, and his music transports you right back into the story. There are also a few other songs in the soundtrack in the film that are funny, but no Harry Belafonte' music is heard at all, besides the children's choir at Charles' funeral.

If you love Tim Burton, or at least the first Beetlejuice, I think you will have a lot of fun with this one. Yes, the plots get tangled because there are a lot of things going on, but they get untangled in the end, even if one of them should have had a bigger finish. If you aren't a Tim Burton fan or didn't like the first film, you will not like this one at all.

As I mentioned, I took my wife, Lindsey, with me, and had a fun night out at the movies. I felt it was on par with the first one. It felt like there were stories worth telling to warrant the sequel, and heaven forbid, I could see a future where we might tie everything together in a "Beetlejuice, Beetlejuice, Beetle........Well, I better not say his name three times.

Beetlejuice Beetlejuice is rated PG-13 for Thematic Elements, Violence, Macabre Humor and Brief Strong Language.

Movie Review: You Gotta Believe

unck42@yahoo.com (Nate) — Fri, 30 Aug 2024 23:25:00 -0700

Every once in a while, I am surprised when a movie is ready to open at the end of the week, and I haven't heard much, or in some cases, haven't heard anything about it. Without getting into how film critiquing works in depth, I will give you a small example. I get about fifty emails a day, sometimes more from small movie studios to big advertising companies that have been hired to promote their films to the press. Not only that, but there are emails that go straight into my junk box or spam box, which adds another five to ten emails all dealing with film. Sometimes it's easy to overlook something, or where I have to go search my email for a specific film I do have on my radar. This movie is one I didn't hear about until this past Tuesday, (August 27th), and it didn't have an advance screening for it. The film is called You Gotta Believe.

I am a big sports fan, and so any movie dealing with sports appeals to me, and my wife, Lindsey, is a huge fan of "Based on a True Story" movies. This film was both, and while it was a little cheesy at times, there was actually a nice little film that both my wife and I enjoyed for the most part. It stars Luke Wilson as a little league baseball coach, and his friend, played by Greg Kennear, who helps manage the team, but the team is terrible.

When the team is at their worst, a man from a little league baseball organization comes to the team's last practice and tells the manager of the team, (Greg Kennear) that they have to send in an all-star team to compete in a playoff series that leads to the Little League Baseball National Championship, and they are the last team that hasn't claimed a spot to play in, so the team makes it into the tournament by default.

While these events are happening, we find the coach, (Luke Wilson), who has been coaching the team all season has a fainting spell and we learn that he has a brain tumor, and is going to have to go into treatment to fight his cancer. The problem with this, besides the cancer part, is his favorite thing is to watch his son play baseball, and with the tournament right around the corner, he tries his best to help coach, but has to take a backseat when he starts to get ill from the cancer treatments. The baseball team, especially the coach's son, practice really hard and rally around the coach, believing that he is the reason for their team strength.

That's all I will tell you. It's all in the trailer for the film, but this "Based on a True Story" film ended up going to some places where other "Based on a True Story" films go. Most of the time, the characters come out triumphant and win the day. Everything seems to work out in the main characters favor, with some minor stumbling blocks to get over, but you know they will win. This film keeps you guessing until the final minutes of the film play out. There are a lot of stumbling blocks for the characters to get over, and they aren't all that minor.

Luke Wilson always comes off playing a nice and softspoken family man in his most recent outings. Greg Kennear is also great in this role. The kids are funny. At times there is a little bit of The Sandlot in the film, and even has the actor who played Ham, (Patrick Renna), in The Sandlot, who plays the league's organizer for the tournament. The kids are funny, and have their charms, but the way they rally together to fight and stay in the playoffs by dedicating their performances for their sick coach is well acted.

The film is rated PG, and only has maybe three bad words, usually one of the words you use under your breath when you step on a kid's Lego brick, but the film does have a little bit of a "have faith" message to it as well.

Like I said, the film can feel a little cheesy at times, but it mostly succeeds in its endeavors, and makes a great family movie with a good message and some unexpected moments. If you are a fan of both sports and the "Based on a True Story" movie fan, then this film will be something you will most likely enjoy.

As the summer blockbuster films have all come and gone, fall films will be releasing soon, especially around October, but I will be back soon with other reviews leading up to the fall season over the next couple of weeks, so don't forget to check back in.

Twisters

unck42@yahoo.com (Nate) — Tue, 16 Jul 2024 22:24:00 -0700

Twisters

Rated PG-13 for disaster violence and some language

In the summer of 1996, when I was fifteen.....I automatically just told you how old I actually my mom and her friend took my friend and I to see Twister. It was an exciting disaster movie that I loved and saw three times in the theater way back when. I hadn't seen it in quite a few years, seriously, it was on a VHS tape, so I watched it the other night to kind of go back for a reference reasons, and I found that although I still like the original quite a bit, the special effects haven't aged as well, but I can't blame it. It was the mid-1990s, and special effects have come a long way since then.

I was optimistically cautious about Twisters, and I didn't watch any reviews, aside from the Super Bowl ad they played during a commercial break. Was it worth the 28 years in between the original and now, and I think that if they were ever going to do another Twister movie, it would be a lot like Twisters is. There are a couple of little homages to the original, but the story doesn't really include anything past those little nods.

The story follows a girl named Kate, played by Daisy Edgar-Jones. It starts with her and her college friends trying to find a way to kill tornados before they harm people in their powerfully wrecking abilities. It the plan goes sideways, and most of her team/friends are caught up, literally, in the tornado. Five years passes, and we see Kate working for the National Weather Service in New York City. However, when her old friend who was with her for the infamous event, he is able to get her to take a chance and come try out new scientific ways to study or maybe even be able to end a tornado before getting too big.

During their first storm chase, we meet Tyler, played by Glen Powell, who has a huge YouTube following for chasing, and actually surviving tornados, and seems very smug and pretentious. Tyler's team aren't exactly real scientists, but more of Tyler's YouTube Channel. This is when the fun starts to happen.

Daisy Edgar-Jones and Glen Powell have good chemistry together. Another one of Kate's friends, Javi, is played by Anthony Ramos, who I really liked in "In the Heights" and was enjoyable to watch in Transformers: Rise of the Beasts, which is one of the only two Transformers movies I actually like, with Bumblebee being the other. The cast was just fine, and you can sympathize with their characters from time to time.

If you like disaster movies, especially the first Twister film, I think you will have a good time with this one as well. Plus, the special effects are a lot better. Also, we don't get to see any floating cows, but there is another animal joke in this one too.

I took my son, who is 13, and he really liked it too, although there were a couple of times he asked me when the tornados were going to come. Be rest assured, there are more than enough tornados for you in this one. Another thing, the film is rated PG-13, but the language wasn't very strong. The tornado violence is the cause of the rating. It isn't completely free of bad language, but there isn't a lot.

All in all, it was a fun night out at the movies. It's a great popcorn movie summer blockbuster that is one of the better ones this year. If you have a chance to see it in IMAX, and you really want to see the movie, that would be the best option, although we didn't have our screening in the IMAX theater, but I know it would be a lot more exciting that way.

That's all I have for this one. I hope that it was informative, and remember one thing. If you see a tornado, do not get into your car and try to drive away from it. Apparently it doesn't work. I'll catch ya on the next one!

unck42@yahoo.com (Nate) — Tue, 16 Jul 2024 21:59:00 -0700

Hello, and welcome to the Freaking Film Fanatic Website. I started it, and kind of neglected it for a while. I have learned that some of the newspapers I write for don't always post my reviews on their websites, though they publish them in their in-print newspaper, (Yeah, those still exist!).

I record the podcast, but I don't write my reviews for the papers and then just read them on the podcast. I find it to be boring, and you can totally tell that I am reading it from the article, and my articles are actually written a lot better than what I record for the podcast, so I am starting everything over here.

Thank you all so much for following my podcast and reading my reviews. I appreciate you all so much, for reading or listening to my humble movie reviews. I've said it before in podcast episodes, but I don't go into a movie trying to find faults with them, like a few other fellow critics of mine tend to do. Seriously there is this critic, and she HATES EVERYTHING. I am not joking. It's a pain to sit next to her whenever I have to. If I don't like something personally, I can still list good things like, If you like this particular actor, or if you like this franchise, or if you like the genre, then you might like this movie more than I did.

Basically, my ideas and reviews are opinions, although they are informed opinions, I still try to look for the good in everything, and I hope that is a reason you all read and listen to my reviews.

Anywho, Here is to new beginnings for the website.

Nate Unck

The Freaking Film Fanatic