Star Trek 12 "Trek Into Darkness" (sigh...) review 2012.

My review of “Star Trek” 12 AKA “Star Trek Into Darkness”

Let's go ahead and tell you what you already know. I didn't like it. I would point out my former suggestion that this group of creative individuals would be MUCH happier making a Star Wars film, but as director Abrams has already been announced as the director for the next “Wars” movie there is little need to make that suggestion again. Before we get into the meat of my diatribe, let me warn you of massive spoilers in my review. I mean MASSIVE SPOILERS that will ruin all kinds of “surprises” that are intended for someone to learn while viewing the film. If you ready beyond this first paragraph, it's not my fault as I have mention MASSIVE SPOILERS thrice now, twice in all caps. For a quick review, my review of Trek 11 has been posted here as the previous blog entry for your ease of reading. Now, on to the thrashing...

(Spoiler Space....)

OK, continuing some familiar rants if you've read Trek 11 review. That monstrosity they call the Enterprise... I don't think the word “UGH” covers it. The fact that EVERYBODY beats up on Kirk. If you are the worst fighter in the galaxy, why get into so many fights?

For a quick review of the plot points. The Enterprise crew goes to save a planet. They violate the Prime Directive to save Spock's life. Dr McCoy explains to Spock why Kirk saved his (Spock's) life and that he would expect the same (some heavy foreshadowing here, about as subtle an aluminum bat to the face.) Kirk gets demoted and Admiral Pike takes the Enterprise back over with Kirk as XO (First Officer). (side note, so Spock gets demoted also? I guess so but the film is so busy telling us what a screw up Kirk is, this isn't really even noted as I recall.) There is a bomb attack on Starfleet London and all the Captains & XOs from the area are brought to Earth. Most get killed (including Pike) by what we are told is a former Starfleet operative named John Harrison, Kirk stops the attack but is too late to save pretty much anybody's life. Harrison flees to the Klingon home-world, Qo'noS. Kirk is given command back of Enterprise and he is to go and kill Harrison with special torpedoes. 72 of them, to be exact, which should sound familiar to long time Trekkies (if off by about 10). A cute blond science officer is assigned to the Enterprise (whom if you've seen any promo material, you already know it's actually Carol Marcus but uses a false name). Scotty resigns his post (& seemingly commission) because he doesn't like the fact he can't examine the torpedoes and mentions how dangerous the warp core is (more foreshadowing, kids. Again, not done very well IMO). Spock gets miffed, does some detective work and finds out Carol is Carol Marcus and daughter of the admiral who gave Kirk back control of the Enterprise. Something is up with the special torpedoes, so Carol & Dr McCoy find out what it is. Scotty gets called by Kirk to examine .. something. Spock & Carol talk Kirk into not killing Harrison like the admiral wants so they beam down to meet our first ever Klingon with ridge piercings. Two groups of Klingons are slaughter by Harrison who uses some sort of mini gun and his super strength and reflexes (by now, if you are an old time Trekkie and don't know who it is, go watch something else). When told about the 72 torpedoes, Harrison surrenders and takes a beating like it's nothing. Harrison & Kirk talk, eventually revealing Harrison’s identity of someone Kirk has never heard of named “Khan”. (apparently one of the greatest mass murders of human history isn't listed in the new Trek continuities' databases) Admiral Daddy … I mean Admiral Marcus shows up and the grand plot is finally revealed. Thanks to Nero (the gift that keeps on giving) incursion into this universe, Starfleet is actively seeking all kinds of stuff and the stumble across the Botany Bay. They awake Khan, offer him a job in Section 31 (long story, let's just say it's the Federation's KGB. Very secret, very silent, does all the dirty work to allow the named officers of Starfleet to keep their hands clean without never knowing what really happened. Section 31 was introduced in “Deep Space 9” and shown in “Enterprise”.) Admiral Daddy shows up in a super ship that Scotty has sneaked on board to (which is what he found back in his search) and it utterly outclasses the abomination … I mean “Enterprise” (OK, no I didn't but to explain what ship I'm talking about...) Daddy's ship can out shoot, out run and transport while in warp. Kirk & Khan sneak on board with Scotty's help for some “Enemy Mine” action. (Really? Kirk teams up with a terrorist and know mass murderer? Again, doesn't make a lot of sense but neither of these two movies do...) Spock makes a long distance call to “Prime Spock” (Leonard Nimoy, the original Spock who stayed in this wacked up time-line. Nimoy provided pretty much the only surprise in this mess.) who explains who Khan is. (For those of you that don't remember, Khan was responsible for Spock's death in the original time-line Needless to say, Spock Prime isn't overly found of Khan..) Khan eventually takes over Admiral Daddy's ship and pounds on Enterprise some more after Admiral Daddy did so before. Scotty sabotages the super ship and it crashes into the San Francisco Bay. However, all the pounding of Enterprise has affected the warp core and it needs to fixed but the compartment if flooded with radiation. (And launches into a complete “Star Trek 2: The Wrath of Khan” ripoff/homage with the slight reversal of Kirk going in and saving the day rather than Spock. Even the same lines are referenced with mostly slight changes for the new sacrifice. Again, some might call this homage, I call it lazy writing, you call it what you will). Kirk saves the day (for the one time in the film) and dies. Spock goes on a roaring rampage of revenge and beats down Khan only to be stopped by Uhura's insistence and handy “phaser”. Turns out Khan’s blood is “super charged” and can bring the dead back to life. (guess what? This is shown at the beginning of the film, more of that “great” foreshadowing...) Anyway, Carol joins the crew, Kirk gets to keep command and Enterprise is given a 5 year mission. Cue magic warp pixie dust trail....

On to some new complaints.

1. Given we now have two films from this group, I think we can see some re-occurring themes in their point of view. I have no problem with Spock being the hero as I am a fan of both the character and Leonard Nimoy. However, the writes of this can only do this by turning Kirk into a buffoon. Kirk is like a dog who will hump anything and anyone(s) in their eyes. He's just a lucky frat boy who hasn't a brain in his head to them. It's pretty obvious their agenda in these two films and since Kirk was a boyhood hero, I really don't care for it. There's nothing wrong with Spock, Scotty, Uhura, Sulu, Chekhov, McCoy, Rand or Ensign Redshirt saving the day. You just don't have to make the original hero look like an idiot to allow your Mary Sue to save the day.
2. I think it's a very bad idea to try and reinterpret episodes and movies into a new continuity the way it's done here. You invite too many comparisons to the original with it if you change things and people yelling how you've changed it and now it's ruined. Best to do your own version of things and not reference the original stuff the way it's done here. Khan is a genetic super man from the 20^th century who escaped on a sleeper ship (cryogenic ship, human pop-sickles). Go from there and make it your own.
3. The “Enterprise” does not far well at all in two movies. In both movies, it's completely outclassed, outgunned and outrunned (hah, couldn't resist that one). It's suppose to be The Flagship of your fleet and it can't do anything. Might be time to re-figure your flagship paranoid Federation time-line (while at it, consider getting someone to make it less ugly?)
4. Spock & Uhura's bickering couple act. Geez... I would like to think people flying into enemy space would be able to not act like complete idiots and endanger the mission. But no, since Spock is the Mary Sue, Uhura comes off like the biggest shrew in the galaxy.
5. Why is Khan now a white guy? While Ricardo Montalban was Hispanic and not a Sikh (India Indian), he's closer than BBC's Sherlock Holmes (who does a good job, though). Is this some sort of “white people are always the enemy” propaganda or race apology?
6. So when Khan is refrozen at the end, where is he put? Ceti Alpha 5?
7. Carol Marcus' lack of reaction from seeing her father's head squashed in front of her. A friend pointed this out and it made me wonder. Next time we see her on the Enterprise, she's cracking a joke. Sure, it could be just a defensive mechanism, but it's a bit jarring.
8. Peter Weller's role. Not that he does a bad job or that it's not good to see him. However, he becomes yet another guest star who plays a power mad admiral. Pretty much any guest star playing an admiral is probably going to be power mad and a villain.
9. That “cute” little title. Star Trek Into Darkness. Ugh. I'm sure it was just “oohed” and “aahed” at the meetings but damn that's dumb. I mean, there's dumb and there's damn dumb and that is where this title is located. Sure, I guess Star Trek 12 The New Adventures of Khan ruins the buzz about who the villain might be but “Trek into darkness”??? Wow, that's just damn dumb (again)

In the middle of this here rant, let's list a few things that I like or * Gasp * they got right??

For those of you that didn't get it, the flying saucer the crew uses for Qo'noS arrival was Harry Mudd's. The use of Section 31. Leonard Nimoy's cameo. The few other references to the Trek Universe such as Tribbles, Gorn and Qo'noS. (yeah, this is the shortest section on my review.)

I echo my previous comment from Trek 11 about wondering why Paramount wouldn't give this kind of money for a film with the original stars of this franchise. Imagine what those stories could have been like. But every story, book or interview I read with the creators of the original Trek series and movies talk about how little money they had.

I wonder who Paramount will get to do the next one. I hope since Abrams will be busy leading the Star Wars franchise, it's someone totally different. Who actually might understand what Trek is and how to treat all the characters equally, rather than show obvious favor with the one they like the most.

One sort of good thing to come out of this movie is the revelation that this alternate continuity diverged before Nero's appearance in the previous movie. How can we tell you ask? Well, since Khan is now a white English guy, that is our earliest divergence point. Mid 20^th Century since Khan was probably born in the 60s and agreeing with author Greg Cox, probably partially derived from Nazi genetic programs. (Just a thought I had, it would be interesting to see the immortal Mr. Flint/Micah Brack fighting Khan in the 20^th Century alongside Gary 7.) Maybe this is why Spock Prime is still in the universe, trying to find the divergence point so he can save Vulcan (along with his mother and other relatives). Feel free to use that idea guys, proved you give me credit. I have a few other ideas also about that Shatner appearance...

So I'm giving this mess a 1 out of 5. Mostly for Nimoy and the effort put forth by those who were involved but not part of the creative process. Very disappointing but honestly? About what I expected.

Star Trek 11 (2009) Review Re Post

This is a reposting of my review of Star Trek 11 from my old "MySpace" blog.  Since I'm about to post my review of Trek 12 and I reference it several times, I thought I would post if here for ease of viewing.  I've tried to correct all spelling and grammar errors, but my apologies for all the ones I've missed here.  Anyway, here's 3 years ago....

Star Trek 11 review

I'll go ahead and get most of you out of the way.  I thought it was about average.  2.5 out of 5.  Nothing special, but nothing horrible.  Yeah, I know "what's wrong with him". 

So I'll tell you what's wrong with me.  Part of it is, I have a peculiar personality quirk.  If (usually) something is really popular, I don't like it.  It's not so much an intentional choice as it's just something in me.  I remember a few years ago when Batman Begins came out.  I heard so many good things about it, I couldn't wait to see it.  But when I did.... I didn't like it.  I hated the Bat-Hummer, the costume and I didn't think the writers had any idea who or what Bruce Wayne is about. 

So, that being said, let's get back into the Trek 11 review. 
SPOILER INTENSIVE! 

The Good:
Bruce Greenwood As Captain Pike, Karl Urban as Dr McCoy, Ben Cross as Sarek.  All incredibly fine performances. 
Zachary Quinto did a GREAT job playing Spock with the real Spock in the movie.  (That had to be a very hard and unforgiving job.  Playing an icon in a film with the original actor playing that same icon.  Could have easily been a career killer, but it isn't)

Leonard Nimoy as Spock & Majel Barrett doing the Enterprise computer's voice. 

I can really see Zoe Saldana growing up become Nichell Nichols.  Quinto looks a lot like a young Spock.  Winnona Rider really did look like a young Jane Wyatt. 

And something that really is refreshing these days, the money spent on this film is up on the screen.  (I wonder what would have happened if Paramount had spent this amount of money and backing during the TOS/TNG movies?)


The OK (not horrible, not great)
Simon Pegg as Scotty, John Cho as Sulu, Eric Bana as Nero and Chris Pine as Kirk. 
As a friend said, I'll bet the original actors see this movie and go "Man, I wish I had been allowed to do things that interesting in our movies".   I'm not particularly fond of what the writers did with Scotty (killing Admiral Archer's dog with the transporter.  And what the @#$% was up with the audience laughing at that?????).  Though once they stopped writing Scotty as a spaz, Pegg did a fine job with what he had. 
Nero is not really a character in my opinion.  Mostly he stands around, yelling, taking Starfleet Captains hostage and doing not a whole lot. 
Pine mostly gets beat up (a lot!  I think Chekhov is the only character in the movie who doesn't have his hands around Kirk's neck or seemingly hates his guts).  Pine does ok with what he has, but ... for me, he didn't capture the essence of James Kirk. 

The Bad:
Ok, here I go....  (and yes, there is another category after this)
Anton Yelchin as Chekov
His performance is ... ok, but the accent was way too much.  He might have been born in Russia, but oh Good God.  Can't abrams get him some dialogue coaching?  Maybe because he's from Russia it why he over did it. 

Chris Hemsworth as George S. Kirk
Not that he did a bad job, I just thought it was criminal to waste him as George Kirk.  I thought he looked and acted more like Jim Kirk. 

The story.  So, let me get this straight.  Nero shows up and has 20 something years to wait on Original Spock?  So, other than destroying the Kelvin and killing Kirk's father, he does nothing for 20 years?  Nothing?  So he wanted to wait for Original Spock to torture Original Spock I get but he did nothing?  Really?  And didn't age? 

Original Spock doesn't come off any better.  So other than his former captain, possibly the guy with the most time travel experience just accepts the destruction of his home planet & mother?  Remember City of the Edge of Forever?  This new timeline has not been corrected simply with Kirk in the center seat.  His planet's destroyed, his mother and relatives dead.  GO BACK IN TIME AND STOP NERO AT THE BEGINNING OF THE FILM!!!!  I know, I know, if he does that, then we don't have the "new" continuity.  But for him to not do this is an insult to the intelligence of the character and simply make no sense.  Kind of like going to a planet and throwing away all your advanced technology just "because".  (slight reference there....) 

Kirk goes from third year cadet to captain because he stopped Nero (with help BTW!)?  Wow, wonder what they would have done if he had saved Vulcan also?  Made him the C in C?  Admiral?  I know Starfleet has always been written as a "if the end result is good, all is forgiven" organization but that was a bit much. 

Original Spock's ship from the future (or should I say Georgi's if you read the prequel mini series) looks nothing like any ship we've ever seen in Trek continuity.  Nor does Nero's ship (I think both had names but neither stuck with me).  I'll give you that Nero's was a mining ship, so it might look different but that's a bit much.  Where are the nacelles?  (the cigar shaped things extending from the original star ships, they are what create the warp field that allows the ship to go to warp) 

The "cute little abrams' touches"
The Beastie Boys song when young Jimmy destroys a vintage corvette (what?  They couldn't waste something worthless like a mustang?)  UGH!  And there was another song that came on not long after that that also dragged me out and reminded me that I was watching a movie.  The creatures on Hoth... I mean, Planet Hell looking like Cloverfield rejects.  Uhura ordering "slusho" or whatever it's called from abrams' other films. 
And there is quite a bit of convenient plot developments.  Nero's ship coming from it's time warp right in front of the Kelvan, the Enterprise being built in "Kirk's back yard" (and I still believe it was made in space but I have no proof of that), Kirk being abandoned on the same planet that Original Spock is on AND the only person who can get him back on the Enterprise (Scotty).  Convenient, convenient, convenient. 
Roger Ebert has a much better written review at his website.  He also notices a lot of the same conveniences that I did.  I'll admit that I read the review before I saw the film, so it might have brought some of those to my mind but I'll stand by seeing some of these on my own.  It's not like I have a great memory or anything. 
 (http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090506/REVIEWS/905069997). 
And I didn't notice until just now that he & I both gave it the same "star" amount. 
One last "cute touch".  During the destruction of the Kelvin, we got a crew member being sucked into space and it's utterly silent.  Ok, space is a vacuum and that's how it would be.  But later, during the big fight, suddenly we can hear everything in space. 
One more last "cute touch".  The weird sliding camera angles that made it difficult and at time impossible to see what was going on.  More than once I would turn my head trying to see where the came was coming from/going.  And the damn shaky cam.  I HATE shaky cam.  And it's worse in faux IMAX. 

And lastly a heading I can call BLASPHEMY
I love, love, love the original Enterprise design (from the original series).  Love it, love it, love it.  There is just something about it looks sleek, futuristic and beautiful at the same time.  So, realize that changing the Enterprise (for no reason, because why would the destruction of the Kelvin cause a change in starship design?) is pretty much blasphemy for me.  I don't like the changes they did and it lost it's luster.  It looked like just another space ship.  And the crew seems to act like this is a just launched ship.  Captain Pike had 2 five year missions on it, Spock served with Pike for 11 years.  Maybe they are trying to get the point across that's it was a refit but they sure don't seem to worry about that. 
And no, I don't like the interior looking like the Apple Store either.  Maybe this is what Roddenberry, Coon & Jeffries would have done with the money back in the 60's, maybe not. 


Maybe I'm far too close (being a fan of Trek) to be objective of this movie.  I freely admit that possibility, and I ask, what do I do about it?  Answer?  Nothing.  I'll gladly watch my remastered Original Series on DVD along with TNG, DS9 & Enterprise.  I do kind of wish I could be like my friend Patrick who is able to look at this and enjoy it like he does.  He is able to look at it with fresh eyes and see it with those fresh eyes.  I envy him for that, but I know me.  I like what I like and I don't like what I don't like. 

It's not horrible and I hope that this helps people discover original Star Trek.  There are some good things about it and there are some good people doing good work.  I want to trash it but that wouldn't be fair because of those good things.  (and no, I don't think I trashed it here.  If I wanted to trash it, I wouldn't have tried to be fair or mention the good things about it)  There are some bad things about it and a few that I can't accept.  For me, it's not the social event that it's been for lots of others.  I won't be seeing it again but to give it a chance, I felt like I had to see it.  Now I have and I don't have to bother with it again ('til it hits basic cable...)
Two and a half starships out of 5. 

My Rating System, Explained.

My Rating System.

This topic is spawned by a recent mini movie review on my facebook page. Some times, there are reviews that are a bit misleading and require some insight into the “Bub thinking process”. So let's get to it!

I work on a 1-5 scale, one being the lowest and five being the highest. I've watched way too many movies in my years, so I'm a bit of a snob. (Ha!) Very few movies are rated a 5, fewer still retain that rating over the years. (Yeah, I wish I didn't do retroactive ratings, but at times I do.) I try to avoid not using whole numbers but I do allow half numbers. Say “3.5 out of 5”, for example. I avoid going any lower than that, as eventually you get into splitting hairs and trying to figure out what deserves a 1/10^th of a point and what doesn't.

To help give you readers a better “taste” of my “viewing appetite”, here are some examples of each whole rating. (Note: I am trying to pick movies I've liked for years and given these ratings and don't expect to change them. As always, however, change comes whether we like it or not.)

5 Rating:

To get a 5 rating, this movie has to be damn near flawless. Maybe flawless. You can watch it several times and notice something new. It has to take the story somewhere you don't expect, nay can't expect. It has to either be something like you've never seen before or done in such a way that you don't even realize you've seen this story done before.

Let's see, it's hard to come up with these. Dawn of the Dead 1978 (my favorite horror film of all time. I have literally seen this movie in the hundreds of times.). The Devil's Rejects. Casablanca. Star Trek 2: The Wrath of Khan. The Empire Strikes Back. Iron Man (1). Captain America. The Dark Knight.

4 Rating:

4 rating means it's great. Not good, but great. But it doesn't have to be flawless. It can be a story you've seen before but done in a totally new and/or different way (Star Wars, the first one from 1977). Or it's such a ground breaking, trend setting film that every other movie copies it and it's been copied so much, it's lost some of it's power (Citizen Kane).

Examples include Star Wars (what is now called “Episode 4”, but I refuse to use Lucas' stupid added-on title). Citizen Kane (which most non movie snob fans can't understand what the big deal is about it because so many movies have copied it). Psycho (ditto the Kane note). Night of the Living Dead 1968 (ditto being copied and being trend setting. For those of you that don't know, Walking Dead wouldn't exist with out NOTLD). Star Trek 6 The Undiscovered Country. The Blues Brothers. Animal House. Iron Man 2. Thor. The Dark Knight Rises. Excalibur. 300. 13 Assassins. 28 Days Later. 28 Weeks Later. Airplane. An American Werewolf In London. Ben Hur. The Ten Command. The Big Sleep (1946).

3 Rating:

This doesn't mean the movie is bad. It means for some reason, I expected more. And for some reason, the movie just doesn't have that “Oomph” to push it further. It's lacking something that I'll try to address in each comment. It doesn't mean I don't necessarily like the film either, I'm rather fond of most films with the 3 rating. The recent remake of Evil Dead released this year got a 3 rating. I expected more, given who made it and the way they seemed to be taking it.

3 rating Films: Iron Man 3 (lots of pretty pictures, but the story was lacking. Again, I expected more). Evil Dead (2013) (Pacing, lack of horror, humor in the wrong places. Oh and I'll say it, apparently duct tape can fix anything, including an arm being cut off). American Beauty (This one is borderline. There is nothing “wrong” with it, it's a well made film that I enjoyed. But I guess it just doesn't connect with me on some level. Too many characters conveniently falling into one another's life). Assault on Precinct 13 (1976) (another movie I think there is nothing wrong with, great story, good acting. It's biggest problem is it is so obviously low budget. I honestly love this film and enjoy watching it, it should be higher rated). Bram Stoker's Dracula (I guess my biggest issue was this film was billed as being the closest to the novel. It's not closer than Dracula 2000, oh and Dracula becomes love's bitch). The Butterfly Effect (a good time travel movie for the common person not acquainted with the basic concepts. I would like to see a more complex, more mature version of it made). Captain Kronos, Vampire Hunter (bad choice as lead actor, he turns an action hero into a boring slob. He almost kills the film for me. Thankfully Caroline Munro is there to be some amazing scenery)

2 Rating:

We now start to get into movies I would call bad. Boring, lame, slow pacing, but usually a 2 rated movie have only one major or multiple minor problems. It's not quite a mess, but it's not anything I would be in any hurry to watch again. Truthfully, most movies I see end up with a 2 rating.

2 rating Films

Batman Begins. Cloverfield. Collateral. Constantine. The Greatest Story Ever Told (While the story of Jesus might not be an action film, it's not this... slow... moving... film...). The Dead Pool. (easily the worst Dirty Harry movie, I blame Jim Carrey) Pirates of the Caribbean 2 (there is an hour of this movie that could be cut and never missed). Saw (I know people are suppose to do stupid things in horror movies, but come on....).

1 Rating.

Major issues through out the film. It's bad, it's real bad. I can be forgiving of low budget movies but not poorly made low budget movies with no heart. Something had rubbed me majorly wrong with this film and if you ask or read my review, you will find out what they were. Be prepared for some blunt talk here.

The alleged Star Trek 11 movie from 2009 fits in here. (I'll re post my review from my MySpace page if anyone asks, lots of things to not like about it. I would actually give it a lower rating but there were a few actual things about it that I liked, largely Leonard Nimoy playing Spock one last time even if the role is written poorly.) Hitman (the video game “adaptation”). I Am Legend (My favorite Matheson novella done very, very wrong). Miami Vice The (remake) Movie. Nightmare City. Paranormal Activity. Pirates of the Caribbean 3 (and it only gets this high of a rating due the an action god in Chow Yun Fat). Saw 2. Salt.

And lastly, we come the rating I give out the least the dreaded “Zero” or 0 rating.

This thing has to be an utter dog. If I give a film a zero, it's bad, really bad. If you follow my reviews and agree or get along with them, you probably shouldn't bother watching this film. If you disagree with my films, go Redbox it! I honestly try to not give many zero ratings as I can usually find something to give at least a half point or 1 point for, but this dreck doesn't deserve to get that kindness.

Most of the cheap, bad, Italian zombie George Romero ripoffs would fit here. The remake of Texas Chainsaw Massacre from the mid 2000s would be here along with the remake of Friday the 13^th from the later naughts also. Automanton Transfusion (The first movie I was so mad at for buying, Fangoria lied to me. This is garbage.) Day of the Dead 2: Contagium (what does this have to do with the flawed masterpiece from 1985? NOTHING!). No Country For Old Men (I honestly couldn't stop laughing at the “villain” who was basically Forest Gump's Mexican cousin with a limp. It just seemed like some guy who got his foot stepped on trying to act “tough”). The Spirit (Damn you Frank Miller, Damn you!)

Oh, one last thing (man, can you tell Colombo is on while I type this?), I try to pick some thing related to the film as my rating icon. Usually one or two words to go along with the number rating. Say “3 chainsaws out of 5” for the Evil Dead remake. It could easily be “missing hands” or “evil hands” or even “evil books”. Though some of my choices are a bit more obscure (“yellow ovals” for a Batman film, for example), I try to stick with more obvious ones.

So there you go, a small peek into the movie review part of my brain. I'll take pity on you and not have you travel any further into places no one wants to go. There you go my Good Reader. As always, be good to yourself!