God’s Not Dead: Opium For The Masses

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

Evangelical propaganda, which highlights the absurdities of extreme faith and belief albeit it not on purpose.

As I was strolling through the internet I heard some talk of this film, and despite being deeply negative, decided to check it out for myself to see if it was indeed as bad as people were saying. Well, it turns out the bad reputation this film has is well deserved, as it is an incredibly weak film that feels like religious propaganda belonging in another century.

I will admit my experience with faith films is relatively small, so I cant say if they are all as bad as this, but if they are I question who turns up for them. The plot was not only incredibly ham-fisted but also ridiculous in the extreme, with the way it portrays the atheist characters being especially out of touch and baffling. It is a strawman argument trying to convince the good Christian viewers of how the modern world is a personified devil that needs to be fought at all costs, with only a return to goof old fashion Christian values capable of saving the day.

The film seems to think of itself as a way to convince the agnostics and the atheists out there and get them on board, however, it fails in this aim so spectacularly that it will have the opposite effect, making the version of Christianity this film preaches seem even more fundamentalist.

The only good thing about this picture is that it crosses a line wherein it becomes laughably bad.

Overall, a mess that highlights some of the key problems at the root of US identity.

Pros.

Its laughably bad

Cons.

It is evangelical propaganda

It is stupid

It is so heavy handed with its message that it destroys it

All the characters are loathsome

If you enjoyed this review, then please head over to my Patreon to support me, I offer personalized shoutouts, the ability for you to pick what I review next and full access to my Patreon exclusive game reviews. Check it out!

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

The Simpsons Movie: The Ending We Deserved?

4/5

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

The Simpson family are forced out of Springfield after seemingly dooming it, however they of course come together to try and save the town.

I remember watching this in the cinema when it first came out and it was a huge deal. I enjoyed it a lot then, but my question was would it hold up now after all these years. In short it does, there are one or two lazy elements here and there but for the most part a lot of what made and makes, yes I like modern Simpsons, so great is fully on display here.

I think the best thing about this film is how far they push the concept. They go all out in a way that they simply couldn’t do on an episode of the show or even in a two-parter, and show us things we have never seen before in the show. When you compare this to other series that have also translated to the big screen like the Bob’s Burgers movie you see the difference between what is theatrical and what isn’t.

Moreover, the Simpson family and their various dynamics are kept at the heart of this film and I truly think that is why it is as good as it is. Rather than try and spread its focus amongst a bunch of supporting character, as newer episodes do, this film keeps the focus on the family and that really helps it to thrive. I particularly think the Homer, voiced by Dan Castellaneta, and Bart, voiced by Nancy Cartwright, storyline is quite interesting as it advances the relationship between the two characters into an area we haven’t seen them before where Bart seemingly truly abandons Homer.

My only real criticism of this film is that the writing is a little obvious and crucially convenient. Whereas early seasons of the show would go out of there way to be clever and even subversive, everything that happens here is incredibly signposted and obvious and as such the surprise is lacking.

Overall, a strong ending for a show that would go on for many more seasons after it.

Pros.

The Homer/Bart storyline

The scope

The comedy

It is very quotable

Cons.

The writing is a little predictable and dumb

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

Brian And Charles: Build Your Friends

3/5

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

A lonely but gifted man, played by David Earl, builds a robot, voiced by Chris Hayward, and a friendship between the two blossoms.

I think this film really strikes a chord with those of us out there who have known loneliness, isolation or torment by our peers, in many ways it is a beautiful tale about friendship and standing up for yourself. It truly is hard to not feel something whilst watching this film.

However, therein lies the problem with it for me. Perhaps somewhat paradoxically this film made me care about Brian and Charles so much that during the third act where it looked like Charles was going to be burnt alive I could barely get through it. The film bonds you to these characters in such a way that when they face harm it almost feels traumatic.

I wouldn’t view this film as a comedy, so in that respect I would say temper your expectations, but it does have feel good elements and an ending that makes you want to cheer. Ultimately this film takes you on an emotional rollercoaster, but laughter isn’t on the track.

Overall, a touching film that at times succeeds a little bit too much.

Pros.

You really care about the characters

It has a great ending

The performances are all top notch

Cons.

Seeing bad things befall Charles almost feels a little traumatic and that can be hard to watch

It has pacing issues

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

Only Murders In The Building: The Last Day Of Bunny Folger

2.5/5

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

The last day in the life of Bunny, played by Jayne Houdyshell.

Honestly I am not really digging this season of Only Murders In The Building, and I think that it is just being stretched out for the sake of stuff to put on Disney +. As I have said in earlier reviews the mystery this time around is not particularly interesting and unlike with the first season you don’t care about what is going on. To be frank I could stop watching this show right here and not miss it at all.

However, something that I will give this episode credit for is that it at least takes a chance and tries to do something new. Rather than focus on the central trio we get to see a day in the life of a fairly important side character, and not many shows would dedicate a whole episode to a supporting character in this way so that was pretty cool as it helped to flesh out the wider world of the show.

Although through this focus on another character this episode highlights our central trio in a less than stellar light. I do understand that the point of this episode’s shifted perspective is to reframe things, but it does this a little too well and clearly illustrates all the worst traits of our lead characters and makes them unlikeable. The charm of the show is really gone after this episode.

Overall, I might stop watching as I don’t want to continue watching a once promising show continue to drag itself through the mud.

Pros.

Be brave enough to focus on a smaller character

It is watchable

It makes you care more about Bunny

Cons.

It is fairly dull

The mystery doesn’t seem to be leading anywhere

The leads are unlikeable

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

Falling Inn Love: A Good Way To Kill Off Your Remaining Brain Cells

1/5

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

A symbolic representation of Netflix failing in the most basic concept of quality over quantity.

Honestly, if I were not reviewing this film I would have turned it off at the twenty minute mark. It was more than a slog to get through and at times became actively annoying for me.

This film perfectly encapsulates the idea of the irritating entitled American abroad who thinks that it is okay to talk down to the locals and who is a baffled that they don’t have the latest technology that she is used to. Christina Millan plays the lead character as such a brat that you will find it hard to feel anything towards her other than contempt.

Moreover, the story structure is beyond basic and feels copied and pasted over from countless other Netflix romance films that do the exact same thing: with some slight variation. You know right from the offset where the film is going and it doesn’t surprise you in anyway.

In addition the usual toxic messages and creeping sexist undertones of the romantic comedy genre are here in spades, and again it makes the film even more unwatchable.

Overall, Netflix just makes trash now.

Pros.

You can dare your friends to try and sit through it, that might be some fun as long as you don’t have to watch it back.

Cons.

It is sexist

The lead is awful

It is generic

You can guess all the plot points at the start of the film.

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

Bride Wars: This Wouldn’t Get Made Today, Be Thankful For That

1/5

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

Rather than have a civil conversation about their thoughts, feelings and concerns, two women, played by Kate Hudson and Anne Hathaway, are forced into a showdown for a frankly out of date and overly thought of practice, marriage. The sexism in Hollywood is fairly rampant in this one.

The whole premise of this film from having both girls spend their whole lives dreaming of getting married to having to tear each other down just to get the better big day is simply toxic. Some may say that I am overly sensitive, but I thought the idea that all women really want to do is get married died years ago and that we have all moved on to a more progressive dawn, was I wrong?

Hudson and Hathaway are fine, but neither of them are giving the performances of their career and both are fairly easily forgotten about. I feel like because the writer of this film knew it was a romantic comedy they thought that they could peddle out any old tripe and people would just gobble it up, as that is the only explanation I can think of for why the two leads are written as deeply out of date cliches.

Moreover, the ending sentiment feels predictable and like a bygone conclusion from the outset. There is nothing that shocks you or presents even the most simplistic of challenges, it is all incredibly generic.

Furthermore, this film features Chris Pratt which for me just adds to its list of issues, but some people like him so I won’t be too critical of that.

Overall, a widely sexist out of time romantic comedy.

Pros.

It is short

Cons.

It is sexist

It is generic

Neither of the leads are particularly good

Chris Pratt is his ever unlikeable self and that become distracting after a while

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

Man VS Bee: How To Completely Destroy A House In A Matter Of Days

3/5

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

A novice house sitter, played by Rowan Atkinson, goes to war with a bee.

I thought this had moments of wholesome light entertainment but ultimately felt let down by a lack of clear plot progression and by a lack of character growth. I understand that this program seemed to want to mimic the older dynamics of something like Tom And Jerry and as such the show couldn’t have ended the man and bee learning to get along, yet I think it would have been better if the series had ended with a peace between the two and an unlikely friendship. As it stands Atkinson’s lead doesn’t grow at all from the first episode to the final, which in my mind is an issue, but maybe I am asking too much.

However, something I will commend this show for is the episode length. I think that often Netflix series can run on for far too long and become tedious by the end, but this show tries to get around that by having its episodes on for little over ten minutes in most cases adding to the binge effect of the show and creating a nice breezy pace.

Moreover, it is nice seeing Atkinson back on screens he is always very welcome and brings a great deal of heart and humour to the series. His character is very easy to warm to.

Overall, fun to a degree but the writing stops it from ever being truly great.

Pros.

The episode length

Atkinson

The wholesome fun

Cons.

The ending

It reaches a point where it feels repetitive

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

Only Murders In The Building: Framed

2.5/5

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

The mystery continues but honestly I am starting to lose interest.

I am not saying this is a terrible episode, as by all accounts it is watchable. However, it is also far from good.

As I mentioned in the previous review of this latest season the mystery is feeling more and more needless and forced and this episode did nothing to change my mind on that front. All of this jazz around the painting just feels like clutching at straws to try and give this season a purpose. Moreover, Amy Schumer is once again forced into the episode as even though she is just a guest character they have to get her overly involved the plot as the producers of this show seem to be the only people on earth to not understand how unpopular and disliked she is.

However, it is not all doom and gloom. Much like the first episode had the Brazzos’ remake, this episode explores Mabel, played by Selena Gomez, and her artistic side. I think it is apparent that Cara Delevingne’s character will be the villain of the season, however, despite this rather obvious direction I am glad to see that this season is exploring Mabel more as she is the most interesting of the three characters by a long stretch and also the one we know the least about.

Overall, not without some enjoyable aspects but the mystery really needs to get into gear, and they need to get rid of Amy Schumer if they want to keep me around.

Pros.

Exploring Mabel’s character

It is watchable

There is still some fun to be had

Cons.

It is still struggling to justify its existence

Schumer

The mystery is boring

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

Father Of The Bride: Really This Again

2.5/5

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

A Latinx remake of Father Of The Bride. It is exactly what you would expect it to be for the most part.

A few things I will praise this film for, firstly Andy Garcia is terrific he perfectly captures the neurotic personality that Martin had in his take on the character, but also adds his own distinct flair to it. Moreover, I like that in a few small areas this film doesn’t follow the tried and tested story and does its own thing, sadly these sections were few and far between and the film as a whole could have benefited a lot more from trying to break away from and subvert our expectations rather than just giving us the same old same old.

I think in a lot of ways therein lies the main problem with this film, it is boring. It is the same story with the same characters that you have seen before. I understand that Hollywood is creatively bankrupt but do they think that can just keep remaking the same old collection of films over and over again and people will be happy and accept that? I think they need to do better.

Overall, Garcia is trying and the film is very watchable but ultimately this film lacks any kind of new ideas and just trots out the same worn plot beats and character journeys.

Pros.

Garcia

It is very watchable

Isabela Merced

Cons.

It is deeply generic

It relies heavily on cliches for its character types

It is tired and worn out in the extreme

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

Only Murders In The Building: Persons Of Interest

3/5

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

After being hauled in for murder the trio try and prove their innocence and begin to find themselves staring down another mystery.

I find this show to be good comfort viewing, you aren’t really watching it to see something you have never seen before or to be challenged you are just watching it to be casually entertained. In that view I enjoyed this first episode well enough it was very easy to watch and the central trio all had great chemistry, as they did last season.

My question for this season which the first episode made very more crystal clear, is why did it need a second season, where is there to go from here? Honestly, I feel like the mystery this time around feels a little forced, but who knows maybe they will go somewhere interesting with it and justify why the show needed to come back for a second season.

I liked that the Charles, played by Steve Martin, storyline had him return to his former role as Brazzo’s, and in doing so pointed out and made fun of the idea of legacy sequels wherein the previous main character is only kept around for nostalgias sake and the show or film usually tries to reinvent itself to mixed results.

I won’t spend long talking about the Amy Schumer cameo as a lot of you will know my thoughts on Schumer, though I will say here scene sucked all of the life out of the sequence and certainly was a low point of the episode. The fact some of the characters are in awe of seeing Amy Schumer in a lift is laughably up her arse, also if it was true to life she would be angry for being recognised.

Overall, an enjoyable first episode but not one that justifies why this show needed to come back for season two.

Pros.

It is watchable

The leads all still have great chemistry

I like the meta commentary on legacy sequels

Cons.

Schumer

It doesn’t justify its existence

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer