A one-time Success Story
Deadpool (2016): A former Special Forces operative turned mercenary is subjected to a rogue experiment that leaves him with accelerated healing powers, adopting the alter ego Deadpool.
Look. I'm not gonna lie. I'm getting a little burned out with superhero movies. I mean they're fun movies, no doubt, but none of them try and differentiate themselves from the rest. They just star whatever charismatic actor they cast, they play a character that's essentially the same as every other superhero, and the film makes boatloads of money because Hollywood executives know that's what Millennials want right now. However, that is not the case with Deadpool. Deadpool defies all the norms we've grown to expect from the superhero genre, and delivers a great breath of fresh air to this extremely bloated genre. But, as much as Hollywood execs will try and reproduce the success of Deadpool, it's never going to happen. It won't even happen in Deadpool 2. Hopefully in this review I will be able to explain why I believe this to be the case. So let's go!
I'll make this an unconventional review. After all, that's what Deadpool does, right? I really have to commend the writing staff. They did not hold back with the jokes in Deadpool. They swung for the fences, and while in my opinion a few of the jokes were a little over the top, for the most part they hit it out of the ballpark. But, more importantly than that I think, is how the writing staff/newbie director Tim Miller tried to use a wide variety of jokes. From the opening captions to visual humor to self referential humor, this film had it all. This film really felt like an Edgar Wright film at times, and that is by far the highest compliment I can give a comedy in this day and age. About the only thing it was missing was Simon Pegg. However Ryan Reynolds was a more than capable lead, playing the Deadpool people had been clamoring for ever since he was butchered in X-Men Origins. Another thing that factored into the one-time success was the budget. 20th Century Fox only gave this film a $60 million budget (in comparison Avengers: Infinity War has a rumored budget of $1 BILLION) and the writers were smart enough to make a parody of this fact. They also made the great move of not spending that money on big-name actors: other than Ryan Reynolds, there are no high profile actors on this list. I mean Morena Baccarin and TJ Miller might be familiar to some, they are by no means A-list actors. Even Ant-Man couldn't help but cast Michael Douglas in their movie. And with Cable being the announced villain of Deadpool 2, odds are Fox will follow this trend and cast some big-name actor in this role, completely missing one of the key ingredients of the success of Deadpool: it feels like a B movie that invested all its money into its lead making A-level movie money. Another thing that adds to the novelty of Deadpool is the blood. This will no doubt be adopted in other superhero movies: since Deadpool has shown that you can make money with a film that reaches for that "R" rating and doesn't settle for the stupid (and frankly, should not exist) PG-13 rating, Hollywood execs will not hesitate to incorporate blood into future superhero movies. Heck, Warner Brothers is probably asking if they can add lots of blood in Batman v. Superman right now. Disney likely is too for Captain America: Civil War. We'll definitely see it by Suicide Squad and Doctor Strange. Point is, by the time Deadpool 2 rolls around this novelty will be gone, also removing some of the "perfect storm" mix that we got here in Deadpool.
I'm sorry I sound so cynical, it's just hard for me to get excited about this genre nowadays. There's so much corporate goo behind the scenes that it really makes me sad. I'm terrified this is what will become of me with my beloved Star Wars franchise, but right now we are in the Iron Man 1 days of that series. I'll be quite sad when Episode IX rolls around and Disney announces 6 more Star Wars movies. Anyway, I think another thing that was novel in this film that we won't see again is how it made fun of the fact that it was in the X-Men cinematic universe. The jokes revolving this were absolutely some of the best of the film, and I'm sure next time around Fox will invest all this money in bringing in several members of the X-Men franchise to have cameos in Deadpool 2. Not even Ant-Man could help itself from having a big name Marvel cameo, which I couldn't help but look at as Marvel just circle-jerking itself.
I think I'm just gonna stop now. Ultimately, Deadpool is a blast no doubt. The movie is just mindless fun, but it takes mindless fun to a whole new level, which is a good thing! Mindless fun needed a bit of a shakeup. However, it is by no means a perfect film. The visuals are bland, the acting around Ryan Reynolds is just ok, and the love story between Reynolds and Baccarin was just fine. I'm definitely not as big on that love story as others are, but it's definitely the best love story I've seen in a superhero movie. Course that's basically damning with feint praise but you know......
Anywho, that's all I got. Go ahead and hate me for not thinking Deadpool is the greatest film ever created. It's a good film, but nothing more. Go ahead and hate me for being cynical in the superhero genre. But it's all true, and you hate me because you know I'm right. Let's move on and not think about superhero movies for an entire month.
The Critique: A perfect storm of novelty and no-holds-barred humor, Deadpool is a fun and exciting addition to a genre that desperately needed something to shake things up.
The Recommendation: DO NOT TAKE YOUR KIDS TO SEE THIS MOVIE. That's all I'm gonna say here because everyone in the world has already seen this, but DO NOT TAKE YOUR KIDS TO SEE THIS MOVIE. It is a HARD R.
The Verdict: 7/10 Good.
As lively as a zombie
Pride + Prejudice + Zombies (2016): Jane Austen's classic tale of the tangled relationships between lovers from different social classes in 19th century England is faced with a new challenge -- an army of undead zombies.
First off, can we call this film what it really is? Pride + Prejudice + Motherf***ing Zombies. I mean how can you not love the idea of having zombies invade 19th century Victorian England? The idea of using swords and single shot muskets, the emphasis on going for the headshot and raising the stakes because if you miss the one shot you get with your gun, you're (un)dead, it's so cool! And then you sprinkle the classic Pride and Prejudice tale on the side and you have one great idea for a story. I mean how can you possibly screw that up? Well by filming all the action sequences in close-up so we can't see anything and lose all resemblance of spatial awareness, by making the one likable male character the villain who we're supposed to hate, by never giving Elizabeth Bennet and Mr. Darcey the chance to earn their character's story arc, and by not letting us understand what's going on in the zombie war at any given moment, that's how. Seriously. I know it's early, but this film is already asking to be on my biggest disappointments of 2016 list. I really did not see this coming, because after all how could you possibly screw this up???
So let's talk about the good first. Lily James is great. This is only the second film I've seen with her in it, (the first being the terrible Burnt) but I heard she was really good in Cinderella as well, and she is very likable as Elizabeth Bennet here. While her performance isn't on the same breakout level as Daisey Ridley's in Star Wars, she's still gearing up to be a superstar, and it's quite obvious that's the case here. Let's see what else.....um the costumes are good. I mean these movie studios better have some awesome 19th century attire lying around so it's basically impossible to screw that one up, but fortunately for us they didn't screw that up. And I mean I guess there's the fact that this is a female-lead film. That's awesome. We don't see that enough but I really shouldn't have to point that because it should be happening way more than it actually is. But at least this is a story about the women and not the men. Aaaaaaaaaaand ummmmmmm some of the lore of the zombies was fascinating? Ya I guess. The idea that a zombie "transforms" when they eat their first human brain and can delay this transformation by eating non-human brains and be civil in the meantime is cool and something different from the usual zombie repertoire. Buuuuuuut where they go with this plot point is a huge waste. Like the rest of the film.
Ok so where did this film go wrong? It starts with the cinematography. This film is sooooo poorly shot. The action sequences aren't as much action sequences as they are someone swiping a sword at the air and you having to believe they just struck at a zombie. I mean even by the dreaded "PG-13 rated violence" standard this film is bad. Let me give you a good example: so there's this idea throughout the film that there's several different classes of martial arts training that everyone partakes in to defend themselves from zombies: the rich are trained in Japanese martial arts while the "wise" are trained in Chinese martial arts. Sounds interesting, right? So we're gonna get a scene where two characters trained in the different schools go up against zombies and maybe the one trained in Japanese martial arts is killed or hurt or has to be saved by the one trained in Chinese martial arts, right? Or really any scene where these two schools of training get showcased on the battlefield? Right? WRONG. This training element is brought up in the opening monologue of the film, and the ONLY time it's brought up afterwards is when the rich judge the (supposedly) wise for training in China instead of Japan. That's it. And when we do get fight scenes, they're shot in such uncomfortable close-ups that we can't actually see the fighting styles in action AT ALL. There's a scene where a few of the daughters are training and fighting each other and it was set up to be this great scene where these fighting styles are really showcased but instead it's shot in a dark basement in extreme close up and you have no idea where anyone is or where anyone else is and GAH IT'S SO FREAKING FRUSTRATING.
Not to mention the cliche last-second saves. Ya those moments just made me cross my arms and sigh. Actually really the entire 3rd act is a disaster for that matter. The one likable male character in the film (who is a made-up character, by the way, and not in Pride and Prejudice) is of course the bad guy, and he's played by the EXTREMELY talented Jack Huston (of Boardwalk Empire acclaim) who really should've played Mr. Darcy because holy crap the guy playing Mr. Darcy was bad. I mean no offense to Sam Riley, but this is my first impression of him and he's never gonna get that one back. I'll cut him some slack because he's given literally nothing to work with here from a writing standpoint, because aside from everyone sounding proper the script here is only good when it's a carbon copy of Pride and Prejudice, but every scene between him and Lily James I just felt like James was just dragging him along as she did essentially all the acting herself. Oh ya, and did I mention that Lena Headey and the great Charles Dance are in this film too? Both of them are obviously cash-grabbing here, as Lena Headey's criminally limited performance can basically be summed up as "Cersei Lannister with an eye patch." Dance is given nothing to do either, but at least the most entertaining moment of the film for me came when these two were together (for one brief scene) and I kept hoping for Headey to just blurt out "Shut up dad!" to Dance.
I could go on, but I figured I'd save you the trouble of putting up with my rantings. The few good moments of this film are surrounded by buckets and buckets of crap, and thus make this, well, crap. Even though Lily James is charming and there are some interesting ideas presented with the zombies, I couldn't help but think "Where the zombies at?" whenever they weren't on screen during the 108 minute film because every male actor besides Jack Huston is awful. And when the zombies were on screen I couldn't see what was going on enough to actually appreciate it. In short, Pride + Prejudice + Zombies is a misfire, one which I hope gets corrected someday. There's some awesome potential here. After all how can you not love the idea of zombies invading Victorian era England? That's so freaking badass! And instead of a class system, you have different styles of fighting defining the rich and the poor. That's cool! There's a hugely fascinating story in there. But it's not here. This film gets the unfortunate distinction of being the first real disappointment of 2016, and I recommend everyone avoid it like the plague. Ha. Get it? Plague? Like zombie plague? Ok I'll go home now.
The Critique: A fascinating premise wasted, Pride + Prejudice + Zombies ultimately fails because of a weak script, bad acting from almost everyone outside the lead, and terrible choreography. Sadly it is the first big disappointment of 2016.
The Recommendation: Don't bother. Go watch Pride and Prejudice again and pretend there are zombies everywhere. It'll probably be better than watching this.
Rewatchability: Moderately Low
The Verdict: 3/10 Bad.
Pre-Teen Humor. Pre-Teen humor everywhere.
The Lazer Team (2016): Four losers are thrust into the position of saving the world when they stumble upon a UFO crash site and become genetically equipped to the battle suit on board.
Ok. Most of you won't care about this film. If you have no idea what Rooster Teeth is, then this definitely applies to you. So, let me first address you. The Lazer Team is a b-movie, and a bad one at that. Even though it's a quick 102 minutes, the humor is just lazy. As in it's mostly dick and butt jokes. Such originality! Wow! Never heard that one before! Nestled in between the unoriginal jokes are a few original ones, however these original jokes just aren't enough to worthy a watch for you. If you want to discover what Rooster Teeth is all about, check out their Let's Plays and Red vs. Blue series on YouTube. They are significantly more original. But now, let me address those that do care about this review: fans of Rooster Teeth. And I'll just say this: despite its extremely lackluster script, my fandom of Rooster Teeth came out and I couldn't help but have a good time watching these guys I've spent almost a third of my life with bumble around and essentially be themselves in their first feature length film.
So I think most people after watching this film will think it was ok. I certainly did. On the one hand, I had an absolute blast watching Burnie Burns, Gavin Free, and Michael Jones fumbling through the whole film. Seeing Michael pick on Gavin like he always does was like a trip through nostalgia-ville. The Rooster Teeth cameos were also really fun to watch. Joel's cameo definitely took the cake for me seeing as back in the day he was an actual actor. I just wish we would've gotten more cameos from Achievement Hunter. I waited the whole film to see my boy Ray Narvaez Jr. pop up.....but it never happened. Sad face. The other actors were all over the place, but I guess that is the result of it being a b-level film. Colton Dunn was excellent as.....um......the non-Rooster Teeth employee, but pretty much every other non-Rooster Teeth character in this film was extremely bland, especially discount Chris Evans, aka the "hunk" of the film, Alan Ritchson. Man should that character have been played by Rooster Teeth's own Blaine Gibson. Steve Shearer was also pretty bad, a character that could've been played better by the head of Rooster Teeth and the director of this film, Matt Hullum. If you haven't put two and two together yet, this film would've been a lot more enjoyable had the film used more Rooster Teeth employees. Especially since it's Rooster Teeth fans that are gonna watch this film.
The main problem with this film, though, is the script. Or lack there of. This script is terrible. There's no other way to say it. I expected so much more from Burnie Burns. I mean I get that it's not meant to be anything substantial, it is a comedy after all. But the comedy of this film is not funny either. I mean a few dick and butt jokes are fine, but holy crap that's all this film is. And you know what's worse? The blatant sequel-bait. I mean c'mon, guys. At least act like you care. The sequel bait left me feeling really empty inside after the film and made it resonate even less than it was already going to.
In short, this film is fine. I laughed from time to time, but it was only because I was trying really hard to enjoy myself. After all given how many hundreds of hours of Rooster Teeth content I've watched, how could I not enjoy this film, right? The appeal of this film is definitely only to the already-established fanbase, and just about anyone else will be sitting in as much misery watching this film as they would watching an Adam Sandler film. Rooster Teeth fans: watch it to say you did, then forget about the fact that it exists. Everyone else: stay very far away. There's a lot better ways to spend your time.
The Critique: While fans of Rooster Teeth will find enjoyment in the performances of their favorite RT employees, everyone else will not be able to get past the terrible jokes and script trying to hold it all together.
The Recommendation: Ha. Only if you're a Rooster Teeth fan. Everyone else? This film is pure snake oil.
The Verdict: I'm gonna go with two scores here. One for the Rooster Teeth fan, and one for everyone else.
Rooster Teeth Fan: 5/10 Average.
Everyone Else: 2/10 Garbage.
By: Joseph Kathmann and Peter Kosanovich
A Life-Altering Film
Spotlight (2015): The true story of how the Boston Globe uncovered the massive scandal of child molestation and cover-up within the local Catholic Archdiocese, shaking the entire Catholic Church to its core.
Hey guys! I'm so excited to have another review co-written by my buddy Peter Kosanovich. This time we're taking a look at Spotlight, and I'll warn you....it's very close to my personal favorite film of the year. Everything about this film is perfect, from an incredibly engaging story told in a very respectful manner to some incredibly subdued and fantastic acting performances from the entire ensemble cast. The set is wonderfully authentic, and there's even some phenomenal performances from the numerous extras in this film, which was actually something this film really needed to get right. Fortunately it did.
When making Spotlight, the directors, actors, writers, and everyone involved had to take care when preparing their story. They needed to follow suit from the actual Spotlight team in preparing an unbiased, investigative story – to not glorify the writers or demonize the church. As a reviewer you have to take the same precautions, it’s best to take a step back and figure out how to approach such a delicate subject. Yes, we are giving out opinion to an extent, but we don’t want to come at a movie so sided that we can’t see everything clearly. Telling the story of the Catholic Church sexual abuse scandal from the early 2000s, Spotlight follows the team of investigative journalists from the Boston Globe as they uncover this scandal and its significance to the Boston community, a predominantly Catholic area. Beginning with a flashback scene to the 1970s we are introduced to a sexual abuse case that is promptly swept under the rug. The priest being held at the police station is released into the custody of a Cardinal, who has promised the family that they priest will be removed from circulation. Jumping forward to the early 2000s, Spotlight immediately begins following the investigative team, known as Spotlight, as they are given this story to work on by The Boston Globes’ new head editor. At the time, the story was a simple follow-up to a previous story involving a single priest, but it quickly snowballs into a much larger investigation involving close to 90 priests. What makes Spotlight so compelling is its accuracy to actual events. Yes, the directing, and acting, and writing are all phenomenal in their own right, but the film is as accurate as possible within a two hour time frame.
This was actually something I was very impressed by. Not only did this film maintain accuracy in storytelling, but it maintained accuracy in its set design. The review from the Boston Globe itself (which you can read here) actually said that not only was most of the movie filmed in the actual Boston Globe, but most of the extras in the film are current Boston Globe employees. But we really need to commend Tom McCarthy. His directing here is absolutely subliminal. There's so much care taken in every step of telling this story, and it shows. This crew knew they were working on something important, and the amount of respect shown for the source material bleeds through every aspect of the film.
Beyond the accuracy of Spotlight, as mentioned, the film also utilizes incredible pacing of the story from director Tom McCarthy. He breaks down the events beat by beat to keep the story moving with a captivating pace throughout the 128 minute film. This also leads the performances from all of the leads to be quite dynamic and genuine in their delivery; Michael Keaton is highly believable as the editor of the project, knowing what leads to follow where; Mark Ruffalo is clearly the man-on-a-mission trying his hardest to get to the bottom of this, putting his soul into the project; Liev Schreiber perfectly portrays the outsider, very uncomfortable in the larger public settings, while also being the calculated voice behind the project. Perhaps the most underrated performance in the entire film though goes to Rachel McAdams. She is caught in a situation where her beliefs and put at odds with, and change because of the investigation, but more importantly her relationships with her family, in particular her grandmother are tested. The single most powerful moment in the entire film goes to McAdams and her grandmother when their story is finally published, and we are made to watch this elderly woman read through an article that addresses a tragic scandal within the Catholic church – her entire world is shattered in that one moment, and we can see it.
Agreed. Rachel McAdams is the standout performer here, but overall I was impressed by how grounded all the performances were. I mean Michael Keaton is a very recognizable actor, and yet by halfway through the film I completely forgot I was watching Michael Keaton, and this goes for everyone in this crew. However, for me, there was no single moment that stood out. Instead, this entire film stood out. This film is thought provoking. I think the best way to describe it is that it's a life-altering film. It actually made me rather upset. Why? Because it could have happened to me. For those who don't know I was raised Catholic in Cincinnati, Ohio, a city confirmed to be involved in the priest sex scandals. The only reason it didn't happen to me was because of luck. There were over 1,000 confirmed victims in the Boston area alone between 1975 and 2002. The Cardinal in charge of the Boston Archdioceses knew this was going on that entire time, and did absolutely nothing. Actually, he actively tried to cover it up. And you know what he got? For letting this happen? A promotion to Rome in 2003. I really thought The Big Short was going to be 2015's most important film since it's the first film to truly and accurately explain 2007's financial crisis, but after watching Spotlight I realized that it's not. Not even close. Now does most important equate to best for me? I don't know. I still need to decide that one, but there's no way I can say this is anything less than a perfect film, and easily within my top 3 best films of 2015. I strongly recommend it to everyone, especially Catholics because it's important to see the entire Catholic Church. Not just your rock. I mean obviously this scandal didn't touch every single priest preaching Catholicism, but it impacted faaar more than I thought it did, to the point that it was a statistical occurrence, and that fact is pretty thought-provoking in and of itself, and to be educated by this film I believe is extremely important. This film is a rare film that's more about the story itself than it is the characters involved. It is certainly one of the best of 2015, and not to be missed.
In my final thoughts I thought this movie was brilliant. Normally a movie ends, and unless I’m looking for something specific in the credits I will get up and leave, but for Spotlight I just sat and waited. I listened to the music and just sat on the impact of this film, and by association the original story as it was released in 2002. A powerful movie, and an incredibly well done movie.
Joseph's Critique: The most important film of the year, Spotlight tells a powerful, important, and thought-provoking story in the perfect way.
Peter's Critique: Spotlight is without a doubt a brilliant film. Powerful, with a message, but never feels preachy (pun intended) at any point. A flawlessly executed film, and my pick for Bets Picture at this year's Oscars.
Joseph's Recommendation: This film earns my biggest must-see recommendation of 2015. If someone said, "I've never seen a film from 2015, show me one." This is the one I'd go for.
Peter's Recommendation: I would highly recommend this movie to just about anyone. No, it is not the big blockbuster that many of us want to see all the time, but it has a compelling story that moves very easily on the screen. You are never in a lull for action or movement in the story. It also highlights, and brings renewed prominence to a potentially dying field, in that of investigative journalism, a powerful tool in the world.
The Verdict: 10/10 Perfect (both of us agree on this)
Oscar Talk: This movie has been racking up nominations galore. Among these nominations have been acting accolades, writing accolades, directing accolades, everything. With the Oscar noms already out, not without controversy at that, I would definitely say that this movie is a hot contender for Best Picture of the year, and so far my favorite for that category.
An emotional Roller coaster
Room (2015): After five-year-old Jack and his mother escape from the enclosed surroundings that Jack has known his entire life, the boy makes a thrilling discovery.
Holy crap. 2015 has been a ridiculous year for film. From Ex Machina to Spotlight. From It Follows to The Big Short. And now Room enters the fray. This film absolutely destroyed me. Throughout its 118 minute runtime, I cried seven different times. SEVEN TIMES. And warning: if you have a child about the age of Jack, you will basically be crying this entire film. That is powerful. Now, I was fortunate enough to be able to go into this film completely blind. I didn't watch any trailers, and didn't read any reviews about the film. So I knew nothing other than the fact that it was nominated for Best Picture. I will say right now.....you should go into this film blind too. You should stop reading this review right now and go see this film. It's worth it. Then come back once you have and we'll talk about it. Deal? Deal.
So, now that you've seen the film, let's talk about it shall we? This film is fantastic. It features hands-down the best performance of the year from Brie Larson, and Jacob Tremblay also puts in one of the best performances of the year as Jack. It features superb set design, with Room being meticulously recreated from author Emma Donoghue's imagination, and it features a second-half of film outside Room that's just as good as the first half. Let's talk about Brie Larson first. Yes, the hype around her is real. For years she has been killing it in supporting roles in films like Scott Pilgrim Vs. The World, 21 Jump Street, The Spectacular Now, Don Jon, and this year's Trainwreck. Well, to say she took advantage of her first major starring role is a ridiculous understatement. Her performance here is BY FAR the best performance of 2015. She has to invoke every emotion throughout the film and she does each of them to a spectacular degree. You can expect to see her at the top of my Second Annual Awesome Actors Awards receiving the "coveted" award when I unveil that in a week or two. However, not to be outdone by Brie Larson, you have Jacob Tremblay. This kid can freaking act. Keep in mind for the first half of this film you have Larson and Tremblay. That's it. And Tremblay is every bit as good as Brie Larson is. This kid is asked to do so much in this film. Not only that, but he's asked to perform in an extremely downplayed manner. Usually a child actor will be very pompous or a screen hog. Or worse they're unnatural and need to be pulled along by the rest of the cast. Well not here. Tremblay's performance was not only convincing, it was moving. There have been some who say he deserved an Oscar nomination for his performance. While there were plenty of snubs in 2015 (cough cough Black actors cough cough) Tremblay is definitely going on that list as another. Joan Allen is also excellent as the Grandma, though she is somewhat underutilized. Speaking of underutilized, William Macy! Pretty much my only complaint with this entire film is William Macy's character. I really wish we had one more scene with him and Larson/Tremblay. That's all that's keeping this film from being perfect. Just an extra 5 minutes of film to explain Macy's dynamic with the rest of the plot. Honestly at this point I still don't know if I'm giving this film a perfect score or not because I get that this story is not meant to be about the grandparents as it's obviously about Larson/Tremblay, but Macy's character was just so underutilized! I guess at least it's good to see an actor be underutilized instead of an actress for once. So there's that.
Everything else about this film is awesome. Director Lenny Abrahamson did a fantastic (and Oscar-worthy) job in the chair for this film, as his crew painstakingly recreated every little detail of Room. The second half of the film was meticulous as well, but Room was the big thing that needed to be done right, and it most certainly was. The music was also incredible, with the fittingly titled The Mighty Rio Grande by This Will Destroy You squarely in the middle of one of the most emotional moments in film of 2015. But what really impressed me was the second half of this film. The second half, outside Room, was just as good if not BETTER than the first half in Room. Jack's discovery of the world contrasted with Ma's coping of her ordeal had me in pieces. The pacing is spot-on, and the film never feels heavy-handed at any given moment.
What else is there to say about this film? I think I know what my score is going to be. Even though William Macy's character and the lack of insight there was a complaint I had, I would always say it takes two complaints to remove me from 10ville. But Room really is a perfect film. It has great direction, a phenomenal story, great set design, and some of the best acting of the year. Sure, the makeup/costumes didn't blow me away, but they didn't have to. And the cinematography was just fine. But that's all it needed to be. Maybe in 2016 I will revamp my ratings to try and encompass a larger range of categories (and thus make reaching that perfect 10 status significantly harder) but I'm not doing that right now. Room has the best fictional story of 2015, and thus it is a worthy 10 in my book.
The Critique: Featuring two of the best performances of the year from its grown up and child leads, Room is a fascinating and rewarding investigation into the effects of an inhumane situation on the mind.
The Recommendation: An absolute must-watch. Plain and simple.
The Verdict: 10/10 Perfect.
"Like" Enter the Movies on Facebook for the latest and greatest on all things movies! OR ELSE FACE THE CONSEQUENCES OF A KILLER RABBIT. Sorry about this one, guys. Not my decision. He volunteered. And is just absolute dynamite!