Spider-Man: Far From Home
The Lion King
Forgot your password?
Don't have an account? Sign up here
and the Terms and Policies,
and to receive email from Rotten Tomatoes and Fandango.
Already have an account? Log in here
Please enter your email address and we will email you a new password.
No user info supplied.
Ever since Charles M. Schulz created "Peanuts" first as a weekly comic strip in newspaper syndication and from there would become a franchise of sorts expanding further into television and theatrical films that would include the original characters. As far as the classic television specials based on "Peanuts" it started with the Emmy and Peabody award winning television special "A Charlie Brown Christmas"(1965). And from the success of the "Peanuts" specials came the movies that inspired it from "A Boy Named Charlie Brown"(1969); "Snoopy Come Home"(1972); to "Race For Your Life Charlie Brown!"(1977); to the last Peanuts theatrical feature "Bon Voyage Charlie Brown and Don't Come Back!"(1980) while the television specials to this day continue to run annually going back to the original television special that started it all(as we commemorate the golden 50th anniversary of that classic television special "A Charlie Brown Christmas" that aired originally as a CBS Special Presentation on December 9, 1965). Fast forward to 2015 and we have "The Peanuts Movie" the first theatrical Peanuts movie in 35 years to star Charlie Brown and the rest of the Peanuts gang. Who would have figured that it would be a good idea to put Charles M. Schulz' classic comic strip characters back in theaters and this time around have them shown in 3D. The results are astounding. "The Peanuts Movie" maybe the most simultaneously and the most charming and most daring experiment yet and when it is just that simply brilliant in execution. The issue here is a pleasant grab bag of everything and everybody over a certain age know and love from Charles M. Schulz' beloved comic strip and many of it's off-shoots,all centered around the main character,of course is Charlie Brown. Some people including those under the age of 13 will fully grasp the intricate dynamics of the franchise universe Schulz created around Charlie Brown over many decades. Those with young children may have a passing from the annual holiday television specials and such,but presumably they aren't as thoroughly versed as youngsters of yore who read the comic strip daily and grew up in a time when the characters were as famous as any in the land. "The Peanuts Movie" works on so many levels that it is a refreshing pace to see a children's movie that doesn't involve villains,silly sidekicks or digusting toilet humor that some producers think that would sell to children and parents. Here "The Peanuts Movie" goes beyond expectations and it is with sincere approval of both kids and adults(who grew up as youngsters themselves with Charlie Brown) that doesn't go into certain details but stays focus with the characters themselves is a breath of fresh air these days in children's entertainment. One nice thing that audiences and younger viewers may or may not appreciate. As with "A Charlie Brown Christmas" and basically all of the Peanuts specials and theatrical features that almost all of the character voices are provided by actual children,not adults with childlike voices. But the genetics do come into play with many side bits referring to Schulz' original material...but to those "Peanuts" fans who are longtime followers and the ones who are new to some may find it puzzling. Why is Snoopy(Charlie Brown's faithful and resourceful Beagle)trying to snatch that kid's blanket? Why does Lucy(Linus' annoying kid sister)keep acting strangely around Schroder,the piano-playing boy? Why is Linus always attached to a blanket? Why is Marcy calling Peppermint Patty sir or Why come one girl is calling another girl sir? Why is Sally(Charlie Brown's kid sister)always lusting after Linus? This is especially true of the extended aerial battles that Snoopy has with the Red Baron(the visual high points of the movie's 3-D incarnation is a must see)which is a movie within a movie that may require some explanation. Or maybe not. With a running time of 88 minutes it is one of the most animated films of the year and for some fans who waiting after 35 years it doesn't disappoint and it delivers. firstname.lastname@example.org
Twenty-two years after the original classic that become the phenomenon known as "Jurassic Park",the fourth installment in the series produced by Steven Spielburg,based on Michael Crichton's best selling novel of the same title has dazzling and spectacular jaw dropping special effects that are the only thing that kept this afloat along with its astounding action sequences. The characters Chris Pratt and Bryce Dallas-Howard looked boring and uptight,add along a couple of bland kids that are put in peril as savage and vicious dinosaurs run amok. The action scenes along with its groundbreaking special effects are the best thing in this movie but as far as that is concern it is nothing more than a assembly-line endeavor with phony emotional swells and dumbed down dialogue and relentless product placement. The real stars are the dinosaurs themselves,and it goes to show that the producers are more into the special effects than its audience as merchandise bait. But in all aspects it is huge improvement from the last movie "Jurassic Park 3" with better technology than the original had when it blew audiences' minds in 1993.
My opinion for the second worst movie of the year. Adam Sandler and director Chris Columbus(of Mrs.Doubtfire, Home Alone, and the Harry Potter films) team up for a lamer than lame flick about Aliens attacking Earth and Invading the White House with video game tropes from the 1980's like Pac-Man, Donkey Kong, Centipede, Galactica, just to name a few. Nice throwaway farce complete with nostalgia from that decade,but when it comes to Adam Sandler and Kevin James, the same tired ass jokes and the same tired ass dialogue makes it watered down for great pleasure not to support anything Adam Sandler puts out. Let's face it he sucks.
The question is why? And this isn't the worst reboot of films from the 80's(see the pathetic rehashing of "Poltergeist",and "Vacation"),but it's another depressing and sad reminder of how the powers that be over in Hollywood will regurgitate anything or even bring back a star on the verge of a makeover just so they can make a fast buck. After the dismal failure that was "Terminator 3:Rise of the Machines",and the disaster that was "Terminator 4"(without Schwarzenegger but instead got the annoying ass-hole that was Christian Bale),we now get a fifth installment on the series where the producers lured Arnold Schwarzenegger back into the role that made him one of the biggest action stars of the 1980's and into the 1990's. With this new version good concepts are applied with fantastic special effects but this one has profoundly stupid dialogue,incoherent storytelling and lame action scenes that make this look like the crap it is. Arnold looks tired and depressed in this movie and it shows with some of the lamest and tired down schtick in movie history where the producers using the same lines from previous films just so they can make a quick buck. And this one really is watered down. To experience Arnold's greatness, it is best to see the original "Terminator",and "Terminator:Judgment Day" in terms on how it should be done,and not like this. Sorry Arnold.
An embarrassment and a total insult to Chevy Chase. This isn't the worst reboot of an movie from the 1980's(see the pathetic rehash of Poltergeist),but it is a depressing reminder of Hollywood has really ran out original ideas and basically will regurgitate anything they can for a quick buck. And if you don't believe me see this for yourself. Rusty Griswold(Ed Helms of The Hangover),the kid from the original National Lampoon's European Vacation,is now an overeager dad reinventing his childhood. The family heads out once again to mythical Wally World encountering comic complications along the way. And don't get me started with the jokes which in my opinion the producers and directors of this fiasco copied word for word from the 1983 original movie in which these people lacked originality and concept and needs to take lessons or go back to school on how to come up with your own originality and writing techniques. Ed Helms smears Chevy Chase's good name here and even Christina Applegate(of Married With Children) could not save this movie from the wreck that it is in. Even though Chevy Chase and Beverly D'Angelo do make cameo appearances at the end,you really wish they would have stay the hell away from this one as the worst movie of 2015 and it shows in total utter crap.