Suspect's Reviews

Registered User

05-26-16

Originally Posted by TheUsualSuspect

The main problem with this film is that it, and sorry for the pun, fails to launch any chemistry between McConaughey and Parker. What made "How To Lose A Guy In Ten Days" a decent chick flick was the chemistry between Hudson and McConaughey, they played off each other perfectly. With "Failure to Launch" Parker and McConaughey seem to awkward together on the screen to really be believable. Tie in the fact that the two title characters are ALL THAT Likable to begin with, you have a pretty bad start to a film.

I agree with part of this...I thought this film was a lot better than How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days...on the other hand, I agree that McConaughey and especially Parker's characters aren't that likable.

TheUsualSuspect

28 days...6 hours...42 minutes...12 seconds

06-13-16

Now You See Me 2

(Jon M. Chu)

"We are going out with a show people will never forget."

Now You See Me 2 wins the title for most unnecessary sequel, maybe of all time. The first film was a surprise with decent twists and performances. It was a success, apparently to the point where the studio thought the audience needed more. We didn't and this film doesn't really offer anything new and it expects us to really be invested in these characters and their story. Yet neither of these things are really compelling enough for a second go-around. As a result, this sequel just manages to be serviceable.

The Horsemen are in hiding and the FBI are on the hunt for them. It's been over a year and now the stage is set for their triumphant return. Just when they reappear in the limelight, the trick seems to be on them. Their entire stage was hijacked and they find themselves at the mercy of Walter, a mad genius who needs their skills to steal a microchip. In this battle of wits, which magician has the upper hand?

I begged my wife to see The Conjuring 2, but she was terrified of the original and absolutely did not want to see the sequel in theatres. Double that for the fantasy adventure film Warcraft, so we were stuck seeing the magic heist flick Now You See Me 2...why this wasn't called Now You Don't, me and millions of others apparently will never know. Most of the cast has returned with the exception of Isla Fisher and M�lanie Laurent, with the former's disappearance explained away with a few bits of dialogue. In her place we have Lizzy Caplan, who seems a lot more at ease with the cast and the material. One of the welcomed additions to this sequel.

While the original was somewhat refreshing, this one treads the same waters. I was pleasantly surprised by the twists and turns the original offered us, here everything is telegraphed and predicted a few scenes beforehand. Thus the magic is gone, to a degree. The spectacle is still there is some sequences, yet the revelation is timid. I had to stop thinking about logic a lot of times in order to enjoy the spectacle. One sequence involving the team throwing a card between each other to keep it hidden from people inspecting them, was really well done. But why do they need to throw it to each other? Why not just have one of them keep it and continuously hide it? I don't know. Double goes for a plot hole that I simply do not understand involving a fake chip and the real one. NYSM2 doesn't bother to explain much that makes sense and instead tries to explain what we already know.

As I said before, Caplan is the one good addition the film does. Most of the cast seems to sleepwalk through their roles, especially Eisenberg. The second new addition is Daniel Radcliffe, who despite playing a "magician" does his best to shed that Harry Potter persona. Between his role in Horns, here and the upcoming Swiss Army Man, I hope he manages to do it. NYSM2 is again, a pointless sequel that manages to entertain enough to warrant a view if you're a fan of the original.

__________________
"A laugh can be a very powerful thing. Why, sometimes in life, it's the only weapon we have."

Suspect's Reviews

Last edited by TheUsualSuspect; 06-13-16 at 09:36 PM.

TONGO

Unregistered User

06-13-16

No popcorn box rating?

TheUsualSuspect

28 days...6 hours...42 minutes...12 seconds

06-13-16

Originally Posted by TONGO

No popcorn box rating?

Fixed.

Thank you.

TheUsualSuspect

28 days...6 hours...42 minutes...12 seconds

06-15-16

Warcraft

(Duncan Jones)

"Our hope is destroyed; there is nothing to go back to."

I feel conflicted over this film because I want to like it, I want it to be successful and I believe the world created in the film can obviously be expanded upon and offer some truly great cinematic experiences. Duncan Jones, who gave us the brilliant Moon and exciting Source Code is behind the camera and brings a wonderful visual style, but as is the case with a lot of big budget CGI filled epic flicks, the visual style is not enough.

The Orc world is dying and they need to find another to live. Gul'dan unite the Orc clans together to become The Horde. He uses a magical power known as The Fel to create a portal to another world, Azeroth. The portal needs life to be sacrificed in order to work so thousands of people are captured in Azeroth in an attempt to bring even more of The Horde over to conquer the lands. Sir Anduin Lothar, a military commander leads the humans in a fight to protect their land. Along with their King, a magical being known as The Guardian and a mage in training, they need to stop the portal from being built before it's too late.

As basic as the premise sounds (evil invading / good defending) the film throws a lot at you in quick successions. I'd be lying if I said I didn't feel overwhelmed by it all. I've never played the games, so I'm sure I missed a lot of winks and nods and of course my enjoyment of it might be on the lesser side of things, but Warcraft is exciting in many sequences. Those exciting sequences astonish the eyes with dazzlingly effects. I doubt we'll see anything that looks better this year, the Orcs feel alive. In particular Durotan, an Orc that believes his leader Gul'dan is doing more damage than good. He is the one Orc that is given something that resembles a backstory. His wife gives birth early in the film and I can only assume that the child goes on to become someone important in the game franchise.

On the human side, Lothar is the character that Jones decides to focus on. He's a soldier, that's all he knows. He's even brought his son up to be soldier. His two duties in life are to protect his son and protect the King. With the invading armies of the Horde, his skills and loyalty are put to the test. The King, basically does what a King does, order people to do this, order people to do that. We get little interaction with a more humanistic side to him. Magic is also a big portion of the film, with a man known as The Guardian who holds what seems to be unlimited power and a Mage, who is still learning his spells. They fill their basic fantasy roles, but I can't help but feel that Ben Foster, who plays the Guardian, is miscast. Maybe it's his age, but I simply did not believe him in this film at all.

Warcraft is full on fantasy. Giant birds, magical beings, kingdoms and castles. For those not interested in those things, Warcraft will not convert you. In fact it will make you feel more alienated. What it does do, for me at least, is be interested in the possibility of a sequel. The film throws a few surprises at you and does a lot of set-up for those future instalments, which might not even come. As it stands, Warcraft is a film to watch on a big screen, in high definition. I totally understand why the critics hate it, why the fans love it and why I'm somewhere in the middle.

Last edited by TheUsualSuspect; 06-15-16 at 07:07 PM.

TONGO

Unregistered User

06-15-16

Hm, well at least youre in the middle. It could have ended up just being spectacular looking noise. Ill probably never see it.

It always boggled my mind these studios spend tens of millions of dollars on all the CGI, actors pay, etc... and the story itself is an afterthought. Could you imagine how fantastic some of these big budget movies would have been if they hired a true writer? Its just sad that Ill get more of an emotional resonance from an episode of Daredevil or Walking Dead compared to a 75 million dollar movie production.

TheUsualSuspect

28 days...6 hours...42 minutes...12 seconds

06-15-16

Originally Posted by TONGO

The issue with Warcraft is that I think they don't have the average movie-goer in mind. They want to please the hardcore fans and that they did.

TheUsualSuspect

28 days...6 hours...42 minutes...12 seconds

06-15-16

The Conjuring 2

(James Wan)

"There was a crooked man and he walked a crooked mile...."

James Wan is the best horror director working today. The man knows the genre so well that he can easily manipulate the atmosphere to terrorize the viewer. Such a masterful sense of control that he can easily control your fear. With this sequel, Wan has created 3 very successful and engaging horror series.

Paranormal Investigators Ed and Lorraine Warren are called to England to investigate whether or not the Enfield family are plagued by deadly spirits or if the family is lying and the whole thing is a hoax. We as the viewer know the truth, we are with this family when the strange occurrences start happening. Yet Wan cleverly depicts such things in a shroud of mystery when the Warren's arrive to make them question if what is happening is real or not. Should they leave thinking it's fake, the terror we feel for the family will be even greater.

I believe The Conjuring to be one of the best horror films of the last decade and it's a hard act to follow. Wan tries to up the ante here with the sequel, the scares are more frequent, the demons/ghosts more creepy and the tension is tighter. I still believe the original to be slightly better because it was fresh and the atmosphere was simply brilliant, but Wan does marvellous things with the sequel.

Look to any other horror film and the artistic merit fails by comparison. Wan doesn't need blood and guts or even cheap jump scares to make the viewer scared. He simply builds tension, plays with our expectations and uses creative camera techniques to make the film memorable. One particular scene that stands out in my mind is when Ed first interviews Janet, the little girl who is the focus of the terror. The demon/ghost will not communicate unless they look away, so Ed turns his back to Janet. Wan focuses the camera on Ed, while Janet is out of focus in the background. It's one static shot where the out of focus character slowly and eerily changes into the demon/ghost. We never get a good luck at the thing, but we can see enough to know something is eerily off. Effectively creepy with the simplest camera technique. What other horror director would do something like that today?

Highly recommended for the horror fan and people who really adore the original. Wan has stepped out of the horror genre and has had success (Fast Seven), but he loves the genre too much to abandon it. The man knows how to direct a horror film and he directs this one extremely well. My one complaint is that the film is long. Clocking in well over 2 hours, it feels like it at times. I'd say to maybe take out one of the scares, but I love each one. Add to the fact that most of the effects are practical and it makes me appreciate the film even more.

Omnizoa

Hullo

06-22-16

Originally Posted by Zotis

Yeah, Unfriended doesn't sound very interesting...

You should check out Cyberbully

( O_O)

(2015)

Oh, thank goodness.

__________________
Movie Reviews | Anime Reviews
Top 100 Action Movie Countdown (2015): List | Thread
"Well, at least your intentions behind the UTTERLY DEVASTATING FAULTS IN YOUR LOGIC are good." - Captain Steel

TheUsualSuspect

28 days...6 hours...42 minutes...12 seconds

06-23-16

The Shallows

(Jaume Collet-Serra)

"What was once in the deep is now in the shallows"

Clocking in at a quick 87 minutes, The Shallows never strays from what it knows it is, a heart thumping survival flick. The plus side to the film is that it deals with a shark and Blake Lively in a bikini for the majority of the film.

Still having difficulties with the loss of her mother to cancer, Nancy decides to put her medical schooling on hold to go globe trotting to a beautiful island her mother once went to. The perfect place to be at peace, surf and try not to get eaten by a shark. Nancy soon finds herself stranded on a rock, 200 yards away from the shore. With the shark circling her and the tide coming in, she only has so much time before hers runs out.

Ryan Reynolds, not too long ago, did a one man show in the film Buried. Now it's his wife's turn as she has to hold this film on her shoulders. Can she carry a film? When most of the shots of her lean more towards eye-candy, I'll say she serves her purpose. But, I don't want to undermine her like that. She was surprisingly good in The Town and I really like the film The Age of Adeline. Her she is relegated to screaming, talking to herself and at the end of the day....look good. She does this and while she doesn't blow anyone away with her acting abilities here, she manages to do the material justice.

Is the film scary? Not really, but it does have at least one good jump moment. I didn't feel the dread as much as the filmmakers would have wanted me to. The tension on the other hand, is indeed there. How is she going to make it out alive? Will she? What will be left of her is she makes it to the shore? A lot of questions will run through your mind when she is stuck on that rock.

The Shallows is essentially a B-Movie with a Hollywood make-over. The main draw of the flick is the shark, not much else. The film tries to give a bit of depth to our lead character, but it's extremely cookie-cutter at best. Her family drama stalls the film a bit, which is a bad thing when the film is so short. Chalk that up to mediocre writing.

Unfortunately the film has some pretty awful CGI that takes you out of the experience. Specifically, I caught myself laughing at moments when Lively was "surfing", yet it's clearly someone else and her face CGI'd on top. Then the shark itself is hit or miss. When it jumps out of the water to attack people, it's laughable. Yet when it is underwater and we see it from above, it's really menacing. The film excels with the make-up though, creating some great work on Lively for her injuries. Horror desperately needs to go back to basics, cause it works well.

With a goofy ending, The Shallows falls a hair short of being a classic shark flick. It's a decent summer film that will keep you thrilled no doubt, but it will have to sit near the back of the bus with Jaws driving and Deep Blue Sea sitting near the front. As for Sharknado? It's left on the side of the road.

Derek Vinyard

Msg

Fly Eagles Fly

07-01-16

Originally Posted by TheUsualSuspect

The Conjuring 2

(James Wan)

"There was a crooked man and he walked a crooked mile...."

Thousand Rep.

__________________
''Haters are my favourite. I've built an empire with the bricks they've thrown at me... Keep On Hating''
- CM Punk
http://threemanbooth.files.wordpress...unkshrug02.gif

TheUsualSuspect

28 days...6 hours...42 minutes...12 seconds

07-28-16

Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice

(Zack Snyder)

"We know better now, don't we?
Devils don't come from hell beneath us. No, they come from the sky."

What can be said that hasn't already been discussed about the much hyped, much loathed, Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice? A bloated mess of a film that relies too much on wowing the audience, when it should be focused on the story at hand. A story about two sides of the same coin. Batman, the ruthless vigilante who might be broken at his old age and Superman, the alien God who means to do so much good, but might be causing more harm. These two men are pitted against each other in a showdown that comic book fans have been waiting to see on the big screen since Miller's The Dark Knight Returns was inked.

After the destruction of cities and countless lives lost at the hands of Superman fighting Zod, Batman takes it upon himself to defeat the Man of Steel. Things are turned up to 11 when Lex Luther concocts a plan to make sure their fight match, becomes a fight to the death.

There's no denying the Synder is a gifted visual artist. Much like Malick, the man paints beautiful pictures, but his storytelling technique lacks any emotional punch. It's no mistake the man has made a career on adapting previous works to the big screen, he likes to emulate images and moments in his own style. Watchmen, Man of Steel, Batman v Superman, 300...all these films have previous material already visualized in print form. Synder's job seems easy, he translates those images to the screen. The story for the most part is also already there for him to adapt. It's when he decides to do his "own" thing, that is becomes utterly terrible...damn you Sucker Punch. So Snyder does the same thing here he's done with his previous films, lift those images from paper to screen. So many times while watching this film you see the panels of TDKR come to life. They are great moments, but as it has been pointed out by others, Snyder is obsessed with moments so much that he forgets to tell the story in the scenes. Maybe this is why the film has so many dream sequences, it gives Snyder the visual medium to be 'creative'. These sequences unfortunately stall the film, even if they are supposed to be 'set-ups' for future installments.

Where this film fails is that DC is trying to play catch-up. DC waited to see how people would react to The Avengers before they decided to get their heads in the game and they waited too long. Marvel was able to set up each character with their own film, their own story and miraculously bring them all together. DC has decided to forgo all that and slam everything but the kitchen sink....wait I think they do use the kitchen sink at one point, into this film. The result is overkill. Had the filmmakers taken a step back, reassessed the story and get to the core of it all, we might have had a really good film on our hands.

After the complaints of civilian death tolls being ignored in the previous film, it's interesting to see them address this issue as a main plot point. Is Superman responsible for these deaths? Who does he answer to? Is he welcomed? These questions are raised here and make for something actually interesting.

Snyder gets a lot of hate, but I like his films, he desperately needs a good writer at the helm though. I feel like David S. Goyer is the script writing equivalent to Snyder. Good at what he does, but has a lot more potential. Put these two together and you get the mess that is Batman v Superman.

Don't even get me started on the choices Eisenberg chooses for Lex Luthor. The less said on that topic, the better.

TONGO

Unregistered User

07-28-16

Your score looks right, I might give it a 3 at best, but I originally mistakenly voted it too high in my review (I think 4 1/2?). Enthusiasm doesnt equal longevity.

TheUsualSuspect

28 days...6 hours...42 minutes...12 seconds

07-28-16

I look back on some of my reviews that I'd like to be changed. I cringe at my Spiderman 3 rating...

More like a

Omnizoa

Hullo

07-28-16

Originally Posted by TONGO

Your score looks right, I might give it a 3 at best, but I originally mistakenly voted it too high in my review (I think 4 1/2?). Enthusiasm doesnt equal longevity.

That's a respectable attitude, TONGO.

nebbit

Registered User

07-31-16

Won't be viewing Batman Vs Superman

Thanks for the review

__________________
Health is the greatest gift, contentment the greatest wealth, faithfulness the best relationship.
Buddha

Beatle

BANNED

08-08-16

Originally Posted by TheUsualSuspect

2001: A Space Odyssey (Stanley Kubrick)

"Fantastic ART film, medicore film"

So, I finally saw this weird film and I still don't know what to think of it. I'm not sure if I liked it or not. One of the weirdest movies I've ever seen. It's visionarly brilliant, but......nothing happens. It's hard to explain, but something about this movie I didn't like. There is VERY little story, and whats there is not that interesting. Its an art flick, and a big leap in sci-fi films at the time.

HAL 900 was of course great and probably the highlight of this film with it's cold horrorific voice, send chills down anybody's spine. The ending is obscure, but with repeat viewings, is comprehendable.

I understand that it was not meant to be understood as a whole and for that fact it succeeds, but as a film it fails.

Very difficult to rate this film, because as an art film it warrants a 10/10, but as a film for entertainment value I see myself giving it a 4/10.

6.5/10

Hi Suspect.

Maybe you'd be interested in my theory of the movie.

Originally Posted by TheUsualSuspect

STAR WARS: Revenge of the Sith
(George Lucas)

"Great film, with disappointments"

We start off with your typical STAR WARS, but go down to a non-typical fight. TIE fighters everywhere, beautiful special effects, but from the ongoing camera movements and the bright colors on the screen, it got a little disorienting. The reason for this? Well the clone war is ending and a new villain has entered the series known as General Grevious, half alien half machine with four arms, who from what I've read all over the internet was suppose to be a Jedi killing mother, which brings me to disappointment number one.

General Grevious. This thing does not kill one Jedi in this entire movie. In the scene were OBI-WAN enters and Grevious tells the others to back off, he takes out his four light sabers ready to own. I get excited expecting to see the 2nd best light-saber battle in the whole series. Yet, what we get is a short 2 minute if that fight. First of all, no way can Kenobi block all the light sabers from this guy with his one, yet he does and he manages to slice off two of Grevous's sabers, then the little guy runs away, his end comes by a gun, shot by obi-wan, what a waste of my time, that was pathetic.You expect to see this guy kick major ass and he's taken out of the picture so easily, which is one of my problems with the whole prequel series (Darth Maul/Jango Fett)

This movie of course is darker then the first two and probably darker then Empire Strikes Back, it also carries the most light-saber battles/action scenes in the entire series.....but after seeing so many light sabers battles they kind of lose their excitement.

YODA VS EMPEROR....while great, kinda let down by the shortness and how they did not use their "arena" to the full potential. ANAKIN VS OBI-WAN, people have been waiting for 20 years for this battle and it finally comes, it was good, you can even say epic in a way. But worth the wait of 20 years......I think not. Mace Windu and random Jedi VS EMPEROR....boy did those JEDI get it in 3 seconds or what, it looked like he was literally slow as a snail going uphill when he stuck the light-saber in them and yet the still take the hit. MACE Windu owned the emperor in the battle and the glass shatter was a great. The best light-saber battle is still DUEL OF FATES

Excited to see old characters such as Chewie and VADER, even though you know for a fact that they will have little screen time you can't help but feel disappointed with what they do in that screen time. Vader has no more then 5 minutes on the screen and the Frankenstein tribute was totally stupid in my opinion and took away from the awesomeness of VADER. LACK of Chewie.....lack of Wookies in general. The battle between the Wookies is very short.

What are the absolute worse things about this movie, well you probably would have guessed it, since it does not improve what so ever over the other two...dialogue and acting. A lot of the times I found myself rolling my eyes at the utter stupidness of some of the lines.

"You're so beautiful.."
"Only because I'm so in love."
"No, it's because I'm so in love with you."

HAYDEN is still bad as Anakin until the transformation takes place. Ewan is probably the worst one here.

"hang on were smarter than this"

That is said after being trapped in an energy shield and of course the unbelievable scene where he sees his PADWAN a person who he calls his brother and person he loves kill the young lings (another gripe....just call them children) and all he can say in a monotone voice is something along the lines of

"I can't watch this"

Please it looked/sounded like he was just reading it from the script. Not all the acting and dialogue is bad in this film, the highlight of the movie is PALPATINE....like Ebert said in his review, he has the hardest job of playing a character on both sides and he pulls this off marvelously. He owned this movie, even more then YODA....who owned the second.

Yes this is the better of the first two prequels for the fact that we get more into seeing why things are the way they are....Luke/Leia, Emperor and his disfigurement, that's about it, yup they don't really tie the two films together very well in my opinion. I was just waiting for more things to pop up to tie them together. There are still plot holes. Which I do not want to read the books to find the answers to, this should have been addressed in the film.

1> Who is Cyphis Deus? 2> How does Leia remember her birth mother

We all know what happens in this film and everyone is only going to watch it to see how these things come to be, but I was hoping/praying for one thing to be a surprise, one little thing. I remember reading somewhere that a line is spoken that shatters the STAR WARS universe, where is this line? We all know the Anakin becomes VADER and I was impressed with the story behind why he did this, but not with the amount of time it took for him to do this....it was so quick. I understand the time frame but come on, the movie went by so fast you could of put more time for the transition. The movie is 2:30, but with all the action it flies by so fast. When ANAKIN VS OBI-WAN came up I was thinking to myself, already? I didn't like how he chose the dark side to save Padme's life, but tries to kill her at the same time.

8/10

I agree the highlight is Palpatine. Or rather Ian, one of the best performances I've seen.

TheUsualSuspect

28 days...6 hours...42 minutes...12 seconds

12-11-16

Green Room

(Jeremy Saulnier)

Saulnier's Blue Ruin was a shotgun blast to the chest of intense thrills from an unknown director. I had no idea what to expect from Blue Ruin, but when it was over my wife simply turned to me and said, "That was intense". So I was excited to see his next film get some big name recognition on board. The late Anton Yelchin, Imogen Poots, Alia Shaukat and Picard himself, Patrick Stewart showcase their talents in this nail bitter of a follow-up.

A down on their luck punk rock band take a gig at a neo-nazi club. Reluctant at first, but in desperate need for cash, they accept and play a decent gig. Just as they are about to leave, they see a dead body in the green room and bad decision are made after that. Now it's skinheads versus the punk rockers for survival.

Green Room is not for the faint of heart, I'm a horror lover and I found myself cringing every so often at the shock and awe that Saulnier throws at the screen. He's not afraid to get things going fast and when he does, he turns Green Room up to eleven. I found myself asking, how are they going to get out of this? Multiple times even. Each time an attempt was made to leave, something terrible happens and Saulnier is not one for cheap gore tricks. He is restrained and holds back until you least expect it. Then the terror unleashes on the screen and it's too late to look away. Blue Ruin was about suspense, this is about terror.

Locked up in one location, Green Room is a no holds barred 'us versus them' flick that surprises the viewer at a few turns. Most of the cast serve their purpose of being terrified for their lives and having to fight when needed. It's Stewart, known for his roles as courages and commanding men (Picard, Professor X) that turns in a subtle and low-key performance. The man is the leader of skinheads and has the opportunity to unleash terror, but he holds back and almost has adds a fatherly figure to it. He mentors these young men so full of hate and he has to immediately take control of an out of control situation. Something about the calmness he has makes it even more terrifying. Men like this exist in the world.

TheUsualSuspect

28 days...6 hours...42 minutes...12 seconds

01-11-17

Swiss Army Man

(Dan Kwan & Daniel Scheitert)

The most original film of the year and one of the more original films of the last decade. Swiss Army Man turned a lot of people away with the weird juvenile humour consisting of farts, but I feel like those people who turned it off or left the theatre missed out on something special. Behind all the gas, the film deals with depression, humanity and what it feels like to be alive. Poignant themes in a film that isn't a afraid to make you laugh in the weirdest way possible.

Hank, played by Paul Dano, is marooned on an island and is literally about to hang himself when he sees a dead body wash ashore. He thinks nothing of it, until the body spasms and lets out numerous farts. The dead body, whom is later called Manny, played by Daniel Radcliffe, comes alive, more or less. He's able to have conversations, perform miraculous tasks and gives Hank the courage to look inside himself and answer some deep questions.

This is my favourite Daniel Radcliffe performance, is that odd to say? He plays a corpse who farts, so he doesn't have to move around a lot and he is basically stone faced the whole film, yet he brings an innocent charm to the role. He questions what it means to be alive, what feeling of love hate and depression are. Hank tries his best to answer these questions, but he might not even know the answers himself. The two bond over a few "Weekend At Bernie's" style comedy bits, which have more meaning later on when more characters are introduced, specifically Mary Elizabeth Winstead.

The title Swiss Army Man is appropriate as Radcliffe is used for various tasks. Fresh water pours out of his mouth, karate-chop action figure style arm swing, projectile mouth firing mechanism, sparking flint by snapping his fingers, among other things. Hank uses Manny's unique "powers" to help him traverse the terrain. You have to ask yourself, can you suspend enough of your imagination to enjoy the oddity of this? I don't think the film is ever really concerned with if any of these events are really happening or not. Instead it wants you to focus on the friendship these two have and despite one of them being dead, it's one of the best relationships depicted on screen this year.

I know there are people out there who dislike the film, but count me in the camp of people who really responded to it. Who knew that film about a farting dead corpse would be one of the best of the year and one of the most honesty portrays of friendship. Swiss Army Man is a win and a watch for anyone wanting something unique in their movie going experience.

edarsenal