Really good movie better then the first. I loved the beard it was pretty funny looking. The storyline was way better then part one.

This one sort of slipped through the cracks didn't it? I mean, it has a very good, very heartwarming story that helps define a character's growth over the length of the plot. It has a story about hope and sacrifice and struggle.
It is a good movie.
How does a movie this good get made today? Isn't this sort of the opposite of everything that current Hollywood stands for?
Where is the strong female lead replacing Puss in Boots as the hero? Where are the identity politics? Where is the nonstop shaming of Straight White Men? Where is the depiction of half the country as absolute evil?
How can they make a western movie that doesn't shame the west at every possible turn?
I have absolutely no idea how this could have been made, but what I can say is that it is fantastic, it is moving, it is fun for the whole family and it has a decent nonpolitical message. The main character is heroic. This is just... well, this is a movie that doesn't seem like it could possibly be made in today's Hollywood.

I can't think for a minute that this would have worked at all, had it not for been for the entertainingly over-the-top voice talents of Antonio Banderas in the title roll. His cat is a sort of combination of Cyrano de Bergerac and Casanova - full of flair, dashing and adept with his flourishing blade. Until, that is, he has a run-in with a church bell that brings him face to face with his mortality. He has only one of his nine lives left, and death is poised to come claim him! Shattered, he seeks refuge in a home for cats where he encounters "Perrito" - a small, naive and lost little dog who is determined to befriend him. Meantime, the not so little "Jack Horner" and "Goldilocks" and her three bears are looking for a map that will guide them to a wishing star that, well, it does what it says on the tin. The bears decide to track down our eponymous hero to help them procure it, but he and his feline rival "Kitty" (and their new doggy pal) decide to join forces and must face a series of tortuous escapades in the race to succeed in their quest. It must be 45 years since I last read the "Goldilocks" story and try as I might, I just couldn't remember it as it gradually evolves as one of the threads of this enjoyably crafted montage of fable and charisma. It's pretty action packed with Banderas proving his singing hasn't really improved much since "Evita" (1996). It's a family movie for sure with messages of loyalty, affection, determination etc.; but there is still enough in the dialogue for those older folks in the auditorium to raise a smile and keep it interesting for 100 minutes. The animation is super and this character driven adventure is well worth seeing on a big screen if you can. Maybe not one for tiny kids - but for us bigger ones, this is fun.

I did not expect the sequel to a decent spin-off Dreamworks film from over a decade ago to be one of the most poignant, introspective, genuinely hilarious, and heartwarming films of the year. But here we are.
After an overly cheesy, somewhat clunky opening sequence, The Last Wish very quickly begins developing its zany assortment of characters into distinct quirky personalities with sympathetic desires and clear goals. The film juggles several character arcs and it's almost miraculous how it successfully handled all of them with proper set up and satisfying, emotionally weighty payoffs.
The screenplay is wacky, witty, and also bursting with heart as it deals with weighty themes of trusting others and finding purpose in any circumstances. And it tackles these themes in ways that are always understandable to all ages but never insultingly oversimplified.
What I also didn't expect was that the action sequences would be so well-choreographed and beautifully animated, and that the movie would often be terrifying and violent at times.
I adored this film. I think it's Dreamworks' best film since Megamind and it's easily the best true family film of the year.

Puss in Boots: The Last Wish had a lot to live up to as most of my critic and casual friends have been praising the film, and for the most part the film delivers.
From the opening frames, the unique art style fills the screen and is incredibly captivating. There is some excellent combination of 3D animation with 2D styles that I have not seen before. The combat frame rate shift was also a nice touch that worked better than I was expecting. Action was top notch with some incredible set pieces and superb choreography.
The Last Wish deals with some pretty heavy themes for an animated children's movie. Death is something that all humans will have to face which was handled in such a nuanced and mature way here. From panic attacks to haunting imagery, death looms large throughout the entire film and serves as a menacing villain. The journey our heroes take to confront this fear is very heartwarming and will resonant with most audience members.
With most DreamWorks pictures, the comedy is targeted at both children and adults. I did find myself laughing out loud at plenty of jokes, but just as many landed flat for me. This would be more of an issue, but this is an incredibly balanced film with great action and dramatic moments that leave little room for a few flat jokes to make a large impact on my experience.
I genuinely believe that this movie has restored the Shrek universe and can propel the future projects upward. Hype has officially been restored for Shrek 5!
Score: 86%
Verdict: Great

Ok, my fiance loves these films (but she's worse than me when it comes to sex in movies, and I'll sit through some serious crap for it) so we went to go see it on Valentines Day.
And I am going to point out the problem, and I will do it by quoting the synopsis:
"Anastasia must confront the anger and envy of the women who came before her."
Yeah, that takes all of about 5 minutes of time in the film. It's the plot of the movie...and it takes about 5 minutes total. The problem is solved really quickly, in the middle of the film, and never comes up again.
It's like an after thought....but it's the plot.
I've seen movies based on T and A in the past that have actually more plot focus than this.
But let's be honest, you are only watching it for the BDSM (which it is also light on) so I can't even give it 10 stars for that, and I am an easy grader when it comes to most movie reviews.

**The next fifty shades between an ordinary woman and a billionaire.**
The film was not received well as the book was. Just like the first film, it has been another below average. Might be because of its theme. Usually this kind of films do great business, but ratings and reviews does not praise or encourage the film. So I doubt anybody will be bored of it, which means watchable film and instead it won't be their favourite.
The story continued and this time it was not based on experiment or any kind of agreement, but mutual understanding. So the billionaire Grey and Ana's erotic adventure sustains. With the small-small developments the film goes all the way to the ending. That means, those who are watching it for the selected scenes, will surely would have a nice time. But nothing was strong as any European film on the similar theme.
Apart from the weak storyline, there's nothing wrong with it. As to what this film is about, it served better. That's what I say to you not to expect full storied romance-drama. As usual the actors were good and another two films to come in the 'Fifty Shades' franchise. I hope they can be better than the first two. Overall, it is only for the selected audience, but curiosity makes everybody watch it and they all pour they perspective which is flooded with average to negative. Otherwise, it is an acceptable film.
_6/10_

Ahh how it all started. I was a teen boy growing up when this movie came out. I related to this movie in so many ways. Love it!

The thing that got me about this film is that the four boys here would have no issue at all getting a playmate. My favourite was either Chris Klein ("Oz") or "Kevin" (Thomas Ian Nicholas) depending on my mood - but the fact they all get caught up into this almost puerile, faux-angsty existence really bored me. The girls are equally stunning most of the time, and just as (if not more) sexually curious - what's the beef? The script/humour plays to just about every stereotype imaginable: the sporty jocks and the dimwit broads; the parents who react to their offspring's sexual predilections as if they, themselves, had never had a shag in their lives. The characters are so shallow and have enough implausibly intense conversations about scoring that makes you want to reach for a pen-knife to put a notch on the bed-post (or a hole in your own left leg). Seann William Scott and Jason Biggs (OK, maybe I understand why he struggles to get laid) take "Carry On" style innuendo to a new level of cringe-making embarrassment and the ending really does makes the "Graduate" look like Fellini! The production is shamelessly chauvinist - there is no male nudity - but plenty of boobs and I thought it had dated really badly. Sorry, but much of this just made me squirm!

**A dense film, with few sympathetic characters, but quite reasonable.**
This is one of those films where the most interesting thing is the plot within the plot: the script begins by introducing us to Susan Morrow, a very sophisticated and elegant art gallery owner who suffers from insomnia and who receives, by mail, a sketch of a fictional novel which will be edited by her ex-husband. When she starts to read it, the film shows us the story he wrote: a very conventional family that is ambushed on an isolated road and kidnapped by criminals, leading the main character, a peaceful and friendly man, to go through a real nightmare. And at the same time, we see Susan remember several moments in her relationship, where things didn't always go well.
The film is not bad, but it requires some attention from the public to follow the three ongoing stories, and by far, the most interesting and most striking is the one that the protagonist reads in the powerful novel written by her ex-husband. Personally, I didn't feel any kind of sympathy for the protagonist, I found the character quite bland and uninteresting, and the narrative of her marriage and divorce shows many shadows of the character that can make it even more difficult to empathize with her.
Amy Adams brought the main character to life and seems to me to have done a very dignified and intelligent job, even though this is one of those characters that we never seem to really get to know because she never makes herself known. Jake Gyllenhaal turns out to be much more interesting, not least because he gave life to two different characters: he was the ex-husband of Susan, Adams' character, and also the protagonist of the novel she reads, and who is a nice character, but who finds himself in a dire situation despite all reasonable attempts to avoid it. Now, if we consider that that romance is intrinsically linked to the failed marriage of the two characters, it would have been perfectly possible to give Adams the character that ended up in the hand of Isla Fisher, a good actress with very little to do here. Michael Shannon and Aaron Taylor-Johnson gave good performances in characters with a lot of impact.
Technically, the film makes good use of cinematography to convey the emotions that the characters are feeling: from Susan's depressing loneliness to the threat, danger and tension that surrounds the characters in the novel. Dark colors, very well-designed environments and a clever use of light and shooting angles all contribute to accentuate these sensations. In addition, the film has good sets and costumes, and a discreet but effective soundtrack.

Only in a world where a Reality TV star becomes President could Tom Ford be one of the best directors of the year... I guess that'd be this world.
_Final rating:★★★★ - An all round good movie with a little something extra._

A compelling thriller with an open-ended ending that feels far too easy for what it had going for it.
Nocturnal Animals starts out very strong. It feels reminiscent of Lynch's Lost Highway or Mulholland Dr. The main character lives a luxurious life surrounded by some very striking pieces of art (art pieces which, throughout the story, make things even more thrilling and surreal). She reads her ex-boyfriend's novel which quite honestly makes us feel like we're in a bad dream. The way the novel starts out feels like Michael Haneke's Funny Games. Its opening scene with Aaron Taylor-Johnson so brilliantly builds in tension with his character's mind games. The story however turns into a bit of a tame crime mystery held up with a sort of fun performance from Michael Shannon. The potential to be a very cryptic thriller is there, but decides instead to put all the pieces together for us. As a Lynch fan, this movie made me crave something stranger. I really wanted to be left mystified but instead I got an ending that was kind of obvious.

**RE
VEN
GE**
This was simply awesome. I meant the story, but the presentation was not my kind. I got the story and I enjoyed it. The performances can't be neglected either. Both the lead, Jake and Amy were the film's highlight. But I also happy for Michale Shannon's Oscars nominee. Based on the novel 'Tony and Susan', but for the film adaptation, the title got inspired by the book that appear in the story. From the director of 'A Single Man' which is his comeback film after a long gap. I would say a good attempt.
This is the story of a successful art gallery boss who got divorced and remarried to the man whom she was cheating with from her ex. Her decision was in particular influenced by her mother. Now she thinks she's happy, but one day her ex sends a copy of his latest novel that's dedicated in her name. Reading it, she realises the tough time he'd with their separation. Following the end of the book, she encounters an unexpected truth which could affect her life forever.
A dual layer story. One was fiction and the other one in the real world. But the fictional tale highly influences the main narration and that's what I call the genuine writing. So the credit must go to none other than the original author. I have seen lots of revenge films, even it can be compared to 'Three Colours: White', but the major difference is the sweet revenge. For that alone the film was awesome. The climax was even better. If you understand the narration, you will enjoy it for sure. The filmmaking should have been a bit better. Excluding that the film is not to be skipped.
_6/10_

We live in a country where our current presidential candidates fail to compare to our current president. We live in a country where minorities have been a subject to police brutality. We live in a country where you must enter debt by taking out a student loan and you are still not guaranteed a successful future. Are you uncomfortable yet? Comfortability won't be found here or in fashion designer turned director Tom Ford's second featured film Nocturnal Animals. The director forces you to become comfortable with being uncomfortable and the result is the most beautiful disturbingly gripping films of 2016.
> From writer/director Tom Ford comes a haunting romantic thriller of shocking intimacy and gripping tension that explores the thin lines between love and cruelty, and revenge and redemption. Academy Award nominees Amy Adams and Jake Gyllenhaal star as a divorced couple discovering dark truths about each other and themselves in NOCTURNAL ANIMALS.
Director Tom Ford starts the film with a close up of a handful of naked older white females dancing nakedly with bodies society would be disturbed by. Ford does not focuses on just one part of the body but every piece of fat, extra skin, crease, scar, and stretch mark to really push your comfortability. No, Ford is not going for shock value, especially not so early in the film because there will be plenty time for that, but he is being nice of enough to give the audience a disclaimer. A disclaimer that nothing will be more comfortable than the opening sequence and if you couldn't handle that then Nocturnal Animals is going to be one hell of a trip for you. Heck, regardless, Nocturnal Animals is one hell of a trip.
Nocturnal Animals itself contains a double narrative strand which consists of Susan's real life and her bringing the book of her ex-husband to life. Ford does not implement a voiceover to let you know that you are now in the world of the book yet he makes you feel that you are watching another film. Ford pulls off a difficult task in making the audience care about both narratives and you want to believe that both are fictional then the uncomfortability levels begin to raise once again as you are forced to remember that one is indeed reality. Tony & Susan, the 1993 novel that the films was adapted from, unfolds how intimate the act of reading could be as an author could tap into the reader's thoughts, feelings and experience. Tom Ford pulls this same feat but just with the act of watching a film.
With his first job being a fashion designer, one would only assume to be blown away by the visuals Tom Ford would create. This is true as various scenes of LA and west Texas are beyond stunning but no one would expect the clash of visuals Ford would create with LA and west Texas. The transition from super cool and grotesque LA to a brutal, violent and revengeful west Texas will once again raise your uncomfortability levels.
After all, this is a revenge film. We learn throughout the film that Susan, who comes from a wealthy family, falls in love with an inspiring author in Jake Gyllenhaal's Tony but would eventually go on to break his art in three different way. First, by telling him to take a step back from his dream of being an author. Secondly, aborting his child. Then, if the first two wasn't enough, she lives him for the handsome and dashing Armie Hammer's Hutton. Susan goes on to live the perfect life with Hutton and 20 years after her divorce with Tony, he decides to quietly place a novel about revenge in her mailbox. We feel Susan's chills as she reads the novel and without ever needing to say a word to her, Susan's perfect little world becomes to crumble
Jake Gyllenhaal and Amy Adams give us exactly what we expect from them. Aaron Taylor-Johnson offers a spine-chilling performance as Ray Marcus and Michael Shannon is fantastic as Bobby Andes. Tom Ford finally takes off his fashion designer hat and puts his fully-fledged director hat on as that was his approach with this film and two narratives. Tom Ford sustains the point that he is not a fashion designer turned director but a full-fledged director as a lesser director would have totally botched this film.

Rewatch in preparation for EXPEND4BLES.
"THE EXPENDABLES isn't as fun as I hoped for. The testosterone-filled cast tries hard to make a forgettable, formulaic story borderline enjoyable, but the action set pieces are mostly an incomprehensibly choppy, badly lit mess, despite a couple of admittedly cool, violent stunts. Nice score, though."
Rating: C

Very Good Action Movie
Warning - reviewer is over 50.
If you don't like action movies, you will not like this movie. If you like action movies, you will like this one. If you like 80's style action movies, you will love it. Great/funny one liners and action heroes who look like they can actually punch and take a punch. It also features a poor plot with many holes. But who cares?

You know, I think I preferred this to the original. This time, the eager young "Lightning McQueen" is goaded by Italian champ "Francesco" into taking part in the inaugural "World Grand Prix". This has been set up by reformed oil gazillionaire "Sir Miles" who insists that the cars must use environmentally friendly, oil-free, fuel to compete. Meantime, unbeknown to our shiny red American, the suave and debonaire "Finn McMissile" is doing his best "007" impersonation investigating a network of international espionage that would make "Spectre" look amateur. Together with his assistant "Miss Shiftwell" they soon conclude that their fate is mixed with not just "Lightning" but with poor old "Mater" - who takes pride in every dent he has acquired to his rusting bodywork over his time with his champion friend. There's loads going on, and unlike the first of this series - I found this to be a much more engaging story with a greater international dynamic to it. The Aston Martin and the Citroën, the Ferrari and the tow truck - all reinforcing the messages of team playing and loyalty as the mystery deepens and "Lightning" and "McMissile" have to race to save the trusty old rust-bucket from a fate worse than a magnetic crusher. I enjoyed this, it's quickly paced with some humour in a script that benefits from the understated delivery of Sir Michael Caine and the enthusiasm of Owen Wilson. Good fun!

Not as God as the 1st just slightly though. I do think it's funnier then the 1st one. Diego just bothered the hell out of me for some reason.

**A film more adult than would be desirable, where Pixar insists on giving the stage to funnyless secondary characters.**
The “Cars” franchise was one of the great successes that Pixar masterfully capitalized on, both for commercial purposes and to cement its top status in the field of digital animation. I remember that these three films were accompanied by such incisive (not to say abusive) merchandising that it seemed that the films were being foisted on us. That explains why I preferred not to see them at the time.
If the first film seemed quite regular to me (very good from a technical point of view, but with flaws in the script), this sequel managed to at least maintain the technical level and visual quality. The film has excellent cinematography and graphic work, as is the hallmark of the studio. Realism is excellent, although I felt that it is not as impactful and grandiose as in the first film in the franchise. I also felt that the car races, which were the strong suit of the first film due to their emotion and speed, lost much of their emotion here and sounded much more monotonous. The voice actors continue to do a very good job. Owen Wilson and Larry The Cable Guy secure the most notable efforts, but are closely followed by Michael Caine (with an unmistakable voice), Emily Mortimer and John Turturro.
Where this film really failed was in the conception of the script and the story. I understand the reason why they decided to make Mater the main character: both Disney and Pixar have done this recurrently whenever a secondary character appears in the films that seem to stand out. And as in other cases, the result of the decision was extremely disappointing. Mater is not funny, more ridiculous than funny, and McQueen, who is in the shadows this time, is just another pretentious, obnoxious, arrogant driver. Dialogues don't always work well, and some jokes don't either, although most do. I also have certain reservations about the division of the film's action into two subplots (Mater's and the rivalry between McQueen and Francesco), I believe that this made the film much more adult than would be desirable.

I like 'Cars 2'.
It doesn't deserve to be held in the same bracket as 2006's 'Cars', but that doesn't mean there's not a good time to be had with it. The premise mixes motorsport with espionage, admittedly they don't execute it incredibly but it's still satisfactory to see unfold.
One slight negative is that they give Mater more screen time than Lightning McQueen, which is a mistake. Larry the Cable Guy as Mater is enjoyable, just not front and center as the lead. They could've done a similar plot that has Owen Wilson and McQueen at the forefront. Elsewhere, Michael Caine (Finn) is always a joy to listen to; even if his character isn't anything special.
The racing stuff is cool, with the World Grand Prix. The parts of the story involving strictly that are definitely more entertaining than the spy stuff, especially as we get to see a few different countries via animation - which come out nicely.
All in all, a weaker film than the first for sure but it's still pretty solid for a Disney animated sequel.

Lasseter is smart enough to tell us a completely different story than in the first movie. However, it is far from other titles like "Toy Story" or "The Incredibles".

**The curse of video game movies.**
Really, there must be some plague or curse on this type of film because the examples that deserve our attention instead of our oblivion are rare. And it doesn't take much digging to find some that are really despicable, unworthy of being seen in a big screen. I had some hope that this movie wasn't that bad, knowing minimally the game (I never had the time or patience to play it, but I read about it and saw some graphics). And really, it's a film that, in the wide spectrum of its genre, has some qualities. However, it is far from being a full plate for lovers of good movies.
The best thing about this film are the technical and visual aspects and also the action scenes, with highly stylized choreography and fight routines, unrealistic to the point of sounding very absurd, but incredible. The cinematography is very good, and the film makes incredible use of CGI and digital resources. It seems to me that the director, Justin Kurzel, preferred to turn the film into an orgy of visual graphics than to do a solid job. Excessive attention to visuals has everything from stunning aerial perspective footage to the elaborate sets and environments of the Spain of the Catholic Kings, creatively blended with footage in real settings such as the Alhambra.
This leads us to the film's first problem, which is the absurd lack of historical accuracy. Considering it's a movie based on a video game, it's less of an issue, but it's an issue, particularly when taking advantage of the popularity of the Templar Order, which was defunct and outlawed by the Catholic Church in 1312, nearly 250 years before the time of the Catholic Kings. Whoever wrote the script and included this premise probably barbecued their own history school textbooks.
The cast is made up of renowned and talented actors, but who have not been given anything substantial. There are no characters, there are names, and the actors seem to be improvising or being themselves in some way. Michael Fassbender plays himself with a hood, since the character is nothing more than a walking cliché with no personality. Marion Cotillard, a great actress, must have been royally paid to accept such rubbish in her curriculum and Jeremy Irons proves to be very capable of making an omelette without eggs, going to resurrect what he has done previously in several villains of his career and mixing everything.
What really lets this movie down is the miserable script and poor direction. If we've already talked a little about director Kurzel's apparent fetish for visual effects, we should also talk about the incompetence of the screenwriting team. It would have been better if they had been prevented from writing screenplays. This one is just a giant jumble of confusing ideas involving time travel, genetic memory, futuristic machines, the Inquisition, the Templar's, Columbus, the Catholic Kings of Spain, an Islamic religious sect from Persia and other oddities. The film takes itself too seriously, it is presumptuous and exhausting, and the feeling that hovers over it is existential emptiness, as if there was no reason for any of this.

YOU WERE THE CHOSEN ONE! You were supposed to destroy the bad video movies, not join them! Bring balance to cinema, not leave it in darkness!

I bought this movie recently for a very small amount, and began watching it with very small expectations.
I was treated to a well-paced, stylish action film that relied more on esoteric ambiguity (and a passing knowledge of the video game franchise) than exposition and characterization. Rather than being a hindrance to the overall product, I believe this "flaw" serves the style of this movie wonderfully, and honors to source material to create an interesting and engaging fictional world.
The discerning eye of a devoted film-goer may think this movie is quite beautiful and would find very little argument from me. Certain shots and choices in lighting are remarkable, and the filmmakers emphasis on practicality over computer renderings translates very well during the action sequences.
I would recommend this film - you may not love it, and you don't have to - but it is certainly worth watching.

**All about the apple of Eden!**
One of the much anticipated film of the year. It was a long wait for this film to see a light. I mean ever since the trend had started from the video games to the big screen, this one was a bit late to come into the party. My guess was, that's the disadvantage. The film fanatics thinks, there are too many graphics films. Besides, they did not pick the right screenplay for it like EA did for 'Need for Speed'.
I have never played this game, so I was not expecting it like the others, but I'm surely disappointed with the film. I had no idea about the characters or the universe, it sets in. After watching the film I thought why this game is so famous where I did not find this film any good. Yep, it's not fair to compare two different formats. But the fact will remain that the film was one of the worst among big titles releasing on this year.
I thought it was like 'Matrix', but more a periodic style action- adventure. I think the cast was good and the rest of the film was not. What I disliked the most was the smoky visuals. Yes, all the scenes with the ancient Spain was very smoky atmosphere that I had hard time to have a clear picture of what's going on. I hope there won't be any sequel to it, but if they do plan, I expect a miracle that erases all the bad image created by this part. The film is watchable, but not likable or enjoyable. Only for time pass.
_4/10_

l would lie if I said that I did not enjoy this movie. It has plenty of action, a bit of biblical mystery and some science fiction. It is a decently entertaining movie. However, I also felt a bit underwhelmed.
A less than sympathetic bum happens to be some direct ancestor to an ancient warrior belonging to a ancient secret assassins society protecting the apple of Eden. Since he is a near identical match to his ancestor he is, apparently, an ideal candidate for the evil Knights Templars to unlock ancient “genetic” memories that will help them find the apple. Yes I know, it is a bit of a scientific stretch but hey, it is a fantasy/sci-fi movie and it originates from a video game story so give it some slack.
Speaking of the video game. I have not played the game and I have no idea if the movie follows the story of the game or not which probably is a good think for this movie. What I did have a hard time with though is this nonsensical notion of the apple containing the genetic code for “free will”. What a load of bullshit in so many ways!
There are a lot of quite good action and fight scenes in the movie. However most of them are flashbacks to the time of Callum’s ancestor and it is not really Callum himself. It is not until the very end of the movie that Callum finally realizes his potential and gets to do some fighting in his own time. This disappointed me a bit.
Overall I felt a bit underwhelmed. The movie plodded along at an almost leisurely pace except for the outbursts of action in the flashbacks. There was not really much happening that made me interested except for the action sequences. The acting is also adequate but not more.
When Callum finally gets around to do some assassin stuff in our time it is too little too late. There is a nice fight when he and his assassin colleagues break out of the Knights Templar’s facility but the final show down between the two parties is, well, bland.

I have the advantage of multiple _Assassin's Creed_ games under my belt, and even to me it was nonsense. Wastes an **incredible** cast on what will wind up contributing to the seemingly never-ending pile of lacklustre videogame adaptations.
_Final rating:★★ - Had some things that appeal to me, but a poor finished product._

I actually really liked this- the action sequences are exciting and take on a kind of Jason Bourne-quality and Fassbender, Cotillard and Irons do a nice job of making the characters interesting and helping to overlook a lot of the silliness of the script. Overall an 8/10
Check out my full Youtube review. Trying to go for something funny, engaging, and informative so hope you guys like-https://youtu.be/Um2-B6Gs_QU

Fun film. Has plenty of action sequences and great plot twists throughout the film that make it more interesting. Plenty of well developed characters throughout, and each character has great depth. The execution of the stunts was superb and had breathtaking set-pieces throughout. It's more faithful to the games than other previous game adaptions like Doom and Warcraft: The Beginning, and it moves away from the story while keeping what made the games so well received. A great movie, definitely worth the watch.

With the main characters already introduced in the first two movies, The Death Cure skips over character reintroductions and dives straight into the action from the very first scene. While this fast-paced start keeps the energy high, it feels like a missed opportunity for the director to focus more on story growth and deepening character attachments in the opening act.
That said, character buildup throughout the movie is an improvement over The Scorch Trials. There are several emotional scenes that add weight to the story and allow viewers to connect with the characters on a deeper level. The production quality remains on par with the previous films, featuring impressive cinematography and solid visuals that capture the scale and intensity of the narrative.
The film is packed with action sequences, which deliver plenty of excitement but ultimately lack depth. While the stakes are clear, the story misses an opportunity to create a more engaging conflict that keeps viewers on edge and conflicted about the central themes, such as the cure and its implications.
The finale, while emotional, feels somewhat underwhelming. It hints at resolution but lacks the sense of closure expected from the conclusion of a trilogy. Despite its strong visuals and emotional moments, the film falls short of fully delivering on the promise of its story.
The Death Cure delivers thrilling action and improved character moments but struggles to provide the narrative depth and satisfying closure that could have elevated the trilogy's conclusion.