A horror film which excels in the cinema. Genuinely scary with a great atmosphere, a great script, and one of Cage's most effective performances. Monroe is excellent, as is Perkins' score. Banger 4/5

Oz Perkins is clever and brilliant. And also, what new cryptic language is that?

I recently ventured to the cinema and caught a screening of the latest psychological thriller, "Longlegs." The film delves into the twisted world of a serial killer who is believed to be possessed by Satan, using his demonic abilities to target young girls born on the 14th of the month. He gifts these girls a doll, which remains lifeless and silent, serving as a sinister prelude to their impending doom.
Nicolas Cage portrays the enigmatic killer, appearing sporadically throughout the movie in an unsettling all-white ensemble with pale face paint and hair. His eerie rendition of "Happy Birthday" and unsettling gestures add to the film's chilling atmosphere, leaving viewers on edge about his potential accomplice.
"Longlegs" exudes a retro vibe reminiscent of 1980s cinema, with a jarring visual style that may not resonate with contemporary audiences. The disjointed cinematography and truncated framing add to the film's unsettling nature, creating a sense of unease among viewers.
The lead actress delivers a performance that feels uncomfortably raw, as if she herself is grappling with the character's turmoil. Her portrayal adds to the overall discomfort of the film, leaving audiences questioning the extent of her character's possession.
While the film does offer resolution on the identity of "Longlegs," it ultimately falls short of recommendation. As a cinephile who appreciates the nuances of filmmaking, I found "Longlegs" lacking in substance and entertainment value. While individual tastes may vary, I prefer films that engage and captivate from start to finish, rather than leaving me feeling disenchanted or disturbed. "Longlegs" simply did not align with my preferences or expectations for a compelling cinematic experience.

Nicolas Cage proves again with this movie that he can play any role without problems. He's such a talented actor... He's nailing his role in this movie. Movie itself is strange and interesting. And if you're one of those people who likes strange horror movies, you will like this movie. I personally enjoyed it.

I was really hoping this would make up for the wasted potential of Oddity (2024), and it certainly did.
Longlegs (2024) mixes elements of paranormal pseudoscience with the "Devil made me do it" Satanic panic to deliver a satisfying slow burn thriller where the Devil is actually making them do it.
Nicholas Cage delivers a damn good performance as the titular Longlegs and it's nice to see Kiernan Shipka in yet another "psycho" role after The Blackcoat's Daughter (2017).
MaXXXine (2024) is next on my list. _Please don't disappoint_.
♪ Let me in now and it can be nice! Make me go now and I'll have to come back, not once, not twice, but as many times as I like!
**SPOILERS BELOW!**
Y'know, if Ruth had just shot this !@#$er, we could've avoided a lot of bloodshed.
Also, kids, don't be Agent Browning. It's important to be aware of your surroundings. This scene is probably the worst offender in this movie.
Also, also, blink and you'll miss it, but the Devil does a peekaboo off in the distance when Lee turns to investigate the first gunshot.

I had fun. It's fun.
Hail Satan! Any Satan movie is pretty high on my list. Was a super cool Satan kid in high school. All Anton LaVey book reports and stuff.
It's a fine Satan movie.

There's a fair amount of screen time given to Bill Clinton in this thriller. Luckily, there are no cigars to be seen as his Presidential visage looks down on FBI agent "Carter" (Blair Underwood). He's in charge of an investigation looking into the slaughter of entire families in their homes. There's no evidence of any third party anywhere, with the father invariably found having killed himself after slaughtering just about everyone else. Thing is, fellow agent "Harker" (Maika Monroe) thinks that there's way more to it than that. She's got a sort of sixth sense when it comes to these things and soon she and "Carter" are on the trail of the eponymous character (the sparingly used but effective Nicolas Cage) who may - or may not - be the source of some cryptic messages left near the site of each atrocity. Central to her theories are some eerily looking dolls. There are child size, perfectly made with porcelain and contain mysterious aluminium spheres. What's the purpose of them? It turns out that "Harker" might be able to elicit some answers from her mother "Ruth" (Alicia Witt). She's not quite the full shilling but as the detective recalls an encounter with a stranger many years earlier, we begin to wonder if mum might be more involved... It's quirky this story with elements that make sense and others that dart about making it almost impossible to figure out who's doing what to whom nor, more importantly, why? The rather brutal denouement does let it down. It's rushed and serves to fill in years worth of intrigue with five minutes of dialogue - indeed, I couldn't help but wonder if a sequel was in the offing as the story wrapped all too abruptly. Monroe delivers well here, as does photographer Andres Arochi who helps create an almost claustrophobic atmosphere to add quite a bit of tension to the plot. It's not especially scary, but it takes a different approach to creating horror for the mind rather thanks the eyes - and it works quite well.

Certainly unsettling! 'Longlegs' is solid horror fare.
Nicolas Cage's Cobble is extremely creepy, that one scene in the car unnerved me and then some. I will say that the more we see of his character the less creeped out I was, though credit to Cage & Co. for having that effect! Maika Monroe puts in a very good showing as Lee, I have zero issues with her performance - she nails it. Alicia Witt merits praise as well.
The pacing could've been better, it felt a little longer than its 101 minute run time, but other than that I'd kinda this a success. I had a fun time watching it all unfold, Monroe and the character of Cobble are the main reasons for that.

ABIGAIL is a stylish, bloody vampire flick that thrives on its energetic performances and slick production quality. Melissa Barrera, Dan Stevens, and Alisha Weir shine in their roles, with Weir in particular proving to be a standout young talent. Matt Bettinelli-Olpin & Tyler Gillett's partnership continues to be incredibly successful, blending humor, action, and horror seamlessly. Really fun atmosphere, making it an entertaining ride from start to finish.
While the film impresses visually and keeps a fast-paced momentum, it lacks depth in its storytelling. The plot feels familiar, sticking closely to vampire genre tropes without much thematic exploration. Yet, for those looking for a light, enjoyable experience with excellent performances and sharp direction, ABIGAIL delivers exactly that. It's not groundbreaking, but it's worth watching for fans of stylish horror.
Rating: B-

What a great movie... This movie reminds me of old times when movies were interesting and fun to watch unlike mordern movies which are filled with political propaganda nowadays and boring as hell with zero talent. Good acting, good plot and most importantly - no agenda! I enjoyed watching this movie a lot.

I went into "Abigail" expecting a chilling horror movie with a unique ballerina twist, but I was surprised to find it leaning more towards comedy. The exaggerated fight scenes between adults and a young girl provided some comedic moments that had me chuckling.
While the film does explore character development, it unfortunately disposes of two characters without much impact. Despite this flaw, the plot's unexpected twists and turns keep the story engaging and make for an overall enjoyable viewing experience.
The final act may feel a bit chaotic, but the climactic battle scene is reminiscent of classic movie showdowns, adding to the excitement. Melissa Barrera's presence in the film harkens back to her role in the "Scream" franchise, evoking a sense of nostalgia.
Unfortunately, the film falters in its conclusion with an unnecessary cameo from the father, disrupting the emotional dynamic of Joey. This misstep detracts from an otherwise entertaining movie.

I feel like “Abigail” is going to be one of those horror movies that audiences and genre fans really like. This latest project from Matt Bettinelli-Olpin and Tyler Gillett has everything you’d want in a film, and it delivers on them all. From its wicked sense of humor and slightly taunting tone to its fully committed, talented cast and plenty of bloody gore, this is one entertaining ride from start to finish.
A menagerie of would-be criminals (Melissa Barrera, Dan Stevens, Kathryn Newton, Kevin Durand, Angus Cloud and William Catlett) have taken a mysterious job at the behest of a man named Lambert (Giancarlo Esposito) to kidnap Abigail (Alisha Weir), the preteen ballerina daughter of a very powerful figure in the underworld. It’s a $50 million ransom and payday, and the gang holes up in a creepy old mansion overnight until her daddy makes with the cash. Nothing goes according to plan, and they’re especially thrown for a loop when they eventually discover that they’re trapped inside not only with no way out, but with a 12-year-old girl who is definitely not normal.
It’s a very simple premise and story, but everyone involved makes the most of it. The film exceeds expectations, and it’s so much better and more satisfying than you’d expect. A lot of that is due to the terrific cast and performances, stylish directing, and a series of genuine surprises and twists that are both shocking and sometimes even silly. (In fact, the story’s surprises are one of the biggest strengths, so avoid all spoilers if you want to have the most fun watching this one).
Another thing that sets the film apart is its unexpectedly well-developed characters. In a genre often filled with simple throwaways, screenwriters Stephen Shields and Guy Busick take the time to flesh out each character, making their backgrounds, struggles, and terror feel real. While the adults are understated for the most part, Weir tends to overdo it a bit in some of the later scenes. Her dramatic (and a little goofy) performance, especially when ballerina dancing is combined with throat-ripping, just screams out “corny horror movie.” But that’s also what makes it all so entertaining.
Bettinelli-Olpin and Gillett include a handful of lazy jump scares but never rely on them, which is refreshing. There are plenty of bloody and gross moments that’ll appease fans looking for grisly effects, and even those are played with a lightly farcical touch. I wouldn’t call this film scary, but it’s definitely amusing.
There are some glaring plot holes, so your willingness to look the other way will probably be a major deciding factor if you’ll enjoy or hate this one. It’s a straightforward story, but it’s also clear a lot of effort has been put into every aspect of the movie. “Abigail” knows exactly what it wants to be and delivers on that promise.
By: Louisa Moore / SCREEN ZEALOTS

Not quite as entertaining as Ready or Not, still has plenty of bonker moments, especially the second half. Really liked the performances by Melissa Barrera and Dan Stevens, but the others were a lot of fun as well. **3.5/5**

Abigail is a fun, action-driven vampire movie that seamlessly blends good comedy with its supernatural elements and violence. The film offers a delightful mix of thrills and humor, making for an enjoyable viewing experience.
The standout performances in the film elevate its overall impact. Dan Stevens brings a charismatic presence to his role, delivering both action and comedic moments with ease. Melissa Barrera also shines, adding depth to her character with a nuanced performance. However, it is Alisha Weir as the young vampire Abigail who truly steals the show. Her portrayal is both endearing and fierce, capturing the complexities of a young vampire navigating a chaotic world.
It is always a pleasure to see Giancarlo Esposito on screen, and his role in Abigail is no exception. He brings a gravitas to the film that balances the lighter, more chaotic elements. I would have preferred more of his character in the film.
The rest of the cast is a mixed bag of chaotic characters that fit well within the tone of this horror comedy. While some characters are more memorable than others, they collectively contribute to the film’s energetic and unpredictable atmosphere.
The comedy in Abigail is well-timed and effectively breaks up the tension of the action scenes. The film doesn't take itself too seriously, allowing for playful moments that enhance its entertainment value. The twists, while not entirely unexpected, are executed with enough flair to keep the audience invested. For example, a late-film revelation about Abigail's origins adds an intriguing twist to the narrative, adding depth to her character and setting up potential future installments.

Boy did this one catch me by surprise! I absolutely loved watching 'Abigail'! An unexpected gem!
I knew nothing pre-watch aside from that it was classed, on Wikipedia at least, as horror, so was simply expecting the usual fare à la 'Imaginary' and/or 'Immaculate' (former bad, latter good fwiw). Clearly, what I in fact saw knocked my socks off! I had a tremendous amount of fun with every second of this, it's unsettling as it is amusing... every department did a grand job!
Not even sure where to start with my list of many positives. Alisha Weir is the star of the whole thing, what an utterly brilliant performance from the youngster - so damn convincing, particularly early on. Melissa Barrera is also outstanding, I previously found her fairly forgettable in 'Scream' but here I undeniably liked watching her act. Dan Stevens (another I've found 'meh' elsewhere) impresses as well, as does Kathryn Newton. Heck, everyone onscreen is great.
I love how they showed the bloody (and the blood in general) body implosions, great use of (I assume) practical and special effects - proper thrilled me each time. I was happy to see the film get straight into the plot too, no messing about. It does a good job after that opening portion in setting up the characters before the mess truly hits the fan, which is when the movie seriously clicks into gear. Everything from that point on was an absolute blast - quite literally, eh?!
Going back to that opening few scenes, I was actually a touch concerned when it went from the initial fun escape to a one-location dynamic; I thought that was going to slow it down and make it more in keeping with the vibes of those two earlier 2024 movies that I noted at the top of my review. However, each moment in that one location is fantastic to watch, I have zero complaints. It's all paced to perfection!
Almost stunned at how much I enjoyed this, probably because I wasn't expecting anything from it. Looking at my ratings I've just now realised that I weirdly haven't got a favourite horror movie. According to the Letterboxd sort, I haven't even rated any films from this genre at anything above 9/10 - and even with that score it's only nine flicks, none of which I strongly adore. An unnoticed blind spot in my taste is evidently no longer.
The reviews for this seem generally favourable (at worst), which is nice to see. I've seen many online in agreement with me, what a ride! Not that it needs stating, but I'd highly recommend you check this one out!

Abigail isn't exactly a novel idea but its executed convincingly enough to offer up a moderately watchable, horror, experience.
In spite of its grounding in vampiric horror, I didn't find Abigail especially frightening. There's no sense of creeping menace and frankly, that's a shame. It does "have a go", so to speak, at first but never really takes it far enough or handles the material subtly enough, to pull it off.
Instead, Abigail is more in line with you standard vampire fare, where for the majority of the film you know who and what, you are dealing with. This tends to move the narrative and exposition, more towards a bloody action framework.
This film is not unwatchable, don't get me wrong. The acting is decent, the setting appropriately creepy and the horror sequences are polished. That said, I did find myself feeling like I'd seen it all before, in one sense or another.The ending fizzes when it could have "popped", too.
In summary, Abigail's handling feels like a missed opportunity to do something far more terrifying and creepily menacing, than what we get with the actual final product. Not bad but nothing special.

I don't know that I've heard Tchaikovsky ever used so menacingly before, but here his "Swan Lake" and some deadly pas seul are used to good effect! A group of kidnappers has been assembled by "Lambert" (Giancarlo Esposito) to kidnap the daughter of a wealthy man. They are to whisk her away to a remote, quite spooky, manor house where she is to be held hostage til dad stumps up $50m. Thing is, this butter-wouldn't-melt little girl has a secret even bigger than most of the rather disparate gang of folks who used their complementary skills to snatch her. These folks are led by "Frank" (Dan Stevens) and it's "Joey" (Melissa Barrera) who is left to keep an eye on the young "Abigail" (Alisha Weir). Quite quickly we realise that it's not her who is trapped in their web, but vice-versa and what now ensues sees quite a fun series of daft and gruesome encounters as their gang gradually dwindles and they have to fight for their lives! It runs out of steam a bit towards the ending - which seems to happen quite a few times, but a solid cast including the entertaining Kevin Durand and Kathryn Newton, some quickly paced direction and some pithy writing keeps most of this moving along with the diverse range of characters (and intellects) making for quite an enjoyable romp in a sort of "Cluedo" with loads of ketchup style. Who knew red onions were so versatile?

Almost all the aviation stuff was bullshit.
I was going to put a list together of things that were wrong, but the list would be way too long. They had 10 tons of gold in a plane with 150 passengers? I think that's too much weight. They had panels "stuck" to their plane to make it stealthy? I think not. What did they use to attach them? What kind of material? One guy gets sucked out of the plane, with several others in the same compartment. They would be gone, too. And I don't think their airplane was real in any way. And, much, much, more.
But the story was interesting and the acting was pretty good. I would have given it a thumbs down, but the good guys won, so I couldn't do that.

Worse than Soul Plane. 0 stakes legal heist with a bunch of dumb bullshit.
"What about if we take the big thing and break it into smaller parts?"
"Woooow! Good idea!"
"Yay. We can heist!"
Less homophobia than Soul Plane so in that sense Tyler's growing. Still it manages to suck balls.

Woof. I think they were going for fun quirky spy thriller, but it's just bad. And not bad in a way that is entertaining. All the characters and all the premises are just so stupid, and it looks so bad it's distracting, and it's boring on top of it all.

Cringe worthy nonsense, loaded down with puerile premise after puerile premise, predictable, done to death action and irritating characterisations.
I managed about half of this before walking away. The US entertainment industry really is a bit of a bad joke these days.

What a disappointment. It tried to be a little Long Kiss Goodnight, Bullet Train, Bugs Bunny and James Bond. The CGI is horribly bad. Love Dallas in most things but in this she was fine as the author character but so unbelievable as the action spectacular spy. Sam Rockwell was great, as usual and the rest did a serviceable job but the story was horribly executed. The colorful, smoke bomb, ballet gunfire gauntlet scene was absurd. And what's with the repetitive use of the new Beatles tune? Didn't fit and slowed the action down. And the use of Henry Cavill and John Cena was confusing, silly and not needed. Promising beginning that crashed and burned.

Such a peculiar film. Everything about it feels off.
I was initially a little unsure as to what I thought about 'Argylle', but in the end: it's a no from me. I couldn't actually tell you one thing that I properly liked about this, like at a push Sam Rockwell and Bryan Cranston are decent but even they get a bit hit-and-miss. There's just a constant tinge of lousiness that follows around throughout.
Bryce Dallas Howard feels miscast, even if she is fairly likeable. Henry Cavill is wooden (intentionally? doubtful), as is Dua Lipa but the musician has enough charm to make it work slightly. Speaking of music, all that is used here is alright but again feels off - mostly seems like the correct type of song, just the wrong exact choice of song... "Electric Energy" might grow on me, though.
What also doesn't help is the unavoidable feeling that it is a bad redo of 'Kingsman', which is expected given who directed this and all that they are planning with the two flicks behind the scenes. I'm all for a shared universe, though this is perhaps too on the nose. There are also 'The Lost City' (itself echoing 'Nim's Island') vibes sprinkled in too. Another negative is the special effects, especially at the start... less said, the better.
Overall, I think it all boils down to being a poor film - unfortunately, as I kinda wanted to like it but simply couldn't. Actually, it's just come to me, I just remembered a scene I actually did truly enjoy: the one with Leona Lewis' "Run" track. That was actually entertaining.

_Argylle_ is an action thriller that willingly wallows in goofy, cringey nonsense. Its writing is immature, and its action is overloaded with sloppy CGI and outrageous concepts that are preposterously frustrating.
**Full review:** https://bit.ly/arghspy

It’s disappointing when a film has an intriguing premise but fails to deliver the goods in the end. Such is the case with director Matthew Vaughn’s latest, an action-adventure/comedy about an author of spy novels (Bryce Dallas Howard) who stumbles into a real-life espionage scenario that matches the plot of her latest novel, embroiling her in a web of ever-shifting intrigue with various nefarious parties. The problem here is that the film never quite latches onto a dedicated focus to make the picture work. Some of the comic bits are indeed quite funny, but they frequently get bogged down by a meandering story line that’s trying to follow a more conventional, twist-laden thriller format. It leaves viewers asking, “So what’s it going to be?” There’s also more than a little derivative material thrown in, such as story threads we’ve already seen before in movies like “Romancing the Stone” (1984), “The Long Kiss Goodnight” (1996) and any number of James Bond flicks. While it’s true that this release is intended to be a spoof of these titles (especially in scenes featuring Henry Cavill as a hilariously hammy 007 knock-off), there’s a big difference between paying tribute and playing unrepentant copycat. Then there’s the picture’s excessive length, coming in at a bloated 2:19:00 runtime, far longer than it needs to be, a failing attributable to an often-needlessly complicated plot, one that begins to try audience patience at times, especially in the back half. “Argylle” also features a cute, cuddly cat, Alfie, as a central character (at least in its trailer), but, like the narrative overall, the film doesn’t quite seem to know what to do with the supposedly frisky, fickle feline, an impression far different from what’s conveyed in the picture’s video marketing. All of this is a shame, because this title has both potential and some apparent strengths going for it, such as a fine soundtrack, superbly choreographed action sequences, and an excellent ensemble cast with the likes of Sam Rockwell, Bryan Cranston, Catherine O’Hara, Ariana DeBose, and a seriously underused Richard E. Grant, not to mention fine turns from Howard and Cavill as alter-egos of one another. This one isn’t nearly as bad as many critics have made it out to be, but it could have been substantially better with some significant retooling and judicious editing. “Argylle” apparently has ambitions to become a new franchise, too, but we’ll have to see if that materializes based on what kind of box office draw it ultimately produces. At this point, though, I think it has its work cut out for it.

"Elly Conway" (Bryce Dallas Howard) lives in her remote lakeside home writing spy novels that are going down a storm. Her conclusion to the fifth in the series about the eponymous, "007"-style agent perplexes her mother, though. What happens next? Well wait til book six would seem to be the obvious answer, but mom (Catherine O'Hara) insists so "Elly" decides to take train to visit her parents - and that's mistake number one. Onboard she encounters a rather scruffy looking chap "Wilde" (Sam Rockwell) who is reading one of her books. She tries to hide her identity, but when he gets to the fly-leaf then her secret is out. That's soon the least of her worries as she and travelling cat "Alfie" are soon caught up in something straight out of one of her books! She can't fathom why she'd conceivably be the target for any nasty people, but her new found friend soon convinces her that there is someone she has to meet - and pretty quickly she's embroiled in an whole new world of mystery, intrigue and danger! It's a bit of a slow start this film, with a slightly annoying flicking between her real life and those of her characterisations (that's where the "Action Man" style of the sparingly used Henry Cavill appears) but once we establish who is who and what's going on, we are straight into "Man from U.N.C.L.E." territory with loads of rapid-fire escapades that though hardly original, do have some fun twists and turns as we progress to a denouement that is derivative, but still quite enjoyable to watch. The initial concept is quite original and though the execution largely an amalgam of other Matthew Vaughn features, it still works quite well even if it is far too long, with Rockwell clearly having some fun here and the cat remaining largely contained in it's capsule throughout!

FULL SPOILER-FREE REVIEW @ https://talkingfilms.net/argylle-review-a-delightful-surprise-of-campy-entertainment/
"Argylle emerges as a (very) pleasant surprise this new year, blending absurdity with sophistication to create a truly memorable cinematic experience.
Matthew Vaughn's vision, combined with Jason Fuchs' sharp, clever screenplay, provides an entertainment rollercoaster ride that obliterates initial expectations. From unexpected twists and turns to the incredibly charismatic cast, not to mention a third act filled with hilariously unforgettable action set pieces, the complex-made-simple spy story captivates the audience with its campy charm and relentless energy.
It's my first big recommendation of 2024, one you can't afford to miss in theaters!"
Rating: A-

Good movie. No political propaganda, thank god. No unnecessary sex scenes either. I enjoyed this movie. Was pretty decent.

I think I need to rewatch the old movie because I cannot remember if it was this ridiculous or not. I see there are two; the one with Bill Paxton that I think I remember and an even older one with muh boi, Crispin Glover that I didn't know exist.
So, what's wrong with this movie? Well, besides killing off Kiernan Shipka in the first 15 minutes, everything, everything is wrong (I'm exaggerating slightly) - I thought I was watching a disaster movie, instead it's a weirdly cobbled together romance movie.
MINOR SPOILERS AHEAD
1. Javi is written as an unintentional antagonist and it's kinda dumb. Furthermore, the issue between Javi and Kate is also never really addressed. They both lost their friends and for all intents and purposes it appears Kate built up walls around herself, left town and never looked back. Both of these characters have had to live with and deal with the loss of their friends but in the scene when Javi snaps at Kate, it's hard not to take Javi's side, and we're meant to take Kate's side because the movie follows Kate. Javi is barely in it. The scene that follows between Tyler and Kate felt like it should've been between Javi and Kate, minus the romance because we don't actually need romance in everything.
2. They went a little too far with "reckless Tyler" in those first few scenes where diving Javi and Kate off the road is played for laughs. No one ever brings it up and Javi even pulls the same stunt with Tyler and Kate during the final act. These people are all supposed to be sensible adults.
3. Apart from mini-boss Scott, Javi's team of trained specialists have no personality or character development and are given barely any screen time compared to Tyler's ragtag storm-wrangling group. We're meant to see Tyler's group as cool because "oh whoa, they actually know something!" while we never get to know the team of people who could probably blow your mind with their combined knowledge.
4. My biggest issue with this movie is the two "opposing" groups. Javi claims to be doing this for science so we can better understand tornadoes so we can help people, and Tyler's here to help people by being social media famous, selling merchandise and giving out food. They both have the same goal, or claim to, and their different tech and methods of storm chasing could compliment each other, so why the unnecessary animosity, especially from Tyler's group, who, if we're being honest, aren't really doing that much. Tyler mentions a supercomputer at one point and I have to wonder what exactly have they been using this supercomputer access for all this time? If these two clowns worked together, they could've successfully scanned a tornado before the events of this movie.
ANYWAY... LET'S GET TO THE JUICY PART OF MY "REVIEW"!
"Is there political lecturing? No. Is there lecturing about climate change? No. Is there lectures about being Gay? No. Is there lectures about diversity? No. Is there lectures about feminism? No. Does it make a point that all white people are evil? No. Does it make a point that all men are evil? No. Does it make a point that Christianity is evil? No. Does it have a villain that is supposed to be Donald Trump? No."
What do you suppose Kate's mom was talking about when she mentioned more and more bad weather? Bigots are comically silly, I swear! Swine says they came to watch tornadoes destroy things but somehow missed all the colored people and women on the screen who feel like they take up the majority of the runtime. There's never consistency with these people, is there?
I came to watch a disaster movie and all I left with was the thought that I should've just watched The Day After Tomorrow (2004) again because at least that movie had compelling people drama. The funnier bit is if you read the recent reviews online on that old Bill Paxton movie, there are quite a few complaining that this new movie is woke and shoving agendas down your throat, so either Swine is being comically sarcastic or they're full of it. Like Tyler, I can't really tell.
Do bigots like it because Kate gets with Tyler at the end instead of Javi? It really does seem this simplistic and silly when simply seeing a colored person on screen usually triggers them into spiraling out of control with calls to "boycott the woke DEI agenda movie!"

I dislike this movie. I found it boring and long. So many stupid people screaming. So much noise. So much garbage. So little excitement.
I liked how targeted towards the prairies it is. Just a bunch of good old country folk. Drivin' truck. Goin' to rodeos. Playin' baseball. Sufferin' in poverty and losin' property. Yeehaw.