Category: English

I love loved Pixar movies until they stared making sequels of awesome movies. Yes, Toy Story series was a success, but then every other sequel they’ve made was no where up to their own standards. That apart, their recent films since Coco back in 2017 weren’t great either. So in short, I wasn’t impressed when they decided to make a sequel to one of my favourite films, Inside Out!

Directed by Kelsey Mann, Inside Out 2 tells us the story of now thirteen year old Riley, who’s on the verge of hitting puberty. With this, the five emotions in Riley’s head, Joy, Sadness, Fear, Disgust and Anger, are now joined by new emotions – Anxiety, Envy, Embarrassment, and Ennui (aka. boredom). Soon, Anxiety takes over the console, and bottle’s up the existing emotions (quite literally!). This leads to Riley taking some drastic steps eventually resulting in a panic attack. All the emotions now need work together for Riley to calm down, and rest of the movie (last 10 minutes) deals with how they manage that.

While Inside Out was complicated, Pete Docter, director of the first film, was able to make it simple and relevant, and this made everyone, kids and adults included, love the movie. Come the sequel, Kelsey isn’t able to do similar justice; the movie is super complicated, and my five year old who loves the original, couldn’t make sense of anything. The plat is super busy and screenplay felt rushed – the entire concept of ‘sense of self’ wasn’t explained well either. All of this led to a average film.

Amy Poehler and rest of the voice cast do justice to their characters, but they aren’t able o pull off the charm of the predecessor. Production is good, as you’d expect from the Disney-Pixar studio.

Is it worth your time and money?: Meh! Inside Out 2 isn’t a bad film. But they’ve definitely made a mess of what could have been a potential success. For that reason, I’d say wait for it to stream on Disney+.

Worth mention: Nostalgia!

Acting: 9/10
Story-Screenplay-Direction: 6/10
Technical Aspects: 8/10

Verdict: 7.5/10

Thor: Ragnarok happens to be one of my favourite Marvel films for it was super fun. The banter and tiffs between Thor, Loki and Hulk (and maybe Valkyrie) gave us some best on-screen chemistry between the characters. Thor: Love and Thunder, on the other hand, while a fun film, lacks the spark and emotional connect that its predecessor did.

Directed and co-scripted by Taika Waititi, the film starts with the reinvented Thor at peace, yet desperate for a new purpose, alongside the Guardians of the Galaxy in a galaxy far, far away (no pun intended 😜). A distress signal brings him to earth where he finds his ex-lover, Dr. Jane Foster, as the Mighty Thor, holding his ex-hammer, Mjolnir. They soon realize that Gorr the God Butcher, having lost his child, Love, is, as his name suggests, on a god hunting spree. The rest of the film is about how Thor and the rest of the gang defeat Gorr.

While the storyline on paper is effective, it felt like the emotions were amiss in this almost 2-hour film which aims for a lot. There is a major clash between the serious and goofy elements, with no room for us to digest the former, which makes the film a little too overwhelming at times. The screenplay by Waititi & Jennifer Kaytin Robinson is a hit and amiss for there are a lot of tonal imbalances.

Chris Hemsworth is at his best playing Thor, and it feels like he was born to do this. However, his character arc could have been better developed for he seemed silly at times. Natalie Portman is mighty impressive as the Mighty Thor and does full justice. I however thought that her make-up was inconsistent (and maybe a little too much). The winner however is Christian Bale who acts his heart out as Gorr. Though he is the antagonist, his performance in the backstory makes you feel for him. Russell Crowe surprises with his act as Zeus.

Music by Michael Giacchino and Nami Melumad is alright. There are several featured songs effectively used in the movie. Editing by Matthew Schmidt, Peter S. Elliot, Tim Roche & Jennifer Vecchiarello could have been better for I felt that some value-adding emotional chunks maybe, have been left out. The cinematography by Barry Idoine is perfect, and I loved the way he bled the colours out in the scenes involving Gorr.

Is it worth your time and money?: As I said earlier, it is a fun movie, yes, and worth a watch, but not funny enough. Thor: Love and Thunder has its heart in the right place, but it aims for a lot without paying much heed to the emotional elements. Only if Watiti had spent a few more minutes on balancing the film, alas!

Worth mention: Christian Bale as Gorr the Butcher.

Acting: 8/10
Story-Screenplay-Direction: 7/10
Technical Aspects: 8/10

Verdict: 7.5/10

Toy Story series happens to be one of my favourite movie series to date, and I was excited when Lightyear was announced. But the excitement died soon once the trailer was out. Unlike the Buzz in the Toy Story series, I thought that this Buzz didn’t have the warmth and lacked the nostalgic touch you’d expect; and I felt the same even after watching the movie.

Nowhere connected to the Toy Story but for the small write-up in the titles, Lightyear tells the origin story of Buzz Lightyear and his adventures as a Space Ranger. Scripted by Matthew Aldrich, Jason Headley & Angus MacLane, and directed by MacLane (who co-directed the mediocre Finding Dory in the past), Lightyear doesn’t feel like a Pixar film. Yes, the animation and graphics are great, and the movie does follow the Pixar theme of a character venturing out into the world and learning to appreciate his friends and family. Still, the emotions and core crux of connecting with the audience were amiss in this one. At the end of the movie, all I felt was, okay, that was just another one, but that’s not what you’d expect from a Pixar film, right? (oh wait, none of their movies in the recent past have felt like that! ). The confusing timeline aspect was also too much to handle (imagine having to explain that to my 3-year-old!).

Chris Evans does his best to pour life into Buzz and make the character his own, but bottom line, he’s no Tim Allen. The rest of the voice cast is alright.

Music by Michael Giacchino is okay. Editing by Anthony J. Greenberg could have been better for even at 107 minutes, the movie seemed long.

Is it worth your time and money?: Skip this one in the theatres and wait for it on Disney+.

Worth mention: Fun episodes involving Sox.

Acting: 8/10
Story-Screenplay-Direction: 6/10
Technical Aspects: 8.5/10

Verdict: 7.5/10

Top Gun, released a month after I was born 36 years ago, is considered a cult classic and remains relevant in pop culture decades after its release. Though it is an aviation-themed drama, the stylish, action-packed sequences and some of the most amazing aerial footage make it one of Tom Cruise’s best films. Does the sequel have enough meat in comparison?

Top Gun: Maverick takes off more or less where Top Gun ended. A few months after serving as a trainer at the Top Gun academy, Maverick (Cruise) moves into different roles within the Navy, not lasting at any of them for long. Thirty years down the line, thanks to Iceman (Kilmer), he gets an opportunity to train the best of the best Top Gun fighter pilots for a special/deadly mission. Part of the pilot group is Rooster (Teller), son of Maverick’s best friend Goose (from the first film). There’s tension between Maverick and Rooster, and the rest of the film is about how they succeed working together. 

Scripted by Peter Craig and Justin Marks, the storyline is similar to the predecessor but stronger and sans the drama. Director Joseph Kosinski handles the relationship between Maverick and Rooster, and the banter between the Top Gun candidates in a suitable manner. Rooster and Hangman (Powell) remind you of Maverick and Iceman from the first film. The subtle romantic thread between Maverick and Penny (who didn’t make an appearance but was just mentioned in Top Gun) and the climax stood out for me personally. The screenplay by Ehren Kruger, Eric Warren Singer and Christopher McQuarrie is alright. I, however, felt that the pace of the film was a bit slow at times, especially in the parts where there was a wee bit of drama. 

Tom Cruise, what can be said about this guy! Though age shows in a couple of frames, he looks dashing as ever (I’d be lying if I said I wasn’t smitten by him while watching the movie). Miles Teller has a vital role, and he delivers.  Jennifer Connelly is good as Penny, and so are Jon Hamm and Monica Barbaro. Glen Powell makes an impression. Ed Harris and Val Kilmer make cameos.

On the music front, the Top Gun Anthem and Danger Zone reused from the original make an impact, and so does I Ain’t Worried by One Republic. I thought the sound mixing could have been better, especially for the film’s first few minutes (including the main titles). Editing by Eddie Hamilton could have been tight. The cinematography by Claudio Miranda is exceptional. The electrifying aerial shots are very well choreographed. 

Is it worth your time and money?: A big yes. Top Gun: Maverick is a well-executed film that, in many ways, is better than its predecessor. Tom Cruise holds the fort (like in most of his movies) and ensures you are in for a ride! Watch it in IMAX or at least a big screen for the best experience.

Worth mention: Cruise’s charm and the spectacularly shot aerial sequences.

Acting: 8.5/10
Story-Screenplay-Direction: 8/10
Technical Aspects: 8.5/10

Verdict: 8.5/10

After a movie about feelings having feelings, Pixar’s back with a movie on dinosaur’s having feelings; and that is The Good Dinosaur’s biggest disadvantage. Inside Out was so good that anything after it would have to be superlatively awesome, and unfortunately, this one’s just good.

Directed by Peter Sohn, The Good Dinosaur tells the story of young Arlo, an offspring of a farming Apatosaurus family. Unlike his siblings, Arlo is timid and feeble. Everything changes once he comes across a critter (a caveboy) who helps him discover life and outgrow his fears. The story is simple and very predictable, and this makes The Good Dinosaur feel like a movie you’ve already watched in the past. However, direction by Sohn ensures that you connect with Arlo; you laugh with him, and you cry with him. Pixar’s family bonding is also abundant in the movie. Screenplay by Meg LeFauve is neat.

Not that Raymond Ochoa did a bad job, but I thought Arlo could have been voiced better. The rest of the voice cast is alright.

Music by Mychael Danna and Jeff Danna is good. Editing by Stephen Schaffer is neat while Sharon Calahan’s cinematography is worth a mention. On the downside, The Good Dinosaur doesn’t feel for like a Pixar movie; it could pass as one from any other animation studio.

Is it worth your time and money?: The Good Dinosaur might not be a great film, but it’s worth a watch for its got its heart at the right place.

Worth mention: Direction; I loved the way emotions were showcased.

Acting: 8/10
Story-Screenplay-Direction: 7.5/10
Technical Aspects: 8/10

Verdict: 7.5/10

I’ve always been a fan of the Rocky franchise, and so for obvious reasons, was looking forward to this movie; and thankfully, it lived up to my expectations.

Co-scripted and directed by Ryan Coogler, Creed showcases the life of Adonis, son of legendary boxer Apollo Creed. True to his bloodline, Adonis aims to make it big in the boxing arena, but wants to make his own mark, not as a Creed. In comes Rocky Balboa to help the kid, and next thing we know, he’s fighting for the championship. The story is mostly predictable, but Coogler ensured to stay true to the script. I liked the way he intertwined Adonis’ battle with Rocky’s, and added Bianca’s story-line to add substance. Screenplay is neat and effective.

Micheal Jordon is good as Creed, and is impressive in the ring. Tessa Thompson is alright as his love interest. It’s a cake walk for Sylvester Stallone who reprises his role for the seventh time. Looks like he gets better on the acting front with every movie.

Music by Ludwig Göransson is pretty neat. I badly wanted to hear the Rocky theme (Gonna Fly Now), and while the soundtrack doesn’t compare to it, it is still effective. Editing by Claudia Castello Michael and P. Shawver is good. Cinematography by Maryse Alberti is excellent. I loved the way he shot the first bout in a single frame.

Is it worth your time and money?: Definitely yes. Creed is a perfect spin-off to the Rocky series, and it keeps the franchise alive. It definitely is one of my top movies of the year.

Worth mention: Excellent cinematography.

Acting: 8/10
Story-Screenplay-Direction: 8/10
Technical Aspects: 8.5/10

Verdict: 8/10

America has spent a lot on getting Matt Damon back; we first had Saving Private Ryan, then Interstellar, and now The Martian. Why don’t they reach out to his look-alike Mark Wahlberg instead? 😛

Directed by Ridley Scott, who’s worked a set of duds in the recent past, The Martian is a movie about getting an astronaut who is incorrectly presumed dead and left behind on the planet Mars back to Earth. While I have not read Andy Weir’s novel, I thought the screenplay by  Drew Goddard was pretty weak. With the entire story line being revealed in the trailer, there wasn’t anything gripping showcased on-screen. There were also a few episodes which weren’t stitched well into the movie, and there was no effort made on establishing any characters including Matt Damon’s; he’s left on Mars, and everyone’s trying to get him back – where’s the substance and/or emotion? While the direction is alright, there were no moments of awe. Too much drama towards the climax doesn’t help either.

Matt Damon is very good in the lead role. He has put in a lot of effort to groom himself for the role, and it shows on-screen. While it might not be an Academy Award winning performance, it’s still a commendable one. Chiwetel Ejiofor is good and so is Jeff Daniels. While the rest of the cast has big names, no one stands out for they all seemed liked pawns in a game of chess – actors without character.

Music by Harry Gregson-Williams is nothing great. Use of old disco songs seemed too monotonous after a while. Editing by Pietro Scalia could have been better. Cinematography by Dariusz Wolski is good.

Is it worth your time and money?: If too much wasn’t revealed in the trailer, The Martian would probably have had more impact on the audience. Even otherwise, the weak screenplay and average direction make this an average flick.

Worth mention: Acting by Matt Damon.

Acting: 8/10
Story-Screenplay-Direction: 7/10
Technical Aspects: 7/10

Verdict: 7.5/10

The Gift might not have big names or a star cast, but some slick direction makes it a near perfect thriller.

Directed by Joel Edgerton, The Gift tells the story of a young couple, Simon and Robyn, moving into a suburban Los Angeles neighbourhood after Simon finds a new job outside the city. They are soon visited by Gordo, a former high school classmate of Simon’s. While Gordo thinks of Simon as a long-lost friend and showers the couple with unwarranted gifts, Simon thinks otherwise. Things turn ugly when bygones aren’t bygones any more, and we have an edge of the seat thriller at hand, thanks to some smart story telling. While most of the movie is entertaining, the ending seemed a bit clichéd. Nevertheless it’s a good try by the débutante director. The fact that the movie has a positive message, especially for today’s generation, is noteworthy.

Jason Bateman is good as Simon, while Rebecca Hall does a good job as Robyn. Joel is perfect as Gordo; he ensures to downplay the character perfectly. Rest of the cast is alright.

Music by Danny Bensi and Saunder Jurriaans is good. Editing by Luke Doolan is neat, and so is the cinematography by Eduard Grau.

Is it worth your time and money?: While it might not be a brilliant film, The Gift is a slick thriller which gives you bang for your buck.

Worth mention: The message the movie conveys.

Acting: 8/10
Story-Screenplay-Direction: 8/10
Technical Aspects: 8/10

Verdict: 8/10

Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol happens to be one of my favourite action movies. Brad Bird ensured that there was enough adrenaline pumping action to keep you enthralled for over 2 hours (in spite of a mediocre storyline). While Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation doesn’t have as many adrenaline rushing sequences as its predecessor, it’s still a good watch!

Co-scripted and directed by Christopher McQuarrie, who earlier worked with Cruise in Edge of Tomorrow and Jack Reacher, the film starts off with Ethan Hunt in search of the mysterious Syndicate while the IMF is disbanded and absorbed into the CIA. It’s now up to Hunt to go rogue and save the world. While the script goes haywire at times and the screenplay is lazy, McQuarrie ensures that the limited stunts are amazingly good. Be it Cruise’s jaw dropping drop into the cooling machine, or the spectacularly shot car chase followed by a bike chase, they keep you engrossed. Wish there was more to offer on the storyline for it all seemed too predictable. The screenplay too could have been crisp.

Tom Cruise is stupendous as Ethan Hunt, as expected. Is he really 53? And does he really do the stunts himself? He is the only reason the franchise is alive for so long, he doesn’t disappoint at all. Rebecca Ferguson puts up a commendable act as Ilsa Faust, while Jeremy Renner and Simon Pegg are at their usual best. Pegg tickles your ribs with his witty performance once in a while. Sean Harris is alright as the antagonist.

Music and background score by Joe Kraemer is alright; I wish there was more usage of the original MI theme. Editing by Eddie Hamilton could have been better. Cinematography by Robert Elswit, who also worked on MI4, is brilliant.

Is it worth your time and money?: It’s got Tom Cruise, and amazing stunts. It’s probably the movie every action movie lover has been waiting for. So I don’t think I need to answer the question!

But if you still need an answer, I’d definitely say yes. It might not be an awesome film, but it still gives you bang for the buck!

Worth mention: The spectacularly shot action sequences.

Acting: 8.5/10
Story-Screenplay-Direction: 7.5/10
Technical Aspects: 8.5/10

Verdict: 8/10

Terminator 2: Judgment Day was one of my favourite movies during childhood, and I grew up humming the Terminator theme music. While the third and fourth instalments were huge disappointment (for me at least), Terminator Genisys brings alive the series once more, but only to an extent.

Directed by Alan Taylor, the movie starts as a prologue to The Terminator’s  (1984) storyline, where Kyle Reese is sent back to protect Sarah Connor, yet-to-be-born John Connor’s mom, from Skynet’s Terminator. Just like in the 1984 movie, the T-800 and Kyle Reese arrive at the same time, but things are different now for we already have ‘Pops’ in the picture. Scripted by Laeta Kalogridis and Patrick Lussier, the storyline is very well-connected, but it sometimes is too much to handle. Alan does his best to keep you engrossed, but unfortunately, just like in his previous work (Thor: The Dark World), he defies logic and uses large-scale destruction to do this. Screenplay is alright.

Arnold is back, and he is back to what he does best; being a torpid actor. Nevertheless, he still charms you with his antics. He’s grown old for sure, but man, he still has the body to play the Guardian. Emilia Clarke looks great, and does well as the Mother of Dra.. oops, Sarah Connor. Jason Clarke (no, he’s not related to Emilia, I checked) is alright as John. Jai Courtney comes up with a better performance than in A Good Day to Die Hard, but he still is a mediocre actor.

Music by Lorne Balfe, supervised by Hans Zimmer is good. I liked the background score, but would have loved for the original theme to be playing for longer periods. Cinematography by Kramer Morgenthau is decent, and the 3D effects are good. The CGI work looked patchy at times. Editing by Roger Barton could have been better.

Is it worth your time and money?: Well, it might not be a great movie and it might actually feel like you’ve already watched all of it; nevertheless,you may give it a watch. Ensure that you have minimal expectations.

Worth mention: The SF Bridge episode is well shot.

Acting: 7.5/10
Story-Screenplay-Direction: 7/10
Technical Aspects: 7/10

Verdict: 7/10

Hasta la vista, baby!