I was very interested in seeing "Last Flag Flying" because it had a great cast and I generally enjoy the films of Richard Linklater. However, it surprisingly did not make a very big theatrical splash, so I had to wait until it became available to rent.

Ultimately, I found that the writing of this film was satisfying. The character development is very strong. All three of the leads are developed very well into complex characters that add to the audience's sympathy for the story. This also allows Linklater to deliver his commentary on war more effectively. Even though Linklater had quite a bit that was noble to say, and it does deserve to be heard, I fear that it is too little too late. To me, it appears that the film would have been much more well-timed were it released about five years ago. Now, it feels like the war has evolved to the point that the commentary is a little redundant. That didn't affect my enjoyment of the movie, though. There were many parts that were funny, and there were many parts that were endearing.

The style of the film is definitely extremely minimalistic. It is a little play-like in that it is shot in mostly confined sets and is based predominantly in its dialogue, but I think that is fine to accomplish its purpose. Maybe a few flashbacks to the war could have been beneficial to garner even more audience sympathy, but I thought that it was fine enough. I did very much enjoy the soundtrack, though. The performances were also great, too. Steve Carrell is more well-rounded than usual, and with the exception of one scene, I didn't ever find him to be squeaky and annoying. Bryan Cranston and Laurence Fishburne are also great, having excellent chemistry with Carrell that makes the film what it is.

Overall, I found "Last Flag Flying" to be quite good. There are many things about the film that succeed, I just wish that it would have been released a little sooner so that it could have made more of an impact.

Last Flag Flying
Big Tuna's Rating: B
How Did I Watch It?: Redbox rental.
Had I Seen It Before?: No.
Would I Watch It Again?: Yes.

I had wanted to see Stronger when it was in theaters, but ended up missing it because it never expanded close enough to me. As such, I ended up renting it on Redbox when I got the chance.

Ultimately, I found myself a little underwhelmed by the film. I was really expecting a moving, even a little depressing, character drama. Instead, it felt like I was watching a PSA for Boston Strong that came out a few years too late. This film definitely isn't timely enough for its message to be effective, and I didn't feel like its story was strong enough, otherwise. It's diversion enough, but it never is truly captivating, and I found it to be full of flaws. For one, the characters aren't particularly sympathetic. They are a little annoying due to the sheer amount of bad decisions they make.  For a little bit, I could have suspension of disbelief, but after a while, they outstayed their welcome. In my opinion, the film tried too hard to be inspiring for it to be a good film.

I also found that the execution of the film was mediocre. Undoubtedly the best part of the film was Gyllenhaal's performance. He appeared sincere and emotional in his role, although I would still say it is far from his best. I wasn't particularly impressed by any of the supporting cast. The cinematography was a little rough, but I will say that the practical effects for the aftermath of the bombing looked really good.

Overall, I wasn't super impressed by Stronger. I don't think it clicked for me emotionally, and as a result, it didn't work for me as a whole. I'm sure it has its audience, and it isn't bad, but the story deserved better.

Stronger
Big Tuna's Rating: B-
How Did I Watch It?: Redbox rental.
Had I Seen It Before?: No.
Would I Watch It Again?: Yes.

I had heard a lot of good things about "Beach Rats" out of Sundance. It never came close to me when it was in theaters, though, so when I was looking for something on Redbox and came across it, I decided to pick it up.

The film had some very strong parts, but also had some crippling weaknesses. The protagonist is extremely well-developed for the first half of the film. He does some bad things, but he is shown to be real and experiencing emotions with which the audience can sympathize. However, I think that the protagonist's character is weakened by his companions. I found those characters to be extremely annoying, and every scene in which they shared the screen with the protagonist, I could barely tolerate it because of them. Then, there's also a twist at the ending that is ridiculously sudden and does not do a good job of resolving the characters' arcs at all. It disappointed me that with such a strong start, the movie ultimately fell flat.

​The filmmaking style of this film is rough, but visceral. There were are a lot of shots that are built in the dark, but are bright with the neon-like glow of the moon. The result is quite beautiful. The location scouts also did a good job, as the settings of the film work to build the tone for which it hopes. The music is good, too, further creating suspense. Harris Dickinson does an excellent job in the lead role, but all of the other actor's performances were a little burdensome.

Overall, it's a shame that "Beach Rats" wasn't better. It had the narrative potential to be what it wanted to be, but there was some extreme weakness in the development of secondary characters.

Beach Rats
Big Tuna's Rating: B-
How Did I Watch It?: Redbox rental.
Had I Seen It Before?: No.
Would I Watch It Again?: Probably not.

I had a rent one, get one free code for Redbox, and there was another movie that I really wanted to see, so I looked for the most interesting thing that was available for my second one and this was it. I had heard about Camera Obscura at the Florida Film Festival, and while the reception wasn't positive, I still thought it would be interesting.

The writing of this film was interesting. It's nothing super original. There are all sorts of horror films about a supernatural entity compelling a person to kill. What made this film interesting was the mystery behind it. The mystery was even rather predictable at times, but the film took what could have easily been cheesy in such a serious way that it kept me involved. The commentary is also very solid. The film served as a relatively interesting exploration of PTSD. That being said, there are TONS of issues. The character development is beyond lackluster. There are also a lot of errors in logic found throughout or things that just don't make sense. As a whole, the film is just convoluted.

The execution of the film is surprisingly decent for a horror film, though. The camerawork was solid. It didn't look like it had a super high budget or anything, but it was much better than that of a TV movie. The practical effects for the gore were also very impressive. It wasn't scary, but it was a little disturbing at times. The acting is fine, but not amazing. Christopher Denham does a good job in the lead role, and Nadja Bobyleva accents him well in her supporting role.

Overall, I thought that "Camera Obscura" was an enjoyable horror film that ended up better than expected, but still not great. If you are a horror hound, it's definitely worth a shot.

Camera Obscura
Big Tuna's Rating: C
How Did I Watch It?: Redbox rental.
Had I Seen It Before?: No.
Would I Watch It Again?: Probably not.

I have wanted to see "Patti Cake$" since its Sundance debut. I missed it at the Florida Film Festival because it overlapped with another film I wanted to see, and I missed its theatrical release because of a little storm called Irma. So I had to settle for waiting until its Redbox release.

I had very mixed feelings about this film overall. It starts out very slowly. The characters are rather annoying. They do everything to excess and made a lot of bad decisions that made me not want to sympathize with them. I turned it off after about thirty minutes, took a break, and then decided to give it another chance. At about the halfway mark, the film did begin to pick up for me. In the second half, I found a relatable story that had humor and heart. It worked much better than the first half of the film. That being said, the film as a whole also conforms to the conventions of the underdog drama and follows pretty much every story beat. For the most part, it's fine, but it isn't anything original or revolutionary.

The execution of the film was a little lackluster to me. I thought that the cinematography was mediocre in the real-life sequences with shakiness and frequent unnecessary and rough zooms. It was better in the dream sequences, but those were oddly surreal and too over-the-top to be effective. The acting is fine, but sometimes a little annoying. I think that Danielle Macdonald definitely has promise in her acting career. I thought that the original songs for the soundtrack were quite catchy, too. They have a lot to say about the status quo, and their message is delivered well.

Overall, I ended up liking "Patti Cake$", but I had to struggle through the first thirty minutes before I got to the legitimately enjoyable part of the film. It's definitely not for everyone, so watch it at your own risk.

Patti Cake$
Big Tuna's Rating: C+
How Did I Watch It?: Redbox rental.
Had I Seen It Before?: No.
Would I Watch It Again?: Possibly.

Prior to seeing her new film, "Landline", I wanted to watch Gillian Robespierre's first film "Obvious Child". I liked Jenny Slate's run on SNL and some of her supporting roles, but I was unsure of what I would think of her in a lead role.

I thought that the writing of this film was actually really good. The characterization is really solid from the opening moments of the film. The characters are used more as a way to deliver the commentary of the film, though, which is interesting. It seems as if the writer is making us sympathize with the characters as a means of  justifying their actions. The dialogue is really funny and quick, too. My biggest issue is that the comedy  (and some of the general conversation) delivered by the protagonist is a bit heavy on scatological humor. These elements weren't funny, so the film shined where it had the interesting commentary on society.

The filmmaking aspects of the film are okay. Its style is very indie, so the camerawork is very simple and most of the filming seemed to be on location. The actors all do a fine job in their roles, with Jenny Slate doing a good job of commanding the screen as the protagonist.

Overall, I really liked "Obvious Child". Despite a few juvenile jokes, it's funny as a whole and features likable characters, but is also extremely thought-provoking too.

Obvious Child
Big Tuna's Rating: B+
How Did I Watch It?: Digital rental.
Had I Seen It Before?: No.
Would I Watch It Again?: Maybe.

"The Comedian" was a film in which I had some interest, but wasn't dying to see. As such, I waited until I had a free rental code to see it.

I don't think that the film is as bad as most people say that it is. At the very least, the story is interesting. I enjoy showbusiness films, so I liked this one. I think one of the issues is that the character isn't made as relatable as he could be. He is shown as being a bit arrogant towards the beginning, however, some sympathy does begin to build over the course of the film. The film contains a lot of stand-up comedy performances, some of which are really funny, others fall flat. Apart from those moments, the film is mostly dramatic aside from a few laughs here and there.

There wasn't anything spectacular about the visual style of the film. In fact, it feels a little dated as a whole. Robert De Niro's performance is great. It's a really good callback to his role in "The King of Comedy", switching up his position. Danny DeVito and Harvey Keitel are both good in their supporting roles.

Overall, "The Comedian" is not an awful film, but it isn't a great film either. It's an easy watch with some pretty funny stand-up comedy and a great performance by Robert De Niro, so if that appeals to you, it may be worth a shot.

The Comedian
Big Tuna's Rating: B
How Did I Watch It?: Digital rental.
Had I Seen It Before?: No.
Would I Watch It Again?: Possibly.

"CHIPS" was yet another attempt to take a semi-serious TV show and turn it into an action comedy. I didn't get to see it in theaters because there was always something that I wanted to see more. What filmmakers don't realize is that "21 Jump Street" captured lightning in a bottle, it probably isn't going to happen again.

The plot of the film is ridiculously generic. It plays out the same as basically every inside job story, so it's super predictable. The character development isn't that great either. There are subplots that seem to be in an attempt to get the audience to relate to the characters, such as Jon's separation from his wife, but they often have detrimental effects. In that case, it just made the character feel whiny. The film has humor throughout, but it just isn't that great for the most part. There are a few genuinely funny moments, but there are far too many that play off of Ponch's "sex addiction". It just goes way too over-the-top way too often. That's not to say it wasn't completely unenjoyable, only that it wasn't as funny as it could have been.

The execution of the film was mediocre. There are a lot of shaky tracking shots during the chase scenes. There are so many excessive explosions that it might as well be a Michael Bay movie. The acting is frequently over-the-top. I'm really starting to think that Vincent D'Onofrio is beginning to get typecast in his roles.

Overall, I found myself mildly amused by "CHIPS", but it wasn't anything great. There are some funny moments, but the overly raunchy moments fell flat. It was just... okay.

CHIPS
Big Tuna's Rating: C
How Did I Watch It?: Redbox rental.
Had I Seen It Before?: No.
Would I Watch It Again?: Probably not.

I thought that "The Bad Batch" looked interesting. So I rented it. Interesting is... one adjective that can be used to describe it.

The plot of this film is very threadbare. I guess the best way to describe it would be "Mad Max" meets "The Neon Demon", but not as good as either. It seems almost as if nothing happened. The character development is very thin, too. It was hard to understand a lot of what was happening. A lot of scenes seem like they didn't need to be there, such as a scene showcasing a society of bodybuilding cannibals that never really came back into play. The dialogue can be clunky and random at times, like a conversation about sewage systems. Still, there are a lot of metaphors going on in the film. There are some profound thoughts presented regarding the idea of punishment. There is also a God figure (I think) played by Jim Carrey and another God figure (I think) played by Keanu Reeves. Sometimes it was hard to figure out what the filmmakers were trying to get across. The tone is very intriguing, though, jumping from intense to comedic and back.

Despite its narrative inconsistencies, the film is actually very well-made. The cinematography and production design are great, creating this world of "The Bad Batch". The way in which it did this was very reminiscent of the latter "Purge" films. The mise-en-scene is really direct, though, which created a confusing feeling. The acting is solid by all except for Suki Waterhouse, who is okay, but sometimes a little forced. The effects for her leg were great, though, as were the effects for the gore.

I'm not entirely sure of my opinion on "The Bad Batch". It's scattershot writing keeps it from being a truly great film, and even though I kept feeling like I should hate it because almost nothing was happening, I actually liked it.

The Bad Batch
Big Tuna's Rating: B
How Did I Watch It?: Digital rental.
Had I Seen It Before?: No.
Would I Watch It Again?: Yes.

I may be the only person in the world who feels this way, but I actually like "Cars 2" a little more than the original. While the story is a lot simpler, I found it to be much more entertaining.

I thought that this film had some genuinely funny moments. There is some potty humor in it, but those aren't the funny parts. What I think works in this film is that they chose to focus on the funniest part of the original, Mater. As such, much of the humor in the film is the "stupid comedy" associated with the character, which I find to be rather enjoyable. The conflict does go over-the-top at times, though. The emotional moments in the film are definitely forced too, however, by the end of the first film, the characters were well-developed enough that I cared for them in this one.

The animation and world-building in this film is still excellent, as would be expected. What really impressed me were some of the action sequences. The film manages to do a really good job parodying spy films, especially their excessive, flamboyant car chases. Yet, the film also manages to continue the quality of its homages to racing and the quality of that aspect.

Overall, "Cars 2" isn't as good of a film as its predecessor, but it is definitely a lot more enjoyable, at least to me. So even though it isn't my favorite Disney franchise, I still have interest in seeing what they have to offer in the new installment.

Cars 2
Big Tuna's Rating: B
How Did I Watch It?: Digital rental.
Had I Seen It Before?: Yes.
Would I Watch It Again?: Yes.