Team Avatar returns to save the world (again)

Back before Netflix got into the streaming business, they were a disc rental service. I can’t tell you much about what I rented from them, except for the animated series “Avatar: The Last Airbender.” It was a magical experience. The show is set in a world where some people can “bend” the elements (fire, water, earth, air). There is one, called the Avatar, who can master all four elements and serves as a leader in this world. When the Fire Nation attacked the other nations, the Avatar, a young boy named Aang, vanished. Katara and Sokka find him in the ice 100 years later. Now Aang must master the elements and bring peace back to the world. The series is incredible and a must-watch (it's on Netflix and Paramount+). The show ended in 2008 and was followed by “Legend of Korra” in 2012 (also great). There was a movie we don’t talk about. The live-action Netflix show is in its second season (which I have not watched). But nothing, and I mean nothing, will ever come close to the perfection of the original series.

“Avatar Aang” picks up years after the series ends, when the world has been rebuilt and united. Aang (voiced by Eric Nam) learns of a power that could save his culture (he is the last of the airbenders). With the help of Team Avatar, he sets out to find and restore the Air Nation.

Given that the series is still so beloved, the pressure was on for this to be good. You do not need to have seen the show to enjoy the movie, but it definitely helps. In the show, Team Avatar becomes very close, and the group dynamics are a big part of what makes the show great. The movie manages to recapture that dynamic, while showing how it has evolved in the years between the show and movie. Sokka (Román Zaragoza) is the only non-bender in the group, but can hold his own in the big battles. My favorite character, the blind earth bender, Toph (Dionne Quan), is as sarcastic and quick as ever. The now Firelord Zuko (Stephen Yen) has to balance his duties as leader of the Fire Nation and to his friend Aang. Katara (Jessica Matten) and Aang's relationship continues to grow beyond the childhood crush of the series. To see these five together again feels right. The bickering, quips, and jokes are even woven into them working together to fight the bad guys. Many times these days, nostalgia becomes weaponized to boost engagement. All that tends to be given to us are the same characters doing the same thing we saw they do a decade or more ago. While "Avatar Aang" uses nostalgia, it also grows its characters beyond who they were when they were younger.

My one real issue is that the group of bad guys, called The Denied, are not well developed. This group, made up of non-benders, is angry that they do not have powers. They hope to use the power to give themselves and others the ability to bend the elements. That is all we know about them. I would have liked to see more of what motivates them. We are not given a backstory about why they feel this way, and it is not something touched on in the series, with the movie being barely over 90 minutes. I would have been fine with it being longer if we had some background in this group.

This should have been a theatrical release, but that idea got nixed by the higher-ups at Paramount-Skydance. It became a Paramount+ release and received very little fanfare. That is a shame because this movie deserves as much love as the series it continues. The show is still incredibly popular, and its audience continues to grow. I would love to see more stories told with grown-up Aang and his friends. It would be interesting to fill in the gaps between Aang's time as Avatar and the events of "The Legend of Korra."

8/10

Rated PG for sequences of violence/action.

1h 39m

Bond, James Bond: Roger Moore

The thing about the Roger Moore era of Bond is that it is marked by being, for lack of a better word, silly. This was the era when the plots got outrageous, the action became less believable, and there was a huge reliance on gadgets. What I have come to realize in this project is that your enjoyment of these movies comes down to how much you like the specific elements of the Bond movie. I know what you are thinking, “Well, doesn’t that apply to every movie?” You aren’t wrong, but when a series has 25 movies, there are elements that viewers come to expect, and those elements can either enhance or hinder your enjoyment of a particular entry in the franchise. For this chapter in my Bond series, instead of looking at the specific movies Moore was in, I am going to look at how they utilized a specific element: the gadgets. For me, how they are used is make-or-break.

These gadgets are anything given to Bond by Q to use in his mission, including any modifications to a vehicle he drives. I am not against the use of gadgets by any means; it is more what they are and how they are used. For instance, one of the gadgets I am fine with comes from “Live and Let Die.” Bond is given a watch by Q that contains a powerful electromagnet. It is a bit of a stretch that it would work as it does in the movie (he uses it to pull the spoon from M’s teacup to demonstrate), but that is fine. It is a believable gadget. There is even a version from “The Spy Who Loved Me” that receives and prints out messages from MI6, and in “For Your Eyes Only” it allows Bond to radio MI6.  I am also fine with the bug detectors that Bond uses: in “A View to a Kill” it is disguised as an electric razor. These do not stretch credibility, and I could see them being used in real life.

Then we have examples like the gondola from “Moonraker.” Bond is in Italy and gets into a boat chase. Eventually, to lose the bad guys, his gondola becomes a hovercraft, and he can get out of the water and drive his boat through the streets. Bringing it back to “The Spy Who Loved Me,” the ski pole gun that Bond uses to kill the people chasing him down the slopes. And don’t even get me started on the laser guns from “Moonraker.” This should technically not count since it is not from Q Branch and, as far as I remember, Bond doesn’t fire one; they are used by the space marines and the bad guys in the final fight. Those just made me so furious that they get a special exemption. I will not be talking about the gadgets that are shown being tested by Q Branch, but never used by Bond (and there are plenty of dumb ones there).

This problem is going to persist when I get to Dalton and Brosnan in a little bit, but the ones used in Craig’s are more realistic (defibrillator in his car, for example). As I looked over my Letterboxd reviews of the Bond movies, the more outlandish the gadgets, the less I liked the movie. “Moonraker” had a bunch of dumb gadgets, and the aforementioned laser guns, and it got two stars (my lowest rating for a Moore Bond movie). On the other end of the spectrum, there was “For Your Eyes Only,” which featured Bond using one gadget (the watch communicator), and it was easily my favorite at four stars. It had some silly moments: at one point, Bond is fighting some hockey players, and when he knocks them out, they slide into the goal, and the alarm goes off, but I still really enjoyed it. It had some silly moments like that, but it stayed more serious, and the story benefited from that.

There are some more elements I could analyze these movies from (the ridiculousness of the plot or how prominent the womanizing is), but it is the gadgets that affect my enjoyment most. I think the, frankly, misogynistic way women get treated in these movies is gross, but I also understand that it was a different time (not that that should be an excuse). Being 25 movies into a franchise makes certain things stand out, and for better or worse, Bond tends to lean into those things. It is going to be very interesting to go from these siller Bond movies to Craig’s grounded take on Bond in just a few movies.

Next Time: Timothy Dalton

Board the train to “Hadestown: The Musical”

I saw “Hadestown” when it came to town a few years ago, and I became obsessed. I have listened to the cast album dozens of times, bought merch from the store, and followed many of the cast members' projects post-“Hadestown.” It is probably my favorite musical of all time. I have been dying to see it again on stage and would love to go to NYC to see it live. Until that day, or until it returns to Buffalo, I will have to be satisfied with the proshot released this past weekend. Apparently I was not the only one, because it made a lot of money (for a proshot) and just had its run extended beyond the initial five days.

“Hadestown” is a retelling of the Greek story of the doomed lovers Orpheus (Reeve Carney) and Eurydice (Eva Noblezada). One way the musical differs from the source material is that it also focuses on the lord of the Underworld, Hades (Patrick Page), and his wife, Persephone (Amber Grey).

As much as I love the soundtrack, nothing compares to seeing it performed on stage, and this proshot proves it. One of the things I love about Noblezada’s performance is the raw emotion she puts into her Eurydice. Finally, seeing her on stage, I got to experience how powerful a performance it really is. Actually seeing her choose to go to Hadestown is heartbreaking. She loves Orpheus and wants to be with him, but winter has arrived, and they are out of food, so she chooses safety and security over her love. One of my favorite songs is “Wait For Me (Reprise).” This is the song sung as Orpheus and Eurydice are walking out of Hell. For those unfamiliar with the story, Hades lets them go, but only under the condition that Orpheus walks in front of Eurydice and doesn’t turn around to look behind (side note: I loved hearing the gasp from the people who don’t know how it ends). In this song, Eurydice is letting Orpheus know that she is right behind him, and there is this pleading in the way she sings the ending lines of the song that blows me away every time.

The other performance I have to talk about is Amber Grey. Persephone was forced into this marriage (read the myth, it’s one of my favorites). She loves Hades (unlike in the myth), but after eons together, that love has faded, and she has turned to wine to dull her misery. Grey plays a great drunk. Her song, “Our Lady of the Underground,” opens Act 2, and I appreciate it all the more after seeing her perform it. She is stumbling, making faces and gestures, and it’s a very funny number. It is something you miss just listening to the soundtrack. The proshot gave me a much better appreciation of Persephone in general. She is a woman with a man she used to love, but he has become overbearing. She sees the love that Orpheus and Eurydice have and yearns for that again.

Being a huge fan of the show, I followed the production of the proshot closely. The original cast went to London for a short run, and this was filmed during that time. Before they were scheduled to film, Patrick Page ruptured his Achilles. They reworked a few things (mainly his Act 2 dance with Persephone), and he wore a boot so he could be a part of the filming. At one point, Hades is on this balcony on the stage, then on the stage floor. Obviously he had to come down the stairs, but in the proshot edit, it looks like he magically appears. I am not sure if this was intentional, but it adds a more mystical element to the performance.

I am so glad a theater near me was playing this; I would have been heartbroken if I didn’t get to see it on the big screen. I know that proshots are rare because they can be expensive (it's the cost of a show plus the cost of filming), but they seem to be doing well. Between this, “Hamilton,” and “Waitress” all doing good numbers at the box office, I would hope to see more of these come to theaters.

9/10

Rated: NR

2h 21m

“The Odyssey” is, in a word, epic

As regular readers may or may not remember, Greek Mythology is where my love of writing began. Here is the short version: I started reading the myths in Elementary school, bonded with a friend in Middle school over our shared love of Greek myths, he came to me with an idea to write a story about a group of gods who go on a quest, and I was the primary writer, and I have been writing ever since. I also distinctly remember watching NBC’s “The Odyssey” starring Armand Assante as the titular hero multiple times growing up. So when I say I am the target market for Christopher Nolan’s “The Odyssey.

This is one of the oldest stories ever told, so I am not sure I need to give you a synopsis, but here we go anyway. “The Odyssey” follows Odysseus (Matt Damon) on his epic journey after the Trojan War to return to Ithaca and his wife, Penelope (Anne Hathaway). She is doing her best to keep the suitors at bay and protect her son Telemachus (Tom Holland).

I have said it before, and I will keep saying it until it is no longer true: no one is making movies like Christoper Nolan. After the massive success of “Oppenheimer,” Nolan could have directed whatever he wanted, and he chose to write and direct one of the oldest stories known to man. Anyone else would have used massive amounts of CGI  to accomplish what Nolan pulls off here. When giants attack Odysseus and his men, they used 7-foot-tall stunt performers to play the giants and smaller stunt performers to play Odysseus and his crew. They built the boats and sailed them in actual bodies of water. For the scene with a whirlpool, they had people on jet skis circling to create a small one, then used CGI to enhance the effect. I will always come back to this point: part of the reason 1992’s “Jurassic Park” stands the test of time is that they combined animatronic puppets with CGI dinosaurs. Nolan uses practical effects as much as possible, so that 23 years from now it won't look as dated as movies that rely on CGI. All these small things help the world feel more real and make the performances better.

There are so many performances I could talk about. Damon gives a career-best performance, Holland shows how much he has grown as an actor, Hathaway is incredible in showing the strength of a woman in a culture where her worth is measured by her husband, and John Leguizamo is absolutely incredible as Odysseus’ faithful servant Eumaeus. He gives one of the strongest performances of this incredible cast full of incredible performances. This is such a stacked cast with some huge stars in supporting roles. Zendaya is the goddess Athena, who appears to Odysseus; Charlize Theron plays the nymph Clypso, who spends years with Odysseus on her island; and Samantha Morton is the witch Circe, who, in an incredible scene, turns the crew into pigs. I could sit here and pick apart every performance, because even those with only a handful of scenes/lines do a great job.

Nolan is one of the few directors working today who can get people into a theater based on his name alone. Tickets went on sale a year ago and, in certain areas of the country, showings sold out quickly. At this point, it has gone beyond “that’s the guy who directed those awesome Batman movies,” though that definitely helps. I think it is how he makes them. On its face, “Oppenheimer” doesn’t seem like it should have been the hit it was, but because of Nolan and the way he makes his movies, it was. On top of being a very good movie (easily going to be near the top of my top 10 this year), it is also well made. This movie lives up to the hype, and much of that is due to the performances and the mostly practical effects.

10/10

Rated R for violence and some language

2h 53m

Bond, James Bond: Lazenby and Connery (again)

When Connery decided not to come back as Bond, George Lazenby was picked to take over the role. He was a model with no prior acting experience, and it shows. All I could think when watching “On Her Majesty’s Secret Service” was “this is like Temu James Bond.” Temu, for the uninformed, is a Chinese company that sells cheap versions of stuff-as a teacher, 90 percent of the stickers and prizes I give my students are from Temu. The entire movie felt like a knock-off Bond movie.

And then I looked on Letterboxd, and apparently I am wrong about this movie. People seem to like this one a lot and consider it one of the strongest of the series. I don’t know what I am missing. I was so incredibly bored-I get that they were trying for a more grounded Bond and a realistic story, but nothing in this movie worked for me. “Casino Royale,” Daniel Craig’s first Bond, also did this, but the movie was infinitely more compelling. I don’t think Lazenby is a good Bond. He doesn’t have the charm and charisma that Connery and, quite frankly, every other Bond has. They try to frame him as cool in the opening sequence where we do not see his face, but it doesn’t work, and when you have him look at the camera and deliver the line “This never happened to the other fellow,” it's just a reminder that this is a lesser Bond.

There are two chase sequences down a mountain on skis that are even more boring than the underwater scenes in “Thunderball.” The final fight between Bond and Telly Savalas’ Blofeld takes place in a bobsled. In theory, these could be cool sequences, but the way they were executed was unexciting. I really don’t know what I was missing when I watched this, but I hated it.

When Lazenby decided not to return as Bond, despite testing other actors for the role, the studio wanted Connery back and backed up the Brinks truck to get him (a record $1.25 million at the time). After hating the previous movie, this one was a welcome return. It would be impossible not to know that Connery was back, considering he was in the trailer, but I couldn’t help think about what it would have been like not to know he was back. The opening of the movie does a lot to keep his face obscured (kinda like they did for Lazenby) until he utters that famous line, “My name is Bond, James Bond.” If there had been cell phone cameras and internet back in 1971, there would have been videos circulating of people cheering when he appeared.

The thing about the Bond series is that there are so few great ones (Goldfinger, Goldeneye, Casino Royale, and Skyfall), a handful of good/fine ones, and more than a fair share of bad ones. It really depends on how much you tolerate certain elements of the series. For instance, I am good with some gadgets, but the more silly ones that get used, the less I like the movie (to preview my thoughts on the Roger Moore films which I am about halfway through).

Next Time: Roger Moore

Bond, James Bond: Sean Connery

Growing up, my first experience with James Bond was the marathons that TBS (or some similar channel) would do a few weekends a year. I first saw a “new” Bond movie when I saw The World Is Not Enough at the Regal Henrettia (who says keeping your movie tickets is a waste of time?) When I bought the James Bond Collection, my intention was to fill in the gaps in my Bond movie knowledge, but life got in the way, and that set sat on my shelf for over two years. With no Summer School this summer, I have a lot of free time to get through all 24 movies in that set, plus Daniel Craig’s final Bond film, “No Time To Die.” This is not going to be a review of every movie. I may have time off, but I don’t have the time to do 25 reviews before the back-to-school professional development week at the end of August. These will be my thoughts and impressions of each version of Bond and how the character changes (if he does) over the course of 25 movies.

The first actor cast as James Bond was Sean Connery, and from the five I have watched, he is very clearly the template for the character in all his incarnations. As I was reading up on the character, I found that many actors were considered for the role before Sean Connery was chosen. Cary Grant was the No.1 choice, but he only wanted to do one more, so they kept going down the list until they got to Connery. I want to visit the universe where Cary Grant was Bond! Connery has this suave, cool-under-pressure persona that even the more modern Bonds have. Now, in some cases, we see that this is a bit of a facade he puts on for this spy work. For example, when Goldfinger has him strapped to a table, and a laser is threatening to cut him in half, we see that drop, and Bond becomes more desperate. We see his wheels turning on how to get out of this. What little bit of information does he have that he can use to entice Goldfinger to turn off the laser?

One of the interesting things is to watch the movies evolve. Nowadays, having an artist write a Bond song is a huge deal, but it wasn't until “Goldfinger” that we got an opening song. Likewise, the other hallmark of a Bond movie, the opening title sequence featuring silhouettes of women dancing, was not introduced until the second movie, “From Russia With Love.” He gets his Walther PPK pistol in his first movie, the classic Aston Martin, and gadgets in “Goldfinger.” It is cool to watch all the pieces fall into place to get to what is the classic Bond iconography.

I was actually surprised at the connective tissue that these movies had. SPECTRE has a role in most of these movies; a woman he meets at the beginning of “Dr. No” is back at the beginning of “From Russia With Love” and even mentions that he went off to Jamaica in “Dr. No.” I have not seen all the movies; in fact, I have seen fewer than I thought I would thus far (I had only seen “Dr. No” and “Goldfinger” before), but I was always under the impression that they were more standalone stories. Again, I have not seen all of these, so maybe I am wrong, and my TBS viewings of these didn’t allow me to see those connections.

One thing that really stuck out for me, in a bad way, was the womanizing. Bond is good-looking, he’s smooth-talking, and carries himself with such confidence. All this just makes the ladies fall for him instantly. Over and over again. It usually takes just a sentence or two, and they are ready to hop into bed with him. I understand that these are from the late sixties and that they are part of the Bond character. It is also not lost on me that the target audience of these movies is male, and seeing Bond fight the bad guys and sleep with any woman he wants plays into the typical male fantasy, but it is kind of icky to watch in 2026.

The other thing that hasn’t aged well is some of the effects. I am specifically referring to “Thunderball” here. In the opening scene, James gets away on a jet pack, which looks terrible and lame. The other bit of that movie I didn’t like was the underwater scenes. I am sure that for 1965, they were great and could be fun, but in 2026, they are slow and unexciting.

Next Up: This is going to be tricky. The next two Bond movies feature two different actors playing Bond. George Lazenby in “On Her Majesty’s Secret Service” and then Connery returns in “Diamonds Are Forever.” My plan is to talk about both those movies in one post before getting to the rest. Luckily, the remaining actors played the character in more than one movie, so I can easily look at their tenures as Bond in more detail.

I walked my dog!

I know I promised to start my Bond series this week, but that is getting pushed to next week. A couple of things happened this past week plus I saw “Evil Dead Burn” this weekend, and I know none of you are going to see it. The first thing that happened was that getting all of Connery’s Bond movies was a little more challenging than I anticipated. He is in five (well, six if you count the one he came back for, but we will get to that later), and while I could have easily watched five movies in a few days, I wanted to get some stuff done, so I didn’t marathon those. The second thing that happened was, as the title suggests, I walked my dog for the first time since October 24, 2025.

Before my surgery, I had arranged to have my aunt and uncle take care of Rory while I was in the hospital. My parents and I met my uncle at this park in Pennsylvania. I walked him around a bit before we made the handoff. If everything had gone as I had hoped, I would have been walking him in no time, but as many of you know, my femoral nerve in my right leg had to be cut, and my leg was severely weakened. If Rory were like my sister’s dog, Callaway, I would probably have been fine, but he is very much not. There is some kind of hound in his genes, and he has this hypervigilance that makes walking with him tough with two good legs. I knew that I would not be walking him anytime soon, if ever. In my lowest moments, my only desire was to walk my dog again. If that day ever came, it would be a sign that things were truly on track.

When I started back to work, I was taking rideshares or the bus, which eventually became a bus to work and walking home (I live about a mile from work), and finally, in the last few months of school, I was walking both ways. This was my first sign that I might be ready to throw the harness on Rory and take him for a walk. The problem was, I did not want to risk a solo walk right out of the gate. I waited until the 4th of July weekend, when we would be at our family’s lake house. There, I would have plenty of people ready to walk the dog with me. I  would have someone to hand him off to if there was a situation where he, well, Roryed. At the lake, the road is narrow, and there are no “exit ramps” like in the city. If I see a dog or something that gets Rory excited, I can turn down the closest block or cross the street and avoid the issue. At the lake, those are not options. Anyone or anything approaches close, and there are no blocks to turn down. On the first attempt, such a situation occurred even before I took the leash. Another dog came from the other direction, and he went nuts because it was super close. Sorry you had to deal with that, Will! Once that dog passed, I took the leash, and the rest of the walk was not so eventful.

I returned to Buffalo on Monday evening, and our first solo walk was on Wednesday. I wake up at about 5:30 anyway, but I usually roll over and go back to sleep. Since it was early enough that no one else would be out, we went for our first walk together. We ended up doing a little over a mile, and he didn’t try to kill me. We had one close call when he saw a rabbit a few feet away, but I was able to avoid other dogs, and we made it home without an incident. There were only a few close calls over the next few days. One was when he saw something in a yard (I could not see what he saw, so I assume he saw something that wasn’t there), and the other was when a woman was putting her dog in the car, and we didn’t see her soon enough because there was a fence in the way: we turned around and went the other way.  

Things are not back to normal by any stretch: he and I used to do over three miles on the weekend mornings, and we haven’t done any of our old loops (I miss the zoo loop, which took us past the Buffalo Zoo to see the bison and the Darwin Martian House), but those are goals for later. These walks are doing nothing for my pace (I am up to 19-ish minute miles without him and 24-minute miles with him), but it’s all about doing it safely, not fast. After months and months of having other people take care of my dog, I can finally feel like I'm doing something. 

“Supergirl” could have been great

I was a massive fan of last year’s “Superman.” I watched it during a time in my life when I needed that positivity. I loved everything about that movie, and Milly Alcock’s appearance as Kara at the end helped establish her as very different from her cousin. I have read the comic on which “Supergirl” is based, and I was excited to see what they did with it on the big screen.

When her dog, Krypto, is poisoned by Krem (Mattias Schoenaerta), Kara (Alcock) sets out to get the antidote and is joined by a girl named Ruthye (Eve Ridley) on a quest to kill Krem and avenge her family.

I wanted to love this movie as much as I love “Superman,” but there were some flaws that I couldn’t overlook. Namely, that Krem is a very boring, one-note villain. In the comic (I promise I will not say that past this paragraph), he has more charisma and personality. He joins a group of space pirates who commit genocide wherever they go. What they do here is equally terrible (child trafficking), but it is such a minor plot point in this movie. In the comic, while Kara wants to save Krypto and Ruthye wants to avenge her family, stopping the mass murder is also a major plot point. You could remove the child trafficking from this movie, and it would not affect the plot. It was put there just to make Krem and his lackies bad guys, because poisoning a dog and killing an entire family is apparently too subtle.

Despite all of that, there is plenty to like, even love, about “Supergirl.” Milly Alcock is incredible as Kara/Supergirl. Kara, unlike her cousin, was around for the destruction of Krypton: at least the last remaining bit of it. Her father was able to save a part of the planet, but when people started getting sick and dying, he sent her to Earth. She has lost everything and is still dealing with that loss. It is why she goes to bars on planets with red suns (it makes her mortal) to get drunk. The character arc for her was pretty clear from the beginning: someone who lost “her people” finds people to care about again. Just because it’s obvious doesn’t mean it’s not effective. That has a lot to do with Alcock’s performance. She brings a sadness to Kara that informs most of her actions in the film. She has an edge to her that Clark doesn’t. I look forward to seeing how her character evolves in future movies.

I wish this movie had just adapted the comic it was based on, or told a totally original story, as they did for “Superman.” As much as I walked out of the theater liking this movie, I was disappointed that it did not hit as hard as its predecessor. It is anchored by Milly Alcock’s performance, but its potential is hindered by a very boring villain and not really knowing what to do with most of the other characters in the movie. Lobo (Jason Momoa) was all over the marketing, and while I liked him and Momoa was born to play this character, you could have excised him from the movie and changed nothing. Milly Alcock and “Supergirl” deserved better than this movie gave them.

7/10

Rated PG-13 for sequences of strong violence, action, language, and smoking.

1h 48m

“Toy Story 5” tackles the rise of tech

"Toy Story" was the movie that made Pixar the studio it is today. Before, they were known for their shorts, but this was their first foray into feature-length films. It set the standard for what computer animation could look like and the stories it could tell. That was 31 years ago. It is now 2026, and "Toy Story" is still going. Kids who watched the original in theaters are now taking their kids to see Woody, Buzz, and all the rest on the big screen.

When Bonnie gets a Lilly Pad tablet (voiced by Greta Lee), it's up to Jessie (voiced by Joan Cusack) and the other toys to fight off the threat of tech.

The common thought is that this franchise should have ended at "Toy Story 3." I am in that camp, but after this one, I think that we need to change that mindset. The first three are "The Andy Trilogy" since they focus on the toys' experience with Andy. The last two movies are part of "The Bonnie Trilogy"-assuming they make a sixth. What separates the two, aside from the kid, is how the kid is used in the movie. Andy barely factors into the plot beyond being the motivation for the toys. Bonnie is more of a character. She has her own storyline in her movies, and we see her life outside of playing with her toys.

The best thing that this movie does is sideline Woody (Tom Hanks) and Buzz (Tim Allen). I'd go as far as to say you could take Woody out entirely and nothing would change, and Buzz barely factors into the story at all. Focusing on Jessie is a great way to do something different, five movies in. Her quest to find Bonnie a friend is something deeper than anything we got with Andy. The fight between Jessie and Lilly Pad basically boils down to the best way to make friends, and I wish it had more to say about tech and children. As someone who is in education, I am seeing schools/districts revolt against tech being' the primary way kids learn: lots of places are moving back to paper and pencil testing/assignments. It would have been a great way to comment on a topical issue. It clearly wants to say something (it shows many houses with kids on devices and not playing with toys), but seems afraid to take a real stand: it could be because you can watch any of the “Toy Story” movies on such devices.

The last two "Toy Story" films have been good and, mostly, justified their existence, but have not reached the heights of the original three. There will no doubt be a sixty entry in this franchise, and I am sure it will be enjoyable, if not superfluous. I just hope it has something more important to say.

6/10

Rated PG for some thematic elements and rude humor

1h 42m

“Disclosure Day” is a welcome return of one of the greats

When it comes to the great modern directors, Steven Spielberg is near the top of that list: if not THE top. He is at a point in his career where he has earned the right to make the movies he wants, when he wants. His last movie, "The Fablemans," was released in 2022, and he has not directed a movie since. Not many directors can take four years off between movies, so when one of the greats puts out a movie, it is an event.

"Disclosure Day" tells the story of Margaret (Emily Blunt) and Daniel (Josh O'Connor) as they race to reveal the truth about aliens before Noah (Colin Firth) and his organization can stop them.

I think Blunt and O'Connor are fantastic in this movie. Almost every scene in the movie features one of them, and compelling protagonists. Margaret and Daniel share a mysterious connection and are drawn towards one another as they figure out what is going on. Margaret is a weather reporter who, during a weather report, starts speaking in an unrecognizable language, but when Daniel hears it, he understands her. Daniel is a hacker with an innate understanding of math. These two have clearly been destined for this mission. We do get an answer to why these two are connected, but it isn’t explored as deeply as it could have been.

It’s not a hot take to say that Spielberg is an incredible director and does some very cool things with the camera in “Disclosure Day.” One that sticks out is when Noah’s goons find Daniel in the woods. He has been outside making a call to one of the people helping him when the bad guys pull up to the cabin where he and his girlfriend are hiding. All the goons are approaching the house, and he sneaks down a fence line to steal one of their cars to distract them. The camera follows him down the fence line and into the car in one long shot. This is just one of many incredible sequences that Spielberg pulls off.

There is a lot to like about "Disclosure Day," but I think your opinion of this movie is going to rest on what you think of the ending. Without spoiling anything, I will just say that I was hoping the movie would have something to say about humanity, and it didn't. Throughout the film, there is a battle between "people need the truth" and "the truth would destroy society," and it never really pays off. I did like this movie a lot and will likely watch it again when it's available on streaming. I just wish it explored some of its themes more fully.

7/10

Rated PG-13 for action/violence, some bloody images, and strong language.

2h 25m

“Masters of the Universe” has fun with its goofy history

The success of “Barbie” sparked a wave of announcements that movie studios were snatching up toy IP to adapt into movies. Some made sense, while others were a movie based on the Magic 8 Ball. One that did make sense was “Masters of the Universe.” There are lots of characters, and the world is deep enough to have stories to tell. The only question was whether a character called “He-Man” could have a place in 2026.

Prince Adam (Nicholas Galitzine) was sent away from his home planet of Eternia to protect a powerful sword. He is separated from the sword and gets stuck on Earth with no way to return home. Years later, his childhood friend Teela (Camila Mendes) comes to find him, on a mission to bring him back to fight off the evil Skeletor (Jared Leto).

I had a ton of fun with “Masters of the Universe.” The movie isn’t amazing, but it does exactly what it needs to do. It had a blend of action, comedy, and real sincerity. Adam is not a fighter; after being stuck on Earth, he gets a job in HR, so he is all about non-violent resolutions. Even when he harnesses the power of the sword and becomes powerful, using that power is not his first choice. Galitzine believably showcases both sides of this character. It is a balance I know made some fans of the toys/catroon angry because “that’s not my ‘He-Man,’” but it fits in better with today’s culture; we need our heroes to be a little more complex than “I’m a big, strong dude.”

Then there is Jared Leto. The man is box office poison on top of being a very weird human. The last few movies he was a lead in have tanked at the box office, and while that’s not entirely his fault, his reputation certainly didn’t help. He is infamous for his on-set shenanigans: in 2016’s “Suicide Squad,” he reportedly sent a live rat to co-star Margot Robbie. For “Masters of the Universe,” he would cover his face in blood makeup because, since his face was going to be CGed out, he didn’t want the other actors to “see Jared” while filming. That being said, he is very good as Skeletor. He embraces the corniness of the role of a guy with a skull face. I hate to say it, since I think he’s terrible, but he is my favorite part of the movie.

I am a child of the 80s, but my nostalgia for 80s culture is limited since I was very young for most of them. Now, the 90s- that’s my nostalgia sweet spot. I say this to point out that I have no connection to He-Man and the Masters of the Universe cartoon or toy line, which was made to sell. That is probably why I enjoyed “Masters of the Universe” more than most people. I wasn’t expecting anything, and what I got was a fun movie.

7/10

Rated PG-13 for sequences of violence/action, some suggestive material, and language.

2h 21m

Carl and Princess Dounut take on the dungeon

I have read every day since the beginning of the year, so I have been going through a lot of books. The downside to finishing a book is having to pick out a new one to read. If your last book was awesome, how will you follow it up? What kind of mood are you in, and will the book hold your interest? One thing I love is finding a series to get into. It makes picking your next book easier, because odds are, if you enjoy one, you will enjoy the others. Right now, I am three books into the Dungeon Crawler Carl series by Matt Dinniman and absolutely loving it.

An alien corporation comes to Earth and flattens every building on the planet, killing the majority of the population. Everyone who survived was outside at the time and made their way to The World Dungeon, the setting of a universal show called Dungeon Crawler World. Two of these survivors are Carl, a U.S. Coast Guard veteran, and his ex-girlfriend’s cat, Princess Dount.

While I was recovering in Rochester, I kept seeing this book series pop up on my social media. Everyone seemed to be talking about it, and after seeing it mentioned repeatedly, I decided to give it a chance. I borrowed the first book, "Dungeon Crawler Carl", from the library (never pass up a chance to support your local library) and was blown away by it. It is a genre called LitRPG (literary role-playing game): it takes the mechanics of Dungeons & Dragons and applies them to a work of literature. I do not play D&D; I don't think my ADHD brain could keep up with all the rules and workings of the game, but I have huge respect for those who do. I have watched a few seasons of Dimension 20, one of the most popular RPG live plays, and enjoyed them a lot, so I’d like to think I have a rudimentary understanding of D&D. In the books, Carl and Dounut get items as they fight their way through the different levels of the dungeon that help them level up and boost their stats. When they get to the third floor, they have to pick a class: in D&D, these include Wizard, Fighter, and Ranger, each with special skills and uses in a campaign.

These books are great. They are hilarious and exciting, and the world-building is incredible. Carl is outside in his boxers, trying to get Donut out of a tree when all the buildings are flattened, so he enters the first floor of the dungeon in a compromised state: it becomes a running joke that he can’t find pants in the dungeon. After they get to the first floor, Dounut gains the power of speech. This is where a lot of the humor comes from. Donut is very dedicated to Carl’s ex, Bea, and Carl is not (Bea cheated on him), and Donut does not take Carl's badmouthing of her kindly. The two have a contentious relationship, especially in the first book, but have to work together if they want to survive the dungeon. I finished Book Two: "Carl's Doomsday Scenario" on Friday, and the Carl/Dounut relationship continues to develop and get deeper. They have added more members to their party, including a pet velociraptor that Donut picked and named Mongo.

You do not need to be a D&D fan or know that much about role-playing games in general to enjoy these books. It really comes down to the characters. Besides Carl and Donut, there is Mordecai, a former Crawler who serves as the game guide for Carl and Donut. He is essentially an indentured servant. He will be released from his contract if Carl and Downut reach the fourth floor. He uses his knowledge of the game, its items, and rules, as well as his understanding of the politics surrounding it, to help them. When Dounut picks her class, he ends up becoming her manager, much to his dismay. He spends a large chunk of the second book drunk and lamenting his situation. His one job is to keep them alive as long as possible, but he gets very annoyed when they improvise. On the third floor, crawlers can take up quests. After barely surviving on, he tells Carl not to accept another one and just work on leveling up before they have to go to the fourth floor. Carl ignores him, and he and Donut get caught up in a complex quest involving the leader of their settlement.

Dinniman, along with writing great characters, writes some great action sequences. Even knowing that there are eight books and odds are that neither Carl nor Dornut is going to die, these sequences are thrilling and suspenseful. How are they going to beat this boss? What ramifications will this have in the larger game? There is not always a straightforward solution, and Carl doesn't tend to approach these battles from a typical "hack and slash" approach. It makes many of their encounters with enemies compelling to read.

I borrowed the first two books from the library, but I ended up buying the hardcovers of the other six books in the series. I did this for three reasons. One is that the cover art for these books is cool, and the series would look great on my shelf. The second is that, with the series' popularity, there was a long wait between books: I waited about a month and a half between the first and second books.  As much as I love my library and want to support it, I also want to mainline this series directly into my veins as fast as possible. The third and main reason is that I will 100 percent reread these books. It is such a fun, interesting, and creative series that I don't think I can read it just once. I cannot wait to dive into the third book and hope to get through most, if not all, of them this summer (The later books in the series do get long, so it might take a while). If you are looking for a new fun series, you can't go wrong with these incredible books.

Mando and Grogu’s lackluster big-screen adventure

There was a time when a seven-year gap between “Star Wars” movies would have seemed quaint. “Return of the Jedi” came out in 1983, and fans would have to wait until 1999 to see a new movie set in the “Star Wars” universe. In 2019, “The Rise of Skywalker” premiered, and while it still grossed over $1 billion worldwide, audiences and critics hated it (yours truly included). It caused Disney to pull back on its “Star Wars” plans and focus on small-screen offerings like “The Mandalorian.” After three seasons of the mostly good show, Disney has brought Mano and his little green friend to the big screen.

Mandalorian bounty hunter Din Djarian (Pedro Pascal, Brendan Wayne, Lateef Crowder) and Grogu are on the hunt for the remnants of the Empire.

Here is the thing. When a TV show becomes a movie, it needs to justify the transition. The stakes need to feel bigger, the action more elaborate, and the characters need to go places that the TV show wouldn’t let them. None of that happens in this movie. This is just a few episodes of the show smushed together. The story is small, the action is all stuff we could have seen in the show, and the characters show no growth. There are characters in this movie that get no introduction. As someone who has watched all of the animated shows, I know who Zeb (voiced by Steve Blum) is, but he just shows up randomly, hanging out with Mando. If you haven’t seen him in other things, you are given zero reasons to care about him beyond the fact that he sometimes flies Mando places.

I think my biggest issue is that I am just getting sick of the traditional “Star Wars” iconography. There are Stormtroopers and AT-ATs in the movie, and I could not have cared less. I know those were included to tap into nostalgia for the original movies. I am not against setting stories during the rise/fall of the Empire, but do something interesting with it. Look no further than “Andor.” It is set in the same time period as the original movies (just before “A New Hope”), and there is not a single jedi to be seen. We see exactly one use of The Force-a Force Healer-in 20 episodes of the show. And we all know how I feel about that show. It was story first, universe second.

There are a few things I did enjoy about this movie. The first one is a quick thing. You may have noticed that Mano is played by three different people. Pedro Pascal is the star behind the mask, but he is not always the one in the costume. The coolest thing that “The Mandalorian and Grogu” did was credit the other two performers. They are second- and third-billed during the credits. I thought that was a great way to honor those men whose faces you never see but who are part of the performance of this movie’s main character.

At one point, Mando is incapacitated, and Grogu has to take care of him. Since Grogu doesn’t talk, it basically becomes a silent movie for a little bit as Grogu figures out how to care for Mano. It also highlights the benefit of doing something practically and not with CGI. Grogu is a puppet, so he really interacts with things, and it feels real.

I want more from my “Star Wars” movies. This universe is huge, and yet all that the movies and TV shows want to focus on are these few years from the birth of the Empire to the Fall of the First Order in Episode Nine. As much as I disliked “The Acolyte” (and that puts me in some very toxic company), I appreciated that it was doing something different and was set in a time way before the movies. I want interesting stories from all over the history of this universe, but sadly, I do not think that is going to happen anytime soon.

6/10

Rated PG-13 for sci-fi violence and action

2h 12m

Manic Pixie Nightmare Girl

Typically, I do not review horror movies on here because 99.9% of my readership is friends and family, and not a single one of them is a horror fan (if you are, let yourself be known; we have so much to talk about). Every so often, there is a horror movie that I need to talk about for some reason or another. It is usually the case that something transcends the typical horror movie: the story, a scene, or a performance. With “Obsession,” it is the birth of a new “scream queen” in Inde Navarette.

“Bear” (Michael Johnston) is incapable of admitting his feelings to Nikki (Navarette). In a fit of desperation, he breaks a One Wish Willow in order to make her love him more than anyone else. He gets what he wants, but soon discovers that it is not all it seems.

Before we get to Navarette’s incredible performance, there are some other things to praise about this movie. The idea of a wish gone wrong is a tried-and-true horror plot. Someone wants something so badly, makes a wish, and when it comes true, it gets twisted in some way. Even the most harmless wish can turn into something horrible. In “Bear’s” case, Nikki’s obsession with him quickly turns dark, in some cases literally. When he makes his wish, he is dropping Nikki off at home after a night out. He wants to tell her that he has feelings for her, but he chickens out and then makes his wish. Nikki stops and is seen only in silhouette. This is done a few times in the movie, which adds to its unnaturalness. The movie oozes uncomfortable vibes in every scene, even the ones that are not supposed to be suspenseful.

Now, let’s get to what makes this movie work: Navarette’s performance. The Manic Pixie Dream Girl is a very common trope in fiction: a quirky female character that the male lead falls in love with. Think Annie Hall or Summer from “500 Days of Summer. ” Before the wish, Nikki could be considered a manic pixie dream girl. She is funny and outgoing and wears cool clothes. Once the wish is made, this goes away. She becomes completely devoted to “Bear” and everything that made her Nikki goes away. Navarette’s performance takes this movie from a typical horror movie to a great one. There are multiple scenes where she shifts emotions on a dime. In a dinner scene, “Bear” brings up a lie she told him, and she stands up and starts screaming at him. He apologizes, and she sits back down as if nothing happened. Navarette is just unbelievably good in this role. The stark contrast between post-wish and pre-wish Nikki comes down to her performance.

This is pretty tame by horror movie standards. There is only one person killed (pretty gruesomely, but still), and there are no real jump scares. The horror comes down to Navarette’s performance and how Nikki acts post-wish. It is more akin to a “Silence of the Lambs” than a “Saw” or “Halloween.” It is more of a psychological horror than anything else. I know that horror movies can be a hard sell for the general public, but “Obsession” is one of those worth seeing. It is one of those movies that makes me glad I got over my fear of scary movies, because it proves that horror can be incredible.

9/10

Rated R for strong bloody violence, grisly images, sexual content, pervasive language, and brief graphic nudity.

1h 48m

“Mortal Kombat 2” corrects the mistakes of the first

The year is 2021, and we have barely come out of the COVID lockdown. Warner Brothers decided to release all its movies on HBO Max and in theaters. One of those was a reboot of “Mortal Kombat.” The movie has some good moments, but is overall bad. They chose not to make one of the preexisting characters the main character, opting to create an original character (Cole Young, played by Lewis Tran) and surround him with characters from the game. The most baffling choice was to not even do the Mortal Kombat Tournament in the movie, to paraphrase Ian Malcolm from “Jurassic Park,” “There will be Mortal Kombat in this Mortal Kombat movie?” Five years later, we have a sequel that looks to correct the mistakes of the 2021 movie.

Johnny Cage (Karl Urban) and the champions of Earthrealm face off against the champions of Outworld in an effort to keep Shao Kahn(Martyn Ford) from taking over Earth.

First and foremost, we get the tournament. The whole point of the games is that your character is fighting in a tournament. It was crazy that the first movie didn’t have an actual tournament. It spent so much time with the characters training and awakening their “acrana” (basically, their superpowers). That led to some great fight sequences, but the rest of the movie was boring. This movie does the opposite: it opens with the final fight of the ninth tournament, Shao Kahn and Outworld win (you have to win ten in a row to take over a realm). This meant that the fights had weight-if you lose, you die (it’s not called MORTAL Kombat for nothing).

When this was first announced, one notable bit of news was the casting of Karl Urban as Johnny Cage, a fan favorite from the game. The trailers prominently featured Cage, suggesting he would be the main character. But he wasn’t. He is in the movie and has a prominent role, but I would not classify “Mortal Kombat 2” as his story. The true main character of this movie is Kitana (Adeline Rudolph). Her father is killed in the opening by Shao Kahn, and she is forced to become his “daughter.” She might be fighting for Outworld, but she secretly is helping Raiden (Tadanobu Asano) and the champions of Earthrealm. Normally, I would be annoyed that the trailer promised one thing and the movie delivered something else, but I applaud the choice. I am a huge Karl Urban fan, and he was a big reason I wanted to see this in the first place. I was very impressed by Rudolph’s performance and Kitana’s arc in the movie.

The movie was a ton of fun, and that is all it needed to be. It’s not going to be on my top 10 of the year, but I had a great time in the theater. I don’t believe every movie needs to be a 10-out-of-10 masterpiece. Sometimes I just want to go to the theater and not contemplate life’s great questions. Sometimes I just want to watch some cool fight scenes.

6/10

Rated R for strong bloody violence and gore and language

1h 56m

“Remarkably Bright Creatures” has a lot of heart

As of Friday afternoon, I had not written a damn thing for this week. On Sunday, I saw a horror movie called “Hokum”—it was about a writer, which inspired me to consider working on Chapter 2 of “Escape.” However, this week proved exhausting, leaving me without a single creative thought, so that plan didn’t materialize. Later, during my prep at work, I was searching for reviews of the movie I plan to review next week, “Mortal Kombat 2,” and stumbled upon the fact that a film adaptation of one of my favorite books of the past few years, “Remarkably Bright Creatures,” was on Netflix. 

In “Remarkably Bright Creatures, ” Tova (Sally Field) is a cleaner at the local aquarium. She has a particular affection for the aged octopus, Marcellus (voiced by Alfred Molina). One day, a young man named Cameron (Lewis Pullman) arrives in search of his father. Tova and Cameron form an unlikely bond as she helps him in his search. 

The book was better. Now that we have that trite, overused line out of the way, let’s judge the movie on its own merits. 

Lewis Pullman has been doing some great work lately. In last year’s “Thunderbolts*,” he played Bob a man with superpowers, but is also a man with bipolar disorder (he’s both a hero called Sentry and a villain called The Void) and it was an incredibly powerful performance. As Cameron, he brings that same troubled man energy that he brought to Bob. Cameron has never known his father and is in town to find him. His van breaks down, and he gets a job as the replacement night cleaner when Tova gets hurt and needs some time off. Tova has a very specific and thorough way of doing things, so she shows up to teach him how it should be done. Cameron comes with a lot of baggage and through his relationship with Tova he becomes a better, more responsible person. 

Sally Field is great as Tova. Tova is a woman whose life is defined by the tragedy of losing her son when he was in high school, and Field shows the weight that Tova is forced to carry. She is strongly-willed and determined not to be a burden on her friends. Although she doesn’t need to clean the aquarium, she does need to feel useful. We don’t see much of it in the movie, but it is implied that she tells Marcellus things she won’t tell her friends, which further explains why she has this connection to the dying octopus. 

The one major qualm I have with the movie is that we don’t get enough of Marcellus. The book is split between Marcellus's thoughts and the Tova/Cameron story. There is more interiority and character to Marcellus in the book, which makes the ending hit harder. Granted, I was still in tears when the movie ended, but it is that much more powerful in the book. Octopi are fascinating creatures. They are highly intelligent and known for squeezing through impossibly small spaces. I wish there had been more of that in the movie since it was a bigger part of the book.

“Remarkably Bright Creatures” is on Netflix

8/10

Rated PG-13 for thematic material, some strong language, suggestive references and brief drug use.

1h 51m

Mini Reviews: Thrash and Widow’s Bay

Thrash

In “Thrash,” a hurricane blows through a coastal town and brings with it sharks. Most of what Netflix releases is garbage, and this is one of them. The only reason I watched it was because of the 2019 movie “Crawl,” where a college swimmer goes to her father’s house during a hurricane and has to deal with crocodiles. “Crawl” was great. “Thrash” sucks. I couldn’t help but compare the two movies since they are so similar. There are a lot of characters in “Thrash,” and I could not care less about them (even the kids, because this movie did not have the gall to kill a kid). In “Crawl,” you are given a reason to care for the two characters it focuses on. “Crawl” is tense and scary, with genuine moments. between characters. “Thrash” has one good line: a woman who has just given birth says, “Mommy’s just gotta fight some fucking sharks.” The problem is, she then proceeds to fight zero sharks-she gets saved by the agoraphobe whose mother recently died. I guess what I'm saying is: watch “Crawl.” I am planning on it.

Widow’s Bay

I love it when I get surprised by a show or movie. I don’t mean in terms of my enjoyment, I mean when I have no idea a show is coming out. Take the new AppleTV show “Widow’s Bay.” It’s a Stephen King-esque story of a small New England island where some mysterious things happen. If that wasn't enough to get me to watch (and that’s all it would take), it stars Mathew Rhys, who is always great (it also reminds me I need to finish “The Americans,” I never watched past season one despite really liking that show). The first two episodes are out on Apple TV, and I am loving it so far. Rhys plays the mayor and is not as superstitious as his constituents, but is forced to deal with those superstitions as he leads the community. In the most recent episode, he was goaded into staying at the supposedly haunted hotel. To prove that the hotel is not haunted, he films himself in all the haunted locations. During the night, some creepy and unsettling things occur, and we are beginning to see that maybe the townsfolk aren’t wrong. This is a strong recommendation if you enjoy Stephen King vibes.

Pokopia and the Rise of Cozy Games

When most people hear the word "Video game" lots of examples come to mind: Mario, "Call of Duty" or "Tetris" All these games have one thing in common: you can lose. Mario can fall down a pit or lose too many hearts. You can get shot or blown up in "Call of Duty,' Even inn "Tetris," your blocks can reach the top of the screen and you lose. These games can be very stressful because there are ways to fail. There is a genre of game I have been playing a lot lately that has no Game Over screen. They are called "Cozy Games," and in the past six months or so, they have been exactly what I needed.

The inspiration for this post comes from a video by Ellen Rose on the Outside Extra channel on YouTube. She talked about how, while dealing with a recent health issue, she played a ton of the new Pokémon game. "Pokopia." Needless to say, I can relate to everything she said. As many of you know, I have had some pretty serious health stuff in the last year. I spent five months recovering from a major surgery. I finally went back to work in late February, but the months of recovery took their toll. My Nintendo Switch 2 became a major source of entertainment. After beating "Pokémon Legends Z-A," I was looking for something new and easy to play.

Luckily, before my surgery in October, I had downloaded "Power Wash Simulator 2." Yes, you read that right: a power-washing simulator. The game has no real plot beyond you taking jobs, power washing buses, houses, playgrounds, and any number of filthy objects. You earn money and buy better power washers and nozzles to help make your jobs easier. That is all there is to it. It is an incredibly satisfying game to play. To see this gunk-covered motel get clean as you spray it down is a meditative experience. The other game I played was called Tiny Bookshop. You play as the proprietor of a mobile bookshop. You travel to several locations in the town of Bookstonbury, selling used books to the residents. The townsfolk ask you to make recommendations based on their interests. There are other missions where you help them with things they want. There is no pressure to get these things done, and if you don't recommend the right book, the customer just says things like "Maybe next time!" You use the money you earn to buy more books and items to put in your shop to boost sales of a specific genre.

This brings me to my current "Cozy game" obsession, “Pokopia.” The game is set in the Pokémon universe. Something happened to the world; the humans have disappeared, and all the Pokémon are gone. You play as a Ditto, a Pokémon that can. transform into other Pokémon, which takes the form of their former trainer. Together with a Tangrowth, you are tasked with restoring areas of the world to bring Pokémon back and find out what happened to the humans. You restore habitats, Pokémon appear, complete requests from them, and make their homes more comfortable. The gameplay is just so satisfying. You fix things up like roads and buildings, find Pokémon, learn abilities, and find clues to what happened to the world.

The week after I bought it was my first week off of chemo, and it was a doozy. I got hit with the side effects hand and was miserable. I would get home from work and want nothing more than to lie on the couch. Besides eating and letting my dog out, I barely got off the couch and was playing a ton of "Pokopia! It was the perfect no-stress experience I needed. I could focus on cleaning up and restoring an area, crafting items, or gathering materials without worrying that my physical state would affect my gameplay.

These cozy games are a great entry point for people who want to get into gaming but are intimidated by the complicated mechanics of most modern games. These games let you play at your own pace and not worry about failure to the point of frustration. As someone whose energy is in limited supply, the games have become my gotos. I have come to appreciate the leisurely pace they allow, and in "Pokopia's case, the amount of stuff to do that doesn't feel overwhelming. I love that games like these are becoming more popular and my favorite type to play.

Success comes at a cost in “Merrily”

Back when I was a movie snob, I avoided musicals. Now, as someone who regularly sees live theater, it seems crazy that I once refused to watch it. Looking back, it's even crazier since one of my favorite films even then was "The Lion King"—which is, undeniably, a musical. Fortunately, I wised up and now love them. So, when Netflix released the proshot of "Merrily We Roll Along," it immediately shot to the top of my watchlist.

"Merrily" tells the story of three friends. The narrative unfolds from the end of their friendship to its very beginning.

The musical revolves around Franklin (Jonathan Groff), a very successful composer in Hollywood. We follow his journey from this rich, popular, and secretly jaded composer to the struggling artist who just wants to create something meaningful with his friend Charles (Daniel Radcliffe). In the first scene, he throws a party for all his Hollywood friends. When Mary (Lindsay Mendez), a friend from New York, arrives, we get our first hint of how Franklin has changed over the years.

By telling the story in reverse, the audience sees the results of the compromises Franklin has made to get to where he is, before seeing what they were. Even in that first scene, the specter of Charles looms large. His reaction to the mere mention of Charles shows that he was a huge part of Franklin's life and success, but something happened that drove them apart. As the performance continues, that opening is put into context. All the compromises he made to achieve success were also the ones that led to the dissolution of his friendships. Watching Franklin go from a man who has everything to a man who has nothing but his friends and a dream is pretty powerful. Groff, a Broadway superstar, brings his trademark charm to the role. The Franklin we meet in the first scene is gregarious and seemingly at the top of the world, but his words are tinged with regret at times.

While Groff is the main focus, his costars are also doing some great work. Radcliffe has done a lot of stage work and has made a name for himself beyond Harry Potter, the role that launched his career. He consistently picks interesting projects and always delivers. Charles is a dreamer who refuses to abandon his desire to write a play that says something. He and Franklin end up making a successful musical together and have promised each other they will write something meaningful after. With the success of that musical, Franklin starts to change his mind. This leads to a rift in their friendship that eventually tears them apart when, during a live interview, Charles basically says that Franklin is chasing the money, not the art.

Mendez’s Mary is clearly in love with Franklin. It is why she stays in his life longer than Charles does. Even though she hates the person he has become, she stays out of loyalty and because of her feelings toward him. In that first scene, Mary is very drunk, and Mendez delivers some very funny lines while hinting at events from her past without making her a pathetic character. She is the only one in that scene who is calling him out on his bullshit.

This version of the musical is a lot of fun, and the three leads have incredible chemistry. The story is told in a unique way that makes later events more impactful. There is no substitute for seeing a musical live, but seeing it from the comfort of your couch is the next best thing.

8/10

Rated PG-13 for drug use, some strong language, and smoking

2h 25m

Random Rambling #58: Musical Proshots

I am fortunate to afford season tickets to Shea’s here in Buffalo and see between 7 and 10 musicals or plays a year. Seeing live theater is a privilege I treasure, and I wish more people could experience it. Since attending shows can be expensive, I understand why it's seen as elitist. That’s why I strongly support proshots. There are two big reasons why I want to see more shows get proshots that get either a theatrical or streaming release. One is that it is much cheaper than seeing the show live, and the other is that it makes revisiting them much easier.

A pro-shot is a filmed theatrical performance. The most famous is “Hamilton.” Before the original cast left in 2016, they filmed select shows and planned a theatrical release. COVID shut the world down, so instead, Disney released it on Disney+. This gave everyone the chance to watch the hit musical, regardless of ticket affordability. In 2023, “Waitress: The Musical” released a pro-shot, which I enjoyed seeing again. Recently, Netflix premiered “Merrily We Roll Along,” and this summer will bring proshots of “Six” and “Hadestown.” I look forward to these releases and hope they signal a trend toward regular pro-shots.

Seeing live theater can be expensive, and I’m lucky to live in a city that attracts touring shows. Not everyone can access them or get to Broadway, so pro-shots make theater more accessible without the high ticket prices. While they don’t offer the same communal experience, they capture the essence of live performance. If you are someone who listens to a musical’s soundtrack before seeing it, you might know the words to the songs, but you could be missing the context. With most musicals, the songs are only a part of the story. Seeing the songs in the context of the musical can change how you view them. One of the soundtracks I listened to before seeing the show was “Hamilton.” Hearing “The World Was Wide Enough” is one thing, but to see it staged is another thing altogether. This is the song set during the famous duel between Hamilton and Burr. Burr fires his gun, and a member of the chorus “catches” the bullet and moves it across the stage towards Hamilton. This song becomes so much more powerful in this context, and that is something you don’t get when you just listen to it.

Pro-shots also allow a show to be revisited without waiting for a tour or traveling to Broadway. Years ago, I said that if I had to say what kind of geek I was, it would be a story geek. I love a good story more than anything else. There are many musicals with stories worth revisiting. As I said, I am obsessed with “Hadestown” and part of that has to do with the story. My love of writing can be traced back to a shared interest in Greek myths with a friend in middle school. “Hadestown” is a retelling of the Greek tragedy of Orpheus and Eurydice, so it was right up my alley. It is a story worth revisiting, and the musical does some very interesting things with it. Now I get to see the show again, something I have been dying to do since I first saw it three years ago. Proshots allow the show’s fans to revisit it whenever they want.

If you have not seen one of the recent proshots, seek them out. They offer a chance to see a Broadway-level show in the comfort of your own home. All are streaming (“Waitress” is available to rent or on HBO Max, “Come From Away” is on Apple TV), and they are worth your time. My hope is that with the release of “Six” and “Hadestown,” these proshots become more commonplace. They allow the theater to be more than just an experience for ticket holders. For the price of a movie ticket or a rental, anyone can watch these stories. More proshots are a great thing for the theater, as they open the medium to a wider audience.