Stuck in Love. (why is there a dot in the title?) could be subtitled “or how to shoot a Hollywood romance, that tries to touch on difficult topics, but doesn’t have the balls to commit”. But I understand, that wouldn’t fit on the posters, and these long sub-titles aka Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb (1964) are almost thing of the past. But I think it would fit this movie to the T. Everything here is quirky, wannabe deep, that you just know where the story goes and the only relationship that I wanted to explore (daughter hating her mom) flips half way through into “oh, she just didn’t know this vital piece of information”…

Yes, this movie made me slightly mad. The problem here is this is how people in Hollywood think “normal” people live, talk and act. Except they/we (at least people I know) don’t. These movies want to be so “approachable” and “show you how it is” but what you are seeing is just something most people can’t relate to. And the one part of this story plenty of people could relate to (the mother daughter relationship) is going someplace, but the movie didn’t either have balls to explore it properly, or didn’t know how to make it into a “feel-good story” that they have cheated in a massive way. And, with bit of a brain, they could have had more complicated, more down-to-earth story, that could still have happy ending.

It’s really hard reviewing this movie without going into the spoilers, so let me just say, that overall, there isn’t anything memorable about this movie. The actors are great, but wasted, every character feels as real as Pamela Anderson’s boobs and everything is so predictable… With that said…

Beware, SPOILERS are coming!

The only storyline that felt real and intriguing to me was the relationship between Lily Collins and Jennifer Connelly (both stunning and great actresses in their own right, but again, had not much to do here). As the movie goes along, you discover the reason Lily hates Jennifer is because of Jennifer’s character cheating on her husband. And Lily saw them. So naturally, she blames her mum for the divorce and doesn’t want to have anything to do with her. And where a smarter movie could have had a great scene between those two characters, where we could get both of their points of view, maybe some shouting match, this one “resolves” it by cheating. What I mean is, about 75% into the movie, we learn that her father was the first one to cheat some time ago and Jennifer forgave him. Which is so lazy. Because not only this makes the husband (played by Greg Kinnear) pretty lousy, but on top of that, that makes him an awful dad! What monster would leave his daughter hating her mom KNOWING very well the reason she hates her mom (for OVER 3 YEARS !!!) without at least telling her “Look, hate her all you want, but I am no saint, and here’s why.” Done, movie’s sorted, credits roll. But also, this felt really cheap for another reason, as that makes the daughter a villain, as she needs to acknowledge she was wrong, even though she wasn’t given the whole truth to truly decide for herself! So of course, the movie finishes with them reconciling, as “It’s fine you hated me for 3+ years, you didn’t know your dad was a bit of cheater too, hey, it’s fine, come have some Thanksgiving dinner with us. And on top of that, of course, I will go back together with your dad, because I can’t just exist without that whiny guy. I am so sick and tired of that muscly guy! Your cheating dad, who was lying to you about his affair for 3+ years allowing you to hate me, he’s the guy I need!”

What infuriates me the most is that the movie could have been so much better, if they tried to avoid these bullshit shortcuts. Just imagine this – we get mother daughter scene about how sometimes, as you get older, you change, you evolve, but some people stop evolving. So in order for her mum (Jennifer’s character) to be truly happy, she had to leave her dad, as he wasn’t doing his part. That could have setup some big emotional scene with Lily’s character, where they could have maybe hinted at the very end of the movie, that they might reconcile. Maybe the next day, maybe the next month, maybe next year. Or maybe they never will, but guess what…? That is also fine. It could still play as “happy-ish end”. And as far as the ex-husband and ex-wife coming back together… just no. Please, can we try to normalise people who divorce, BUT move on and still stay friends? This is what I mean when I say nothing feels real in this movie, as this is typical Hollywood nonsense – either the divorced couple ends up back together at the end of the movie, or they hate each other and never talk. There seems to be hardly anything in between.

My rating would have been much, much better if this movie didn’t follow every single cliché this genre had given us over the years. Because the actors are all great, the story is also there, but because of lazy shortcuts, or unwillingness of trying to do something we haven’t seen as much before, this movie just feels lazy, boring, predictable and… did I say boring?

That’s all for this one! Did you see it? What did you think about it? Let me know!

Until next time,

Luke

Before getting into this review, I need to admit something – I am just a normal guy and as such, I have a weak spot for beautiful women, that are unique. And one of the most uniquely beautiful women of the last decade for me was (and still is) Alexandra Daddario. And yes, as plenty of other men, I have discovered her through her role on the first season of True Detective (2013) for… reasons. But the longer I was watching her throughout the years, plenty of other movies and pictures, it’s not just her body, but the eyes! They are out of this universe, I just can’t describe how hypnotising she is to me. That is how Night Hunter became a movie I had to see. Didn’t know, who else was in it, didn’t know, what it is about, I purely watched it because of Alexandra.

Let me tell you… what a CAST! On top of the already mentioned Alexandra, this movie stars Henry Cavill, Ben Kingsley, Stanley Tucci, Nathan Fillion and Minka Kelly! At this point, I was honestly gobsmacked, as I thought “how come I have never heard of this movie, with such a stunning cast?!” There is a reason for it though, and it’s exactly the one you are probably thinking of… the movie is not that great.

Night Hunter wants to be part The Silence of the Lambs (1991, my review here) and part Se7en (1995), but it’s not. Which is a shame, as the the movie has a pretty good start, but the more you watch it, the more boring it gets. Then, there is a plot twist, that has been used bunch of times before, but fair enough, it did work for this story. And then, the last 20 minutes happen, where any logic goes out of the window. I mean, seriously. I can get over some leaps in logic, but sometimes, movie, that wants to be darker, does something, that just taints the experience.

Beware, SPOILERS are coming!

The final showdown is happening on a lake, where the twin brothers (what a twist, as M. Night Shyamalan would say) kidnapped Alexandra’s character and Eliana Jones‘s character. Ok, fair enough. The “not so Superman” Henry Cavill comes, drops his weapon (a slight stretch, but ok) then his co-worker, another police woman has her gun pointed at the main bad guy from the BEHIND, (aka he doesn’t know about her) but, she doesn’t take the shot! She gets herself shot instead (THE FUCK?!) by the main bad guy and honestly, just because of her stupidity alone, I couldn’t feel any sympathy towards her at all. I understand it’s just a movie, but come on, you have a clear shot on somebody, who’s aiming a gun on your co-worker!

Also, the movie starts quite dark, where you think there might be something, just for it to kind of fizzle out. There is no sense of any danger, anything that would seep through the movie. It just feels really “meh” after the first 15 minutes or so. That is the main problem with Night Hunter. This movie should have been at least watchable, especially with such a killer cast, but it turned into pretty bland, mediocre movie that you won’t remember a few weeks from now. Only thing I will remember is Alex’s (based on her Twitter bio, we can call her Alex) eyes, and… I mean, they are astonishing, but given her character did get only one or two scenes, where she could shine, it isn’t enough. I almost wish the twist would be for her to be the villain somehow, as I would love for somebody to give her a big, meaty role, she could use to showcase that she’s much more than body and those mesmerising eyes. Maybe one day…

That’s all for this one! Did you see it? What did you think about it? Let me know!

Until next time,

Luke

Let me be clear, did I have massive expectations that this movie, based on a board game, will actually be great? No. Did I expect to be this average? Also no. And that is the main issue with Battleship. This could have been a dumb, fun movie. Instead, it’s a long movie, that is just plain dumb, with no fun.

I think the main thing (I really don’t want to say problem) here is Peter Berg – he’s a great action director. Some of those sequences actually still looked pretty great (the very first time we see the alien ships, and when they jump over their ship was quite neat) but I don’t think he’s a great “actors director”. Let me explain – you have a few decent people here, like Taylor Kitsch who I would argue is not a dramatic, soon to be Oscar winner by any means. But I do believe he’s capable of much more (if I remember correctly, he was one of the brighter points of the poor second season of True Detective) and it’s no secret, that 2012 wasn’t his year. Nevertheless, I still think he’s better than some people give him credit for. Then you have Liam Neeson a really seasoned actor, who has done a lot of great things, but in this film, he seams not fully there, overacting. And then you have Ri-Ri (you might know her as Rihanna, but I call her Ri-Ri because that’s how I roll) who was totally wasted in this movie. Not even talking about any acting, because she’s literally had no space to have any character, she was always kind of in the background, with most of her dialogues comprising of “Yes, sir”… why even hire her for that role? Such a waste.

The other thing about Battleship, it is way too long and it overstays its welcome. If you were to develop your characters better, than you could justify going over 2 hours (this movie is 2 hours 11 minutes) but this film is not really interested in doing that and instead, indulges itself in plenty of unnecessary scenes. I swear I have seen certain scenes that I had no idea why were they necessary to film, let alone put them in the finished film. This whole movie could have been at least 20 minutes shorter, and honestly, it could have been a fun, slightly dumb B movie we could all enjoy. Because occasionally, you do need to switch off, just relax, watching ships go boom. But this film takes itself way too seriously, so I was not sure what to think about it.

Which is a shame, as I love cheesy, dumb, B movies (after all I grew up on action movies from 80’s/90’s) where you shouldn’t take the movie seriously and let’s face it, what would be the better candidate for that, than a movie based on Battleship board game, where you could literally come up with 50 different stories…? As long as you give us some boats (pardon, ships!) destroying each other, you are golden. But this movie doesn’t feel fun. It just feels like a mix of action, with plenty of “meh” in between. Which is a shame, as with solid cast, pretty solid action scenes and Ri-Ri on top of that all, this should have been my guilty pleasure. Instead, I would feel guilty recommending this film to somebody with a good conscience.

Overall, you can definitely do worse than watching Battleship, that’s for sure. And I do still believe that on technical level, it’s pretty good movie. Too bad the story and characters have had a minimum work put into them. It’s also a shame somebody didn’t suggest to Peter Berg editing this film, before releasing it, as that would’ve sorted some issues. I will still continue playing Battleship, as it’s a game a do enjoy. But I don’t think I will be in a hurry to re-visit this Battleship.

That’s all for this one! Did you see it? What did you think about it? Let me know!

Until next time,

Luke

Watching Showgirls is like watching a car accident during a train wrack, while there is a tornado full of sharks, that is keen on spreading fake news & COVID-19 at the same time, somehow. It’s a bizarre, bizarre movie, that went from really bad to a cult classic within two decades, where the main actress acknowledged, that this movie was the main reason her carrier stalled and her agent actually dumped her right after this movie flopped so hard. Yes, how often do you hear about an agent leaving their client because of a single movie…?

I’ve recently had the… pleasure (?) re-watching this, as I’ve only seen this film once before, when I was really young, for… ehm… reasons. Ok fine, Elizabeth Berkley is a great looking woman, and I am really simple man, so there is that. I was too young to grow up on Saved by the Bell (1989 – 1992), so I wasn’t as attached (or shocked?) as many by seeing her naked. By the way, while researching this I’ve discovered there will be new Saved by the Bell, that’s supposed to premiere this year…? Is creativity truly dead? Is 2020 just a bad simulation that just got out of the control? Will Kanye be president? Plenty of questions, but we will never know the answers to them (well, maybe except the last one).

Prior re-watching this movie I’ve read a lot about it, I’ve seen a lot of videos mocking it, exploring its cult status, or how Elizabeth is in totally different movie than rest of her cast members, as she overacts the fuck out of every scene she’s in. Seriously, EVERY scene. But it’s only when you properly watch it and you actually see it right in front of your eyes, it becomes apparent, that the 90’s were truly the “anything goes, God that’s some great cocaine” decade. This movie is over the top with pretty much everything – nudity, violence, dance sequences, but Elizabeth Berkley unfortunately turns everything up to… let’s say 28. Out of 10. And I’ve always found that weird, as everybody around her seems like they somehow knew what this movie was while they were making it, so they just went with it. But not Elizabeth. Well, as I’ve learned after reading the IMDb’s trivia, she’s actually done exactly what’s been asked of her by the director Paul Verhoeven:

In 2015 Paul Verhoeven said the film ruined Elizabeth Berkley‘s career. He said, “Showgirls certainly ruined the career of Elizabeth Berkley in a major way. It made my life more difficult, but not to the degree it did Elizabeth’s. Hollywood turned their backs on her. If somebody has to be blamed, it should be me because I thought that it was interesting to portray somebody like that. I had hoped the end of the movie would explain why she acted that way, when it’s revealed she has convictions linked with drugs, but that too turned out to be a big mistake. I asked Elizabeth to do all that – to be abrupt and to act in that way, but people have been attacking her about for that ever since. I did consider that people would think she had a borderline personality, but that was because her character had a history of drug abuse, so I tried to express that through her abruptness.”

Paul Verhoeven about Elizabeth’s performance, source: IMDb.com

Knowing this, I do feel bad about Elizabeth and her having the target on her back, for getting the blame for this movie. I honestly didn’t get anything remotely close to Paul was trying to say, but I don’t think any other actress would have made it work either, as that’s not something that can come through in that kind of movie even in 2 hours. It’s like that infamous rape scene – while it might have been based on a real event (as another IMDb trivia states below), it totally stuns you, as the movie prior is wanna be satire of Las Vegas (or Hollywood, if you wish) and it’s glamorous lifestyle (“you are a whore, darling”) but until that scene, it didn’t go to such a drastic dark place. It honestly felt like it was there for a pure shock factor, something like “Gotcha, see! This movie can be dark AND serious!”

The rape scene, and the subsequent refusal of the Las Vegas big shots to punish those responsible, is based on a real incident that Joe Eszterhas learned of while he worked for Rolling Stone magazine.

Why the screenwriter felt the need for the rape scene… I guess…? Source: IMDb.com

It almost feels like the movie didn’t know what it wants to be, so it’s trying to be both, sexy, violent low-stakes “fun”, that takes a dark turn just so we get a message and that message is… things like that happen? Big celebrities can get away with pretty much anything? I mean, yeah, I guess…? Showgirls is truly a movie that somehow feels like it came both little too early and too late. I wouldn’t be surprised, if somebody rebooted it into some sort of dark HBO mini-series where we could actually see the original concept behind Nomi’s behaviour, past, drugs etc., being explored properly, with more time and nuance, as that might work…? Would it pay off in some sort of massive way that it’d be worth getting back to this material instead of coming up with something new? That’s a question for the audience, but I guess if people are willing to watch reboots/remakes of most shows/movies from the last 20/30 years, why not this one?

That would be the ultimate challenge, wouldn’t it? To me, remakes of successful movies never made sense – why reboot/remake something that’s already worked and was successful? Why not take something that had potential, (and from that IMDb trivia, something like that would intrigue me), but because of variety of reasons failed (horribly failed) but somehow, it managed to find an audience that seems to be enjoying it without labelling it as guilty pleasure? You’d still get the audience of the original that loves the original property, and its name without any of the heavy burden on your shoulders, because if you fail, you won’t fail as spectacularly as the original (at least I can’t even imagine how that would look like) so there is no pressure, and if you succeed, congratulations, you’ve improved something that existed and was… questionable to say the least.

When I started this review, did I think it will turn into me basically advocating for a reboot of this property? No, I can’t say I did see that coming. But that’s what movie like Showgirls does to you – you start thinking about it and you never know where you’ll end up. Truly one of the most bizarre, big budget Hollywood disasters of all time, but yet… I couldn’t look away.

That’s all for this one! Did you see it? What did you think about it? Let me know!

Until next time,

Luke

As weird as this might seem, I’ve loved Rambo ever since I saw the first movie when I was about 11/12 years old (you know those uncles, that show you what they grow up on…? Exactly.) and that is why I was looking forward to the latest, and from the looks of it, the last Rambo movie (at least with Sylvester, somebody will probably do some sort of “son of Rambo” or “third cousin twice removed, whose dad kind of knew a guy, who once looked at Rambo from a distance) they will make. And the results is… a pretty mixed bag.

Rambo: Last Blood doesn’t feel personal. Let me explain what I mean by that. Plenty of people have this franchise associated with Rambo being this undestroyable killing machine, who’s taking out fools by hundreds, has muscles on top of muscles and doesn’t really talk that much. But they seem to forget that the very first movie (who’s often miscalled Rambo, but its actual title is simply First Blood (1982)) was actually a really good drama/reflection on Vietnam war, focused mainly on treating the Americans, who fought there by the general public right when they came back. I dare you to re-watch it, and you will discover, that it’s more a drama than anything else. The sequels made Rambo into the “punchline” we all know and parody now, but even those sequels still felt “personal”, where it was about him and dealing with the trauma (in a very bad way, don’t get me wrong) and the darkness in his soul.

This movie tries very hard to play with that, and if done correctly, this could’ve been so great. But instead of centring the story on Rambo in his later years and how he deals with everything, we get a story about him living on a farm (ok) with some maid (ok…?) whose granddaughter just needs to find her real father in Mexico (… I mean what?), even though she’s warned by every single character in the movie (meaning her grandma and Rambo) not to do it, yet she goes and of course get kidnapped and sold (?) into a sex slavery, so Rambo needs to find her… If you are thinking “well, that seems random”, you are not alone. And this is where this movie fails the most – why should we care, as an audience, about these random people in a RAMBO movie…? Even the sequels, no matter how ridiculous they’ve gotten, were always centred around Rambo and his Vietnam war experience. This didn’t feel like that at all. You could take this script, take the name “Rambo” out of it, and make it with anybody, and it would probably work slightly better, as it has no tie or relation to Rambo whatsoever. It’s interchangeable. Instead of being more like the very first movie, this ended being much more like the sequels. And as much as I can enjoy them in their own way, that’s not a way to say a goodbye to this legend.

The last 30 minutes or so, when Rambo actually kicks ass and defeats pretty much every single bad Mexican there is (I swear, if this movie was a reality, Americans wouldn’t need any walls or anything, as Rambo just cleaned up Mexico once and for all) were actually entertaining, but it was a bit too late at that point. And the ending with the “Rambo over the years” montage felt so undeserved. Don’t even get me started on the scene right after that montage…

What could’ve been a proper “back to the roots” ending of a franchise, that would honour the previous movies, just kind of fallen flat, with the last 30 minutes or so being the clear highlight of this otherwise average, not personal movie. For a screen icon such a as Rambo, it feels underwhelming. This also points out one clear fact – we could only be grateful that Creed (2015) and Creed II (2018) were as great as they were, as they had somebody behind them who actually understood what that franchise was about. And, with all all due respect to the creators of this movie, they didn’t seem to understand what made Rambo (mainly the first film) into such an icon. Shame.

That’s all for this one! Did you see it? What did you think about it? Let me know!

Until next time,

Luke

Terminal is a strange movie. On one hand, I really liked the aesthetics, some of camera work is great and the movie has a perfect length, where it doesn’t drag on for too long, but… everything else is so heavy handed, or predictable, that it knocks the movie down.

The main crux of this movie is – bunch of assassins going after each other, in unspecified part of the world, all situated at train terminal. Very roughly, without going into any spoilers yet, that’s it. This modern film-noir then takes the route of being really stylised, dialogue heavy movie, where nothing is as it seems, and there are a few twists coming your way. Some you will see from the very beginning, some will only surprise you because movie wants you to be surprised (doesn’t give you plenty of clues, so you know there is something else coming, but don’t know what).

It’s difficult to go into why it didn’t work for me without going into the spoiler territory, so…

Beware, SPOILERS are coming!

This movie has several twists. And as I’ve mentioned, plenty you will see coming a mile away (identity of Mr. Franklyn, the fact Margot Robbie‘s character might have a twin sister) and others you won’t really see as you had no way (who Simon Pegg‘s character really is, or the “main” twist of Mr. Franklyn being related to Margot’s characters). And where the movie was meant to be great because of these, it just felt… meh. I don’t know why, because I need to repeat myself, stylistically, I did enjoy this movie. But I don’t think it’s as clever as the movie thinks it is. Some parts of the screenplay reminded me of Quentin Tarantino, but without any of his “magic”. And some visuals, and editing reminded me of Edgar Wright, but without any of the genius, that would give the movie anything extra.

Most of this movie almost felt like it knew, it might not be that strong or clever story, so it tried to “hide” it using these visual crutches that would work for the filmmakers mentioned above, but they didn’t and here’s why. Both Quentin and Edgar, use these in a way that elevates something they already thought of, not as a distraction. Or it never feels like that in their movies. Especially the visual gags and editing style of Wright’s movies often add an extra layer of enjoyment for some jokes, or even story points, so when you re-visit his movies second, third time, you’d notice something new each time. With Terminal, you notice everything almost immediately, and if you didn’t, the movie makes sure it hits you over the head with it, so even if you only paid attention half the time, you’d get it. It’s almost like the movie doesn’t trust its viewers to be able to handle this story. And for a movie, where several times different characters mention “Who says mystery is a lost art?”, that feels slightly disappointing.

I did like the cast, mainly Margot Robbie, Simon Pegg and Dexter Fletcher who were all great. Even though, towards the end, Margot’s performance felt little too over the line, where I understand her characters called for her being off the chain, balls to the walls crazy, but last 20 minutes or so, it felt like overacting from her, just a tiny bit. And I’m a huge Margot fan.

I can honestly say that if this movie came out in mid 2000’s and if I were to see it when I was around 15 or so, I’d have probably loved it. And there will be people who will see it at the right time in their life, where it will be their version of how great a mystery noir film can be. But not for me, unfortunately, as pleasant aesthetic is not everything and the story feels like something I’ve seen before a few times with 2 extra twists, just to mask the fact everything else is re-hashed. And with IMDb rating being 5.4/10, it looks like I am not the only one thinking that.

That’s all for this one! Did you see it? What did you think about it? Let me know!

Until next time,

Luke

Unlike plenty of people of my generation (let me put it this way, in the year 2021 I’ll be as old as Terminator 2: Judgment Day (1991), so I’ll let you do the math) I didn’t grow up watching The Lion King (1994), I’ve only seen it when I was around 18 or so, as it was (and still is) considered one of the best animated movies of all times. And it was definitely great, I did like it a lot.

That’s why I’ve actually went into this movie full of hope, as I wasn’t as attached to the original film, I really liked what Jon Favreau managed to do with The Jungle Book (2016) (which I would still consider alongside Cinderella (2015), my review here, to be the best two live action Disney remakes so far) and the voice casting alone… I really was trying my best to like this movie and it didn’t happen.

Which is a shame, as visually, the movie is stunning. At least in the beginning – was I alone in thinking the longer the movie played, the worse the CGI has gotten? I mean, we’ve started with almost photo realistic looking animals and nature, but the ending looked kind of animated…? Maybe it was just me, but something about those night fight scenes didn’t sit well with me.

The main issue wasn’t retelling the same exact story, basically scene for scene, well at least not for me. For me, it was the fact that by making the animals so super-duper-extra-4K-great looking, they can’t really emote and the movie looses its magic. Don’t get me wrong, the animals (mainly the cubs in the beginning) did look cute, but mainly later on, you can’t really connect with them, as their faces aren’t usually as expressive as animation. You could probably make them expressive, but then it’d look really creepy, as we know (subconsciously), that animals don’t do that. And this is where The Lion King fell into its own trap – by trying to be The Jungle Book, but not realising why that worked and was (mostly) celebrated.

From my point of view, it made sense to remake The Jungle Book, as even though it was fairly beloved animated movie, plenty of time has passed, so the technology moved so much, when people had seen that, they were shocked, and they liked it. But the film still had a main character that wasn’t CGI. Whereas with The Lion King, there is “only” 25 years in between the original and the remake, and there are no human characters, so we are too focused on our beloved characters we knew from the original, where they were beloved because they animated them in that way, for us to fall in love with them. Unfortunately, you can’t CGI your way around that, as hyper realistic animals can’t emote and be as relatable as their animated counter parts. So anything these characters do, feels off, and you as a viewer, find yourself bored as you can’t really connect to anything on the screen, as everything just looks so perfect, you know it must be fake. It’s a bizarre trap to fall into, I am not going to lie, but the fact this movie looks as stunning as it does (at least for the most of it) is also its biggest downfall.

I thought the voice actors did a solid job, mainly John Oliver, Seth Rogen, Billy Eichner and Donald Glover were outstanding. The rest of the cast was fine, and I know it seems like it’s not a compliment, but it is, the issue with this movie isn’t its voice casting. You couldn’t really cast a better group of talented people.

Disney already announced another bunch of animated movies getting their live action remakes (the full list is here) – basically, within 10 years or so, we will get to the point that if an animated movie ever existed and was made by Disney, there will be a live action remake of it. We’ve gotten a bunch of the most beloved ones, and honestly…? As I’ve mentioned at the beginning, only 2 of them come to mind I would describe as pretty good movies in their own right. The rest of them do kind of blend into a mediocrity, where I honestly wonder what the breaking point will be – more precisely, which movie will be the Solo of live action Disney remakes, where they’ll loose so much money, they will be forced to re-evaluate their strategy, and make sure they bring their A++ game to every single live action remake. Something, that unfortunately is getting rarer to see with these, which is the most puzzling thing – they literally have money to burn, they can afford to hire the best in the game, and somehow, even the best people under the Disney “umbrella” are not performing well. Something needs to change.

That’s all for this one! Did you see it? What did you think about it? Let me know!

Until next time,

Luke