2025 New Year’s Eve Message

 

(This is a poster image for New Year’s Eve and New Year’s Day.) 

 

 

Happy New Year everyone 🥳🎆🎇🥂, I hope you had a fun Christmas 🎄, and I hope you have an equally fun New Year’s Eve. And a safe one too, be sure, if you drink any alcohol 🥂🍷🥃🍸, you have a designated driver, and don’t drive while you’re drunk 🥴. And if you have a gun, please, be careful where you shoot it, don’t wanna kill anyone by accident, do you? Me? I’m probably going to stay inside when the ball drops, and the hand sticks midnight 🕛, because frankly, it’s much safer inside on New Year’s than it is outside. All I know is there’s going to be a lot of hungover people 🫩 the next day, on New Year’s Day. This is going to be different than my past New Year’s Eve posts because it is not a full recap. It is just a message to send the year off, and to reflect on the year a bit. I didn’t see enough new movies this year to justify me doing a full-on recaps. I only saw five: A Working Man ♂︎, Predator: Killer of Killers, Fight or Flight ✈️, Shadow Force (2025), and A Loud House Christmas Movie: Naughty or Nice 🎄, in that order. 

 

I liked most of them, the only one I didn’t like was Predator: Killer of Killers, that was a major disappointment for me, not I had particularly high expectations for that movie. It had an animation style that I didn’t like, and it was directed by Dan Trachtenberg, and outside of Prey (2022), I haven’t really liked what he’s been doing with the Predator franchise, the directions he’s been taking with it, and how he’s changed the Predator lore, and portrayed the Predator. I’ve hated pretty much all of the Predator designs in all of his Predator movies so far. But, even with those lower expectations, I still didn’t like it, it still disappointed me. I wrote a full review of that movie, if you really want to know the reasons why I didn’t like it, and why I don’t like Dan Trachtenberg as a writer and director, and why I don’t like that he’s attached himself to the Predator franchise and is seemingly, the only one guiding it forward. Get this man ♂︎ away from Predator, please. You got rid of Shane Black and Fred Dekker, now get rid of this guy ♂︎, he’s disposable. Watching Killer of Killers made me hesitant to watch Predator: Badlands, even though I was interested in watching it after I saw the initial trailer. And even though I had planned to watch and review the other two Predator films, Predators and The Predator, in the lead-up to Badlands after taking a short break from Predator after Killer of Killers, but I kind of lost interest and petered out, and decided not to do it. 

 

Admittedly, I focused on other things at the time, like I was working on my reviews of the two Jimmy Neutron PC games that AWE Games made, Jimmy Neutron: Boy Genius and Jimmy Neutron vs. Jimmy Negatron. I also had my mind on politics at the time, and wasn’t really thinking about Predator. But, even if I had really wanted to see Badlands, even if I had liked Killer of Killers, and it got me excited for Badlands, which is what it was intended to do, I wouldn’t have been able to see it anyway because like with a lot of movies I wanted to see this year, I wouldn’t have been able to see it in the theater because the theater going experience is too expensive for my family’s budget, and we’re always busy all the time and preoccupied with other stuff. We never get the time to go to the movies, even if we have the money 💵, and even when we have the time and the money 💵, none of the movies we wanted to see are out anymore, and are out on streaming or physical media, which my preferred method of watching movies at home. 

 

Even with all the movies I managed to see this year that were new releases in the year, 2025, I didn’t see any of them in the theater, even though I wanted to. I ended up watching them when they’re available on streaming, VOD, or Blu-Ray 💿. I watched A Working Man ♂︎ on VOD, and I watched both Fight or Flight ✈️ and Shadow Force (2025) on Blu-Ray 💿. Predator: Killer of Killers and A Loud House Christmas Movie: Naughty or Nice 🎄 were the only time streaming only movies or streaming first movies that I saw this year. Of all the new movies I saw this year, I would say I liked A Working Man ♂︎ the best. I know A Working Man ♂︎’s not technically a good movie, and a lot of people don’t like it, but I liked it. I thought it was a pretty kick ass action movie, and I do have a soft spot for Jason Statham. I’m always on the lookout for whatever puts out in a single year since he pretty much has a new movie coming out pretty much every year. He’s got a new movie coming out next year, in January called Shelter (2026). I hope I’ll be able to see that in the theaters, but not I’m holding out any hope for that one given my track record in the year, 2025. I doubt it will be much different in the year, 2026. I do admittedly like The Beekeeper 🐝 a little bit more than A Working Man ♂︎, and I’d probably revisit The Beekeeper 🐝 a lot sooner than I would A Working Man ♂︎. 

 

I mean, it fits because A Working Man ♂︎ not only stars Jason Statham, but it was directed by the same director as The Beekeeper 🐝, David Ayer. The only difference is that whereas The Beekeeper 🐝 was a totally original film, A Working Man ♂︎ was based off a book 📖, called Levon’s Trade, and Sylvester Stallone was heavily involved in the making of the movie. He was a producer and a writer. That’s why the writing in that movie is so different than of The Beekeeper 🐝, and why it may be not as strong as that movie. A Working Man ♂︎ kind of had a harder time deciding what it wanted to be than The Beekeeper 🐝, and seemingly kept changing genres whenever it felt like. Sometimes it felt like a serious crime thriller, while other times, it felt like a dumb action movie, which is what a lot of people were expecting it to be throughout. It even abandons things it seemingly set up, those Mexican cartel members 🇲🇽 that show up at the beginning. You think, that after Levon beats them up that they’re going to come back for revenge, and kidnap Joe and Carla Garcia’s daughter, and the cartel were going to be the bad guys for the rest of the movie, but they aren’t. It’s actually the Russian mob 🇷🇺 like it is in every other action movie, except there’s also a biker gang that’s in league with the Russian mafia 🇷🇺, or is apart of the Russian mafia 🇷🇺, even though none of the members of the biker gang are Russian 🇷🇺. But, to be somewhat fair to A Working Man ♂︎, it does still maintain throughout of Levon trying to rescue his bosses’ daughter from some human traffickers. 

 

It’s just the movie just changes what criminal organization is responsible for trafficking her. We’re lead to believe at first that it’s going to be the Mexicans 🇲🇽, but it actually ends up being the Russians 🇷🇺. That to me, feels like a last minute rewrite, like the villains were going to be the cartel, but then, at some point, they decided to change it to the Russian mob 🇷🇺. My guess to is avoid the same controversy that Rambo: Last Blood 🩸 faced by making Mexicans 🇲🇽 the bad guys, during a time where hostility towards immigrants (particularly Mexican immigrants 🇲🇽), particularly from our government, was ramping up. No one really cares if you make Russians 🇷🇺 the bad guys in movies, even people who cry Russophobia 🇷🇺; which only really started after the full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine 🇷🇺🇺🇦 happened, and people were understandably criticizing Russia 🇷🇺 for invading a sovereign country unprovoked 🙄. In fact, it’s to be expected that Russians 🇷🇺 be the bad guys in action movies. They’re kind of the default now, or the starter pack since every ongoing action franchise we have right now started out with Russians 🇷🇺 being the bad guys in their first movie. John Wick did it, The Equalizer did it, and Nobody did it. There’s a lot more than that, but those are the three main ones. A Working Man ♂︎ is just following in their footsteps. 

 

The Beekeeper 🐝 was more consistent throughout, and had a better grasp of what it wanted to be. The way I saw A Working Man ♂︎ is that it was just a substitute for a Beekeeper 🐝 sequel, which we are in fact getting now. It’s going to be called The Beekeeper 2 🐝, it’s being worked on now, they started filming it this year, and I’m guessing it probably won’t come out until 2027, the same year that Godzilla x Kong: Supernova comes out, which is my most highly anticipated release of that year. I would be shocked if it took longer to make, and it ended up coming out in 2028, but I’m pretty sure it’ll come out in 2027, that seems like the most likely release year, given the timeframe they’re making this movie. It’s not going to be directed by David Ayer this time, instead it’s going to be directed by an up and coming Indonesian director 🇮🇩, Timo Tjahjanto, who recently directed Nobody 2, another movie that I wanted to see in theaters this time but didn’t get to, and whose most famous work outside of Hollywood is the 2018 martial arts action crime thriller, The Night Comes for Us. He also did work on two of the V/H/S 📼 films, V/H/S/2 📼 and V/H/S/94 📼, contributing one short to each, as well as another horror anthology film, The ABCs of Death. All of which were filmed in his native Indonesia 🇮🇩, and were done in the Indonesian language, with English subtitles provided by the American filmmakers 🇺🇸 leading those projects. 

 

So, he’s worked in horror and action, and he’s seems to be a pretty versatile director, able to blend genres. Like, his segment in V/H/S/94 📼, The Subject was more horror action rather than straight up horror like his segment in the second V/H/S 📼 movie, V/H/S/2 📼, Safe Haven, which did draw some criticism from some fans who were expecting more straight up horror from all the segments rather than a horror action blend in one of them. I am so happy that they got him to direct this, that he’s the replacement for David Ayer. I just hope that they actually let him bring his unique style to it, instead of just treating him like an interchangeable director-for-hire and don’t give him a lot of creative freedom, like they do with a lot of directors nowadays that aren’t established big names. Because while people in the horror community or the action community may know who he is, he still isn’t a super well known director. 

 

He’s not a household name the same way Martin Scorsese, Quentin Tarantino (😒), Robert Rodriguez, Steven Spielberg, James Cameron, Ridley Scott, Christopher Nolan, Denis Villeneuve, Guillermo del Toro, Tim Burton, M. Night Shyamalan, Sam Raimi, Zack Snyder, Michael Bay, and even Ryan Coogler to a certain extent are. Who’s pretty much trying to be the black Martin Scorsese, how keeps collaborating with Michael B. Jordan, and basically turn him into his Robert De Niro, or at least, his Leonardo DiCaprio. Keep in mind, these are big name directors who are currently working, there are few others like Stanley Kubrick, Francis Ford Coppola, George Lucas, Peter Jackson, John Carpenter, and Wes Craven, who are not currently working anymore, because they either retired or they passed away. I mean, Peter Jackson is still technically working, but he’s making documentaries now, rather fictional narrative films. I think The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies was the last fictional narrative film he made (the last blockbuster he made) before completely shifting to documentaries. His first major documentary film was the critically acclaimed and Academy Award winning World War I documentary film, They Shall Not Grow Old. It helped that it came out during 100th anniversary of the war, and World War I stuff was becoming way more popular than it ever had before in decades prior. 

 

Again, because it was the 100th anniversary. I’m sure World War II stuff will skyrocket in popularity, and we’ll get a bunch of World War II documentaries and movies when the 100th anniversary rolls around, which is only two decades away, can you believe that 😱? We’re much closer to that than we are to the release of Peter Jackson’s King Kong remake. 2025 was that film’s 20th anniversary (as it was for many other movies), and 2039, the start of the 100th anniversary of World War II is only 14 years away. I guess that gives you an idea of just how short the Interwar period was if World War I ended in 1918 and World War II started in 1939, that’s only a 21 year gap. Someone could’ve been born in 1918, when the First World War ended, and been in their early 20s when the Second World War started, as were many of the people who ended up participating in the Second World War; the so-called Greatest Generation, not to sound dismissive or anything of them, they truly are the Greatest Generation; they more than earned that name. 

 

Peter Jackson did continue to produce some blockbusters after this, like he produced that YA novel movie, Mortal Engines, which cost $100–150 million 💵 to make, and bombed at the box office 💣, making only $83.7 million 💵. And of course, he executively produced that animated Lord of the Rings movie, The Lord of the Rings: The War of Rohirrim. And there is talk of him returning to the world of blockbuster filmmaking by making yet another Lord of the Rings film, and perhaps a whole new series of films, starting with a film under the working title, The Lord of the Rings: The Hunt for Gollum. So, even now, Peter Jackson can’t escape the Lord of the Rings franchise or the world J.R.R. Tolkien, that shit will pretty much follow him the rest of his life. Just like how the Matrix franchise will follow the Wachowskis for the rest of their lives, or at least Lana Wachowski’s, since she seems to be real brains 🧠 behind the Matrix movies. Like, she’s the one who actually came up most of the ideas for The Matrix, and thus, it is more of her baby than it is her sister, Lily’s. Maybe, that’s why Lily Wachowski split away from Lana, and didn’t want to direct The Matrix Resurrections with her 🤔, she didn’t want to continue being defined by this one franchise, whereas Lana is still more than okay with being associated with The Matrix. 

 

So, Peter Jackson’s career is far from over, and he’s still got some work ahead of him. Francis Ford Coppola, on the other hand, even though he didn’t officially announce his retirement, I don’t think he’s got anything left in him after Megalopolis, and after the way he acted during the making of that film, the things he’s accused of (the sexual harassment and assault that he engaged in on set with some of the female extras ♀︎), the way the film was advertised (using fake AI generated critic quotes), and the way the film ultimately turned out, I really don’t want him to make another film after that. Just retire man, we don’t need another movie from you, you’re a bad man ♂︎, you’ve done bad things (victimized other people), and even defended and protected other bad people (Victor Salva), even after it was known that they were bad people doing bad things, and this movie you made, that’s shaping up to be your last film was pretty bad from what I saw and from what I heard. 

 

I don’t think I ever need to watch Megalopolis. I doubt if some pretentious film snob 10 years from now, comes out and tries to convince me or anyone else that Megalopolis is actually a good movie, and we were all just being too harsh on it. There are film snobs today trying to convince us that Megalopolis was actually good, and it was just misunderstood, and everyone who criticized it or called it a bad movie was just too stupid to get it. I can already think of one: Rick Worley, the transphobic film essayist who made a name for himself defending the Star Wars prequels, Star Wars special editions, and George Lucas…and also J.K. Rowling 😒. Can you see why I don’t like Rick Worley, and why I call him a transphobe? I wrote a whole journal about him on DeviantART that I then reposted on here, if you’re interested in reading that, though I must warn you, I do go on some lengthy tangents in the foreword of that repost talking about Rust (the Alec Baldwin western movie 🤠 that was filmed in New Mexico, as most westerns 🤠 are these days, and had an “accidental” on-set shooting and death), Jaws, Piranha, Maneater (2020), and Iron Chef. But, they’re entertaining tangents, I think you’ll like what I wrote if you’re in anyway interested in any of those topics. 

 

But, I am confident somewhat, that they’ll let Timo Tjahjanto loose on The Beekeeper 2 🐝 because he incorporated some stuff in Nobody 2 that was in previous feature film, The Night Comes for Us. If you know, you know. Given how much of the original cast from the first movie are returning in this upcoming sequel, it seems like The Beekeeper 2 🐝 is going to be a pretty direct sequel to the first one, and might even pick up from where the first one left off. A few of the new cast members include Yara Shahidi, Pom Klementieff, and Adam Copeland. I’m sure one of them is probably going to be the main villain, my bets are on Pom Klementieff, since she usually plays villains in movies like this, and she played the villain in The Killer’s Game, which I reviewed on this blog. Unless President Danforth is the main villain, as despite him saving her life, she was so traumatized by seeing Adam Clay kill her son, Derek, even though he tried to kill her, that she uses the full resources of the presidency, of the US government 🇺🇸 to get revenge on Adam Clay. 

 

Because even though Derek Danforth was a bad man ♂︎, and he did try to kill her, he was still her son, and no mother, no parents, wants to see their child get murdered in front of them, even if their child was the danger and it was done to protect them. Adam Clay saved the president’s life, and the president isn’t very grateful because he killed her son, and now she’s out for blood 🩸. If that ends up being the plot of The Beekeeper 2 🐝, then maybe Pom Klementieff is an ally of Adam Clay’s, maybe she’s the head of the Beekeeper program 🐝, the secretive leader of this secretive program, and she decides to help Adam Clay evade the US government 🇺🇸, and take down President Danforth because she’s corrupt as hell. I know, in the first movie, she tried to act innocent, like she wasn’t apart of her son’s money laundering scheme 💵, but she was. She benefited from it, she became president because of it. And even though she she wasn’t aware of the money laundering scheme 💵, she knew her son was up to some pretty shady stuff, and protected him from consequence…until she couldn’t anymore. 

 

That’s why she hired Westwyld, to protect her son, and that’s why he was willing to go to extreme lengths to try to take out Adam Clay before he could get to Derek. All of which failed obviously since Adam ultimately kills Derek at the end of the film, traumatizing Jessica Danforth immensely. You’re telling me she isn’t corrupt? You’re telling me that she isn’t complicit in her son’s crimes, and she wouldn’t get impeached for something like that? It’s going to be interesting to see what they do in the sequel, but all we know is that it’s going to feature a lot of the same characters as the first one, and it’s going to follow the events of the first one very closely. Just how closely? We’ll have to see. Hopefully, it doesn’t longer than a year for this movie to get finished and come out, find out. I hope they keep that gold and yellow lighting and tinting that they had in the first one, it helped give it its unique identity, and helped convey that it was about a beekeeper 🐝 (both literally and figuratively), and it had to do with bees 🐝 and honey 🍯. The Os in the opening credits were even shaped like honeycombs, I hope they do more of that in the second one. If you’re reading this, Timo Tjahjanto, which, I doubt you are, please keep all that stuff, while also bringing your own style to it. It would be much appreciated by me, probably the biggest Beekeeper 🐝 fan there is. 

I still want to review Nobody 2, I still haven’t gotten the chance to. I didn’t get it for Christmas 🎄, but I did at least get three of the games that I wanted: Resident Evil 4 (2023), Epic Mickey Rebrushed 🖌️, and possibly, the best one of all, SpongeBob SquarePants: Titans of the Tide 🧽. I still can’t play of them yet because I still haven’t hooked up my PlayStation 5, and I’m until I get a 4K TV because I think the PS5 will only work if you have a 4K TV, especially since it doubles as a 4K player. That’s why I want to get Nobody 2 on 4K, so I can finally watch it. But, if I can’t find the 4K anywhere in the stores, I’ll probably have to just order it online like I will have to do with Sinners (2025), and probably Jurassic World Rebirth, and all the other movies that came out this year that I wanted to see that are out on Blu-Ray 💿 and 4K Ultra HD 💿. Because after awhile, if a movie’s been out for a while, they just won’t put the 4K version on the shelves anymore, and they’ll only put the Blu-Ray version 💿 and the DVD version 📀 on there, and the only places where you can find the 4K version is online, usually Amazon. But, if I don’t have the money 💵 to order it, or if I can’t wait any longer to review, I guess I’ll just have to stream it, probably on Amazon Prime if it’s there…hopefully 😬. 

I’m just glad I got SpongeBob SquarePants: Titans of the Tide 🧽, it makes up for not being able to see the new SpongeBob 🧽 movie, The SpongeBob Movie: Search for SquarePants 🧽, which I probably won’t get the chance to see until it comes on Blu-Ray 💿, or 4K 💿. I know my grandma said that we might see a movie today to celebrate New Year’s, since we each $50 💵 from one of my uncles, but she’s not going to wanna go see a SpongeBob 🧽 movie, or an Anaconda movie (more on that later). Maybe, I could see it when it’s on streaming, probably on Paramount+, since it’s a Paramount movie, though, I really don’t know. The latest Loud House movie, A Loud House Christmas Movie: Naughty or Nice 🎄, premiered almost exclusively on Paramount+, although it may have premiered simultaneously on Paramount+ and on the actual Nickelodeon channel on regular TV, and it was only on Paramount+ for a few weeks until they randomly decided to remove it for some reason. I ended up watching Naughty or Nice on Amazon Prime, I had to rent it, I used my aunt’s money 💵 to do it. I asked her, and she said “yes,” and so it was thanks to her that I was even able to watch that movie and review it for my blog. 

 

It ended up being the last review I did for the month of December, and the last review I did of the year. This is why I hate the current streaming era, these streaming platforms can just remove movies or shows on a whim, with very little actual justification, except for maybe tax write-offs, and then they’re unavailable through legal means. They pretty force you to pirate some of these movies 🏴‍☠️ because they just remove them from their platform for no reason, and try to make them disappear and make people forget they even existed. This is I prefer physical media, and will always prefer physical media, for as long as I live. Not only can watch the movie you want to watch anytime without Internet 🛜, but you actually own it, and it always be in your collection so long as you don’t lose it or give it away, and no studio or streaming service can remove it whenever they want, and make it unavailable and disappear. So, even if Search for SquarePants does end up on Paramount+, there’s no guarantee that it will stay there. 

I’m surprised at how so few people have reviewed this movie on YouTube. None of the big reviewing channels have covered it, it’s only these smaller no name creators who have covered it, or these foreign channels in other languages which YouTube inevitably autodubs into English, and the AI dubbing sounds absolutely terrible. The two biggest channel that covered it are 3C Films and Dazz Reviews, two channels that I do not watch. I guess people were so caught up in the other two big releases of December 19, 2025, Avatar: Fire and Ash 🔥 and The Housemaid, that this one just got lost in the shuffle. I don’t know why Paramount, and Nickelodeon for that matter, thought it was a good idea to release a SpongeBob 🧽 movie the same day as an Avatar movie 🤦‍♂️. I guess they figured that it would be something for parents to take their kids to if they’re too young to see Avatar or The Housemaid (I don’t know why you’d want to watch The Housemaid under any circumstances, but I guess there are some women out there, some moms out there who’d go see it instead of seeing Avatar). They could just take the kids to see SpongeBob 🧽 instead. 

 

But, I don’t know if that strategy actually worked because while I don’t know what the box office results for Search for SquarePants were, I wouldn’t be too surprised if it was a flop. Why is a SpongeBob 🧽 movie a December release anyway? Couldn’t they have released it sooner in the year, like during the spring 🍃 or summer ☀️? It just seems that the December release was ill conceived, and they shouldn’t have even bothered, and who’s ever idea it was to release it in December, on the same day as the latest Avatar movie, should probably be fired because they pretty much set this movie up to fail. Paramount barely promoted it or marketing it, like they really didn’t start marketing it until late November, which is way to late to start marketing a movie, when it’s only a few weeks away. Burger King 🍔 did a tie-in meal for it, and judging by the reactions to that meal 🤢, that cross promotion was also ill conceived, and wasn’t worth the effort. Me thinks Burger King 🍔 just wanted their own version of the McDonald’s Grinch meal, and they just decided to use the SpongeBob 🧽 movie to do it, even though they just rushed it and didn’t put much effort into it. 

What reviews this movie has gotten seem to be pretty negative. Not only was I shocked at how few reviews of this movie were there on YouTube, but how negative they were. People are hating on this movie, calling it one of the worst SpongeBob 🧽 movies ever made, because there are multiple SpongeBob 🧽 movies. I can’t imagine Stephen Hillenburg (rest in peace 😔) thought that there would ever be more than one SpongeBob 🧽 movie, and that the movies would become a franchise in and of themselves . But, just because everyone else hates this movie doesn’t mean that I will. The Sandy Cheeks Movie 🐿️ got a lot of negative reviews when it came out, back in 2024, and I’m still probably going to review it at some point (if Netflix doesn’t remove it from their platform by the time I get to it 😒), and I might end up liking it a lot more than everyone else. I feel like people exaggerated how bad that movie was, just like they’re doing now with this movie, Search for SquarePants. 

 

I think people are just hating on it because Ice Spice is in it (she’s not just in it, she contributed a song to it), and a lot of people on the Internet 🛜 don’t like her, and they’re letting their negative opinion of her cloud their view of this movie, like her mere association with this movie drags it down for them, and they think less of it now. I really don’t know anything about Ice Spice, I’ve never listened to any of her music, and I don’t know why the Internet 🛜 hates her, I just know that she’s hated, but I personally don’t carry that hatred for her. She means nothing to me, I’m not a fan or a hater, she doesn’t affect me at all, she’s just some young rapper out there who I’ve never listened to. So, I don’t have that association with her that I would hate on a movie that simply had her in it, or had one of her songs in it; not any song, but a song she made specifically for this movie. 

 

People aren’t just hating it because of her though, they’re also hating it for some of the marketing, that they feel was too sexual and inappropriate for kids. Like, there’s a picture of this billboard that’s circulating online, promoting the movie, showing SpongeBob 🧽 almost completely naked, except for an eyepatch and a Christmas gift bow 🎁 covering his crotch area, doing a sort of sexy pose. Like he’s a male model or something. People thought that billboard went too far, and it shouldn’t have been done to advertise a kid’s movie, even if SpongeBob 🧽 has had adult humor in the past. But not to this extent, people felt. I mean, I get it, I can sort of see where the people complaining about that billboard are coming from, but again, that’s a problem with the marketing, not with the actual movie. Those are two separate issues, they’re not one and the same. You shouldn’t let one bad billboard, one bad advertisement, cloud your opinion about a film, and you shouldn’t let a rapper you don’t like cloud your opinion about a film either. This isn’t even the only SpongeBob 🧽 movie released this year, there also Plankton: The Movie, a spinoff movie centered around Plankton, where he’s the main protagonist, and SpongeBob 🧽 is his sidekick. 

 

The plot of the movie revolves around Karen 🖥️ going rogue, and trying to take over the world, and Plankton needing to ask SpongeBob 🧽 for help to stop her, and restore her back to her normal self. Usually, in these spinoff movies centered around other characters as the main protagonists, they still have to pair them up to SpongeBob 🧽, and turn it into a buddy movie, so that, I guess, people will still that it’s a SpongeBob 🧽 movie and it’s apart of the same franchise 🤷‍♂️? Like, Saving Bikini Bottom: The Sandy Cheeks Movie 🐿️ from last year, Plankton: The Movie was released exclusively on Netflix. So, we had two SpongeBob 🧽 movies in 2025, one on streaming, and one in theaters. And of the two, the Plankton movie received better reviews than the SpongeBob 🧽 movie, like Plankton: The Movie was received way better than Search for SquarePants has. I’m just worried that we may never get another theatrically released SpongeBob 🧽 movie ever again because of Paramount’s boneheaded decision to release The SpongeBob Movie: Search for SquarePants 🧽 the same day as Avatar: Fire and Ash 🔥; and also The Housemaid I guess 😒. 

 

But, speaking of Netflix, Search for SquarePants isn’t the only movie that came out in the last two months (November and December) that people ignored (or were completely unaware of), there was a new Knives Out 🗡️ that came out in late November, on November 26, 2025, called Wake Up Dead Man ♂︎: A Knives Out Mystery 🗡️, and it barely even made a blip. None of the big movie reviewing channels actually covered it. There was a time when a new Knives Out 🗡️ movie coming out was a huge event. Glass Onion 🧅 was huge when it came out, it was trendy on YouTube and all over social media. Pretty much every major movie reviewing channel covered it, and pretty much every movie reaction channel reacted to it. Wake Up Dead Man ♂︎ comes out, and hardly anyone talks about it. It just comes and goes, and quickly fades into obscurity. I bet there are people out there who didn’t know that new Knives Out 🗡️ movie (or new Benoit Blanc movie, if you prefer) came out this year. It was a huge mistake for Rian Johnson to start making these movies for Netflix. He should’ve never gone to Netflix to make Glass Onion 🧅 or this movie, and should’ve just stuck with Lionsgate. Then maybe, it and Wake Up Dead Man ♂︎ would’ve gotten theatrical releases and physical media releases, and people might’ve actually heard of it and gone to see it. Instead of the movie getting buried in Netflix’s sea of content, and being quickly forgotten about. 

 

I do sort of understand the feeling that people had about hating Search for SquarePants because of Ice Spice’s presence, because I’m shit talking The Housemaid, and saying that I don’t understand why anyone would want to watch that because Sydney Sweeney’s in it, and I hate Sydney Sweeney. Not just because of her politics, but because her inauthenticity, her artificiality, and her inability to act. Sydney Sweeney’s one of the most overrated actresses in Hollywood right now, and people are finally starting to see that she isn’t that great of an actress. All it took was her doing a stupid jeans 👖 commercial for the all the mystique and hype around her to just fade away, and for people (particularly on the Left; and more particularly, women ♀︎ and queer people on the Left) to fall out of love with her, and for all of her movies following that ad campaign to flop. I don’t know what the box office numbers for The Housemaid were, but I can’t imagine that they were that good. It might’ve been made more money 💵 than The SpongeBob Movie 🧽, but it still probably was by no means a box office success, and was more than likely a flop. Sydney Sweeney’s career is on life support at this point, the only thing she has left is The Devil Wears Prada 2, which I still can’t believe they made and is coming out next year. That movie might make money 💵, if there are enough fans of the first one willing to come out to support it, and if there is enough of appetite amongst the general public for a Devil Wears Prada legacy sequel. 

 

The Freaky Friday sequel that came out this year, Freakier Friday did actually make money 💵. It grossed $153 million 💵 against a budget of $42–45 million 💵, and I thought that too was an unnecessary sequel. But, what do I know? I’m not the target audience for these movies, women ♀︎, girls ♀︎, and gay men ⚣♂︎ are. Gay men ⚣♂︎ (and bisexual men ♂︎ too, let’s not leave them out) love Devil Wears Prada, and it’s not hard to figure out why. Gay men ⚣♂︎ are over represented in the fashion industry, or at least, that’s what all the movies tell me, since anytime a movie shows a male fashion designer ♂︎, they always make them gay ⚣, or at the very least, queer coded; with the most stereotypical and over exaggerated gay lisp ⚣ imaginable; I know there are gay men ⚣♂︎ who talk like that in real life (a lot of them are on YouTube and TikTok), but still, they do exaggerate it in movies when they have a gay male character ⚣♂︎, or a male character ♂︎ they want you to think is gay ⚣ but they actually want to say is gay ⚣ to avoid upsetting the homophobes in the audience. So, you know they’re going to show up for Devil Wears Prada 2. So, if anything else, Devil Wears Prada 2 may end up being the film that saves Sydney Sweeney’s career. 

 

But, you never know, box office numbers are not exact science, or math I guess, you can’t engineer a movie to be a box office success, and just because one movie became box office success, doesn’t mean that another similar movie will as well. Movies are made and released under wildly different circumstances, and what may have worked for one movie, and propelled it to box office success, may not work for another movie, and may not propel it to box office success. Sometimes, it may just lead to that film tanking at the box office. Release dates contribute to a movie’s success or failure, not a lot, but a little. Release a movie on the right date, and you might help ensure its success, release a movie on the wrong date, and might hurt its chances its chances of success and may contribute to its failure. I think that was the case with the two major releases of December 19, 2025 that weren’t Avatar, these studios released these movies on the day that had no chance of succeeding because they pitted them against a film that they had no chance of beating at the box office. Avatar movies are like black holes, no movie can resist their gravitational pull. And while I’m not exactly sure how much Fire and Ash 🔥 did, I’m sure it still made a lot of money 💵. I was kidding myself when I believed that there was a chance that it could bomb 💣 or underperform. It might still underperform compared to the previous two. It might just make $1 billion 💵 instead of $2 billion 💵 like the last two. But, I guess, I’ll just have to see when it’s all said and done, and this movie is out of the theaters. 

 

I don’t care about these movies at all, I think they’re pretty insulting as a Native American myself (perpetuating a lot of myths and stereotypes about Native Americans, and preventing us from being seen as anything more than primitive savages, noble savages maybe, but still savages, or as being seen as modern people who exist in the modern day, rather than people who existed in the past and don’t exist anymore), but my opinion of them isn’t going to stop them from making billions of dollars 💵, and isn’t going to stop James Cameron from making more of these. I know James Cameron said in recent interviews that he isn’t thinking about Avatar 4 right now, and he’s just focused the release of Fire and Ash 🔥, but come on, the movie’s making money 💵, he’s going to make a fourth one. He talked in the lead up to Fire and Ash 🔥 about how worried he was that it wasn’t going to make as much as the previous two Avatar movies. He said that he worried that it wasn’t going to underperform, and I actually believed him. And yet the movie came out, and it’s making a ton of money 💵 🤑. The jury’s still out on whether or not it’ll make $2 billion 💵 like its predecessors, but the chances of it making $2 billion 💵 are higher than it not. Again, like I said, it could just make $1 billion 💵, in which, James Cameron would technically be right, it still would have made a billion dollars 💵, and that’d be more than enough to justify making another one. As much as I don’t want him to. 

 

The point, don’t take Cameron at his word, when he’s talking about box office prospects or projections, or really anything really. This is the same guy ♂︎ who lied on camera about Terminator: Genisys being a good movie, was probably paid a hefty sum to say good things about it, and did it without a single ounce of shame or remorse. This is a guy who can be paid off to say nice things about a film that isn’t very good. Even if I admittedly liked Genisys when it came out, but even then, that was only because I was influenced by Bill Wurster and the other guys ♂︎ on the Sons of Serizawa podcast who inexplicably liked that film, and gave it the most positive and glowing review on the Internet 🛜. Going by their review, you would’ve thought that it was the best Terminator movie since Terminator 2, which it isn’t. Terminator Salvation is. But, they made a convincing argument about why Genisys was good, and I fell for it. I pretty much adopted the same opinion about it that they did, instead of formulating my own opinion about it. 

 

It’s been a long time since I’ve seen Genisys, so I can’t say what my opinion of it is now, but looking back at it, there are a lot of things in that film that don’t hold up, and it is definitely not a good Terminator movie, or even a good movie. But, why would you ever listen to a guy like that, or think he’s a reliable source of information, or has excellent foresight? I wouldn’t, which is why I don’t. I don’t like James Cameron, and I don’t listen to him. So, just because Freakier Friday made a lot of money 💵, doesn’t mean that Devil Wears Prada 2 will make a lot of money 💵. But, the likelihood of it making money 💵 is a lot higher than it not. There are more people exciting for this thing than I would’ve thought possible, given people’s supposed exhaustion with reboots, remakes, sequels, prequels, and spinoffs. I guess it just depends on what they’re making a sequel, prequel, reboot, remake, or spinoff of. 

Speaking of which, another movie that came out this December that I probably won’t get the chance to see in theaters is Anaconda (2025), the comedic reboot or remake of Anaconda (1997) starring Jack Black and Paul Rudd. People can’t seem to decide what it is or what to call it, a reboot? A remake? A reimagining? One of the stupidest things I’ve seen it be called is a “spiritual spinoff,” like what does that even mean? How can something be a spiritual spinoff? Usually when people say a movie is spiritual, usually they mean it’s a spiritual successor, meaning it’s not actually a sequel or a continuation of that movie, nor is it actually connected to that particular franchise, but does share a similar premise, or a similar concept, or similar themes, and builds upon them. So, it’s still a successor, but only in spirit, hence the term, “spiritual successor.” A good example of this is Zathura: A Space Adventure, it’s not actually a Jumanji sequel or spinoff, it doesn’t even take place in the same universe, and it’s not considered a part of the same franchise (not really). 

 

But, it does share the same concept as Jumanji of a board game come to life, and the kids playing it having to survive whatever dangers the game throws at them for real; as well as them being helped out by an adult, or adults, who had experiences with the game before. The only difference is it’s a space adventure board game rather than a jungle adventure board game like Jumanji. Oh, and the other difference is that Zathura ends with a big twist that everything was a dream 💭, whereas in Jumanji, everything that happened in the film happened for real. It wasn’t a dream 💭, it all actually happened. Zathura was made, very much with Jumanji in mind, Jon Favreau and the other people involved in the making of that  movie were very aware of Jumanji, and made Zathura with the idea of it being the sci-fi counterpart to Jumanji in mind. And it does work as that, Zathura and the original Jumanji do work as perfect counterparts to each other. If only they left it there, with those two movies, and didn’t make any actual sequels (or reboots? 🤔) to Jumanji, then this perfect symmetry between the two films could’ve been preserved.  

 

Anaconda (2025) is more of a spiritual successor to Tropic Thunder than it is a “spiritual spinoff” of Anaconda (1997) (whatever that means 🙄), especially it also stars Jack Black, which Tropic Thunder also does. He’s not in the lead role like he is in this movie, but he is in it, as one of the pivotal roles. He’s part of what makes that movie so good, and so legendary within comedy community. Whoever, in Sony’s marketing department, came up with that term and thought it would be a great way to describe Anaconda (2025) should be fired because it does is add to the confusion about what this film is, and what it’s relation to the original Anaconda is. In fact, Sony’s marketing for this movie was pretty incompetent. Not only was the initial first trailer not very good, or do a good job at selling the movie, but it, and the trailers that followed, showed way too much. They gave away almost everything in the trailers and TV spots. To the point where the trailers (and TV spots) act as condensed versions of the movie. You could probably compile all of the trailers, TV spots, and marketing material and pretty much piece together the entire movie. You could just watch the marketing material instead of watching the actual movie. It would save you $50 💵, or however it would cost for you to see this in the theater. 

 

They even used that Nicki Minaj song that made it so that whenever these movies are brought up, people have to reference that song. People can’t talk about Anaconda on YouTube (or on social media in general) anymore, without someone in the comments saying, 🎶 My anaconda don’t 🎶. Sometimes the people in the video say 🎶 My anaconda don’t 🎶, like this one video I saw reviewing the recent 4K steelbook release 💿 (more on that later). Even the trailers to these movies are full of comments on YouTube saying 🎶 My anaconda don’t 🎶, or making some kind of joke with it, like one comment that said, “the anaconda dont want none unless it’s Jlo’s bun.” It was written just like that, no apostrophes, no capitalization, nothing. That line wasn’t even written for that song. It was taken from another song called “Baby Got Back” by Sir Mix-A-Lot, a song that was all over the 1990s and early-to-mid 2000s, and Nicki Minaj just sampled that to create “Anaconda,” not just using the beat, but also using verses from that song. The anaconda verse is pretty much exactly how it sounds in the Nicki Minaj song, and it’s used in a similar context. It’s used as a euphemism for big dicks, like really big 📏 😲. They’re both overtly sexual songs, but, because “Anaconda” is a song from 2014, and not 1992 like “Baby Got Back,” it was able to be even more overtly sexual than that song was. There was no subtly at all, it was right up front about what it was about: sex, and to be more specific, big dicks and big asses. 

 

But, of course, it’s still funny to say whenever anyone brings up the anaconda animal, or the Anaconda movies. And of course, the marketing department at Sony thought it would be funny to use that song in a trailer for an Anaconda movie, since it had been over 28 years since the original Anaconda movie, and none of the other ones in between had used that song in their trailers, or in the actual movies. Which makes sense since the “Anaconda” song by Nicki Minaj came out in 2014, and the last solo Anaconda movie, Anacondas: Trail of Blood 🩸 came out in 2009, and the big crossover movie, Lake Placid vs. Anaconda came out in 2015. I mean, these were low budget TV movies, you can’t expect them to have the money 💵 to get the rights to use that song, if it’s the song people associate the most with this franchise just by sheer coincidence; the fact that they share the same name 🙄. 

 

There is a bit of unfortunate timing with this movie, and the use of this song since Nicki Minaj has kind of a controversial figure recently, in the last weeks, due to her trying hedge her bets and attach herself to MAGA 🇺🇸, and appearing on a TPUSA panel 🇺🇸 with none other than Charlie Kirk’s widow, Erika Kirk, who really doesn’t seem too broken up about her husband’s death. Like, even when Nicki Minaj made a faux pas, and accidentally called JD Vance an “assassin” while talking about Charlie Kirk, Erika was just all smiles 😁, she didn’t seem upset at all, in fact, it seemed like she was laughing at what Nicki Minaj said 🤣, calling JD Vance an “assassin.” That woman ♀︎ is a psychopath. I really don’t know why Nicki Minaj thinks that she can pander to MAGA 🇺🇸, and that MAGA 🇺🇸 will accept her. 

 

She’s a black woman ♀︎, she’s an immigrant from Trinidad and Tobago 🇹🇹, her brother’s a pedophile, her husband is a sex offender, and she made a hypersexual song 11 years ago about how she likes big dicks, I’m assuming. I read the Wikipedia page on the song, and apparently some people interpreted it as a diss track to “Baby Got Back” since, rather than it being a male rapper ♂︎ rapping about a woman ♀︎’s body and how horny it makes him, it’s from the woman ♀︎’s perspective, and it’s all about how she uses her body to profit and empower herself. I guess, I’m not sure if I totally buy that. I think it’s just another song about a how horny the rapper is, it’s just in this case, it’s a female rapper ♀︎ rapping about how horny she is. I feel that interpretation is more so people trying to frame Nicki Minaj as an empowering figure, which as we’ve seen with recent events, she is not. 

 

She’s just a capitalist trying to save her own skin, and maintain her own celebrity and pop culture, and maximize her profits in this current political climate. I mean, I’m a capitalist too, I’m not completely opposed to people making money 💵, so long as they don’t go too far with it, and become greedy 🤑, and sacrifice morals and exploit people just for the sake of profits. And for me, Nicki Minaj has gone too far by trying to attach herself to MAGA 🇺🇸, and pander to MAGA 🇺🇸. I don’t know how many times this lesson needs to be learned, there is no money 💵 in MAGA 🇺🇸. There is no financial benefit to you attaching yourself to MAGA 🇺🇸. You have everything to lose, and nothing to gain. Just look at Sydney Sweeney and Kanye West, oh, I’m sorry, Ye 🙄. This was a profoundly stupid decision for Nicki Minaj to do because not only will she fail to win over MAGA 🇺🇸, and MAGA 🇺🇸 will soundly reject her, but she just lost her already existing fanbase.

 

She burned that bridge 🔥, she pretty told them that she doesn’t need them anymore and that she’s going to pander MAGA 🇺🇸 instead, and now they don’t like her anymore. They feel betrayed that she would cross over to the dark side, and align herself with a political movement that hates them. Just so that she can grift, at a time when her career is fledgling, she hasn’t had a hit song in years, and she’s quickly fading away into irrelevancy. I was never really a big fan of Nicki Minaj, and now I have even more of a reason to not like her. I don’t just not like her now, I straight up dislike her, because not only am I not really a fan of her music, but I don’t like her as a person because she showed a complete lack of integrity, and a willingness to just follow wherever the wind blows 💨, just to stay relevant and to keep making money 💵; to grift basically, and maybe get pardons for her brother and husband, and to avoid getting deported since she’s not a US citizen 🇺🇸. 

 

They even gave away the big cameo of the movie, Ice Cube, who was of course in the original Anaconda. He’s the only one of the original cast from the 1997 movie that they were able to get to make a cameo in this movie. They didn’t even get Owen Wilson, or even try, though that might be because even they forgot he was in that movie, like pretty much everyone else did. And they couldn’t get Jon Voight, despite him being the most memorable thing about the original movie, because he’s fully embraced Trump, he’s gone full MAGA 🇺🇸, and he’s kind of gone senile and lost his mind, and is a pretty controversial figure now. They did get Jennifer Lopez, J.Lo, to make an uncredited cameo in the movie, as herself, which I was surprised at that. I thought that they didn’t get her to make a cameo, but it’s nice to know that she isn’t completely embarrassed of being in the original, and didn’t think she was above it all to make a cameo in a reboot of it. And at least, they didn’t give her cameo away in any of the trailers, TV spots, or other marketing material. 

 

But still, I don’t think they should’ve given away the Ice Cube cameo in any of the trailers, TV spots, or other marketing materials. At least Ice Cube got to be in a better movie this year than War of the Worlds (2025), not saying Anaconda (2025) is good, it’s just better in terms of quality than War of the Worlds (2025). Even if, most people probably won’t remember Anaconda (2025), but will remember War of the Worlds (2025) for years to come. Ice Cube will probably never be able to live that film down, his association with it has forever tainted his reputation, and will probably affect the kind of film roles he gets from now on. It shouldn’t, but it probably will. 

 

It’s pretty topical that I bring up Owen Wilson because of course, the big news in movie world, for the past few weeks has been Quentin Tarantino talking shit about Paul Dano, Owen Wilson, and Matthew Lillard. He also talked shit about Martin Scorsese, I feel like that got lost in the conversation, but those are the ones people are focusing on the most. I’m glad people are finally turning on Tarantino, and seeing him for the insufferable, self-indulgent, self-important, disingenuous, hypocritical, narcissistic prick that he truly he is, instead of just blindly agreeing with what he said just because he’s Tarantino. He’s gotten away with saying a lot of stupid stuff over the years, and putting a lot of people down, including Bruce Lee, whose portrayal in Once Upon a Time in Hollywood borders on slander, and now it’s finally catching up with him. He’s gone too far this time, he picked on the wrong people. 

 

But, it’s not just what he’s said about actors and filmmakers in interviews, it’s other things too, people actually scrutinizing other aspects of his personality and scrutinizing his filmmaking, like how incorporates his foot fetish 🦶 into his movies, or how he takes things from other movies and presents them as his own, just regurgitating these images and ideas from other movies out and putting very little of his own spin on it, or how he takes historical events and historical figures, and disrespects them by twisting them and trying fit them into his own personal fantasies, or he insists on using the N word in his movies, and insists on having an N word pass, and even sort of fetishizes black people and black culture instead of seeing and respecting them as actual people. He is racist towards Asian people that’s for sure, the way he portrayed Bruce Lee in Once Upon a Time in Hollywood should tell you that, despite how much he steals from Asian cinema. 

 

If he had just kept his mouth shut 🤐, and didn’t attack anyone while promoting Kill Bill: The Whole Bloody Affair 🩸, none of this would’ve happened, and his reputation would’ve still intact. People, particularly in the film community, would’ve still been kissing his ass 💋, and calling him one of the greatest directors of all time. But, you know, for a guy like him, that’s kind of impossible to do. He can’t just keep his mouth shut 🤐 and promote the movie like a grown adult, he has to keep yapping about nonsense that no one cares about, and that he knows nothing about, and to put people down that don’t deserve it. People speculate that the reason why Tarantino went after Paul Dano is that Paul Dano is pro-Palestine 🇵🇸, and made some pro-Palestinian comments 🇵🇸, and Tarantino’s pro-Israel 🇮🇱, and has a settlement (or settlements) in the West Bank, despite not actually being Jewish ✡️. I don’t know how much of that true, is there’s any merit to that argument, but if it is somewhat true, it does make sense. 

 

It is kind of hard to pin down what Tarantino’s ethnicity is because he has claimed Cherokee ancestry through his mother, who he claims is also of Irish descent 🇮🇪, while his father was Italian-American 🇮🇹🇺🇸. I don’t believe that Tarantino is of Cherokee ancestry, he has provided very little hard evidence to prove his claim, and it is more than likely a fraudulent claim. A lot of white people (and even some non-white people) like to falsely claim Native American ancestry for some reason, and I think that’s the case with Tarantino as well. There’s nothing Native American about that man ♂︎ at all, he doesn’t have a single drop of Native American blood 🩸 in him, get outta here with that. He is the whitest white boy ♂︎ you can imagine. He just wants to attach himself to other cultures, and other races and ethnicities, to make himself seem less white, to make him seem cooler and less lame. 

 

But now, people see him for what he truly is, a pathetic loser crying out for attention, a bully, a man ♂︎ who is too immature despite his old age. Tarantino’s 62 years old, and yet, he still acts like a teenager who just saw his first R rated film. Now, people understand why I don’t like Tarantino, or his movies, and why I think he’s the most overrated director in Hollywood, or at least, one of the most. Christopher Nolan’s pretty overrated too. He’s got a new movie coming out next year called The Odyssey (2026), which I’m not particularly interested in, despite the good trailer and interesting visuals, particularly that one guy ♂︎ with blue armor and helmet with a spinal cord attached to it. Especially, if it’s 4 hours long like people are speculating that it will be, and are hoping and begging that it will be. I don’t have the endurance or the patience to sit in a theater for that long.

 

I could probably barely sit through a 3 hour movie, 4 hours is way too much if you ask. I don’t care how epic it is, I don’t care how much of Greek tragedy 🇬🇷 it is. I don’t want to have to hold in my pee, and risk ruining my bladder or bladder control so that I won’t miss anything. Not that there would even be anything in that movie that I wouldn’t want to miss. But, at least he has a new movie coming out, and isn’t going there, trashing actors or other filmmakers. At least he has class. QT has nothing. He’s arbitrarily limited himself to 10 films, and has yet to make that 10th film. He can’t even come up with any ideas, he’s run of people to steal from. All he has is a re-edit, a longer version of a movie he made 22 years ago (21 years ago if you count the release year of Kill Bill: Volume 2, which was 2004). That’s it. 

 

For the sake of brevity, I’m calling it a reboot, a comedic reboot. That’s the most accurate way to describe this particular movie, it’s a comedic reboot. It’s a meta parody of the original 1997 Anaconda that tries to take the piss out of it, and make a joke out of it. The concept of this movie, once I learned what it was, always kind of rubbed me the wrong way. Because they’re remaking or rebooting a movie from 28 years ago that they don’t really respect, and are making fun of it. They have no respect for the original, and think that they’re above of it, and that it’s not worthy of respect or admiration. It would be one thing if they were remaking a movie that they didn’t like, but liked some aspects of it, that liked the idea of it, and thought it had potential, and wanted to make it better, so that it could fully live up to that potential, no. They just see it as a joke, and treating it as a joke. Like, “oh, you didn’t want to make an actual Anaconda movie, and take it seriously or play it straight? You thought so little of the original, that the only way that you could think to reboot it or remake it, was to do parody of it 😒.” Or to put it another way, it’s like they’re laughing at the original, rather with it. 

 

It’s like what Shane Black and Fred Dekker did with The Predator, but cranked up to 11, and the results are about the same or worse. At least, there no extensive amounts reshoots to change the time of day like in The Predator. It’s funny that I mention The Predator here because in the actual film, I learned the remake that the characters are making in the film is actually called The Anaconda. That’s a nice little joke or jab at Hollywood, and how they name sequels, especially to horror movies. They either make the title of the first one plural, which started with Aliens, and Anaconda did itself twice with the second film, Anacondas: The Hunt for the Blood Orchid, and the fourth film, Anacondas: Trail of Blood 🩸. Or they add the word “the” in front of the title, like The Predator did or The Suicide Squad did, so if Anaconda did that, it would be The Anaconda. That is a nice touch, but it doesn’t really make up for everything else. It doesn’t make up for them making fun of Anaconda. I’m not saying Anaconda is high art or anything, it’s not, but at least show some respect. 

 

I’m surprised they didn’t call this new movie, The Anaconda, you think they would, it’s the most obvious thing, and it would really drive that point home that this is supposed to be a satire of Hollywood, and of remakes and reboots specifically. It would also help distinguish this movie from the original. I mean, it already kind of is like The Predator, in the sense that there’s an even bigger snake 🐍 along with the more regular sized, but still pretty big snake 🐍, and the bigger snake 🐍 is the real threat while the regular sized snake 🐍 is not. But, for whatever reason, they just decided to call it, Anaconda (2025), so now we have to call the original Anaconda, Anaconda (1997) to distinguish it from the new one, so no one will get confused. I guess that is pretty typical of remakes, reboots, and even legacy sequels, just name it the same thing as the original. Halloween 🎃 (2018) did it, so did Scream (2022), so, why not Anaconda (2025)? 

 

Something that I learned that I didn’t know about until I saw reviews of this movie was this movie was directed by Tom Gormican, the same guy who directed The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent, the action comedy film where Nicolas Cage plays a highly fictionalized version of himself called Nick Cage, and pretty much just makes fun of Nicolas Cage, and the meme he became over the course of the late 2000s and 2010s. It’s even written by the same writer, Kevin Etten. The weird thing is that on Wikipedia, Kevin Etten has a page dedicated to him, while Tom Gormican doesn’t. He’s a major director who’s directed two high profile movies, why doesn’t have a Wikipedia page already? So, it’s no wonder that when asked to do a reboot of Anaconda, they decided to turn it into a meta parody. Being meta is this is these guys’ ♂︎ thing I guess. 

And making fun of things that they deem cheesy or over-the-top, and they think aren’t worthy of respect is also their thing. They made a whole movie making fun of Nicolas Cage because people see him a “bad actor,” or as an actor who gives insane over-the-too performances, and see him as a meme. And now they’ve made a whole movie making fun of Anaconda (1997) because it’s a cheesy late 90s creature feature about a giant killer snake 🐍, that was intentionally a B movie, that got a lot of negative reviews from critics at the time, but still made a lot of money 💵 at the box office, developed a cult following, and spawned a whole series of sequels; one theatrical and two made-for-TV. A lot of people forget, or overlook the fact that Anaconda (1997) was a huge hit when it came out, despite all the negative reviews from critics. It kind of had to spawn all those sequels and a reboot. 

 

I’ve heard mixed things about The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent, saying that while it had a clever concept, it never fully delivers. Like, it had a fun concept, but bad execution, and that seems to be the case with Anaconda (2025). Except, people were way more positive about The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent, than they are of Anaconda (2025). All the reviews that I’ve seen of it have been pretty negative, calling it a “disappointment,” “unfunny,” “waste of a good idea” (wasn’t that good in my opinion 😒), “toothless and tame,” and just “lame,” and saying that they’d rather watch the original 1997 Anaconda than watch that one. Or watch Tropic Thunder, since this movie borrows heavily from it, and is kind of a pale imitation of it. It definitely looks lame, I thought that when I saw the first trailer. 

 

There’s also that weird Christmas Day release 🎄. Who thought it was a good idea to release an Anaconda movie on Christmas Day 🎄? The last thing I think of, when I think of Christmas Day 🎄 is Anaconda. Anaconda’s not exactly Christmas movie 🎄material, it’s not holiday season material. I mean, how many people are going to want to watch an Anaconda movie on Christmas weekend 🎄? Maybe, they were betting people watching this movie the week after Christmas 🎄 to celebrate New Year’s Eve or New Year’s Day, like my grandma was talking about. Even if I did have the money 💵 and time to go see a movie in theaters, I still probably wouldn’t be able to see this movie because my grandma’s afraid of snakes 🐍. 

 

She has ophidiophobia, which is the fear of snakes 🐍, which, given that there’s a movie called Arachnophobia, I’m surprised there isn’t a movie out there called Ophidiophobia. Maybe because the studios feel that audiences probably wouldn’t know what that word means, and make the connection that it was about snakes 🐍, like they did with Arachnophobia being about spiders 🕷️. That’s what I meant earlier when I said was going to be able to get her to see the new Anaconda movie with me. If I were to see it in theaters, I’d have to see it by myself, while grandma either sees another movie or does something else, like go to a thrift store because my grandma likes to thrift. And if I did see it, it would only be so that I could review it. Ideally, after I review the 1997 one; more on that later. 

 

I would say the best thing about this movie coming out is that it got me interested in watching the original. I had it on my list of things I might want to review, I had it in the “maybe” category because I wasn’t sure if I was going to review it or not. I was originally thinking of maybe skipping it, and going to the second movie because that was the one I was the most interested in watching; I still am. It was the one that I had the most nostalgia for. Not for the movie itself, but for the trailer to the movie because they featured that trailer on almost all of the Sony Godzilla DVDs 📀 back in the 2000s. So, I saw the trailer for Hunt for the Blood Orchid a lot as a kid, but I never got around to actually watching it. This would be my chance to finally watch it, and I’d have something to review for my blog. 

 

But, once I heard about this movie, and especially, once I found out that Brandon Tenold reviewed the 1997 movie to coincide with the release of the new one, I knew that I had to watch it. I took the “maybe” part off, and it’s part of my list of movies I’ve definitely going to review sometime. It also helped that Sony recently released a 4K steelbook edition of this movie. So, whenever I do have the money 💵, I can just buy that version, and then watch the movie on that, instead of buying the standard Blu-Ray 💿 or watching it on streaming. Brandon’s review got blocked on YouTube worldwide due to copyright issues ©, and he has been unable to get it lifted. So, unless you have a Patreon, and unless you’re able to start donating money 💵, or unlock the review 🔓 with a one time $3 purchase 💵, you can’t watch his review. Unless, someday, the block gets lifted, and YouTube only viewers can finally watch it. 

 

It’s always possible. Addie Counts’s reaction to The Iron Giant got blocked a year or so ago (maybe 2 years ago, it’s a video from early on in her channel’s history), and it recently got lifted, and people can finally watch it. But, if not, Brandon could always make edits to the review, and have everything be still images, or have as much of the music be royalty free as possible. I don’t mind, as long as I get to see it. But, I’m going to see if I can unlock the review 🔓 with that one time purchase if it’s still available. It better not be for a limited time. Because I do not have enough money 💵 to keep donating on a monthly basis. So, it’s up to me to do my own review of it. It’ll be fun, not to watch it, but to review it. I’ve already written some stuff for it, and I have them stored in my “Thing(s) to Remember” list. That’s where I write all my notes and prewritten lines for my reviews. Then, once I do Anaconda (1997), I’ll do the second one, Anacondas: The Hunt for the Blood Orchid, and maybe I might I do the made-for-TV sequels afterwards, I don’t know. I’m going to see how I feel after I review the first two Anaconda movies, and if I review this one. That’s why all the other Anaconda movies besides the first two are still in the “maybe” category. 

 

As long as they don’t touch my beloved Lake Placid, I’ll be good, and if they do reboot Lake Placid, I hope they do it respectfully, and take it somewhat seriously instead of doing a parody of it; meta or otherwise. I don’t know how more comedic you could make it because Lake Placid is already kind of a comedy. It’s categorized as a horror comedy, and it has plenty of comedic moments sprinkled in between all the horror bits. I mean, it ends with Betty White feeding a bunch of baby crocodiles 🐊, while a Bob Marley song plays in the background. They clearly weren’t taking this completely seriously. How much more of a comedy before it loses its identity? Before you round off all the edges? Because that’s what this new Anaconda movie did, it rounded off the edges, and made it softer and tamer. And it’s not like the original Anaconda was rated R, it wasn’t. It was rated PG-13, but it was a hard PG-13, and it pushed that rating as far as it could possibly go. It had edge. But this new one doesn’t have edge, and you need edge for it to be an effective creature feature, and by all accounts, the new one is not an effective creature feature.  

 

Lake Placid was rated R, you did see blood 🩸, you did see gore, so there’s more of an imperative with Lake Placid to not round off all the edges. You cannot pussy by with a PG-13 rating on a Lake Placid movie. So, if you want to do a new Lake Placid movie, but you don’t want to make it R rated, and you want to make it PG-13, you might as well not even bother. At least, they won’t give too much away in the trailers, TV spots, and other marketing material if they make one. Lake Placid was a 20th Century Fox movie, and pretty everything that 20th Century Fox ever owned is now owned by Disney since Disney bought them out. So, any new theatrically released Lake Placid movie (one released straight to Hulu or Disney+) would a Disney production, even if it would technically be released under their 20th Century Studios label. And Disney tends to be a lot better at marketing than Sony does. They won’t give be big secrets or surprises, or show too much of the plot to where the trailers are just condensed versions of the movie. And as much as I don’t like Disney as a company, I at least got to give them respect when it comes to their marketing. Sure beats the hell out of Sony’s shitty ass marketing. 

 

I will review Lake Placid at some point though, because it is a childhood favorite of mine, and it’ll be fun to revisit it after all these years. If I can get my hands on the Blu-Ray 💿, or if it’s available on streaming somewhere; no guarantee it’ll be on either Hulu or Disney+, despite the franchise being owned by Disney, thanks to the Fox merger. I hope they do a 4K release 💿 for this movie like they did for Anaconda (1997), but I’m not sure if they will. Disney has been kind of flaky when it comes to 4K releases of their movies, whether it’s them doing them on their own, or letting third party labels like Arrow Video, Shout Factory (who did actually do a Blu-Ray release 💿 for this movie under their Scream Factory label, which is reserved exclusively for horror films as you could probably tell), or even Vinegar Syndrome, do them. They’ve kind about letting Criterion do 4K releases 💿 of their movies, but I highly doubt they’d do a 4K release 💿 for Lake Placid, considering the movie was poorly received by critics at the time, and didn’t receive any accolades, not even any Razzie nominations, at least according to Wikipedia. 

 

But, if there ever is one, I’ll definitely buy it…ideally in the store, but I’d still be willing to buy it online if I had the money 💵 and the ability to do so. And I may consider reviewing the made-for-TV sequels, since like Anaconda, Lake Placid got a bunch of sequels that were made-for-TV. They all premiered on the Sci-Fi Channel AKA just Sci Fi AKA SYFY; don’t know why they renamed it to SYFY, it’s just stupid. And then they were released on DVD 📀 afterwards. But, unlike Anaconda, which had at least one theatrically released sequel ☝️, Lake Placid didn’t have any. All of its sequels were made-for-TV movies. But, it actually got more sequels than Anaconda did. It only had two made-for-TV sequels, those being Anaconda 3: Offspring and Anacondas: Trail of Blood 🩸, and when you include the theatrically released second one, Anacondas: The Hunt for the Blood Orchid, all together, Anaconda had three sequels.  

 

Lake Placid on the other hand, had about four sequels, including: Lake Placid 2, Lake Placid 3, Lake Placid: The Final Chapter, and Lake Placid: Legacy. And these franchises are linked, I’m not just comparing them because they’re both creature features about semi-aquatic reptiles that eat people, they do actually have a connection. They did a crossover together called Lake Placid vs. Anaconda. It was one of the made-for-TV movies, following both the made-for-TV Anaconda sequels and the made-for-TV Lake Placid sequels, acting as the fifth film in both series. When you include it, it brings the total number of sequels in the Anaconda series to four and the total number of sequels in the Lake Placid series to five. Altogether, when you include the originals, Anaconda had five movies in total prior to the reboot, and Lake Placid had six movies in total. With the inclusion of the reboot, it brought Anaconda’s total number of movies to six. So, they’re neck-and-neck now, they have the same number of movies now, unless they reboot Lake Placid too, which would bring the total number of movies in that series to seven. It exists in the same continuity as the made-for-TV movies of both series, and events from those other film are referenced and characters from those other films appear in it. Meaning that Anaconda and Lake Placid exist in the same universe, at least as far the made-for-TV continuity is concerned. 

 

It’s funny, or I guess sad, that I said “cranked up to 11” earlier that since Rob Reiner, the director of This Is Spinal Tap (the movie where the phrase “up to 11” comes from), The Princess Bride, A Few Good Men ♂︎, among other movies, recently died on December 14, 2025. He and his wife, Michele Reiner were both murdered by their own son, Nick Reiner. Rest in peace to them both 😔. Their deaths happened the same day as the mass shooting at Bondi Beach in Sydney, Australia 🇦🇺, during a Hanukkah 🕎 celebration. It was an antisemitic attack, carried out by a guy ♂︎, who apparently had ties to ISIS, or the Islamic State if you prefer. Of course, not willing to pass up any opportunity to take advantage of Jewish death ✡️, the prime minister of Israel 🇮🇱, Benjamin Netanyahu spoke about the attack, where he tried to link it to Australia 🇦🇺’s recent recognition of Palestine 🇵🇸 at the UN General Assembly 🇺🇳 in New York back in September. 

 

Everyone pretty much ignored him, and dismissed what he had to say as pure nonsense, pure bigoted nonsense, and they called him out for crassly trying to exploit a tragedy to make a political point, to spread hatred towards a group who he is actively committing on and off atrocities against. I’m glad no one’s listening to anymore, and are seeing him for the corrupt, genocidal bastard he truly is. Netanyahu is a corrupt politician, and he only prolonged the war in Gaza as he did to avoid prosecution and to stay out of prison. He’s a liar and a hypocrite, and he is not to be trusted or respected. The only men less worthy of respect than ol’ Bibi is Trump, Putin, Xi, and Kim. There are a few others besides that, but those are the main ones. The fact that he tried to exploit this tragedy in Bondi Beach to make a political point about Palestine 🇵🇸, and essentially blame Australia 🇦🇺’s recognition of Palestine 🇵🇸 for it, shows much how of an asshole he is. 

I was actually going to talk about the UN General Assembly 🇺🇳. I even wrote some notes down about what I wanted to say or talk about in that post, but I never got around to it. I’m not even sure if I should still cover it because it is way old news now. But, I don’t all the stuff I wrote for it to go to waste, so I might still do it, along with the other political posts I wanted to do, but didn’t get to. My output decreased significantly as the year went on. It started out pretty strong, with me being able to get at least four or five posts out a month, but later on in the year, that number dropped to just two or three posts a month. I only got three posts out in the months of October and November, and with this post, I will have only been able to post two posts in the month of December. And I checked, and along with the draft version of my Nobody 2 review, I’m still only at 198 posts; and the current number of published posts on my blog right now is 196, and with this post, it’ll be at 197. I guess I could’ve eked out one more post for the month of December, one more review, since I’ve pretty low on reviews lately.  

 

Poseidon (2006) would’ve been a good one to review, especially after reviewing a Christmas movie 🎄 like A Loud House Christmas Movie: Naughty or Nice 🎄, since the whole movie takes place on New Year’s Eve, and on New Year’s Day since the rogue wave 🌊 hits when the clock strikes midnight 🕛, and the new year begins. So, the first half before the wave 🌊 hits takes place on New Year’s Eve, on December 31st, and the second half after the wave 🌊 hits and the ship gets capsized takes place on New Year’s Day, January 1st. So, it is a New Year’s Eve movie, probably more so than even the original Poseidon Adventure movie, and it’d be a great movie to watch this time of year; just not on a ship 🛳️. But, I don’t own it. I don’t have the Blu-Ray 💿, or the recent 4K 💿 that Arrow Video put out a few months ago, even though I wanted it, so I can’t do it. Maybe next year. 

 

My output decreasing in the later half of the year wasn’t always by choice. Our Internet 🛜 kept getting shutting off because my grandma kept running out of money 💵 to make payments on time, and I kept getting sick 🤧. I got sick twice this month ✌️, first I got diarrhea in the first half of the month, and then I got a cold 🦠🤧 in the second half, right in the days leading up to Christmas 🎄. I felt a lot better by the time it was Christmas Day 🎄, but my nose 👃 was still pretty stuffy and I kept coughing on and off throughout the day, especially if it got extra dry and scratchy. And I don’t know about you, but I don’t my best writing when I’m sick 🤧. In addition to me getting sick twice this month, our water line 💦 broke, and we had to hire a team to fix it. So, we went two whole weeks without running water 💦. We couldn’t flush the toilet 🚽, we couldn’t use the sink, and we couldn’t take showers 🚿. It was awful, and this was like the third time something like that has happened to us, where you didn’t have running water 💦.

 

Either because one of the pipes broke and the whole reservation didn’t have water 💦 for over a month, or the Utilities shut our water 💦 off because we couldn’t make payments on time, and now with our water main 💦 broke and started leaking in the house. It’s like living up at Acoma, because they also don’t have running water 💦 up there, and germs 🦠 spread like a motherfucker up there because of it. But, we got through it, it got fixed, and we’re mostly back to normal, except we don’t have a washer or dryer since parts of the washer got corroded by all the bleach we were using (all the bleach I was using since I’m the only one uses bleach in our household), and my grandma got bed bugs in her mattress, and had throw it out. She had to sleep on the couch 🛋️ for a couple of days, and then had to ask my aunt for an air mattress, which is what she’s currently using, and we had to keep going to the laundry mat for a few weeks until we were finally able to get a new washer. We finally got one, so know we can wash at home for free, and don’t have to keep going to the laundry mat, and spending our money 💵 to wash clothes, towels, and bedding. 

But, even if I only managed get two posts out for the month of December, and my output overall decreased as the year went on, I still have plans for my blog in 2026. I’ve already got a few posts in mind, for the month of January, and perhaps February as well. Obviously, I’ve got that review of Nobody 2 that I still need to do, I just need to watch it somehow. I also got a post about Eternal Darkness: Sanity’s Requiem that I want to do. Not a full review mind you, I already pretty much reviewed it in the foreword of my review Star Wars: Episode II – Attack of the Clones, which was a repost of a journal that I originally wrote on DeviantART. No, this is going to be more of a companion piece or addendum, where I talk more about my thoughts on the game, say some things that I didn’t get to say in my review, and say some things that I didn’t even think of originally. 

 

Mainly I want to talk about whether or not the game should be remade or remastered, and whether or not it should get a film adaptation, and if so, how would you do it? Since I’ve been revisiting the game recently, I’ve been listening to the soundtrack again, I’ve been rewatching the longplay on YouTube by Longplay Archives, and I’ve been watching reviews of the game, mainly these long form retrospectives which discuss the game in great detail, down to the lowest level. I’m even thinking of reviewing the HP Lovecraft documentary, Lovecraft: Fear of the Unknown, since revisiting Eternal Darkness got me on a Lovecraft kick. I want to review it, and talk about Eternal Darkness again to get it out of my system, and so that I will not only have a dedicated post about Eternal Darkness, but also have a dedicated post about something actually Lovecraft related; not simply something inspired by Lovecraft like Eternal Darkness is. 

 

I’m also thinking of reviewing Ghosts of Mars, John Carpenter’s most divisive film, because looking at Anaconda (1997) also made me want to look at some other movies that Ice Cube has been in, and Ghosts of Mars seems like the perfect candidate. It’s a cult flick that many people view as John Carpenter’s worst film, the film that ended his career before he made a brief comeback with The Ward, it’s a film that has a weird and kind of stupid premise, and it’s a film that has a wacky cast. Obviously, you have Ice Cube, who’s pretty much the main male lead ♂︎, but also have Natasha Henstridge, who’s most known for playing Sil in the first Species movie and Eve in the second and third Species movie, Jason Statham, before he made it big with the Transporter movies and back when he still had hair, and Pam Grier, who dies pretty early on in the film and isn’t in it for very long from I can tell. It’s a movie whose reputation precedes it, and I’m interested to see if it’s as bad as its reputation would suggest, or if its badness has been exaggerated over the years. 

 

Plus, it would give me a chance to have another Mars related post on my blog, after reposting my old review of Red Planet from DeviantART, and reviewing Mars Express. I’d also see like other people review Ghosts of Mars like Brandon Tenold or Double Toasted 🍞 on their Bad Movie Roast series. Speaking of which, like what I did with Brandon Tenold earlier this year, I’m thinking of writing a post where I recommend movies for Double Toasted 🍞 to review on their Bad Movie Roast, or Bad Movie Review series. Currently, it goes by Bad Movie Review, but it used to be called Bad Movie Roast, and Korey and everyone else still refers to as Bad Movie Roast. They refer to all their videos in this series as “roasts,” whenever they do one of these videos, they call it, “roasting a movie.” So, I’m probably just going to call it, Bad Movie Roast in my post when I finally get to it. It’s a way better name than Bad Movie Review.

I’ve also got my 200th post coming up real soon, and it’s looking increasingly likely that I’ll have to review The Simpsons Movie for my 200th post. I still don’t have Jimmy Neutron: Boy Genius on Blu-Ray 💿, and it’s not available on streaming. I mean, it is, but you have to rent it or buy it, you can’t just watch it for free as long as you have a paid subscription. I guess I could ask my aunt to rent it for me like I did with A Loud House Christmas Movie: Naughty or Nice 🎄, but I don’t want to keep doing that with every movie that I want to review that’s only available to buy or rent. I’d rather have a Blu-Ray copy 💿 anyway. If anything, I’ll just wait to review Jimmy Neutron for my 300th post, which depending on what my output will be like, could take two years. Hopefully, I’m able to get 300 posts by the end of next year, and I review Jimmy Neutron by the end of the year. But, for now, The Simpsons Movie will have to be 200th post. At least, I got to review the Jimmy Neutron PC game, that game was a huge part of my childhood. Probably more so than the actual movie, but the movie was a childhood favorite of mine also. Hopefully I can keep up the tradition of reviewing a creature feature before my big milestone post, and review Anaconda (1997) for my 199th post, since I reviewed Deep Blue Sea for my 99th post before I reviewed The SpongeBob SquarePants Movie 🧽 for 100th post. 

 

It’ll still work with The Simpsons Movie being my 200th post after The SpongeBob SquarePants Movie 🧽 was my 100th post, it probably fit better than Jimmy Neutron: Boy Genius being my 200th post because as I pointed out, there are a lot of similarities between The SpongeBob SquarePants Movie 🧽 and The Simpsons Movie. Not just that they’re movies to long running series about yellow characters, but there are similarities in the plot and how they approached bringing these characters to the big screen. It felt like these two movies were kind of trying to do the same thing as each other with their respective series, and they kind of occupy a similar space within their respective franchises. Of course, SpongeBob 🧽 ended up having way more movies than The Simpsons. SpongeBob 🧽 has had about six movies in total (when you include the spinoff movies on Netflix), while they’re just barely talking about doing a second Simpsons movie now. I don’t know if that second Simpsons movie will ever happen, but if it ever does, I’ll be sure to talk about it, and by then I will have reviewed the first movie. 

As for new releases in 2026, the one that I’m looking forward to the most The Super Mario Galaxy Movie. That is the movie that I’m the most interested in watching in 2026, just like how Godzilla x Kong: Supernova is the movie I’m the most interested in watching in 2027. Speaking of which, there’s some news, or rather rumors, that apparently, SpaceGodzilla has been confirmed to be the main villain in Supernova. People are basing this solely on some copyright information that seemingly had the registration for both Godzilla and SpaceGodzilla. I won’t believe it until I see it in a trailer. There’s also that Jason Statham movie I was talking earlier that’s coming out next month, Shelter (2026), and then there’s an orca movie called Killer Whale (2026), which is about an orca killing a bunch of people after they set it free from an abandoned aquarium or a Sea World-style oceanarium theme park, because it still believes it’s in captivity. 

 

I found out about that movie after the trailer popped up in my recommended feed, and I am interested in checking out simply because of the subject matter. It’s about an orca, a killer whale, killing people. They usually don’t make these kinds of movies about orcas, they usually just make them about sharks 🦈, and orcas, and dolphins 🐬 in general, are way scarier than sharks 🦈. We’ve just been conditioned to think orcas and dolphins 🐬 are cute and cuddly, and are harmless by pop culture, and just culture in general. We’re conditioned to think dolphins (and orcas) are the “good guys,” while sharks 🦈 are the “bad guys.” When in reality, it’s dolphins 🐬 (and orcas) who are the bad ones. So, it’s refreshing to see a horror film acknowledge that orcas and dolphins 🐬 are the true menaces, instead of just presenting sharks 🦈 as the bad ones yet again. 

 

There hasn’t been a horror film about an orca since the 1977 film, Orca, AKA Orca: The Killer Whale. I pointed that out in the comments of the trailer, and a lot of people agreed with me, and said they liked Orca (1977), calling it a tragic masterpiece. Because from what I understand, Orca (1977) is not really a standard creature feature where the creature is presented as the bad guy, and the humans are the good guys, but rather the creature is presented in a much more sympathetic light. The orca in that film is simply trying to get revenge on this fisherman who killed its mate. Like, you’re supposed to be more on the orca’s side than on the human’s side, whereas, in a Jaws film for instance, you’re supposed be on the humans’ side rather than on the shark 🦈’s side. I made that comparison because Orca (1977) is often considered a Jaws ripoff, or a Jaws knockoff, or a Jaws copycat, or a Jaws cash-in 💵, and they took a dig at this movie in Jaws 2 by having the shark 🦈 kill an an orca off-screen, and have its body wash up on the beach. 

 

All they need to do now is do a horror film about a hippo 🦛 killing people, because hippos 🦛 are one of the most dangerous animals in the world. They kill more people than sharks 🦈 and crocodiles 🐊 combined. Even crocodiles 🐊 won’t mess with them. And yet, like orcas and dolphins 🐬, hippos 🦛 don’t have much of a reputation of being scary or deadly the same way sharks 🦈, crocodiles 🐊, and snakes 🐍 do. They have more of a reputation of being cute and cuddly, and being harmless, when they are anything but. I mean, they are starting to gain more of a reputation as being dangerous animals, but it’s still not to the degree as sharks 🦈, crocs 🐊, and snakes 🐍, or even lions 🦁, tigers 🐅, and bears 🐻. And there are still no mainstream horror films about hippos 🦛, not any that I can think of. It all stems back to this bias we have towards herbivores, we’re conditioned to think that herbivores are good and that they’re harmless, and that carnivores are bad and that they’re dangerous, and the only way an animal can be dangerous is if it has sharp teeth and eats meat. When in reality, herbivores are often more dangerous than carnivores, especially when we’re dealing with megafauna. The bigger a herbivore is, the more likely it is to be dangerous. 

 

The only difference is that they don’t kill for food, but they kill because they’re territorial, or because you pissed off 😡 or provoked them in some way, or you just scared them and they’re just trying to defend themselves; which is often the case with any animal that attacks humans. Or, often in the case of dolphins 🐬, they try to sexually assault people because they’re sexually frustrated. Most dolphin attacks on humans 🐬 are of sexual nature, because the dolphin 🐬 is horny, and is trying to mount a human, or is taking its sexual frustration out on humans. Sometimes a dolphin 🐬 will form an attachment to a specific human, and try to mate with them. Dolphins 🐬 are probably the most sexual animals out there, besides humans and bonobos. They have sex for pleasure, in addition to reproduction, and they’ll even have sex without even asking for consent. They’re a bunch of aquatic Harvey Weinsteins or Diddys with flippers. Which is still pretty scary. The idea of being raped by a dolphin 🐬 is creepy in its own right. An animal doesn’t have to want to eat you to be dangerous, or to be scary, in fact, it’s probably scary if they don’t want to kill you for food, or if they don’t want to kill you at all, but want to violate you like dolphins 🐬 do. 

 

Of course, I mentioned how we as a society have a bias towards herbivorous animals, and we’re often conditioned to that they’re less dangerous than carnivorous animals (or even omnivorous animals), when that’s just not the case. But, dolphins 🐬 are not herbivores, they’re actually carnivores. They eat fish 🐟, and other sea creatures. Orcas are top predators, even beating out the great white shark 🦈. They even eat great white sharks 🦈 on occasion, or at least their livers. But, even though they’re carnivores, and primarily eat meat and fish 🐟 (I still don’t understand why fish 🐟 isn’t considered meat by some people, but it is), they’re still seen as cute and cuddly and basically harmless. But, they’re not. People kind of know orcas can be dangerous, but they still think other dolphins 🐬 like bottlenose dolphins 🐬 are harmless, when they’re not. Bottlenose dolphins 🐬 can be dangerous, and they do attack humans. It’s just that those attacks are often more of a sexual assault nature rather than a “being eaten alive” nature. But that’s still pretty bad, and that’s still pretty scary. Unless the idea of being sexually assaulted by a 13 foot marine mammal doesn’t scare you at all, which I don’t know how it wouldn’t, and if it doesn’t, you’re probably a crazy person and there’s no salvaging you. 

 

When it comes to orcas, or killer whales specifically, there are no recorded attacks on humans in the wild, the only times orcas actually kill people is in captivity, and it’s usually due to the immense of stress that are put on the animal, due to them being taken out of the wild, and put in captivity, the conditions they’re kept in, or because of the intense rigors of training when they’re trained to do tricks like at Sea World or places like Sea World. It could also be because of the abuse that’s inflicted on these animals when they’re in captivity, and leads to one of them going rogue and killing someone, often their own handlers, their own caretakers. Clearly, Killer Whale (2026) is going with the angle that this was a captive kept killer whale that was traumatized while being in captivity, and is taking it out on these people who were on its side, who actually freed it from captivity. But, it doesn’t know that or care, and it’s taking its anger 😡 out on any human it comes across, even ones who helped it. 

 

I just wonder if it’s going to be the kind of horror film where you actually like the characters and want them to survive, or if it’ll be the kind of horror film where you hate the characters and want them to die. Horror films, especially slasher films and creature features, can really go of two ways. They can either make you like the characters, so that you’ll feel bad when they die, or they can hate the characters, so that you won’t feel bad when they die. Not only will you not feel bad when they die, but you’ll be actively rooting for them to die 🤞, and then you’ll cheer when they do 😁👏. So, is this going to be the kind of horror movie where they’ll make you like the characters, so that you’ll feel bad when they die, or is it going to be the kind of horror movie where they’ll make you hate the characters, so that you won’t feel bad when they die?

This isn’t even the only creature feature coming out in the month of January, as there’s another movie called Primate, which is about a killer chimpanzee. The plot is that this family, who owns a pet chimp, goes on a vacation to a tropical location 🌴 (I don’t know if it’s a tropical island 🏝️ or not) with their pet chimp, and their chimp gets bitten by a rabid animal and suddenly becomes violent. So, it’s pretty much Cujo, but with a chimp instead of a dog 🐕. I don’t know if they needed all that to explain why a pet chimp all of a sudden goes crazy and starts killing people. But, I guess they needed all that so that we didn’t hate this family for owning a pet chimp, since people who own chimps as pets tend not to be the most upstanding individuals around, and their grisly fates tend to be more on them, and how they treated the animal. Pet chimps who go rogue and kill their owners only do it because they were abused or mistreated in some way, and put through a lot of stress that they wouldn’t have been put in if they were in the wild. 

 

So, they had to come up with this contrivance to have the chimp become violent because it got rabies, so that they could have a violent killer chimp while also still having the family still be somewhat likable and sympathetic. I don’t even know if chimps even get rabies like that, if rabies even affects them the same way it does dogs 🐕 or other animals. I would think it would affect them a bit more like it does humans, since they’re much closer to humans than any other animal, we share a lot of DNA 🧬 with them (although the 99% figure that’s often cited is very misleading). But, what I know? I’ve never seen a rabid chimp before. This is another one of those film festival movies, where it premiered at a film festival one year, and then got a wide release a year or so later. Primate premiered at Fantastic Fest back in September of this year, but won’t get a wide release until January next year. So, it’s technically a 2025 movie, even though it won’t get a wide release until 2026. There’s a couple of those that I’ll talk about here, but Primate is definitely one of them. 

 

Then there’s Grizzly Night, which actually is 2026 movie. It’s a bullshit film festival movie that premiered one year and then gets a wide release the following year or so, no, it is a fully 2026 movie. It also comes out in January, at the very end of the month, on January 30, 2026. It’s not coming out in theaters unlike the other two creature features coming out next month, it’s going straight-to-VOD, which makes sense considering it’s the one of these three films that isn’t being put out by a major studio. It only has budget of $3 million 💵, it’s definitely on a smaller budget than the other two movies, not that those movies were made with a ton of money 💵. It’s a killer bear movie 🐻, as you could probably tell from the title, and unlike with Killer Whale (2026), there have been plenty of killer bear movies 🐻 over the years. They’re not as uncommon as killer orca movies, or killer hippo movies 🦛; there are pretty much no killer hippo movies 🦛. The one people are probably thinking of, and is the most well known and recent is Cocaine Bear 🐻, but there’s also the 1976 movie, Grizzly, which this film seems to be borrowing the most from and is trying to emulate the most, and the 1979 film, Prophecy, which was about a mutated bear 🐻, who got mutated by toxic waste ☣️ and pollution in a river. 

 

The movie had an environmental message to it since people were becoming a lot more conscious about the environment and pollution in the 1970s. But mostly, it’s remembered for the hilarious sleeping bag kill, where the mutated bear 🐻 kills a kid in a sleeping bag by slapping him into a rock 👋🪨, and the sleeping bag literally explodes 💥 with the kid inside of it, and all the feathers 🪶 fly out 🤣. It doesn’t sound it would be hilarious, but the way it was executed was hilarious 🤣, it’s one of the most unintentionally funny scenes in any horror film. The fact that they were willing to kill a kid, when kids are usually safe in horror films, and the fact that they chose to kill him in this way, shows that they didn’t give a fuck, and I gotta kind of respect them for that. I gotta respect any horror film that has the guts to kill the things are usually considered off-limits like kids, dogs 🐕, or cats 🐈; even pregnant women 🤰. Even Grizzly Man ♂︎, if you want to count that. I don’t because it’s a documentary and not actual narrative film. Yes, I know documentaries have narratives (most of them do anyway), but you know what I mean, it’s not a regular movie. 

 

But, while Grizzly Nights is not a documentary, it is based on a true story, at least, according to the trailer and the description on IMDb. It’s supposed to take place in 1967, in Montana, though it really doesn’t look like it in the trailer. I’m not convinced that this takes place in the 60s, it looks too modern and recent for it to be the 60s. Unless they were just that shit at representing the 60s, that it just looks like the 2020s. So, between this, Killer Whale (2026), and Primate, January is quickly shaping up to be the month where studios release all their creature features. It used to be the dumping ground where they’d release bad movies they had no faith in, but now it’s becoming the month where they release creature features that wouldn’t be commercially viable in any other month of the year. You could say that’s still what they’re doing, and these are bad movies that they and no body else has any faith in, but not all of these movies are strictly bad. Primate actually got pretty good reviews and has a 92% on Rotten Tomatoes 🍅, so, if these were just bad movies they were releasing so they wouldn’t have to think about them again, they should’ve left that one out because it wouldn’t fit with all the others. But, I’m a sucker for these kinds of movies, so even if the critics and everyone else thinks their bad, I might still like them. The schlockiest one of them all that’s the most likely to be viewed as a bad movie is Killer Whale (2026), but even then, it might still be fun in a B movie kind of way, or at least, in a “so bad it’s good” kind of way. 

The other two film festival movies getting wide releases next year that I’m the most interested in is Normal (2025) and Good Luck, Have Fun, Don’t Die. I already talked extensively about Good Luck, Have Fun, Don’t Die in another post that I may or may not have linked to already, and if I haven’t then here’s the link right here. So, I won’t focus too much on it here, all I’ll say about it here is that it looks interesting, but it has some things in it that prevent it from being one of my most anticipated movies of next year, namely the AI plot and the comedic tone. It looks like a movie that might be too far up its own ass to be entertaining, and may be too preachy with its message because it looks like a sci-fi action comedy that has something to say. Now, whether what it has to say is even remotely valuable or insightful or not is yet to be determined. I’m thinking it’s not, but that’s just me. It looks like a movie that will try too hard to be quirky and weird to the point to where it comes across as try hard, and will feel forced and inauthentic. 

 

I’ll only check this one out if the reviews are good, but even then, with a movie like this, I don’t fully know if I’ll be able to trust the reviews because even if they’re all positive, it still might not be very good. It could be a movie that appeals to critics and no one else, the kind of people who thought The Beekeeper 🐝 and A Working Man ♂︎ were stupid, and wanted an action movie that was “smarter,” though really, I think that this movie looks dumb as shit, and not in a good way. Or it might get mixed reviews, where some critics really like it while others really hate it, and you won’t where you’ll fall on that spectrum unless you go see it for yourself. Which, I’m not very keen to do. At least, the trailer was pretty good. It wasn’t enough to sell me on the movie, or convince me that it would be good, but it’s still an entertaining trailer, especially the music, I like the music in the trailer, especially at the end. 

The movie I really want to focus on in this section is a movie called Normal (2025). Like I said earlier, Normal (2025) is another one of these movies that premiered at a film festival one year, and then won’t get a wide release until a year or so later. The Sydney Sweeney movie, Americana 🇺🇸 (2023) had the longest gap in between film festival premiere and wide theatrical release, as it premiered at South by Southwest in 2023, hence why it’s called Americana 🇺🇸 (2023), and didn’t get a wide release until 2025, where it promptly bombed 💣. It only made ~$500,000 💵 against a $9 million budget 💵 😬. But, that’s an extreme example, most film festival movies usually come out the year after they premiere at the film festival they premiered at. In Normal (2025)’s case, it premiered at the Toronto International Film Festival, on September 7, 2025, and it won’t get a wide theatrical release until April 26, 2026. So far, it’s only scheduled to be released in the US 🇺🇸, but even still it’s Magnolia Pictures’s widest release yet, as they haven’t released a movie in over 2,000 theaters until now, until this movie. It is being distributed by Amazon MGM Studios in Canada 🇨🇦 though. 

 

It’s an action crime thriller, the Wikipedia page just describes it as a crime thriller, but going by the trailer, it’s an action crime thriller since it has plenty of action elements. Though, I’m sure how we should go by the trailer considering the trailer tries to make it look like a comedy, and the movie may not be that much of a comedy. It’s basically about a guy ♂︎ named Ulysses (played by Bob Odenkirk), who becomes the temporary sheriff of a small Minnesota town called Normal (hence the title) after the previous sheriff dies; of natural causes I’m assuming, unless he was murdered, and that’s part of the mystery 🧐. A bank robbery takes place, which leads to Ulysses uncovering a vast criminal underworld that stretches across the entire town. Now, this would already be a movie that’s on my radar because I like action movies, and while I don’t know how much of an action movie this will be, it looks like it’ll at least have some action. But, what really put it on my radar, as a movie that I should watch next year is that a lot of creatives behind the John Wick movies and the Nobody movies were involved in the making of this movie. Obviously, you have Bob Odenkirk, who is of course the star of the Nobody films, but you also have Derek Kolstad, who wrote the first three John Wick movies and is considered the creator of John Wick, and he wrote the two Nobody movies so far. He was even an executive producer on the Nobody movies. And you have Marc Provissiero, who was a producer on the Nobody movies. 

 

So, you have a lot of people who worked on the John Wick and Nobody franchises, working on this one. It’s pretty safe to say that it’s in good hands, and that it’ll deliver, at least in the action department. It is being directed by the same director as Meg 2: The Trench 🦈, so…😬 I don’t know about that 😕. According to the Wikipedia page, they said they wanted this to be a Hitchcockian style mystery crime thriller, though really it reminds me of a Coen Brothers movie. I got serious Fargo vibes from watching the trailer to this movie, which is why I said earlier that it felt like the trailer was trying to sell this as a comedy, a Coen Brothers style comedy, or more specifically, a Fargo esque comedy. Not just the Minnesota, Midwestern setting, the snow 🌨️, the accents, but the tone, the tone is very similar to Fargo, at least from what the trailer shows.  

 

And it’s like Fargo in the sense that’s a crime thriller disguised as a comedy, or a comedy disguised as a crime thriller, and it’s happening in this unusual, unexpected setting, and the people aren’t really reacting to it the way they would in a typical crime thriller, or taking it particularly seriously. Everyone’s too polite, reserved, and mild mannered about it. You know, that Minnesota nice and all that. It’s like Fargo if it had John Wick or Nobody style action. It’s like if Bob Odenkirk’s character from the Nobody movies, Hutch Mansell stepped into a Fargo movie. Fargo’s a TV series now too, so maybe, like he stepped into a Fargo episode. Almost every other comment in the comment section on the trailer was comparing it to Fargo. If you didn’t want people to compare it to Fargo, you shouldn’t have put it a quirky narration in the trailer where the narrator puts on a stereotypical Minnesota accent (which sounds an awful lot like a stereotypical Canadian accent 🇨🇦 in my opinion), and sounds like a character ripped straight from Fargo. But again, I think the Fargo comparisons were on purposes, and they wanted people to think of Fargo while watching the trailer at all. 

 

I don’t know how much like Fargo it’ll feel like, but I’m sure it’ll at least feel a little bit like Fargo, if only because of the snowy Minnesota setting 🌨️, and the occurrence of criminal activity, as well as the blood 🩸 and violence. The original Fargo’s rated R, and it was very bloody 🩸 and violent despite its warm and inviting exterior. The movie itself has Minnesota nice, and I think that’s something the Coen Brothers fully intended. Like all the movies I’m interested in seeing next year, I’m not sure if I’ll actually be able to see this in theaters, but if I do, I hope it’s as good as this trailer makes look, and I hope it has some action. I’m not asking for it to be balls to the wall action, I don’t need for there to be action in every scene (that would get exhausting after awhile), but at least more than just one or two action scenes in the whole movie. Hopefully, Ben Wheatley doesn’t F this up 😒, but I’m sure Bob Odenkirk, Derek Kolstad, and Marc Provissiero will keep him in check. 

Sam Raimi has a new movie coming out, also on January 30, 2025, the same day as Grizzly Night (only it’s coming out in theaters and not on VOD like Grizzly Night), called Send Help. It’s a survival horror comedy these two people who stranded on a desert island 🏝️. They’re a couple of corporate people, Rachel McAdams working at this company, and Dylan O’Brien is her boss, and they get stranded on this island 🏝️ together after a plane crash ✈️, and have to try to find a way to survive and also get rescued. Dylan O’Brien gets injured during the plane crash ✈️, and has to be taken care of by Rachel McAdams, but Dylan O’Brien was an asshole boss and he often mistreated her. So now that he’s in a vulnerable position, and she’s now in a position of power and authority over him, she decides to take her anger and frustration 😡 out on him, and get back at him for he treated back at home, as she starts going crazy from stranded on this island 🏝️ for too long. And so, Dylan O’Brien not only has to survive being on this island 🏝️ with an injured leg, but also has to survive her. I know I kept referring to them by the actor’s names, but I just did that to make it easier for myself, they have actual character names. It’s not like Rachel McAdams and Dylan O’Brien are playing themselves, although that would be pretty funny 😄. 

 

It looks like it could be an interesting thriller with some horror and comedic elements that plays with gender dynamics and workplace boss/employee relationships. It might even play with age since Dylan O’Brien is 13 years younger than Rachel McAdams in real life, and his character is Rachel McAdams’s character’s boss, so I’m sure they’ll play with that a little with an older middle aged woman with a male boss who’s way younger than her, and is abusive towards her. It could be the kind of thing that leaves you at the edge of your seat, wondering if Dylan O’Brien is going to make it out, or if Rachel McAdams is going to kill him, or if they both die. With Sam Raimi, anything’s possible, there’s no guarantee that either one of them will live. Or it could be really bad, and infuriating, or might it go into camp, and be unintentionally funny. I know, it’s supposed to be a horror comedy, but it could end being unintentionally funny with people laughing hysterical at things 🤣 that Sam Raimi never intended for them to laugh at 🤣. It could go either way with this movie, with it being good or bad. I’ll have to see what the reactions to this movie will be like from critics when it comes out. 

 

Now obviously, it has a lot of similarities to a couple other movies: Castaway and Misery. Those were the two movies that people compared it the most to in the comments on the initial trailer. It essentially has the same plot as Castaway, but if you added a second person into the mix, made them the opposite sex, and then gave them a Misery type dynamic with the other person. Where a guy ♂︎ is injured and can’t move, and the woman ♀︎ who’s supposed to take care of him is kind of crazy, and is taking advantage of that injury, and is essentially holding him hostage, not letting him leave. It is kind of an interesting idea to take those two movies, or at the concepts of them, and then combine them. We’ll see if it can put enough its own spin on these ideas and concepts, so that it doesn’t just feel like a ripoff or rehash of those movies and those ideas and concepts. And doesn’t stray too far into camp and unintentional hilarity. I’m just glad to see Sam Raimi directing another movie that isn’t a superhero movie (more on that later). 

But, Sam Raimi is not the only director who has a movie coming out next year. Obviously not, a lot of directors have movies coming out next year, and not all of them are well known or are household names. But, Sam Raimi, isn’t the only somewhat well known director to have a movie out next year. J. J. Abrams, the director of such films as Mission: Impossible III, Star Trek (2009), Super 8 (2011), Star Trek Into Darkness, Star Wars: The Force Awakens, and Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker, and the producer of many more, also has a new movie coming out. I consider him and Sam Raimi to be in the B or C tier of directors where they’re not super well known outside of the film community, like they aren’t big heavy hitters or household names like Steven Spielberg, Martin Scorsese, James Cameron, Guillermo del Toro, Tim Burton, Christopher Nolan, and Quentin Tarantino. Even with James Cameron and Guillermo del Toro, it’s a bit dubious to include them amongst those other directors because while people have seen their movies and their movies are pretty popular and have made money 💵 (especially Cameron’s movies), they don’t necessarily know them by name. 

 

But, Christopher Nolan definitely belongs in that list with those other guys ♂︎, like he is a household name. He’s one of the few directors whose name can still be used to sell a movie. It’s possibly the only reason why Oppenheimer (2023) was such a big hit, besides it being released the same day as Barbie (2023) and being associated with that movie through the Barbenheimer phenomenon. It was really more of a meme than a phenomenon, or rather it started out as a meme and became a meme, and these two movies were able to become box office hits off the back of this phenomenon so. And while I have no interest in seeing it, I’m sure The Odyssey (2026) will be a big hit also, just from Nolan’s name being attached to it alone. But, while Raimi and Abrams aren’t as well known as Nolan, Spielberg, Scorsese, Tarantino, and Burton, they’re still more well known than the average no name director or director-for-hire. Like, I’m pretty sure no one knows Ben Wheatley by name, unless they’re as into movies as I am, and probably many of you reading this. At least, these guys ♂︎ are names that you still know, and whose work you still follow, no matter what.

Abrams’s new movie in 2026 is called Ghostwriter, not to be confused with The Ghost Writer from 2010, which starred Ewan McGregor and Pierce Brosnan, along with Kim Cattrall and Olivia Williams, and was directed by convicted pedophile rapist and fugitive from the law, Roman Polanski 😬. The less said about him the better. Just know that he’s a bad man, and he shouldn’t have been allowed to still be making movies in 2010, or be given any awards, like at the 60th Berlin International Film Festival and the 23rd European Film Awards, all awards that he won for this movie, and he belongs in prison. This movie, Ghostwriter (2026) is not just being directed by J. J. Abrams, it’s being written by him too. He is the sole credited writer on this. So, it’s written and directed by him, just like Super 8 (2011) was. We don’t know anything about the plot at this time, all we know is that it’s a fantasy movie, and judging by the title, it’s probably going to involve writing ✍️ somehow. Given that this is a fantasy film, the title might be literal, and it’s about a literal ghost writing a book 👻✍️📖, and the things they write in it come to life or happen for real, or something. Or maybe it is about an actual ghostwriter, who writes fantasy novels 📖 for someone else, under someone else’s name, and they have the ability to make anything they write in it come to life or happen for real. Kind of like that book, Inkheart, which got adapted into a movie in 2009 starring Brendan Fraser. 

 

I actually read the book 📖 in school in 1st or 2nd grade (maybe even 3rd grade), or rather, our teacher read it to us, and that’s why I so interested in seeing the movie with Brendan Fraser. I remember liking it, but it’s been a long time since I’ve seen it, I’ve only seen it once (when I saw it in the theater back in 2009), so I don’t know what I’d think of it now. I also don’t know how accurate it is to the book 📖, and if I would still like it even after reading the book 📖. Even though my teacher read the book 📖 to us in class, I really didn’t remember that much for it by the time I saw the movie, except for a couple of character name. To this day, the only character name I remember from that book 📖 is Dustfinger. I remember seeing somewhere online that fans of the book 📖 weren’t happy with the movie because it deviated too much from the book 📖, so if that’s true, that tells me that if I was a fan of the book 📖, I probably wouldn’t like the movie that much. But, whereas Inkheart was simply about a guy who had the ability to make any character in a book 📖 come to life and come into the real world simply by reading them, this movie might be about someone who has the ability to make anything they write ✍️ come to life or happen for real. 

 

At least, I’m assuming, based on what little information we have to go off. All we really have to go off at this time is the title and the genre, and the title is vague enough to where it could really be anything. Even knowing that the genre is fantasy isn’t much to go off of since fantasy can be anything. Just because something’s fantasy doesn’t mean that it’s swords and sorcery ⚔️🧙‍♂️, even though that’s usually what people think of when they hear the word “fantasy.” It might even take place in a fantasy world at all, it might take place in our world, but have fantasy elements like magic 🪄 in it. We just don’t know at this point, and I’m not sure when we’ll actually start getting more information and learning more about this film, and get a better idea of what it’s about, when the marketing truly kicks into high gear. Though, given how J. J. Abrams loves his mysteries, I’m sure the marketing will be as vague and mysterious as the marketing for Super 8 (2011) was, or even the marketing for The Force Awakens was. I’d be a little bit disappointed if the marketing for the movie wasn’t like that, and they just told you everything up front about what this movie is and what it’s about. 

 

The movie does have a pretty stacked cast though. You got Glen Powell, Jenna Ortega, Emma Mackey, and Samuel L. Jackson. I’m sure there’s a lot more than that, but those are the cast members they’ve listed so far. Unless the cast in this movie really is that small, and this movie only has four characters, but I kind of doubt it. Given that this is a J. J. Abrams movie and it’s a fantasy movie being put out by Warner Bros., I’m guessing it’s going to have a pretty big budget. This isn’t going to be a small scale production or a bottle film with just four people the entire time, it’s going to be a pretty big production, with probably a ton of extras. At least, it’ll have the same budget as Super 8 (2011). I would honestly be surprised if it was a small scale low budget movie with just four actors, and possibly one location ☝️. But, I highly doubt that it will be. 

 

Even if it’s a movie that primarily takes place in one location, I’m sure it’ll have way more people than just four people. It would be a lot similar to Ghosts of Mars, where it does take place mostly in one location, but it has a lot more people in it than just the principal cast, other actors playing smaller roles, and of course a ton of extras, playing the possessed miners that the main characters have to fight for most of the film. Never thought I’d be making any comparison to Ghosts of Mars, but here we are. If we really want to push the Ghosts of Mars comparison, we could say that Samuel L. Jackson being in this movie is the equivalent to having Pam Grier be in Ghosts of Mars. Hopefully he lasts way longer than she did in that movie. I mean, they both have the word “ghost” in the title, so there is some overlap. The big heavy hitters in the cast are obviously Glen Powell, Jenna Ortega, and Samuel L. Jackson, while Emma Mackey isn’t that well known. 

 

I mean, she’s been in stuff, but she’s not as well known as the other three actors in the cast, at least to an American audience 🇺🇸. In her native Britain 🇬🇧, she maybe a lot more well known. The thing she’s best known for is a Netflix series called Sex Education, which I’ve never seen. She was also in the second Kenneth Branagh Hercule Poirot movie, Death on the Nile (2022), which a lot of people make fun of because of Gal Gadot’s performance. Especially the part where she talks about how they have enough champagne 🍾 to fill the Nile, while spilling out her glass of champagne 🥂 in the Nile River to illustrate her point. That was one of the movies that made people realize that Gal Gadot isn’t a good actress, as well as the one part in Justice League (both the Joss Whedon version and Zack Snyder version), where she says, “Kal-El, no!” Emma Mackey was also in another movie in 2022 called Emily, which is a drama, and I’ve also never seen. So, this’ll probably be my (and a lot of other Americans’ 🇺🇸) introduction to her if I do end up watching it. 

 

I am kind of tired of seeing Glen Powell in everything. I kind of have Glen Powell fatigue, just like how some people have Sydney Sweeney fatigue (which is funny I mention her considering that her and Glen Powell were in a movie together) or Jack Black fatigue. And I totally get why people have fatigue for those actors, and why they wouldn’t want to see a movie if those actors were in them. That’s one of the reasons some people have given for why they don’t want to see Anaconda (2025) because Jack Black’s in it, and he’s mostly just being his usual Jack Black self, and they’re just sick of his shtick and him being in everything. Don’t forget, he was also in A Minecraft Movie, one of the biggest hits of the year, where he pretty much just played a variation of himself, just doing his usual shtick; he Jack Blacked it up. Or why some people refuse to watch The Housemaid, because Sydney Sweeney’s in it, not just because they disagree with her politics, but also because they’re just tired of seeing her in everything. Well, I, and many others, are tired of seeing Glen Powell in everything. It’s part of the reason why I was hesitant to see The Running Man ♂︎ (2025), and probably a lot of other people were too since that movie bombed at the box office 💣. And it’s kind of making me hesitant to watch this movie. 

 

But, Jenna Ortega and Sam Jackson do sort of make up for Glen Powell being in this movie. Jenna Ortega has changed her appearance in recent months. Ever since promoting the second season to her flagship show, Wednesday, she’s looked kind of different. The most notable thing that’s different about her appearance lately is her lack of eyebrows. I was kind of put off her not having eyebrows, it just looked kind of weird, and every time I’d see an interview with her, I’d be like, “What is up with her eyebrows?” And then, when I found that she was going to be in this movie, I thought maybe this was just something she was just doing for the role. And if this is indeed something she did for the role, it makes me wonder if she’s going to be a villain, like maybe a witch or something. But, even so, she didn’t have to actually shave off her eyebrows for real, they could’ve just did all this with makeup and prosthetics. But maybe, she went to the Shia LaBeouf school of changing your appearance for a movie role. Which is ironic that I bring him since he too started out as a Disney Channel star with his own sitcom, Even Stevens. 

 

Jenna Ortega’s Disney Channel sitcom was Stuck in the Middle, a show that she really doesn’t like to acknowledge anymore. But, both Even Stevens and Stuck in the Middle were single camera sitcoms rather than multiple camera sitcoms, meaning there was no laugh track, and you had more dynamic camera movements, and more artistic shots. So, I guess that’s one way that Shia LaBeouf and Jenna Ortega are similar, they both started their careers as Disney Channel stars, with their own sitcoms, and both of their sitcoms were single camera shows with no laugh track. I mean, Shia’s the same guy ♂︎ who gave himself a real cut on his face for his role in Fury (2014), and kept opening the wound, so that it would look fresh and authentic. But, after seeing that interview she did with Emma Myers for Buzzfeed Celeb, with the kittens 🐱, the no eyebrow look did sort of grow on me, and she does kind of make it work and it looks cute. 

 

But, it isn’t just her eyebrows, she also removed the fat from her cheek, her cheek fat. It’s called bucal fat removal, it’s a surgical procedure where they remove the fat from your cheeks to, I guess, make your cheekbones more visible and pronounced. And apparently, this procedure is currently trendy amongst female celebrities ♀︎, the people who can actually afford it. But, this procedure has come under some criticism, because it makes the women ♀︎ who get it look way older than they would have if they didn’t remove that fat from their face. Like, it ages them. The one of the first people to publicly get this procedure, and to be scrutinized for it is Ariana Grande, who also also come under her fire 🔥 recently for her weird behavior with her Wicked co-star, Cynthia Erivo, who also got the same procedure, and also has people worried about her health because after doing the two Wicked movies, her and pretty every other female cast member ♀︎ of those movies came out looking way skinnier than they did before, almost to an unhealthy degree. Meaning people wonder just the hell went on the set of these movies to make these actresses look this emaciated and unhealthy. Everything surrounding those movies is weird, and makes me wonder kind of horror stories happened behind-the-scenes that we’ll hear about 10 or 20 years from now 😰. 

 

Then, a few other actresses and celebrities got the procedure, like Anya Taylor Joy (Princess Peach herself; or young Furiosa if you watched Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga), and it seems Jenna Ortega got it too. Knowing that information about it that it makes a woman ♀︎ look older, makes me kind of think Jenna Ortega got the procedure to make herself look older, to make herself look more mature, so that people won’t just see her as a kid, and just keep casting her as teenagers in movies. She has been getting typecast in movies, and I imagine it is getting to her, especially at her young age. She’s only 23 years old, she’s 4 years younger than I am. So, I can somewhat understand the impulse of wanting to change her appearance to make herself look older so that people won’t see her a teenager, and keep giving her teenage roles. But, come on girl ♀︎, you didn’t do that. This is a radical change to your body and your appearance, a change that may or may not be reversible, you didn’t need to do that just to prove a point or to follow trends. Following trends in Hollywood is one of the easiest paths to self destruction. So many women ♀︎ in Hollywood have destroyed their bodies in their pursuit to follow trends, and to stay relevant and please the tastes of men ♂︎. 

 

You didn’t need to go down that path. One of the reasons why I liked you is that you were one of the more real celebrities out there, you were laid back and chill, and you didn’t just follow trends, especially cosmetic ones, and change your appearance drastically just because everyone else was doing it. I liked your more youthful appearance because it was natural, and it was who you were. This new look you got now with the bucal fat surgery is not natural, it’s unnatural, and it looks off putting. At least, Emma Myers, so far hasn’t gotten that procedure, she’s still keeping it real, and au naturale, a lot more real than Jenna apparently. I always kind of liked Emma Myers more than Jenna Ortega anyway, I always found her a bit more attractive. She’s a bit more of a my type than Jenna is, not to say Jenna was bad looking before, she wasn’t, she was pretty good looking, a lot better looking than she is now in all honesty, but I always found Emma Myers to be a hotter. It’s hard to resist a cute white girl ♀︎ like her sometimes 😍. 

 

Still, even if this new look of hers probably isn’t for this role, and she probably isn’t playing the villain, it would still be cool to see Jenna Ortega play a villain in a movie. I’m tired of her always seeing her play the hero in movies or TV shows (in the case of Wednesday), let her play the villain for once. She can pull it off. She already kind of tends to play darker characters, especially ever since being in Wednesday, so, why not have her go all the way and play an outright villain, at least once ☝️? I haven’t seen Miller’s Girl ♀︎, and while that is an erotic thriller (apparently), I don’t know if her character in that movie is even supposed to be an outright villain or not. So, I really don’t know if that counts. I really doubt that it does, given it’s about a girl ♀︎ trying to have sex with her teacher after she develops a crush on him 😍, I’m assuming. It’s supposed to be an erotic thriller, so where does the erotic part come in? Don’t worry though, Jenna Ortega’s character in that movie is 18 (even though she was 21 in real life when she filmed that), and she’s in her senior year. So, while she is still a high school student, it’s a little bit easier to swallow, and not as uncomfortable, that she’s trying to pursue a relationship with her teacher. 

 

I know a lot of people are probably hesitant to watch this movie because it’s written and directed by J. J. Abrams, and a lot of people don’t like J. J. Abrams, mainly for his work on the Star Trek franchise and the Star Wars franchise (people see him as the guy who ruined two sci-fi space adventure franchises), but I am actually interested in watching this, and think there’s a chance that it might actually be good. Whenever J. J. Abrams works on a pre-existing franchise, it usually doesn’t turn out well, but whenever he does something original that he came up with himself, it usually turns out way better. I like Super 8 (2011), I think it’s pretty good, and pretty underrated. It’s probably J. J. Abrams’s best movie. Of course, that’s not to say that it’s flawless or perfect, it’s not, it’s got some problems, a lot of the same problems as Abrams’s other movies. But, it is still a solid science fiction movie that’s very clearly Spielberg inspired, and wears its influences on its sleeve. It was a passion project for Abrams, and it was very personal for him, since it’s very much about him, and his childhood making movies with friends using a Super 8 camera. It’s pretty much what Spielberg would do himself 11 years later with The Fablemans, except without the sci-fi elements. It’s not like any real aliens 👽 show up in The Fablemans like they do in Super 8 (2011). And it’s a stand alone movie that he didn’t bother making any sequels (or prequels or spinoffs) to, and I’m glad because it doesn’t need any. 

 

I was actually surprised to find out that Super 8 (2011) only had a budget of $50 million 💵, when I watched JoBlo’s review of it on their JoBlo Originals channel, because it like it cost twice as much. It looks like a movie with a $150 million 💵. That just goes to show Abrams’s ability to stretch his dollar 💵, and make something look more expensive than they actually are. As much as people don’t like The Force Awakens, or especially The Rise of Skywalker, those movie still look very bit as expensive as they are. Abrams made sure every bit of that money 💵 was on screen, and that’s got to be appreciated. I think we’ve got used to big budget movies not looking anywhere near as expensive as they actually are, and making us wonder, “What did they spend all that money 💵 on?” But, it’s nice when we get one where all the money 💵 is all on screen, and it looks every bit as expensive as it is. I think that this could be solid. I’m willing to give this chance when it comes out. You don’t have to, but I will. And if I ever see it, and I review it, and it’s bad, I’ll be honest about it. I won’t lie to you, and tell you it’s good and that I liked it, that’s not what I do here. 

I mentioned The Devil Wears Prada 2 earlier, but I have no interest in that. It’s unnecessary sequel to a movie from 19 years ago (it’ll be 20 next year when this comes out) that didn’t need a sequel at all, and was perfectly fine as a stand alone movie. What else is new 🤷‍♂️? But, did you know that The Devil Wears Prada isn’t the only chick flick starring Anne Hathaway from 20 or so years ago that’s getting an unnecessary sequel? I learned recently that they’re apparently making a third Princess Diaries movie, you know the movies where Anne Hathaway plays a girl ♀︎ who learns she’s a princess of a fictional European country, and is summoned by her estranged grandmother (on her father’s side) to take her rightful place on the throne of that country? The first Princess Diaries was Anne Hathaway’s acting debut, so without The Princess Diaries, we wouldn’t have Anne Hathaway. No one wants to live a world without Anne Hathaway. Christopher Nolan wouldn’t have anyone to cast Catwoman in The Dark Knight Rises, or as that one astronaut 👩‍🚀 in Interstellar that was the daughter of Michael Caine’s character, only went the mission to find her boyfriend (or husband, I don’t exactly remember) and believes that love ❤️ is real tangible physical thing that can be quantified. He even casted her in his next movie, The Odyssey (2026). So she’s going to be in two movies next year, The Devil Wears Prada 2 and The Odyssey (2026).  

 

But, unlike The Devil Wears Prada, The Princess Diaries did actually have a sequel before, called The Princess Diaries 2: Royal Engagement. The only thing I really know about the second one is that Chris Pine is in it. Yes, that Chris Pine, Captain James T. Kirk, Jack Ryan, and Steve Trevor himself. I bet a lot of people forget that he even was Jack Ryan at one point, which is understandable, considering that he only played him in one movie ☝️. He’s pretty much the George Lazenby of the Jack Ryan franchise. Or maybe it’s Ben Affleck, since he also only played Jack Ryan in one movie, or maybe Alec Baldwin, since he also only played Jack Ryan in one movie 🤔. So, I guess the Jack Ryan franchise has three potential George Lazenbys. Even Tom Cruise lasted longer as Jack Reacher by two ✌️. That was his debut feature film role, and he was really young when made that. He was 24. So, these movie did make careers. So, unlike with The Devil Wears Prada, there is more of a precedent to make a third Princess Diaries since there was already a second one. It wasn’t a stand alone movie that they just dig up, to do something with 20 years later, because they’ve got nothing better to do and they have no other ideas, and hey, it’s a great way to bank people’s nostalgia. It already had a sequel, a sequel that a lot of people liked. People who liked the first Princess Diaries seemed to like the second one as well. It’s just been so long that I don’t think it’s worth doing. 

 

But, Disney has to legacy sequels to all their live action movies from the early-to-mid 2000s I guess. The box office success of Freakier Friday was just too much for them to resist, they just saw dollar signs after seeing that movie’s success 🤑. They have take it out of the vault, and wring out whatever nostalgic value could be left. There’s just such a pure and obvious money making decision 🤑 behind it. This is not a project that’s being developed for artistic reasons, because the original creators had a great idea that they just had to develop, no, this is just being made because Disney just wants that money 💵 🤑, they want to milk people’s nostalgia further because that’s still the current hot thing to do in Hollywood. So far, there hasn’t been many details about the movie, other than that it’s currently in development, some woman ♀︎ named Adele Lim is the director (instead of Gary Marshall like on the first two since he died in 2016), and Anne Hathaway is set to return. So, we don’t currently have a good idea of what it’s about, or when it might come out. 

 

Given that it’s still in development, and it’s likely still in a pre-production stage, I’m guess we probably won’t see this until either 2027 or 2028. I think the safest bet is probably 2028, given how long the pre-production process can be on a movie, but for a movie like this, that’s either a coming-of-age movie, or a romcom, or both, I can’t imagine the pre-production would be that long. It’s not like this is going to be an effects heavy movie or anything, probably 🤨. But, the pre-production could be a shorter, and they could start shooting sometime next year, and the movie will be out in 2027. But, I guess we’ll see. This movie might not even happen at all, and it could get canceled. Just like that Lethal Weapon 5 movie that never ended up happening, despite Mel Gibson insisting that it would. While Anne Hathaway is set to return in The Princess Diaries 3, her co-star, Julie Andrews is not. She was asked about it, and she said that she more likely won’t return for a third one. I mean, when she was asked about it, she didn’t even think there would be a third one because Gary Marshall was dead. But you know, this is modern Disney, and they continued with the project anyway with a new writer and a new director. 

 

So, while they did confirm that they got Hathaway back (not just an actress but as a producer), they still confirmed one way or another if Andrews will be in it. If they can’t get Andrews back, or if they refuse to bring her back, then they might as well not even bother because she was a big part of those movies. It’s not like this is a small part that they can just leave out, no, she was a huge part of those movie, and was a huge part of what made them what they were, and what made them so beloved among so many people. It’s not Princess Diaries without Anne Hathaway or Julie Andrews. Doing a Princess Diaries movie without Julie Andrews is like doing an Independence Day movie without Will Smith, or a Matrix movie without Laurence Fishburne and Hugo Weaving, which they already did. Imagine if they did Freakier Friday without Jamie Lee Curtis, or The Devil Wears Prada 2 without Meryl Streep, would people have liked them nearly as much? Probably not.  

 

Devil Wears Prada 2 hasn’t even come out yet, so it’s unknown whether people will actually like it or not, but I imagine they would like it a lot less if Meryl Streep wasn’t in it. If they couldn’t get her to come back for the sequel, and they just killed her character off in-between movies, saying she died sometime after the first one and before the second one. So, if they can’t get Julie Andrews to come back, they probably shouldn’t do it. I mean, they shouldn’t do it at all anyway, but if they are going to do it, they should at the very least, include Julie Andrews. I know the woman’s in her 90s now, but still. If you’re going to do an unnecessary sequel to a movie from 21 years ago, you should bring everyone back, everyone who’s still alive, because people won’t like it as much if you leave anyone out, especially when that person was still alive and able to do it, and you for whatever reason chose not to bring them back. 

 

I know Lana Wachowski’s reason for excluding Laurence Fishburne from The Matrix Resurrections was that she wanted to stay in continuity with The Matrix Online, where Morpheus died, keep everything canon, including the ancillary material. So, she did have a story reason for not including him, but it didn’t go over well with people, who wanted to see the gang all back together. They wanted that trio of Keanu Reeves, Carrie-Anne Moss, and Laurence Fishburne, and Lana Wachowski refused to give it to them for a somewhat arbitrary reason. It didn’t help either that she created a character that was like Morpheus, that was called Morpheus, but also not. It felt like to a lot of people that she was trying to create a replacement for Morpheus, who was younger and better, and they didn’t like that. If she didn’t want Morpheus to be alive, then she shouldn’t have written the movie in a way that would’ve required Morpheus or a Morpheus type character. But, while Lana Wachowski did have somewhat of an excuse to not bring back Laurence Fishburne to reprise his role as Morpheus, there was no reason at all why she didn’t bring back Hugo Weaving to reprise his role as Agent Smith, or Exile Smith as I like to call him since he’s not an agent anymore by the time The Matrix Revolutions and The Matrix Resurrections happen. She could have easily have brought him back, she did not need to recast him with Jonathan Groff. 

 

Even the story reason for him not being Hugo Weaving doesn’t really make sense, and is pretty weak. It ruins his and Neo’s dynamic with him not being the same actor, and having that history and connection, that chemistry that Weaving and Reeves built with each other in The Matrix, and expanded upon in The Matrix Reloaded and The Matrix Revolutions, and instead having be played by a much younger actor who Reeves just barely met and worked with for that film. But not only do Reeves and Groff not have any chemistry with each other whatsoever, but Groff isn’t even that intimidating as a villain. You couldn’t have asked for anybody less intimidating than him to play this role. And I don’t know about you, but I feel like Smith should be at least a little intimidating 🤏, considering he used to be an agent. Every time that Jonathan Groff does make at being intimidating, or even just badass, in this film just falls flat on its face. There’s nothing intimidating or badass about Jonathan Groff, he can’t play a believable intimidating bad guy or a believable badass, which are both things that are required to play a character like Smith. He was just so miscast in this movie, they should’ve just brought back Hugo Weaving. 

 

In retrospect, The Matrix Resurrections was such an ill-conceived movie that probably shouldn’t have even happened in the first place, and the only reason it did was because Warner Bros. got greedy 🤑 and wanted to milk one of their old properties, and Lana Wachowski stepped in because she didn’t want to make it without her. And she basically just turned it into a big “fuck you 🖕” to Warner Bros., and Hollywood in general, for making lazy legacy sequels to things instead of just making something new, as well as a way for her to grieve her dead parents. That’s always been the excuse that Lana Wachowski has made about this movie, and what people will say in defense of this movie, that it’s meta and it’s poking fun at the concept of legacy sequels, and therefore immune to criticism. Well, just because something’s meta and making fun of the concept of legacy sequels doesn’t mean it’s immune to criticism, especially when it engages in the very things it criticizes. In fact, that makes it more susceptible to criticism. This is one of the most hypocritical movies ever made. Every interesting thing that the movie does say about legacy sequel is completely undermined by the fact that it does almost all those things itself, and doesn’t even do them in particularly ironic way. If this movie was meant to be satire, like Lana and the defenders of this movie claim, it’s a pretty poor attempt at one. 

I have no interest in watching Avengers: Doomsday at all, nor do I have any interest in watching Spider-Man: Brand New Day, or Supergirl (2026). I’m completely done with superhero movies, I’ve completely checked out, I’m not going to watch another superhero movie. Even if Dami and all those other overzealous Snyder fans are proven right, and the Snyderverse does come back, and Zack Snyder does make more DC movies, starting with Justice League 2, I won’t watch that either. That’s much how I don’t care about the genre anymore, and how much I kind of despise it. Which leads me to the other thing that I want to talk about: Netflix and Paramount are trying to buying Warner Bros.. They have both put out competing bids to buy the company and all of its assets, all of its IPs and vast film library, after Comcast dropped out of the bidding war, and so far (at the time of me writing this), neither one of them has gone through because they have to be approved by the FCC and other anti-trust organizations in Europe, and this has monopoly written all over it. I have little faith that the current FCC, under Trump, would stop either one of these deals from happening, especially the Paramount one because Trump has his people inside of the company. The top positions of the company are held by Trump loyalists, Trump supporters, Trump backers, and people are especially worried about Paramount getting Warner Bros. because they’re worried they’ll use it to push pro-Trump propaganda. Frankly, I don’t want either one of these deals to happen because it’s monopoly. It’s large corporations getting bigger, and squeezing out the little guy, and stifling competition. I don’t want these companies owning everything, it scares me. 

 

When they own everything, they become shit. Star Wars became shit after Disney bought it, Lord of the Rings became shit after Amazon made that series for it, The Lords of the Rings: The Rings of Power. Or at least, that’s what the Internet 🛜 tells me, it could just be a bunch of anti-woke chuds complaining about there being people of color in the show, but I have seen more mixed reviews criticizing the writing, you know, something that actually matters. Marvel was good for while despite Disney owning it but it too eventually became shit, and there is a real concern that James Bond will become shit now that Amazon has bought it. These companies run these IPs into the ground, completely cheapening these brands, stripping away everything that made them special or beloved. I don’t trust any of these companies to handle most of these IPs with care, and push the industry forward in a positive direction. They’re just blinded by their own greed 🤑, and can’t see that their decisions are hurting the industry rather than helping it. I don’t want Netflix to own Warner Bros. because they’ll use that power to not only destroy all of their competition, which are the other big studios, but also kill the theatrical model for good. Netflix has never liked movie theaters, they have never respected the theatrical model, and have spent pretty much a whole decade trying to kill it. 

 

And with Warner Bros. and all of its assets, they’ll be in a better position to do that. To achieve that evil goal. Ted Sarandon is evil! Just as much as David Zaslav, who’s the main one responsible for running Warner Bros. into the ground, to the point where it’s at risk of being bought out by another major studio. I expressed my disapproval of Comcast possibly owning Warner Bros. because of the Saudi Arabia connection 🇸🇦, so I’ll talk about the reasons why I don’t want either Netflix or Paramount to own Warner Bros.. I don’t want Netflix to own Warner Bros., and I don’t want Paramount to own Warner Bros., and my reasons why are different for each. I don’t want Netflix to own Warner Bros. because I don’t want physical media and movie theaters to die, and I don’t want Paramount to own Warner Bros. because I don’t want to see Trump propaganda. It’s really a lose/lose situation that we have here, I don’t like either option, either possibility. 

 

But, if I really had to pick my poison, I’d choose Paramount because as bad as it would be to see it to be turned into a Trump propaganda machine, at least movie theaters and physical media would still exist. And besides, Trump is finite, he’s not going to be around forever, he will die someday, probably sooner rather than later, given that he’s 79 years old, pushing 80, and the US presidency 🇺🇸 is such a stressful job that it ages everyone who gets into it. And we already see signs that Trump is slowing down, he’s showing his age, he’s becoming senile, and he’s already exhibiting a lot of health problems that the White House is trying desperately to cover up. 

 

So, they can’t keep producing Trump propaganda forever. Given that Paramount is a media company, an entertainment company, they’ll want to appeal as many people as possible, so when Trump goes, they’ll quickly change their tune, and try to pivot back to the center, and act like they were never with Trump to begin with. It’ll be like how Disney acted after they reinstated Jimmy Kimmel after the global backlash against them for suspending him, only cracked up to 11. There I go quoting This Is Spinal Tap again, the same thing I said earlier, and the thing people always say from that movie. People only really know the “up to 11” line, and it’s the only thing that entered the lexicon, and became apart of normal everyday conversation. 

 

But, the thing that annoys me the most about this whole conversation about which studio, which conglomerate should own Warner Bros., is that the Snyder fans are going along with this. They want Netflix to own Warner Bros. just that they can have the Snyderverse back, and Zack Snyder can make DC movies again 🤦‍♂️. They’ve wanted this for a while, and why they do want Netflix specifically to own it? Because Snyder made his last couple of movies for Netflix. Neither of which were particularly well liked by anyone who wasn’t already a die hard Snyder fan, who just kiss his ass constantly and will praise anything that he makes, regardless of the actual quality. These are some of the most selfish, delusional, and short-sighted people I ever come across on the Internet 🛜. And believe me, selfish, delusional, and short-sighted people are not in short supply on the Internet 🛜. 

 

What good is it to have the Snyderverse back when there are no more movie theaters, and there’s no more physical media? Sure, it was nice having the convenience of watching Zack Snyder’s Justice League on streaming, during a time when movie theaters were closed, but it would’ve been nice to have seen it in a theater, and it is nice owning it on Blu-Ray 💿. That way, I can watch it without Internet 🛜 because our Internet 🛜 sometimes gets shut off due to us being unable to make payments on time. But, my aunt has been paying our Internet 🛜 and phone 📱 bill for us lately, so that’s become less of a concern. But still, watching a movie on physical media is still preferable to watching it on my streaming because sometimes the picture quality dips when the Internet connection 🛜 gets disrupted, and sometimes the movie you want to watch isn’t available to watch on streaming because it was removed, or it was never on there to be begin with. 

 

Not that I’d even want to watch that long ass movie casually, just for the sake of watching something to have something to do, something to watch. But, really, it isn’t just Netflix. When Comcast threw their hat 🧢 into the ring, and announced their bid to buy Warner Bros. on behalf of the Saudi government 🇸🇦, all of these Snyder fans all of a sudden became Saudi apologists 🇸🇦, ready to dawn thobes and express their love for MBS, once they found out that Snyder was friends with a Saudi government official 🇸🇦, and that same Saudi government official 🇸🇦 was a fan of his work. You can’t make this stuff up. This man ♂︎, and his movies, have forever ruined the way these people view the world. So, even though I consider myself a Snyder fan, and I do like his work (most of the films of his that I’ve seen), I really hope that these other Snyder fans don’t get what they want, and the rug is pulled out from under them, and the Snyderverse doesn’t come back. They don’t deserve the Snyderverse in all honesty.