Ty Watches "Don't Look Up"

I just finished "Don't Look Up". I am being as literal as possible. I just turned off my tv after watching the movie.

First off I loved it. It is a great movie, very well made, the acting is superb and it is wonderful. I do not understand the bad reviews. My only critique is that it is a bit too long, but it did not feel like any of the footage was overused or unnecessary. The movie is very funny, but also horrifying. I actually look at this movie more as a horror movie than a comedy.

For the people that do not know, the movie is about a comet the size of Mt Everest coming to Earth in six months. There are scientists, astronomers, doctors and other very smart people that want to do whatever they can to stop this comet. Then we have the politicians, their followers and the tv people that just want ratings who choose to ignore the smart people. We also have a tech company leader, a la Steve Jobs, who is a money grubbing genius, and may be the most evil of all the villains in the movie. I am not going to spoil the movie because people must watch this movie. It is an important piece of pop culture that perfectly encapsulates our modern society. Leonardo DiCaprio and Jennifer Lawrence play the scientists, along with Rob Morgan. Lawrence discovers the comet, she tells her teacher and mentor, DiCaprio, about it and they celebrate, until they find out how disastrous this comet is going to be. They have done the calculations over and over again, and it keeps coming up that the comet will destroy Earth in just over six months. They tell Morgan's character this, and since he has connections to the White House, he gets them in front of the president.

Meryl Streep plays the president, and my goodness she is wonderfully scary in this role. She is this media obsessed, money grubbing scumbag of a person. She doesn't care about anyone but herself and she is all about her image and her votes. She crushes this role. Jonah Hill is her son and chief of staff. And he is woefully terrible at his job because he doesn't know what he is doing. There is a great runner that starts when the White House and scientists meet, and a general charges DiCaprio, Morgan and Lawrence for their snacks. Then they realize that they are free. It is truly the funniest bit in the movie.

From this meeting on out we get the whole social media circus. Tyler Perry and Cate Blanchett play a morning talk show team that just wants ratings. They loathe Lawrence and love DiCaprio. When Lawrence tells everyone the truth, she is immediately made out to be the pariah. She is memed to death. She is portrayed as the "bad guy", She is the only one that lets everyone know the truth from jump street. But that doesn't stop everyone from finding a person to bash. That is exactly what people do everyday now. It is maddening. And this movie shows that to perfection. Streep as the president takes even more of a heel turn when she gets rid of the original crew who told her what to do, and tells everyone to simply not look up. The comet is in the sky, we can all see it, but she is too busy worrying about the upcoming election. She goes so far as to put a hat on. It is frighteningly hilarious. And when stuff does hit the fan, the way people reacted, it sent chills up my spine. It was like looking at the real world. I cannot fathom what we would do as a country if this really happened. I have sat here just typing and thinking about how truly scary all of this would be. Then I remember that we have something similar with COVID. It is so wild and so scary.

Watch this movie now. It is required viewing. It is important to watch and discuss. Everyone must, must watch this movie. Please.

Ty

Ty is the Pop Culture editor for SeedSing and the other host of the X Millennial Man Podcast.

Come and support Ty and the podcast on Patreon.

Follow Ty on instagram and twitter.

SeedSing is funded by a group of awesome people. Join them by donating to SeedSing.

Better Never Than Late on "Dark Phoenix"

For quarantine date night my wife and I watched "Mad Max Fury Road". It was its release day birthday, my wife hadn't seen it and I wanted her to experience the awesomeness that is that movie. But, I am not going to write about that today. We have been very vocal on how much both RD and I LOVE that movie. I think we have said pretty much everything we can say about its greatness. It is a perfect movie.

On the day after quarantine date night, Sunday, we decided to watch "Dark Phoenix". It was on cable, we hadn't seen it yet and we are completists when it comes to "X-Men". I had heard not so good things about the movie, and my wife mentioned the same. She also rented the movie awhile back when she was home sick from work. So the fact that she didn't remember it should have been our first sign that maybe we shouldn't watch. But, we did see "X-Men Origins: Wolverine". We watched "Apocalypse". We saw the other Wolverine movie, the one in Japan, which I actually liked. We have seen them all. So we had to see. Maybe the critics were wrong, maybe it was the fever that caused my wife to forget, maybe, just maybe, they finally got this story right, maybe they did what "X-Men 3" tried to, but couldn't.

Well, and it bums me out to say this, this is the worst "X-Men" movie I have seen. That's right, I would rather watch "Origins" than "Dark Phoenix" if I had to pick. I mean, I don't want to watch either, but "Dark Phoenix" was just so very boring. Everything about the movie, for me, just didn't work. I felt like all the actors kind of phoned it in. James McAvoy, Sophie Turner, Michael Fassbender, they all just knew it was the end. Jennifer Lawrence seemed extremely checked out too. I know she said she didn't want to do this anymore, and boy did that show. Her death scene, which makes zero sense in the "X-Men" world, could have been very dramatic and moving. It was not. It was quick and easy to see coming. Nicolas Hoult, who I really like, was not good as Beast. I could hear his accent slip in and out, he seemed to have very little interest in the role and looked like he wished he was anywhere else. Both McAvoy and Fassbender seemed happy to just cash the check.

The thing that made this so disappointing was the story. Jean Gray has such a cool story. She is the most powerful X-Men. She can do what Professor X does to the nth degree. She is also very strong. She can fly. And she is an incredibly conflicted character. She has all the elements for what should be a very good story. The writers did not do that. They wrote scenes that seemed to drag. Sophie Turner, try as she might, had to deliver some super cheesy lines. Same thing with Lawrence. They had to do that with straight faces. My props to them. But all the stuff with Gray, as a kid, going to the academy, then becoming all powerful, it just seemed to drag on screen. There were too many scenes explaining stuff as opposed to showing her power. Her conflict was boring and cliche. The way she handled herself, especially when the bad guys came, it was all far too easy to see what was going to happen. The stuff with her and Cyclops made me opine for the relationship between grown up Jean Gray and him, and my wife and I call him "Cryclops". Like, it just didn't work at all. Even the big fight scene was not very good. My wife said that she thought she remembered it being solid, but that was with her fever addled brain. The fight scene was boring, they kept cutting back to Gray as a kid and there was only one good moment, when Magneto crushed a train car and tossed it aside.

My point? "Dark Phoenix" is not a good movie. It is not even a fun good movie. It was a bummer, and they should be able to get this story right. I hope someone else tries, like they did with "Logan", because Jean Gray's story is a great one. But "Dark Phoenix" way missed the mark for me. I'd skip this one if I were you. 

Ty

Ty is the Pop Culture editor for SeedSing and the other host of the X Millennial Man Podcast.

Come and support Ty and the podcast on Patreon.

Follow Ty on instagram and twitter.

SeedSing is funded by a group of awesome people. Join them by donating to SeedSing.

If You Listen to the Critics, you Might Miss Out On Good Movies Like "X-Men: Apocalypse"

It is your choice alone to sit in the movie theater

Last night I finally got around to seeing "X-Men: Apocalypse". As you all know by now, I am a big X-Men fan. They are my favorite group of superheroes, Wolverine is the best superhero all time and I pretty much like all the mutants that make up the X-Men. I think their stories are the most unique and the coolest, by far. I have liked all the X-Men movies, with the exception being "X-Men Origins: Wolverine". It pains me to say that because of my love for Wolverine, but it is a bad movie. I almost put "X-Men 3" as the other bad movie because that ending is an abomination, but the first 3/4 of that movie is very interesting and kind of cool. The ending is just so, so terrible.

I put off seeing "X-Men: Apocalypse" for so long before the reviews were luke warm at best. The critics said that it was a waste of a good cast and the actors played cliché characters. They were hardest on Oscar Issac, who played Apocalypse, but I thought he did just fine. In fact, I enjoyed this movie.

My blog today is not a review, but more so an indictment of critics. But, I will give a short review. "X-Men: Apocalypse" is not even close to the same level as some other movies in the X-Men universe. "X-Men 2", "X-Men", "X-Men: First Class" and "X-Men: Days of Future Past" are all better movies than "Apocalypse". But,as I said, I enjoyed all 2 and a half hours. I was never bored, the story was interesting and I really liked the acting. Michael Fassbender, James McCavoy, Jennifer Lawrence, Nicolaus Hoult and the kid that played Havoc were all just fine reprising their roles. And the new people, the girl from "Game of Thrones" as young Jean Grey, the kid that played young Cyclops, the young Nightcrawler and young Storm, Psylock and Oscar Issac, I thought they all did a good job. I felt that "Apocalypse" was a fine addition to the X-Men pantheon. It was a good popcorn movie and I think most people would enjoy it if they watched it.

This all leads me to my main point. After the movie, I checked back on Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic and IMDB and other sites like that to see if I misread the reviews. Well, I did not misread anything. The movie scored a 44% on Rotten Tomatoes, hovered right around a 5/10 on Metacritic and IMDB and seemed to be considered a flop by most websites that compile critics reviews. I read most of the consensus' on each site, and they all said virtually the same thing. They said the movie was "overwrought with action and clichéd characters that take away from a compelling story and good actors".

I could not disagree more. First off, overwrought with action? It is a god damn superhero movie. Superhero movies are supposed to be filled with action because they have superheroes in them. The same critics did not say this about movies like "Captain America: Civil War" or any other X-Men movie, and I feel like all those had way more action scenes than "Apocalypse". "Civil War" was basically all action, and critics loved that movie. I think it is a better movie too, but it is not that much better than "Apocalypse". And all the other X-Men movies that these same critics loved, like "Days of Future Past" for instance, they loved the action scenes and said they added so much to the story. I love the scene where Magneto destroys that baseball field in "Days of Future Past", but there was also a very similar scene in "Apocalypse", and the critics claimed it was "overwrought with action sequences". That is totally baffling to me.

Then, to call the characters cliché, what were they expecting? These characters are already in the ether. They have all been established a long, long time ago by the creators of the X-Men comic books. They cannot be any more clichéd than the characters in the comic books that I'm sure these critics read and loved. That is such a blanketed, ill-conceived criticism, in my opinion. I understand when they say that about a movie that does not have established characters, but saying it about a superhero movie is asinine. If these characters are clichéd, so is Captain America, Iron Man, Dr. Strange, basically any superhero, that these critics gave wonderful, glowing reviews, they are all clichéd. They are all the same character that they are in the comic books, so they are clichéd versions of their comic book characters. I'm sorry critics, but you cannot have it both ways. If the people that made these movies started to add new characters themselves, rabid fans would demolish them on social media, and I guarantee that you critics would chastise the people writing these movies for adding new, unnecessary people in an established universe.

I just do not understand the hatred for "Apocalypse" coming from so many well-known critics. I feel like they need to bad mouth some movies sometimes just because. they have no real reason, they just want to dislike something, so they choose the new superhero movie coming out with big expectations, and that is the one that they are going to crush on their websites and papers. This may be the same thing that happened with "Batman V Superman", but that movie had a director with a known track record of being mediocre. The X-Men movies have a well established, albeit a creepy dude, directing these movies, and for the most part, they have gotten glowing reviews.

I guess what I'm really trying to say is, do not trust critics, me included. If you want to see, read or listen to something, do it. Do not base your decision on what these people say. I wish I hadn't waited so long to see "Apocalypse", but I read, and trusted these critics, and it was the wrong choice. I try not to listen to critics, but I made a mistake. I really enjoyed "Apocalypse", and I think most fans of superhero and X-Men movies will enjoy it too. Check it out, if you want.

Ty

Ty is the Pop Culture editor for SeedSing and the other host of the X Millennial Man Podcast. He has not been kind to the movie critics this year. Hear him talk about it all on a classic X Millennial Man Podcast that is all about the Oscars.

The Oscar Nominations Came Out Today, and They Mostly Suck

I am not sure the Oscars really know what is good.

I know I promised everyone a greatest American band blog today, but I'm putting that off until next week. There's bigger fish to fry for me today.

The Oscar nominations were handed out this morning and I have two big, big problems with the nominees. First off, why all the white people again? Do the people who vote on these awards think that there are no people of color that act in movies these days? There were a decent number of people that were well deserving of, at the very least, a nomination. What about Samuel L Jackson for his performance in "Hateful 8"? He was awesome. What about Michael B Jordan in "Creed"? Stallone gets nominated, but the lead of this great movie gets no love? That's lame. And even though the movie "Concussion" didn't have its desired effect and wasn't very good, Will Smith was excellent and totally deserved a nomination. I guess the people that give out the nominations are racist, old white people that wish it was still 1950. It's a shame that they refuse to nominate actors that aren't white, especially in 2016. It's upsetting to be frank. I wonder how long it will actually take for actors of color to get their due. It's time, and there are so many great African American, Asian, Indian and so on and so forth of any ethnicity well deserving. I'm sick of all the same white people being nominated. I'm done with Meryl Streep and Matt Damon and Jennifer Lawrence being the people that get nominated no matter how bad or repetitive their performances are. Eddie Redmayne belongs with the people I mentioned above too. I'll take Michael B Jordan, Will Smith and Samuel L Jackson any day over the four actors I just mentioned.

Second issue, my biggest problem, why is Charlize Theron not nominated for her role, Furiosa, in "Mad Max: Fury Road"? How on earth does this happen? How was Jennifer Lawrence's performance in "Joy" aka "Silver Linings Playbook 2", more deserving than Theron? Or Cate Blanchette in a movie I've never heard of, "Carol", more deserving? In fact, Brie Larson in "Room" is the only one that I have no problem with being nominated. "Mad Max: Fury Road" got a ton of nominations, but none for acting. That's wrong. Theron was the best actor in the best movie of the year, possibly of all time. She was so fantastic and perfect in her role. She played the part expertly. She was tough when needed, vulnerable when needed, sad and angry when needed, basically, whatever George Miller asked of her, she did it and did it phenomenally. She was so, so great in this movie. I know it's called "Mad Max", but Furiosa, not Max, was the star and leader of this movie. This may be one of the biggest snubs of all time in Oscar history. I just don't get what else she could have done. Maybe the movie needed to be foreign, or she needed some kind of disease, or she needed some kind of smaller indie role that the academy loves now. That's all bullshit. Why won't they reward the actors from the movie that's widely considered the best movie of the year? It makes absolutely no sense at all. I wrote before, and I still believe, Theron not only deserved the nomination, but she 100 percent deserves the Oscar. There was no better performance all year from anyone, man, woman or child. Theron was head and shoulders above anyone that's been nominated this year. Another shame.

I guess I should know by now to be disappointed in what this dumbass academy does every year. They clearly don't care for minorities and they are just flat out wrong when it comes to nominating actors and actresses. You'd think they'd be more conscious in the 21st century, but they're still racist and stupid.

The morons that give out these nominations suck.

Ty

Ty is the Pop Culture editor for SeedSing and the other host of the X Millennial Man podcast. He was once nominated for a grade school acting award, but lost it to the kid playing tree #2. Follow Ty on twitter @tykulik.

Ty wants to rant about the overrated Meryl Streep

The inside of every Diet Coke bottle Meryl Streep buys

With the release last week of "Ricki and the Flash", I want to take time out today to call out critics and, most importantly, Meryl Streep.

I don't get the love that's given to Meryl Streep. Sure, she's a fine actress, but all the accolades and the awards being given to get baffle me. Case and point, "Ricki and the Flash" has a rating of 59% on Rotten Tomatoes, with the consensus being, "while the narrative is trite and predictable, Streep shines in her role as an aged rocker reuniting with her family". First of all, when I first saw the preview for this movie, I thought Funny or Die, or The Onion made a joke preview. There was no way this was a real movie. Meryl Streep is easily in her sixties and they try to make her look like she's in her forties. You look great Mrs. Streep, but you don't look like your in your forties. The preview also makes the movie look like a melodramatic piece of garbage. AKA, a typical Meryl Streep movie and role. I cannot believe critics convinced themselves to, not only see this movie, but heap praises on Streep. Put someone like Naomi Watts or Maggie Gyllenhaal, two great actresses, in this exact same role and I guarantee you, critics would have crushed the movie. But not with Streep. She or her people must have given money to the critics association with the understanding that they'd never bad mouth her. That's not fair to other actresses and actors out there. Even guys like George Clooney and Brad Pitt get bad reviews when they're in bad movies. That doesn't happen to Meryl Streep.

Not only does she get rave reviews no matter how bad the movie is, but she gets nominated, and sometimes wins Oscars for bad movies. Last year the movie "August, Osage County" was released. It got luke warm reviews. It was about a family full of people with mental problems. It was another typical melodramatic movie that wanted to be a play. In fact, I think it was originally a play. Anyway, Streep plays Julia Roberts mother that has dementia, or something like that, and she spends the movie basically yelling her lines and, as Jon Lovitz would say, ACTING. She chews so much scenery in that movie. Did she get blasted by critics like a lot of the other actors in the movie? No, in fact, she got nominated for best supporting actress. What a crock of shit. That movie is garbage and her performance is really rough to watch. I don't recommend that movie. The same thing can be said for "The Iron Lady". This is the Margaret Thatcher movie and it got slammed by critics. I think it was below 40% on Rotten Tomatoes. That's not good, in fact, that's pretty bad. That's "Pixels" bad. But, once again, not only did Streep get nominated for an Oscar, I think she won it that year (ed note: She did win the Oscar). So, a movie that's given such a bad review for how terrible it is, gets awarded for with an Oscar. WTF! That makes ZERO sense!

I guess, I don't, and probably never will understand the love for Streep. I haven't seen many of her movies because I'm not into melodrama, but the love for her makes no sense to me. She's a very good actress, but I'll take Maggie Gyllenhaal or Naomi Watts or Jennifer Lawrence or Octavia Spencer over Meryl Streep any day.

No question.

Ty

Ty is the Pop Culture editor for SeedSing and the co-host of the X Millennial Man Podcast. He is really annoyed that everyone in his family loves Meryl Streep in Mamma Mia. Follow Ty on twitter @tykulik.