Fan Film Mondays - Superman: Awakens Review

 

It's been weeks since the release of James Gunn's Superman, but I still have that movie on my mind. So I think it's a good idea to see what the fan film side of things have done, again.

Superman: Awakens is a 2023 CGI animated short fan film that takes inspiration from the character of Kingdom Come Superman along with other works by Alex Ross. Antonis Fylladitis directed and wrote the story along with Stavros Fylladitis and John Finnegan.

The story is, after suffering through great tragedies Superman doesn't feel as though he's the beacon of hope he once was. Can the Man of Steel come back and be that hero people need, or will he give up?

• Negatives

I've got nothing.

• Mix

I do have just one mix feeling regarding this and that's Daniel Zbel as Superman. Now he didn't do a bad job with acting. I thought he did good. But his Superman voice is a mix bag. Now I get what they were going for. This is not just an older Superman but also one who's been beating down because of all of the tragedies in his life. So naturally Superman isn't gonna sound as confident and triumphant. But I think his voice sounded a bit too gruff and brooding.

• Positives

One thing to praise is the story. Taken a bit from Kingdom Come, Superman is broken and doesn't know if he's the symbol people believe him to be. The voice over by Zbel a provides very well done narration of how Superman is trying to find his way back. The closing dialogue by the end actually got me excited. It was incredible.

The last thing I'll praise is the animation. The team used an Unreal Engine. For any of you who don't know, is 3D computer graphic software typically used for video games. And the animators used it to perfection. On one hand it looks like Alex Ross' draws were brought to life and on another hand there were some shots that almost looked like they were close to looking like it was live-action. That's how great these guys did.

I strongly recommend you watch Superman: Awakens. It's only four minutes long but it's worth the time.

My final rating is, Great.

That's all for now. Come back on Saturday, Jul 26th, for my review of the newest MCU movie, The Fantastic Four: First Steps. Until then, enjoy the rest of your day.

I Know What You Did Last Summer (2025) Review

 

So we've got a new I Know What You Did Last Summer movie. Fingers crossed it's a lot better than the last one, I'll Always Know What You Did Last Summer. And if any of you didn't know that one existed, do yourself a favor and avoid it at all cost. Trust me.

I Know What You Did Last Summer (2025) is a slasher movie and the fourth movie in the franchise. It's produced by both Columbia Pictures and Original Films with distribution by Sony Pictures Releasing. Jennifer Kaytin Robinson directed and wrote the story along with Sam Lansky.

The story is, five friends unintentionally killed an innocent pedestrian with their car and during their panic they covered up their mistake. One year later, as they try to move on they each get a message by a stalker saying he knows what they did. They soon realize the stalker is copying a legendary serial killer, and the group's only hope is the survivors from the original 1997 massacre.

Initial Reaction

I remember when I first watched the first Last Summer film. I believe it was 2002 and it was on TNT, and I actually enjoyed it and today I still enjoy it. Then there was the sequel which was alright, and the less said about the third movie the better. So when I heard about this newest one I was interested and I'd figured I give it a chance. I mean there's no way it can be worse than I'll Always Know.

Cons

I've got nothing.

Middle Ground

Let's start off with the story. Mainly the whodunit element. Firstly, I still liked the overall story. I thought it was very entertaining. Having said that the mystery is something you'll figure pretty quickly. There really only a select few who could possibly be the killer and some red herrings were more obvious than others. Then there's characters. Now Jennifer Love Hewitt and Freddy Prinze Jr. do play some big roles in the story and aren't just cameos. So thankfully their characters do feel properly used. But then we have the new characters those being Ava, Danica, Milo, Teddy, and Stevie. Honestly I thought they were okay. Some are giving some depth like Danica who's grieving over her fiancé's death but it's kinda surface level, while others you're just expecting them die pretty soon. Speaking of depth, I do appreciate the movie trying to tackle themes, the biggest one being trauma. It did add layer to the story, but I don't think they dived as deep into has much as they could've.

Pros

The first thing I'll credit is the pacing. Some parts could be a little bit slow, but for the majority of the runtime this is a breeze to get through. The last thing I'll credit is the slasher element. While it's great to have horror films that aren't just typical blood and guts and instead focus on deeper story elements. But sometimes you do just want a horror movie where a psycho goes around killing people in very creative ways. You just want that fun element, and I Know What You Did Last Summer (2025) is that fun slasher movie.

Well by no means flawless, this still had some entertainment to be had. And it's a hell of a lot better than I'll Always Know What You Did Last Summer. Sorry I keep bringing that one up but man was it mind-numbingly stupid.

My final rating is, Okay.

That's all for now. Come back on Monday, Jul 21st, for another edition of my brand new segment, Fan Film Mondays. Until then, enjoy the rest of your day.

Looking Back at the Films of 2024 Part Two - The Bikeriders & Longlegs

 

Alright, time for another edition of Looking Back at the Films of 2024. Let's get to it.

Why Didn't I See The Bikeriders?

Now I did want to see The Bikeriders. Cause as much as I love my superheroes, explosive action flicks, and sci-fi epics, I do prefer to step away from that stuff and enjoy something at a much more smaller scale. And The Bikeriders seem like the perfect choice to enjoy something smaller. But I decided to skip out because not only was I working on other reviews, but I was also tried from helping family members with their stuff. So I decided to skip the movie and save it for later.

What is The Bikeriders?

The Bikeriders is a crime drama with it's plot inspired by the Danny Lyon's photo book of the same name with production being handled by Regency Enterprises, New Regency, and Tri-State Pictures and distribution done by Focus Features. Jeff Nichols both wrote and directed.

The story is, in the late 60's to early 70's a biker gang and their colors were everything. They started off as a simple gang, but as their members grew they transformed into something else, something darker. Because of this transformation and questionable loyalty, one of their members named Benny must chose between the club and the woman he loves.

My Thoughts

The Good: First off, the movie provides a great insight into not just the Vandals, but motorcycle clubs as a whole. The movie doesn't glamorize them and their lifestyle. It shows how it starts as a social club into a criminal organization. Now while the movie shows this isn't a lifestyle you should set out for, it does have an appropriate vibe to it. What I mean is the film captures the rebellious spirit of the 60's and then heading into the 70's. Where the filmmakers also managed to capture that decades more intense vibe what with the looming shadow of the Vietnam War. But my biggest praise goes to the performances. Jodie Comer brings emotional depth into the role with capturing Kathy's much more innocent spirit. Oh and her Midwestern accent is spot on. Then we have Austin Butler as Benny. While his role is quieter, he does bring some intensity to the role. But I think the more quieter side is fzr more interesting because I think it draws you in more because you do kinda want to know more about his character. Lastly there's Tom Hardy as Johnny. What I love about Hardy's performance was while his character has menace to him, Hardy also brought out Johnny's more vulnerable side as he realizes his club is growing darker and his control over it is slowly fading away.

The Bad: I've got nothing.

The Okay: Now overall the story is pretty good. We get to quite a bit of the Vandals were just a couple of guys hanging and riding motorcycles to slowly becoming a criminal group. But we don't get to see too much of the gangs' inner workings. That's because they narrative is told through Kathy (Benny's wife) and her interview with Danny Lyon. So because of this narrative structure our view is gonna be limited.

Final Verdict: Good.

Why Didn't I See Longlegs?

Honestly, I didn't know this movie was a thing. I don't recall ever seeing a TV spot on my TV or an ad on YouTube. I didn't know about it until I saw people I follow on X post about, but by that time it was too late for me to give a review. So much like The Bikeriders I decided to save it for this section.

What is Longlegs?

Longlegs is a horror thriller that was produced by Traffic., Range Media Partners, Oddfellows Productions, and Saturn Films with Neon being the distributor. Osgood Perkins wrote and directed.

The story is, it's the 90's and someone is murdering families throughout Oregon. FBI Agent Lee Harker is assigned to the case, but the more she investigates she not only realizes the killings might be linked to the occult, but she also shares a personal connection to these killings as well. With these shocking turn of events in mind, she's even more determined to stop the killer before he strikes again.

My Thoughts

The Good: The first aspect I want to touch upon is the cinematography. Andrés Arochi did a spectacular job. His coloring is brilliant. His use of white is blinding and gives a sense of isolation instead of purity like it's typically used. But I think it's his use of red that's the biggest standout. He is using as a sense of danger but he uses effectively. Red is greatly used for danger, unease, and links perfectly with the movie's satanic themes. Then there's the performances, mainly from Maika Monroe as Lee Harker and Nicolas Cage as Longlegs. Now yes, Cage can be over the top sometimes in the role. But he provides a great shift from creepy whispers to more maniac outbursts is actually really chilling. His biggest standout moment is during an interrogation scene where his behavior is truly unsettling. Then we have Maika. Now she's able to say so much with very little dialogue. She's primarily using facial and body language to tell us what inner turmoil she's going through. From beginning to end Monroe perfectly captures how Detective Harker is on edge, as this case is making her unravel from both a professional and personal perspective. The last thing I'll praise is tone. I do admit there was some overhype but, I don't think that undermines that the movie can get you to feel uneven. The opening alone makes you tense up because you can feel that there's something not right. Osgood crafted a good movie that relies way more on psychological tension instead of the pitfalls of jump scares that a lot of modern day horror flicks go for.

The Bad: I've got nothing.

The Okay: It's the pacing. Longlegs is only an hour and forty-one minutes, but it felt longer than that. That's because of the slow burn approach. Which isn't particularly a bad thing cause the mystery is intriguing so a slow build up should be put in, a matter of fact there's a lot of great crime films that have a slow burn approach. However there were moments that I felt were good and others just a bit too long, a feeling I especially felt during the middle act.

Final Verdict: Good.

So that's all for now. Come back on Saturday, Jul 19th, for my review of I Know What You Did Last Summer (2025). Until then, enjoy the rest of your day.

A Look Back at Happy Gilmore (1996)

 

With the sequel arriving very soon on Netflix, it's yet again that time where I continue the tradition of reviewing what came before.

Happy Gilmore is a sports comedy movie that was produced by Brillstein-Grey Entertainment and Robert Simonds Productions with Universal Pictures distributing. Adam Sandler not only starred but also wrote the story alongside Tim Herlihy, with Dennis Dugan directing.

The story is, Happy Gilmore is a failed short-tempered aspiring hockey player. When Happy learns that his grandmother's house is gonna be foreclosed and he seeks to gather enough money to pay the IRS. During this adventure, Happy learns his powerful slapshots can be used in golf and soon joins in to paid tournaments. Despite some not approving of Happy's attitude his skills and boorish behavior gathers him a following.

• Negatives

I've got nothing.

• Mix

Now let's get to the story. Yes, we've got the whole sports underdog tropes. Happy's the underestimated hero, Shooter is rival, we've got a love interest whose skeptical about him but falls in love, and we got to the big climatic event. It's all here. But while I was aware of those things, I still to this day have a blast watching this. Which I've said many times before. If your story is predictable make getting from point A to point B entertaining, and Happy Gilmore is one of many best examples.

• Positives

First there's the pacing. The movie is 92 minutes long and doesn't waste anytime. Through a mix of sports and comedy, you'll be kept engaged throughout the brisk runtime.

Then the performance. Because this was during a better time during Adam Sandler's career, Happy is a very entertaining character with his over the top energy. Meanwhile we have Christopher McDonald playing Shooter and he nails it as Happy's smug foil. And maybe it's just me, but he looked like he was having some fun in the role too. Lastly there's the late Carl Weathers as Chubbs Peterson. Despite his character having a more over the top disability, he does add a more grounded warmth to Happy's manic characteristics.

The last thing I'll praise is the humor. I would like to go into more details, but when it comes to comedy movies, or at least the good ones, I don't want to give them away because giving too much will in my mind ruin the experience provided you haven't seen this already. But what I will say is yes, the movie's very funny. Everybody mentions the Bob Barker brawl, and rightfully so it's a great moment. But there's also some great bits of dialogue. My personal favorite is during one of Happy's games and he of course gets angry when things aren't going his way where he proceeds to say this, "You little son of a bitch ball! Why don't you want to go *home*? That's your *home*! Are you too good for your *home*? Answer me! Suck my white ass, ball!" 🤣. Oh how I love that line. See if golf had more outburst like that, I'd watch it more.

I am without a doubt a fan of this movie. I love it from beginning to middle to end.

My final rating is, Good.

That's all for now, I'm hoping the sequel is decent but for now come back on Thursday, Jul 17th, for part two of Looking Back at the Films of 2024. Until then, enjoy the rest of your day.

Superman (2025) Review

 

Superman is a comic book movie that's not only based on the DC Comics' hero, but it's also the second reboot to the character and the first film in the DC Universe. Production was handled by DC Studios, Troll Court Entertainment, and The Safran Company with Warner Bros. Pictures doing distribution. The movie is written and directed by James Gunn.

The story is, after getting involved in a war between two neighboring countries, Superman maybe a inspiration but that action has also made him a controversial figure. And nobody has taken advantage of this fear then Lex Luthor. Lex plans to not only kill the Man of Steel, but but break his spirit first. Now, Superman must not only defeat Lex but show the public he is a hero.

Initial Reaction

Now since the day I heard James Gunn was gonna be involved, I've been very wary of him and his style of filmmaking. Something I wrote about not too long ago. Then when waiting for the movie to arrive I reviewed the previous movies, gave my thoughts on the newest suit, and the comics that influenced it. And now, here we are.

Cons

There's the humor. Jeez, I can't remember the last time I've been in a theater and surrounded by so much silence. Nobody was having a fun time with these jokes and stuff, myself included. And what really infuriated me especially was how James said on Threads (remember this site? The supposed thing that was gonna kill X/fka Twitter?) one of his many influences for his movie were Superman stories like Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow?, Superman for All Seasons, and the criminally underrated Superman: The Animated Series. Well were those influences James? Guess all of the comedic bullshit I saw are saying otherwise. Then there's the pacing to this. This is a supposedly 2hrs and 9min, but it didn't feel like that. Now some of you are probably wondering why should that be a complaint? Shouldn't that be a good thing? And you'd be right, but the reason I'm seeing it as a negative is because we barely get a moment to breath. Going by memory I think there was one, maybe there were two scenes where we slow down. But the other parts just go by a breakneck speed.

Middle Ground

Firstly there the tone. I found this movie to be a very similar situation to a previous James Gunn film, that being Guardians of the Galaxy Vol.3. Both have a stories with some very serious elements to them and those are the best parts. But sadly there overshadowed by all of the stupid goofy crap. But even if you can ignore that, the world building isn't all that great. Having not doing an origin story and having an established Superman is a good idea. That what was the same route Matt Reeves took with his Batman film not too long ago. But with characters like Green Lantern, Hawkgirl, and Mister Terrific just being thrusted in here and some Superman mythos also thrown in, unless you've read quite a lot of comics like I have, you're gonna be left wanting more context. Then there was the CGI. Now the CGI on Krypto, that was pretty good. A lot of time was put into him. Even the kaiju looked good as well. But there was CGI that just wasn't good, one example being Superman holding a baby while trying to fit his way out of pocket dimension. Then lastly there's the action. Now I did enjoy some scenes. There was some action that was pretty good, like Superman fighting both Ultraman and The Engineer that was fun. But some action scenes are brought down because of Gunn's directing choices and a lot of frenetic editing.

Pros

So is there any positive thing to this? Yes, the cast. They did put in a lot of good effort in their performances despite the material not understanding if it wants to be serious or over the top.

Superman (2025) truly was James Gunn's time to not only challenge himself as a director, not only give the DCU a big spectacular beginning, but also had the chance to shut a lot of his critics up. But sadly he just continues to stay in the same rut he's been in. Having said that, do I hate this movie? No, there's just somethings I don't like. Am I gonna be a shill for this? Ha! Not in this lifetime. I think the movie's just okay. It's not gonna be something I'll watch back to back like previous Superman movies, it's just something I'll occasionally watch.

My final rating is, Okay.

So yeah, if you are planning to see this, just take your time. You really don't have to get to the nearest theater asap. That's going to do it for me. Come back on Monday, Jul 14th, for A Look Back at review of Happy Gilmore. Until then, enjoy the rest of your day.

Why I'm Highly Skeptical About James Gunn's DCU

 

So originally I was gonna do this way back when James Gunn first announced his slate back in Jan of 2023. But I decided to save it for later when we were closer to Superman. Well, Superman is coming out tomorrow so now's the time.

Disclaimer

Now let's get this out of the way before I start giving my thoughts. As you guys know I'm a fan of Zack Snyder's DCEU movies and I've even shown support for fan movements related to the SnyderVerse on X, or at least I did before they wrongfully suspended me, but that's besides the point. But regardless of my love for Snyder's work in my reviews I still pointed out somethings I thought we decent or didn't like in his DCEU films. So what am I getting at here? My point is while I am a fan of Snyder's DCEU films, everything I'll be writing about for James Gunn's DCU doesn't come from a strictly Snyder fan perspective. I was a DC Comics fan long before I was a Zack Snyder fan! Now let's get into my thoughts on why I'm skeptical.

Let's start off with...

James Gunn Isn't A Master Class Filmmaker

Firstly let me explain something. This point is gonna more of a rant on people rather than Gunn himself, because James has made some good things, yes there's Guardians of the Galaxy and what I find to be more of his underrated works that being Slither. But what's driving me crazy is his fans. Now don't get it twisted, there's plenty of Snyder fans out there that take it too far. But every since I want to say somewhere around the time him and Peter Safran were announced as the co-CEOs of DC Studios, people have been praising Gunn like he's the second coming of Steven freakin' Spielberg.

All of sudden James Gunn belongs up on the mount Rushmore of directors alongside Stanley Kubrick, Martin Scorsese, and whoever else you want to put up there. But prior to Guardians, nobody knew nor cared who he was. When I think a filmmaking legend I think of guys who everybody knows and has had more box office hits than flops, and James Gunn isn't one of them. Way before the MCU, his highest-grossing movie was...the live-action Scooby-Doo movie back in 2002. Now I like that movie in a so bad, it's good way, but come on. That movie being one of your first smash hits isn't something any filmmaker should brag about. I know Gunn hasn't actually bragged I'm just saying in general. So after Scooby-Doo, James made other movies like the previously mentioned Slither among others, but guess what? They bombed. I'm well aware not every box office bomb is a sign of quality but that should speak to people.

Now that was before the MCU, what about outside the MCU? Did James Gunn write and direct anything else? Yes, he did, 2021's The Suicide Squad. And it bombed. NOW I KNOW WHAT YOU'RE ALL GONNA SAY! "But Michael, there was COVID!" "It was released the same day on HBO Max"! NO! I am so feed up with those arguements! They don't work! Why? Well what about all the other movies that were released during that time? F9, Sing 2, Ghostbusters: Afterlife, and then there's actually movies that Warner Bros. made that didn't bomb despite being in the same situation as The Suicide Squad. Those being Godzilla vs. Kong and Dune. Now you could make the argument Dune got released later in 2021 (October 22nd to be exact) and restrictions weren't as bad compared to earlier in that year. But that still doesn't change the fact it was in a very similar situation to Gunn's film especially also being released on HBO Max. There's also Godzilla vs. Kong, I saw that one in theaters when we still had social distancing and masks. And guess what? That move was a hit in spite of everything.

The point I'm getting at is, James Gunn maybe a good director/writer, but he's not the box office draw people on social media, especially on X, are making him out to be.

The Slate is Lackluster

I mean it, I'm not a big fan of this slate of projects. This is a lackluster slate. I mean let's look at. You only got two big names of out this, that being Superman (2025). That'll get some eyes because it's Superman. The other being The Brave and The Bold. That'll get attention because it's a Batman film and as long as that don't repeat Batman & Robin, people will go see that in droves.

Then we got some...not so big names. Clayface, if that's anything like the first Joker movie especially with a GOOD word of mouth maybe that'll do well? Maybe? Supergirl could also maybe possibly be a hit because of the connections to Superman. The we have The Authority, I don't see it doing all that well because nobody expect hardcore comic book fans of heard of them, and they're not gonna be enough to get a good box office performance. As for Swamp Thing, I don't see that doing well because much The Authority, Swamp Thing isn't all that known despite his long history in comics and having a short-lived show on the CW.

That's just the movie side of things, the TV series aren't really all that better. Like who in there right mind wanted a tv show about Amanda Waller? There's also Paradise Lost, and maybe that'll get some attention because of the show's connection to Wonder Woman. But that show won't have Wonder Woman in it so a lot of people probably aren't gonna tune in. We saw that same method with SyFy's Krypton and it only got two seasons. There's also other shows scheduled to come out but I think you get the picture.

So yeah, this slate isn't all that exciting. There's only two heavy hitters involved in this one, and one [Superman (2025)] is right around the corner but the other [The Brave and The Bold] doesn't even an estimate of when it's gonna be released.

What is This Universe's Canon?

What do I mean by this? Isn't the canon what's on the slate? Isn't this a brand new universe starting from the beginning so we don't have to worry about previous projects? Well you would think, but James Gunn went and made this confusing!

Back in June 13th of 2023, James Gunn revealed that Blue Beetle (the character from his self-titled 2023 movie) is the first character in the DCU while Superman is the first full DCU movie. What?!? Blue Beetle is in the DCEU continuity so how is he the first DCU character? Shouldn't the first DCU character be I don't know, Superman!

And if you thought that was confusing, here's a statement he made not too long ago. On Jan 21st of this year, James Gunn took to Bluesky and answered a question from a fan regrading canon to his previous DC projects those being the first season of Peacemaker & The Suicide Squad. In that post he said,

"Short answer: Only Creature Commandos forward is pure canon. For instance, Rick Flag Jr. was killed because we heard Rick Flag Sr. talking about it in Creature Commandos, not because we saw it in The Suicide Squad".

He would continue with, "Long answer: Only CC forward is pure canon; Peacemaker is almost entirely consistent with that canon other than the Justice League; The Suicide Squad has a lot of consistencies but I think of it as an imperfect memory".

This is a mess. Because this whole pick and choose situation just makes things confusing. Because in the first episode of Creature Commandos, yes, Rick Sr. did hear of his sons death. But, during that conversation he had with Amanda Waller she mentioned Rick Jr's death happened during Project: Starfish. A mission that only happened in The Suicide Squad! Casual audiences,  if they start doing research are gonna be confused by this weird decision of taking events that happened in the DCEU they putting them in the DCU and then saying to the extent of "Yeah that happened but,".

This could've been solved had James & Peter just made this franchise a full blown reboot, but apparently James just wanted his stuff not to be erase.

Not Helping The One Trick Pony Claims

For the longest time I've heard people repeatedly say James Gunn is a one trick pony. The common complaints is his bag of tricks of needle drops, animal character, multiple usage of cursing dialogue trying to be Quentin Tarantino, overuse of comedy, and shouting.

At first I just ignored this. I thought it was just people finding stuff to complain about. But over the best couple of years I'm understand the complaints, especially now because it truly does feel like it. The Suicide Squad had needle drops, an animal character [King Shark], overused comedy, and who can forget Bloodsport & his daughter arguing? That moment had both cursing and shouting. Then there was season one of Peacemaker. There were needle drops, animal character [Eagly], swearing dialogue, overuse of comedy, and instances of shouting. And then there's his newest DC show, Creature Commandos. Where you guessed it. Needle drops, animal character [Weasel], cursing, and overuse of comedy!! I forgot if there was shouting but I wouldn't be surprised if there was.

Which now brings me to Superman (2025). Now I don't like to judge movies by their marketing because sometimes the marketing won't do a movie any justice, Transformers One anybody? When the first teaser dropped I was surprised. I thought to myself, "Wow, this feels different. This feels like James Gunn isn't gonna do his usual stuff". But then as the marketing continued more of James Gunn's usual signatures starting popping up. Some could argue the sneak peek had an overuse of comedy what with Krypto jumping on Superman as he's hurt, the trailer released a month ago has Superman shouting at Lois, and lastly we had that newest tickets on sale trailer where near the end we have a comedy moment of Superman laying on the ground saying "I'm not messing around I'm doing important stuff". And if we count Krypto, so far Superman (2025) has three of the five things people criticize James Gunn for.

And there you have it. My reasons for being skeptical about this new DC cinematic universe. Before signing off I want to reiterate something. I was a DC Comics fan long before I was a Zack Snyder fan! Why did I repeat this? Because I want you to know I viewed this situation strictly as a fan of DC. Now do I want this universe to fail? No. Me wanting this to fail would not be a good look. Also that would be real nice wouldn't it? I want the GunnVerse to fail despite some people actually wanting it, yet here I am wanting the SnyderVerse restored and the Joel Schumacher cut of Batman Forever released. Like I said before, not the best look for me if I truly wanted this new cinematic universe to fail.

So that's all for now. Come back on Saturday, Jul 12th, for my review of James Gunn's Superman. Until then, enjoy the rest of your day.

Road to The Naked Gun (2025) - The Naked Gun 33⅓: The Final Insult Review

 

Wow, first I finished the road to Captain America: Brave New World, then I finished the road to Karate Kid: Legends, then I finished the road to The Fantastic Four: First Steps, then there was the road to Superman (2025) that I finished not too long ago, and now I finished this road to. That's five Roads folks.

The Naked Gun 33⅓: The Final Insult is a crime comedy film and the third film in the series. This time around Paramount Pictures both produced and distributed. The screenplay was written by Pat Proft, David Fucker, and Robert LoCash and was directed by Peter Segal in what was his directorial debut.

The story is, Lt. Frank Drebin is retired and spending time with his wife. This retirement is soon cut short when Frank is called back into action when he's told about a terrorist plot to bomb the Academy Awards. Frank goes undercover to try and stop this insidious act of terror...now if only he can stop causing trouble as much as he's trying to prevent.

• Negatives

I've got nothing.

• Mix

There's two mix bags. One being the villain Rocco Dillon. Much like Quentin Napsburg in The Naked Gun 2½: The Smell of Fear before him, he's not bad he's just okay with a few good humorous moments. 

Then there's the humor. Sometimes they do recycle material which will give you a feeling of seen it before. But there are still plenty of new ones too. There's two I remember. One is a funny bit of Frank's inner narration saying, "Like a blind man at an orgy, I was gonna have to feel things out". Then the other joke involves a transsexual. Remember when you could make those kind of jokes before everybody got a stick up the ass? Those were good times. 😌

• Positives

Now I'm gonna make these next two very brief because they're just repeats from what I said in my review for The Naked Gun 2½. Firstly the pacing. Regardless of quality the third movie continues what the others did, which is not over staying it's welcome. Just like it's predecessors The Naked Gun 33⅓ is quick and to the point.

Then there's the cast and their performances. Leslie Nelson continued his winning streak of bring his comedic talents to the role of Frank Drebin, along with a strong supporting cast including George Kennedy having his great chemistry with Nelson. And a big surprisingly enough the late Anna Nicole Smith playing Tanya Peters, where she provides a hilarious parody of the femme fatale trope.

While there's flaws as far as third movies in a trilogy go, The Naked Gun 33⅓: The Final Insult isn't a bad way to go out. If anything it was pretty good in the grand scheme of things.

My final rating is, Okay.

Okay that's a wrap. Due come back on Thursday, Jul 10th, where I'll give my opinions on James Gunn's upcoming DC Universe. Until then, enjoy the rest of your day.