Michael 2026 by AverageMansReviews

Michael 2026 by AverageMansReviews

Review Time

Warning: there is flashing effects/colourful effects/child-abuse/cancer/burning/disfigurement/shooting/drugs/medical/references to racism and a sexual predator; Pepé Le Pew and for an rare occasion there will be some censored adult language references at some point or another in this content.

This film should have been called Jacksons instead of Michael: briefly; this film covers the early stages of Michael Jackson's life until he is 30 years old; Michael Jackson [Young: Juliano Krue Valdi/Older: Jaafar Jackson: the real-life nephew of Michael Jackson:] the front boy/man of the Jackson 5 and goes on to have a generational singles career as the King of Pop.

Generally speaking: well we have a lot to discuss such as to begin with; the first thing that got up my nose was the fraudulent title of this movie; clearly to begin with you can't have Michael Jackson without bringing up the Jackson 5, I know this; I have no problem with this matter of fact, but to call this film Michael straight off the bat is... I will be nice first... is disrespectful to the Jackson 5 legacy on their own merits, misleading because we clearly just don't get Michael Jackson and finally exploitative; as his name still sells and makes money, but we move on; this movie moves like a pebble stone skipping off water in a pond; at one point missing a chunk of his life and think a roundabout 10 years [basically when Jaafar Jackson gets introduced into the film:] so what is the point of making biopic about someone's life if you are just going to skip through it essentially creating a greatest hits CD? I mean hell I will tell you about the script; it cherry picks or whitewashes anything negative about Michael, because if you don't know I am sure some of you know, but if you don't know for legal reasons, they had to completely re-write a part of this movie and when I say legal reasons I mean we are real courtroom documents so it had to be scrapped and re-written and obviously re-shot.

Which swiftly brings me on to my second point; so far I have not seen one person talk about this gigantic elephant in the room and now I can see why; firstly can I just say the people defending this film and highlighting its positives; you really are a bunch of cowards, because you know and quite clearly I know now there is one big point you have forgotten to mention... now shall I tell the class or are you going to tell the class?... Okay I will do it, this film leaves on the phrase "To Be Continued." Which of what I understand at this point in time there is no sequel scheduled but in a nutshell they would like to continue the story [ I will discuss this more later on in this content;] but back to here and now; because of all of this so far; on reflection it does feel and look like a greatest hits CD compilation, don't get me wrong when we are in these sections of time and moments; the film blitz framework and pacing of this 127 minute film settle down and smoothly gets on with it purpose, but I am not going to lie this film is greatly helped by its visual representation and Jaafar as Michael and the entire assembled cast.

Art, character developments and performances; if I get this off my chest at the very beginning of this section we can move on; I may be partly brain-dead, but even I can see what they've done or at minimum how it looks... they have very much painted over the cracks or diverted their audience/viewer's attention away from anything negative with these spectacular visual spectacles which either became the Jacksons or/and specifically Michael's raison d'être which conveniently sums up the entirety of Michael's life, but for now I will park that and say... the visual representations are fantastic and by far are a bit positive to this project has the Jacksons or Michael was a showman.

But if you listen or/pay attention closely it does drop some what I perceive to be real big clangers or reminders that this film is walking a tightrope of being fraudulent but in this case very much by design meaning we hear Michael make reference to or something to the effect of I want to be mysterious on the basis of not doing anything media related or/and he doesn't want any drugs.

If you can't read between the lines allow me to explain; this whole mysterious persona as you will see stems from possibly his incredibly strict upbringing, but also behind this persona he goes on to have allegedly bizarre goings-on and incidents and at some point as a history of drug abuse in the future; this film drops these clangers/things to remind you that we are being fed could just be on some level smoke and mirrors, so as it relates to the character developments usually I would say something to the effect of they are good; but in this case I think I will have to go with something a bit more in-depth; such as it is an excellent version of character types of how they want us to see them; so they may or may not be true. But what I can tell you is this... on my limited knowledge of the Jackson family; they did is father and mother justice; Colman Domingo as Joseph Jackson: the manager of the Jacksons and a complete posterior hole and Nia Long as Katherine Scruse-Jackson: she always knew that there was something special about Michael; which comes across in this movie and as I have body referenced this cast of performers does an excellent job of bringing this film to life.

This film receives: 5/10, this film is mixed; based on the positives of this match I have even decided to award another mark to reflect the positives, but having said that or done that, I can't help but feel or/and think essentially this is a puff piece; which for those people that broadly speaking don't know what this is; basically in this context it means to make someone or something look better than what they are or what they were in the most positive light and if possible to disregard the negatives or at the very worst shrink them down, so it is damage limitation at best.

Now we come on to the massive problem faced with this movie and like I said earlier I would discuss more about the script; I don't know the ins and outs, so I'm just talking from an outsider's perspective; I honestly don't know how the hell they are going to get the next 20 years of his life in a sequel project... because it is clearly going to cover the downfall of Michael and I am not a legal genius, if they had legal issues with this film, speaking with common sense in mind you are going to clearly have multiple upon multiple issues when it comes to his allegations and bizarre incidents and if by some miracle you get the legal go-ahead on some legal go-aheads but not on others which hopefully they won't... are they even going to join the dots and make it up as they go along or are they just going to make the whole thing up if they don't get the legal go-ahead? As the person I watch some of this content with reminded me that there is a lot you can still do, but it's difficult because of legal issues, because it would be a giant elephant in the background of this sequel and not forgetting protecting those individuals that allegedly may or may not have been going through the situations to potentially relive these moments again on the big screen may be too much and if I am being brutally honest with you, I think if this sequel did come out that would be a complete manure show. So the person and I came up with the conclusion that they should really just leave it at this movie and leave him on top and how he should be remembered for the King of Pop.

Yes, this film does have some awards accredited to its name such as 2 Winners which include but not limited to California on Location Awards 2024 COLA Location Manager of the Year - Studio Feature Film Chris Baugh and 1 Nominee from the same award ceremony/event Location Team of the Year - Studio Feature Film Chris Baugh (supervising location manager) Erce Deli Cantu (key assistant location manager) Kim Jordan (assistant location manager) Ted Kim (key assistant location manager) Sofia Ochoa (key assistant location manager) Jeanie Farnam (key assistant location manager) Michael Soleau (key assistant location manager) Marie Healy (key assistant location manager) Santino Salamon (key assistant location manager)

 

Power: The Downfall of Huw Edwards 2026 by AverageMansReviews

Power: The Downfall of Huw Edwards 2026 by AverageMansReviews

Related content: Average Extra of: Huw Edwards gets handed a six-month suspended prison sentence for handling under age material in 2024 Link https://averagemansreviews2017.blogspot.com/2024/09/average-extra-of-huw-edwards-gets.html

Review Time

Warning: this project is no way meant for children, granted you don't see anything under age; but the implications and verbal references are there, so there are mature themes, drugs, mental abuse, adult self gratification, mental institution and references to under age, sex offender and suicide

The fall of: briefly; this project is about Huw Edwards [Martin Clunes:] once highly respected BBC News report now highly disgraced

Generally speaking: even though this project is based on real-life events; it does feel like we are having to squeeze everything in so yes now and again we get dates and so on, other times I am like where the hell are we? Including going full circle  at some point as well, So the script could have done with some work especially with later on in this content you will find out that we don't spend too much time on the downfall, consequently the framework and pacing of this may be 80 minutes project [as I watched this off TV; which was roughly 118 minutes I have included advertising] is at best after everything has been considered okay

Character developments, performances and comedy; predominantly the character developments were based on real-life events so they were all good versions of what they are meant to be but Clunes; as Edwards puts in a masterful performance, what with his perfect impression of mannerisms and voice pattern, he also puts across which is absolutely crucial here, what kind of monster Edward was and Clunes should hopefully win some at minimum positive award nominees for this performance and I will even though one more step and I will add an additional mark based off this performance. Now towards the end of this project we have this dark comedy scene; where we have Edwards/Clunes reading off this teleprompter to what he yet he received as a punishment for these criminal acts; now straight off the bat I need to highlight that this sequence is done with impeccable seriousness as he lists off what was found and woe for the consequences, but if you can read between the lines/subtext of that fine line between seriousness which is, but also this very, very fine pinch of dark comedy in this monologue to subtly imply seriousness, but " Yes remaining impartial, but we know it was a joke of a punishment." So even though we all know this was a serious situation, don't feel too bad if or when you come to this scene and you end up laughing a little, because as I have just shown, it is saying more than what you think; in a nutshell it comes off slightly passive aggressively, but what can I say I really like how they cover up this subtext with Edwards coming across as just doing his job as usual; this monologue is excellently written and performed.

This film receives: 5/10, this film is mixed; like I have been indicating I can only give high praise to Clunes and the well timed dark comedy interpretation, but in all seriousness; the time jumps, about 20 minutes covering the downfall section and yet again I am sitting here wondering how Edwards is not in any prison cell is beyond me, because in a nutshell; if we are now having people being put in prison for what they say on social media, which by comparison is absolutely nothing compared to what Edwards did [just for the record; I am not condoning what people say on social media,] I am just obviously saying by comparison there is no comparison Edwards should be spending years upon years in prison and without is fat BBC pension as well, without giving too much away but it is a fair point or points nonetheless; but if you are expecting this project to give you answers unfortunately it won't do that, it will only give you more questions; like how did Edwards get into this lifestyle, I know he makes reference to it in some capacity but I am talking about online, I know I have said this already; but why is he not in prison and what is he doing now?

 

 

Swearing Allegiance 1997 [alternative nameLove's Deadly Triangle: The Texas Cadet Murder] by AverageMansReviews

Swearing Allegiance 1997 [alternative nameLove's Deadly Triangle: The Texas Cadet Murder]  by AverageMansReviews

Review Time

Warning: there are flashing effects/colourful effects/man on woman violence/religion/shooting/bodily functions/medical/reference to sexual assault and drugs. I also made reference to bodily functions in this content as well

The production of this film is moronic: briefly; this couple; Diane Zamora and David Graham [Holly Marie and David Lipper:] a couple that thinks that they are going to spend the rest of their lives together from high school... what utter garbage; she is heavily religious and he couldn't keep his genitals in his parents; but between them they commit this heinous and pointless act.

Generally speaking: everything about this film is just deeply appalling and I will even go one more step and say it is highly, incredibly highly disrespectful to the actual true story which this film is based on.

I mean what the hell? I do understand the fact that this was a TV movie production so you know you have to kind of adjust your expectations from a production level which is somewhat understandable, but come on people... seriously? The storyline/script starts of somewhere in the middle and then we start at the beginning; we don't even have any form of notifications of time jumps back or forward it doesn't matter, all we have is the scenery or some kind of indication that we have moved in time and we have sometimes Graham's in a monologue and they couldn't even be bothered to put some words on screen to tell us the sentencing length and other details or if they had the consent from the family to dedicate this film to the deceased individual in question; I mean theoretically the pacing of this 90 minute film once it settled down in a place in time is from the perspective of in this location then for a while it is good [yes I am looking for a needle in a haystack really; to say anything positive about this film.]

The character developments and performances from everyone involved was and is a skid mark on my underwear after a night of eating too much chilli or curry, they are just so bad that they are highly comical and as you can pretty much guess this film is anything but a comedy, they actually do a great disservice to as I have already referenced the real-life tragic and idiotic events that took place.

This film receives: 1/10, this film is poor; I am not usually this direct, this is one other occasion where I am just going to say I wouldn't all will not recommend this film

 

Jack Reed: Badge of Honor 1993 by AverageMansReviews

Jack Reed: Badge of Honor 1993 by AverageMansReviews

Review Time

Warning: there is flashing effects/colourful effects/shooting/burning/sexual assault/medical/references to strangling, dismemberment and immigration

I will get this guy: briefly; when this heinous criminal take away this mother from her young child;  Sgt. Jack Reed [Brian Dennehy:] he works for the sheriff's office and now is on this case regardless of how many times he gets told to leave it alone.

Generally speaking: the character developments, storyline/script, framework and pacing of this roughly 96 minutes film is basically good on all counts; but having said that this film has one massive problems and it is; the character developments are front and centre stage; which means if you are like someone like me that can read character developments pushes them too far forward, so in essence you are waiting for the rest of the film to catch up with these developments including other character developments as well, so when it is established who this individual is; it isn't too surprising even if you were going to attempt to act surprised [this is why I was somewhat brief in the plot section; I would have run the risk of going into much.]

Action, comedy and character developments; we have some scenes within this indoor shooting range and some attempt of Russian roulette, then we have this beautifully timed, because of the serious nature of this film, I'm going to go with accidental comedy sequence of events; we have this main character giving this high ranking according character a mouthful and I like this one giving a mouthful; then for some reason for the expects to receive a lift in the same vehicle, but they get left hanging as this vehicle rides off; it is hilarious, and I am very much aware this sequence of events, could also be interpreted as this individual thinking that they are worth more than what they think, but it really does come off as priceless comedy.

Character developments and performances; other than what I have only said on both counts the character developments and performances are solemnly good versions of what they are meant to be.

This film receives: 5/10, this film is mixed; I would have really given this film another mark, if it didn't have the issue I have made clear in this content already, because from beginning to end; it knows what it is and sticks to the plan, this film also has an ongoing sequence when the ending in this begin to roll.

 

Song Sung Blue 2025 by AverageMansReviews

Song Sung Blue 2025 by AverageMansReviews

Review Time

Warning: there is flashing effects/colourful effects/vehicle hit/vehicle crash/drugs/childbirth/amputation/religion/medical/references to racism and cancer.

The ups and downs of life: briefly; we meet these two individuals that eventually become Mike and Claire Sardina [Hugh Jackman and Kate Hudson:] or a.k.a. "Lightning" and "Thunder" a Neil Diamond interpretation/tribute band act and this is the story about their lives and their family lives; as it reminds us all enjoy the present, because we don't know what is around the corner as this family works hard to move forward, but life keeps throwing a span in the works.

Generally speaking: the framework and pacing of this 132 minutes film is really very good as it clearly has been laid out and all you have to do is pull it, but I would have really appreciated some form of dates when it is appropriate, the only reason I knew move forward in time is because of Mike hairstyle slightly changing or/and let's just say signs of getting older, but other than that, things move along with some gusto.

Art, action, comedy and character developments; the art is either clear to see or/and here as we have our lead partnership on stage performing which depending where you are in the film it has elements of a colourful or/and glamorous experience on a budget. Now we come to this incident and horrific accident where in one room of this hospital this situation is unfolding, meanwhile in this other room with these two founding members having another medical emergency as we have one member showing another member how to use defibrillator; now I am sure at that time this was not darkly comical and at best it is only slightly darkly comical, but at the same time it does and wonderful multilayer aspect to their lives of and I am very sure that as you will see when or if you choose to watch this film it wasn't always smooth sailing, but throughout their lives and the madness of it all, they were able to build this lovely husband-and-wife, family unit that was by and large nurturing, caring and loving; on a quick side note I should quickly state that my intention here was not to cause offence to anyone, I mean to highlighted again I did say that it wasn't always smooth sailing, but these people made a note of environment and now I can include anyone that they met as well as in they treated them like family as well.

Character developments and performances; well as I was just highlighting the character developments are layered this is very much a cast performance; led by Jackman and/or Hudson individually or together they put in powerful performances as the person I watch someone was content with said one made reference to; they have spot on chemistry; they are authentically natural and yes individually or as a duo they can sing masterfully, I can say this with confidence that this film wouldn't be the same without them, you see sometimes in film or TV or any or any other media sometimes is sometimes all the planets align to create this situation where these moments get captured on in this case the big screen and consequent we get to enjoy them.

This film receives: 9/10, this film is excellent; on a little reflection I decided to award another two mark, by its entire presentation minus the lack of date thing and I have already indicated the performances of Jackman or/and Hudson should be given high praise and hopefully going toward into awards season they either get a few more at minimum nominees or in the discussion for nominees or awards to go alongside the accredited awards or/and nominees that they already have, right at the end of the first credits there is a real life picture of this husband-and-wife back in the day. This film has some awards accredited to its name such as 4 Winners which includes but not limited to Gotham Awards 2025 Tribute Award Musical Hugh Jackman Kate Hudson. 6 Nominees which also includes but not limited to New York Film Critics, Online 2025 NYFCO Award Best Use of Music Scott Bomar

 

Nuremberg 2025 by AverageMansReviews

Nuremberg 2025 by AverageMansReviews

Review Time

Warning: there is flashing effects/colourful effects/capital punishment/drugs/bodily functions/Swastika and the salute/holocaust/concentration camps and what happened in them/racism/suicide/medical/references to terrorism, Hitler, Russia Soviet Union. Additional Warning: I mean this respectfully if you are Jewish or/and have personal family experience of World War II, I am just going to tell you nicely and straight you are going to find this film difficult to watch, I am not trying to put you off from watching this film, just simply giving you an extended warning and advice and I am here just to talk about this film..

Welcome to Nuremberg: briefly; it is decided Reichsmarschall des Grossdeutschen Reiches/translation: Reich Marshal of the Greater German Reich Hermann Göring [Russell Crowe:] he is the highest ranking individual left of Hitler's army and he was very much heir apparent to Hitler, that he and those that remain of Hitler's army of are going to stand international trial for war crimes amongst so many other things. Dr. Douglas Kelley [Rami Malek:] here the US psychologist that get given the job to get to know these individuals and basically how they tick before the trial especially Göring.

Generally speaking: the framework and pacing for this 148 minutes is for the vast majority of the time excellent as things smoothly glide with progression, I announced to be completely honest, but this will make perfect sense, after seeing the concentration camps and those scenes, it does very much slowdown in the film, as you would expect seeing those graphic images, let's just say it as it is; you have made your point clear and respected those that went through this [hard-hitting viewing] and to do those scenes justice the film doesn't recover after that, as it really shouldn't have. On reflection if they wanted to give this footage respect and everlasting impact, they did it perfectly to imply that.

Art; the set designs such as the construction of the court room: it is very fitting of this occasion and the wardrobe such as costumes are really of an impeccable standard and everyone that put a working to create these should be absolutely delighted with the ending results.

Character developments, performances and comedy; the character developments are likewise very fitting to who they are; hopefully Crowe or/and Malek get at minimum an Oscar nominees for their individual or partnership performances, as broadly speaking between them, the entirety of this film is based on them putting in excellent performances consequently creating smooth intellectually challenging dialogue exchanges with one or two moments of brief comedy; as it relates to Reichsmarschall des Grossdeutschen Reiches Göring's weight as Dr. Kelley needs to know if he understood English, even though he spoke German, his eyes give him away or a little later this trick, I mean I know it isn't comedy per se, but it is one of the light-hearted moments of our journey and for the rest of the cast there is good character developments with a mixture of positive performances ranging from good to excellent; but everyone has this free-flowing chemistry throughout because, it is just Crowe and/or Malek lead the cast.

This film receives: 8/10, this film is excellent; this is one of those rare occasions where I had to think hard about the marking, because on reflection I have greatly improved it based on everything I have discussed or at minimum made reference to, it is just one of those situations where I know, I know this is just a film, but it is also based on real events so I am very conscious/sensitive to the subject matter in this case of this film and when I say sensitive I don't mean offended, I mean aware of being polite the historical and quite clearly the impactful and life changing situation of these events and briefly I know it is of very little consolation to Dr. Kelley now that he was 100% right when he indicated that I am paraphrasing here; the next dictator won't be wearing a uniform, this film does have some awards accredited to its name such as 3 Winners which include but not limited to Golden Trailer Awards 2025 Golden Trailer Award Best Foreign Drama, 6 Nominees which also include but not limited to from the same award ceremony/event Best Foreign Independent.

Apologies: when I originally put up this content I spelt the title wrong, you see I was so focused on giving this particular content, a little bit of sensitivity it needed, that I screwed up the title I apologise for any inconvenience or upset and might have caused, by doing so, the error was pointed out to me by a person that I watch some of this content with and they have since rectified it; apologies again.

Roofman 2025 by AverageMansReviews

Roofman 2025 by AverageMansReviews

Review Time

Warning: there is flashing effects/colourful effects/religion/transformation/shooting/burning/bodily functions/medical/references to racism and sexuality.

Strange things are going on at Toys "R" Us: briefly;  Jeffrey Manchester/Roofman/other name [Channing Tatum:] he is a father to 3 children, former U.S. Army Reserves Sargent, turned criminal that escapes from prison, he kind of laids low at this Toys "R" Us; meaning he gets a job there as well as lives there, he/we meet Leigh "Lee" Wainscott, [Kirsten Dunst:] she is an employee of Toys "R" Us and a single mother of two children. Meanwhile Mitch Haygunn [Peter Dinklage:] he is a manager of a Toys "R" Us store.

Generally speaking: the framework and pacing of this 126 minutes film is to begin with and for the vast majority of this title; it is predominantly really very slow and only roughly around just before the final quarter or somewhere around here does it find some get up and go to it.

Character developments, comedy and action; basically because of the way Manchester presents himself to be as in nice, for an example before putting these people/captives in somewhere like a fridge he would make sure they would have a coat and at some point Manchester decides to do his impersonation of Tom Cruise as Joel Goodsen [from Risky Business 1983: if you have been around films of long as I have you may not have seen the film like myself, you know this sequence, basic description; it is where Goodsen/Cruise slides onto this in; in his socks, underwear and shirt] and for the action, is also feeds into his character developments as he builds a habitat for himself to live in; also include things running, shooting and an explosion.

Character developments and performances; the character developments and performances are very much linked into the framework or/and pacing of this film; so broadly speaking they fulfil their purpose on both counts, but there is enough blame to go around that on top of this character developments or/and performances are not particularly noteworthy and I have to question in all fairness and was Manchester a nice guy? Because I am very street smart and incredibly cynical; how can these people say or reference he was something to the effect of a nice guy? When used to rob them, don’t get me wrong I should imagine it is somewhat difficult when someone is holding a gun, but for the fact he is robbing you even though it may not be yours he is stealing, because he was nice about it that doesn’t automatically make him a nice guy and/or took advantage of their kind nature and finally on to that he is a repeat offender.

This film receives: 5/10, this film is mixed; I think after taking everything into consideration, this mark is a fair reflection, by all means if you are a fan of any of the names referenced in the section at the top, go and see this film, but I would go in with reasonable expectations and there are some extra bits and pieces in the closing credits of this film.

 

I Swear 2025 by AverageMansReviews

I Swear 2025 by AverageMansReviews

Review Time

Warning: there is flashing effects/colourful effects/drugs/shooting/cancer/child abuse/attempted suicide/self harm/animal cruelty/medical and there will be a censored adult language reference in this content

I can't help it: briefly; we meet John Davison [Younger: Scott Ellis Watson/Older: Robert Aramayo:] this is his story about getting diagnosed with Tourette's Syndrome and at first no one taking him seriously, until one day he meets this lovely lady Dottie Achenbach [Maxine Peake:] she has her own health concerns, but also is a mental health nurse, that basically couldn't stand by and watch Davison put himself through what he puts himself through and not try and help him, so he moves in with her family

Generally speaking: the framework and pacing of this 120 minutes long is good; we have this outlay of coming full circle and then a little bit more in the present times, but we smoothly go through Davison's life.

Character developments, performances, comedy and action; broadly speaking the character developments and performances are all good; but it is down to the performances of Watson/Aramayo, Peake and Peter Mullan as Tommy Trotter: he to begin with is looking for someone to assist him at this community centre, but that when these four characters and performances firstly Watson/Aramayo do a superb job of bringing John Davison to life as they individually becomes this person as they put their bodies through what Davison's went through/goes through on a daily basis and these other two very special people that Davison meets in his life, that completely turn his life around for the better; that shows with a natural environment/environments combined with caring/strong people/performances that will stand by him, that anything of a realistic achievable goal can be possible and not forgetting Murray Achenbach [Francesco Piacentini-Smith:] he is the son of the Achenbach family and very good friends with Davison: I will be out to be fuming if at some point in the future if this film does not at minimum get some positive nominees for these performances in one way or another, because they all deserve awards. Well as you would if you are educated on some level with Tourette's the comedy comes from what Davison comes out with such as this somewhat censored version "Seaman for milk." Now unfortunately I have to briefly discuss at one point or another the viewers will see the unpleasantness and yes I am being incredibly kind here; you will see the unpleasantness of having something that brings you different and people clearly not being able to either just ignore it or deal with it as an adult consequently choosing a completely unnecessary options [which I to have experience that in my life.]

This film receives: 10/10, this film is top-notch entertainment; it is a faultless film that shows an incredible honesty about being different and not having the choice but to be different. But sadly it shows likewise an incredible honesty approach that most don't even know or if you want me to be incredibly honest as well; but most really don't care or a strong disdain for those that are imperfect and the fact remains regardless if this individual was born in the 70s, but his condition came through roughly when I was born in the 1980s or in my case as I said when I was born in the 1980s; yes we have very different conditions he has Tourette's and I have quadriplegic cerebral palsy with mental health issues on top.

But there are some similarities; we both have being polite impulse issues that we can't control as I am a spastic my body tends to do things without my say-so or if it is it can be for an example incredibly heavy-handed or completely switch off, so I can be doing something and out of nowhere my hand could just say no thanks I don't want to hold that anymore consequently I could drop something or/and shooting pain due to being a spastic causing me to drop F-bombs or both F-bombs and C- bombs and to continue with this honesty from out of nowhere I have OCD symptoms; when I say from out of nowhere I mean I know I have had them for maybe 19 years; for an example of OCD in my case as long as I don't have too many lights on; my head stays quiet, I should be honest I have never been diagnosed with OCD, but when I am angry or frustrated or things irritate me such as having to make sure that my address is of my post and if I don't I have to check, then become angry and making a mistake of not disposing of my address properly and then becoming furious that I made a mistake, worried if something goes wrong because of that mistake: that is a clear indication that I might have OCD [yes I am fully aware that doctors and other medical professionals really don't like it when you self diagnose, but what I just illustrated is a pretty straightforward OCD scenario] and whatever you do don't take me shopping, because I am a date shopper; this basically means I am looking for the item let's say a bottle of milk with the longest date on it and yes I will go right to the back including if I can't get to it time someone to get me a bottle of milk with a good date on it, this is because perishable food groups may run the risk of giving me a dodgy tummy so this is learned behaviour as it has happened.

But I digress; as of this content it is now 2025 and as of this content it is a cold, but realistic reminder that regardless of conditions or disability or other as it relates to other sections of our society we are in comparison way, way so far behind I mean as long as the individual told me about their Tourette's I would happily take them on, but based on the world at large people are fixated on perfection, not building anything of substance or adventure with their lives. My point which if you don't get it yet is; until people realise that a good selection of imperfect people are good and mostly decent, our lives may be different and slightly more difficult, but when your time is up, you can look back on your life knowing that was different, wholesome and throughout the majority of my life I was cared and loved for by this somewhat unique person: but until we are seen as people, we are going to be treated as less than human and finally yes there is an extra real-life footage in the ending credits.

 

Jerry & Marge Go Large 2022 [alternative name Jerry & Marge Go Large] by AverageMansReviews

Jerry & Marge Go Large 2022 [alternative name Jerry & Marge Go Large] by AverageMansReviews

Review Time

Warning: there is flashing effects/colourful effects

In this little town Evart, Michigan: briefly we meet this husband-and-wife Jerry & Marge Selbee [Bryan Cranston & Annette Bening:] they are now both retiring Marge has been for some time, in fact we don't know what let's go with some time and Jerry is just about being retired; they are a very balanced couple and have been married for the vast majority of their life; Jerry is a numbers guy whilst his wife is more of a people/street-smart individual, but when Jerry discovers a way to make lots of money, his wife is up for the journey and not only that they take this whole town with them as well.

Generally speaking: this framework and pacing of this 96 minute film is good; as in it settles down and moves at a good pace

Comedy and art; this film has a good-natured to it, with little bits of comedy in it as well, I say it more as first of all of real life events and secondly a light and breezy drama with comedy moments; such as when Jerry purchases these shades which can turn into glasses and vice versa; he just has to flip up or put down what he wants and that specific time or/and when he schools this character that attends Harvard University in real maths; where he mathematically and verbally hands this individual his posterior on a plate. When we have this event near to the end of the project we have these little blub lights: they look welcoming and elegant.

Character developments and performances; the character developments and performances of everyone in the cast are good and there is good chemistry throughout. But let's be completely honest the pairing of Cranston and Bening as Jerry & Marge was very natural and free-flowing, if which I am sure they are; if this is what the real Jerry & Marge were/are like they nailed it; as this couple really do balance each other out and with Rainn Wilson as Bill: he is a shopkeeper that is going through a divorce, seems a pretty normal guy with odd tendencies: so if you know anything about Wilson this kind of role suits him down to the ground, so we have this trio being the driving force.

This film receives: 7/10, this film is good; it is a pleasant little film and there are some real life photos in the closing credits. This film deserves more positive awards accredited to its name other than this one; 1 Nominee Astra Television Awards 2024 Astra TV Award Best Streaming Movie

 

Gladiator II 2024 by AverageMansReviews

Gladiator II 2024 by AverageMansReviews

Previous instalment: Gladiator 2000 Link https://averagemansreviews2017.blogspot.com/2025/09/gladiator-2000-by-averagemansreviews.html

Review Time

Warning: there is flashing effects/colourful effects/slavery/burning/impaling/stabbing/cutting/ritual/dismemberment/animal cruelty/animal biting/suicide/strangling/torture/drugs/medical/references to underage

16 years later: briefly; Hanno Verus/other character [Paul Mescal:] he is a slave who gets purchased by Macrinus [Denzel Washington:] he is a slave/Gladiator maker for the games at the Coliseum, he sees lots of potential in Verus and we get to bear witness to their rises

Generally speaking: the framework and pacing of this 148 minutes film is when it is good; it is good as the person I watch some of this content with said/paraphrasing the time went quickly, which is true. But now and again and throughout this content will be making references to the pacing. But for here and now I will say when it is good; it is good. But when it noticeably drops off it isn't so good, but then again it does help when we have Washington doing is Washington thing.

Art and action; we get this wash of paint effect basically recapping some of the previous instalment, the costumes and set designs and so on and so forth are transportive and captivating of this time in history and likewise the battle sequence in the opening section is a massive asset and the Coliseum action sequences are hard-hitting as well, the ending one-on-one sequence, without giving too much away; it is good but... but very anticlimactic as in was that it? I can't lie I didn't feel like this film was beginning to run out of steam again [I will make more of a reference to the running out of steam in this content at another point.]

Character developments, performances and comedy; the character developments are as the person I watch some of this content with agreed with me that; these character types are not as in-depth based on the previous instalment's standards so it is down to the performers; to push and make their performances to compensate for on the whole good character developments, but when it comes to a film of this length of as I have already mentioned 148 minutes you need a little bit more substance to work with; but the cast collectively by the vast majority of this sequel built and manufacturing some very good chemistry, but from time to time you can tell [based on my viewing experience obviously] that now and again for small segments; things did begin to wane and go into the a momentarily loll but then again it pushes through and moves on. On a quick side note; the person I watch some of this content with rated this sequel higher than I did, just for the interest of fairness amounts. the special mentions has to go out to Washington; for it is highly typical high standards of performance; he is another massive asset to this sequel, Alexander Karim as Ravi: an ex-gladiator turned doctor that repairs the Gladiators that are not dead for combat for another day in the Coliseum; he is a man of wisdom and is very down to earth about things and Matt Lucas as the Master of Ceremonies; in today's modern language; he is the MC [Master of Ceremonies] of the Coliseum throughout this sequel and he has for me the most comical moment of this film; where he and these trumpet players have little interaction as far as he says and they do, there is a little bit more comedy but when I say this I mean a drop.

This film receives: 7/10, this film is good; this is one of those occasions where after I take everything into consideration, it has enough to get into this bracket of my marking system, But it's predecessor is the stronger one out of the two, if there are any fans of Washington out there, this should suit you down to the ground as I have already indicated, he is very much a driving force of this sequel when he is on screen. This film has some awards accredited to its name such as 2 Nominees Camerimage 2024 Golden Frog Main Competition John Mathieson (cinematographer) Ridley Scott (director) and Hollywood Music In Media Awards (HMMA) 2024  HMMA Award Best Original Score - Feature Film Harry Gregson-Williams

 

Gladiator 2000 by AverageMansReviews

Gladiator 2000 by AverageMansReviews

Review Time

Warning: there is flashing effects/colourful effects/slavery/stabbing/cutting/impaling/dismemberment/animal cruelty/animal biting/animal feeding/torture/suffocation/hanging/shopping/burning/drugs/bodily functions/references to incest and underage

In 180 A.D. there will be revenge: basically; Commodus [Joaquin Phoenix:] he is the new Caesar of the Roman Empire, after his father is apparent found in his bed not breathing. Commodus wants his father's best soldier to swear loyalty to him; he goes by the name of General Maximus Decimus Meridius/other names [Russell Crowe:] he is a General for Commodus's father's army. But he declines this opportunity and is sentenced to death, but don't worry he escapes [which is a good thing, because if he didn't we wouldn't have a movie.] But I digress; Commodus's sister swears loyalty to him her name is Lucilla [Connie Nielsen:] she used to be in the interest of Meridius, but nowadays she has her son Lucius Verus [Spencer Treat Clark:] he is a young boy and his uncle is Commodus.

Generally speaking: the framework and pacing of this 155; yes they did just say 155 minutes film is broadly speaking for me is a little bit of hard work; I don't know what actually happens; it begins from with a good get up and go as there is always something happening and it very slowly but noticeably slows down into lol which I was struggling to keep awake, but then it seems to pick itself up and offered goes again.

Art, action and comedy; the art well without being funny it is clear to see as they went in with the idea of a full round and immersive experience as the scenery/landscapes or the wardrobe department and action sequences; have been given that authenticity; to put across to its audiences; you will just peering into our world, you may be safely in your seats, but for us this was everyday life; with full on action sequences were people live or die and yes these action sequences can be full on and/or similar but still graphic nonetheless and I just have to acknowledge that now and again there is some comedy bits and pieces; for one very brief and basic example as it relates to these giraffes in a dialogue exchange at some point so you may want to hear out for that.

Character developments and performances; the character developments are pronounced versions of what they are meant to be coinciding at minimum good to higher performances from everyone in this cast; be it Crowe to a small role from Omid Djalili as Slave Trader; which without giving too much away sells Meridius to Oliver Reed as Antonius Proximo: he used to be a Gladiator, but these days he is an entertainer that puts on these fights for entertainment and obviously we have Crowe and/or Phoenix; individually or together leading this cast with this priceless chemistry as one is of honour yet the other is a snivelling little boy in a man's body.

This film receives: 7/10, this film is good; for me after everything is said and done; this film finds itself in this section of my marking system, the wrong if you have never seen this film, if you have the time it is well worth a watch especially when the sequel is [when this content was first created] well on its way Gladiator II 2024 and not forgetting if there are any fans of Crowe, Joaquin Phoenix, Djimon Hounsou as Juba: a slave belonging to Proximo; that befriends Meridius; Nielsen or/and for the older generations Reed [which sadly died whilst making this movie whilst making this film; 1938-1999 RIP Oliver Reed.] his film also has many awards accredited to its name such as well 60 Winners Academy Awards, USA Oscars 2001 Best Picture Douglas Wick David Franzoni Branko Lustig, Best Actor in a Leading Role Russell Crowe, Best Costume Design Janty Yates, Best Sound Scott Millan Bob Beemer Ken Weston and Best Effects, Visual Effects John Nelson Neil Corbould Tim Burke Rob Harvey. 104 Nominees which includes from the same award ceremony/event Best Actor in a Supporting Role Joaquin Phoenix, Best Director Ridley Scott, Best Writing, Screenplay Written Directly for the Screen David Franzoni (screenplay/story) John Logan (screenplay) William Nicholson (screenplay), Best Cinematography John Mathieson, Best Film Editing Pietro Scalia, Best Music, Original Score Hans Zimmer, Best Effects, Visual Effects John Nelson Neil Corbould Tim Burke Rob Harvey and Best Art Direction-Set Decoration Arthur Max (art director) Crispian Sallis (set decorator)

 

The King's Speech 2010/2011 by AverageMansReviews

The King's Speech 2010/2011 by AverageMansReviews

Review Time

Warning: there is flashing effects/colourful effects/animal cruelty/chopping/references to child abuse, Russia, Germany and swastika

We can't hear you?... Speak up: briefly; we meet the Duke and Duchess of York Prince Albert and Princess Elizabeth/other names [Colin Firth and Helena Bonham Carter:] as they are fulfilling their royal duties, but Prince Albert has a really pronounced stammer, which really does affect him, so Elizabeth finds this person that has and excellent understanding of elocution  Lionel Logue [Geoffrey Rush:] he is a no nonsense individual that has excellent dry comedy timing, that has these unique methods to assist his clients.

Generally speaking: the framework and pacing of this 119 minutes film uses the reliable and straightforward outlay which is usually best associated with biography projects; as in we start in one place and consistently rotate forward through time until we get to a certain point in history which is the end of the content covered in the film; it breezes through its allotted time.

Art, action, comedy and character development; the design on bringing this part of England's history to life is amazing; they did a fantastic job, be it the set design or landscape or location, wardrobe and accessories and etc; they clearly had a very defined idea and consequently execution and realisation of this type of history in this film; basically they hit it out of the park. We have Prince Albert doing some exercises to assist with his treatment and the usage of adult language references as an include of his therapy and someone has been keeping a secret from his wife having you Logue?: excellent character developments.

Character developments and performances; broadly speaking first of the character developments are very good, with excellent performances from the entire cast; they really did try to not only push the authentic approach onto the artistic outlook, but also the interpretation of their characters and the performances bringing them to life as well and with the trio of performers I have already mentioned in this content leading this cast and here are some special mentions: Michael Gambon as King George V: at the beginning of film he is reigning King and Prince Albert is one of his children and then we have Timothy Spall as Winston Churchill: eventually be becomes Prime Minister and takes us through one of our dark periods in England mystery; they most definitely gave gravity to their versions of these characters.

This film receives: 10/10, this film is top-notch entertainment; on reflection I decided to give it top marks, because it does everything it set out to do and with quite clearly a lot of class about it, so if you haven't seen it yet, it is well worth a watch even though as you can see it has taken me quite a few years to get around to watching it; meaning it was released in 2010/2011 and as of this content being first created in 2025 so give it 14 or 15 years, but at least I finally got around to seeing it. This film has many awards accredited to its name like 109 Winners include but not limited to Academy Awards, USA 2011 Oscar Best Motion Picture of the Year Iain Canning Emile Sherman Gareth Unwin and Best Performance by an Actor in a Leading Role Colin Firth [altogether this film has won 4 Oscars.] 206 Nominees would also includes but not limited to, back to this award ceremony/event Best Performance by an Actor in a Supporting Role Geoffrey Rush and Best Performance by an Actress in a Supporting Role Helena Bonham Carter [altogether this film has 8 Oscars nominees to its name.]

 

 

The Imitation Game 2014 by AverageMansReviews

The Imitation Game 2014 by AverageMansReviews

Review Time

Warning: there is shooting/burning/medical/references to Russia and/or the Soviet Union, drugs, homosexuality, suicide, sexism and Swastikas

During World War II: a highly intelligent group of people were brought together consisting of Alan Turing [Younger: Alex Lawther/Older: Benedict Cumberbatch:] he is a very intelligent person, but also as you would come to broadly expect, he struggles social interaction and sometime later we meet Joan Clarke [Keira Knightley:] she is likewise intelligent in her own right, as she completes this crossword puzzle in less than 6 minutes, but unlike Turing she does not have such problems in social interactions.

Generally speaking: the script outlay, the framework and pacing of this 115 minutes film is at best okay; meaning if you wanted to go that way, I guess that is one way to do it. Now I have gotten the amicable part out there first I can now say this; I really didn't like the construction of this film; it rotates from Turing's history to present day consistently throughout this film and on top of that later on we have Turing beginning this story teller outlay. What they should have done is even started the movie when he was younger and progress the film from there or used the mind’s eye approach from the perspective of Turing and how he came to be here, either way this title would have had a much better system approach, especially with the mind’s eye, because at least we would have known we are going backwards in time instead of being dropped off here and there and everywhere.

Art and action; the set designs, wardrobe and etc really do bring this part of British history to life as it transports its viewers back into World War II when we are back in this part of history in this movie; they should be very happy with how this film turned out as a relates to its historical representation; it is of a very high quality indeed and for the action it is code breaking or trying to or/and building machinery and making tough choices as it relates to strategies.

Character developments, comedy and performances; broadly speaking the character developments and the performances of the vast majority of this cast are all good and likewise there is good chemistry throughout, but and I should highlight that this is not a comedy  without meaning to; well that is just Turing  being as it relates to just a very simple question of lunchtime and all that or/and a little later getting some of his colleagues fired, without giving too much away using the financial resources to better use. Clark/Knightley: players a vital role in this title as her character Clark is the gateway between briefly; Turing's world and everyone else's regular world: as she gets him to attempt to build bridges with a peace offering and a joke and say it is the closest person to actually knowing him for him Cumberbatch and Knightley make a fluent and excellent lead partnership in this project and they should be very happy with what they produced here.

This film receives: 6/10, this film is good; I mean if you have seen it already it is at minimum it is well worth a watch and yes it has quite a few awards accredited to its name such as 49 Winners that include but not limited to Academy Awards, USA 2015 Oscar Best Writing, Adapted Screenplay Graham Moore and from Aspen Filmfest 2014 Audience Award Audience Special Recognition - Feature Morten Tyldum (director.) 167 Nominees which include but not limited to go to the Oscars of 2015 Best Performance by an Actor in a Leading Role Benedict Cumberbatch and Best Performance by an Actress in a Supporting Role Keira Knightley [altogether it was up for 6 Nominees.]