"Midsommar" Movie Review

By: James Southworth
Rating: 4/5 Stars

A lot of people have been dubbing the past five years or so as the "Golden Age" of horror films. In many ways, I absolutely agree. Horror was in a place for a time where there only seemed to be disastrous sequels to what used to be great horror icons. Then their legacies were tarnished by these other films. There were still some good horror films during those times, but they didn't seem to get quite the recognition that many indie horror films do these days. "Hereditary" is one of many modern-day horror films that holds pretty wide-spread recognition. I remember all the conversation this controversial film sparked, with critics and general audiences being on the exact opposite ends of the spectrum. I myself was rather conflicted coming out of the movie, but I've grown on it over time. One things I was sure of even coming out of the movie was this: Ari Aster was a director to be watched. He had a distinctive stylistic eye, and intriguing ideas. I was hoping with "Midsommar" that he'd be able to flesh his vision out in an even more coherent way. While I'm not quite sure if it's as good as "Hereditary", "Midsommar" is still an excellent movie; it may even be the best horror film I've seen so far this year.

The plot of this film will sound absolutely bizarre, and that's because it is weird in many ways: Dani, reeling from an awful tragedy, decides to try and ignore it by going on a trip with her boyfriend, Christian, and his friends- much to their collective chagrin. Only one friend seems enthusiastic about her going: that's Pelle, the one who has arranged the trip. What is this outing, you might be asking? Well, it's to a rural, secluded area in Sweden, where the individuals residing there practice this bizarre midsummer festival. As time goes on, weirder and weirder occurrences keep happening, until one cataclysmic event sets off a series of terrifying events that there might be no escape from. Let's go ahead and get this out of the way: the horror aspects of this movie work incredibly well and are also very unique. I remember part of the promotion for this movie being from Jordan Peele, who said that this was unlike any other horror film he'd seen before. I think I mainly agree with this sentiment. What's most interesting about the horrifying aspects of this film is most of them don't take place in the dark. In fact, they occur in broad, blinding daylight. I think horror fans have been trained to believe that the most terrifying things happen when we can't see, but Aster begs us to think differently. What if the most horrific things can happen right in front of our eyes, and the blinding light makes it impossible to run away? There's something poignantly terrifying about that. There are moments here that scared me in a way that I haven't been in quite some time. There were so many scares here that chilled me to my bone. I don't think I've felt actually scared by a movie in quite some time the way this movie scared me. It deserves quite a commendation for that, as I have watched quite a few horror movies. Though most of the scares happen in broad daylight, there are some that happen in the dark, and those scenes are just as effective. I will continue to remember the cold open of this movie, as things about this traumatizing event Dani experienced keep on unfolding right in front of our eyes. As more information is revealed to us visually, the more foreboding and heart wrenching it becomes. The ending of this film also leaves quite an impact on the viewer. I remember actually feeling a cold chill going from the top of my head to my feet. I knew then that this movie had quite the effect on me in its scares. The way the horror alone functions in this movie accounts for my desire to give it a high recommendation to anyone.

The style of this movie shouldn't go without being recognized, either. This movie is undeniably scary, but it's also incredibly beautiful in many ways. The way the rural community is filmed is quite gorgeous. There's a lot of flowery aesthetics here that have the ability to feel simultaneously chilling and beautiful. The way some scenes are shot just makes them feel satisfying to look at, such as the many eating scenes or a dance segment that occurs in the film. And yes, there is a dance segment, believe it or not, and it works quite well. What might make this movie just a little bit more intriguing is that it has a surprisingly hefty amount of off-kilter humor. While we are supposed to be scared of these rural Swedes, Aster also makes us able to laugh at them. This can be based off of the way the main characters react to them, or sometimes by how laughably uncomfortable a scene is. I appreciate that this movie isn't entirely self-serious. The comedic aspects of the movie help lift it up a bit, and it makes the audience all the more tensed up, wondering when the comedy will stop and the next inevitable scare will come. I appreciate how different this film is from "Hereditary": whereas that movie thrived on dark imagery and demonic presences, this movie thrives on bright and beautiful imagery contrasting with the unsettling behavior of many of the characters. 

The performances in this movie are almost all great. I've known ever since seeing "Lady Macbeth" that Florence Pugh would be an actress I should keep my eye on. And I was absolutely right. I've seen here in a couple more films, and in every one she has been an instant highlight of it. This movie is perhaps her best performance yet. While it's hard to say if it's as great as Toni Collette's, she is at least very close to what Collette does. What I appreciate the most about Pugh's performance is how nuanced and complex she makes it throughout the film. The character development she goes through in this film never feels out of place or nonsensical. That is due to the great writing the film consistently has, as well as Pugh's wholly committed performance. I can't go without mentioning how wonderful she is in the cold open and the end of the film. The way she uses facial expressions in both of those moments speaks volumes about how her character has changed. It's incredible how well she was able to contrast her emotions in both of those moments. I thought another highlight of hers was in the dance scene; what she was doing there really had me hooked. Jack Reynor's performance as Dani's boyfriend Christian was pretty interesting. I think he had some of the toughest material to deal with, as he's not a very likeable character, yet there are moments when we feel bad for him. I like how he traverses this complicated individual, making him an intriguing and fitting counterpart to Dani. Will Poulter is, as always, commanding the viewer's attention any time he's on screen. He seems to really relish the role he's playing here, and I appreciated how he went all in with whatever he was doing. If anything, I wish he was given even more to do in the film. Isabelle Grill was a big highlight here as well, being appropriately unsettling and chilling anytime she was on screen. The only main performances I didn't care for as much in this film were William Jackson Harper and Vilhelm Blomgren. They weren't awful performances by any means, but they felt a little underwhelming.

There are a couple issues with this movie that I have to talk about. Many of them are actually similar to some of the problems I had with "Hereditary". Probably the biggest is that I feel this movie's thematic arc can be a little confusing. I understood wholly Dani's character arc, but I feel like Aster was also trying to get a message across about toxic relationships and what exactly constitutes a "family". I could see threads of these themes coming to fruition in the film, but it felt like they were left mostly unanswered. There was also this odd thematic arc that kept popping up: communication, or lack thereof, can be a way to destroy relationships. I don't think this was somethings super compelling to explore. However, I could be totally wrong about that theme being part of Aster's intended writing. Another sort of problem with this film is that it's a little slow. This film is two and a half hours long. I appreciate the fact that the movie takes time to establish its characters; in fact scenes where that is happening is completely fine. But, for as much as a like the way some of the ritual and dinner scenes are filmed, it feels like a lot of them were heavily padded out. It can make one start to lose interest in the film until the next big thing inevitably happens. I think if some scenes were shortened down, then the film could've felt a little more concise and purposeful. Finally, the usage of symbols in this film can make it a little hard to follow along. Some symbols I did remember, but others that came back in the film didn't seem to hold much weight or significance. I had this same issue with "Hereditary". I appreciate that Aster likes to use visual cues instead of telling his audience everything, but this might be one of the rare moments where I would say a little spoken exposition could help.

Despite the problems I have with "Midsommar", I still think I can confidently say I'll remember this movie for a good long while. I haven't forgotten "Hereditary" either really. I still think about that film often. Aster has a unique voice in the horror landscape, one that I could see becoming marked in infamy later on down the line. I wouldn't complain about that at all. There's a lot to like about this film in my opinion, although I can see how it would be polarizing, much like its predecessor. Go into this film with an open mind. It's bizarre, uncanny, and off-kilter, and I love this movie for all those reasons. It will definitely have a place in my top 10 of this year!

Ed Sheeran "No. 6 Collaborations Project" Album Review

By: James Southworth
Rating: 2.5/5 Stars

Out of all the big pop artists that I am willing to defend as more than just mainstream sellouts, Ed Sheeran is one of the first that tended to come to mind for me. Now, I won't deny that Sheeran knows how to write songs that appeal to a majority. But, more often than some of his other contemporaries, he's able to make songs that feel more interesting and memorable. This was especially the case on "Multiply", easily his best album. While I initially sung praises for "Divide", that album has soured on me considerably. There are still great songs on it (especially "Castle On The Hill" and "Galway Girl"), but a lot of the album comes across as quite forgettable. Sheeran has seemed to be disliked by people lately, and one can maybe understand why. He's mainly done guest features with other artists (Eminem and Taylor Swift most prominently come to mind for me), and at best they've been confusing, at worst quite bad. So, it's not too surprising that he would draw more ire for doing an album which just seems like a way for him to get as much radio play as possible. After all, it's filled with some of the biggest pop acts, so it's easy to see that this would be a way for Sheeran to make easy money. However, for me the album isn't that offensive. Unfortunately, the project still can't help feeling messy and overall unmemorable.

Now, I can't deny that there are good songs on here. There might be more I like here than the average person, because I do generally like Ed's personality. He can have enough of a gravitas to put on a bigger than life personality, but he can also be intimate and relatable when he wants to. It seems like these two things would be hard to navigate, but I've felt that Sheeran has traversed them decently enough on his other albums. Opening track "Beautiful People" proves to be one of the best collaborations here. I think that Ed and Khalid are actually pretty logical fits for one another, and this song proves that pretty solidly. In fact, I think this is the best track on the album. Musically, it has a nice, relaxing beat that the two artists are able to sing over well. It creates a nice atmosphere that is sure to be appreciated by a widespread audiences. Content-wise, I enjoy the lyrics of this song quite  a bit. I think the sentiments are really nice- that these two people don't live up to what people say is "beautiful", and they're completely fine with that. The lyrics are simplistic but bring across the theme in an effective enough way: "Inside the world of beautiful people/Champagne and rolled-up notes/Prenups and broken homes/Surrounded, but still alone/Let's leave the party".

The second album single "Cross Me" is also solid enough. I'm not necessarily in love with it, but I can't deny that it was already in my head on first lesson. The bouncy beat in the background is incredibly fun, and PnB's hook has a really memorable quality to it. I found Chance The Rapper's purposefully cheesy rap about protecting his girlfriend from other leering people to be fun in just the right way. In fact, I'd say he's the highlight of this track. "Take Me Back To London" has some really solid flows from Stormzy, who makes this song have a delightfully British flavor to it. In fact, this seems to be a throwback to the grime style of music that Sheeran did on his early-career "Collaborations 5" EP. "Best Part Of Me" feels like Ed Sheeran at his most genuine, and is certainly a better love song than the obnoxiously sentimental "Perfect". This song continues to convince me that YEBBA is an artist to keep my eye on. She was great in her features on Mark Ronson's "Late Night Feelings", and she's great here. Other highlights include "Antisocial" (with some of Travis Scott's most fun rapping I've heard from him) and the big surprise that is "Blow". This song jarred me quite a bit, as it's a pure rocker in every sense of the word. Bruno Mars and Chris Stapleton get to show off their vocal and guitar chops here (Mars's guitar solo is great), and it's a true delight to hear. It ends the album off with quite a bang.

Unfortunately, for all the legitimate good that is on this album, there is a lot of stuff here that just doesn't work. Since this is a collaborations project, it's a given that this album is gonna be messy sound-wise. There are stylistic shifts from song to song, which can give one significant whiplash. I hope it wasn't Ed's intent to make an album that sounds cohesive, because if it was he failed at that attempt spectacularly. There are many songs here that are eye roll worthy. The song can also have some thematic contradictions. Right after the great "Beautiful People", one of the worst songs appears in "South of the Border". I think this song is trying to sound seductive and sexy, but it's hard to do so when none of the artists sound invested. Ed's singing here isn't particularly interesting. Camila Cabello's voice is fine enough, but I can't help but think that she was on autopilot the whole time for this song. Cardi B is particularly weak here, sounding like she only came to the song just to get a nice paycheck. In fact, for a lot of these weaker songs, that feels like the case. "Remember The Name" is far to cheesy for my taste, with 50 Cent and Eminem's awkwardly written lyrics really ruining the song for me. Eminem's lyrics are filled with far too many corny puns for me, and 50 Cent's voice here has an incredibly odd quality to it. I can't place my finger on it, but it just doesn't work for me.

"Feels" is easily the worst song on the album. Young Thug is absolutely awful here, with his autotuned singing being one of the most painful things I've heard all year. Ed Sheeran's flows here don't work well, either. J Hus's here isn't anything to write home about either. It's quite forgettable. "Put It All On Me" with Ella Mai rubs me the wrong way. It seems to be having this idea of putting all your demons on another person as a romantic act. To me, that feels more like a rather toxic relationship. There's nothing wrong with being honest about your faults to another person, but asking them to be the only one that helps you out with those flaws seems like a recipe for disaster. Also, Ed and Ella are fine here vocally, but I don't really feel any chemistry. "I Don't Care" is a fitting title for the song. That's all the description this incredibly generic song deserves. The rest of the cuts here aren't really even worth talking about. "Nothing On You", "I Don't Want Money", "1000 Nights" and "Way to Break My Heart" all come back to back. They create a very forgettable portion of the album where I found myself tuning out more and more with every listen. The saving grace for the ending of the album is "Blow", but it can't entirely redeem all the throwaway filler that came before it.

As a whole, Ed Sheeran's "No 6. Collaborations Project" isn't awful. It's definitely not comparable to some of the trash I've heard over the past two months. Unfortunately, June and July haven't been conducive to particularly great music. This album goes right along with many of the uninteresting releases I've heard these past two months. The easiest thing to do with this release is to cherry pick the good songs and just forget about the rest. I'm sure this album will have a lot of success on the Billboard Hot 100, so expect it there, for better or for worse. This release is just okay, and I probably won't be returning to it anytime soon- save for some select songs.

Favorite Songs: "Beautiful People", "Antisocial", "Best Part of Me", "Blow"
Least Favorite Songs: "Feels", "I Don't Care", "South of the Border", "Remember the Name", "I Don't Want Money"

"Spider-Man: Far From Home" Movie Review

By: James Southworth
Rating: 4/5 Stars

For as long as I can remember, Spider-Man has been my favorite superhero of all time. I think I may be able to relate to this character so much that it's uncomfortable. He definitely has inspired the awkward, introverted nerd in me. Because of my passionate love for this character (as well as his many great villains), I have been equally passionate about him getting the best possible movies he deserved. The Sam Raimi films, in my opinion, mostly delivered on this front. I returned to "Spider-Man 2" recently, and there is stuff about it that I appreciate more now than when I first saw it at a younger age. Spider-Man 3, in my view, isn't as bad as some people say it is. The first of the Raimi films is my favorite of the trilogy. Then there came the embarrassing "Amazing Spider-Man" films, which really didn't understand the character well. He was made out to be edgy and dark, which is not what Peter is at all. Also, the second film is probably one of the worst superhero films I've ever seen; it's so messy and insipid. The MCU proceeded to partner with Sony and give us yet another Spider-Man, this time in actor Tom Holland. While I didn't find "Homecoming" to be a great SM film, I still mainly enjoyed it. It was a little rough around the edges, but Holland proved to be a good enough Parker. The best part of the first film was actually its teen comedy plot lines rather than the superhero moments. Also, Michael Keaton was superb and gave us one of Marvel's strongest villains/antiheroes. I started growing on Tom Holland more in films where he was more of a side character, such as "Infinity War" and "Endgame". So, I was actually pretty excited to see what he could deliver in "Far From Home". Thankfully, this movie is a really solid follow-up to "Homecoming", and in some ways, might be a little (though not significantly) better.

This movie takes place following the events of "Endgame". At Peter's high school, they refer to the disappearance of half of the population as "The Blip". Now that many people are back, some people are aged differently than others. But that is the least of Peter's worries: he now has feelings for MJ and is trying to find a way to confess them. He thinks the best way might be on his school's field trip to Europe. Along the way, though, he meets Mysterio, who needs him for a mission to defeat the Elementals that are threatening to destroy the world as we know it. Now, Peter has to decide whether he wants to have a normal life or be a superhero. I really enjoyed myself consistently throughout watching this movie. Even though I will be pointing out flaws later, I can't deny this is one of the most enjoyable viewing experiences I've had this year. For all of Marvel's flaws, they still can often deliver a movie that, while not necessarily the most intelligent piece of art in the world, is still undeniably fun and filled with things one can enjoy. There's a lot to commend about this movie. Even though I think I may like it a little better than "Homecoming", a lot of things that work about "Far From Home" are pretty similar to what works about the former. The best parts of this film often come in its teen comedy aspects, once again. This movie is pretty much a teen rom-com disguised as a superhero movie. I like that, as it gives this movie an ability to effortlessly shift between two genres. This is somewhat similar to what Sam Raimi's films did, except director Joe Watts is doing it in his own way. The rom com aspects work because our two main couples have impeccable chemistry. Peter and MJ are probably the best they have ever been in any film. A problem I always had with Raimi's films is that Peter and Mary just didn't click well, and their dialogue was clunky. Though Peter and Gwen Stacy in the "Amazing Spider-Man" movies were slightly better (the only aspect that was an improvement over the Raimi films), their chemistry still felt awkward at times considering the fact that they were obviously improvising a good portion of their dialogue. So, I can confidently say that the Peter/MJ romance in the MCU is the best version we've gotten of it yet. The scenes between them have so much legitimate charm; it's hard not to root for them to get together. I wasn't expecting to like the Ned/Betty pairing so much, but I did. I guess I didn't realize just how much comedic potential there was in it. I don't want to reveal much about what happens between them, but I feel like their relationship is meant to be a bit of a parody on tropes that occur in teen romance movies. And even though there is a parody aspect, their relationship is still quite endearing and fun to watch. I really liked both Ned and Betty better in this movie than in the first. This movie even starts to afford some complexity to Flash Thompson, which was not something I was expecting. They don't do a lot with him in this movie, but I think that there could be potential to see more of his story in future movies. It seems there might be tragic reasoning for why he acts the way he does. So yeah, pretty much all the teen characters in this movie are great, with the exception of Brad. He serves as a sort of side antagonist for Peter because Brad's also after MJ. I didn't find him particularly compelling.

I think what might work best about this movie is its very honed-in focus on Peter Parker's internal struggles. The main problem I had with "Homecoming" is that it didn't really seem like Peter's struggles were that significant. They were there sure, but any tension was drained because of the fact that Tony Stark kept on needlessly appearing in the movie. I somewhat understood Watts's reasoning for having him there, but his role was far too significant for my taste. Tony is very much a part of "Far From Home", but in my opinion it's in a way that makes more sense. It's obvious that Peter would be affected by Tony's death, as he's looked to him as a father figure. The fact that he's trying to live up to him increases the stakes for Peter considerably. Also, we finally get to see what makes Spider-Man so compelling as a character: his conflict between choosing life as a superhero or life as a normal teenager. That was what drives Peter more than anything, and it's what makes the audience invested in following him as a character. This movie portrays that struggle incredibly well in so many moments. The previous Spider-Man movie seemed to give Peter no real consequences for when he messed up. This one does. When he does mess up, it's him who has to deal with the mess; no one else is going to be there to clean up for him. That means Peter is always actively involved in the action happening, and the choices he makes are his own. This makes him a compelling character in this film, and easily at his best in live-action form since Spider-Man 2. The fact that the villain in this movie directly feeds into Spider-Man's vulnerabilities only helps us to understand Peter more and root for him to overcome his struggles.

The performances in this film are overall great. Tom Holland does his best Parker to date here for me. I thought he was playing up the innocent aspect of Peter a little too much-to the point of slight exaggeration- in "Homecoming". Here, he plays his character with a bit more nuance. We can see that the events of "Endgame" have matured Peter significantly, and his character matures beyond that throughout this film. I really liked what Holland did with the character here. I am now fully on board with his performance. It's not like I disliked him in any other previous film he was in; I just wasn't sure if he could carry Spider-Man for several more films. This movie makes me more certain he can, and I'm excited to see him continue to grow into this character. Zendaya is actually quite good here as MJ. I'm glad that this movie fleshed her out so much. Like I mentioned earlier, this is probably the best interpretation of MJ I've seen. She's actually got a personality beyond being someone for Spider-Man to save. In fact, she's quite independent, funny, and intelligent. The way her and Peter's relationship develops in this film is interesting and unique; it's a wholly new interpretation. I appreciated it significantly. I continue to consider Jacob Batalon as Ned a welcome highlight of these films. Him and Peter's friendship has been one of my favorite things to come out of the MCU. His comedic timing is always on point, and the things they do with his character in this movie is fun. I feel like they could continue to dig deeper with him, but I also understand the desire to keep him as mainly a comedic relief. Angourie Rice is great fun here as Betty. I liked how the movie developed her beyond just her awkward personality. Jake Gyllenhaal's performance as Quinn Beck/Mysterio is a little complicated for me to talk about. I love Gyllenhaal as a performer, and I think he did pretty well here. At first in the movie, his performance seems a little weak and underwhelming. However, as the movie goes on, his performance begins to improve. I can't reveal the reason why, but I he grew on me a lot more about halfway into the film. There are some weak performances to point out, all of them being adult character performances (besides Gyllenhaal). Samuel L. Jackson was surprisingly boring here as Nick Fury. This is the first time I've not enjoyed this character, and I hope it will be the last. I'm still not convinced on Marisa Tomei as May; I think Rosemary Harris's performance is just too iconic to be replaced. Martin Starr and J.B. Groove as Mr. Harrington and Mr. Dell (Peter's chaperones for the field trip) don't seem to quite fit into this movie. There are some funny moments with them, but nothing super interesting.

I haven't actually talked about what probably a lot of people came to this movie for: the action sequences. I will say they are a bit of a mixed bag, similar to the first movie. There are some thrilling action sequences here that are visually quite stunning and creative. I can't reveal what they are as that would be delving into spoilers, but you'll know what I mean if you see the movie. Otherwise, the action here isn't offensive; it's just sort of standard. The Elementals look like what you'd probably picture them to be: big, hulking monsters who are made up of whatever element they represent. They're not really the most interesting threat out there, but they're okay for what they are. The superhero aspects of this movie are interesting mainly because you care about Spider-Man and him getting out of it alive. The stakes aren't high, but I don't think they needed to be. After all, we have just come off "Endgame", and it would be an understatement to say the stakes were high there.

Overall, "Spider-Man: Far From Home" is a great movie. It's gonna be nearly impossible at this point for any movie to hold a candle to what "Into The Spider-Verse" did for its titular hero. But when you compare this movie to its live-action predecessors, it actually stands out pretty well. I would say it's easily better than "Spider-Man 3", though maybe not as good as the first two in Raimi's trilogy. I definitely recommend you see this movie! Also, be sure to stay for the end credits sequences. The first one in particular had me grinning like an idiot, and left me incredibly excited for what's to come in this series.

Here's my official ranking of every Spider-Man movie:
1. Spider-Man: Into The Spider-Verse
2. Spider-Man
3. Spider-Man 2
4. Spider-Man: Far From Home
5. Spider-Man: Homecoming
6. Spider-Man 3
7. The Amazing Spider-Man
8. The Amazing Spider-Man 2

"Toy Story 4" Movie Review

By: James Southworth
Rating: 4.5/5 Stars

Pixar is a name now that is practically synonymous with quality. Sure, you can argue that in more recent years Pixar has fallen off compared to their heyday where they were on a streak of now widely revered animated classics. But even now when you do get lesser films like "Finding Dory" or "Brave", you still will be rewarded with releases like "Inside Out" and "Coco". So, I disagree that Pixar has lost their magic touch entirely. They still have it, and the only movie of theirs that I would argue as legitimately bad is "Cars 2" (although I'll admit I haven't seen "Cars 3" or "The Good Dinosaur", I could tweak this opinion in the future). I'll also admit that Pixar's weaker movies tend to be their sequels. There has been one obviously vast exception to this general rule: The "Toy Story" series. These first three movies are regarded by a majority of people as some of Pixar's best films ever, and I would put myself in that camp. I love every single film almost equally. I do hold a special place in my heart for the first film, as it's probably my favorite Pixar movie (this may change, as I plan to watch every Pixar movie again and rank all of them- coming soon!). I thought the third movie was a practically perfect way to end off this series of movies. We had grown up with these toys, and now we could move on. But then, "Toy Story 4" was announced. I'm not gonna lie, I was a little worried with this announcement. It made me wonder if Pixar was truly going to turn into a company who only did cash grabs on nostalgic properties. I should've never had those worries in the first place. "Toy Story 4" is a superb addition to this series, and may be even better than the third movie.

This movie is an interesting addition to the Toy Story world. I appreciate that a lot of it feels quite unlike any of the other films, making it its own unique entity. There are so many actual risks taken in this movie, which is exactly what I want from Pixar. In this film, Woody, Buzz, and the gang's new kid, Bonnie, is going into Kindergarten. It's clear she's not too excited about this, and isn't seeming to do well on her first day. Thankfully, Woody sneaked into her backpack, and in his own clever way lets Bonnie make a new toy that can comfort her. Out of a plastic spork, red pipe cleaners, and a Popsicle stick comes Forky. This toy soon becomes Bonnie's new favorite. However, when it soon comes to life, Forky has an existential crisis that it belongs in the trash. Woody has to show Forky how to be a toy, all the while grappling with his own place in the world now that Bonnie seems to be losing interest in him. This is only the outline for the movie. There's a lot that happens here, making this one of the more complex Toy Story films plot-wise. As usual though, Pixar knows how to balance all of its many threads to make each of them understandable. There's so much to love about this film. What should obviously be talked about first is the animation. I don't know how Pixar was able to improve on "Toy Story 3"'s already stellar animation, but somehow they did. More than ever, Woody looks like a toy you could reach out and touch. There are so many tiny details that make him seem realistic, like the way his face has this shining effect, or the fact that the marker of Bonnie's name looks a little worn. Bo Peep is markedly better looking in this film than the first one, now looking like an actual breakable doll. It is truly impressive what they do to make each toy look even more feasible. The surrounding animation is incredible as well. In the antique shop where a majority of the film takes place, there is so much detail put on the dust or cobwebs that surround the store. There is a cat who looks for many moments like a real cat. It's jaw dropping when you do a side by side comparison of the dog form the first film to the highly lifelike cat from this film. There are so many colorful and creative moments to the movie. It is stunningly beautiful to look at, and the animation moves so gracefully. There's not a bad or weakly animated moment here. I wouldn't expect less from Pixar, but still, the animation here somehow managed to surprise me in delightful ways.

Working just as well in this film is its slew of new characters. I was at first a little disappointed to see most of the old gang not paid as much attention to in this film. Even Buzz, who has played a big role in the other three films, is reduced to a relatively minor subplot for the majority of this movie. However, I think new life is breathed into this movie because of how great pretty much every new character is, along with their respective voice actors. I appreciated the substantial attention given to Bo Peep. Annie Potts's voice work is stellar for this character, making her confident yet compassionate characteristics clear to the audience. I appreciated that Pixar paid special attention to this character, affording her a lot more complexity than the first movie did. Her and Woody's chemistry is off the charts here. Huge props go to Keegan Michael Key and Jordan Peele for their absolutely hysterical performances as Ducky and Bunny. There was never a moment when they were on screen that me and my brother weren't laughing. I appreciate that Pixar clearly let Key and Peele bring their comedic talents to the stage, while making it more appropriate for kids. I think you'd be hard-pressed to not laugh at what they do. The animation that accompanies their characters makes the comedy jump off the page from a visual standpoint as well. The ever-lovable Keanu Reeves is great here as Duke Caboom. I would actually be interested to see Reeves do more voice acting in the future, as you can really tell he's having a ball here. He brought a cool energy to the movie, and I appreciated that the film gave Caboom his own mini-character arc that is funny but also legitimately heartfelt. The character who I feel may go the most underrated is Gabby Gabby, played by Christina Hendricks. This character (minor spoiler alert) takes on a somewhat similar role to Lotso in TS3. However, she does not go in the direction I was expecting, which was a truly nice surprise. Many aspects of her character does feel somewhat reminiscent of Lotso, but her character arc truly makes her stand out from most Toy Story characters. This movie doesn't really have a villain, and I think that works to this film's benefit.

I purposefully left out two particular characters for a separate paragraph. The character everyone has been talking about is Forky, with a hysterical voice acting performance done by Tony Hale. It makes sense why Forky is so popular, as his frequent catchphrase of "I'm trash" does appeal to the cynical dark humor of all the millennials out there. There is plenty of comedy to be found in his existential crisis throughout the film, but there is also some rather interesting things to pick out about this character if one were to look a little deeper. I think Forky was needed to make this film exist. His journey in trying to understand his role as a toy is sort of the catalyst for the most important character arc here- Woody's. There are undeniably many great characters in this film, but at the end of the day, this film clearly belongs to Woody. I think that was the best possible decision the director and writer Josh Cooley could've made. For all the plot threads going on here, Woody's is the one that we're supposed to care about most. Tom Hanks, as always, is wonderful as this character. Woody is practically an extension of Tom Hanks's own personality at this point, which does give Woody a unique human connectivity that I don't think the other toys have to such a significant extent. I think Woody will be very easy for an older audience to connect to, especially for those who have grown up with this character. He's wiser than he's ever been, but he's also still uncertain about his place in the world. I feel like I can connect to that now more than I ever could when I was a child. Where his character arc goes I don't want to reveal, but it made me quite emotional. The ending of this movie packs a punch. I'm not quite sure if gave me the same huge emotional punch as the ending of "Toy Story 3", but it still hit me all the same. There was one clear reason this movie was made: Woody's development was not quite done yet. That much is clear to me now. This movie was actually necessary; it wasn't just a cash grab. It actually makes the series feel even more satisfying rather than cheapened, which is quite a rarity in movie series that go on beyond a trilogy.

I don't have many significant issues with this movie. Like I sort of alluded to earlier, it was a little disappointing to see the old gang of toys not paid as much attention to. To be fair, it's not like they were huge characters in the other films, but I still would've liked to see a little more of them. The only character paid significant attention to was Buzz. I ultimately wasn't as invested in what he was doing. It also seemed like the movie dumbed him down a little bit too much. The way his character acted here felt more like how his character would've acted in the first Toy Story. I do understand why his B-plot thread was needed. Because it was clearly not as significant as Woody's or Forky's stories, it didn't ruin my positive feelings about this movie in any significant way.

What more can be said about "Toy Story 4"? I was blown away by this film. It is yet another stellar addition to what is undoubtedly Pixar's best series of films. I'm not quite sure where it ranks in the TS series or in Pixar's catalog as a whole, but it will definitely be on the higher end. I feel brave enogh to say that this movie feels reminiscent of Pixar when it was in its biggest winning streak. That is yet another added bonus. I can't recommend this movie enough. It's definitely one of my favorites of the year!