Elvis-Del-Valle

The creator of the famous Friday The 13th saga ventured into the world of television productions with this movie, which was part of the Sci Fi Channel's programming. There wasn't much chance of anything good coming out of it because the last movies Sean S. Cunningham had produced didn't have the same impact as the Jason Voorhees saga. House had already concluded with its fourth movie and Friday The 13th went into decline after its eighth movie. Now, with the popularity of Sci Fi Channel movies, Sean was determined to present Terminal Invasion as a television proposal. This was his third science fiction movie after DeepStar Six and Jason X. The plot of the movie is intriguing and puts the characters in a very intense situation because no one knows who is human and who is an alien. It's the same as The Thing, but with a lower caliber. The star that stands out quite a bit throughout the entire movie is Bruce Campbell. It is well known that he is an iconic figure in cult cinema thanks to his participation in the Evil Dead saga. He also earned a place in B-movie cinema with productions like Maniac Cop and Crimewave. The truth is that Bruce Campbell often becomes the best thing you can find in this type of movie. Here, Bruce Campbell delivers an excellent character. Jack is a convict who ends up becoming an antihero. It might seem like he's the bad guy in the story, but the aliens are the worst threat in this tale, and Jack fights to try to survive. This struggle leaves him with no choice but to trust some people at the airport if he wants to stay alive. The person he interacts with the most is the pilot Cathy, and she also turns out to be another very notable character in the movie. Terminal Invasion could be a pretty good movie, but it could have been better if it had been made with a larger budget. Being a B-movie, it has notable flaws. The most obvious flaw is the mediocre CGI, which is of the same quality as other Sci Fi Channel movies. It's what you can expect the most from this movie. Only practical effects were used for some scenes and for the design of the aliens. They are typical designs, but they are fine. The aliens mostly don't appear with their original appearance, and that's fine for the intrigue of the movie. What it does have are a couple of continuity errors that cannot be overlooked. One of them is when Jack shoots Angie and she doesn't have any visible gunshot wound until a few scenes later. Another mistake is when one of the aliens attacks Andrew by going through the coffee machine, which logically means that the alien went through the door that the machine was blocking. This can be somewhat difficult to process because the aliens could have easily knocked down the door. The dialogues are mostly fine, but they have some very unbelievable moments. One of them is when Darian mentions the existence of government disintegrator weapons. Something that would be very typical of a 50s sci-fi movie. There's also the moment when David and Sarah can't think of a better idea than to scream for help when the alien tries to enter the room. This is a rather obvious cliché and too convenient for the situation they are in. There are absurd moments and it meets the requirements of a B-movie. But the movie turns out to be quite entertaining and its story can be enjoyed a lot. The plot is very simple, and the intrigue is what makes it quite enjoyable. Like many of Cunningham's original films, it is far from reaching the reputation of Friday The 13th. The intention here was not to compete with that work, but to be something more suitable for television. Terminal Invasion is an honest B-movie that simply aims to entertain without the need to be excellent. Bruce Campbell's charisma and the intriguing story make it one of the few Sci Fi Channel movies that can truly be enjoyed. My final rating for this movie is a 6/10.

The second feature film directed by Ben Stiller is quite an unusual comedy with a lot of suspense elements. The plot itself is quite disturbing and is a suspense story dressed up with eccentric humor, but it is quite noticeable that it is not a light comedy. At the beginning, it acts like a normal comedy where Matthew Broderick, with his manly image, becomes a victim of the bizarre behavior of the always eccentric Jim Carrey. The truth is that both actors have very believable characters that come to life through the acting style that defines both of them. Steven is an ordinary man with a quiet daily life, and his only problem is that he has to deal with Robin's separation. But even so, he has a quiet life that is interrupted by Chip. At first, he seems like someone who just likes to joke around and has no bad intentions. Chip keeps Steven company and shows generosity towards him. As the movie progresses, Chip's behavior becomes stranger, and it is suspected that he is not someone very sane. The movie keeps the humor intact, but the plot itself becomes something more disturbing. Chip develops an obsession with wanting to win Steven's friendship, to the point that he begins to torment him. The movie turns into a suspense story similar to Cape Fear, Fatal Attraction, and Play Misty For Me. Chip turns out to be a lunatic who had a difficult childhood. The mentions he makes about his childhood and the flashback showing one of those moments give a clear idea about Chip's past. It's about someone who has never had a social life and whose mother was never there for him. Chip spent his entire life in front of the television, and that severely affected his mind. Chip's dialogues contain quotes or references to various television shows. So his behavior is a consequence of his psychological deterioration from spending his entire childhood in front of the television and not socializing with other individuals. Chip always wanted to have a friend, but by not developing a much healthier ability to socialize, he cannot form healthy relationships and his attempts to win the friendship of others end in harassment. Chip becomes the clear example of a toxic relationship with someone psychologically unstable. What the movie presents with this character are the consequences of exposure to television and the lack of interaction with other people. During the rise of television, there was much discussion about the influence it could have on people with minds still in full development. It was a debate that lasted quite a long time, and the movie makes a satire about it. Chip would be the representation of the negative effects that television could have on children's psychology. Chip's childhood bears some resemblance to that of children who do not have their parents present and are left in front of a screen. Although television has become less relevant with the rise of the Internet, the satire in this film can still be applied to the exposure of young people to screens and their psychological effects. Chip has two interesting speeches that apply to this idea. The first is when he talks about the future, referencing the expansion of the Internet. He talks about shopping from home and playing Mortal Kombat with someone from abroad. Here Chip talks about digital globalization that became a reality several years later. Chip's final speech at the climax of the movie talks about saving the children so they don't end up like him. This salvation consists of killing the babysitter, which in this case would be the television. The message of the movie is clearly understood, and although it is a satire of the television era, it still makes sense in an age where cable has evolved into digital networks. Chip had become someone incapable of having a stable social relationship, and his final action is a reflection on trying to prevent the influence of screens from harming the future of the next generation. During the events of the movie, there are broadcasts reporting on the trial of the former child star Sam Sweet. It doesn't seem very relevant, but it also contributes to the movie's message. The reports on the case capture the audience's attention and keep them interested until the end of the movie. Here, what would be planned is the fascination of people with the morbid towards disturbing cases. Something that the media profits from and even mentions the production of a movie based on the Sam Sweet case. All of this makes more sense in an era where people are exposed to morbid content on social media. This even counts as part of the psychological effects that the screen can generate in young people. Chip has even witnessed Sweet's career since childhood, and everything the movie wants to convey is becoming clearer. That makes the movie have something quite profound, hidden behind its humor, and that something makes the story disturbing. The bizarre and strange performance by Jim Carrey also makes the film generate a sense of discomfort. His performance as Chip is undoubtedly the most intriguing and disturbing of this actor's entire career. The final result is a comedy that entertains and intrigues at the same time. This would be one of the most interesting and peculiar films in the filmographies of Jim Carrey and Ben Stiller. Apart from its credible protagonists and Jack Black's limited participation, it also features striking cameos involving Owen Wilson, Kyle Gass, and Ben Stiller himself. The humor of the movie may be exaggerated, but that enhances the uncomfortable feeling that its disturbing context aims to generate. It has unforgettable scenes like the medieval restaurant, Jim Carrey singing Somebody To Love, and Steven's grim nightmare. The Cable Guy is an intriguing comedy that, beneath its dark humor, carries a message that, even in post-television times, still gives much to think about. My final rating for this movie is an 8/10.

Just when the first movie turned 10 years old, Disney took the opportunity to release this third installment that concluded the trilogy of films. In this case, The Lion King 3: Hakuna Matata is a movie that presents a hidden subplot from the first film. This installment narrates how the friendship between Timon and Pumba began while the events of the first movie were unfolding. Here they once again demonstrate that Shakespeare's literature has always been a significant influence on The Lion King saga. The reason is that this third installment draws inspiration from the play Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead. This play narrates the events of Hamlet from the perspective of his friends Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. The same happens here, as several events from the first movie are present while Timon and Pumba begin their friendship. Everything begins before Simba's birth, and the movie explains who Timon really was. Here we meet his mother and Uncle Max. Although these characters were never mentioned in the other movies, their participation helps to understand Timon's past. It is about a meerkat who was always marginalized due to his bad reputation for causing incidents that expose his companions to danger. Ma is the only one who shows appreciation to Timon and does everything possible to keep her son from getting discouraged. The interesting thing is that here we see that Timon already knew the infamous trio of hyenas led by Shenzi. The return of the hyenas for this movie was a good decision because they were memorable villains, and fortunately, they returned along with the actors who portrayed them. The truth is that showing the hyenas as already established rivals of the meerkats was ideal for creating a connection between them and Timon. After that, Timon finally meets Pumba just as he sets off on his way to the Pride Lands. At first, Timon accepts Pumba just because he can provide protection, but Pumba's kindness makes their friendship blossom. The Lion King 3 develops the friendship between both characters quite well and is a very pleasant story to learn about the origin of this duo. It could be considered a kind of spin-off, but since it is set at the same time as the first movie, there are things that can be somewhat difficult to reconcile when it comes to continuity. The movie fits well with the first one to a certain extent. Here they recycled scenes from the first movie, doing something similar to what was done in Silent Night, Deadly Night Part 2 and Boogeyman 2, although these used the recycled scenes as flashbacks. But like those two, The Lion King 3 maintained a certain coherence with the continuity. Partly, it amplifies the plot of the first movie by showing that Timon and Pumba were present at certain moments. They were present at Simba's birth without knowing it, and Pumba was the reason the animals started bowing. Both were also present in the musical number "I Just Can't Wait to Be King," and Timon had caused the collapse of the animal tower. The curious thing here is that it seems that happened the day after Simba was born, as if the cub had only taken a day to grow a little. That affects the logic of the first movie, but even both previous movies show a newborn cub at the beginning and the next day it has already grown a bit. It seems that in the universe of The Lion King, the cubs grow faster than normal. The movie continues to show what happened after Timon and Pumba adopted Simba. Here, the movie offers a glimpse into the time Simba spent with the duo until his adulthood. This was a good addition to get an idea of what Simba's childhood was like during that period. To continue amplifying what was seen in the first movie, it also shows how Timon tried to interfere with the love between Simba and Nala during Can You Feel The Love Tonight. This makes sense given the time Simba and Nala spent roaming the territory. From the beginning to the moment when Timon and Pumba go to help Simba reclaim his throne, everything in this movie seems to fit with the first one. A detail that seems to affect continuity is when, before Simba's birth, Timon and Rafiki had already met. Here it seems that Rafiki used the phrase Hakuna Matata as a motive for Timon to travel to the Pride Lands and along the way meet Simba to save him. It's as if Timon and Pumba were destined to save Simba. The thing is that in the first movie, when Rafiki appears before Timon, Pumba, and Nala, Timon doesn't seem to recognize him. This could be justified by saying that since years passed after the first encounter with Rafiki, Timon forgot about him and took a while to recognize him. This is indeed a mistake in the movie that can be justified in that way, but when Timon and Pumba face the hyenas in the final confrontation, here the movie begins to contradict what was seen during the confrontation with Scar. Here, two possible theories can be proposed. The first would be that this event, and probably much of what was seen in the movie, takes place in a second timeline. In this timeline, many of the events seen in the first movie occurred, and only the confrontation with Scar and the hyenas was different from what was seen in the original timeline. The second would be that everything is being narrated by Timon and Pumba, and they distorted what really happened in their story. In the movie, they break the fourth wall by sitting in a movie theater while the film is being projected. This would be an interpretation that Timon and Pumba are narrating their own version of what was seen in the first movie, but altering some events. Maybe Timon never really met Rafiki, perhaps he and Pumba weren't present in some situations, and much of what is seen in the movie was invented by them. In Mufasa: The Lion King has something similar when Timon and Pumba tell Kiara that it was them who defeated Scar. Since The Lion King 3 is narrated by Timon and Pumba, it would make sense that some of the things seen in this movie were invented by them. Moreover, the movie is heavily oriented towards the comedy and humor of both characters. This would be the same case as the Timon & Pumba series, which is not classified as canon, but has some things that make sense within the continuity. That series served to justify why Timon always mentions human objects that were never seen in the movies. Since that series was also narrated from the perspective of Timon and Pumba, some of those events may have happened in the canon, while others were invented by them. It could be said that what is really happening is that after the events of the previous movies, Timon and Pumba started telling the world what happened in the first movie, but distorting the facts. The cameo of the other characters from the Disney classic franchise seems to indicate that Timon and Pumba's story became popularized in this universe that makes up the franchise. So, without trying to find too much logic in it, the movie can be seen as an alternate event or a story distorted by this beloved duo. It can even be seen as a parody of the first movie, and the truth is that its story about the friendship between Timon and Pumba is quite charming. It's a fun movie that takes advantage of Timon and Pumba's humor and parodies some moments. The movie only features 2 original songs, which are Diggah Tunnah and That's All I Need. They are songs with a good rhythm, and I wish the movie had more songs like that. Instead, they recycled the soundtrack from the first movie and used pre-existing musical themes. This further strengthens the parodic tone of the film. The animation picks up the style of the first movie, but here they take advantage of the bright colors to match the cheerful comedy. By focusing quite a bit on the humor of Timon and Pumba, this installment ends up being something more original that adapts the first movie to its own humorous style. The peculiar thing about this trilogy is that each movie was made in its own style. The first is a work with a profound message, the second is a darker work, and this third one is a humorous work. So each installment of this saga has its own flavor and a unique identity that doesn't necessarily repeat the same things from the original movie. Compared to the previous installments, this movie ranks low. But among the sequels and prequels that Disney has been making, this one is somewhat interesting for presenting a different narrative from the original movie. Taking into account the charm and humor of Timon and Pumba, this is a movie that offers plenty of this beloved duo. The Lion King 3: Hakuna Matata is not a very original movie for recycling the first one, but it is a fun humorous film that is better seen as a parody or as one of the Timon and Pumba gags. My final rating for this movie is 8/10.