DRAWMA KINGG Movie Reviews

Tag: movies

  • M3GAN 2.0 2025 Movie Review – Why does this movie exist?

    Yes, I really went to see Megan 2.0 and yes, I was even a Thursday night early bird. Why was I possessed with the desire to actually do this with my short time on this space rock we call planet Earth? Let’s get philosophical today with a lot of whys. Most importantly, why does this movie exist?

    To answer why Megan 2.0 exists, we must first assert these assumptions: that it does in fact exist, I exist, things exist, and the Earth exists. Now that we have the eezy peezy stuff outta da way – why did M3gan get a sequel? I’ll tell you two inaccurate reasons: it was a great film and human beings demanded more Megan world-building.

    Upon hearing of a M3gan sequel, my initial thought was “That movie doesn’t need a sequel!” Upon watching 2.0, my thought had not changed at all. Well, if anything, it solidified. The movie really did have no point whatsoever. I guess on the philosophical end that does make it a good representative work of the pointlessness of real life. When I say the movie had no point, I don’t mean there wasn’t a plot or any goals for the main characters. I mean that the movie did not position itself anywhere in the history of movies. I seem to remember the first Megan being a horror sci-fi film. 2.0 was sort of an action comedy movie. I guess it is still sci-fi, but there were only a couple moments of horror. However, perhaps the only legitimately good thing about the film was [SPOILER] when you see Megan’s makeshift physical body in the basement that is extremely grotesque and reminiscent of the horror robot film Hardware.

    While viewing the first half of the movie, I was actually strangely impressed with the director for how he approached making a pointless movie. It was inexplicably almost working somehow. The second half starts to get so silly that it throws it all away though. Impromptu singing scene, impromptu dance scene, guy accidentally chloroforms himself, impromptu gliding through the air like a superhero scene, main characters doing things that can’t possibly avoid serious prison time scenes, etc. etc. I will say that the movie did actually make me laugh a handful of times. The funny moments and Hardware Megan are honestly the only real positive things I can say about this film.

    Ending Explained: They beat the bad guy. Megan is now [trying to be] a franchise superhero.

    Final Thoughts: I’d give it maybe a 3 or 4 out of 10. A stronger first half than I expected, but the second half WAS just as bad as I expected. The logic and the physics of the movie just fell apart biggg time. I’m pretty sure the main message the movie leaves the viewer with is:

    You should never mix up your poisonous rag with the rag you use to wipe your face. 

    “Oh no! Dat one waz my CHLOROFORM RAG!”

  • 28 YEARS LATER 2025 Movie Review – Ending Explained

    28 Years Later really is a different beast than I was expecting. It felt like a slice of life virus movie. Compared to other 28 Later movies, there was arguably quite a lot of drama here! If you know anything about dis Drawma Kingg so far, you know I am AT LEAST a moderate fan of drama!

    The good: Oddly, my favorite part about the movie is the pacing. It seems to move just at the right pace to keep you engaged in the experiences the main character is having. The acting, in my opinion, was very good IF I am allowed to voice my opinion on whether acting is good or bad in a movie of pictures that move. The directing and the camerawork were both exceptional. For someone that feeds on the dramatic flair, these are not the usual things I praise in a movie.

    Now, let me explain. I was enjoying the film while watching it. It even won me over after a rocky start with the odd intro scene. This is my super extra nonchalant express method of segueing into the next SPOILER paragraph:

    I won’t ever be able to talk about 28 Years Later without talking about Da Sandwich! The beginning and end involve this Jimmy character that seemingly has nothing to do with the rest of the film. He is a boy that survives an attack during the intro and is NOT the boy that is the actual main character. Then at the very end, we have a complete tonal shift to the Adidas Parkour People. Jimmy from the intro is now the leader of these people that do jump flips in what looks like Adidas style comfy clothes. The final scene feels drastically out of place in an otherwise well-made drama. I have imagined a conspiracy theory where the producers told the filmmakers that the initial movie didn’t wrap around like a bow properly and then forced them to add Da Sandwich (perhaps they called it this TOO) scenes at the beginning and end. Just don’t quote me on my imagination’s machinations. Usually, I love sandwiches! Unfortunately, this time Da Sandwich was the worst part.

    Ending Explained: Father and son live, mom not so much. Intro boy now leads a team of Adidas Parkour People.

    Final thoughts: 8/10 Ish, if the first and last scenes about Jimmy were cut from the master (film masters still work that way!). 6/10 ish as the movie played to me at the theater. The slice of life angle of the film is probably what I enjoyed most about the third 28 Later movie. Overall, it wouldn’t be a bad choice for an outing at the theater with some friends and sum snaxxy snax. That is, assuming I hadn’t spoiled it for you already. Drawma Kingg out.

  • BALLERINA 2025 Movie Review – Ending Explained

    Do you love movies that have BOTH lines AND scenes? If so, you will not be disappointed in Ballerina! I assure you this movie has things to look at and words to hear. If I were an easily satiated Drawma Kingg, I would have LIKED IT too.

    Let me start with a lil bit of good before all the bad. The action scenes are probably the only reason other people like this movie. I had issues with them that I will get to later, but I will say that they did accomplish keeping the viewer on edge from moment to moment. The violence was over-the-top, including constant moider and lots o’ grenades. There always seems to be a hammer laying in arms reach, and let’s not forget the klassy flamethrower on flamethrower battle! The extreme nature of these scenes could be a pro or con, depending on the viewer, but I would guess it’s a pro for most people buying a ticket to a John Wick Universe movie. The other pros are: one funny scene about John Wick’s reputation, and the acting of Ana de Armas. I think she did her best with the lack of anything interesting in the script.

    Begin serious trash talk. Ballerina’s plot and script were far from intriguing. Your brain could just completely give up and sign out from life to avoid having to finish watching it. I sat through the whole thing completely awake and sober, and I literally cannot think of a single interesting thing to relate to you about the events of the film. I think to myself: were the John Wick movies this dull? I don’t recall thinking they were very good when I watched them, but I also don’t recall them being this thin in plot. Then again, since I barely recall the several John Wick movies I’ve watched, that may suggest that they were equally void of information.

    Why is it called Ballerina? They make it very clear at the start of the film that she likes this ballerina knickknack. The knickknack likes her back (I think). Her assassin training program she enrolled in also makes her do ballet stuff. I think there was supposed to be more to her ballerina persona beyond all that, but it kinda just stops there.

    Ending Explained: She defeats the villain while perhaps becoming one. She lives on for sequel.

    Final Thoughts: 3/10 Stars. Ballerina just wasn’t for me. Although quite dramatic, the movie wasn’t enjoyable unless you want to watch a movie with a main character that is constantly moidering their opponents left and right (not morally obvo). I also don’t think they presented a good character origin story. I’m pretty sure teleportation was involved with some documents at one point. Just a lazy story, without any nutrition. And let me tell yoo – this Drawma Kingg needs to eat!!

  • THE WIZARD OF OZ 1939 Movie Review – Ending Explained

    I want to start out talkin’ ‘bout Professor Marvel. The only stuff that happens before that is like – she is girl, she has dog, Kansas. You know, important exposition. Professor Marvel is noteworthy because he is the first Marvel superhero – even before Green Lantern! He has a defining outfit and accessories. He has fortune-telling superpowers. Is there anything he himself can NOT do? Unlikely.

    On to Oz. Dorothy arrives in Oz from a rather expected method of housenado. I assume it was the shark’s day off and a house was the most logical pilot next in line. Once we enter the magic world, it quickly becomes one of the simultaneously best and worst films I’ve ever sat through. The colors, the production, the sets, the choreography, all brilliantly executed and not just by 1939 standards. It still holds up as outstanding! Now, on the other hand, the plot/story/dialogue are all so bad that I was in a state of constant cringe. I’m aware this was meant for kids, but even taking that into account, it’s still really bad. I would say the target market is 3 to 6 years old. As soon as you turn 7 your brain says “What the fluff is this baby stuff? I’m more mature than this! I’m turning this off and going outside to kick a ball like a sophisticated gentleman!”

    For a movie where even a seven-year-old has to turn his brain off to enjoy, there is a few sneaky philosophical moments of brain usage. For instance: when the group asks to see the wizard, the Door Guard states “Nobody’s ever seen the great OZ. Even I’ve never seen him.” To which Dorothy responds: “Well, then how do you know there is one?” Some rather subversive god commentary for those days wouldn’t you say? Additionally, when they meet their god, Ozzy Ozbourne, he turns out to have no powers and just pretends to have powers by using man-made machines. I think the moral of the story is accidentally: There is always a scientific explanation behind superstitious beliefs. 

    Ending Explained: Dorothy wakes up from her dream. Nothing actually happened. Everyone’s time was wasted.

    Ending Analysis: the Wizard of Oz is like the ultimate dream sequence movie in a bad way. Rather than “oh look that scene was just a dream” it’s “oh look the entire chain of events happens to just be a dream.” Now most movies that end this way are ambiguous as to whether it was really a dream or maybe not a dream. I don’t think there is ambiguity here though. Her friends and family in Kansas appear to be the same actors as the people she met in Oz implying it really came from her subconscious. Plus her house seems to be intact without signs of piloting a tornado.

    Final Thoughts: Is this film a work of anti-superstition or pro superstition? Even I, a Drawma Kingg who happens to be dramatic, have no words to answer that question for you.