Sonic the Hedgehog (2020) is fun family-oriented entertainment but it lacks what made Detective Pikachu a must-watch: Originality.

I was surprised I liked this film a lot but wasn't caught off guard by the amateurishness of the director and two screenwriters who have never worked on a big-budget blockbuster before.

The best aspect was undoubtedly the cast comprising of James Marsden, Jim Carrey and Ben Schwartz.

Carrey was especially brilliant and this film was the perfect comeback for him big-budget entertainment-wise.

I look forward to the sequels despite this movie's predictability and lack of originality. Sonic the Hedgehog might not be one of a kind, but you're in for the fastest ride in your life - pun intended.

The Rating: 3 out of 4.

I thought Dev Patel's best movie and performance to date was Lion (2016). Although, he was Oscar-nominated for the former, he deserved not only a nod but a win here for The Personal History of David Copperfield (2019) based on the eponymous character created by Charles Dickens. But this is not just another Victorian Era film based on a classic novel - this is the most modern Dickens' adaptation ever directed by Armando Iannucci with a screenplay co-written by him and Simon Blackwell.

Poster of The Personal History of David Copperfield.

This movie has perfect pacing for a flick of this genre. Every minute seems to be an adventure and Iannucci proves you can breathe life into legendary works by adapting them in a modern way. The character design, the dialogues, the cinematography create an unparalleled mise-en-scene. I particularly love how colorful the movie is - not only looks wise - but character wise as well.

Although, we have some stereotypical characters whose intentions you can guess early on before they make a move, they are so well constructed that it is hard to find one major or minor individual who doesn't affect the viewer in some way.

The black comedy element is the finest aspect. Half satire, half sociological criticism, the movie never gets too serious or too jolly to escape its major goal - and that is exposing classicism which still exists in current society regardless of which country you are based in.

Dev Patel steals the show but the entire ensemble gave noteworthy performances and I cannot single out any of the major or minor performers as they were equally glorious, and kudos to filmmaker Iannucci for handling such a diverse line-up of performers and characters.

The set design is also wonderful and you feel like you are in Victorian England. No prop seems fake or no costume seems artificial. Without the vibrant cinematography by Zak Nicholson, this movie would not have such a positive effect on me, because it is one of those rare fictional-historical dramas which book look good and make you feel good.

All in all, The Personal History of David Copperfield does suffer from Victorian Era tropes - with a screenplay seeming to be based more on a story by Horatio Alger than Charles Dickens - yet these flaws are minuscule in comparison to how well everything was constructed. I don't remember the last flick I awarded a perfect score to, but I will be remember this 2019 rendition of David Copperfield for all of time.

The Rating: 4 out of 4.

Sacred Games' Nawazuddin Siddiqui continues his epic form into Manto (2018), an Indian flick on the Pakistani writer Saadat Hasan Manto, written and directed by Nandita Das. The film mainly focuses on post-Partition India and how Manto was affected by the sudden division of the pro-Hindu and pro-Muslim countries.

P.S. Click on the following link to read my review of Khalid Hasan's translation of the major works of Saadat Hasan Manto titled Bitter Fruit (2009) and published by Penguin India: Bitter Fruit Review.

Notable Aspects of the Film

The point-of-view: Finally, we get to see the effects of Partition on society through an author's eyes. Unlike most films on Partition where the prevalent theme is mostly patriotism, here literature and artistry move the plot along, making for one hell of a must-watch.
The acting: Not only was Nawazuddin Siddiqui picked over Irrfan Khan for the lead role, but he does ample justice to it. The supporting cast was great too with surprise appearances from the likes of Paresh Rawal, Rishi Kapoor, and the acclaimed poet and screenwriter, Javed Akhtar.
The screenplay: Despite Das' filmmaking skills are not to be ignored, her script is what sets the movie apart from others, especially from the 2015 Pakistani by the same name. Not only were the events of Partition, Manto's rise and fall in both his public and personal life, etc., showcased so effectively in just two hours, but there was still space in the running time depict his best-known stories such as Thanda Gosht and Toba Tek Singh as well.

In conclusion, Manto is an unparalleled, no-holds-barred take on a writer who moved to Lahore from Bombay, and whereas other Muslim authors preferred to write patriotic poetry and/or on topics like the plights of the newly-formed nations' citizens, Saadat Hasan Manto upped the ante by focusing on those people in the society whose tales weren't read about on paper. He wasn't afraid of writing about the taboo; a stance which led him to being tried for obscenity in Pakistan for a record three times!

The Rating: 4 out of 4.

Even if a movie in Hollywood is universally panned but is a hit at the box office there's a 99% chance it gets a sequel, and if the case is reversed it definitely doesn't get one. In the case of the first 2 The Conjuring movies they were both box office hits and critically acclaimed, but keep the former factor in mind, as that is what led to the spawning of a franchise containing multiple spin-offs, and finally this third outing released more than 4 years after The Conjuring 2.

The Conjuring: The Devil Made Me Do It (2021) lives up to it titles as making Satanism the centerpiece of the storyline. Whereas, in the previous part, it was established that the demon was self-motivated all along, here the twist or mid-film reveal is that a satanic cult might be behind everything going on.

But there's more to the story that meets the eye. The story really starts going when Arne is about to get the death penalty for brutally slaying a co-worker. However, his case is the first in America where he pleads not guilty by virtue of demonic possession. It's kind of laughable but, for a movie set in this universe, highly plausible as well.

I think in the hands of a better director, say James Wan (though he did co-write the story), this horror film would have been better focused on the trial. I might have seen this scenario before in a film, The Exorcism of Emily Rose, I think. Ultimately, the movie does have its highs and lows.

THE GOOD

The direction by Michael Chavez is not as profound as James Wan's but he does his best with a screenplay written by The Conjuring 2 co-screenwriter, David Leslie Johnson-McGoldrick.
The jump scares are effectively timed, and though the movie is not as scary as the initial 2 instalments, it is still horrific enough for a sequel.
Even though the cult element is cliched given how the cult subgenre in both horror and non-horror media ventures is trending in Hollywood, I still liked how the creative team handled it. The reason for being non-guilty due to demonic possession was also an interesting subplot. Plus, those scenes involving the Lorraines trying to prove their talents to a detective were very thought-provoking and also reminded me of the previous 2 movies where they also have to prove their worth to doubters.

THE BAD

Compared to The Conjuring and The Conjuring 2, this movie was very predictable rendering the plot twists as not being twists at all.
There was something about this movie's atmosphere which seemed straight-to-DVD like despite having a $39 million budget.
The movie was simply not as scary as The Conjuring 2 which itself isn't the scariest of horror movies is overall one of the best modern horror movies in existence.

Moreover, if you have read the plus points above you'll know that despite being of lower quality, this 3rd part does stay true to its roots by featuring traditional plot elements from its predecessors. For a director like Chavez who directed The Conjuring spin-off The Curse of La Llorna, which was a passable flick, this movie itself passed a good sequel which overall did not add anything new to the supernatural genre.

To end with, there are movie trilogies which suffer a drop in quality in descending order: For example, The Matrix trilogy. There are some movie trilogies whose sophomore attempts outshine the original like the original X-Men trilogy where X2 was the best one followed by X1 and rounded off by X3. The Conjuring trilogy follows the latter formula.

The Rating: 3 out of 4.

Hi everyone!

This is a throwback to our first short horror film which was shot and released in January of 2015 - 6 years ago!

From left to right: Bilal (cameraman), Hassam (actor), Hassan (1st assistant director), Ali (actor), Ahsan (actor and 2nd assistant director) and lastly me, Nisar (director, screenwriter and actor).

The Crew That Never Returned originally started as a project for one of my courses at SZABIST Dubai. I don't remember the grade I got but we deserved an A for effort - Media Sciences is about visualization and execution after all. :)

So, without further ado, click the link below to watch The Crew That Never Returned on YouTube:

Dear Readers,

During May I met my dear friend, Farooq Qaisrani, to discuss an idea for a website. That idea has turned into a reality this month: http://literaryretreat.com/

Literary Retreat is dedicated to the memory of the late film-critic Roger Ebert and his eponymous website. The reviews and star-ratings pay homage to his legendary career.

As you have already assumed from the title, Literary Retreat is a haven for literature lovers. We publish book reviews in every possible category. It doesn't matter when the book was published, or who wrote it, as there is no bias regarding topics on which the articles are written.

The best part is that we have an interview section. Every month we select 1-2 authors from distinct genres to crown them as our Authors for that particular Month. For July we had addiction-horror specialist, Mark Matthews, and I'm certain that he won't be the last wordsmith we'll interact him.

Farooq is responsible for all the advertising and design-related aspects of the website. Abdullah Riaz is the second contributor being a writer himself. And I am the primary content writer.

So enjoy reading the interviews and reviews. Please comment and share the articles as much as you'd like. This is more of an intellectual venture and I hope that all our visitors will leave Literary Retreat with new knowledge gained.

Kong: Skull Island (2017) is that kind of film where you know what you're in store for, as soon as you take your seat. The opening gross of this feature proved that monster movies are far from dead. And that's not a bad thing.

The following review contains spoilers.

The Plot: Scientists escorted by military personnel, travel to an undiscovered island, where they have to survive in the midst of Kong and other creatures.

The Good: The visuals are too good. This is the best CGI I've seen this year yet. Definitely worth watching in the theater and especially in IMAX. The second-best aspect is undoubtedly the sound effects. Not only is watching the gigantic gorilla enough, but combined with stunning audio, hear the king roar!

We get a sneak peek of Kong early on unlike 2014's Godzilla. It's set in the backdrop of a fight between Japan and America. Setting this movie in war and post-war eras was smart. This showcased that even during man versus man the greatest obstacle is animals.

The action is spectacular. Whether it be Kong brushing away helicopters like flies, or fighting off the "Skullwalkers", the sequences are meant to kickstart adrenaline.

This movie is never boring and perfectly paced. Each scene has its own visual beauty. The cinematography is one of this century's best. And you won't find a better looking monster movie anytime soon. Consider the scenes of the main team entering the island's airspace. The lighting-filled hurricanes top most of the VFX incorporated in disaster movies. And all the creatures were designed immaculately; inspiring awe and fear at the exact same time.

The Bad: Kong is not without its flaws. The ensemble isn't lacking but the characterization sure falls short. Our protagonist is a generic decommissioned special agent, and the heroine is an idealistic anti-war photographer. Tom Hiddleston and Brie Larson are wasted in such limited roles.

Yet Samuel L. Jackson and John C. Reilly manage to stand out. Though Jackson's obsession with killing Kong and Reilly's survival story, seem far-fetched they still make for the most intriguing subplots for a storyline that is heavily clichéd.

And some parts, such as the introduction of multiple carnivorous creatures showcased through jump scares, were painfully predictable. The ultimate showdown between Kong and the biggest Skullwalker works as a redeemable effort.

The Verdict: Kong: Skull Island is the best monster movie in decades. It's visually pleasing and keeps you at the edge of your seat throughout the 118 minutes duration. Plus it makes the most of Jackson's screentime, and as an action fan, you couldn't ask for more.

The Rating: 3 out of 4.