New Poster for Darren Aronofsky's Mother is Bloody Disturbing

Director Darren Aronofsky dropped the first poster for his upcoming movie Mother, and it isn't for the faint of heart. Jennifer Lawrence and Javier Bardem star as "a couple whose relationship is tested when invited guests arrive at their home, disrupting their tranquil existence". The film also stars Domnhall Gleeson, Michelle Pfeiffer, and Ed Harris.

Aronofsky tweeted the gruesome, ethereal poster created by visual artist James Jean on Mother's Day. It doesn't hold back on the macabre, to say the least. Here it is in full:

Photo Credit: James Jean / Paramount Pictures

Aronofsky is not one to skimp out on symbolism or metaphors. With psychological horrors like Pi, Requiem for Dream and Black Swan under his belt, this is the exact kind of gorgeous disturbance we can expect.

Jennifer Lawrence's character offers a vacantly hopeful expression while ripping her heart out. Subtle details in the background offer a few twists such as a doorknob, a ghostly image of a man, an odd square shape in the bottom corner, a mound of gold placed on a flower's pistil, and a frog looking onwards. She is centered in a jungle (perhaps the house where the couple's tranquil existence is disturbed), which includes a salivating man-eating plant.

In Interview Magazine, a cover story with Michelle Pfeiffer by Aronofsky hinted that the script is esoteric. If we expected anything less, it'd be a major surprise.

Besides the poster and summary, not much is known about Mother. It comes late on the heels of Aronofsky's last film Noah, an ambitious Biblical retelling which left most critics lukewarm. Those close to the upcoming project have said the director makes a solid return to cerebral horror similar to Black Swan, which garnered Natalie Portman her first Academy Award win for Best Actress. The promising thriller is set for an October release just in time for award consideration.

What do you guys think of the new poster? Creepy or gorgeous?

Starting a New Chapter with Once Upon A Time

When Once Upon A Time premiered on ABC in 2011, it was such an enchanting show. There was nothing like it on television, and for the near future, there's not to be a similar adventurous experience again. As news soars in about the future of the series, the seventh season will whole start a new chapter.

The first season was one of my all-time favorites of any show ever. Its heroine Emma Swan is compelled by the son she gave up for adoption to enter a secluded town called Storybrooke. Henry believes everyone is a fairytale character, and don’t know it because a curse has been placed on them by his adoptive mother Regina Mills. He compels Swan to believe that she was destined to save the town and break the curse keeping them in the dark.

Jennifer Morrison Bids Farewell to Once Upon A Time

Photo Credit: ABC / Once Upon A Time

It's hard to imagine a show without its lead character but that's exactly what ONCERs have to face. After a long-awaited musical episode leading to Emma Swan and Captain Hook's wedding, actress Jennifer Morrison confirmed the worst: she's not returning to Once Upon A Time after season six.

The actress shared the announcement on her official instagram.

As I reached the end of my 6 year contract on ONCE UPON A TIME, I was faced with a significant decision. ABC, Eddy Kitsis, and Adam Horowitz very generously invited me to continue as a series regular. After very careful consideration, I have decided that creatively and personally, it is time for me to move on. Emma Swan is one my favorite characters that I have ever played. My 6 years on ONCE UPON A TIME has changed my life in the most beautiful ways.

This news comes after a turbulent season for the series. Unlike other shows on the ABC network which were given an official renewal or axe in early March, Once Upon A Time struggled to save itself,. Ratings continued to drop, leaving Storybrooke fans to wonder if the show had any magic left in it keep going. Morrison's announcement comes after an official renewal for a seventh season.

Now, I'm not even the most devout fan, but sometimes I wondered if it would've been good for the series to quit while it's ahead. Too many creative issues couldn't have fixed the past and mistakes continued to linger in every new episode. I often go back to season one and feel like there was so much potential left on the cutting room floor. Most of the time, it was the cast that kept me interested more so than the writing or worldbuilding. It remained one of the most optimistic and hopeful shows on tv. As the yellow brick road has come to an end, Morrison exiting the show isn't all that surprising.

Morrison has promised that she will be be back for at least one more episode of the show, so that at least guarantees the start of season seven to handle Swan's departure or explain her whereabouts. Her exit puts the rest of the cast in a bit of a pickle and leaves us to wonder about fan favorites. Actor Robert Carlyle, who played Rumpelstiltskin, was the second most outspoken star to say he was hesitant to sign on again. Word has it that the rest of the cast such as Lana Parilla, Ginnifer Goodwin, and Josh Dallas haven't renewed either. Colin O’Donoghue's contract, who plays Swan's husband Captain Hook, still has another year left.

Show creators Adam Horowitz and Edward Kitsis have been toiling with the idea of a reboot, taking the show in another direction with a new narrative. In what could be the series finale airing Sunday, May 14th, the two-hour final battle between Emma Swan and the Black Fairy comes to a head.

Swan's arc on the show is still something to be cherished. She was a lost girl who grew into a powerful woman deciding her fate alongside a loving family and believing in happy beginnings. But what will Once Upon A Time be without Emma Swan? I hate to say it, but a probably a whole new show, and one that fans will struggle to get on board with.

What do you think of Jennifer Morrison's exit?

Has Once Upon A Time's ship finally sailed?

Series Review: Bates Motel

Alfred Hitchcock’s Psycho tells the twisted story of Norman Bates; a young man living at a desolate inn who kills a troubled hotel guest, but there’s much more to him than meets the eye. If you ever wanted to know more about the complicated loner and his overbearing mother, Bates Motel accomplishes what only a few have conquered before: re-imagine a classic horror film into a classic horror television show.

The 1960 film without a doubt put the psychological- slasher genre on the map and will remain a classic for all-time. As the master of mystery Hitchcock dolls out suspense in terrifying measure, the story doesn’t explore the complex relationship between mother and son. Save for the ending where Bates’ slashing tendencies is delved into between a psychologist and the victim’s closest relatives, there’s always more to wonder about them both. The re-imagining created by Kerry Ehrin and Carlton Cuse goes much further.

Building up to the evening where Marion Crane was murdered, Bates Motel dials back the years to when Norman and Norma first acquire the famous motel in an effort to start over. After suffering psychological disturbances throughout his childhood, Mother thinks a new place is just what they need. But a different life doesn’t fix all of their problems as Norma fights off detrimental plans destined to drive traffic away from their inn, the town’s seedy underground of drugs, and even darker secrets about their family Norman couldn't ever imagine.

It’s safe to say that Norman and Norma are the hearts of the show as well as the movie.  Though Anthony Perkins’ performance in the movie is without a doubt timeless, Mother exists, intriguingly but lightly, as a literal skeleton in a closet. Except for Perkins and Hitchcock’s detail to the atmosphere, it’s very one-sided. Bringing both of these characters to life comes unforgettable performances from Freddie Highmore and Vera Farmiga who are tasked to make a disturbed duo likable, interesting, but also scary and dangerous.

Feud (2017) Season 1 Review

Photo Credit: Feud / 20th Television

Having set a precedent for award-winning and binge-worthy shows, Ryan Murphy knows what it takes to make a drama. His latest creation Feud tackles notorious rivalries throughout history. It was fitting the first one tackles Joan Crawford and Bette Davis' famously bitter showdown.

After becoming Classic Hollywood screen queens, Joan Crawford and Bette Davis aged like the rest of humanity. With younger, hipper generations growing up on television as the studio system fell apart, their careers suffered dry spells. When Crawford initiated a project of two cruel sisters harboring jealousy and secrets in Whatever Happened to Baby Jane, the claws came out. On-screen and behind-the-scenes, a real showdown was ignited between the duo by the studio and publicity hounds.

Legend has it that the two hated each other. Speculation around this rivalry float in every which direction, it’s hard to tell what’s the truth or was fictionalized. Adding more misdirection following the movie's release, the stars threw shade at each other in interviews only to retract them later. Instead of resorting to catty squabbles and Real Housewives-esque drama, Feud tries to ask what was the source of their hostility and why they couldn't let their resentments go.

Drawing on second-hand biographies and heresy within the industry, this version tries to be as well-rounded as possible. Even though every episode spurred sites to fact check what was true or elaborated, Murphy does a smart thing by indulging in news pieces but focused more on Crawford and Davis’ limitations, strengths, and weaknesses. He depicts an exceptional range of ageism, sexism, the pressure and manipulation they endured from Hollywood, and publicity that threatened to put the final nails in their professional coffins.

As much as they regarded each other as enemies, Crawford and Davis were more alike than they could've recognized. Personally, they suffered insecurities wrought by rejection, always wanting to be better. In love, they married multiple times, and as mothers never recovered from scathing autobiographies their daughters published, where Hollywood's elite, former spouses and friends of the actresses would decry as trash and lies. Professionally, they had different acting approaches. They maneuvered through the studio patriarchy as best as possible; both trying to transition "past their prime" as women and performers trying to not be remembered as a laughing stock, or nothing at all.  Despite what they had in common, they struggled to see each other as allies trying to live up to the fans expectation as well as their own.

To carry Murphy’s vision, Lange and Sarandon play Crawford and Davis, respectively. As veteran performers in their own right, they’re certainly perfect picks because of their range and experience. It’s difficult to replicate their characters' talent, but they managed to portray them enough in mannerisms and attitude. Each explores self-value within and out of Hollywood. As the studio drives a wedge between them, they're left to vilify each other to protect their glory days. If they reach out, it's almost in vain to their self-preservation. In doing so, they render determination and ballsiness but also great vulnerability.

Though Feud explores both titan's struggles with a well-studied range, it also takes too long to find its groove and never quite reaches the same palpable energy displayed in Whatever Happened to Baby Jane. As a making-of feature, the attention to detail with the sets and costumes is extraordinary for the most part. Playing the role of Crawford and Davis off-screen from their Baby Jane characters is when Lange and Sarandon truly succeed. But put them in scenes recreating earlier work or Baby Jane, and their performances are bad copycats with cheap wigs and choppy line delivery. These small moments reinforcing what talents these women initially were doesn't match their brutal obscurity.

It's hard to imagine these icons created something so palpable as the real icons that it earned Oscar nominations and created a whole new genre by which other aging Tinseltown titans had to follow through with to stay alive too. By all means, Feud studies the legends we think we know, but we're still talking about the movie itself fifty-five years later not just because of the bloated rumors of what went on behind-the-scenes. No matter how relevant the blatant sexism and ageism in Hollywood, let alone society, still exists today, the talent of Crawford and Davis are undeniably brilliant, and on those recreation scenes, Feud misses the mark.

Primarily told in flashbacks within a fictional documentary, Murphy often employs other characters to reinforce his powerhouse leads. Some are needed, some are a pure distraction. Those connected to the main stars, such as Judy Davis as the spirited snake-in-the-grass Hedda Hopper and Alfred Molina as director Robert Aldrich caught in the middle, offer more direct sympathy. But when Catherine Zeta-Jones as Olivia DeHavilland and Kathy Bates as Joan Blondell, among others, intermittently pop up to offer commentary, they weakly reestablish what's already playing out. DeHavilland at least has a closer utilized friendship to Davis, while Blondell is just sorta there. As the last few episodes increasingly attempt to soften the vicious narrative created by Christina Crawford's autobiography Mommie Dearest, Davis' near identical issues aren't as greatly explored and the story starts to drop off into a heartwrenching and half-realized what-could've-been finale.

In 1962, Baby Jane revived two stars to younger generations, and fifty-five years later, Feud will re-introduce their work to even more people. It’s hard to watch the show and not want to watch the movie. That’s a very good thing. However, other than the script, and the exceptional performances, the series never quite reaches the level of palpable energy of its inspiration. Murphy's biopic of sorts intelligently swaps juicy gossip into a heartfelt catharsis, but also made me think there’s simply no way of capturing the original, and it’s okay for legends to just be that.

Rating: ★★☆ 

If you love Feud, you might like: 

Conversations with Joan Crawford by Roy Newquist

Mother Goddam: The Story of the Career of Bette Davis by Whitney Stine

Have you seen Feud? What did you think?

6 Feels You Get After Seeing a Bad Movie

Whether at home or the movie theater, there's nothing quite like seeing a really bad movie. An okay movie can be redeemed by a memorable performance, imaginative production design, or a wicked soundtrack. Ever walk out of a theater and feel like you wasted your time or money? you're jealous of people walking out of a theater happy with their night out? YEP. A pretty bad movie can make you remember where you were the day you saw it even though you want to forget. If you're lucky, it'll be bad enough to get a lot of memes or earn an honest trailer. A movie that fails to live up to your expectations or has terrible direction or cast is a real bummer. These are six feels you might get after seeing a really bad movie. Am I missing a feeling you get? I'd love to know! Feel free to share in the comments!

Tired

After seeing a really good movie, you might feel energized and wonder how the time magically flew by. This sleeper flick just seems to go on and on and on with no end in sight. A car exploding in a massive action scene or an actor shouting might give you a shot of much-needed adrenaline, but when the end credits start you're tired...if you're lucky to have not snoozed through the movie already.

Bored

Nothing is happening. Maybe words are coming out of the actor's mouth but you can't make sense of what they're saying. Or that one frame was pretty....but you feel like nothing is going on. You're waiting for that moment to feel engaged, but the story isn't holding your attention. So you start thinking about grocery shopping, your job, did you leave the stove on at home, should you've spent your afternoon at the DMV instead...That's one boring movie!

Confused

The movie could've been really good, but what was the story really about? why was the direction so weak? Maybe the characters' choices went against their motivations, and you're left to watch the mistakes unfold. You might even anticipate how the next scene will change things around. There's got to be a good twist or cathartic ending to clean up this mess....There's nothing to do except wonder dumbfoundedly - how could a movie be so terrible? What did I sit through? what is life?

Cheated

You're psyched: the music videos are awesome. The trailer gives you life. But something happens between initially seeing the teasers and the movie's release. The ad campaign misses the mark on what the movie was going to be about. It's one thing to have expectations, it's another to feel like you were watching an entirely different movie than what you were anticipating. Were you watching an entirely different movie? GAH, you feel so cheated. You want the movie you were promised!

Ranty

A better protagonist. Cut the montage. The villain doesn't have to be a super softie underneath because of his *woe is me* past. Fewer edits. Deepen the romance. More pacing between scenes. You have a checklist of ideas for how the movie could've been better. If only the studio or director knew what they're doing, they could've had a hit on their hands, which makes you feel ranty. CAUSE IT COULD'VE BEEN BETTER.

Disappointed

The movie had one job to do: not let you down. But after the hype for months from friends, or family, the internet, the movie fails on an epic score. In fact, the promotional tour of trailers and interviews were much better than what the movie was advertised to be, or what you thought it was going to be. You might've just lost a potential fandom or favorite, but it feels like you lost something much bigger. It's going to take a lot to get over this disappointment. Maybe a good movie will do the trick?

The Man From U.N.C.L.E Sequel in the Works (This is not a drill)

Photo Credit: The Man From U.N.C.L.E / Warner Bros. Pictures

Back in 2015, a stylish, comedic, and action-packed spy movie took some movie goers including yours truly by storm. It was Guy Ritchie's remake of the classic television show The Man From U.N.C.L.E.

Henry Cavill, Armie Hammer, and Alicia Vikander played spies during the end of World War II trying to stop Nazi sympathizers from getting their hands on a nuclear weapon.

The movie decently satisfied critics but didn't exceed expectations, and subsequently, had an uphill battle at the box office barely just making back its $75 million budget. But since the movie set up the possibility of a franchise, leaving the trio to team up once again for another op, fans were left wondering if a sequel would ever happen.

While talking about his latest film Free Fire, Armie Hammer divulged to SlashFilm that he gets asked about a sequel all the time and that one is in the works. The film's co-writer and producer Lionel Wigram is apparently on the job to get a second film written.

I was like, ‘Dude, what’s the deal? I get asked about this **** all the time. Can you just write a sequel?’ He was like, ‘You know what?...I’ll do it. Sure, I’ll write a sequel.’ I was like, ‘If you write one, I’m sure we can get one made,’ so who knows? Apparently, the sequel is being written right now.

Officially, a movie isn't in the works just yet. Director and co-writer Guy Ritchie or other members of the cast haven't signed on. With interest from Armie Hammer to get a project rolling, hopefully, miracles can happen. Fans are clamoring for the next mission, so sorry to say Wigram, there's a lot of pressure to deliver. *fingers crossed*

UPDATED: While doing interviews for King Arthur, Ritchie talked about the possibility of doing another U.N.C.L.E. and that he'd be on board to direct.

Are you excited for a possible The Man From U.N.C.L.E sequel?

Feel free to share your thoughts in the comments!

GPOY as the news broke

The Girl On The Train (2016) misses its thrilling destination

Photo Credit: The Girl on the Train / Universal Pictures

Reading the book before an adaptation’s released is typically my M.O. There’s something special about fleshing out a novel into pockets of time, adding up pages here and there so I can feel a little bit more about the characters and story from my imagination in the movie. Last year, a psychological thriller The Girl on the Train by Paula Hawkins was my latest attempt.

The premise was interesting enough: an alcoholic woman Rachel (Emily Blunt) commutes to the city on the train every day and night. From her seat window, she watches a mirror of the life she used to have play out with her ex-husband Tom (Justin Theroux), his wife Anna (Rebecca Ferguson) and their child. Getting glimpses of a neighboring couple Megan and Scott (Hayley Bennett and Luke Evans), Rachel finds purpose in imagining how idyllic their life must be. When Megan goes missing during one of her drunken stupors, she fears the worst and tries to discover the root of her disappearance.

Though fan and critic reviews aren’t favorable for the movie, I’m unsure how readers felt with this adaptation. For me, it’s weird to hold half-hearted expectations towards both, and wonder if the other one measures up. Putting my failed attempts to read the book aside, in a very strange way, the movie still doesn’t pan out.

It’s not for a lack of trying by the cast, most of all with Blunt as the star. Because of her alcoholism, Rachel is determined to figure out what happened the night Megan went missing. But because of it, her perspective of events are deceptive. Days blurring together in flashbacks and an overactive imagination reveal the illusions of her marriage, and the profound sorrow stemming from not being able to have a child. As an undependable source for half of the story, she's also wildly empathetic because for her sake you want to know what occurred. Nearly on-screen for the whole movie, Blunt gives a memorable performance of emptiness and desperation.

Outside of Rachel's mental and emotional carousel of delusions and realizations, this is where the mystery begins and ends. Surprisingly, there's no real investigation into Megan's disappearance except tidbits here and there. It's a high enough priority for a detective to visit Rachel and question her, but not get involved beyond the media reporting on it. Minor characters are swept to the side who could have a bigger impact. Except Rachel (and Scott) inching around the truth, there's no real sense of urgency to find Megan sooner rather than later.

While the movie tries to merge thrills with issues like infertility, the story skims the surface on both. A line seems to be drawn between the male characters who are red flags to pay attention to in relationships, and the female characters are much more interesting but aren't given much to work with. Every male character is a hormonal leech who want what they want (sex, kids, etc) no questions asked, while the women are shells of their former selves, facing pressure to conceive or not, and questioning their worth based on their husband's expectations. Rachel, Anna, and Megan are inextricably linked by these things, and Rebecca Ferguson and Hayley Benett are intriguing, but they're not given enough time to set themselves apart.

Given the enigmatic trend movies like Gone Girl, director Tate Taylor inadvertently or purposely echoes the atmosphere of David Fincher’s 2015 movie. Both have something in common with mixing a missing person’s case and a deeper exploration of marriage, but unlike Gone Girl, Taylor is a little out of his depth. His cinematography, cross-overs between characters and timelines, and vibe feels like a copy and doesn't live up to its inspiration.

I wish I could've stuck with the book, but I felt as stumped with its story as I did with the movie. Suspense lingers while Rachel's pain and discoveries unfold, but that doesn’t last long. If one guesses who the perpetrator is early in the story, and it’s not difficult to do, the big reveal is even less impressive. The biggest shock for me wasn’t the revelation of who killed Megan, but finding out that Rebecca Ferguson played Anna 'cause I never recognized her with blonde hair. Despite Blunt’s performance, The Girl On The Train never arrives at a place to be truly thrilling.

Rating: ★☆☆

Watch Instead: Gone Girl, Big Little Lies
Have you seen or read The Girl on the Train? What did you think?

Star Wars: The Last Jedi (2017) Teaser Reaction

Photo Credit: Star Wars / Walt Disney Studios

This year's Star Wars Celebration has been an epic reflection of the forty-year franchise created by George Lucas. It promised an action-packed weekend of panels, tributes, and news for fans. Walt Disney Pictures and Lucasfilm did not disappoint with a thrilling teaser of the next installment Star Wars: The Last Jedi! The anticipation for the eighth film has been galactic-sized proportions as we've waited to see what happens in the next battle of the forces.

Take a look! (Spoilers below!) What are your first reactions? Feel free to share in the comments!

My first reaction is that I want the movie too. I. WANT. IT. NOW.

In expert Disney fashion, the teaser is just as cryptic as the initial Star Wars: The Force Awakens' first look. But that just gives us further room to get hyped up and the anticipation to build.

Rey is obviously receiving training by the one and only Luke Skywalker. But will they have moved from their speechless staredown and how far long has Luke been mentoring her Empire Strikes Back style?

As she begins her journey to bring balance to the force, events surrounding the Resistance's stand against the First Order are growing direr as battle scenes take place on other planets and throughout the universe. We get a sneak peek at what her friends are up to:

Finn is shown resting in what looks like a medical bay. One fan translated the Aurebesh text to reveal that he's in stable condition. Is he recovering from the back injury he sustained during Ren and Rey's lightsaber showdown or something else he suffers in another fight? What will his journey be like in finding his place in the Resistance?

Other tidbits in the trailer include: Poe and BB8 are on the move again to fight in the sky, but the landing bay he needs to use is blown up.

Is that an old set of books on a wooden shelf in Luke's cave?

Someone's hands runs down the vintage Jedi symbol.

The Millennium Falcon flies again.

What will be Luke's first words? I'm thinking somewhere along the lines "I've been expecting you."

Not only has the trailer sparked new questions, but also calls on older questions still left over from Force Awakens to be answered - Who is Rey's parents? Given Carrie Fisher's unfortunate passing, what will General Leia's role be in her last installment?

On the opposite end of the spectrum of Luke mentoring Rey, we still have much to learn about Kylo Ren and the seducer of the dark side Supreme Leader Snoke. As another planet goes up in flames with Ren walking through the rubble, obviously he is living up to his grandfather's legacy. Will we see more of Snoke other than a hologram? What planet did, Matt the Radar technician, I mean Kylo Ren scorch this time? Who falls to their knees next to R2D2?

Even though Skywalker is teaching Rey the ways of the force, his final words ominously declare: "I only know one truth. It's time for the Jedi to end." Does Skywalker believe the Jedi way is over or will it evolve into something else?

I don't know about ya'll but I can't wait! The next installment is written and directed by Rian Johnson (Brick and Looper). Making Christmas even more special, Star Wars: The Last Jedi hits theaters December 15th, 2017.

What did you think of the Last Jedi trailer? What you most excited about? Feel free to share in the comments!

Relaxing Perfect Guide To Skinnypop Popcorn And Wine

It doesn't take a lot for me to unwind. Curling up on the couch with popcorn, a glass of wine, and of course, some of my favorite shows is my idea of a perfect night at home. When it comes to snacking, I've experimented with a few different flavors before, but never quite hit the perfect combination of a timeless snack combined with a smooth spirit.

Trying to narrow down which popcorn and wine make the best pair can be difficult. It's a good thing the people at SkinnyPop have made it easy.

With this graphic below, a night of chillin' is even simpler: Choose your favorite popcorn flavor and pair it with the best wine. And then relax with your snack while watching your favorite shows (or movie).

Spring is a busy time for tv shows and all of us binge-watchers. A lot of series are reaching their final episodes or season finale, as newer shows ready to take over summer.

One of my favorites this year has been HBO's big thriller Big Little Lies. Based on the novel by Liane Moriarty, it weaves murder and mischief with the complicated relationships between housewives, their spouses, and children in a serene, beachfront community. With a top-notch cast like Reese Witherspoon, Nicole Kidman and Shailene Woodley, and hypnotizing direction by Jean-Marc Vallee, it's been a gripping, wild ride. For the final few episodes which I've been saving to binge-watch, I chose white cheddar with malbec which is going to be perfect to enjoy with all of the who-dun-it suspense coming to an end.

I can't wait to use this guide for more shows premiering over the next few months. My Monday nights are sealed with a new season of Bachelor in Paradise making me feel better about my love life (or lack of one). And then there's the wild escapade of Fargo on FX, which is getting a third, zany season of Minnesotans solving a crazy crime.

With summer around the corner, movie nights are also a great way to cool off from the heat with my family. I'm already planning ideas for going on an adventurous fairytale with The Princess Bride, grooving down on the beach with Beach Blanket Bingo, and trying to capture a great white shark with Jaws. SkinnyPop's Sea Salt and Pepper popcorn sound delicious with Zinfandel will go well with these...Thanks to SkinnyPop Popcorn, they gave me the bright idea to enjoy guilt-free goodies to wind down and enjoy life a little more.

What shows are you watching lately? What popcorn & wine combination are you going to make?

The Walking Dead S7X16 First Day of the Rest Of Your Life

Photo Credit: The Walking Dead / Gene Page

When the war Rick secretly waged against Negan unexpectedly comes knockin on his front gates, Alexandria discovers unlikely traitors and allies. As one of his latest captives, Sasha must contend with her failed revenge scheme and the best method to save her friends. No one has to die, but in an apocalyptic war, that’s not a guarantee. This recap includes spoilers for the latest episode - you've been warned! Hope you enjoy!

The Beast Within: A Tale of Beauty's Prince by Serena Valentino

In the right hands, Disney villains can be a fascinating source of storytelling for so-called bad guys. Fans can learn more about antagonists on a deeper level that's often lacking in the animated movies. While I wouldn’t consider the Beast / Prince from Beauty and the Beast a villain per say, an intriguing potential backstory can be explored about his value towards superficiality versus true inner beauty.

The Beast Within changes quite a lot about what we know of Disney’s the Prince. For one, he’s great friends with Gaston. Hunting animals and looking down on others, especially women who don't meet their standards, is primarily what they have in common. When the Prince falls in love with a woman who is beautiful, but nothing more than a farm girl, it’s just about the worst thing that could happen. But not in the way he assumes. After a humiliating breakup, she and her sisters reveal themselves to be Enchantresses. Out for revenge, they place a curse on him by turning him into a Beast. He can only break the spell by falling in love, receiving love in return, and the union must be sealed with a kiss before the last petal of an enchanted rose falls.

Something fans don’t quite get in the original movie, and only teased in the recent remake, is what a genuine cad the Prince must’ve been to be turned into a monster. Author Serena Valentino has a competent grasp on what makes him ugly on the inside and outside by focusing on his limited attitude towards women and his material needs. His blatant selfishness and lack of compassion is quite overbearing and exudes off the page. You manage to dislike him but also recognize his fears as he's physically morphing from a human into a beast. At times, he's not necessarily likable, but from the nature of the story and his fate, gives him room to change his ways.

By fleshing out The Prince, the story starts out admirably. But beyond fleshing out The Prince's ego, The Beast Within feels very limited in taking an interesting start and turning into a compelling journey.

Valentino's version ultimately becomes is a little too mixed up in plugging in staple scenes from the original movie while tapping into different backstories that seem cool but aren't well-rounded. Her additions to the story like his friendship with Gaston is a creative place to drawn on as to why the Prince might act the egotistical and conceited, but the story backs from fully committing to the idea. Even romantic relationships with a woman who turns out to be a witch, and another socialite whom Beast prematurely uses to outsmart the curse with, offer interesting twists to female characters other than Belle. But then their unique motivations wear off to reveal the writing and construction is very basic. And, the iconic heroine herself Belle is ultimately used as a bookend and doesn't hold any significant bearing or involvement in Beast recognizing how to be a kind, compassionate human.

Sometimes villains can't be redeemed by their corrupted ways, but for a character who has that room for growth, it's disappointing when re-tellings don't capitalize on exploring the full spectrum. Unfortunately, the story and book are just too small, only a quick 200+ pages with fairly short chapters. If the length and size of the book were bigger, or the author worked with a wider scope, the story had potential to be more detailed. How the Prince acts like a monster is just as important as to the Prince recognizing the error of his ways. The book never aims to accomplish both.
Rating:★☆☆

The Walking Dead S7X15 Something They Need

Photo Credit: The Walking Dead / Gene Page

Sasha crossed over to the other side by attacking the Saviors, but encounters an old friend and faces the consequences of her failed raid. Meanwhile, Tara broke her promise to the Oceanside community and leads Rick to a sanctuary loaded with weapons and supplies. But will her betrayal and Rick's approach ruin their chances to gain more allies? This recap includes spoilers for the latest episode - you've been warned! Hope you enjoy!

More Magic, More Problems: How the Enchantress Almost Shatters Love in new Beauty and the Beast

Photo Credit: Beauty and the Beast / Walt Disney Studios

The original 1991 Beauty and the Beast left Disney fanatics with a lot of questions. Many stem from the Enchantress, her origins, and why she casts a spell on The Prince as a young child and curses him into a beast. With the new live-action movie, Disney had an opportunity with the revived story to close plotholes. However, with more insight into the Enchantress, come a few more problems. Namely, how the Enchantress nearly shatters the epic love story in the new Beauty and the Beast.

If you haven’t seen the new movie starring Emma Watson, here is your warning: There’s nothing but HUGE spoilers below! You’ve been warned!

The Walking Dead S7x14 The Other Side

Photo Credit: The Walking Dead / Gene Page

Alexandria is inching its way to a war against the Saviors, but it's not moving fast enough for some. Rosita and Sasha are on a mission to take out Negan, secretly departing from their loved ones and onto their enemy's compounds for the perfect shot. But can they take it? This recap includes spoilers for the latest episode - you've been warned! Hope you enjoy!