Showing posts with label movie review. Show all posts
Showing posts with label movie review. Show all posts

Monday, July 10, 2017

Spider-Man: Homecoming Review

Spider-Man has had a pretty complicated movie history in the last fifteen years having six movies, three actors, and two reboots you can see where the confusion comes from.

However, in Civil War Spidey has been successfully established in the Marvel Cinematic Universe with promise of another trilogy on the way. And while most people loved his appearance in Civil War, could Tom Holland carry a whole film to himself?

Spider-Man:
Having watched this movie, I'm fully on board with Tom Holland as Peter Parker/Spider-Man. No disrespect at all towards the previous actors, but I do think that Holland does an excellent job with this character. He had that nerdy frantic personality, constantly wants to help people, and still has that room for growth in future movies. Moving forward, we'll see Peter during his high school years, which is where some of the best Spidey stories take place. In the past, the movies were always in a hurry to get Peter out of school, but here it takes its time to see the character change and improve in his skills. Holland plays the part of a teenager perfectly well and you're fully invested with his character. Another thing they do well is making his life as Peter just as epic as his life as Spider-Man. A huge plus for this movie.

Vulture:
Michael Keaton plays the main villain here and he does a good job. Marvel movies don't have the best villains overall, but Keaton does stand out. I appreciate that the movie shows his past and how he became an arms dealer alien technology. He doesn't overplay this part, but just manages to give you enough menace to make him a threat, yet you completely understand where he's coming from. I also appreciate that they show him having a sense of honor to his family, his cohorts, and even to Spidey.

Other Characters:
This movie knows how to do supporting characters extremely well. 
Peter's friend, Ned has a great partnership and chemistry with Holland;

Marissa Tomei as Aunt May was fun to watch and how she's far more aware of Peter's actions than what she lets on.

It was great to see Tony Stark and Happy Hogan again as the mentor/student relationship with Peter. Again, great interactions done in a natural way.

Liz was a fun love interest that doesn't have any sappy moments. It's fun and even cute to see her with Peter. And the twist that happens with her in the movie had great mounting tension.

It was great to see several villains show up prior to most of them having powers/skills. Nice seeds planted for sequels in the potential Sinister Six.

Final Thoughts:
While I do love the previous five movies, I have a huge passion for this movie. Everything moves at a smooth natural place, the action and character moments keep you invested, and the dialogue is realistic and charming. Overall, it was a great optimistic feel good movie. I think it was a smart decision to play this a teenage comedy without any of the cliques that features a superhero. It's lighthearted approach was needed after the emotional weight from both Civil War and Guardians of the Galaxy vol 2. I for one highly look forward to the rest of the trilogy and the crossovers that Spidey will have.

Next Time:
War of the Planet of the Apes.

Wednesday, June 7, 2017

Wonder Woman Review


Wonder Woman has been in comics for almost eighty years now. While she's had several interpretations in both comics and television, up until now, she's never had a live action film.

Last year, Gal Gadot played Diana in Batman vs. Superman. She was one of the few things I enjoyed about that film (read my review for more details). I was intensely looking forward to watching Wonder Woman this year! However, just like with many of us, I've been burned by the last three DC movies. Will DC finally make a good film in their expanded universe?

Main Characters:

The characters are handled well here. We learn all about Diana's origin, and while I'm normally not a fan of origins, this movie did a great job of holding your interest.

Gal Gadot now has more time to flesh out Diana and does an excellent job with her! Not only does she convince you of how tough she is under pressure, but she also shows her empathy and compassion for humans all throughout the movie. This is something that people often forget about her, it's that while she was always a warrior, she was also always a diplomat and willing to help others.

Chris Pine plays Steve Trevor, and I did like him here. This was a tricky character to pull off, because he's often seen as annoying in both comics and shows. Here, comes across as a charismatic man of action. Personally, I could do without the romance between him and Diana, but it doesn't hurt the film.

Ares is a one that I'm a little mixed on. On one hand, I like the actor that played him and how he was presented. On the the other, I think he was a little shoved in at the last minute and while his fight was cool, it reminded me too much of the Doomsday fight from BvS. Even though the "twist" may have been a little obvious, you can tell they wanted to do something different and they put sincere effort into him. Out of the recent villains that we've had, he's the best one and though he has room for improvement; it shows that DC is going in the right direction for their villains.

Side Characters:

There are some pretty cool side characters here with Etta Candy, Dr. Poison, and Steve's team. I just wish that Etta and Dr. Poison had more things to do in the film. I loved every time they were on screen, just wish there was a little more of it.

Final Thoughts:

It's certainly the best of the DC Expanded Universe so far and the best DC film since Dark Knight. It gives me a glimmer of hope that DC could learn from this example and put this type of effort in future projects. It's entertaining, worth watching multiple times, well paced, and well acted. It has some hiccups, but they're minor. This is a movie that I recommend and you won't be disappointed by.

Next Time:

Spider-Man Homecoming.

Monday, May 8, 2017

Guardians of the Galaxy volume 2

Well, here we have the first Marvel movie of 2017 and it's the sequel to a movie that everyone just flat out loves. How does the sequel compare to what happened before? 

 

Rest assured, this movie is wonderful and just does a great job with handling themes such as family and how you don't have to be related to become a family. It's not something you see so much in comic book films, at least not at this level. I do love how it wasn't heavy handed and just kept the right balance with the action and humor. 

 

I will say that the bare plot of this movie isn't really the best plot. Essentially, Star Lord meets his dad for the first time and adjusts to the consequences with it. Even though the plot is weak, that's okay because the characters are just fun to watch when they're with each other. This isn't a plot driven movie, it's a character driven one; and the benefit of that is you see how each character grows over time. The best examples of this are Rocket and Yondu. Overall this helps you to see them be an even better team and family.

 

New characters included Star Lord's dad, Ego, and his assistant, Mantis. Both are interesting additions to the movie, but I think more could've been done with both of them. Although I'm happy that everyone from the previous movie had more depth to them.

 

Final Thoughts:

If you loved the last movie, you'll definitely love this. It has the same emotions and tones from before and puts them in a new way that gives you action, heart, and humor. An absolute blast to watch.

 

Next Time:

DC. Fourth time's the charm, right? Let's see how you handle Wonder Woman. 

Thursday, March 30, 2017

Beauty&The Beast (2017) Review

Disney doesn't really have the best track record when it comes to live action remakes of their famous animated films. They kept trying to be edgy and flashy whilst completely missing what made the original great. That being said, I was initially skeptical when Disney announced one of my favorite Disney films was getting a remake. Even though Little Mermaid was a rebirth for animation, Beauty and the Beast did set the highest of standards with this art form. So much so that it was the first animated film to be nominated for Best Picture! An incredibly high bar was set with movie, so did Disney deliver again? Only one way to find out!

Since both versions are extremely similar, I won't be covering plot summary. Instead I'll cover the differences between the two--which changes work and which ones didn't. 

Belle:

Now, many people were uncertain when Emma Watson was cast as Belle, but she does a good job in this role. She has all of Belle's wit and charm that we fell in love with, but she does add a more inquisitive mind to this part by her asking more details about the curse and how she can help out. Her chemistry is good with everyone, especially with Kevin Kline as Maurice. Definitely one of the highlights of this movie.

Maurice: As mentioned, Kevin Kline has great chemistry with Watson, but his version is far less zany than his animated counterpart. I like this change, because we see more of his love for his family. Also have to give points that he stands up to Gaston, even though it backfired. Not to mention he had a part in helping Belle escape. 

Gaston:

Luke Evans as Gaston wasn't as fun to watch as the original, but he still did a good job. I appreciated how Evans shows how he manipulates the town to his advantage. However, I'm not keen on him attempting to kill Maurice. Gaston would only kill wild animals or individuals that he perceives to be wild animals. It's a small change, but I give it to original Gaston. 

LeFou:

I'm not going to get into the whole "controversial" issue with this character, but I'll just say that it's subtle enough. Besides that, I liked the other changes Josh Gad made here such as his friendship with Gaston, that he respects the town and his goofy nature is toned down. All of which made him a third dimensional character.

Cogsworth: 

It's Ian McKellan. What else can I say?

He doesn't stray too far from the original, but they do add a far more "take charge" attitude when dealing with everyone. 

Lumiere: 

Ewan McGregor had a challenge with Lumiere by having a natural Scottish accent and playing someone with a heavy French accent that sings. Now, Jerry Orbach will always be Lumiere to me, but I don't hate McGregor. He still has plenty of his good qualities and does an acceptable job.

Mrs. Potts/Chip:

These characters are the closest to the first movie and Emma Thompson does a good job with being affectionate yet still tough. Chip still acts like rambunctious boy that we care about. 

The Beast:

Dan Stevens had a challenge by being almost entirely in motion capture and yet still give a convincing performance. Showing his life in the castle before the curse was a fantastic idea and giving clues about his parents was a plus. However, I don't think he quite nails all of the lines like Robby Benson does. I know Stevens is a good actor, so I think it was the direction he was given. Although I do love that this Beast is also a book nerd, so that he and Belle have more things to bond over.

Other Differences--

1. The Curse:

This movie manages to explain what the consequences of the curse is! It affects the memories of the local village, so no one knows anything about the Prince, castle or the staff. Because of this, Mrs. Potts' husband has no idea that he has a family until the curse is lifted.

Also, we know that the servants were turned into enchanted objects, but were still able to have their personality, speech, movement, and mind. But if Beast couldn't find love before the last petal fell, then not only would he be a beast forever, but all the servants would lose all humanity and become literal objects without any sentience. This led to an extremely heartbreaking scene near the end.

They also made it vague as to how long the curse has been going on, which disproves other questions. 

2. The Enchanted Book:

So, not only does Beast have a magic mirror that allows him to see anything, he also received a magic book that allows him to travel anywhere. This change was not needed at all. Belle and Beast use it to travel to Paris, where she discovers that her mom died of the plague when she was a baby, but that could've been said in dialogue. Also when she finds out Maurice needs help, she could've used the book to go there but she just rides the horse instead. I'm not a fan of this change, but it doesn't hurt the movie.

Songs--

All the best songs are here, along with some new ones. I was happy that Maurice and Beast each have a song, but they are a little forgettable. All of our favorite songs sound good, but I do have to give it to the original voices more. Not saying the new cast is bad, but it's just a difficult act to follow. Regardless, they're still catchy for you to enjoy. 

Final Thoughts--

If you're a fan of the original, you have nothing to fear. Disney did a respectfully great job with this remake and clearly put a lot of thought behind it. All the plotholes from before have now been cleaned up and it was a joy to see everything in live action. But I'm going to give it to the original movie that told the better story. Those voices and acting choices really stood out to me. Everyone does a fine job here, but it just doesn't stick out to me as much. This is a solid A. This movie and the live action 101 Dalmatians are the two best live action remakes from Disney. Definitely go see it!

Next Time: Guardian's of the Galaxy Vol. 2.

Saturday, February 18, 2017

Lego Batman Movie Review

Welcome to 2017, everybody! We have a great year ahead of us and we're starting the year off right with The Lego Batman Movie. 

Plot: 

As a spinoff of The Lego Movie, we see Batman at a lonely place in his life when he accidentally adopts Dick Grayson. Meanwhile, the Joker plans to make sure that Batman takes him seriously as a villain.

Batman:

Will Arnett returns as Bruce Wayne/Batman and once again nails it with his performance. In previous Batman films, we saw him experiencing loneliness before, but not at this level. So it's refreshing to see character development from the over-confident solo act to being part of a team with people that care about him. At times he is far too abrasive and careless, but he does handle it with confidence and we see natural progression with his character. 

Robin:

It has been twenty years since we saw Robin in a movie, and it's been far too long in my opinion. Michael Cera plays an extremely young, hopeful, and optimistic Dick Grayson that is reminiscent of the Burt Ward version of the character. This movie really shows how important Robin is to Batman by keeping him grounded and bringing joy in his life. Their chemistry is such a delight to watch and worth every moment.  

Barbara Gordon: 

It's also been twenty years since we saw Barbara Gordon and I love Rosario Dawson as this character. She starts off as the new commissioner of Gotham who wants to work with Batman. She is pretty capable of handling crime long before she becomes Batgirl, and even knocks some common sense into Batman.  Easily one of my favorite versions of Batgirl.

The Joker: 

Zack Galafinakis is great to watch as Joker. He has the zany elements of Ceasar Romero with the charisma of Jack Nicholson, but really most of the past Jokers are represented well in this movie. I enjoyed how this movie delves into the Batman/Joker dynamic and how it affects their respective psychoses. Not extremely in depth, but it's acknowledged at least in a comical sense. 

Imagery: 

As with The Lego Movie, the animation is wonderful. The nice blend of stop motion and CGI makes all the scenes both simple and complex, not to mention all the character designs are done so that you're never confused by the characters. And that's not even getting into all the references! Oh my goodness, there are references to all versions of Batman over his 78 year history! With characters, lines, props, and scenes that cover all the movies, shows, comics, etc. So no matter what your favorite version of Batman is from any decade, it's here.

Final Thoughts:

If you loved The Lego Movie and you're a Batman fan, then you'll love this. It was an excellent 78 year anniversary tribute to all things Batman that anyone will enjoy. And it has the moral of not pushing people away out of fear of losing them. It's not a moral you see often in movies, so I was impressed to see this done in a subtle yet comfortable manner. I highly recommend this to anyone and it's easily one of the best DC films in quite some time. A great way to kick off 2017.

Next Time:

Beauty and the Beast.

Monday, January 30, 2017

Best&Worst of 2016

#21. Suicide Squad.
#20. Miss Peregine's Home For Peculiar Children.
#19. La La Land.
#18. My Big Fat Greek Wedding 2.
#17. Alice Through the Looking Glass.
#16. Legend of Tarzan.
#15. The 5th Wave.
#14. Finding Dory.
#13. Rogue One: A Star Wars Story.
#12. Pride and Prejudice and Zombies.
#11. The Shallows.
#10. Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice.
#9. Jungle Book.
#8. Sing.
#7. Magnificent Seven.
#6. Me Before You.
#5. 10 Cloverfield Lane.
#4. Star Trek Beyond.
#3. X-Men: Apocalypse.
#2. Captain America: Civil War.
#1. Zootopia.

Next Time:
The only DC movie I'm legitimately excited about. The Lego Batman Movie!

Saturday, December 17, 2016

Rogue One: A Star Wars Story Review

It's been awhile, guys. This time of year is difficult for the movies, but we do have one with which we can wrap up 2016. And believe it or not it's a Star Wars prequel. And it's actually good! Shocking, I know!

Plot:
Set after the events of Revenge of the Sith, a group of Rebel fighters attempt to steal the plans of the newly constructed Death Star in order to give the Rebels a fighting chance for A New Hope. 

SPOILERS.

Characters
Jyn Erso: I like Jyn, but at times I thought her acting was a bit flat. However, I do greatly enjoy her character arc. We see her left behind at a young age, separated from her family.  Over the years she became more rebellious and was later recruited to be part of something bigger when it's revealed that her father, Galen, had a huge role in creating the Death Star. Watching this progression was entertaining, but just a bit rushed for my taste.

Galen Erso: One of the top engineers for the Death Star, Galen proves to be on the side of the Rebellion by playing the part of an Empire sympathizer. This is a nice change of pace from what's usually depicted of those who work in the Empire. It gives them a more emotional and human response for their actions and Galen does a great job of conveying this.

Chirrut Imwe: One of my favorite characters here! Even though he's technically not a Jedi, the movie suggests that he does have a connection to the Force and knows how to use it. Especially since this was during the time when most of the Jedi are nonexistent, it gives him an added depth that I didn't see coming and was pleasantly surprising. 

K-2SO: My other favorite character! A reprogrammed Imperial droid that aids the Rebellion is a fun idea and this movie takes full advantage of it! I really love his personality and dry humor. He reminded me of a snarky C-3PO. Excellent addition.

Characters that return are Bail Organa, Mon Mothma, Darth Vader, and Tarkin. All different levels of cameos and fan service, sure but they do make sense given the context of the movie and while it's a treat to see them return, it doesn't take you away from the main plot.

Composition
I'll let you know that this film is slow at the beginning. It helps here since, for the most part, we have no idea who these people are and where their motivations lie. So while it has a slow start, halfway through it does pick up and it just doesn't stop until the end.

I would also like to say that as a prequel, it lines up perfectly with Episode IV concerning the events that need to take place and all the great easter eggs for fans of the main series. Nice touches.

Final Thoughts
This movie was actually pretty enjoyable. Now, I don't think it's as great as Empire Strikes Back or Force Awakens, but it's a nice, refreshing take on the series that's easily the best of the prequels, set in the same world and yet still separate from the Skywalker family being the focus. This was a pretty big gamble and I think they succeeded in this experiment. Gladly look forward to the next standalone films.

Next Time:
Best & Worst of 2016.

Wednesday, October 5, 2016

Magnificent Seven (2016)

As you may know, westerns aren't my preferred genre; for whatever reason I just wasn't invested in the plots for most western films. That being said, I was highly looking forward to this Magnificent Seven. 

Greedy real estate developer, Bartholomew Bogue, is stealing a small town's gold and other resources for himself and leaving the people destitute. This town decides to hire seven shady men to help them fight back.

The plot is a bit simple, but this movie's strength is in the characters. This film has an impressive all-star cast and all of them have amazing chemistry on screen. No one is two-dimensional; each one has a distinct personality, and you're never confused about what each person's agenda is. Even better is that despite never learning the depth of their backstories, it is not necessary due to the dialogue and action supplying all the entertainment.

What I appreciate is that this is a traditional western, but it's modern enough so that it is not dated. For instance, many current westerns use the gimmick of unnecessary gore, but this film does not utilize such scenes.

Overall, if you want a fun and entertaining film to watch, then definitely check this out. Everything is done so well and while the plot is simple, it's just an enjoyable movie that far surpasses the original.

Next Time: Miss Peregrine's Home ForPeculiar Children.

Friday, August 19, 2016

Suicide Squad Review

You may recall back in March, I mentioned in the Dawn of Justice review that there are two controversial movies this year. Suicide Squad is the second movie. This movie has garnished so much hype amongst the fan community since its opening day and... I honestly don't know why. There are some cool moments that I did enjoy, but I think the bad outweighs the good, here. However, as I said in the previous review, I needed some help with this movie, so we're having four different people carefully examine Suicide Squad and focus on different aspects of it. Please read all of them, as we will have different content in each review.

The Reviews:

AGuerrero1991: Where do I begin with DC's newest attempt at a movie? As a regular movie goer, not a comic fan, I am insulted.

The explanation of each member in Suicide Squad was cool, but I felt the font of the bios were juvenile. Was this for a kid or an adult? Some members were not properly introduced. I enjoyed Deadshot's introduction; his skills were demonstrated very well.
DaveEddiePowers: This movie, overall, just gave me a headache. Does it fail completely? No. In fact, there were several good moments. Harley Quinn and Joker are together live for the first time. Harley shows off what she can do in the elevator scene. Deadshot shows off his skills several times. El Diablo was a character I didn't care about at all going in and the writers made him more human than any of the other main characters. The problem is, it feels like the creators of this movie wrote down a dozen scenes they wanted to shoot and haphazardly pasted in filler to get from one scene to the next. Most of the characters fall flat, with cookie cutter personalities. Most are not terribly consistent in their motivations or personalities. 

DaveEddiePowers: This is not a super hero movie. This movie is about a group of hot topic rejects saving the world. That feels like such an easy shot at the movie, but it's so true I don't know how to avoid saying it. I read comics and love these villains because we have a rich diversity of characters all with their own angles, motives, and goals. This movie does not share those features. All the "villains", with the exception of El Diablo, are generic thugs. They care about looking tough, having bling, and watching BET (not even joking). We don't get villains. We get 2D caricatures of street gangs. I can see that for free at the mall. I don't need to waste $10 on that. None of these characters are deep or have real motivation. They constantly refer to themselves as "bad" or "evil" which is absolutely pathetic. Decent villains, real villains, don't think of themselves that way. Lex, Zod, and Ra's saw themselves as heroes. Falcone, Marconi, and Penguin are pragmatists, treating people the way they got treated, just trying to end up on top. Scarecrow, Riddler, and all previous versions of the Joker are just doing what they enjoy and don't care about the world's perspective. The Suicide Squad gang have the basic attitude that "we don't do good things, like save the world" despite that they would all die with everyone else. Logic and reason are not this film's strong suit.

Skyeraptor59: Suicide Squad... good grief, where to begin? I will start off by saying that every time I see a movie for the first time, I try to see it with as little preconceived expectation as possible, like a kid seeing things for the first time. Despite the trailers that were released (and I did see all of them, just to gain some glimmer of hope and maybe catch a few lines from Waylon Jones, AKA Killer Croc, but more on that later), and partially because of one, I did have a smidgen of optimism about this movie. And you know what? It met my expectations. Sadly, said expectations were set quite low. Comics fan aside, as an amateur movie critic, dabbling film maker, and sci-fi/fantasy writer (and I complain a lot about the bad writing in this review), I wasn't impressed. However, as a lifelong music lover (and drummer), the soundtrack was excellent. But I'll give a rundown on that later.

The Complete Character Breakdown: 
Amanda Waller

Watchman300: Viola Davis is the best actor in this entire film. She plays Waller as a tough, no nonsense, ruthless government official that creates the squad in order to stop threats that the government can't do on record since Superman isn't active during the period in the film. Davis does an exceptional job playing this woman. I have no issues with her.

AGuerrero1991: Amanda Waller is exactly what I was hoping for. She did what she was supposed to, no more, no less. 

DaveEddiePowers: I grew up on Waller and fully expected this to be a cheap knockoff like we've seen before. Viola Davis, despite not having the stature of Waller, pulled off her attitude completely. She felt more imposing than her slight frame should've been able to project and was one of the highlights of the film. That said, they made her weak whenever they thought they could get a "cool" scene out if it. She tells Deadshot to kill Harley or she will kill him. He disobeys. She lets him. Yeah, she'll do whatever it takes unless she's against an actor with top billing. Then, she just falls through completely and becomes castrated.

Skyeraptor59: As has been mentioned, Viola Davis played Waller perfectly. The right amount of ruthlessness, the right amount of confidence, the right amount of "your lives belong to me, so get back to work if you don't want to have your heads blown off." I have no complaints about her. In the comics, Waller is designed to be hated because of how callous and vicious she is, and in this instance, the writers of Suicide Squad wrote the character true to her comic personality. Of course, it helps to have a highly decorated actress like Davis backing up some decent writing for this character, a rarity in this movie.

Rick Flagg 
Watchman300: I have issues with Flagg. Out of all the criminals and psychos, he represents the voice of reason and leadership to the team. In the movie, it's obvious that he's only Waller's lacky and that he has little control over his crew, despite being the "team leader." Not to mention he's extremely unprofessional for a "by-the-book" type of solder, since he has a romantic relationship with Enchantress. In short, he needed much character work.

AGuerrero1991: Rick Flagg was, in my opinion, just a regular soldier; there isn't anything special about him. Again, just as a movie fan; I don't know about him from the comics.

DaveEddiePowers: Speaking of castrated, the tough army guy who has to be in charge of the league of losers is a complete wuss. He literally gives up and lets all of them walk away without consequences. He starts off as a generic army character, which isn't that different from how he is in comics, but becomes a mindless milksop whenever they want Deadshot to look tough.

Skyeraptor59: Flagg in the comics is supposed to be a tough, no-nonsense soldier, the man who keeps the Squad focused on the task at hand. And while there are many instances during which he loses control of the Squad members, it is never for lack of trying. He is a military leader and strategist. He doesn't take crap from anybody. Not so with this movie. 

Flagg, whilst still a strategic military commander, is leashed, castrated, and sort of bland. He's forced into the job of the Squad's babysitter (and whilst that term has been used in the comics, based on this movie, it fits better) by Waller when she pretty much threatens to chain up his metahuman girlfriend Enchantress if he doesn't cooperate. He leads, true, but many times, he leads the Squad from behind because the Squad doesn't want him to die or they'll die. It makes sense to some degree, but this movie takes it to an extreme. One scene in particular gave me the impression of Flagg as, not a leader, but a diplomat under the protection of mercenaries, unable to fight lest he be taken prisoner. The Squad responds in kind by encircling him and not letting him fight, despite his feeble protests. So much for the Squad's leader. There's even a moment when it looks like all is lost and the Squad abandons Flagg. Does Flagg, who has a job to do and the "love of his life" to save/stop, give a stirring pep talk to rally his troops? Nope. He says they can do whatever they want, but he needs them to save his girl, but they can do what they want. Some pep talk.

Deadshot
Watchman300: Lawton is one of the first characters we're introduced to in the movie. For the first few minutes, I enjoyed how it demonstrated his skills of being an expert marksman and how he has a loving, yet flawed relationship with his daughter. There are interesting moments with him, but he doesn't act like Deadshot. Instead, he acts like Will Smith in any standard action movie. That's not playing a character. That's playing himself. However, I will give him points in the action department. My friend will cover more on him soon.

DaveEddiePowers: Well, Will Smith is playing Will Smith again. Whoop-dee-doo. I don't know why he is playing Deadshot. I don't think they did any research on this. Deadshot isn't a "bad guy" who does things because he is "bad". He does what he is good at. He's worked on the Suicide Squad and the Secret Six. He's a gun for hire; he does a job and expects to be paid, but not in this incarnation. He doesn't commit to his job and expects everything to be given to him. He keeps going on about his daughter, but is going to let the world burn until Flagg reminds him she exists. Every bit of this character is writing so that he appears to show whatever emotion they feel is right for the scene, but has nothing to do with his actions five minutes ago or five minutes later. He get paid two million dollars for his work and he insists the government cover his daughter's college. He only cares when it is convenient for him. We get a mindless thug, not a Southern gentleman. He does manage to steal the show most of the time, and we get the best actions scenes from him, but the character has no grasp of reality and just does stuff to make the audience scream or sigh. Please, let's have a basic character arc for your main character.

Skyeraptor59: As my third favorite Batman villain (I will not be doing the full review of this character, as Daveeddiepowers knows more about Lawton and covers him in more detail), I was interested to see how Will Smith portrayed him. I wasn't crazy about the casting originally, as Smith, despite being a great actor and highly entertaining to watch (and one of my personal favorites because of this), is one of those actors who plays himself in mostly everything he does. I normally don't have much issue with this, but when it comes to characters with established personalities, it shouldn't happen. Sadly, Smith did just that. Whilst I did enjoy several moments of Smith as Lawton, especially scenes with his daughter (which decently captured his troubled relationship with her, how much he loves her, and vice versa, yet how much his life conflicts with being able to be the father he wants to be) and scenes where he demonstrated brilliantly why his alias is Deadshot (notably his conversation on angles as he helps his daughter with her math homework, his holding the line single-handedly when confronted with a small army of enemies, and his sniping capabilities), he was not Lawton as he should have been. Heck, there was even a point where Flagg gives him something connected to his daughter, and instead of at least decking Flagg for withholding anything connected to his daughter, Lawton practically pledges his life to him (slight exaggeration, but still). I get that there is gratitude for Flagg for doing that, but at the same time, Deadshot would not let that pass without at least getting him back. His lines take some fault for this, as they do with most of this movie. DC needs to get some better writers.

Killer Croc
Watchman300: Croc is a fascinating Batman villain, but they don't give him much of anything to do. He has a handful of good lines, but it's all wasted potential. My other friend will cover him in full detail, so I don't want to take anything away from him, so to wrap it up, Croc didn't have the screen time he needed.

AGuerrero1991: Killer Croc seemed cool and I was disappointed we did not see more from him. 

DaveEddiePowers: Croc is like Katana. He is mostly just there and window dressing. He doesn't do a whole lot and whenever they need a cheap jokes they forget his character. I don't know why someone who literally lives in the sewers even knows about BET, but that's what he cares about.

Skyeraptor59: Waylon Jones, AKA Killer Croc, AKA, Croc, AKA Waylon, has been my favorite Batman villain since the Batman Animated Series of the 90's. Aside from me being highly partial to more his more reptilian designs, this character and his backstory, that of a kid born with a form atavism that gives him scaly skin and superhuman strength who ends up being a circus freak and eventually a criminal with a unique look in Gotham, fascinates me. There was even a brief time when he was trying to clean up his sewer croc look and dressed up in a fancy suit. He actually became a legit mob boss for a time, though, of course, his animal instincts kicked in, so it didn't last, but it still added to the character's evolution. So when they announced that Waylon was going to be in the movie, I was excited to say the least. "My boy! Waylon! He finally gets a big screen live action debut!" And then I find out he was the second choice after King Shark. Left me a little miffed. But I quickly forgot about that when I discovered that Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje, one of my favorite actors from Lost, was playing him. I had to keep reigning in my excitement, seeing how they were messing with so many characters (i.e. Joker, Harley). I didn't want to get my hopes up too high. So, cautiously optimistic at least about Waylon, I watched. 

Verdict--there wasn't enough of him. They gave him very few lines, most of which were spot on ("I live undergound. Ya'll are just tourists." Now that's Waylon!) and hardly any backstory at all (he's a croc man; he looks like an animal so they treat him like one). I wasn't crazy about the hoodie and jacket look. It looked cool, but that's not his way. Wife-beater shirt and pants. Some hand wrappings. That's it. The makeup wasn't horrible, and I liked what they did with his eyelids. He looked a little saggy when he does get bare-chested, but he still throws down mostly as Croc should, though again they don't show a lot. They had so much potential that they could have tapped into with him, but they barely touched him. I had a problem with two of his lines. When Waller threatens the Squad, then leaves the room, shouldering Waylon aside, he says, "I like her." Whilst it was one of the funnier moments in the film, if someone did that to Waylon, he would have at least growled menacingly, if not tried to start something. I don't care if you're Amanda Waller, you do not shoulder Killer Croc aside and him respond with affection. It just doesn't happen. Also, he requests BET. Not cable. Not a bigger swimming cell. Not better meat. BET. Really? Talk about out of character. Aside from those issues, I liked Croc, and honestly, he would be the only reason I would see this movie again.

Captain Boomerang
Watchman300: Harkness is my favorite character in this movie. He provided the bulk of the humor, which is sad considering Harley Quinn and Joker are in this movie. More on that later... Boomerang is the first Flash villain that has a cinematic appearance and it wasn't horrible, but it could have been better. In the comics, he does have a bit more of a professional attitude, even though he's a thug. Just flesh him out a bit more and we're good.

AGuerrero1991: Captain Boomerang was funny, but I don't see how someone with boomerang skills fits in with the rest of them.  

DaveEddiePowers: He is pretty much dead-on. My only complaint is he didn't throw nearly enough boomerangs. They could have given him more screen time, but at least they didn't screw him up.

Skyeraptor59: Whilst I did enjoy Harkness in this movie, it wasn't for character accuracy. He was the comedic relief, and my friends will tell you I laugh way too easily. Harkness' antics were entertaining and hilarious, but he had no true purpose on the team, when in the comics he at least has more skills and knowledge the team needs. Here, he was just a drunk secretly obsessed with unicorns (part of the humor stemmed from this, but still). He even leaves the team the first chance he gets (that is, the first chance he gets without the threat of death by exploding head) and then comes back without so much as an explanation. He's got little motivation to be with these people, and he could actually get out of danger without much of a problem. They also hardly even touched upon Lawton and Harkness' feud. The two have been known to scrap with each in nearly every rendition of the Suicide Squad they are both on. It's a staple for those characters to fight, even when they are cooperating. But aside from some weak back-and-forths, it wasn't covered at all. Add another to the tally of death by bad writing.

Katana
Watchman300: Katana is not needed at all in this movie. They say she's Rick Flagg's bodyguard, but she's horrible at her job. Seriously, the villains save Flagg more often than she does and she even leaves him near the end of the movie. Her existence in this film was mostly pointless. The team didn't need her, just her sword to kill the main threat (even though she didn't make the kill shot...).

AGuerrero1991: Katana seemed to be a random character they just dropped into the group. 

DaveEddiePowers: She's just kind of there. She's basically window dressing. She is supposed to be Rick's righthand, completely loyal and honor bound, but when he wusses out, she just leaves him to go drinking. They could have done more with this character. They mentioned how she talks to her dead husband but, please, don't have a conversation because deep character moments would undermine the fluff of this movie. She wasn't done horribly, but you barely even notice she's there.

Skyeraptor59: They could have fleshed her out more. She was somewhat 2D (bad writing again), and whilst her sword was necessary for the mission, she wasn't moving much at all. And she wasn't the best body guard for Flagg, but to be fair, she did try. I will give credit for that.

Slipknot
Watchman300: Slipknot has zero development, but his point was to illustrate how dangerous the mission is. And, well, he did exactly that. Not much to say here about him.

AGuerrero1991: ...... Moving on. 

DaveEddiePowers: Well, I don't know if there are any Slipknot fans out there, but this guy is useless. They did not give him a backstory. They didn't even pretend that they were not going to just kill him. They could have a had a watermelon play this part. Seriously, if Flagg injected a watermelon with the bomb to show that it was real it would have served the same purpose. At least in Assault on Arkham, they gave KGBeast the same intro everyone else got so that there was a chance you could have been caught off guard by his death. His death was written in flashing neon lights and you have just spent more time reading this than he had time on screen.

Skyeraptor59: ...who now? Oh, the "man who can climb anything"? The dude nobody cared about in this movie, not even the filmmakers? Yeah, he illustrated why the mission was dangerous and that their lives were on the line. He was less a character and more of a plot device. Bad writing takes another one.

El Diablo
Watchman300: I enjoyed how El Diablo was written. Out of all the villains in this film, only Diablo is genuinely repentant for his crimes and actively seeks redemption. This makes his character  arc incredibly fascinating to watch and the payoff is nice.

AGuerrero1991: El Diablo, I understood a bit. Some may say he was a stereotypical Mexican gangbanger, but that makes sense. He was the only one who did not want to use his powers due to remorse. Usually, those who have lived his lifestyle, they regret their past decisions. 

DaveEddiePowers: This character is the biggest success of the movie. He is the one character that doesn't fit in with all the others. He wants some kind of redemption. I don't remember ever reading any stories in which he played a major part, but I enjoyed him. He is a little goofy with his powers sometimes, but overall he was the best surprise of the movie.

Skyeraptor59: One of the few characters I actually cared about. A gangster seeking redemption for his crimes. Fire powers (at minimum). Yup, I was sold. Actor Jay Hernandez gives this guilty gangbanger some true feelings of heartache, loss, and remorse. You can truly feel for him and him not wanting to let his powers loose again, lest he lose control and hurt any innocents. And the big reveal regarding the true extent of his powers makes for an exciting moment in the movie, one that's not all just flying bullets and random explosions (though, obviously, fire is involved).

Enchantress

Watchman300: She is a creepy character as the main threat for the team. Which I don't have a problem within itself, but I don't understand what her evil threat is supposed to be. Not to mention she hardly had any interaction with the other characters, which makes her character simply bland.

AGuerrero1991: One big issue I held was with Enchantress--what was her plan? I get it; she's a witch, she is evil, and the Squad needs to stop her. Stop her from what, exactly? She mentioned building a machine, but I didn't see one. So, I ask again: what was her plan? Along that thought, what is the deal with DC bringing in villains' relatives? Why did we need Enchantress' brother? Why can't we just have the villain alone? In Justice League, the villain will not be Darkseid, but his uncle Steppenwolf. Who's going to be the villain in Wonder Woman? Ares' cousin?

DaveEddiePowers: I don't know what the actual bad guys were doing here. June Moon and Enchantress are two beings sharing the same body, but there is supposed to be a balance. There is no balance here. It's all one or the other. June doesn't want Enchantress to be let loose ever but goes along with everything and, of course, everything goes as badly as she expects. June has no personality and neither does Enchantress. She wants to build a machine to destroy the world because humans worship machines. I don't even know what she was building. This is the ultimate MacGuffin. They don't even pretend to care what her plot is and if they gave her the neck bomb that everyone else had, they would have saved themselves a lot of trouble.

Skyeraptor59: She was legit creepy, as she should be, but... she... her plan... um... hmmm. Okay, let's put it this way. She was pissed at Waller for keeping her on a leash, but it didn't make sense for her to be on the team, as she was too much of a liability and got out fairly early on. She was more of a wildcard than Harley Quinn, and definitely more dangerous. Her plan seemed to be to get back at Waller, and mankind, for trapping her and for not worshiping her anymore by conjuring up some "machine" to rule the world. It looks more like, as Deadshot put it, a "floating circle of trash in the sky" with lightning and dark clouds. Said lightning can target important government facilities and resources with pinpoint accuracy. However, you hardly get to see this "huge threat" in action. And it really doesn't do much aside from look menacing, shoot lightning, and acquire more bits of the city. Plus, Enchantress needed a body guard in the form of her brother Incubus (non-comic book canon) who literally acted as a magic battery and meat shield for her. Based on what little I know of her, she doesn't need a body guard. Yay, bad writing!

Incubus

DaveEddiePowers: Way to pull a F-list villain that no one cares about. No personality. No story. Just wants to kill people and accept worship. Pointless and cookie cutter.

Harley Quinn
Watchman300: She is one of my biggest complainants about this movie. Harley Quinn was originally written to be a character with a good heart, but often sidetracked by the Joker and other villains. Also, she's only devoted to Joker and won't get romantically involved with other people. 

This movie, however, took a rush job of her origin and horribly warped her personality and appearance. What was meant to be a lighthearted jester character with good humor and a complement to Joker, is now just reduced to telling bland jokes and flirting with most men she meets out of sheer boredom. Yes, she's crazy, but her character was a psychologist; she is meant to have intelligence. I also can't understand why she's with the team on this mission. If the mission was to infiltrate Arkham Asylum, then I could understand. She worked there and knows all the secrets to the building. In a risky job like this, you shouldn't hire someone this unstable.

Another thing I'd like to point out is that Joker and Harley have little interaction together. This was a brilliant opportunity for one of the most famous comic book couples to finally be onscreen. As both a DC and massive Joker & Harley fan, this was a moment I've been waiting years to see! And, yeah... It met far below my expectations. Not only do they have limited interaction, they have bad chemistry in this film. The writers had Robbie portray an extremely watered down version of a character that they had twenty years of material to choose from.

AGuerrero1991: Harley Quinn was... different. Margot Robbie's portrayal was certainly not what comes to my mind when I think of Harley. As for the other characters on the team, I am honestly not familiar with them, but I can share few likes and dislikes. 

DaveEddiePowers: Margot Robbie is probably the worst actor in this movie. Everything felt fake. It always felt like she was trying to make people think she was crazy. Nothing felt genuine. She didn't have the positive attitude that is Harley's trademark. I could go into this more, but I'll leave it to Watchman300.

Skyeraptor59: Before my review of this character and Joker, I need to give a little background. Watchman300 and I have been friends since we were kids, and we joked that he was Joker and I was Batman (best frenemies forever!). Because of this, much of what I will say on both Harley and Joker is based on knowledge acquired from knowing him, as well as my own research and comicbook reading. 

Now, Harley Quinn. Watchman300 recently showed me a meme that showed Quinzel's looks through the years, starting from the classic Harlequin black, red, and white costume from the Batman Animated Series, to her costumes in the Arkham and Injustice games, to Suicide Squad. The caption? "They only noticed me when I started taking my clothes off," or something to that effect. This accurately illustrates the devolution of this character, from the sweet and dangerously crazy, yet bubbly and intelligent girlfriend of the Joker, to the oversexed random wildcard we have in Squad. Again, I blame poor writing. From what I understand, Margot Robbie is actually talented as an actress (ignoring the whole Wolf of Wallstreet thing, here), but that wasn't really tapped into. They could have gone into Quinzel's psych evaluating of Joker more fully and actually show how her at first objective view to the Clown Prince of Crime slowly, through subtle manipulation on his part, became that of admiration and adoration, and then love. They could have shown how fluctuating their relationship was. But no. They decided to make it Joker being super obvious about winning her over and her being somewhat blind and dense about anything psychiatric at all. Also... what's with the phone? She randomly has a phone right after they suit up and is constantly texting Joker. They didn't think to take it away? She's a criminal on a nanite bomb leash and you let her have a phone? Hey, DC writers? You're fired. To be fair, though, when they had a dream sequence for what Harley wanted out of life, it was actually spot on with what she really wanted, so I have to give them credit there.

Joker
Watchman300: My favorite villain of all time is the Joker. The majority of his incarnations in all media have shed different lights on this character, but they all made sense with either the setting of the story or with his personality. Jared Leto is the fourth live action interpretation of the character, and, as I predicted, he's the worst one. 

First, his appearance is horrendous. Joker represents a clown. His themes are playing cards, circuses, carnivals, amusement parks, gags, jokes, and laughter. His weaponry look like toys, but with deadly outcomes. He takes his appearance seriously and only wears the best tailored suits that fit this theme. A "gentlemanly psychopath" is what he goes for. He doesn't need tattoos to show how "edgy" and "dangerous" he is. He does that by his actions and reputation. He wears purple, because it's a royal color and he is vain to the point of believing himself to be royalty. He is called the Clown Prince of Crime! 

Let's also breakdown his personality. Contrary to popular belief, there is always a method to the madness and in the long run, it makes sense. Leto's personality is all over the place and doesn't mesh well with with any preconceived notion of the character. The most offensive thing he did was pimp out Harley to some random guy. Joker would NEVER do that. Harley is only his. He hates sharing and wouldn't even attempt something so ludicrous as even a trap or  joke. No one touches his stuff.

His other significant relationship is with Batman and they never meet face to face on film. His greatest rival and they never meet. This is a glaring sin. He tells no jokes, he rarely smiles, he doesn't have the signature bombastic laugh (he laughs like the Penguin for some reason). Leto's acting reminds me of a cracked mirrored version of what Heath Ledger accomplished in the Dark Knight. It's simply outright disrespectful and makes the audience aware that he's afraid to make this character his own. I have no idea if it was Leto, Ayer, Warner Brothers, or the writers, but in my opinion, for only ten minutes of screen time, this wasn't impressive in the slightest. It really would've been better if they referenced Joker instead of showing him.

AGuerrero1991: Joker, I will admit, was not what I expected. Jared Leto did okay as the Joker, but he could have done better. The tattoos did not make sense to me. He had very little screen time. I could not hear many of the things he said. I believe we can determine that DC couldn't decide what to do with this character. Was he a pimp, club owner, or a gangster? Apparently all three. One of the most infuriating scenes is the first scene where we get to see Harley and Joker interact. I'm not entirely sure what was said, but basically Joker was pimping out Harley to a gangster played by Common. There are several reasons this upsets me: 1) Joker would never let anyone touch Harley. She is his and his only. 2) Joker spoke in a manner that was difficult to understand. 3) Common played a gangster. The reason the last one gets me upset is because Common cannot act as a tough guy. I have seen him cast as a "tough guy" on several occasions and I am never convinced. Why not give the part to a rapper who can do the job well? Or better yet, an actor?

DaveEddiePowers: We did get what they advertised. A guy with tattoos and a grill who doesn't tell jokes, but has green hair and white skin, so good enough. I'll let Watchman300 tear this one apart.

Skyeraptor59: This guy was not Joker. He had some semblance to him, but he wasn't the true Clown Prince of Crime. He wouldn't get tattoos, especially not on his face, because he values his appearance way too much. And he certainly wouldn't rely on a tattooed smile on both hands to capture his signature grin. That was one of the worst things Squad did to Joker. Here, again, I think poor writing (and definitely poor costume and makeup) cut this character down from what he truly is in the comics (so I blame Leto mainly for his acting choices; he could do better than that). He was all about Harley and everything shiny, from his gold plated guns to his purple-tinged chrome-plated car. That's not how Joker rolls. 

He means business (funny business, but still) and any flashiness is either from his impeccable suits or explosions from his toys. Leto reminded me less of Joker and more of a minor celebrity who is trying to be a hardcore gangster (emphasis on trying). He didn't even have his Joker Gas. I know Heath Ledger's Joker didn't have that either, but he didn't need it. Leto having the gas would've saved him some, if only a little. He told no jokes, laughed in a very halted manner, and even tried to pimp out Harley. As Joker said in "Batman: Assault on Arkham" (a far superior Suicide Squad movie): "Oh, Floooyd!" *shoots at him* "Don't touch my stuff." Who/what was he referring to? Harley! Despite how tumultuous and downright abusive Joker and Harley's relationship is at times, Joker does love Harley in his own way, and he would never even pretend to offer her to someone else. I'll stop there, as I'll risk repeating what was already said by watchman300 and a.guerro if I go on.

Batman

Skyeraptor59: Yes, I'm making a brief commentary on a cameo character. He's my favorite DC character and second favorite superhero (real original, I know). Despite my surprised approval of Ben Affleck's Batman in Batman v Superman, there are two issues I have with his cameo appearances. 

1. Bruce, in spite of his quest for justice, would not ambush Lawton in civilian attire in front of his daughter. He said he didn't want to do that in front of his daughter. Well, you kind of are!

2. Aside from the throwdown with Deadshot, Batman's only other cameo is chasing after Joker and Harley. Forget the fact that he should have had another cameo with Killer Croc. All Bruce does is hop on Joker's car, pull Harley out of the wrecked car, and give her mouth to mouth (which he wouldn't do; the only time something like that has happened that I can recall is in the animated series when Harley kisses Bruce; he does not reciprocate). No actual confrontation with Joker. Talk about a serious letdown. 

However, he does make one other appearance, as Bruce Wayne himself, and he plays it well.

Final Thoughts: 

Watchman300: In conclusion, save your money for this film. It's just flat out bad. As I mentioned before, there are some genuine moments but they don't save the film. For the most part the acting is standard, the editing is choppy, the lines are either above or below the audience. This is not something I would recommend to a DC fan, an average movie goer, a kid, or an adult. Just save your money for either reading some comics. If you're interested in seeing a much better Suicide Squad film, watch Assault on Arkham.

AGuerrero1991: There was a lot of action in this movie but it takes more than that to make a good, solid film. Do I completely hate this movie? No. Would I watch it again? Maybe. Overall I give it 2 out of 5. 

DaveEddiePowers: 2/5 stars. There are a lot of fun scenes in the movie, but you cannot watch this movie and have your brain working at all.

Skyeraptor59: On the technical side of things. Having studied filming techniques and various manners of onscreen storytelling, this was what I would expect from anything Zack Snyder touched. Dark-lit for no real reason, horrible transitions, missing plot points. Though it did have slightly more of a sensible plot than BvS, which isn't saying a whole lot. Something that bugged me right off the bat was the introductions of the Squad members. I felt like I was watching a commercial (and a cheesy one at that) rather than a feature-length film. Introducing a character with a still of them, overlaid with weird graphics and a brief official dossier desrciption is more the tactic of a middle school movie maker who thinks it's cool to make every movie like a weird indie heist game. They also only did it in the beginning and they didn't even include everyone on the team (a notable team member left out: Slipknot; see? even the filmmakers don't care about him). Come on, guys, if you're going to pull this kind of thing, be consistent with it, at least. 

In addition, the reasons and motivations for the characters were sorely lacking or very weak for the most part. Aside from the whole death by nanite bomb in head threat, they had very little motivation (or rather, very little motivation was pointed out) for what they did. Case in point: Boomerang coming back after leaving. No explanation, no excuse. He dips out, then shows back up as if nothing ever happened. And this kind of thing happens throughout the movie. There was so much that good writing could have fixed or filled in, and they simply attempted to let it be a cheap action movie, oh, and there are super villains who say they're villains even though most villains don't even see themselves as bad guys. Yeah, DC, that's what the fans want. 

The one thing that everyone I talked to who has seen this agrees on is the soundtrack. I'm unashamed to say I will buy this, as it featured excellent selections from several genres. We all know Bohemian Rhapsody makes an appearance. Other notables include Norman Greenbaum's Spirit in the Sky, Eminem's Without Me, and The White Stripes' Seven Nation Army. And that's just barely touching the list. In many scenes, the songs were played to excellent effect. For instance, when Waller enters Bellerive Prison to see the members of the team, the Rolling Stones' Sympathy For the Devil is played. I don't like that song for various reasons, but it had the desired effect for Waller's first meeting with the team.

Overall, this movie was a solid C, and that's me being extremely generous. It had a lot against it (poor writing; choppy editing; Zack Snyder; bad costumes) but it did have some good going for it (many landmark onscreen live action debuts of characters, whether good or bad, and Waylon for me personally; humorous and entertaining moments; a fantastic soundtrack). I'd really only see this again for Waylon Jones, as I said before. Advice to movie goers: wait til it's available at Redbox. Or better yet, watch it on TV.

And there you have it, a comprehensive and fair review of DC's Suicide Squad. Many thanks to those who took the time to contribute.

Next time, Magnificent Seven.

Sunday, July 24, 2016

Star Trek Beyond Review

Star Trek has a massive fandom with a growth that shows no signs of stopping. We have a new television series next year and now, we have a new movie that fully lives up to the hype that the previous movies have garnished.

Plot:
Set one year after defeating Khan, the Enterprise crew find themselves dealing with personal conflicts. When Starfleet sends them on a mission to find a lost crew, things take a sharp turn for the worst.

Characters:
The previous movies focused primarily on Kirk and Spock, whereas this movie has a plot which involved the whole ensemble. Every main character had at least two great moments and they all complimented each other. Also, this movie contains a tasteful amount of comedic moments so as to achieve a balance without being a comedy. With the same epic space drama  complementing the hilarious character interactions, the audience is engaged. 

I also have to comment on our new villain, Krall.
There is a twist with him, which I won't spoil, but I saw it coming a mile away. 

Without that twist, he would have been a disappointingly corny presence. With that twist, he has a much deeper personality and you can piece together the clues that lead to his identity.

And even though I'm not usually a fan of having new characters join a classic cast, I really love Jaylah's character and everything she does. Taking her fear of Krall and manipulating it as a defense was an extremely interesting facet. 

Final Thoughts:
If you're a fan of the previous Trek movies, then this is definitely right up your alley and worth every penny. I feel that with each movie we get one step closer to classic Trek. This is one of the better paced movies with action, humor, and fascinating character development.

Next Time: 
*siiiiiiiggghhh* Alright..... time to get this over with. .....Suicide Squad is next..... I'm going to get some help with this one.

Tuesday, July 5, 2016

The Legend of Tarzan

Tarzan has been in the public's consciousness for almost a century now. Originally written by Edgar Rice Burroughs, this character has had several film and television adaptations that are both comical and deep. How does this newest incarnation handle the story?

Plot:
We find Tarzan and Jane already married for eight years and living in London. George Washington Williams tells him that he needs to return to the jungle in order to stop the slave trade. They agree, but in doing so, Jane is kidnapped and it's up to Tarzan and George to save her and his friends.

Tarzan:
I actually do like Alexander Skarsgård as this character. We get a fresh look at this character and see his capacity to adapt in every situation. When we do get to the jungle, we see that his relationships with the natives and the animals are a little strained, but in the end we see how much they care for each other.

Jane:
Jane Porter is similar to Lois Lane, in that most incarnations make her extremely annoying. Margot Robbie isn't annoying, but she could be better. The few times she and Tarzan are together, it's not perfect but it's enjoyable. However, most of the time she's away from him and is captured so we don't get to see their chemistry and her character fully developed. That being said, she does have some genuinely good ideas on how to outsmart the villain, so good points there.

George Washington Williams:
Samuel L. Jackson is the best part of this whole movie. He helps carry the film with both humor and depth, and manages to be an excellent partner. My minor complaint is that I think he really plays more of himself than the character, but that doesn't hurt the film and is far too entertaining to complain about.

Rowe:
It has been the tradition of all Tarzan movies, dating all the way back to Johnny Weissmuller, to make the mustachioed man the villain. Christoph Waltz carriers on this tradition, but he doesn't pull it off as well as you would think. Waltz plays it far too over the top and acts like he's in a cartoon. His motivation makes no sense and he has little chemistry with the other actors. His acting choices have confused me before, but it's far more apparent here.

Final Thoughts:
If you liked some previous versions of Tarzan, then you might like this adaptation. If you've never had anything to do with Tarzan before, you might be confused since there are quite a few things that are without context. Personally, I think it would've been best to do a straight up remake, instead of this pseudo-sequel that we have. Which was the same thing I thought when Burton made his Alice in Wonderland years ago. While the film is okay, I have seen better versions of Tarzan and that includes the Disney version. 

Next Time:
Star Trek Beyond.

Sunday, June 19, 2016

Finding Dory Review

Well, Pixar. We meet again. We've definitely had some great times together but we've also had rocky moments in our long relationship. And while I enjoyed Inside Out, The Good Dinosaur left a bad taste in my mouth (we all remember that infamous review). So going to see Finding Dory made me nervous. But I'm glad to say that this movie isn't horrible.

Plot:
Set one year after Finding Nemo, Dory starts to remember her past, including her parents. Dory, Marlin, and Nemo travel across the ocean to reunite her with her family. Along the way, they meet various sea creatures who help them in their journey. 

Characters:
Dory takes the stage here, and I was worried that a character that was originally meant for comedic relief couldn't carry a whole movie to themselves. It often makes the movie extremely forced (Hello, Minions). But with the prologue, we see Dory's childhood and all the events leading up to when she met Marlin. This was a smart move, since we can see the tragedy of not only losing a family but also almost entirely forgetting about them for years. This does add a few extra layers to Dory, but without betraying any of her core character traits. Well done, Pixar.

Marlin and Nemo return, but honestly I think they're the weakest characters of the movie. Neither of them contribute much of anything to the story, aside from them saying they're part of Dory's extended family. They're not annoying, but they could use some improvement. 

The new characters, however, are pretty cool. Hank and Destiny are my two favorites. They and the other supporting characters do an excellent job of moving the story along, whilst still being entertaining and and revealing a little more of Dory's history. And what I find fascinating is that all of this is done in a natural way.

Imagery:
Once again, Pixar blows it out of the park with their artistic representation of ocean life. Just as in Finding Nemo, they did extra research for several underwater creatures to ensure the animation matches their real life movements and even how water naturally moves. So, not surprisingly, Pixar succeeds again in imagery. 

Final Thoughts:
While this sequel didn't need to be made, I'm still pleased that it was. It makes me excited to see that Pixar is still interested in telling a good story and not just making money. If you loved Finding Nemo, then you'll love this. Personally, it doesn't even come close to magnificence of Zootopia, but it's still enjoyable and one of their stronger sequels. 

Next Time:
Legend of Tarzan.

Tuesday, May 31, 2016

Alice Through the Looking Glass review

I came into this movie with seriously low expectations. This movie had several things going against it: It has been six years since the original movie. The plot isn't based on any preexisting book, and I had mixed emotions about the previous film; so a sequel could move things in a bad direction.

However, this wasn't as bad as I thought it was going to be.
Plot:
Three years since her last adventure, Alice returns to Underland to help the Mad Hatter find his long dead family. To do so, she steals a device from Time and travels through Underland's past, attempting to change the future. 

Alice:
In the previous movie, Alice had a lot of cool moments; in this she just got on my nerves. In fact, she causes most of the problems in this movie and unknowingly becomes the villain to everyone. To me she had poor reasoning skills and her mission could've been solved in just a few minutes... Granted, we wouldn't have a long movie but at least this beloved and well-known character wouldn't be tarnished by her actions. The movie shows that she spent her time as a successful sea captain. Given her decision making, I'm legitimately surprised her crew/ship wasn't destroyed a long time ago.

Mad Hatter:
I loved Depp's Hatter in the last movie. In fact, he was one of the films strong points. The same is true here. I love his acting choices in this movie, but I wish we didn't see his backstory. Once again, Depp plays a famous character with daddy issues as a huge part of his past. I'm all for making a character deeper than he was intended to be, but giving him unresolved daddy issues is just lazy and extremely unnecessary. None of this is Depp's fault. He does a great job with what he's given, but it could've been done a little better.

Time:
Our big new character is Time, played by Sacha Baron Cohen. In the trailers it seemed like Time was the villain, but I was pleasantly surprised that he wasn't. In fact, he's the most level headed person in the whole movie. Being the physical representation of time itself in all of Underland, he strikes the right balance of serious and silly and manages to give Alice some sage, practical advice. He does chase Alice through the past, but not out of hatred; he does it so that Underland and himself won't be destroyed, so one could argue that he's a better hero than Alice. Not to mention, I love his steampunk design that he shares with his castle, both of which were perfectly themed. There's also an awesome scene with him, Hatter, March Hare, the Dormouse that explains why it's always tea time for them. Nice touch.

Other Characters:
The Red & White Queens were good and it was nice to see their history, since that needed more explanation in the first film. The animal friends did have more screen time, but I still wanted to see them in a far more active role.

Visuals:
This was one of the film's strong points. Underland looks amazing with its theme and color. As I mentioned, Time's castle is incredible and well thought out, but the best visuals were Alice actually traveling through time. The oceans of time where you can see old and new scenes in these majestic oceans were a pretty creative way of time travel. 

Final Thoughts:
If you loved the first one, you'll enjoy it. If not, you're gonna hate it. In all honesty, we didn't need this movie, but that doesn't mean it's terrible. There are some good things going for it, although there will be moments during which you'll be rolling your eyes. However, the good does outweigh the bad and while I don't recommend seeing it in theaters, it should be watched as a DVD rental. That should be enough to satisfy your curiosity without paying top dollar. 

Next Time:
Me Before You.

Sunday, April 17, 2016

Jungle Book (2016) Review

Disney's 2016 remake is the fourth installment in their live action renditions of their own famous animated productions. Previous attempts have been hit and miss, however Jungle Book actually succeeds on all counts. 

The characters are more fleshed out this time and their relationships with each other are much stronger. Mowgli and his wolf family, in particular. The animated movies skimmed over this family, but the newer film takes the opportunity to explore the affection between Mowgli, his mother, and his siblings. That was a nice touch. 

Mowgli's relationships with Baloo and Bagheera are about the same, but you do get a deeper sense of responsibility from both of them as they try to protect Mowgli.

Shere Khan was terrifying and simply evil. Now for this, I give points to the animated movie for having a better Shere Khan, in that he didn't need to act menacing. His reputation did all that for him, and thus made him free to put on the refined gentleman mask. In the remake, he kills without any hesitation and while that's threatening, it's not as scary as someone calmly planning your demise.

Mowgli was pretty cool in this. They made him to be the MacGyver of the jungle, using his surroundings to build simple things to help himself and others in everyday ways. The law of the jungle makes building things to be extremely taboo and we see Mowgli struggling between his love of the jungle and developing his skills as a human.

The world of the jungle was just fascinating to me. It was interesting to hear what the laws of the jungle are and how they apply to all of the characters. Not to mention the imagery was wonderful.

My minor gripes are: Kaa needed to be in more of the story and King Louie didn't need to have a musical number. I know one of the popular songs in the original movie, but we didn't need to have him sing it out.

In the Books vs. Movies debate, I'm giving it to the movie this time. The book is cool, but I'm not a fan of the composition. The book is essentially comprised of several short stories, not a solid plot. The movie has a solid plot and is definitely worth watching. Don't miss it! 

Next time: Civil War.

Sunday, March 27, 2016

Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice Review

Let's pause for a moment and think about this fact: We have a movie featuring Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman together in live action. That is a historic event for DC movies. That being said, this is one of the two controversial movies of this year and, just as for Man of Steel, people are split down the middle on their opinions. What do I think? Let's dig into Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice and find out.

Superman:
My feelings for Clark are mixed. On the one hand, I think Henry Cavill is a good actor and would enjoy seeing how he would expand his character, but sadly, he doesn't get as many scenes as he deserves. The few scenes he has are exceptional, but there should be more. Especially for the fact that he wants to help people, but they are legitimately frightened of him. That would be a fascinating study, but it wasn't examined in detail.

Batman:
I love Ben Affleck as Batman/Bruce Wayne! He's my favorite live action interpretation of this character. He was finally a detective, built his tools, and an expert fighter. My one gripe (and many will share this with me) is that he kills criminals in this movie. I'm not a fan of that, but there are some reasons behind it. We see this Bruce after his second Robin, Jason Todd, was killed by Joker. When this happened in the comics, he became extremely ruthless. Even Alfred points out that he is not acting his usual self. 

Not to mention, he's a human forced to come to the realization that aliens exist, and as we know, you fear what you don't understand. The film has that theme with several characters, but Bruce handles better than the rest of the characters.

Also, the original Batman from 1939 did kill crooks and so did Michael Keaton's Batman. Again, it's not my favorite aspect of Batman, but they did not just add this as a new concept. While the branding doesn't make sense for why he's doing it now, there are explanations. In short, I fully support Affleck's Batman.

Wonder Woman:
My editor is going to hate me (not really, but she's severely disappointed), but I enjoyed Gal Gadot as Diana. Similar to the Superman argument, I wanted to see more of her. Thankfully, she has her own movie next year, so we'll see her origin story. In here, she was awesome, but like Batman, we don't know much about her.

Lex Luthor:

*sigh* 

Any version of Lex Luthor from movies, cartoons, and comics always depict him as a suave business man who genuinely wants to help the world and sees Superman as a hinderance to mankind. For that reason, he wants to destroy him. In this movie, he's a brat that loves Jolly Ranchers. I'm not even joking. I can't believe the man depicted in this film can operate a high level corporation like Lex Corp. I don't blame the actor, but I do blame the writers for who they think Lex is. He needs a DRAMATIC change.

Other characters:
The supportive characters are solid in this movie. Martha Kent, Lois Lane, Perry, and Alfred were very amazing and they did an excellent job of carrying a film. 

Doomsday:

I hate Doomsday in this movie. I never like it when movies combine characters. With this depiction Doomsday, they smashed Zod, Bizzarro, and Doomsday together and that's just plain laziness. Also, it is too soon to be using the Death & Life of Superman saga in a movie. Especially if you have other heroes to establish first. Most people don't like Superman here, so his death wasn't a huge impact in the world compared to the comics in which he was the hero for years.

Plot:
This movie has the problem of trying to tell seven different and conflicting storylines. Which ones? 
1. A minor Superman movie
2. A decent Wonder Woman movie
3. A great Batman movie
4. A Justice League movie
5. A World's Finest movie
6. The Dark Knight Returns movie 
7. And The Death & Life of Superman movie
Each of these would be great on their own, but certainly not all together. The end result is that the plot is fairly clunky and every time we see something interesting on which we'd like to dwell, it quickly moves to another scene. All of that was a result of combining too much too soon.

Concluding Thoughts:
The movie does have its problems, but it's still entertaining and there are plenty of cool moments. In my opinion, only three things would need to be altered: if you changed Lex's personality dramatically, got rid of Doomsday, and focused on one storyline, then this would be a pretty amazing movie! As I mentioned, I love Affleck, Gadot, the supporting characters, setting up the Justice League, and a handful of awesome scenes.

So, if you liked Man of Steel, you might like Dawn of Justice. Personally, I think it's better than Man of Steel. I think you should watch it and if you're on the fence, watch it on a matinee or low budget movie theatre. I got my money's worth, but there is definitely room for improvement.

Next Time:
My Big Fat Greek Wedding 2.

Saturday, March 12, 2016

10 Cloverfeild Lane Review

Every now and then you'll see a movie that catches you completely off guard. 10 Cloverfield Lane is certainly one of those movies.

Eight years ago, we had a movie named Cloverfield that did moderately well in the box office and we thought that was the end of it. J.J. Abrams thought otherwise and decided to secretly produce a second Cloverfield and release it this year. What was the result?

A woman named Michelle decides to leave her husband and run away. She gets into a car accident and wakes up in an underground bunker, where the owner tells her that the world is now uninhabitable due to a nuclear/chemical attack. But things aren't what they seem as she realizes that it's still dangerous underground.

Going into this one, I had no clue what to expect. After watching it, I'm still not 100% sure what to think about this movie. Let me first make this clear: This is not going to be to everyone's liking. You need to have a specific mindset to view this film.

It caters to those who love suspense, horror, jump scares, and twisted thinking. I love that this movie plays with your mind as you follow this woman in an impossible situation. Abrams keeps the audience wondering if Michelle will make it out alive throughout the entirety of the film. The portrayal of fear is masterfully captured in all three of our main actors.

I do have a couple of minor complaints. For instance, how each character's different, unknown agenda in relation to each other is addressed. It's clear they all ultimately want survival, but how they go about it is radically unique. I don't want to give away spoilers, but personally I think this could've been handled better in simply having those moments teased further until the climax.

Also, certain details remain unaddressed, such as why Michelle left her husband, etc. Granted, details as such don't contribute much to the plot, but it would help the audience better understand the motives of her character. The same goes for John Goodman's character, but I won't spoil it. In short, these minor details aid in character development, which makes the viewer care more about the plight of those onscreen.

A big issue I have with Abrams is that what he excels in build up, he lacks in payoff. If you watched Super 8, then you understand where I'm coming from and can guess what happens in the end. If there's a sequel, I hope the climax is much better.

So overall, if you watched this and you hate it, then I understand why. As I mentioned, this isn't everyone's cup of tea, so that's why I would hesitate to recommend it to everyone. If you love twisted mind games and are okay with a somewhat watered-down ending, then see it. If not, it's at least worth the wait for Redbox or the $4 theatre.

Next Time: The biggest grudge match of the year, Batman V. Superman: Dawn of Justice.

Sunday, January 24, 2016

The 5th Wave Review


Welcome to 2016, guys! We have a massive slew of movies to watch and review. Some of them look fantastic, some of them will have controversy;  but for now, we'll start the 2016 movie year with The 5th Wave!

Before we get started, let me give a quick shout out to my friend Esmé, for doing my editing. She also has her own blog site at Instgram.com/redsbreadslady. Be sure to check it out and tell her Watchman sent you.

Now on to 5th Wave!
Let me say that I'm a big fan of the books; the concept is done so well that I knew this film would do a great job in adapting the story. How did they do?
Honestly, they did a great job with this movie. I'll even go as far to say that they did a much better job than the Hunger Games movies. My reasoning is that in watching the Hunger Games, you would feel lost if you didn't read the books. That one reason is why I personally feel the first Hunger Games fails as an adaptation. If you need to make your audience do homework just to understand basic plot elements, then you need to rethink your movie.

5th Wave didn't have that problem at all. I saw this movie with some friends who primarily didn't read the book and they weren't lost at all. As someone who did read it, not only was I not lost, but the film still kept all of the main highlights and managed to keep me, the audience, interested all the way through.

Characters:
We have our main character, Cassie, who is struggling to find her brother, despite the chaos that's going on in the world. What I like about her character is that she's not The Chosen One, nor is she a girl that is super skilled in everything since birth. No, she's just your average girl who's struggling to survive an alien invasion. I think Chloë Grace Moretz did a fantastic job with this character. She usually gives 100% in every role she takes and Cassie is no exception. Looking forward to her acting in Infinite Sea.

Zombie is actually one of my favorite characters, and while he isn't as developed in this movie, the actor did a fine job in conveying subtlety with this character. He has more to do in the sequel.

I like Evan, however, his character in the movie was written to be a little too obvious. In the novel, there was more time for development, which resulted in more of a shock when his true nature is revealed. It's not the actor's fault, but it does leave much to be desired

Final Thoughts:
As far as the Books vs. Movies debate, it's no surprise that Book wins this round, not that the movie was bad. The movie did well. The book had the advantage of good development of Cassie's character, while still managing to be engaging. So just for making a better use of time, the Book wins.
Lastly, if you're looking for high class cinema, then you'll be disappointed. If you're looking for just a fun disaster sci-fi movie, reminiscent of classic B movies with good acting, then this is the movie for you. I give this movie a solid A and a great start for 2016.

Next time:
Pride Prejudice and Zombies. Yes, really.

Friday, December 25, 2015

Star Wars episode VII: The Force Awakens review

SPOILERS!!!
Okay, guys. Here we have the most anticipated movie of the year. The one that all Star Wars fans have been expecting for years! Does it live up to the hype? Or do we get another Phantom Menace? Let's dive in and see.

Characters:
We have the Resistance fighter pilot Poe, and while I like him and want to see more of him, he doesn't get as much screen time as he deserves, and sadly only has a few great scenes. Now I know that a movie only has SO much time to cover everything, and they're probably saving his best scenes for future movies, which I'm looking forward too. But even though I liked him, I wasn't emotionally invested in his character. Hopefully that will change when episode 8 comes around.

Finn:
I really like Finn! It's a interesting idea to see a young stormtrooper who has second thoughts about the First Order, despite the fact he's been sheltered since childhood and this is all that he knows. This is another character I look forward to seeing more of, but I think he at times was a bit too humorous for humors' sake. I get that it's the fish out of water story we're doing here, but at times his humor is pretty forced. Great acting and backstory, but we need to see some more serious moments from him.

Rey:
I have zero problems with Rey.
How cool is it that we get a female protagonist in this series!? I know people will say that we had Leia and Padme in the other movies, but those were Luke and Anakin's stories. This is totally Rey's story. They treated this differently from Luke&Anakin, because they wanted to be better; Rey just wanted to get back home and wait for whomever dropped her off. It wasn't til near the end that she decided to commit herself to being a Jedi. I like that, because it shows not everyone wants to be a hero, but in her case she had this power and wanted to use it for helping others stop the chaos. Not to mention, even if she didn't have the Force, she still had an impressive set of skills such as pilot, linguist, mechanic, and scavenger. An excellent portrayal of a new main character.

Kylo Ren:
One our biggest bad guys in this new trilogy doesn't quite live up to the hype that the ads have made him to be and there were a lot of complaints about him in this regard. It gets on my nerves when people compare him to Vader, but think about this:
Vader had 20 YEARS of being a Sith and had much practice with the Dark Side and maintaining his reputation. It doesn't specify how long Kylo Ren has been using the Dark Side, but given the context of the movie; probably no more than a few short years. In Kylo Ren's mind, he views his grandfather as an ALMOST perfect Sith. To him, what got Vader out of the Dark Side was his family, as we saw in Return of the Jedi. With that in mind, Kylo decided that if he kills his family, then that temptation to go to the light would be gone and he won't limping on two different opinions, just like we see in this movie.

People also complained about his whiny attitude, but look at young Anakin and Luke. Really it's a family trait that's been in most movies, so I don't understand the complaints. Also the fact that Kylo took his rage towards inanimate, replaceable objects to me is better than Vader choking every guy he meets. Kylo at least knows his minions are helpful.

Original cast:

It was a pure delight watching Leia, Chewie, Han, C-3PO, R2-D2, and Luke back on screen. Everyone played their parts perfectly.
I know there's some gripe about Han's death, and well... I kinda had a feeling it would happen before I saw the movie. It's sad to see him go, especially since he's one of my favorites, but the context and motivations for the characters made sense. Not to mention they made it clear that as the trilogy progresses, that we'll slowly see more of the new cast and less of the old cast. Which to be fair, we know they can't keep playing these characters forever, so it makes sense.

"Issues"

This is by no means a perfect movie. There are some logical issues in this, as well as the other Star Wars movies, but there is definitely far more good than bad.

Yes it does repeat itself from A New Hope, but so does Phantom Menace and yet somehow people forget that. Normally, I would complain about that, but really that's just how Star Wars begin each trilogy. If you really think about it.
The movie also had to get the attention of older fans AND attract new fans. Not an easy thing to do, but they pull it off.

My personal complaint was that there wasn't enough exposition on the First Order, Kylo's descent to the Dark Side, and how R2 is able to wake up. It seem that the original trilogy had decent exposition, prequels had TOO much exposition, but this movie didn't have enough. Again, I'm sure future movies will explain it, but to me it makes you feel a little lost and wanting to look things up.
I hear the novelization does fill in some gaps that the movie has, and I would love to read it and give it a nice comparison.

Final Thoughts:
You'll see this movie. It really doesn't matter what review you read, you'll watch it. You definitely get your money's worth and it does bring back nostalgia. It does give credit for being the second movie to ALMOST make me cry. The first was Toy Story 3. Yeah the movie does have problems, but you can overlook them. Does it have leave questions? Absolutely. In the original trilogy, each movie felt complete, but that was because Lucas didn't know if people would want more. Now we know there is a need for more, so they can have a more connected plot thread and give cliffhangers and theories. (Which I have heard a lot about, but won't discuss here, since this is a review site. Not a theory site.)
At the end of the day, you go to a movie to be entertained and I was definitely entertained. I understand the issues, but clearly it doesn't hurt the movie. So calm down. Definitely an A+ and makes you want more.

That's it for 2015, guys! Thanks for reading all my stuff! I really appreciate it!

Next Time:
Best&Worst 2015.