kellym40 film review

The female heroin goes to battle in DC’s ‘Wonder Woman’

Rating 2.5/5

With the release Wonder Woman from DC, one might “wonder” what the purpose is. DC seems to be attempting to build a universe but I don’t think they’re at the level Marvel is with their superhero flicks. I liked this film a little more than Dawn of Justice, but that’s not saying much.

Director Patty Jenkins takes the screenplay from Allan Heinberg and turns it into 141 minutes of underdeveloped characters, a seemingly tired story, and a derivative plot. Heinberg, Zack Snyder, and Jason Fuchs developed the story.

This is the origin of Wonder Woman, aka Diana Prince (Gal Gadot), who was seen in last year’s Batman vs. Superman: Dawn of Justice. I suppose the film did its job by introducing the character and telling her story, but it just didn’t catch my interest that much. That is to say it didn’t hold my sustaining interest through the film that much.

The film seemed to reflect Captain America where a hero is seen out of time. This character is one where I don’t know much about either. The film begins when Diana is a young girl with an urgent need to train and fight like the other women of the island, but her mother won’t let her. But of course, she ultimately begins to train and Diana learns how to handle herself in battle.

Flash forward a few years when Diana is older. The story advances.

Through an unexplained time warp thing, a pilot crashes in the ocean off the shores of Themyscira. Diana saves him. Captain Steve Trevor (Chris Pine) tells the women of this great war in which Diana believes to be influenced by the god Ares. Determined to stop the God of War she returns with Captain Trevor to put an end to Ares’ reign.

Diana tries to fit in. Steve tries to help her. He finds some help to track down some bad guys. Diana and Steve begin to fall in love. He sacrifices himself to help save the world. Diana realizes her true potential and….

I won’t spoil it for those that haven’t seen it yet, but I imagine most of you have. And if you have, then you know what happens.

I suppose the fault I find with this film (and all the DC films I’ve seen) is that it just doesn’t sustain my interest. I mean they do have somewhat interesting stories, but the polished delivery is not there for me. I don’t know what it is about these DC films thus far, but that’s how I’ve viewed all of them. They seem to drag in a lot of places and it really messed with the timing and pacing for me to really enjoy.

For the most part, the acting was average. I don’t believe there was anything special. Gadot portrayed the character with a sense of determination and strong will with just enough of a sense of heroism that came across in the film at times, but most of the time her performance seemed quiet and reserved. Pine was decent enough with his character but it was nothing spectacular. Connie Nielsen plays Queen Hippolyta, Diana’s mother, with the love and protection only a mother can give. Diana’s aunt, Antiope (Robin Wright) trains Diana into the strong, determined woman Diana becomes. Rounding out the good guys (and providing much humor and light heartedness in the film) were Ewen Bremner, Eugene Brave Rock, and Said Taghmaoui.

The villains seemed to be added on in this story. There were some twists to know the identity of the actual evil arch nemesis, the god Ares. General Ludendorff (Danny Huston) and a mad scientist Doctor Maru nicknamed Doctor Poison played by Elena Anaya, didn’t really seem to play much of a role in the film as one might be led to believe. Honestly, I thought if these characters weren’t in the film as much as they were or maybe only mentioned, the film could have cut some time off and still told the story it wanted to tell.

I believe the film set up the story and main plot well enough for the characters and the audience to see, but it was the execution of the second and third acts with its slow-moving plot points and character and story development that was somewhat incongruent. That takes me out of a film every time. Every. Time.

Some might have enjoyed this film. Some might have really loved this film. But again, I couldn’t really get on board with this DC film like the ones before. I wanted to like it more. In fact going in, I thought, “maybe this is the DC film I will enjoy.” But not so much. I want to like these DC films. I want to enjoy them. But I just can’t. Maybe Justice League will be better. But I’m not getting my hopes up.

 

 

kellym40 film review

Spidey swings into action in the Marvel Cinematic Universe in “Spider-Man: Homecoming”

Rating 3.5/5

Ever since the release of Marvel’s Captain America: Civil War last year and the introduction of everyone’s favorite wall-crawler, fans and movie goers alike couldn’t wait for the new Spider-Man in his first solo outing within the Marvel Cinematic Universe. It was fun to see the character within this universe and this film appeared to be more fun, vibrant, and comical than Sam Raimi’s take starting in 2002 and Marc Webb’s reboot in 2012.

And another thing about reboots/remakes, I have heard people say that this is the third reboot of Spider-Man. That’s fine to say, but the truth is it isn’t. The character didn’t come to the big screen until Raimi directed the Tobey Maguire picture in 2002. And of course that spawned two sequels. It wasn’t until 2012 when Webb directed The Amazing Spider-Man (what would then be a reboot). It wasn’t a remake because it was a different story than 2002’s Spider-Man. This installment is of course not a remake, and I don’t consider it a reboot. Although, in a way it is because it is rebooting the character within the MCU, but at the same time it holds it own as a stand-alone Spider-Man film.

Okay. Enough of that.

While Raimi seemed to kill his franchise with Spider-Man 3 and Webb doing the same with the 2014 follow-up The Amazing Spider-Man 2, this film appeared to punch some life into the character. This first solo outing did not disappoint. Director Jon Watts brings much more fun and a new take on the character than we’ve seen in the other five films. I’m not sure why it took six writers to put together this film, but what’s done is done. Watts co-wrote the script with Jonathan Goldstein, John Francis Daley, Christopher Ford, Chris McKenna and Erik Sommers. Either way, the filmmakers brought the character back to the beginning. Peter Parker received his powers when he was only a teenager. This film really brought out the angst of a teenager wanting to do more with his powers, and his impatience and eagerness to help along with his sarcastic quips.

And as I have said before, I am not anywhere near a comic book aficionado, but what I do know is this take on the character seems to be more in line with who the character is. It may be correct to assume this was generally a crowd-pleasing success. There are those that would still probably knit-pick on some details here and there, but I believe most would still appreciate the web-slinger in the vast MCU.

The new Spider-Man (aka Peter Parker) is Tom Holland. He brings a fresh charisma and charm to the youthful, unlikely hero. He is also younger than Tobey Maguire and Andrew Garfield were in their respective outings as the web-head. Additionally, Holland plays a younger Peter Parker than the previous films. His cameo in Captain America: Civil War last year was definitely surprising and seemed to steal the show at that climactic battle.

I will admit this film has a bit of an ambiguous beginning. Or maybe I just missed something. The film takes place within a few months after the events of Civil War, but supposedly begins eight years prior in what was left after Loki released his carnage in New York from 2012’s The Avengers. That timeline doesn’t seem to quite add up but I assume Marvel knows what they’re doing.

I probably won’t go on about plot details here, but just say the story slowly unfolds in the beginning. And I say that because it just moved a little slow for me in a couple of places, but I see that it was for the establishment of plot points and character introduction and development. And overall, the film moved at a decent pace for its length at roughly 133 minutes. I won’t say the performances here were really moving and captivating, but they weren’t bad either. Holland’s performance really stood out though. He looked younger, playing a younger version of Peter Parker than we’ve seen in the other films. Marisa Tomei returns as at Peter’s aunt May where she was first seen in last year’s Civil War. I think she fulfilled the role nicely with the amount of screen time she had. Although, I still somewhat question the casting choice. I mean, again, she was adequate in the role but the look of her character wasn’t what I was expecting. (But that’s okay. I won’t judge). Peter’s love interest Liz (Laura Harrier) was a nice addition. I do know that Peter had romantic interests other than Mary Jane Watson and Gwen Stacy. What added to the humor and various comedic moments was the interaction he had with his friend Ned (Jacob Batalon). Even the appearances of Robert Downey Jr. and Jon Favreau added to the humor and gave their usual energy and humor to Tony Stark and Happy Hogan. I think the film focused on the inner struggles of Peter coming to terms with his powers and his eagerness in wanting to do more.

I suppose that is why there wasn’t much of a villain in the story as I would have liked. And while Michael Keaton’s acting was not to blame here, and not to say he didn’t have a bad performance as Adrian Toomes, but I was kind of hoping for a little more out of his character. That might be the case as the post-credit scene hints. It is nice to see Keaton making some films again. And to go from playing a superhero in Batman to an actor playing a superhero in Birdman to playing a villain in another superhero movie, is something that I don’t think has been done before. Kudos to Keaton!

This was a fun film and a great addition to the MCU. The cinematography was great and the use of colors and locations added to the film. That is something I’ve noticed comparing Marvel and DC. Marvel uses bright colors and is more fun and vibrant and seems to show off more energy. The DC universe just appears to be more dark and gloomy. But at any rate, I was pleasantly surprised with this solo outing from the web-crawler. Of course, it’s Marvel. I don’t think there has been a Marvel film released that I haven’t enjoyed.

 

 

kellym40 film review

‘Super’ tells crime to shut up

Rating 3/5

I had reservations while viewing this film. Like a previous statement I made “You can’t judge a film by its trailer,” so it is with this film. It seems to be billed as a comedy, but plays out in an entirely different way. I can see where some might be turned off and find it unlikable. But if you put away any preconceived ideas and expectations you may have (like expecting something funny and upbeat) and open up to what the film is, it might just be bearable, or even enjoyable. And, despite its themes and explicit action, Super does have its merits.

With this film, writer-director James Gunn appears to ask the question, “What lengths would one go to if your wife fell under the influence of bad people?” He takes a real situation and turns it into a somewhat authentic reality. There is some humor in the film, but again, the trailer seemed misleading here. I don’t think Gunn intended this to be a straightforward comedy, or even a black comedy. And while the film turned a corner and strayed off the comedy path, the characters stayed true to themselves and played through the story’s action throughout the film.

While themes may be blurred and the film’s purpose may be unclear at times, it does have varied and somewhat interesting characters. And since the characters are more or less drawn into a seemingly real situation, one might wonder what someone else would do in a similar situation. Maybe not to the extent our main character goes to in the film, but some other similar action.

Super is a character driven film and seems to be driven by the lead character, a short-order cook, Frank (Rainn Wilson). Frank is an average guy and is married to, what he thinks is the woman of his dreams, Sarah (Liv Tyler). Sarah is a recovering addict and is then caught up in the hands of a slick drug dealer, Jacques (Kevin Bacon). When Sarah goes missing, Frank is determined Jacques had something to do with that and is determined to get her back. While watching a Christian cable channel, he gets a notion to emulate a superhero that stops evildoers with the power of God. Looking for more inspiration, Frank goes to a comic book store where he meets Libby (Ellen Page), a lively clerk who knows her comic superheroes. To get to Jacques, Frank dons the identity of a masked superhero, the Crimson Bolt, and takes the motto, “Shut up, crime!” Armed with a large wrench, he takes on evil wherever it may be by hiding behind dumpsters all day waiting for crime to happen.

What Frank becomes seems more like a mad man beating people senseless over petty things. But ultimately what drives him is stopping the ultimate evil, Jacques, and getting Sarah back. Libby finds out Frank is the Crimson Bolt and then becomes his junior sidekick, Boltie. She then helps Frank take on crime and go after Jacques.

The performances here are nothing stellar, but they do provide interesting enough dynamics in their character relationships that add enough to the story that kept me involved. As I said earlier, the film takes the audience for a ride by teasing one type of film and then exploding in a different direction. That may be off putting to most people, including me. But as a viewed the film, Frank became a character I connected with and wanted to see the outcome to the end. Super is not your ordinary superhero movie. Nor is it a laugh-a-minute riot. It may not be super, but it does have some merit.

kellym40 film review

The mystic world comes to Marvel in ‘Doctor Strange’

Rating 3.5/5

Marvel appears to be on a roll. The studio’s films have not seemed to disappoint. At least they have not disappointed me. At this point, Marvel’s “Doctor Strange” has been out for more than a month and has made over 220 million dollars. As I’ve mentioned before, I am not really up on comic books and I know very little about the Doctor Strange character, but I (as always) will give an honest review of how I view the movie as a whole from a filmmaking standpoint.

Doctor Strange tells a mystical story with just enough thought and “eye candy” to keep the viewer interested. This film is an origin story that, by my calculation, fits into the Marvel Universe some time around Captain America: Civil War, as Stephen Strange is mentioned in the film. This film gives insight to the character’s origin.

As the film opens, we are treated to an exciting action sequence that sets the events rolling as the bad guy steals something that could possibly result in some very bad things happening. This of course leads us to the introduction of the heroic main character. Doctor Stephen Strange (Benedict Cumberbacth), with a sense of arrogance, is a brilliant neurosurgeon who relies on his skillful hands and professional skills to carry him through life. One evening, he becomes the victim of a vicious car accident resulting from his fast, reckless driving. He is faced with the possibility of never practicing medicine again because of the massive nerve damage done to his hands. Desperate for any nuance of hope, he discovers a place where he could heal himself. So he travels to Nepal to train under a teacher known as The Ancient One (Tilda Swinton). While there, he also meets a disciple, Mordo (Chiwetel Ejiofor), and befriends him as Strange learns how to use mystic powers to bend reality and control time.

The action moved along at a decent pace. This was done with a skillful use of montages, imaginative scenery, and provoking dialogue. I felt the story never faltered and the action never seemed forced or trite. It flowed well all the way to the climactic showdown with Kaecilius (Mads Mikkelsen), and then Dormammu, a powerful cosmic entity.

This film was driven by highly effective special effects. Too often in special effects driven films, the story and characters suffer and are not fully developed. Here, they become part of the story and add the magic and excitement of the film. At times though, the effects appeared to be something from Christopher Nolan’s Inception, or sometimes characters running about through a landscape designed by M. C. Escher, but still they seemed imaginative and original to the film.

Scott Derrickson directed the film and also co-wrote it along with writers Jon Spaights and C. Robert Cargill. Famed Marvel producer Kevin Feige helmed that role once again. The filmmakers put together a film that was entertaining and they understood how to blend the elements of storytelling together seamlessly. This is another solid showing from Marvel that is continuing to build the foundation to its ever-expanding superhero universe.

 

 

 

kellym40 film review

Marvel expands its universe with ‘Captain America: Civil War’

Rating 4/5

Marvel released the third installment in the Captain America series as part of the ever-expanding Marvel universe earlier this year. Although the title was Captain America: Civil War, it did feel somewhat more like an Avengers film, and others have agreed with that sentiment. I believe it was a great story to bring to this third Captain America because I believe it did center more on Steve Rogers (Chris Evans) and his childhood friend Bucky Barnes (Sebastian Stan). However, the overall story and plot involves every superhero and their ultimate actions and consequences, but I do believe at the heart of it was the relationship between Rogers and Barnes.

Your favorite Avengers are back: Iron Man (Robert Downey Jr.), Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson), War Machine (Don Cheadle), Vision (Paul Bettany), Falcon (Anthony Mackie), Hawkeye (Jeremy Renner), Scarlet Witch (Elizabeth Olsen), and newcomers Black Panther (Chadwick Boseman), Ant-Man (Paul Rudd) and Spider-Man (Tom Holland).

The performances were as good as any previous Marvel film and even the newcomers performed well in their respective roles. Fans have waited for the appearance of Spider-Man ever since the announcement that Marvel had finally acquired the character from Sony. What I’ve heard and people I’ve talked to say that was one of the highlights of the film. There has been discussion I’m sure as to why Spidey didn’t get a solo film before his appearance in this adventure. All I can say is, “Come on, it’s Spidey.” I mean do we really need another origin film for Spider-Man at this point? With Sam Raimi’s Spider-Man in 2002 and the recent reboot in 2012 with Marc Webb directing The Amazing Spider-Man, I believe fans, and audiences alike, are familiar with the web-head. Now that the character is in the famed Marvel Cinematic Universe, much anticipation awaits for the release of the first solo film, Homecoming – set to be coming July 2017. Some may have considered Spider-Man’s appearance a bit rushed and a poor storyline to add him into the mix, but I disagree. As mentioned, we have already seen two different origin films within the past several years and there was a mention of Spider-Man in Marvel’s Ant-Man. The set up here in Civil War was Tony’s dialogue about the need to see him. So I believe the character is adequately introduced into the Marvel world. The one exception I have (and I may not be alone in this) is casting Marisa Tomei as Aunt May. Not that I have anything against Tomei (she is a wonderful actress), it just seems to be an unusual casting choice on some level (of course the same might be said as casting Sally Field in the role in Marc Webb’s reboot).

But anyhoo.

Back to Cap and the gang. The trailer pointed out a showdown between the heroes with each taking sides – some with Cap and some with Iron Man. The “feud” comes about as the government attempts to intervene and provide an oversight committee, a sort of accountability, for the heroes. Iron Man thinks it’s a good idea and Cap doesn’t. Therefore, you have each taking sides resulting in an ultimate superhero smack down. And that sequence was as compelling as the other fight scenes in The Avengers, but this time it was hero on hero.

What works for me in this film is how directors Anthony and Joe Russo weaved all of the characters, story and visual elements into a cohesive, entertaining film while developing character and story arcs. It was a bit lengthy, coming in at nearly two and a half hours, but there were plenty of action sequences, fights, and character moments that kept me in the film. All of the elements (costume, lighting, cinematography, visual effects, sound) come together in this film to bring these wonderful Marvel characters to life in a fun, entertaining way.

 

 

 

 

kellym40 film review

A brooding look for ‘Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice’

Rating 2/5

About a couple of months before audience’s reveled in Marvel’s Captain America: Civil War, DC finally put forth their first multi-hero effort in Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice. Writers Chris Terrio and David S. Goyer penned this script with Zack Snyder directing. His most recent directorial outing was 2013’s Man of Steel. Other directing credits include 300, Watchmen, and Sucker Punch. Snyder has a dark, brooding style that, most of the time, leaves me feeling uneasy and gloomy while watching his films. Many of Tim Burton’s films have a dark overtone, but are still somewhat more enjoyable than this. The script is a lengthy one as the film runs just over two and half hours. There is a lot packed in the film and overall it just seemed cumbersome.

Batman/Bruce Wayne (Ben Affleck) thinks Superman/Clark Kent (Henry Cavill) is a danger to the world and he must be stopped. Superman thinks Batman is a dangerous vigilante and must be stopped. Then the film spends half the time setting up the big, climactic battle between the two caped heroes that seems to cause more destruction than really solves anything. Lex Luthor (Jesse Eisenberg) comes in and ultimately wants to pit these two together and create Doomsday from the corpse of General Zod to put an end to the heroes. It also introduces and poorly sets up Diana Prince/Wonder Woman (Gal Gadot) who comes in towards the middle of their battle and helps them defeat Doomsday. It seems DC was in a rush to try to introduce this character into their cinematic universe that they didn’t really develop the character enough to really do much of anything. They could have left the character out and most of that storyline and the film still would not be that different. Now Wonder Woman’s solo film is set to be released next June and a trailer has just been released at the San Diego Comic Con this weekend. You can view that trailer below:

Wonder Woman

They introduced this character now and then go back and release a film, which looks sort of like an origin film, and then put her back into Justice League to be out in theaters later next year in November. There was a trailer for that film shown at SDCC this weekend as well. You can view the trailer below:

Justice League

Aquaman (Jason Momoa), The Flash (Ezra Miller), and Cyborg (Ray Fisher) were teased at the end of Batman v. Superman and will be in Justice League next year. Then those characters, as with the aforementioned Wonder Woman, are going to get their solo films. It appears DC is sort of going backwards from Marvel. Putting these characters together and then giving them their own films doesn’t appear to be the greatest decision. But I may be wrong.

When it was announced that Affleck was cast as the new Bruce Wayne/Batman, there was uproarious upheaval in the decision. There seemed to be mixed reviews about Affleck’s portrayal of the character. There were seemingly positive reviews but there were those that didn’t like the choice. It appeared to be mediocre at best. His Batman dominated more when he was fighting, although his use of firearms was a bit much. It was too aggressive for my understanding of the character.

Amy Adams brings the same low-key performance to Lois Lane in this film as she did in Man of Steel. She had moments of strength and independence but there just didn’t seem there was enough of those moments. Jeremy Irons is a great actor, but here again, it was somewhat of another dull performance of the Alfred character. Perhaps the overall dark, brooding tone had something to do with the performances. I’m not sure. But they just didn’t have that punch to the characters to hold my interest. It was almost like viewing a live theatrical performance where the actors have low energy and the play just seems to drag. I believe the same could be said here.

However, Eisenberg’s Lex Luthor was different. I wasn’t sure about his casting either at the start. Of course, I wasn’t sure about Heath Ledger cast as the Joker in Christopher Nolan’s The Dark Knight, but he was brilliant. Overall, I did like the way the Luthor was portrayed. It was completely different from Gene Hackman’s version and also the Kevin Spacey portrayal in Superman Returns. Eisenberg played him with some high energy and more psychotic (for lack of a better word).

It felt like they crammed too much in this film. As I mentioned earlier, Wonder Woman’s character and storyline could have been left out and teased the way Aquaman, the Flash and Cyborg were and the film wouldn’t have suffered any (or at least anymore than it did). The storyline where Luthor creates Doomsday seemed like an unnecessary one and just added to “create” more excitement and spectacle. That whole sequence could have probably been cut and the battle between Superman and Batman could have ended differently or with the same outcome and moved on from there. I still question how it ended. But maybe those scenes were left in there to give it more spectacle and something for the fans. The film had some merit, just not enough to keep it interesting.