Search
Search results
The How to be British Collection
Book
A perennially popular collection of colour cartoon illustrations, with accompanying texts, on the...
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The New Mutants (2020) in Movies
Sep 9, 2020
Character-driven storyline rather than wham-bam Marvel action (1 more)
Illyana Rasputin - great character
"Glass" - Half Full.
So, I've heard a lot of bad word-of-mouth about this X-Men flick, but otherwise knew very little about it. As such, I went in with low expectations. And although there is nothing remotely novel about the movie, I didn't think it was too bad at all.
The plot: So, my review title suggests that the plot is very closely aligned to M Night Shymalan's "Glass" - his "Split" sequel from last year. A Victorian-style hospital-cum-prison similarly forms the claustrophobic setting for the majority of the movie. This is where the troubled teen Dani Moonstar (Blu Hunt) is taken after being suddenly orphaned in dramatic and mysterious circumstances. The only doctor present, Dr Reyes (Alice Braga), says she is being held there for her own - and society's safety - while her puberty-driven mutant tendencies emerge.
Locked away with her is Rahne (Maisie Williams), Charlie (Sam Guthrie), 'hot' Brazilian hunk Roberto (Henry Zaga) and the gloriously named Illyana Rasputin (Anya-Taylor Joy). Danni's arrival sparks a serious of escalating events that literally lead to all hell breaking loose.
Blu is the warmest colour: What made this Marvel movie stand-out for me, from the normal glass-shattering standard, is that it is predominantly a character-led piece. We spend quite a bit of time (for a Marvel movie) in building relationships between the teens, including a sweet lesbian-coming-out 'will they/won't they' tension between Rahne and Danni.
I was also very much attracted to the performance of Blu Hunt. I admit that this might not just be due to her interesting performance (the indigenous / LBGT angle is intriguing) but because she reminded me strongly of a girl at school who I had a mad crush on and completely failed to get off with! Blu is actually native American (from the Lakota tribe). Given she is the lead and has to carry the movie, it's a surprise that she is only about 5th in the billing: I'd have been upset with the director (Josh "A Fault in our Stars" Boone) about that.
Maisie Williams is also effective in this, and gets top billing, although arguably Anya-Taylor-Joy has emerged - with her wonderful "Emma" - as the bigger star since filming.
But it's Taylor-Joy's Rasputin that really stands out as the most interesting of the characters on show. There's a scene where she goes into action - eyes blazing and 'daemon' hovering - that would make a splendid PC screensaver! Stuff the "Black Widow" standalone movie: I'd go watch Illyana Rasputin kicking ass in her own follow-up movie! (Of course, Anya Taylor-Joy was also prominent in "Glass", which unfortunately cements the similarities between the films.)
The movie has had a long and tortuous path to its final release, being made waaaaaayyyyy back in 2017. As an X-Men movie, it's appeared after the X-Men universe finally imploded (with the disappointing whimper of "Dark Phoenix"). So in that sense it's a bit of a ghost of a flick.
Overall, it's a mixed bag. There's a sense of great familiarity with the contents - particularly with the strong echoes of "Glass", actually filmed after this one (but with 'inversion', who knows anymore?). Even the "Indian legend" that runs through the movie swaps a bear for a wolf but ends with a familiar, rather groan-inducing, motto. (It was used in "Tomorrowland" I think?)
But the young cast are attractive and entertained me for the (pleasantly short) running time. It's not going to win any prizes for originality, or indeed anything else. But it really wasn't the X-Men bust I expected it to be.
(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/09/08/x-men-the-new-mutants-2020-glass-half-full/ . Thanks.)
The plot: So, my review title suggests that the plot is very closely aligned to M Night Shymalan's "Glass" - his "Split" sequel from last year. A Victorian-style hospital-cum-prison similarly forms the claustrophobic setting for the majority of the movie. This is where the troubled teen Dani Moonstar (Blu Hunt) is taken after being suddenly orphaned in dramatic and mysterious circumstances. The only doctor present, Dr Reyes (Alice Braga), says she is being held there for her own - and society's safety - while her puberty-driven mutant tendencies emerge.
Locked away with her is Rahne (Maisie Williams), Charlie (Sam Guthrie), 'hot' Brazilian hunk Roberto (Henry Zaga) and the gloriously named Illyana Rasputin (Anya-Taylor Joy). Danni's arrival sparks a serious of escalating events that literally lead to all hell breaking loose.
Blu is the warmest colour: What made this Marvel movie stand-out for me, from the normal glass-shattering standard, is that it is predominantly a character-led piece. We spend quite a bit of time (for a Marvel movie) in building relationships between the teens, including a sweet lesbian-coming-out 'will they/won't they' tension between Rahne and Danni.
I was also very much attracted to the performance of Blu Hunt. I admit that this might not just be due to her interesting performance (the indigenous / LBGT angle is intriguing) but because she reminded me strongly of a girl at school who I had a mad crush on and completely failed to get off with! Blu is actually native American (from the Lakota tribe). Given she is the lead and has to carry the movie, it's a surprise that she is only about 5th in the billing: I'd have been upset with the director (Josh "A Fault in our Stars" Boone) about that.
Maisie Williams is also effective in this, and gets top billing, although arguably Anya-Taylor-Joy has emerged - with her wonderful "Emma" - as the bigger star since filming.
But it's Taylor-Joy's Rasputin that really stands out as the most interesting of the characters on show. There's a scene where she goes into action - eyes blazing and 'daemon' hovering - that would make a splendid PC screensaver! Stuff the "Black Widow" standalone movie: I'd go watch Illyana Rasputin kicking ass in her own follow-up movie! (Of course, Anya Taylor-Joy was also prominent in "Glass", which unfortunately cements the similarities between the films.)
The movie has had a long and tortuous path to its final release, being made waaaaaayyyyy back in 2017. As an X-Men movie, it's appeared after the X-Men universe finally imploded (with the disappointing whimper of "Dark Phoenix"). So in that sense it's a bit of a ghost of a flick.
Overall, it's a mixed bag. There's a sense of great familiarity with the contents - particularly with the strong echoes of "Glass", actually filmed after this one (but with 'inversion', who knows anymore?). Even the "Indian legend" that runs through the movie swaps a bear for a wolf but ends with a familiar, rather groan-inducing, motto. (It was used in "Tomorrowland" I think?)
But the young cast are attractive and entertained me for the (pleasantly short) running time. It's not going to win any prizes for originality, or indeed anything else. But it really wasn't the X-Men bust I expected it to be.
(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/09/08/x-men-the-new-mutants-2020-glass-half-full/ . Thanks.)
Charlie Cobra Reviews (1840 KP) rated Train to Busan Presents: Peninsula (2020) in Movies
Oct 6, 2020
Not as good as the original (2 more)
Sometimes uses too much CGI making scenes look silly or too fake.
Not enough character development
Peninsula: Half Fast and the Furious, Half Zombie Movie (6/10)
Contains spoilers, click to show
(CCR Original Content) Peninsula Review No Spoiler Section (6/10)
Peninsula is a 2020 South Korean Action Horror movie directed by Yeon Sang-ho and written by Park Joo-Suk and Yeong Sang-ho. The film was produced by Next Entertainment World, RedPeter Film, and New Movie and distributed by Next Entertainment World (worldwide) and Well Go USA (United States) with producer Lee Dong-ha. The film stars Gang Dong-won, Kim Do-yoon, and Lee Jung-hyun.
Four years after the entire country of South Korea fell to a virulent zombie outbreak, former Marine Captain Jung-seok (Gang Dong-won) lives a life of regret following tragic events. Jung-seok is guilted in to joining his brother-in-law Chul-Min (Kim Do-yoon) on a suicide mission to go back to South Korea. If they can locate and bring back a truck containing $20 million dollars, then they get half, that is along with two other equally reckless people along for the job.
(Warning Spoilers Below)
I have to say first off that Train to Busan was a great movie. I'm a big fan of that movie so I have to say I was pretty hyped for this movie. I'm not going to lie, I was disappointed with the direction they took on this movie plot/story wise compared to the story they told in the first movie. But it was still a decent zombie movie. Right away it had me with it's opening scene and I think that's what let me down. It started off so emotional and I half expected a similar experience to the first film and it's anything but. It's hard in this genre to be original and I like how they were still able to bring some cool ideas to the board in and otherwise overdone genre. I like how they implemented a couple of things into the movie like showing how the zombies are attracted to light and sound, like with the r/c car and the car alarms. Also the people talking about how the zombies are more active in the day and going out at night more. I didn't like that they went too far in the special effects where things wind up looking overly-fake, even though most were pretty decent. I liked the weird gladiator/survival game that they made the prisoners of Unit 631 compete in. That was interesting. I also liked the sister characters and thought that they were a welcome addition to the movie. I feel like there wasn't enough character development between their mother and Jung-seok. They should have shown him get more attached to her or the daughters. Also with him and his brother-in-law, I feel they skipped a lot in those 4 years. There were some ridiculous zombie scenes with a lot of zombies (number-wise), which was a little expected because Train to Busan was the movie World War Z ripped off with the concept of zombie hordes that way. But I have to say the whole scene with the glass tunnel and all the zombies spilling out was pretty satisfying. All in all I would say this movie fails to reach the emotional tone and despair of the situation as well as setup characters that you care about as well as the first film. That being said it's a pretty good zombie movie and a stand alone sequel that shouldn't really be judged that way even if it's hard not too. I would have to give this movie a 6/10. It does a decent job rising about the average zombie movie in being exciting as well as gripping without holding itself too serious.
Peninsula is a 2020 South Korean Action Horror movie directed by Yeon Sang-ho and written by Park Joo-Suk and Yeong Sang-ho. The film was produced by Next Entertainment World, RedPeter Film, and New Movie and distributed by Next Entertainment World (worldwide) and Well Go USA (United States) with producer Lee Dong-ha. The film stars Gang Dong-won, Kim Do-yoon, and Lee Jung-hyun.
Four years after the entire country of South Korea fell to a virulent zombie outbreak, former Marine Captain Jung-seok (Gang Dong-won) lives a life of regret following tragic events. Jung-seok is guilted in to joining his brother-in-law Chul-Min (Kim Do-yoon) on a suicide mission to go back to South Korea. If they can locate and bring back a truck containing $20 million dollars, then they get half, that is along with two other equally reckless people along for the job.
(Warning Spoilers Below)
I have to say first off that Train to Busan was a great movie. I'm a big fan of that movie so I have to say I was pretty hyped for this movie. I'm not going to lie, I was disappointed with the direction they took on this movie plot/story wise compared to the story they told in the first movie. But it was still a decent zombie movie. Right away it had me with it's opening scene and I think that's what let me down. It started off so emotional and I half expected a similar experience to the first film and it's anything but. It's hard in this genre to be original and I like how they were still able to bring some cool ideas to the board in and otherwise overdone genre. I like how they implemented a couple of things into the movie like showing how the zombies are attracted to light and sound, like with the r/c car and the car alarms. Also the people talking about how the zombies are more active in the day and going out at night more. I didn't like that they went too far in the special effects where things wind up looking overly-fake, even though most were pretty decent. I liked the weird gladiator/survival game that they made the prisoners of Unit 631 compete in. That was interesting. I also liked the sister characters and thought that they were a welcome addition to the movie. I feel like there wasn't enough character development between their mother and Jung-seok. They should have shown him get more attached to her or the daughters. Also with him and his brother-in-law, I feel they skipped a lot in those 4 years. There were some ridiculous zombie scenes with a lot of zombies (number-wise), which was a little expected because Train to Busan was the movie World War Z ripped off with the concept of zombie hordes that way. But I have to say the whole scene with the glass tunnel and all the zombies spilling out was pretty satisfying. All in all I would say this movie fails to reach the emotional tone and despair of the situation as well as setup characters that you care about as well as the first film. That being said it's a pretty good zombie movie and a stand alone sequel that shouldn't really be judged that way even if it's hard not too. I would have to give this movie a 6/10. It does a decent job rising about the average zombie movie in being exciting as well as gripping without holding itself too serious.
Christ In Song
Music and Book
1.0
Rate It
App
We are pleased to present the Christ in Song hymn treasury. These hymns are hand-picked for their...
HTML Egg Website Creator
Business and Productivity
App
Create beautiful websites right on your iPhone and iPad! "If you don’t know or don’t want to...
SatFinder - Adjust your dish in few seconds
Utilities and Productivity
App
SatFinder – Adjust satellite antennas in 4 easy steps – The original since 2010 With SatFinder,...
Solomon Wendt (30 KP) rated A Deadly Education: Lesson One of the Scholomance in Books
Aug 28, 2021
Worldbuilding (2 more)
Magic
Coming of Age
Some descriptions lacking (2 more)
Confused on Series Plot
Good first book but not a stand alone story
A Deadly Slice of Life/Coming of Age Magic School
Magic School. Wizards. Teenage Angst. A lot of reasons I signed up for the giveaway of this novel and glad I got a copy.
For those who want the quick recommendation, if you enjoy wizard teens and magic schools, you will enjoy this book. Outside of that category, it is a decent fantasy novel that is worth a read, but no need to go and get right away.
First and foremost, books like "A Deadly Education" have the unfortunate hurdle of separating itself from the magic school genre alpha that is Harry Potter, to which I believe Naomi Novik did really well. Whenever I read such stories, I can't help compare to the Potter series, but the world that Novik builds is such a stark contrast that I quickly forgot about Hogwarts and Muggles and traded in for the Scholomance and mundanes.
The world that Novik builds is dark and untrusting. Inside the school, there are maleficera, or 'mals,' that try to consume the students' mana at every turn. This puts the place on edge, making almost every character paranoid to open anything or even go anywhere without at least one other person with them, usually at a cost. This darker side is refreshing, especially because the magic in Novik's world is hard magic as opposed to the soft magic of other series. To those who don't know the difference, soft magic is that magic just exists and spells come without consequence. Hard, on the other hand, has limits and comes from a source and takes skills and finesse to learn and use them. Any author who takes it upon themselves to make the magic in their world hard magic gives themselves a challenge, something that Novik clears easily.
The other part of the world that is dangerous are the mals that attack students. There are a lot of them, so much to the point there should be a separate book that could be referenced to know what they are fighting. Although your imagination can run wild, some of the descriptions, or lack there of, leave you to fill in a lot of blanks. I'm still not sure if they are shadows and/or goo with various metal attached or part of their bodies. The variety is so immense that you don't encounter the same thing twice it seems. When reading the encounters, it was hard to picture the exact nature of the fight in my mind. However, the sense of danger was ever present throughout the whole book.
The story itself is coming of age, or more so coming of friendship, mixed with a slice of life feel. Although there is a starting event, Orion saving Galadriel for the second time, there is not an overarching plot for the story. It is just to survive and possibly make an alliance for graduation. This is not my cup of tea when it comes to stories as I enjoy seeing a defined goal or enemy that leads to a finale or into the next book of the series. This story does not have that, which seems to lack an overall plot other that "just survive." Even the climax of this story felt a little out of the blue in terms of action, and then is superseded by a social bombshell and cliffhanger for the next in the series.
To wrap and reiterate, I enjoy the world that this story takes place. It is inventive and unique to standout against others within the magic school genre. There was some plot lacking, but is still enjoyable for not quite knowing what is coming around the next corning. This a clearly the first book of series which is not the strongest as its own installment, but definitely has me waiting for the next in the line.
For those who want the quick recommendation, if you enjoy wizard teens and magic schools, you will enjoy this book. Outside of that category, it is a decent fantasy novel that is worth a read, but no need to go and get right away.
First and foremost, books like "A Deadly Education" have the unfortunate hurdle of separating itself from the magic school genre alpha that is Harry Potter, to which I believe Naomi Novik did really well. Whenever I read such stories, I can't help compare to the Potter series, but the world that Novik builds is such a stark contrast that I quickly forgot about Hogwarts and Muggles and traded in for the Scholomance and mundanes.
The world that Novik builds is dark and untrusting. Inside the school, there are maleficera, or 'mals,' that try to consume the students' mana at every turn. This puts the place on edge, making almost every character paranoid to open anything or even go anywhere without at least one other person with them, usually at a cost. This darker side is refreshing, especially because the magic in Novik's world is hard magic as opposed to the soft magic of other series. To those who don't know the difference, soft magic is that magic just exists and spells come without consequence. Hard, on the other hand, has limits and comes from a source and takes skills and finesse to learn and use them. Any author who takes it upon themselves to make the magic in their world hard magic gives themselves a challenge, something that Novik clears easily.
The other part of the world that is dangerous are the mals that attack students. There are a lot of them, so much to the point there should be a separate book that could be referenced to know what they are fighting. Although your imagination can run wild, some of the descriptions, or lack there of, leave you to fill in a lot of blanks. I'm still not sure if they are shadows and/or goo with various metal attached or part of their bodies. The variety is so immense that you don't encounter the same thing twice it seems. When reading the encounters, it was hard to picture the exact nature of the fight in my mind. However, the sense of danger was ever present throughout the whole book.
The story itself is coming of age, or more so coming of friendship, mixed with a slice of life feel. Although there is a starting event, Orion saving Galadriel for the second time, there is not an overarching plot for the story. It is just to survive and possibly make an alliance for graduation. This is not my cup of tea when it comes to stories as I enjoy seeing a defined goal or enemy that leads to a finale or into the next book of the series. This story does not have that, which seems to lack an overall plot other that "just survive." Even the climax of this story felt a little out of the blue in terms of action, and then is superseded by a social bombshell and cliffhanger for the next in the series.
To wrap and reiterate, I enjoy the world that this story takes place. It is inventive and unique to standout against others within the magic school genre. There was some plot lacking, but is still enjoyable for not quite knowing what is coming around the next corning. This a clearly the first book of series which is not the strongest as its own installment, but definitely has me waiting for the next in the line.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Flatliners (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
The undiscovered country… which they shouldn’t have returned to.
The movies have depicted the hereafter in varied ways over the years. From the bleached white warehouses of Powell and Pressburger’s “A Matter of Life and Death” in 1946 and Warren Beatty’s “Heaven Can Wait” in 1978 to – for me – the peak of the game: Vincent Ward’s mawkish but gorgeously rendered oil-paint version of heaven in 1998’s “What Dreams May Come”. Joel Schmacher’s 1990’s “Flatliners” saw a set of “brat pack” movie names of the day (including Kevin Bacon, Julia Roberts, William Baldwin and Kiefer Sutherland) as experimenting trainee doctors, cheating death to experience the afterlife and getting more than they bargained for. The depictions of the afterlife were unmemorable: in that I don’t remember them much! (I think there was some sort of spooky tree involved, but that’s about it!)
But the concept was sufficiently enticing – who isn’t a little bit intrigued by the question of “what’s beyond”? – that Cross Creek Pictures thought it worthy of dusting off and giving it another outing in pursuit of dirty lucre. But unfortunately this offering adds little to the property’s reputation.
In this version, the lead role is headed up by Ellen Page (“Inception”) who is a great actress… too good for this stuff. Also in that category is Diego Luna, who really made an impact in “Rogue One” but here has little to work with in terms of backstory. The remaining three doctors – Nina Dobrev as “the sexy one”; James Norton (“War and Peace”) as “the posh boy” and Kiersey Clemons as the “cute but repressed one”, all have even less backstory and struggle to make a great impact.
Still struggling to get the high score on Angry Birds: from left to right Ray (Diego Luna), Sophia (Kiersey Clemons), Marlo (Nina Dobrev), Courtney (Ellen Page) and Jamie (James Norton).
Also putting in an appearance, as the one link from the original film, is Kiefer Sutherland as a senior member of the teaching staff. But he’s not playing the same character (that WOULD have been a bloody miracle!) and although Sutherland adds gravitas he really is given criminally little to do. What was director Niels Arden Oplev (“The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo”) thinking?
In terms of the story, it’s pretty much a re-hash of Peter Filardi’s original, with Ben Ripley (“Source Code”) adding a few minor tweaks to the screenplay to update it for the current generation. But I will levy the same criticism of this film as I levied at the recent Stephen King adaptation of “It”: for horror to work well it need to obey some decent ‘rules of physics’ and although most of the scenes work (since a lot of the “action” is sensibly based inside the character’s heads) there are the occasional linkages to the ‘real world’ that generate a “WTF???” response. A seemingly indestructible Mini car (which is also clearly untraceable by the police!) and a knife incident at the dockside are two cases in point.
Is there anything good to say about this film? Well, there are certainly a few tense moments that make the hairs on your neck at least start to stand to attention. But these are few and far between, amongst a sea of movie ‘meh’. It’s certainly not going to be the worst film I see this year, since at least I wasn’t completely bored for the two hours. But I won’t remember this one in a few weeks. As a summary in the form of a “Black Adder” quote, it’s all a bit like a broken pencil….. pointless.
But the concept was sufficiently enticing – who isn’t a little bit intrigued by the question of “what’s beyond”? – that Cross Creek Pictures thought it worthy of dusting off and giving it another outing in pursuit of dirty lucre. But unfortunately this offering adds little to the property’s reputation.
In this version, the lead role is headed up by Ellen Page (“Inception”) who is a great actress… too good for this stuff. Also in that category is Diego Luna, who really made an impact in “Rogue One” but here has little to work with in terms of backstory. The remaining three doctors – Nina Dobrev as “the sexy one”; James Norton (“War and Peace”) as “the posh boy” and Kiersey Clemons as the “cute but repressed one”, all have even less backstory and struggle to make a great impact.
Still struggling to get the high score on Angry Birds: from left to right Ray (Diego Luna), Sophia (Kiersey Clemons), Marlo (Nina Dobrev), Courtney (Ellen Page) and Jamie (James Norton).
Also putting in an appearance, as the one link from the original film, is Kiefer Sutherland as a senior member of the teaching staff. But he’s not playing the same character (that WOULD have been a bloody miracle!) and although Sutherland adds gravitas he really is given criminally little to do. What was director Niels Arden Oplev (“The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo”) thinking?
In terms of the story, it’s pretty much a re-hash of Peter Filardi’s original, with Ben Ripley (“Source Code”) adding a few minor tweaks to the screenplay to update it for the current generation. But I will levy the same criticism of this film as I levied at the recent Stephen King adaptation of “It”: for horror to work well it need to obey some decent ‘rules of physics’ and although most of the scenes work (since a lot of the “action” is sensibly based inside the character’s heads) there are the occasional linkages to the ‘real world’ that generate a “WTF???” response. A seemingly indestructible Mini car (which is also clearly untraceable by the police!) and a knife incident at the dockside are two cases in point.
Is there anything good to say about this film? Well, there are certainly a few tense moments that make the hairs on your neck at least start to stand to attention. But these are few and far between, amongst a sea of movie ‘meh’. It’s certainly not going to be the worst film I see this year, since at least I wasn’t completely bored for the two hours. But I won’t remember this one in a few weeks. As a summary in the form of a “Black Adder” quote, it’s all a bit like a broken pencil….. pointless.
Connor Sheffield (293 KP) rated Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016) in Movies
Apr 18, 2017
The Good, The Bad and The Editing
So...here's a movie that split so many fans and has caused COUNTLESS arguments online. My review may also cause arguments, but I'm willing to risk that as I have a fair bit to say about this movie, most importantly and foremost;
I enjoyed the movie!
The Good:
Let me start with what's good because I feel there's never enough positivity around this movie so here goes.
Ben Affleck and Gal Gadot were the two focuses of this movie because they had a lot of pressure on them to bring Batman and Wonder Woman to life and do the characters justice (terrible I know but I couldn't resist). All over the internet I saw hate for Ben Affleck and people saying Gal Gadot was too skinny. At first, I'll be honest, I did think Gal Gadot was really skinny and couldn't imagine her as Wonder Woman, BUT, unlike most people, I knew that before they would film her scenes, she would be 'buffing up' because I have faith in Zack Snyder because he is a fan and has made brilliant films. Man Of Steel made me like Superman, because of the way he was written as conflicted and the whole film made him more human and I loved it.
Here's where some people will disagree highly with me....I am not a big fan of the Nolan trilogy Batman. Now, before you throw a fit and verbally kick my ass, let me try and tell you why. The Voice! (it's not the only reason, but this is the reason I'm trying to make a point of) Batman a.k.a Bruce Wayne is a BILLIONAIRE, so who thought that the best way for him to disguise his voice would be to make him sound like he's fucked up his throat somehow? A billionaire with all those gadgets would surely think that what he needs is a voice modulator. Snyder brought in the voice modulator and I fell in love in that first trailer from hearing Batman talk through a voice modulator because I was sat there like "Hallelujah they finally worked out what a billionaire vigilante would do!" and I think it could be just me, but I honestly would prefer to think of Batman using one of those rather than grumbling his voice, because it just makes more sense.
So...Batfleck was incredible. My favourite portrayal so far and here's why:
- Arkham game fighting style
- Aged personality that says it all about why he's that violent
- He's definitely a great portrayal of the Dark Knight Returns version of Batman
- Ben Affleck is a great actor (in my opinion)
People's biggest complaint was 'Batman Kills' and I've had this discussion with my friends many times. Yes people died, IT'S HAPPENED BEFORE! It's rare but it's happened. You like the realism of Nolan's trilogy but there's a realism to Batfleck that you might not be seeing. He's been through all the same shit year in, year out for decades. Villains cause chaos, Batman fights villain, lets them live, puts them away, they break out, rinse repeat. Doing that for decades, losing people you love because of your choice not to kill, would surely cause a spark in your mind and Bruce Wayne says this in the movie through less words. "How many good guys are left? How many stay that way?"
If you think about it, he's essentially saying "I was a good guy but even I have had my boundaries pushed to the line and over". He's finally at the age where he has a state of mind that from his perspective...bad guys don't deserve to be shown mercy, but at the same time, he doesn't necessarily kill the bad guys directly.
Think of the warehouse scene. Bad Guy throws grenade, Batman kicks it back at him. Grenade goes BOOM. Bad guys die. BUT! If the guy hadn't have tried to throw the grenade, Batman wouldn't have kicked it back, and it wouldn't have ended in their death. Simple as that.
Let's move on though.
Superman is conflicted and the movie gets very political with a message of "Here's a God-Like figure. Should he be allowed to do what he wants or should we take away Choice by having under the Governments thumb?" and Superman personally is having internal issues of "I want this to be my home because it's the only home I've known, but these people don't want me and this stress is affecting both Clark Kent and Superman". He should have been able to see or hear the bomb in the wheelchair, but his mind was preoccupied with "Why does this government and these people hate me when I saved not only my city but the whole world?". Think about your stress with work, with college, school etc. and how it really does effect everything else around you. You might not want to go out with friends because you feel drained from the stress, now try to imagine that on the level of Superman! The poor guy just wanted to help.
My biggest enjoyment from this film was ALL OF THE DC REFERENCES! There were so many cool easter eggs, references etc. that I adored from Riddler Question Marks, to seeing Superman in a skeletal form after the Nuke explosion and then regaining his life force from the flowers through their Photosynthesis just like in the graphic novel! It was an incredible experience and I loved the film mainly for that.
The Bad:
Doomsday....I want to hope it's not the actual Doomsday and maybe just a failed experiment that Lex tried out but at the same time I know it probably is meant to be THE Doomsday.
The Editing:
The editing was jumpy and some cuts didn't make sense UNTIL the Ultimate Cut. The Ultimate Cut gives us some scenes with Clark Kent in Gotham BEFORE the big introduction to Batman in person, and hearing stories and investigating why people fear him, but also respect him. This would have worked so much better in the Theatrical Cut but sadly studios like to cut the film and people blame the Director for it which annoys me slightly.
Guaranteed this post might not change your mind, but I must say that you should try watching the film again if you've avoided it, watch the Ultimate Cut and really pay attention to how its being shown to the audience. Overall this is one of my favourite superhero movies and I will always stand up for it, BUT I'm not blind to it's faults.
I enjoyed the movie!
The Good:
Let me start with what's good because I feel there's never enough positivity around this movie so here goes.
Ben Affleck and Gal Gadot were the two focuses of this movie because they had a lot of pressure on them to bring Batman and Wonder Woman to life and do the characters justice (terrible I know but I couldn't resist). All over the internet I saw hate for Ben Affleck and people saying Gal Gadot was too skinny. At first, I'll be honest, I did think Gal Gadot was really skinny and couldn't imagine her as Wonder Woman, BUT, unlike most people, I knew that before they would film her scenes, she would be 'buffing up' because I have faith in Zack Snyder because he is a fan and has made brilliant films. Man Of Steel made me like Superman, because of the way he was written as conflicted and the whole film made him more human and I loved it.
Here's where some people will disagree highly with me....I am not a big fan of the Nolan trilogy Batman. Now, before you throw a fit and verbally kick my ass, let me try and tell you why. The Voice! (it's not the only reason, but this is the reason I'm trying to make a point of) Batman a.k.a Bruce Wayne is a BILLIONAIRE, so who thought that the best way for him to disguise his voice would be to make him sound like he's fucked up his throat somehow? A billionaire with all those gadgets would surely think that what he needs is a voice modulator. Snyder brought in the voice modulator and I fell in love in that first trailer from hearing Batman talk through a voice modulator because I was sat there like "Hallelujah they finally worked out what a billionaire vigilante would do!" and I think it could be just me, but I honestly would prefer to think of Batman using one of those rather than grumbling his voice, because it just makes more sense.
So...Batfleck was incredible. My favourite portrayal so far and here's why:
- Arkham game fighting style
- Aged personality that says it all about why he's that violent
- He's definitely a great portrayal of the Dark Knight Returns version of Batman
- Ben Affleck is a great actor (in my opinion)
People's biggest complaint was 'Batman Kills' and I've had this discussion with my friends many times. Yes people died, IT'S HAPPENED BEFORE! It's rare but it's happened. You like the realism of Nolan's trilogy but there's a realism to Batfleck that you might not be seeing. He's been through all the same shit year in, year out for decades. Villains cause chaos, Batman fights villain, lets them live, puts them away, they break out, rinse repeat. Doing that for decades, losing people you love because of your choice not to kill, would surely cause a spark in your mind and Bruce Wayne says this in the movie through less words. "How many good guys are left? How many stay that way?"
If you think about it, he's essentially saying "I was a good guy but even I have had my boundaries pushed to the line and over". He's finally at the age where he has a state of mind that from his perspective...bad guys don't deserve to be shown mercy, but at the same time, he doesn't necessarily kill the bad guys directly.
Think of the warehouse scene. Bad Guy throws grenade, Batman kicks it back at him. Grenade goes BOOM. Bad guys die. BUT! If the guy hadn't have tried to throw the grenade, Batman wouldn't have kicked it back, and it wouldn't have ended in their death. Simple as that.
Let's move on though.
Superman is conflicted and the movie gets very political with a message of "Here's a God-Like figure. Should he be allowed to do what he wants or should we take away Choice by having under the Governments thumb?" and Superman personally is having internal issues of "I want this to be my home because it's the only home I've known, but these people don't want me and this stress is affecting both Clark Kent and Superman". He should have been able to see or hear the bomb in the wheelchair, but his mind was preoccupied with "Why does this government and these people hate me when I saved not only my city but the whole world?". Think about your stress with work, with college, school etc. and how it really does effect everything else around you. You might not want to go out with friends because you feel drained from the stress, now try to imagine that on the level of Superman! The poor guy just wanted to help.
My biggest enjoyment from this film was ALL OF THE DC REFERENCES! There were so many cool easter eggs, references etc. that I adored from Riddler Question Marks, to seeing Superman in a skeletal form after the Nuke explosion and then regaining his life force from the flowers through their Photosynthesis just like in the graphic novel! It was an incredible experience and I loved the film mainly for that.
The Bad:
Doomsday....I want to hope it's not the actual Doomsday and maybe just a failed experiment that Lex tried out but at the same time I know it probably is meant to be THE Doomsday.
The Editing:
The editing was jumpy and some cuts didn't make sense UNTIL the Ultimate Cut. The Ultimate Cut gives us some scenes with Clark Kent in Gotham BEFORE the big introduction to Batman in person, and hearing stories and investigating why people fear him, but also respect him. This would have worked so much better in the Theatrical Cut but sadly studios like to cut the film and people blame the Director for it which annoys me slightly.
Guaranteed this post might not change your mind, but I must say that you should try watching the film again if you've avoided it, watch the Ultimate Cut and really pay attention to how its being shown to the audience. Overall this is one of my favourite superhero movies and I will always stand up for it, BUT I'm not blind to it's faults.
