Search
Search results
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Thor: Love and Thunder (2022) in Movies
Jul 8, 2022
Good Character Arcs for Thor and Jane
Under the Writing and Direction of Taika Waititi, the THOR franchise portion of the Marvel Cinematic Universe has gone in a more comedic, rather than Shakespearean, direction and THOR: LOVE AND THUNDER proves that this direction is a smart one both for THOR and for the overall health and diversity of the Marvel Cinematic Universe as well.
Starring Chris Hemsworth, of course, as the titular THOR, Love and Thunder shows our demi-god hero at a crossroads in his life and career. Into this world walks his ex-girlfriend, Jane Foster (Natalie Portman) and chaos ensues as both are chasing the god-killer, Gorr (Christian Bale).
This sort of premise set-up (and the fact that Hemsworth is playing THOR for the 8th time), could have fallen victim to banality and dullness, but under the watchful eye of Waititi (Writer/Director of the severely under-rated JOJO RABBIT), this THOR soars with the best of them and develops the overall arc and (eventual) pay-off of both Thor’s and Jane’s arcs precisely and (upon retrospection) in the only satisfying way that they could have ended. So, kudos needs to be given to Waititi for walking this tightrope and sticking the landing.
Hemsworth, of course, is charming and buff as Thor and balances the action, romantic drama and comedic portions of this story well. Waititi brings more than just comic relief (though he has plenty of that as well) as the voice of Thor’s buddy KORG, while Christian Bale is more than just one-dimensional (how can this actor be anything but interesting) as the main villain of this piece..
What surprised me the most in this film is the portrayal of Jane Foster by Portman and how her character becomes the “female Thor” (that’s not a spoiler, it’s in the trailers) and does NOT become just “Thor’s girlfriend”. Portman has made no secret of her distaste of how her character became the femme fatale in THOR: THE DARK WORLD and refused to return to this character previously. Obviously, Waititi has been able to come up with a storyline - and an arc - that would interest an actress like Portman to return and Natalie nails it. She looked bright-eyed and energized by this part and by where her character goes in this film.
And then there is Tessa Thompson’s Valkyrie. This character is a strong part of Thor’s story - and the story of the survivors of Asgaard (their destroyed homeworld). Thompson owns this part and is engaging and interesting to watch on-screen. Out of necessity, her character and story play a supporting role to the main Thor/Jane story, so her character didn’t get quite enough to do for my tastes. But it did whet my appetite for a stand-alone Valkyrie film (make that happen Marvel).
There are cameos and extended-cameos galore in this film - as well as TWO end credits scenes - so to mention them would be to spoil them, except to say that the GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY play a pivotal role, but for those who came to see a GUARDIANS film, you’ll have to wait for GUARDIANS 3 to come out next year - this is a THOR film.
A very satisfying entry in the Marvel Cinematic Universe and while not a perfect film (it does try too hard, at times, to mine the same, surprise comic gold of THOR: RAGNAROK), THOR: LOVE AND THUNDER delivers a stand-alone Thor story that drives both the characters of Thor and Jane forward in a smart, intelligent way…and when is the last time the words “smart and intelligent” were used with a comic book film)?
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Starring Chris Hemsworth, of course, as the titular THOR, Love and Thunder shows our demi-god hero at a crossroads in his life and career. Into this world walks his ex-girlfriend, Jane Foster (Natalie Portman) and chaos ensues as both are chasing the god-killer, Gorr (Christian Bale).
This sort of premise set-up (and the fact that Hemsworth is playing THOR for the 8th time), could have fallen victim to banality and dullness, but under the watchful eye of Waititi (Writer/Director of the severely under-rated JOJO RABBIT), this THOR soars with the best of them and develops the overall arc and (eventual) pay-off of both Thor’s and Jane’s arcs precisely and (upon retrospection) in the only satisfying way that they could have ended. So, kudos needs to be given to Waititi for walking this tightrope and sticking the landing.
Hemsworth, of course, is charming and buff as Thor and balances the action, romantic drama and comedic portions of this story well. Waititi brings more than just comic relief (though he has plenty of that as well) as the voice of Thor’s buddy KORG, while Christian Bale is more than just one-dimensional (how can this actor be anything but interesting) as the main villain of this piece..
What surprised me the most in this film is the portrayal of Jane Foster by Portman and how her character becomes the “female Thor” (that’s not a spoiler, it’s in the trailers) and does NOT become just “Thor’s girlfriend”. Portman has made no secret of her distaste of how her character became the femme fatale in THOR: THE DARK WORLD and refused to return to this character previously. Obviously, Waititi has been able to come up with a storyline - and an arc - that would interest an actress like Portman to return and Natalie nails it. She looked bright-eyed and energized by this part and by where her character goes in this film.
And then there is Tessa Thompson’s Valkyrie. This character is a strong part of Thor’s story - and the story of the survivors of Asgaard (their destroyed homeworld). Thompson owns this part and is engaging and interesting to watch on-screen. Out of necessity, her character and story play a supporting role to the main Thor/Jane story, so her character didn’t get quite enough to do for my tastes. But it did whet my appetite for a stand-alone Valkyrie film (make that happen Marvel).
There are cameos and extended-cameos galore in this film - as well as TWO end credits scenes - so to mention them would be to spoil them, except to say that the GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY play a pivotal role, but for those who came to see a GUARDIANS film, you’ll have to wait for GUARDIANS 3 to come out next year - this is a THOR film.
A very satisfying entry in the Marvel Cinematic Universe and while not a perfect film (it does try too hard, at times, to mine the same, surprise comic gold of THOR: RAGNAROK), THOR: LOVE AND THUNDER delivers a stand-alone Thor story that drives both the characters of Thor and Jane forward in a smart, intelligent way…and when is the last time the words “smart and intelligent” were used with a comic book film)?
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Gareth von Kallenbach (977 KP) rated Funny People (2009) in Movies
Aug 9, 2019
We all have our favorite Adam Sandler movies. There are the fans of The Wedding Singer and 50 First Dates and there’s the loyal camp who can quote Happy Gilmore or Big Daddy verbatim. You hear the name Adam Sandler’s and you think goofy, lovable guy. Dependably funny and quotable, from the mid-90’s on, he was the go-to comedian when we looked for an easy laugh. Of late, with the growing list of popular movies under his belt, when you think goofy, lovable funny guy, another name comes up: Seth Rogan. In “Funny People” you get them both.
Sandler plays George Simmons, a popular comedian who’s diagnosed with a fatal disease. Playing a comedian is hardly a stretch for Sandler, but for one whose dramatic turns can be counted on one hand, he plays the stricken man who’s suddenly face to face with his immortality quite convincingly. Rogan is Ira Wright, a desperate young comic who’s still vying for stage time at the local comedy club. George, perhaps recognizing a bit of himself or seeing a glimmer of comedic genius in Ira after catching his act, hires Ira to write for him.
Ira goes from writer and personal assistant/confidante to opening act as he helps George deal with his illness. He encourages the veteran comedian to reconnect with his compatriots in the business, opening the film to a parade of old faces from the stand-up circuit. George’s reflections on his life eventually lead him back to a lost love, Laura, played by Leslie Mann. Amidst the funny, laugh-out-loud scenes, are some believably tender moments, not just between Mann and Sandler but also, oddly enough, Sandler and Rogan.
Directing the comedic duo is writer/director Judd Apatow, who gave Rogan that growing list of successful movies after first casting him in The 40-Year-Old Virgin. Sandler could certainly use some of Apatow’s Midas-like touch after his recent string of marginal films. With a strong supporting cast of Jonah Hill and Jason Schwartzman who play Ira’s roommates Leo and Mark and Eric Bana, Laura’s husband, the movie is in turns hilarious and puzzling. The strong storyline of a veteran comedian taking a novice comic under his wings gets lost when George pursues a second chance with an unhappily married Laura. What could’ve been a touching passing of the torch tale is confused by an annoying love triangle. When the movie returns its focus to George and Ira, it’s saved, just barely, by the fact that we’re still watching two of comedy’s goofy, lovable funny guys.
Sandler plays George Simmons, a popular comedian who’s diagnosed with a fatal disease. Playing a comedian is hardly a stretch for Sandler, but for one whose dramatic turns can be counted on one hand, he plays the stricken man who’s suddenly face to face with his immortality quite convincingly. Rogan is Ira Wright, a desperate young comic who’s still vying for stage time at the local comedy club. George, perhaps recognizing a bit of himself or seeing a glimmer of comedic genius in Ira after catching his act, hires Ira to write for him.
Ira goes from writer and personal assistant/confidante to opening act as he helps George deal with his illness. He encourages the veteran comedian to reconnect with his compatriots in the business, opening the film to a parade of old faces from the stand-up circuit. George’s reflections on his life eventually lead him back to a lost love, Laura, played by Leslie Mann. Amidst the funny, laugh-out-loud scenes, are some believably tender moments, not just between Mann and Sandler but also, oddly enough, Sandler and Rogan.
Directing the comedic duo is writer/director Judd Apatow, who gave Rogan that growing list of successful movies after first casting him in The 40-Year-Old Virgin. Sandler could certainly use some of Apatow’s Midas-like touch after his recent string of marginal films. With a strong supporting cast of Jonah Hill and Jason Schwartzman who play Ira’s roommates Leo and Mark and Eric Bana, Laura’s husband, the movie is in turns hilarious and puzzling. The strong storyline of a veteran comedian taking a novice comic under his wings gets lost when George pursues a second chance with an unhappily married Laura. What could’ve been a touching passing of the torch tale is confused by an annoying love triangle. When the movie returns its focus to George and Ira, it’s saved, just barely, by the fact that we’re still watching two of comedy’s goofy, lovable funny guys.
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse (2018) in Movies
Mar 3, 2020 (Updated Mar 3, 2020)
If I was still 10 or 11 years old, this might be my favourite film of all time (for a few months). The 10 year old trapped inside me kinda thinks it is! At first I was sceptical that it could be any good at all, seeing it getting nominated in a lot of best animation categories during award season, and then winning them all! From the poster, or even the trailer, alone, I just didn’t get it!
Then folk whose opinion I trust, that normally go for really intense dramas and artsy stuff, started telling me how good it was. I added it to my watchlist and walked away, nodding, as if to say “sure, I’ll get around to it”. More fool me for waiting so long, cos let me tell you, as modern animations go, it is really really good! But why? Well, there are several things that set it apart…
Firstly, it patronises no one. This is a fun, all swinging, all action, adventure, with real threat, real emotion and real excitement. Secondly, the love and attention that have gone into the myth of Spiderman and what he/she/it represents is so astonishingly comprehensive in a 2 hour film, that anyone living on Mars and never knowing a single thing about it, would understand instantly. You also don’t have to be a superhero geek to like it (but it helps a bit).
And thirdly, the animation. Wow, the animation! Incorporating so many styles and techniques, often in the same image / scene, it is a mind boggling experience, and a visual festival of comic book art. It shouldn’t work, but, my word, it not only works, it totally rocks! I have never felt before that I was experiencing a living, moving, comic book. Every detail makes you respect and appreciate this art form, and its evolution through the years.
Not only that, however, but it has an inclusivity that is awesome and so simple. This isn’t a film about boys, for boys. Gwen Stacy, aka Spider-Woman, is a great, strong character in her own right; as is Spider-Ham; as are all of them. Literally, there is something for everyone to relate to. And the cunning conceit that brings them all together just… works!
I’m not sure I’ll watch it very often, because, you know, I’m not 10 any more. But if I am ever in the mood to feel young and excited about heroes, then this will be my first port of call.
Then folk whose opinion I trust, that normally go for really intense dramas and artsy stuff, started telling me how good it was. I added it to my watchlist and walked away, nodding, as if to say “sure, I’ll get around to it”. More fool me for waiting so long, cos let me tell you, as modern animations go, it is really really good! But why? Well, there are several things that set it apart…
Firstly, it patronises no one. This is a fun, all swinging, all action, adventure, with real threat, real emotion and real excitement. Secondly, the love and attention that have gone into the myth of Spiderman and what he/she/it represents is so astonishingly comprehensive in a 2 hour film, that anyone living on Mars and never knowing a single thing about it, would understand instantly. You also don’t have to be a superhero geek to like it (but it helps a bit).
And thirdly, the animation. Wow, the animation! Incorporating so many styles and techniques, often in the same image / scene, it is a mind boggling experience, and a visual festival of comic book art. It shouldn’t work, but, my word, it not only works, it totally rocks! I have never felt before that I was experiencing a living, moving, comic book. Every detail makes you respect and appreciate this art form, and its evolution through the years.
Not only that, however, but it has an inclusivity that is awesome and so simple. This isn’t a film about boys, for boys. Gwen Stacy, aka Spider-Woman, is a great, strong character in her own right; as is Spider-Ham; as are all of them. Literally, there is something for everyone to relate to. And the cunning conceit that brings them all together just… works!
I’m not sure I’ll watch it very often, because, you know, I’m not 10 any more. But if I am ever in the mood to feel young and excited about heroes, then this will be my first port of call.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Fantastic Four (2005) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
About As Memorable As My Last Poop
Based on the long-running comic book, four people are given superpowers when they come in contact with cosmic energy out in space.
Acting: 7
Beginning: 5
Not exactly how you start a movie. Definitely could have scored this lower, but there was at least a glimmer of hope shown in the first ten minutes that told me this movie wouldn’t be a total waste of space. Still, my hopes weren’t high.
Characters: 3
I had some issues here, but I struggled with my scoring. Reason being, I LOVE the comic book characters and appreciate their depth. Yeah, none of that is shown in this movie. The characters aren’t layered, rather they have mere personality types, none of which I was really in love with. They made Johnny Storm (Chris Evans) an over-the-top dick while Reed Richards (Ioan Gruffudd), the brains of the group, can’t understand the concept of normal social interaction to save his life. I won’t even waste time profiling the other lame-duck characters. You get the point.
Cinematography/Visuals: 2
Conflict: 2
Entertainment Value: 0
At no point during Fantastic Four did I ever say, “Ok, we might have something here.” It was bad on top of bad from beginning to end. Just an unapologetic dumpster fire. Sitting through this movie again is what I envision Hell to be like.
Memorability: 5
Pace: 4
Talk about a slow-moving film. Not only does it take forever for scenes to get to the point, but they divert off into random tangents that ultimately amount to nothing. This is a don’t-pause-when-you-go-to-the-bathroom movie. Drove me crazy.
Plot: 2
There is a scene that happens on a bridge where people need saving. Not only do all four of the superheroes magically end up on the bridge at the same time (they weren’t together previously), but Thing’s wife shows up as well just to walk away in shame because of how gross he’s become. I laughed my ass off! And that should tell you enough about what I think of the plot.
Resolution: 4
I give it a four because it ended. No, the ending wasn’t any better than the rest of the movie, but damnit, it ended and the fact that it finally came to a close put me out of my misery.
Overall: 34
There are bad movies that make me want to stop watching and reviewing movies altogether because of how horrible they are. And then there’s Fantastic Four. This movie is torture to the millionth degree.
Acting: 7
Beginning: 5
Not exactly how you start a movie. Definitely could have scored this lower, but there was at least a glimmer of hope shown in the first ten minutes that told me this movie wouldn’t be a total waste of space. Still, my hopes weren’t high.
Characters: 3
I had some issues here, but I struggled with my scoring. Reason being, I LOVE the comic book characters and appreciate their depth. Yeah, none of that is shown in this movie. The characters aren’t layered, rather they have mere personality types, none of which I was really in love with. They made Johnny Storm (Chris Evans) an over-the-top dick while Reed Richards (Ioan Gruffudd), the brains of the group, can’t understand the concept of normal social interaction to save his life. I won’t even waste time profiling the other lame-duck characters. You get the point.
Cinematography/Visuals: 2
Conflict: 2
Entertainment Value: 0
At no point during Fantastic Four did I ever say, “Ok, we might have something here.” It was bad on top of bad from beginning to end. Just an unapologetic dumpster fire. Sitting through this movie again is what I envision Hell to be like.
Memorability: 5
Pace: 4
Talk about a slow-moving film. Not only does it take forever for scenes to get to the point, but they divert off into random tangents that ultimately amount to nothing. This is a don’t-pause-when-you-go-to-the-bathroom movie. Drove me crazy.
Plot: 2
There is a scene that happens on a bridge where people need saving. Not only do all four of the superheroes magically end up on the bridge at the same time (they weren’t together previously), but Thing’s wife shows up as well just to walk away in shame because of how gross he’s become. I laughed my ass off! And that should tell you enough about what I think of the plot.
Resolution: 4
I give it a four because it ended. No, the ending wasn’t any better than the rest of the movie, but damnit, it ended and the fact that it finally came to a close put me out of my misery.
Overall: 34
There are bad movies that make me want to stop watching and reviewing movies altogether because of how horrible they are. And then there’s Fantastic Four. This movie is torture to the millionth degree.
Gareth von Kallenbach (977 KP) rated Paul (2011) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
Can you think of a better vacation than going to the San Diego Comic-Con, then hopping into an RV with your best friend to travel around America checking out various UFO hot spots? If you answered “Heck No!” then you would get along just fine with Klingon-speaking best friends from the UK, Graeme Willy (Simon Pegg) and Clive Gollings (Nick Frost).
That’s how the movie Paul begins, at one of the greatest conventions, San Diego Comic Con. Then Graeme and Clive are off on their cross country adventure during which they meet all sorts of interesting people including Paul (voiced by Seth Rogen), an alien whose ship crash landed on Earth 60 years ago and, until his recent escape, had been a “guest” at a secret military base. After some fainting, wetting pants and fears about probing have been addressed, Graeme and Clive agree to help Paul get to where he can meet his mothership and go home.
At this point the movie goes from funny to really funny and as the three of them get to know each other better, Graeme and Clive soon realize that Paul is just a everyday guy like them (well except for the whole alien thing). They also meet Bible-thumper Ruth (Kristen Wiig) whom they accidentally kidnap, causing her shotgun-toting father to chase after them. Of course there are government agents also looking for them and the movie even throws in a few high speed chases. To round out the road trip there’s even a fight at a biker bar (Star Wars fans will love the band playing inside). Will they achieve their goal and send Paul home? Will there be probing? Klaatu barada nikto?
The special effects that went into creating Paul and his realistic interactions with the human cast were amazing, however the humorous soul that Seth Rogen breathed into Paul made the character truly out of this world. Not since Mork and Gordon Shumway (ALF) has an alien made me laugh so hard. Simon Pegg and Nick Frost were their usual extremely funny dynamic-duo selves. The movie is loaded with well-placed humorous references to sci-fi movies and shows, a well-balanced amount of action and great character interactions with an unbelievable supporting cast that includes Jason Bateman, Jane Lynch and Bill Hader just to name a few. This movie is not only one that I want to see again in the theatre but one that I also want to own.
That’s how the movie Paul begins, at one of the greatest conventions, San Diego Comic Con. Then Graeme and Clive are off on their cross country adventure during which they meet all sorts of interesting people including Paul (voiced by Seth Rogen), an alien whose ship crash landed on Earth 60 years ago and, until his recent escape, had been a “guest” at a secret military base. After some fainting, wetting pants and fears about probing have been addressed, Graeme and Clive agree to help Paul get to where he can meet his mothership and go home.
At this point the movie goes from funny to really funny and as the three of them get to know each other better, Graeme and Clive soon realize that Paul is just a everyday guy like them (well except for the whole alien thing). They also meet Bible-thumper Ruth (Kristen Wiig) whom they accidentally kidnap, causing her shotgun-toting father to chase after them. Of course there are government agents also looking for them and the movie even throws in a few high speed chases. To round out the road trip there’s even a fight at a biker bar (Star Wars fans will love the band playing inside). Will they achieve their goal and send Paul home? Will there be probing? Klaatu barada nikto?
The special effects that went into creating Paul and his realistic interactions with the human cast were amazing, however the humorous soul that Seth Rogen breathed into Paul made the character truly out of this world. Not since Mork and Gordon Shumway (ALF) has an alien made me laugh so hard. Simon Pegg and Nick Frost were their usual extremely funny dynamic-duo selves. The movie is loaded with well-placed humorous references to sci-fi movies and shows, a well-balanced amount of action and great character interactions with an unbelievable supporting cast that includes Jason Bateman, Jane Lynch and Bill Hader just to name a few. This movie is not only one that I want to see again in the theatre but one that I also want to own.
Crazy Kings
Games, Entertainment and Stickers
App
The popular CCG meets Tower Defense game that has 1M+ downloads worldwide! Challenge your strategy...
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets (2017) in Movies
Jan 22, 2021
Where to begin with Luc Besson? The masterpiece of Leon aside, he is notorious for creating beautifully bonkers visual treats that twist and turn like a monkey on cocaine, making as much sense. This comic book adaptation starts well, with some jaw dropping CG design and a decent concept – it truly is a dreamscape of glorious colour and imagination rarely matched… but so is Tim Burton’s Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, and we all know how awful that is.
He just doesn’t have the knack with story and character in the same way as he does with the visuals, often leaving you with the impression that even the actors are confused by what is going on, and why, and what the hell is coming out of their mouths as an excuse for dialogue.
I like Dane De Haan, he has shown a lot of promise in some valiant near misses, such as Chronicle, The Place Beyond the Pines and The Cure For Wellness – three films I enjoyed, with reservations, that were better for him being in them – but he has not quite made it to the A-list as yet. Here, opposite the gorgeously cute but somehow hollow presence Cara Delevingne, he is burdened by a love story with no chemistry and some cringe-worthy banter. As the film ultimately focuses and depends on the likability of this relationship it inevitably fails; melting into comic book kookiness that loses a lot in translation.
I almost found myself hating them and wishing they would die painfully so the film could end, but not quite as much as I hated how fundamentally terrible Clive Owen was as the villain – I mean, so awkward and awful it made how uncomfortable Harrison Ford seemed in Ender’s Game look like an Oscar worthy performance. Risible. Inexcusable. Inexplicable. But that’s Besson where let loose into the realm of full sci-fi.
One corner of joy was Rihanna as the shape-shifting Bubble, who showed a charm and talent for film acting I hadn’t quite expected, and how much fun Ethan Hawke had dressing up and hamming it up as Jolly, her pimp. But essentially, you’d be better off turning the sound off completely and just drinking in the spectrum of imaginative design on display. A film that may hold some cult status into the future, and one small children may get oddly addicted to, but as a functioning and satisfying cinematic story… just, no.
He just doesn’t have the knack with story and character in the same way as he does with the visuals, often leaving you with the impression that even the actors are confused by what is going on, and why, and what the hell is coming out of their mouths as an excuse for dialogue.
I like Dane De Haan, he has shown a lot of promise in some valiant near misses, such as Chronicle, The Place Beyond the Pines and The Cure For Wellness – three films I enjoyed, with reservations, that were better for him being in them – but he has not quite made it to the A-list as yet. Here, opposite the gorgeously cute but somehow hollow presence Cara Delevingne, he is burdened by a love story with no chemistry and some cringe-worthy banter. As the film ultimately focuses and depends on the likability of this relationship it inevitably fails; melting into comic book kookiness that loses a lot in translation.
I almost found myself hating them and wishing they would die painfully so the film could end, but not quite as much as I hated how fundamentally terrible Clive Owen was as the villain – I mean, so awkward and awful it made how uncomfortable Harrison Ford seemed in Ender’s Game look like an Oscar worthy performance. Risible. Inexcusable. Inexplicable. But that’s Besson where let loose into the realm of full sci-fi.
One corner of joy was Rihanna as the shape-shifting Bubble, who showed a charm and talent for film acting I hadn’t quite expected, and how much fun Ethan Hawke had dressing up and hamming it up as Jolly, her pimp. But essentially, you’d be better off turning the sound off completely and just drinking in the spectrum of imaginative design on display. A film that may hold some cult status into the future, and one small children may get oddly addicted to, but as a functioning and satisfying cinematic story… just, no.
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated Justice League (2017) in Movies
Oct 11, 2019
Oof
I had a horrible horrible feeling that Justice League was going to be rubbish. After the double whammy of raw sewage that was BvS and Suicide Squad, my hopes for a third ensemble film weren't high at all.
The finished result was worse than I thought it was going to be be though...
Firstly, we will start with the characters - a collection of some of the finest heroes the world of comics has to offer.
Batman, who I thought was the best part about BvS, is relegated to a boring and tired waste, who acts as occasional comic relief. It doesn't help that at this point, Ben Affleck seems completely uninterested in even being involved (can't blame the guy).
After a pretty good solo outing, Wonder Woman has gone from an empowered female badass, to someone who mopes around about her ex boyfriend (but is still admittedly badass).
The Flash (one of my favourite DC characters) is LITERALLY useless from start to finish.
Cyborg has the remnants of a potential interesting back story, but the rushed nature of the whole affair gives us next to nothing there.
Aquaman isn't too bad, but is there, like Batman, for light comic relief whilst he shouts generic gym-bro nonsense everywhere.
Superman, when he turns up, is ok. Just not really given much to do - it's all just a big mess.
The villain of the piece is Steppenwolf, a bland, forgettable and generic CGI demon who has little-to-no impact as he shouts his way through the bare bones narrative.
Talking of the CGI, it's just not that great, again. I'm not sure how this keeps happening with the amount of money being pumped into these things?
The third act of the film is draped in CGI, and it all looks cheap! And I just can't get my head around it! Ahhhhh!
(I'm not even going to talk about Henry Cavill's now infamous and hideous CGI mouth)
When it comes to the DCEU, the better films have been the solo outings, and it really shows here - the three characters who had not yet appeared properly at this point (Cyborg, Aquaman, and The Flash) just seem hugely wasted in a movie that is obviously trying to play catch up with the MCU - something that's not necessary! DC has a wealth of great source material to draw from, and it's yet to be utilised properly!
It would seem that going forward, Warner Bros are concentrating more on these solo films, and judging by the putrid mess of Justice League, that's is definitely the right direction to go in.
The finished result was worse than I thought it was going to be be though...
Firstly, we will start with the characters - a collection of some of the finest heroes the world of comics has to offer.
Batman, who I thought was the best part about BvS, is relegated to a boring and tired waste, who acts as occasional comic relief. It doesn't help that at this point, Ben Affleck seems completely uninterested in even being involved (can't blame the guy).
After a pretty good solo outing, Wonder Woman has gone from an empowered female badass, to someone who mopes around about her ex boyfriend (but is still admittedly badass).
The Flash (one of my favourite DC characters) is LITERALLY useless from start to finish.
Cyborg has the remnants of a potential interesting back story, but the rushed nature of the whole affair gives us next to nothing there.
Aquaman isn't too bad, but is there, like Batman, for light comic relief whilst he shouts generic gym-bro nonsense everywhere.
Superman, when he turns up, is ok. Just not really given much to do - it's all just a big mess.
The villain of the piece is Steppenwolf, a bland, forgettable and generic CGI demon who has little-to-no impact as he shouts his way through the bare bones narrative.
Talking of the CGI, it's just not that great, again. I'm not sure how this keeps happening with the amount of money being pumped into these things?
The third act of the film is draped in CGI, and it all looks cheap! And I just can't get my head around it! Ahhhhh!
(I'm not even going to talk about Henry Cavill's now infamous and hideous CGI mouth)
When it comes to the DCEU, the better films have been the solo outings, and it really shows here - the three characters who had not yet appeared properly at this point (Cyborg, Aquaman, and The Flash) just seem hugely wasted in a movie that is obviously trying to play catch up with the MCU - something that's not necessary! DC has a wealth of great source material to draw from, and it's yet to be utilised properly!
It would seem that going forward, Warner Bros are concentrating more on these solo films, and judging by the putrid mess of Justice League, that's is definitely the right direction to go in.
Numbers League
Education and Games
App
Numbers League is made for ages 5 to Adult. "My kids beg to play this game." -GeekDad, Wired.com...
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated The Batman (2022) in Movies
Mar 7, 2022
Like many others, I've been pretty much sold on The Batman since the first trailer dropped, to the point where I was worried that my own hype would leave me disappointed. Luckily that's not the case. Matt Reeves has crafted the definitive live action Batman experience.
The character himself has gone through many iterations over the years, and most of them come with their own merits, but he works aesthetically and thematically better at the darker end of the spectrum. This Batman is certainly that. The narrative takes place wholeheartedly in the criminal underbelly of Gotham, bathing in it's corruption. It's noir-thriller construction compliments the setting perfectly, presenting a slow burning crime piece, with occasional bursts of action, that never feels boring over its near 3 hour runtime.
Pattinsons take on the character could be the very best yet. Through projects such as The Lighthouse and Tenet, he's proven that he has the chops for this kind of thing, and he nails it without a doubt. I was pleasantly surprised by how much on screen Batman we got. He's under the cowl more often than not, and it's an understandable direction to take considering how great the suit looks alongside the general aesthetic of the film. Paul Dano's Riddler is a worthy foe as well. This villain is portrayed as unhinged and dangerous from the get go, a person who is angry and upset with the world, and who has the capacity to bring Gotham to its knees. His master plan is wonderful to watch unfold. Dano is golden in anything he appears in, and my only real complaint about The Batman is that we didn't get more of him.
Colin Farrell, Zoe Kravitz, Jeffrey Wright, and John Turturro are all fantastic supports. It's a well rounded cast, playing well written characters.
The direction and cinematography on display is some of the best I've ever seen in a comic book movie. Reeves has a great eye, from Cloverfield to his Planet of the Apes entries, he has a certain brand of cinema magic that suits Gotham down to the ground. Throw Greig Fraser into the mix, fresh from his outstanding work with Dune, and you have a pretty solid pairing that results in a breathtaking, visual feast, all backed up by a phenomenal music score, from the ever reliable Michael Giacchino.
I can't heap enough praise onto The Batman, a patient, unforgiving, enthralling, and bleak comic adaption that sits at the top of the pile that is deserving of its glowing reviews.
The character himself has gone through many iterations over the years, and most of them come with their own merits, but he works aesthetically and thematically better at the darker end of the spectrum. This Batman is certainly that. The narrative takes place wholeheartedly in the criminal underbelly of Gotham, bathing in it's corruption. It's noir-thriller construction compliments the setting perfectly, presenting a slow burning crime piece, with occasional bursts of action, that never feels boring over its near 3 hour runtime.
Pattinsons take on the character could be the very best yet. Through projects such as The Lighthouse and Tenet, he's proven that he has the chops for this kind of thing, and he nails it without a doubt. I was pleasantly surprised by how much on screen Batman we got. He's under the cowl more often than not, and it's an understandable direction to take considering how great the suit looks alongside the general aesthetic of the film. Paul Dano's Riddler is a worthy foe as well. This villain is portrayed as unhinged and dangerous from the get go, a person who is angry and upset with the world, and who has the capacity to bring Gotham to its knees. His master plan is wonderful to watch unfold. Dano is golden in anything he appears in, and my only real complaint about The Batman is that we didn't get more of him.
Colin Farrell, Zoe Kravitz, Jeffrey Wright, and John Turturro are all fantastic supports. It's a well rounded cast, playing well written characters.
The direction and cinematography on display is some of the best I've ever seen in a comic book movie. Reeves has a great eye, from Cloverfield to his Planet of the Apes entries, he has a certain brand of cinema magic that suits Gotham down to the ground. Throw Greig Fraser into the mix, fresh from his outstanding work with Dune, and you have a pretty solid pairing that results in a breathtaking, visual feast, all backed up by a phenomenal music score, from the ever reliable Michael Giacchino.
I can't heap enough praise onto The Batman, a patient, unforgiving, enthralling, and bleak comic adaption that sits at the top of the pile that is deserving of its glowing reviews.