Search
Search results
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Wonder Woman (2017) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
DC gets it right
I’m not going to sit here and tell you that Wonder Woman is alright because it’s been directed by a woman, or that it’s the most progressive superhero film of the last decade. No, neither of those things are true.
However, the titular superhero, played superbly by Gal Gadot stars in by far the best film in the ever-expanding DC Universe – though with Suicide Squad and Batman v Superman as stablemates, that really isn’t saying much.
Before she became Wonder Woman (Gal Gadot), she was Diana, princess of the Amazons, trained to be an invincible warrior. Raised on a sheltered island paradise, Diana meets a US pilot (Chris Pine) who tells her about the conflict that’s raging in the outside world. Convinced she can stop the threat, Diana leaves her safe haven for the very first time. She fights alongside men of war and along the way discovers her true potential and her destiny.
So, let’s get the elephant in the room out of the way first. Director Patty Jenkins is one of the only women to have helmed a big summer blockbuster. Mimi Leder crafted Deep Impact back in 1998 and since then, female directors have been few and far between with Kathryn Bigelow being a notable exception. The gravitas of this cannot be understated.
How does the cast do? Well, it’s a story of two halves. Gal Gadot has proven herself in Batman v Superman and with a full film behind her, she is exceptional. It’s almost impossible to now think of anyone better suited to playing the titular character. Chris Pine is fine but he’s in the film far too much – not really his fault, but a superhero sidekick is usually relegated to a few witty one-liners rather than a fully-fledged supporting role.
The villains on the other hand are absolute garbage. Danny Huston hams it up as a German general and Elena Anaya’s portrayal of “Dr Poison” aiming to ramp up the war effort with the introduction of mustard gas is little to no use to the plot. The introduction of another villainous character towards the film’s climax also fails to lift the offering.
But what about the special effects? You guessed it, it’s 50/50. The sequences of Wonder Woman braving No Man’s Land are stunning, especially with the now instantly recognisable theme tune playing in the background, but this is poorly juxtaposed with some very shoddy CGI, it had me thinking of 2003’s Catwoman it was that bad.
Then the finale arrives and we’re thrown head first into the same CGI heavy ending that blights the majority of comic-book films nowadays. So, whilst it’s true that Patty Jenkins certainly knows how to shoot the action, she’s let down by cheap looking special effects.
Overall, Wonder Woman is a perfectly decent addition to the DCEU and certainly head and shoulders above its other offerings. The problem arises when we take a deeper look at Gal Gadot – she’s much, much better than the film she is in, and that’s a problem facing Ben Affleck, Henry Cavill, Will Smith, Margot Robbie… you get the picture.
Justice League, the ball is in your court.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/06/02/dc-gets-it-right-wonder-woman-review/
However, the titular superhero, played superbly by Gal Gadot stars in by far the best film in the ever-expanding DC Universe – though with Suicide Squad and Batman v Superman as stablemates, that really isn’t saying much.
Before she became Wonder Woman (Gal Gadot), she was Diana, princess of the Amazons, trained to be an invincible warrior. Raised on a sheltered island paradise, Diana meets a US pilot (Chris Pine) who tells her about the conflict that’s raging in the outside world. Convinced she can stop the threat, Diana leaves her safe haven for the very first time. She fights alongside men of war and along the way discovers her true potential and her destiny.
So, let’s get the elephant in the room out of the way first. Director Patty Jenkins is one of the only women to have helmed a big summer blockbuster. Mimi Leder crafted Deep Impact back in 1998 and since then, female directors have been few and far between with Kathryn Bigelow being a notable exception. The gravitas of this cannot be understated.
How does the cast do? Well, it’s a story of two halves. Gal Gadot has proven herself in Batman v Superman and with a full film behind her, she is exceptional. It’s almost impossible to now think of anyone better suited to playing the titular character. Chris Pine is fine but he’s in the film far too much – not really his fault, but a superhero sidekick is usually relegated to a few witty one-liners rather than a fully-fledged supporting role.
The villains on the other hand are absolute garbage. Danny Huston hams it up as a German general and Elena Anaya’s portrayal of “Dr Poison” aiming to ramp up the war effort with the introduction of mustard gas is little to no use to the plot. The introduction of another villainous character towards the film’s climax also fails to lift the offering.
But what about the special effects? You guessed it, it’s 50/50. The sequences of Wonder Woman braving No Man’s Land are stunning, especially with the now instantly recognisable theme tune playing in the background, but this is poorly juxtaposed with some very shoddy CGI, it had me thinking of 2003’s Catwoman it was that bad.
Then the finale arrives and we’re thrown head first into the same CGI heavy ending that blights the majority of comic-book films nowadays. So, whilst it’s true that Patty Jenkins certainly knows how to shoot the action, she’s let down by cheap looking special effects.
Overall, Wonder Woman is a perfectly decent addition to the DCEU and certainly head and shoulders above its other offerings. The problem arises when we take a deeper look at Gal Gadot – she’s much, much better than the film she is in, and that’s a problem facing Ben Affleck, Henry Cavill, Will Smith, Margot Robbie… you get the picture.
Justice League, the ball is in your court.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/06/02/dc-gets-it-right-wonder-woman-review/
Nick Friesen (96 KP) rated Suicide Squad (2016) in Movies
Jul 18, 2017
Margot Robbie's Harley Quinn (2 more)
Will Smith is Actually a Great Deadshot
The Two Seconds Batman is Involved
Weak Story (3 more)
Terrible Villain
PG-13 was an Underwhelming Choice
Most of the Characters are Forgettable
A Half-Assed Suicide (Squad) Attempt
After the success of Deadpool six months prior, an R-Rated anti-hero action movie that pushed the envelope, Suicide Squad just felt weak. The movie about DC's most famous rogues should have took a chance on an R rating as well. There's just something not quite right with these characters participating in a (mostly) family friendly romp. They fight black, faceless zombies, sort-of curse, and sometimes make lame jokes along the way. Along with that, there's too many characters crammed into the movie without any previous introduction or characterization. At the very least, Harley and the Joker should have been in an entire Batman movie before the Suicide Squad movie happened, if not Deadshot as well. Instead we get a miniature helping of Batman versus these foes in the early minutes of the movie, and then this ragtag group of baddies is thrown together to fight an evil bigger than themselves without much in the way of good storytelling. It's sad, really, because these characters are compelling in their own right. If DC really wants to have a cohesive movie universe, they need to slow down and build the movie versions of these characters before slapping them all together and expecting people to care. That, or at least give these awesome anti-heroes an equally awesome antagonist to square off with; the Enchantress is just lame.
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated Joker (2019) in Movies
Oct 8, 2019 (Updated Oct 23, 2019)
Believe the hype
Contains spoilers, click to show
Full disclaimer - I have not been a massive fan of any movies DC related since the Dark Knight trilogy. There have been highlights here and there, but it's a been a rough few years to say the least.
I went to see Joker under a pretty neutral assumption - I had heard the good reviews, the bad reviews, and seen the incredibly well put together trailers - but I was still worried that I wouldn't like it.
What I was presented with was quite possibly the film of the year (I can't realistically see anything beating it at this point)
Make no mistake - Joker is a character driven think piece, light on action, and at times difficult to watch.
Jaoquin Phoenix is absolutely phenomenal as Arthur Fleck, and as we watch his descent into madness (or mental freedom depending on which way you look at it), it's hard not to sympathise with him - I felt myself welling up on more than one occasion.
Frances Conroy deserves a round of applause as well, carving out a fading and sad character failing to realise just how low Arthur is spiralling.
The film itself is bleak, painting a realistic Gotham City, on the brink of anarchy, not too dissimilar to how our world is IRL. All it takes is someone ballsy enough to pull the trigger to set it all off.
The film is draped with tense scene after tense scene as the plot builds up to its climax.
The films depiction of mental health issues rings louder than ever, showing us an all too real world that dismisses and laughs at those who suffer with such issues. It's haunting.
The final act is breathtaking - watching Arthur/Joker on Murray Franklin's talk show - when he's underneath the make up, he's a completely different person, threatening, but with a point that makes sense, and that what makes him so sinister.
The much discussed violence is seldom, but impactful, and most importantly, has a purpose as it builds character growth. Everything just seems so wonderfully crafted - hats off to Todd Phillips.
The score is pretty much flawless, hitting all the right notes, as is the cinematography, showcasing fantastic shots continuously throughout.
Joker feels like a true stand-alone, and is concrete evidence why DC should maybe concentrate on one off efforts rather than building an underwhelming connected universe...
It's a fantastic film through and through, and Phoenix deserves an Oscar, at the very least a nomination.
I went to see Joker under a pretty neutral assumption - I had heard the good reviews, the bad reviews, and seen the incredibly well put together trailers - but I was still worried that I wouldn't like it.
What I was presented with was quite possibly the film of the year (I can't realistically see anything beating it at this point)
Make no mistake - Joker is a character driven think piece, light on action, and at times difficult to watch.
Jaoquin Phoenix is absolutely phenomenal as Arthur Fleck, and as we watch his descent into madness (or mental freedom depending on which way you look at it), it's hard not to sympathise with him - I felt myself welling up on more than one occasion.
Frances Conroy deserves a round of applause as well, carving out a fading and sad character failing to realise just how low Arthur is spiralling.
The film itself is bleak, painting a realistic Gotham City, on the brink of anarchy, not too dissimilar to how our world is IRL. All it takes is someone ballsy enough to pull the trigger to set it all off.
The film is draped with tense scene after tense scene as the plot builds up to its climax.
The films depiction of mental health issues rings louder than ever, showing us an all too real world that dismisses and laughs at those who suffer with such issues. It's haunting.
The final act is breathtaking - watching Arthur/Joker on Murray Franklin's talk show - when he's underneath the make up, he's a completely different person, threatening, but with a point that makes sense, and that what makes him so sinister.
The much discussed violence is seldom, but impactful, and most importantly, has a purpose as it builds character growth. Everything just seems so wonderfully crafted - hats off to Todd Phillips.
The score is pretty much flawless, hitting all the right notes, as is the cinematography, showcasing fantastic shots continuously throughout.
Joker feels like a true stand-alone, and is concrete evidence why DC should maybe concentrate on one off efforts rather than building an underwhelming connected universe...
It's a fantastic film through and through, and Phoenix deserves an Oscar, at the very least a nomination.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated The Mummy (2017) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
A new franchise is reborn
It seems that the Marvel Cinematic Universe has kicked off a trend over in tinseltown. Shared franchises are all the rage at the moment, and why not. Marvel has taken over $10billion. DC has finally found its footing with Wonder Woman and Legendary are fusing Godzilla with Kong: Skull Island to create their own monster universe.
But for every success story there is a failed series that didn’t quite grab the cinema-going public with The Golden Compass and The Last Airbender immediately springing to mind. Nevertheless, Universal Pictures has pushed ahead with creating its own ‘Dark Universe’. Proceedings kick off with The Mummy. But how does this reboot fare?
Nick Morton (Tom Cruise) is a soldier of fortune who plunders ancient sites for timeless artefacts and sells them to the highest bidder. When Nick and his partner (Jake Johnson) come under attack in the Middle East, the ensuing battle accidentally unearths Ahmanet, a betrayed Egyptian princess (Sofia Boutella) who was entombed under the desert for thousands of years. With her powers constantly evolving, Morton must now stop the resurrected monster as she embarks on a furious rampage through the streets of London.
First-time director and long-time screenwriter Alex Kurtzman crafts a film that moves at breakneck speed, features a lot of nifty set-pieces and is an intriguing precursor to the next instalment of the franchise. It’s pretty good fun to be honest.
Tom Cruise is as reliable as ever, and does all the Tom Cruise staples; running, heavy breathing, shirtless preening, but the stand-out performance here is Russell Crowe’s Dr. Henry Jekyll (yes, that’s right). Despite being slightly underused, Crowe is a fantastic choice to play this multi-layered character. Elsewhere, Sofia Boutella is very good as Ahmanet.
Unfortunately, Jake Johnson (Jurassic World) and Cruise’s love interest Annabelle Wallis (King Arthur: Legend of the Sword) feel miscast with Wallis in particular having no believable chemistry with her co-star.
To look at The Mummy is first-rate. Gone are the campy special effects of the Brendan Fraser-era films, instead replaced with crisp CGI – though the dark and gloomy filming style hampers the obviously great effects. Nevertheless, the aircraft and subsequent crash sequences that have been marketed in the trailers are gripping and produced very well indeed.
Unfortunately, The Mummy relies heavily on jump scares, of which there are far too many, and the trade-off for that rollercoaster pace is a film that feels disjointed, relying on visually stunning action sequences to cover over cracks in the story. Some of the humour also falls flat.
Ultimately though, these are small gripes in a vastly entertaining popcorn flick that is a very solid starting point to a series that will include films like The Invisible Man, Bride of Frankenstein and The Wolfman.
Whilst not the most original film you will see this year, The Mummy opens up some intriguing doors and whilst I’m in no rush to see it again, despite its competence, I’m excited to see how Universal will bring all of their iconic monsters back to the big screen in one unified franchise.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/06/10/a-new-franchise-is-reborn-the-mummy-review/
But for every success story there is a failed series that didn’t quite grab the cinema-going public with The Golden Compass and The Last Airbender immediately springing to mind. Nevertheless, Universal Pictures has pushed ahead with creating its own ‘Dark Universe’. Proceedings kick off with The Mummy. But how does this reboot fare?
Nick Morton (Tom Cruise) is a soldier of fortune who plunders ancient sites for timeless artefacts and sells them to the highest bidder. When Nick and his partner (Jake Johnson) come under attack in the Middle East, the ensuing battle accidentally unearths Ahmanet, a betrayed Egyptian princess (Sofia Boutella) who was entombed under the desert for thousands of years. With her powers constantly evolving, Morton must now stop the resurrected monster as she embarks on a furious rampage through the streets of London.
First-time director and long-time screenwriter Alex Kurtzman crafts a film that moves at breakneck speed, features a lot of nifty set-pieces and is an intriguing precursor to the next instalment of the franchise. It’s pretty good fun to be honest.
Tom Cruise is as reliable as ever, and does all the Tom Cruise staples; running, heavy breathing, shirtless preening, but the stand-out performance here is Russell Crowe’s Dr. Henry Jekyll (yes, that’s right). Despite being slightly underused, Crowe is a fantastic choice to play this multi-layered character. Elsewhere, Sofia Boutella is very good as Ahmanet.
Unfortunately, Jake Johnson (Jurassic World) and Cruise’s love interest Annabelle Wallis (King Arthur: Legend of the Sword) feel miscast with Wallis in particular having no believable chemistry with her co-star.
To look at The Mummy is first-rate. Gone are the campy special effects of the Brendan Fraser-era films, instead replaced with crisp CGI – though the dark and gloomy filming style hampers the obviously great effects. Nevertheless, the aircraft and subsequent crash sequences that have been marketed in the trailers are gripping and produced very well indeed.
Unfortunately, The Mummy relies heavily on jump scares, of which there are far too many, and the trade-off for that rollercoaster pace is a film that feels disjointed, relying on visually stunning action sequences to cover over cracks in the story. Some of the humour also falls flat.
Ultimately though, these are small gripes in a vastly entertaining popcorn flick that is a very solid starting point to a series that will include films like The Invisible Man, Bride of Frankenstein and The Wolfman.
Whilst not the most original film you will see this year, The Mummy opens up some intriguing doors and whilst I’m in no rush to see it again, despite its competence, I’m excited to see how Universal will bring all of their iconic monsters back to the big screen in one unified franchise.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/06/10/a-new-franchise-is-reborn-the-mummy-review/
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Wonder Woman (2017) in Movies
Jul 11, 2019
The extent of my knowledge of Wonder Woman comes from vague memories of the TV show with Lynda Carter in the 70s and the Super Friends cartoon in the early 80s. So I knew she was an Amazon princess from Paradise Island who flew an invisible plane. I may have been Wonder Woman for Halloween back when you stuck your arms through a plastic sheet with Wonder Woman’s torso painted on it, that tied at the neck like a cheap, hospital gown, with a mask with eyes cutout and a mouth you really couldn’t breathe through. So really, I knew OF her, but I never really actually knew much about Wonder Woman.
Fast forward some 40 years later and I’m in a theater learning Diana is the fiercely spirited daughter of Queen Hippolyta who sculpted her from clay and was brought to life by Zeus. Wait. What? Tell me more! She’s raised on the secluded island of Themyscira where, thanks to her aunt Antiope’s training, Diana develops extraordinary skill in combat.
Those skills come in handy when Steve Trevor somehow crashes through the protective barrier surrounding Themyscira, while trying to escape from the Germans. Suddenly made aware of an outside world, Diana decides to leave Themyscira with Trevor for war-torn Europe believing she must help stop the great war.
Gal Gadot portrays Wonder Woman as a strong-willed, worldly but still naïve force to reckon with. Chris Pine plays a wiley American spy who isn’t immune to Diana’s beauty but remains respectful of the innocence he can see behind her conviction. Together they team up with a motley crew of unlikely heroes to bring down a horrific German, whom Diana believes is Ares, the God of War, reborn.
I wasn’t sure what kept me more riveted, the storyline, the chemistry between Gadot and Pine,or Wonder Woman’s physical beauty and prowess. I can tell you that I never heard a screener audience cheer for Batman or Superman like they did for Wonder Woman, just at the sight of the determined superhero slowly walking towards battle, prompted in part by the pounding opening wails of Wonder Woman’s theme music.
Wonder Woman is an origin story well-told, something I really can’t say for the previous Justice League movies. Where Man of Steel, Batman v Superman and Suicide Squad have left me “meh” for future DC movies, Wonder Woman left me hopeful for Justice League and future DC Extended Universe movies. I hope the directors of DCEU movies take some lessons from Wonder Woman’s director, Patty Jenkins. Simply put, we want to root for a multi-dimensional superhero with a story we can easily follow and get behind. In other words, be like Wonder Woman.
Fast forward some 40 years later and I’m in a theater learning Diana is the fiercely spirited daughter of Queen Hippolyta who sculpted her from clay and was brought to life by Zeus. Wait. What? Tell me more! She’s raised on the secluded island of Themyscira where, thanks to her aunt Antiope’s training, Diana develops extraordinary skill in combat.
Those skills come in handy when Steve Trevor somehow crashes through the protective barrier surrounding Themyscira, while trying to escape from the Germans. Suddenly made aware of an outside world, Diana decides to leave Themyscira with Trevor for war-torn Europe believing she must help stop the great war.
Gal Gadot portrays Wonder Woman as a strong-willed, worldly but still naïve force to reckon with. Chris Pine plays a wiley American spy who isn’t immune to Diana’s beauty but remains respectful of the innocence he can see behind her conviction. Together they team up with a motley crew of unlikely heroes to bring down a horrific German, whom Diana believes is Ares, the God of War, reborn.
I wasn’t sure what kept me more riveted, the storyline, the chemistry between Gadot and Pine,or Wonder Woman’s physical beauty and prowess. I can tell you that I never heard a screener audience cheer for Batman or Superman like they did for Wonder Woman, just at the sight of the determined superhero slowly walking towards battle, prompted in part by the pounding opening wails of Wonder Woman’s theme music.
Wonder Woman is an origin story well-told, something I really can’t say for the previous Justice League movies. Where Man of Steel, Batman v Superman and Suicide Squad have left me “meh” for future DC movies, Wonder Woman left me hopeful for Justice League and future DC Extended Universe movies. I hope the directors of DCEU movies take some lessons from Wonder Woman’s director, Patty Jenkins. Simply put, we want to root for a multi-dimensional superhero with a story we can easily follow and get behind. In other words, be like Wonder Woman.
Lee (2222 KP) rated Joker (2019) in Movies
Oct 6, 2019 (Updated Oct 6, 2019)
Arthur Fleck (Joaquin Phoenix) is a down on his luck loner, currently taking seven different kinds of medication and living with his frail old mother (Frances Conroe). Arthur fantasises about living a ‘normal’ life, with hopes of becoming a stand up comedian and dating his next door neighbour, and the lines between reality and fantasy begin to become just as blurred for us during the movie as they do within Arthur’s mind.
We’re in Gotham City during the early eighties. A garbage strike means that the city is currently suffering from a build up of garbage on the streets and the subsequent arrival of ‘super rats’. The rich are getting richer, the poor and the underprivileged even more so. And, at the forefront of all the wealth and power in the city is Thomas Wayne, who is currently looking to run for mayor. There is growing divide and unrest throughout Gotham, all of which serves to add fuel to the increasingly unstable mind of Arthur Fleck.
We’ve had our fair share of Joker portrayals over the decades, the most memorable of which being in 2008, and Heath Ledger’s brilliant take on the character in The Dark Knight. But Joaquin Phoenix brings a side to the Joker we’ve not experienced before - all skin and bone, abused, downtrodden, ridiculed and with a neurological condition that sees him suddenly laughing maniacally and uncontrollably, even during times of stress or sadness. Throughout the movie, we learn that Arthur also had a pretty unpleasant childhood and, for a while, you really can sympathise with him and the suffering he experiences. “I just don’t want to feel so bad any more” he says at one point.
Joker features no CGI, no costumed antics (other than the clowned kind), or any of the traditional comic book movie themes that we’re now so used to seeing. Instead, Joker treats us to something of a slow-burn character study, one mans slow descent into madness, and the birth of one of the most iconic villains of all time. Joaquin Phoenix is incredible in the role, supported by an outstanding cast, including Robert De Niro as a late night talk show host idolised by Arthur and Zazie Beets as the neighbour Arthur becomes obsessed with.
Joker isn’t exactly enjoyable in the traditional sense, uncomfortable at times and a brutally honest depiction of extreme mental health issues. But it’s beautifully shot, subtly weaving itself into the familiar DC universe while remaining unique and original. I was gripped from start to finish and I just hope that the upcoming Robert Pattison incarnation of The Batman fits into the universe and style that has been introduced here within Joker.
We’re in Gotham City during the early eighties. A garbage strike means that the city is currently suffering from a build up of garbage on the streets and the subsequent arrival of ‘super rats’. The rich are getting richer, the poor and the underprivileged even more so. And, at the forefront of all the wealth and power in the city is Thomas Wayne, who is currently looking to run for mayor. There is growing divide and unrest throughout Gotham, all of which serves to add fuel to the increasingly unstable mind of Arthur Fleck.
We’ve had our fair share of Joker portrayals over the decades, the most memorable of which being in 2008, and Heath Ledger’s brilliant take on the character in The Dark Knight. But Joaquin Phoenix brings a side to the Joker we’ve not experienced before - all skin and bone, abused, downtrodden, ridiculed and with a neurological condition that sees him suddenly laughing maniacally and uncontrollably, even during times of stress or sadness. Throughout the movie, we learn that Arthur also had a pretty unpleasant childhood and, for a while, you really can sympathise with him and the suffering he experiences. “I just don’t want to feel so bad any more” he says at one point.
Joker features no CGI, no costumed antics (other than the clowned kind), or any of the traditional comic book movie themes that we’re now so used to seeing. Instead, Joker treats us to something of a slow-burn character study, one mans slow descent into madness, and the birth of one of the most iconic villains of all time. Joaquin Phoenix is incredible in the role, supported by an outstanding cast, including Robert De Niro as a late night talk show host idolised by Arthur and Zazie Beets as the neighbour Arthur becomes obsessed with.
Joker isn’t exactly enjoyable in the traditional sense, uncomfortable at times and a brutally honest depiction of extreme mental health issues. But it’s beautifully shot, subtly weaving itself into the familiar DC universe while remaining unique and original. I was gripped from start to finish and I just hope that the upcoming Robert Pattison incarnation of The Batman fits into the universe and style that has been introduced here within Joker.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Aquaman (2018) in Movies
Jan 10, 2019
Momoa saves it from being a complete disaster
I have been a defender of the darker DC Universe films. While not as popular (nor, generally, as good) as their Marvel counterparts, they all do have their good points - until now.
AQUAMAN is not a very good film and I could really only come up with 1 good point - Jason Momoa as Aquaman. Some are calling him "the next Rock" and he certainly has the physique, the screen presence and the charm to pull this off. This movie ALMOST worked because of Momoa's presence on the screen.
Almost.
Director James Wan (Furious 7, The Conjuring) certainly had the "chops" to Direct a film like this, unfortunately, I found his Direction to be choppy. What I mean by that is that this film never really settled into a good flow. It cut back and forth - both in content and in tone - to such an extent that I, the movie-goer, could never settle back into my seat and enjoy the ride. I'm sure Mr. Wan would call this movie a "roller-coaster ride", but if it is, it is an old, wooden, rickety roller coaster, jarring the riders as they go.
As for the cast, they are "fine". From Patrick Wilson to Amber Heard to Willem DaFoe to Dolph Lundgren(!) to good ol' Nicole Kidman. They all do decent, professional jobs with what they are given, but what they are given is weak and disjointed.
I would like to point out Yahya Abdul-Mateen as the sub-villain of this piece, Black Manta. This is the most incompetent Super-Villain in any Super Hero movie to date. His Black Manta was there, obviously, to give Aquaman someone to beat. And he beats him...again...and again...and again.
All I wanted to do was "beat feet" out of the theater.
Letter Grade: C+ (for Momoa's efforts)
5 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
AQUAMAN is not a very good film and I could really only come up with 1 good point - Jason Momoa as Aquaman. Some are calling him "the next Rock" and he certainly has the physique, the screen presence and the charm to pull this off. This movie ALMOST worked because of Momoa's presence on the screen.
Almost.
Director James Wan (Furious 7, The Conjuring) certainly had the "chops" to Direct a film like this, unfortunately, I found his Direction to be choppy. What I mean by that is that this film never really settled into a good flow. It cut back and forth - both in content and in tone - to such an extent that I, the movie-goer, could never settle back into my seat and enjoy the ride. I'm sure Mr. Wan would call this movie a "roller-coaster ride", but if it is, it is an old, wooden, rickety roller coaster, jarring the riders as they go.
As for the cast, they are "fine". From Patrick Wilson to Amber Heard to Willem DaFoe to Dolph Lundgren(!) to good ol' Nicole Kidman. They all do decent, professional jobs with what they are given, but what they are given is weak and disjointed.
I would like to point out Yahya Abdul-Mateen as the sub-villain of this piece, Black Manta. This is the most incompetent Super-Villain in any Super Hero movie to date. His Black Manta was there, obviously, to give Aquaman someone to beat. And he beats him...again...and again...and again.
All I wanted to do was "beat feet" out of the theater.
Letter Grade: C+ (for Momoa's efforts)
5 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated the Xbox 360 version of Batman: Arkham Asylum in Video Games
Nov 4, 2019 (Updated Nov 4, 2019)
Welcome to the Madness
Arkham Asylum- is one, if not the best batman video game or all time. It is a excellent game, that gamers shouls play. If you want to feel the experience of being batman, this game does that.
Lets talk about it:
In the game's main storyline, Batman battles his archenemy, the Joker, who instigates an elaborate plot to seize control of Arkham Asylum, trap Batman inside with many of his incarcerated foes, and threaten the fictional Gotham City with hidden bombs.
Most of the game's leading characters are voiced by actors who have appeared in other media based on the DC Animated Universe; Kevin Conroy, Mark Hamill, and Arleen Sorkin reprised their roles as Batman, the Joker, and his sidekick Harley Quinn respectively.
The game is presented from the third-person perspective with a primary focus on Batman's combat and stealth abilities, detective skills, and gadgets that can be used in combat and exploration.
Rocksteady began developing ideas for a sequel months before Arkham Asylum's completion, hiding hints to the sequel within the game.
The player can use "Detective Vision"—a visual mode which provides contextual information, tinting the game world blue and highlighting interactive objects like destructible walls and removable grates, the number of enemies in an area and their status—such as their awareness of Batman's presence—and shows civilians and corpses.
The game world has 240 collectable items, such as Riddler trophies, chattering Joker teeth, interview tapes with some of Arkham's inmates, and cryptic messages left in the asylum by its founder Amadeus Arkham that discuss the facility's bleak history.
The player can use predatory tactics through stealth—including silent takedowns, dropping from overhead perches and snatching enemies away, or using the explosive gel to knock foes off their feet—to tilt the odds in their favor.
I love this game, i can go on and on about how i love this game.
If you havent played it yet, i would reccordmend playing it.
Lets talk about it:
In the game's main storyline, Batman battles his archenemy, the Joker, who instigates an elaborate plot to seize control of Arkham Asylum, trap Batman inside with many of his incarcerated foes, and threaten the fictional Gotham City with hidden bombs.
Most of the game's leading characters are voiced by actors who have appeared in other media based on the DC Animated Universe; Kevin Conroy, Mark Hamill, and Arleen Sorkin reprised their roles as Batman, the Joker, and his sidekick Harley Quinn respectively.
The game is presented from the third-person perspective with a primary focus on Batman's combat and stealth abilities, detective skills, and gadgets that can be used in combat and exploration.
Rocksteady began developing ideas for a sequel months before Arkham Asylum's completion, hiding hints to the sequel within the game.
The player can use "Detective Vision"—a visual mode which provides contextual information, tinting the game world blue and highlighting interactive objects like destructible walls and removable grates, the number of enemies in an area and their status—such as their awareness of Batman's presence—and shows civilians and corpses.
The game world has 240 collectable items, such as Riddler trophies, chattering Joker teeth, interview tapes with some of Arkham's inmates, and cryptic messages left in the asylum by its founder Amadeus Arkham that discuss the facility's bleak history.
The player can use predatory tactics through stealth—including silent takedowns, dropping from overhead perches and snatching enemies away, or using the explosive gel to knock foes off their feet—to tilt the odds in their favor.
I love this game, i can go on and on about how i love this game.
If you havent played it yet, i would reccordmend playing it.
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated the PlayStation 4 version of Injustice 2 in Video Games
Oct 17, 2017 (Updated Oct 3, 2018)
Technically sound (1 more)
Good online functionality
Naff character redesigns (1 more)
Lack of character motivations
Gods & Monsters
Quick disclaimer before I start the review, I am not a huge online gamer. Whilst playing through Injustice 2, I dabbled in a few online fights and played a few co op games with my better half, but for the most part, this is a review of the single player story portion of the game.
I was so pleasantly surprised when I played the first Injustice game. I am a big DC fan, but fighting games aren’t one of my preferred genres in gaming, yet this fighting game set in the DC universe blew me away. The story was intriguing, the characters were diverse and it was a unique taste on a beloved universe. Therefore, the sequel had a fair amount to live up to and while it is still a fun fighting game with a multitude of colourful characters, it doesn’t feel anywhere near as special as Gods Among Us did.
The setup this time around revolves around Brainiac descending upon the earth in search of Kal-El and Kara, the last two remaining Kryptonians and eliminating them. Since the events of the last game, Batman has been keeping Superman in a special prison that suppresses his powers and the world has remained relatively free of crime, however Brainaic’s arrival changes all this. From here onwards we have our superhero story, which sees epic battles occur and mortal enemies being forced to work together against a common evil.
Most importantly, the game is fun. Gameplay feels pretty tight, which is both a positive and a negative when compared to Gods Among Us. The controls feel more solid and purposeful, but also feel more restrictive and less forgiving since the last time. This makes button bashing a void method and forces you to learn intricate button sequences if you want to pull off a decent combo. Thankfully, the super-moves are really fun to watch and make you feel awesome when you manage to successfully pull them off.
I’m going to delve deeper into the game’s story mode, so if you want to avoid spoilers, I would skip this paragraph. I was so looking forward to the story mode in this game, I loved the story mode in the first game and was relying on this one to deliver also, unfortunately I found it jarring and hard to swallow, even as a lifelong comic book fan. The story in Gods Among Us was controversial amongst DC fans, as it turned a number of iconic characters on their head, causing them to fight on the opposing side from what we are used to seeing. In that game though, I thought it worked, character motivations were clear and there was context given for the heroes and villains who switched sides. This time around, characters switch sides faster than a tennis ball at Wimbledon and half the time, there is no apparent reason for it. The most jarring moment came when Wonder Woman turned on Kara. In the mission that preceded it, Wonder Woman inhales Scarecrow’s toxin and through a hallucination and it is revealed that her worst fear is turning on her friends, yet in the mission immediately after this sequence, she turns on her friends in reality! With no apparent motive to do so other than she is unconditionally on Superman’s side, making no moral decisions for herself. It came across so awkwardly and felt lazy, it’s as if the writers totally forgot about the last scene that illustrated that the last thing that Wonder Woman wants to do is turn on her friends.
I did appreciate the graphics in the game. Netherealm have really stepped up their game since the first Injustice and there are some truly stunning moments throughout Injustice 2 and I don’t just mean the cut-scenes. The area transitions are gorgeous to look at, the super-moves are very visually impressive and the detailed locations where the fights take place are also effective. The multiple unique environmental hazards present in each environment add an extra layer of unpredictability and opportunity to the fights and they do a good job of helping a player on the back foot start a comeback against their opponent. Facial animations and voice acting across the stable of characters are also solid.
Although the game is technically sound and the graphics are good looking, I wasn’t a fan of the character design overall this time around. The last game updated a few character designs, but for the most part followed the traditional style that the characters are portrayed in. This time, a lot of the character’s costumes look goofy and come off looking like toy armour rather than something a superhero would realistically wear. Also the redesign of the Joker makes no sense. Not only did it look like they were trying too hard to make him look edgy, but in this universe, Joker was killed at the beginning of the first Injustice game and he didn’t look like that when he died. In this game he appears to Harley through one of Scarecrow’s hallucinations and looks similar to the Jared Leto version of the character, but why? As far as we know, he has never looked like that in this universe during the time he was alive and if you are going to redesign him, don’t base it on Leto’s Joker, (AKA the worst version of the character.)
The co-op is as much fun as you would expect and certain matchups are more interesting than others. As with the first Injustice, pulling off combos and super-moves on someone that is physically sitting next to you is a lot more satisfying than doing it to some AI or an online player thousands of miles away. There is nothing quite like the couch co-op experience when it comes to a fighting game. Injustice 2 is a lot of fun to play in a group as well, setting up a tournament and throwing in real life forfeits also makes things more interesting.
As for the online play, the few matches I did play ran pretty well, there were no sudden glitches present throughout my time, the lag time between the player pressing a button and the character executing the corresponding move wasn’t that noticeable and matchmaking was fairly quick.
In summary, other than some jarring moments in the story, unclear character motivations and some naff character redesigns, there is a fun fighting game here buried underneath all of the nonsense, it’s just a pity that you have to put up with all of these hindrances to get to it. If you are a fan of the first game, then sure, I would recommend you picking this up and playing through it, but if you aren’t familiar with the series and are looking to jump into it and are considering grabbing the latest entry, I would highly encourage you to avoid it. You would be much better served picking up the first game. It will be a great deal cheaper than the latest version, the character designs are better and it’s a lot simpler and more fun overall.
I was so pleasantly surprised when I played the first Injustice game. I am a big DC fan, but fighting games aren’t one of my preferred genres in gaming, yet this fighting game set in the DC universe blew me away. The story was intriguing, the characters were diverse and it was a unique taste on a beloved universe. Therefore, the sequel had a fair amount to live up to and while it is still a fun fighting game with a multitude of colourful characters, it doesn’t feel anywhere near as special as Gods Among Us did.
The setup this time around revolves around Brainiac descending upon the earth in search of Kal-El and Kara, the last two remaining Kryptonians and eliminating them. Since the events of the last game, Batman has been keeping Superman in a special prison that suppresses his powers and the world has remained relatively free of crime, however Brainaic’s arrival changes all this. From here onwards we have our superhero story, which sees epic battles occur and mortal enemies being forced to work together against a common evil.
Most importantly, the game is fun. Gameplay feels pretty tight, which is both a positive and a negative when compared to Gods Among Us. The controls feel more solid and purposeful, but also feel more restrictive and less forgiving since the last time. This makes button bashing a void method and forces you to learn intricate button sequences if you want to pull off a decent combo. Thankfully, the super-moves are really fun to watch and make you feel awesome when you manage to successfully pull them off.
I’m going to delve deeper into the game’s story mode, so if you want to avoid spoilers, I would skip this paragraph. I was so looking forward to the story mode in this game, I loved the story mode in the first game and was relying on this one to deliver also, unfortunately I found it jarring and hard to swallow, even as a lifelong comic book fan. The story in Gods Among Us was controversial amongst DC fans, as it turned a number of iconic characters on their head, causing them to fight on the opposing side from what we are used to seeing. In that game though, I thought it worked, character motivations were clear and there was context given for the heroes and villains who switched sides. This time around, characters switch sides faster than a tennis ball at Wimbledon and half the time, there is no apparent reason for it. The most jarring moment came when Wonder Woman turned on Kara. In the mission that preceded it, Wonder Woman inhales Scarecrow’s toxin and through a hallucination and it is revealed that her worst fear is turning on her friends, yet in the mission immediately after this sequence, she turns on her friends in reality! With no apparent motive to do so other than she is unconditionally on Superman’s side, making no moral decisions for herself. It came across so awkwardly and felt lazy, it’s as if the writers totally forgot about the last scene that illustrated that the last thing that Wonder Woman wants to do is turn on her friends.
I did appreciate the graphics in the game. Netherealm have really stepped up their game since the first Injustice and there are some truly stunning moments throughout Injustice 2 and I don’t just mean the cut-scenes. The area transitions are gorgeous to look at, the super-moves are very visually impressive and the detailed locations where the fights take place are also effective. The multiple unique environmental hazards present in each environment add an extra layer of unpredictability and opportunity to the fights and they do a good job of helping a player on the back foot start a comeback against their opponent. Facial animations and voice acting across the stable of characters are also solid.
Although the game is technically sound and the graphics are good looking, I wasn’t a fan of the character design overall this time around. The last game updated a few character designs, but for the most part followed the traditional style that the characters are portrayed in. This time, a lot of the character’s costumes look goofy and come off looking like toy armour rather than something a superhero would realistically wear. Also the redesign of the Joker makes no sense. Not only did it look like they were trying too hard to make him look edgy, but in this universe, Joker was killed at the beginning of the first Injustice game and he didn’t look like that when he died. In this game he appears to Harley through one of Scarecrow’s hallucinations and looks similar to the Jared Leto version of the character, but why? As far as we know, he has never looked like that in this universe during the time he was alive and if you are going to redesign him, don’t base it on Leto’s Joker, (AKA the worst version of the character.)
The co-op is as much fun as you would expect and certain matchups are more interesting than others. As with the first Injustice, pulling off combos and super-moves on someone that is physically sitting next to you is a lot more satisfying than doing it to some AI or an online player thousands of miles away. There is nothing quite like the couch co-op experience when it comes to a fighting game. Injustice 2 is a lot of fun to play in a group as well, setting up a tournament and throwing in real life forfeits also makes things more interesting.
As for the online play, the few matches I did play ran pretty well, there were no sudden glitches present throughout my time, the lag time between the player pressing a button and the character executing the corresponding move wasn’t that noticeable and matchmaking was fairly quick.
In summary, other than some jarring moments in the story, unclear character motivations and some naff character redesigns, there is a fun fighting game here buried underneath all of the nonsense, it’s just a pity that you have to put up with all of these hindrances to get to it. If you are a fan of the first game, then sure, I would recommend you picking this up and playing through it, but if you aren’t familiar with the series and are looking to jump into it and are considering grabbing the latest entry, I would highly encourage you to avoid it. You would be much better served picking up the first game. It will be a great deal cheaper than the latest version, the character designs are better and it’s a lot simpler and more fun overall.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
The Transformers of the superhero genre
It feels like eons ago that Batman v Superman was announced as a genuine movie. Way back in 2007 there was a poster that seemed to signify DC Comic’s plans in I am Legend, but fans just thought of it as a pipedream.
Now, in 2016, the moment has finally arrived. The marketing campaign has been relentless, the trailers have been criticised for showing far too much (which they have), and Ben Affleck’s casting as Batman was met with disdain rather than joy. So what is the finished product like?
Superman has now become a controversial figure after his climactic battle with General Zod, with Batman in particular being cautious of his true plans for Earth. After a new threat is created, Doomsday, they must put aside their differences to save the planet.
Following on directly from the events of Man of Steel, director Zak Snyder brings together DC Comics’ biggest superheroes in a film as loud as anything Michael Bay served up in the Transformers series.
Henry Cavill returns as the god from above with Ben Affleck taking over duties from Christian Bale as the Dark Knight. Both of them give great performances with Cavill in particular impressing. Affleck proves his doubters wrong and is more than a match for Bale, though his one facial expression wears thin over the course of the film.
Elsewhere, Jesse Eisenberg takes on the role of Lex Luthor in a portrayal reminiscent of Johnny Depp’s Willy Wonka – eerily creepy and well-acted but just trying that little bit too hard. Amy Adams makes a welcome return as Lois Lane and gets much more screen time here than she did in Man of Steel.
However, the most praise has to go to Gal Gadot. Her exceptional characterisation of Wonder Woman is one of the movie’s highlights and it’s such a shame she takes a backseat to the two titular characters. It’s clear the filmmakers thought highly of her too, as she gets her own thundering theme tune whenever she appears.
Unfortunately, the plot is just too nondescript and completely incomprehensible at times, with Lex Luthor’s motives remaining unclear throughout the 150 minute running time. This proves increasingly hard to swallow as the film progresses and makes his villain feel less menacing than he should be.
Nevertheless, Batman v Superman is visually spectacular. Snyder bombards the audience with breath-taking set pieces, dispersing them well enough to ensure the plot only drags in a few areas, namely at the beginning – though the film’s flabby length is a sticking point; it simply doesn’t need to be nearly three hours long.
It may all sound pretty negative, but the exciting and beautifully filmed final act almost makes up for these shortcomings. We also get to see an emotional side to the genre, something that has been sorely lacking more recently with the constant quipping of the Marvel Universe.
Overall, Batman v Superman was never going to live up to the hype and in some ways it does fall short. The battle between Bat of Gotham and Son of Krypton is disappointingly brief and the story lacks any real weight, until the final 30 minutes. But it’s filmed in such a unique fashion and with such confidence; it’s quite possible you may not see anything like it in the genre again.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/03/27/the-transformers-of-the-superhero-genre-batman-v-superman-review/
Now, in 2016, the moment has finally arrived. The marketing campaign has been relentless, the trailers have been criticised for showing far too much (which they have), and Ben Affleck’s casting as Batman was met with disdain rather than joy. So what is the finished product like?
Superman has now become a controversial figure after his climactic battle with General Zod, with Batman in particular being cautious of his true plans for Earth. After a new threat is created, Doomsday, they must put aside their differences to save the planet.
Following on directly from the events of Man of Steel, director Zak Snyder brings together DC Comics’ biggest superheroes in a film as loud as anything Michael Bay served up in the Transformers series.
Henry Cavill returns as the god from above with Ben Affleck taking over duties from Christian Bale as the Dark Knight. Both of them give great performances with Cavill in particular impressing. Affleck proves his doubters wrong and is more than a match for Bale, though his one facial expression wears thin over the course of the film.
Elsewhere, Jesse Eisenberg takes on the role of Lex Luthor in a portrayal reminiscent of Johnny Depp’s Willy Wonka – eerily creepy and well-acted but just trying that little bit too hard. Amy Adams makes a welcome return as Lois Lane and gets much more screen time here than she did in Man of Steel.
However, the most praise has to go to Gal Gadot. Her exceptional characterisation of Wonder Woman is one of the movie’s highlights and it’s such a shame she takes a backseat to the two titular characters. It’s clear the filmmakers thought highly of her too, as she gets her own thundering theme tune whenever she appears.
Unfortunately, the plot is just too nondescript and completely incomprehensible at times, with Lex Luthor’s motives remaining unclear throughout the 150 minute running time. This proves increasingly hard to swallow as the film progresses and makes his villain feel less menacing than he should be.
Nevertheless, Batman v Superman is visually spectacular. Snyder bombards the audience with breath-taking set pieces, dispersing them well enough to ensure the plot only drags in a few areas, namely at the beginning – though the film’s flabby length is a sticking point; it simply doesn’t need to be nearly three hours long.
It may all sound pretty negative, but the exciting and beautifully filmed final act almost makes up for these shortcomings. We also get to see an emotional side to the genre, something that has been sorely lacking more recently with the constant quipping of the Marvel Universe.
Overall, Batman v Superman was never going to live up to the hype and in some ways it does fall short. The battle between Bat of Gotham and Son of Krypton is disappointingly brief and the story lacks any real weight, until the final 30 minutes. But it’s filmed in such a unique fashion and with such confidence; it’s quite possible you may not see anything like it in the genre again.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/03/27/the-transformers-of-the-superhero-genre-batman-v-superman-review/