Search
Search results
Joe Goodhart (27 KP) rated X-23 (2018-) #1 in Books
Nov 30, 2020
As mentioned in my reviews Kyle & Yost's X-FORCE TPBs, I am quite a fan of the character of Laura Kinney. There is nothing of 'shipping or anything of the sort. To me, she is a character with a scarred background, one in which she struggles to move forward from it, leaving her past as a trained killer behind her. I find her to be multi-layered, with a lot of potential for future character development.
When it was announced several months ago that Tom Taylor's ALL-NEW WOLVERINE would be coming to a close, I was saddened. While I didn't always like the light-hearted approach, esp. when it involved Laura's clone "sister" Gabby, I felt that he had done so much to move Laura forward, allowing to become so much more than a) a female version of Wolverine and b) another cold-hearted mutant killer.
Laura's book would be relaunched as 'X-23', with her Wolverine title being traded in for her old Weapon X classification. Canada's Mariko Tamaki (SUPERGIRL: BEING SUPER mini for DC as well as non-superhero prose novels) would be helming it, with ANW's Juann Cabal would be joining her on the art end. I felt good about the art side of it, but I was not all that familiar with Tamaki, as I had never read anything she written previously.
My biggest fear in regard to the new series? How was Laura going to go back to her former title/classification? It made no sense, and considering how they handled her transition into Wolverine (um, yeah, nope. Marvel dropped the editorial ball when ANW was launched!), my worries did not seem entirely unfounded.
Last night, I had those fears shushed away, as I dove into reading the digital version of Tamiki's X-23 (thank you, Comixology, for allowing the first three issues to be included as part of this weekend's BOGO sale). From Cabal's A-MAZ-ING art, to Tamiki's superb handling of Laura (both her inner thoughts and dialogue, as well as her interactions with Gabby), this was such an UNEXPECTED WiN
And a minor spoiler-of-sorts, Issue 3 has Laura saying why she has chosen to go back to being X-23. Not going to say anything more, other than it makes sense. Oh, and that it was this reveal that made me decide to start reading the new series.
As I said, I was not sure about the new series, but after devouring the first issue, i feel safe now having withnessed Tamaki's approach to Laura. There is no scale in mind that can showr Ms. Tamaki with the amount of praise she has earned for this brilliant undertaking! Color me impressed!
RECOMMENDED!!
When it was announced several months ago that Tom Taylor's ALL-NEW WOLVERINE would be coming to a close, I was saddened. While I didn't always like the light-hearted approach, esp. when it involved Laura's clone "sister" Gabby, I felt that he had done so much to move Laura forward, allowing to become so much more than a) a female version of Wolverine and b) another cold-hearted mutant killer.
Laura's book would be relaunched as 'X-23', with her Wolverine title being traded in for her old Weapon X classification. Canada's Mariko Tamaki (SUPERGIRL: BEING SUPER mini for DC as well as non-superhero prose novels) would be helming it, with ANW's Juann Cabal would be joining her on the art end. I felt good about the art side of it, but I was not all that familiar with Tamaki, as I had never read anything she written previously.
My biggest fear in regard to the new series? How was Laura going to go back to her former title/classification? It made no sense, and considering how they handled her transition into Wolverine (um, yeah, nope. Marvel dropped the editorial ball when ANW was launched!), my worries did not seem entirely unfounded.
Last night, I had those fears shushed away, as I dove into reading the digital version of Tamiki's X-23 (thank you, Comixology, for allowing the first three issues to be included as part of this weekend's BOGO sale). From Cabal's A-MAZ-ING art, to Tamiki's superb handling of Laura (both her inner thoughts and dialogue, as well as her interactions with Gabby), this was such an UNEXPECTED WiN
And a minor spoiler-of-sorts, Issue 3 has Laura saying why she has chosen to go back to being X-23. Not going to say anything more, other than it makes sense. Oh, and that it was this reveal that made me decide to start reading the new series.
As I said, I was not sure about the new series, but after devouring the first issue, i feel safe now having withnessed Tamaki's approach to Laura. There is no scale in mind that can showr Ms. Tamaki with the amount of praise she has earned for this brilliant undertaking! Color me impressed!
RECOMMENDED!!
Joe Goodhart (27 KP) rated The Batman Who Laughs in Books
Nov 30, 2020
I am really eating up DC's books of late, especially the Scott Snyder and James Tynion IV! Yes, there are some hiccups along the way, as true for even the best of publishers, but the overall good output far outshines the bad/MEH output! I am quite liking this whole "Rebirth" thing and the way it ties into WATCHMEN, can't wait to see it all wrapped with DOOMSDAY CLOCK #12. <i>*ahem*</i> Let's not get ahead of ourselves then, eh? Onto my thoughts on TBWL..
I liked it quite a bit! Yes, it probably could easily have been a 5-issue mini, but I don't feel the story suffered by the added length. It allowed for the crazy roller coaster ride that it was to be even crazier, helped to spread just a bit more darkness in Gotham! Oh, and it showed how Alfred truly is the necessary light in Batman/Bruce's life, something B-Man totally needs, far more than Selina (sorry, Tom King, but I don't think the romance between the two works. Jus' sayin' is all!).
I know a lot of folks absolutely <b>abhor</b> DARK NIGHTS: METAL and anything relating to it, including the Batman Who Laughs! Me? I am enjoying it to no great end! It reminds me of some of the best things about the 90's, just turned up to 11! I think it's an interesting concept, bringing some clever creepiness into DC's "Rebirth"! And besides, it is at least something fresh and different (unlike the umpteenth X-deaths/reboots over at Marvel!)!
One aspect of the mini that really drove it all home was the art by Jock. I loved what he did in the WYTCHES (also with Snyder), and here it is just as good, if not better. The use of shadows and angles brings the creepiness all up and about, leaving with you long after the lights have gone out and sleep comes over you!
I already mentioned it, and several others have as well in their reviews, but Alfred was clearly the MVP here! He was totally on board, taking being a butler to a whole new level beyond 100%! I think sometimes he is under-utilized, but here he definitely got some much needed appreciation and respect! Kudos to you, Scott Snyder, for giving Alfred his due!
And lastly, that ending, the last couple panels? Ewwwww... chills!! Now, I can not wait to read Joshua Williamson's BATMAN/SUPERMAN #1! No spoilers, tho', promise!
So, yes, I was super-impressed with THE BATMAN WHO LAUGHS, just as I was with Snyder's DARK NIGHTS: METAL. If you didn't like METAL, then, well, chances are pretty likely you won't like this one!
I liked it quite a bit! Yes, it probably could easily have been a 5-issue mini, but I don't feel the story suffered by the added length. It allowed for the crazy roller coaster ride that it was to be even crazier, helped to spread just a bit more darkness in Gotham! Oh, and it showed how Alfred truly is the necessary light in Batman/Bruce's life, something B-Man totally needs, far more than Selina (sorry, Tom King, but I don't think the romance between the two works. Jus' sayin' is all!).
I know a lot of folks absolutely <b>abhor</b> DARK NIGHTS: METAL and anything relating to it, including the Batman Who Laughs! Me? I am enjoying it to no great end! It reminds me of some of the best things about the 90's, just turned up to 11! I think it's an interesting concept, bringing some clever creepiness into DC's "Rebirth"! And besides, it is at least something fresh and different (unlike the umpteenth X-deaths/reboots over at Marvel!)!
One aspect of the mini that really drove it all home was the art by Jock. I loved what he did in the WYTCHES (also with Snyder), and here it is just as good, if not better. The use of shadows and angles brings the creepiness all up and about, leaving with you long after the lights have gone out and sleep comes over you!
I already mentioned it, and several others have as well in their reviews, but Alfred was clearly the MVP here! He was totally on board, taking being a butler to a whole new level beyond 100%! I think sometimes he is under-utilized, but here he definitely got some much needed appreciation and respect! Kudos to you, Scott Snyder, for giving Alfred his due!
And lastly, that ending, the last couple panels? Ewwwww... chills!! Now, I can not wait to read Joshua Williamson's BATMAN/SUPERMAN #1! No spoilers, tho', promise!
So, yes, I was super-impressed with THE BATMAN WHO LAUGHS, just as I was with Snyder's DARK NIGHTS: METAL. If you didn't like METAL, then, well, chances are pretty likely you won't like this one!
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated Captain America: Civil War (2016) in Movies
Dec 24, 2020
To it's credit, Civil War was incredible at it's time of release, but a recent re watch left me feeling a little emptier than I remember, and I think it's down to further films in the MCU. The main issue is that whilst it's a third Captain America movie, it is also Avengers 2.5, and as such, loses something from both sides of the coin. The complicated relationship between Bucky and Cap was one of the driving forces that made The Winter Soldier one of the best MCU films to date, but here, that side is distracted from by the big headline brawl. The Civil War side of things is set up pretty well, but the pay off doesn't quite pack the punch it needs to due to the overall focus on the aformentioned Bucky/Cap story.
When it first released, it benefited from boasting the first MCU appearances of Black Panther and Spider-Man. Since then we've seen plenty of both, in arguably better movies. At the time of release, the airport fight scene had me beaming with nerdy joy, but since then, we've been spoiled by Infinity War and Endgame, and the titular Civil War is really a low stakes fight full of pulled punches, wrapped up in a fan pleasing package. Basically, hindsight shows that Civil War is a victim of Marvel Studios bigger event movies that have followed since.
Another point worth mentioning is the villains' evil plan. The big bad this time is classic Captain America antagonist Baron Zeno, and his plan is, well, it's really convoluted. I know it's a comic book film, and I should suspend my disbelief to a certain degree, but I can't rag on Lex Luthors' stupid plan in Batman v Superman and then give this a free pass. It gets the ball rolling, and puts all the players into the right places for the film to proceed, but it's dumb as fuck.
It's miles away from being a bad comic book film though. The cast are all once again superb. Some of the emotional beats are fantastic, especially the final showdown between Iron Man and Cap. The way Tony is portrayed as a man with nothing left to lose at the films climax is heart breaking. It's extremely visually pleasing, the CGI is top drawer and the action is stupidly entertaining.
Civil War ultimately is full of thrilling moments that are designed to have comic book fans jumping for joy, but underneath all it's pizzazz, my recent re watch has shown me that it's a film trying to do too much. Luckily the Russo's managed to refine their formula for Infinity War, and as such, Civil War is a flawed yet important stepping stone to the Infinity Saga climax. Still 100% worth watching.
When it first released, it benefited from boasting the first MCU appearances of Black Panther and Spider-Man. Since then we've seen plenty of both, in arguably better movies. At the time of release, the airport fight scene had me beaming with nerdy joy, but since then, we've been spoiled by Infinity War and Endgame, and the titular Civil War is really a low stakes fight full of pulled punches, wrapped up in a fan pleasing package. Basically, hindsight shows that Civil War is a victim of Marvel Studios bigger event movies that have followed since.
Another point worth mentioning is the villains' evil plan. The big bad this time is classic Captain America antagonist Baron Zeno, and his plan is, well, it's really convoluted. I know it's a comic book film, and I should suspend my disbelief to a certain degree, but I can't rag on Lex Luthors' stupid plan in Batman v Superman and then give this a free pass. It gets the ball rolling, and puts all the players into the right places for the film to proceed, but it's dumb as fuck.
It's miles away from being a bad comic book film though. The cast are all once again superb. Some of the emotional beats are fantastic, especially the final showdown between Iron Man and Cap. The way Tony is portrayed as a man with nothing left to lose at the films climax is heart breaking. It's extremely visually pleasing, the CGI is top drawer and the action is stupidly entertaining.
Civil War ultimately is full of thrilling moments that are designed to have comic book fans jumping for joy, but underneath all it's pizzazz, my recent re watch has shown me that it's a film trying to do too much. Luckily the Russo's managed to refine their formula for Infinity War, and as such, Civil War is a flawed yet important stepping stone to the Infinity Saga climax. Still 100% worth watching.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Wind River (2017) in Movies
Jul 11, 2019
Between Sicario and Hell or High Water (both of which landed on my year-end best lists for 2015 and 2016 respectively), Taylor Sheridan has already proven to be an incredible talent at crafting slow-burning thrillers that also serve as in-depth character studies. His new film, third as a screenwriter and second as a director, may move at quite a faster pace than his previous two screenplays, but it is no less accomplished, either in plot or in character development. Though some may leave the theater feeling that they haven’t seen anything new, and they’d be right to as there isn’t anything particularly flashy or unique in the direction or cinematography, Wind River however finds its strength in its simplicity. It’s a simple story concerning the death of a young girl on a Wyoming reservation, of the tracker (Jeremy Renner) for whom the circumstance strikes too close to home, and of the presumably untested FBI agent (Elizabeth Olsen) forced to face the darker side of her chosen profession.
For Jeremy Renner, Wind River marks a career best. He displays restraint in a role that others would have played far too arrogantly and when he lets us in to share in his character’s painful past, the melodrama inherent in the dialogue is delivered with dignity and humility. Complimenting his performance beautifully is Gil Birmingham as Martin, the father of the murdered girl. Much like his work opposite Jeff Bridges in Hell or High Water, his scenes with Renner are the highlight of the film. Every line he delivers reverberates with truth and with the weight of losing of two children, one whose life is thrown away to drug use and one to an untimely, mysterious death. Veteran actor and longtime favorite of mine, Graham Greene is also on hand to give a competent turn as the local sheriff who in equal measures doles out tension-relieving humor as well as reminding us of the gravity of a bleak situation.
In amongst a predominately-male cast, Elizabeth Olsen shines. This film was an undoubtedly a tough task, as her character is given no soft options, and her performance gave me cause to reflect on a young Jodie Foster in The Silence of the Lambs. I don’t just draw this comparison because of the fact they both play young agents thrust into a situation beyond their level of experience, but because of the scenes in these films where they are called upon to confidently take command of a room full of men and to show great physicality in moments of unexpected violence. It’s another top mark in her filmography comparable to her breakout in Martha Marcy May Marlene and hopefully, in-between bouts of this bloated Marvel Cinematic Universe nonsense, we’ll continue to see her in roles of some substance.
For Jeremy Renner, Wind River marks a career best. He displays restraint in a role that others would have played far too arrogantly and when he lets us in to share in his character’s painful past, the melodrama inherent in the dialogue is delivered with dignity and humility. Complimenting his performance beautifully is Gil Birmingham as Martin, the father of the murdered girl. Much like his work opposite Jeff Bridges in Hell or High Water, his scenes with Renner are the highlight of the film. Every line he delivers reverberates with truth and with the weight of losing of two children, one whose life is thrown away to drug use and one to an untimely, mysterious death. Veteran actor and longtime favorite of mine, Graham Greene is also on hand to give a competent turn as the local sheriff who in equal measures doles out tension-relieving humor as well as reminding us of the gravity of a bleak situation.
In amongst a predominately-male cast, Elizabeth Olsen shines. This film was an undoubtedly a tough task, as her character is given no soft options, and her performance gave me cause to reflect on a young Jodie Foster in The Silence of the Lambs. I don’t just draw this comparison because of the fact they both play young agents thrust into a situation beyond their level of experience, but because of the scenes in these films where they are called upon to confidently take command of a room full of men and to show great physicality in moments of unexpected violence. It’s another top mark in her filmography comparable to her breakout in Martha Marcy May Marlene and hopefully, in-between bouts of this bloated Marvel Cinematic Universe nonsense, we’ll continue to see her in roles of some substance.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Avengers: Infinity War (2018) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
14,000,605:1 …. or perhaps 50:50!
So, it’s been a week of full-on work and family commitments…. which means it’s also been a week of ducking and dodging of film reviews in case of spoilers! (Actually, all my favourite bloggers have been pretty good!). This review will also be spoiler free,but there is just SO MUCH that can be discussed there will be a Spoiley McSpoiler section after the trailer video.
Upfront I have to admit that I’m not the world’s greatest MCU fan, but even I felt a twinge of anticipation on going into this 19th instalment: a film that has had fan-boys frothing at the loins for years. And the film doesn’t disappoint, drawing together most (but not all) threads of the disparate MCU universe into a sprawling epic adventure.
Thanos (which inappropriately always seems to autocorrect to “Thanks”!) is played by a CGI’d Josh Brolin, first glimpsed as a “monkey” after the original “Avengers” movie where his quest for the “infinity stones” was first mooted. This particular McGuffin has been revealed in parts throughout the series, with others being surreptitiously slipped into this instalment. With all six stones, Thanos will be able to fully exercise his God fixation over the Universe. Will the Avengers and their new Guardian friends (“Who the hell are you guys?” LOL) be able to stop him?
There are shocks and surprises aplenty. Most of these come courtesy of Thanos who, although like all megalomaniac Bond villains is as mad as a box of frogs, has a backstory and a depth of character that is several cuts above most movie villains.
All of the cast seem to have great fun bouncing off each other. The only performance I found out of kilter was Mark Ruffalo as Bruce Banner who (to me) seemed to be really off his game and false, at least for the early scenes in the movie.
The special effects are – naturally – top-notch and are clever in trying to smooth the joins between the ‘traditional’ view of the Avengers world and the garish world of the Guardians of the Galaxy crew.
Cinema staff must hate a Marvel movie as they have to wait til the very end of the credits before they can move in to clean! And there is a “monkey” (and a good one) at the very end of the credits here, but the credits are very, very long!
So, in summary, it’s complete nonsense as normal, but it’s high-class nonsense, well-written, suitably humorous and provides excellent popcorn entertainment. Directors Anthony and Joe Russo are to be congratulated in pulling off what could have been a disaster. Recommended.
Upfront I have to admit that I’m not the world’s greatest MCU fan, but even I felt a twinge of anticipation on going into this 19th instalment: a film that has had fan-boys frothing at the loins for years. And the film doesn’t disappoint, drawing together most (but not all) threads of the disparate MCU universe into a sprawling epic adventure.
Thanos (which inappropriately always seems to autocorrect to “Thanks”!) is played by a CGI’d Josh Brolin, first glimpsed as a “monkey” after the original “Avengers” movie where his quest for the “infinity stones” was first mooted. This particular McGuffin has been revealed in parts throughout the series, with others being surreptitiously slipped into this instalment. With all six stones, Thanos will be able to fully exercise his God fixation over the Universe. Will the Avengers and their new Guardian friends (“Who the hell are you guys?” LOL) be able to stop him?
There are shocks and surprises aplenty. Most of these come courtesy of Thanos who, although like all megalomaniac Bond villains is as mad as a box of frogs, has a backstory and a depth of character that is several cuts above most movie villains.
All of the cast seem to have great fun bouncing off each other. The only performance I found out of kilter was Mark Ruffalo as Bruce Banner who (to me) seemed to be really off his game and false, at least for the early scenes in the movie.
The special effects are – naturally – top-notch and are clever in trying to smooth the joins between the ‘traditional’ view of the Avengers world and the garish world of the Guardians of the Galaxy crew.
Cinema staff must hate a Marvel movie as they have to wait til the very end of the credits before they can move in to clean! And there is a “monkey” (and a good one) at the very end of the credits here, but the credits are very, very long!
So, in summary, it’s complete nonsense as normal, but it’s high-class nonsense, well-written, suitably humorous and provides excellent popcorn entertainment. Directors Anthony and Joe Russo are to be congratulated in pulling off what could have been a disaster. Recommended.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Napoleon (2023) in Movies
Dec 6, 2023
Whole Does Not Equal The Sum of it's Parts
The new Epic Motion Picture NAPOLEON is the perfect example of the term “the whole does not equal the sum of the parts”. There are some very, very good items in this film, they just don’t combine to make a Motion Picture above the average.
Directed by Ridley Scott (GLADIATOR), NAPOLEON tells the tale of the titular Frenchman who rises to great power only to fall to great defeat. It is a story ripe for a fascinating film, this just isn’t that film.
There are many, many things that work in this movie, like the performance of Oscar Winner Joaquin Phoenix (THE JOKER) as Napoleon. He plays him as an enigmatic figure who is over-compensating for a lack of…something. Bravery? Self-Confidence? Height? That’s the problem, the film never delves into it, it just gives us a quirky character - strongly played by Phoenix - who is, obviously, using his power and skills as a General to cover up a flaw…whatever that is.
Vanessa Kirby (Oscar Nominated for PIECES OF A WOMAN a few years back) is equally strong and enigmatic as Napoleon’s Empress, Josephine. Kirby’s performance is, probably, the strongest in the film as she plays Josephine as strong and independent, living by her own rules and knowing that she has the powerful Napoleon at her beck-and-call. But, again, we never really find out the person behind the facade and her scenes with Phoenix/Napoleon fall flat for there never is any really love or passion between the 2 of them, just a “baby boy” fawning all over Josephine and a manipulative (we think) social climber using this “baby boy”.
4x Oscar Nominee (but never a winner) Ridley Scott (GLADIATOR) knows how to produce an EPIC and he puts together some EPIC Battle Scenes and Napoleon’s Emperor Inauguration scene is one to behold (which is why you should see this film on the largest screen possible) but these scenes seem isolated and separated from the rest of the film.
And, there, is where the problem of the film is. We have an interesting performance by Phoenix, a strong performance by Kirby and EPIC scenes from Scott, but they all seem isolated and in their own film and never quite gel together to build any emotional connection. All seem cold, flat and calculated. There is none of the passion that Napoleon says he has for France.
Go to marvel at the craft of the film, leave feeling unfulfilled, emotionally by NAPOLEON.
Letter Grade: B-
6 Stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Directed by Ridley Scott (GLADIATOR), NAPOLEON tells the tale of the titular Frenchman who rises to great power only to fall to great defeat. It is a story ripe for a fascinating film, this just isn’t that film.
There are many, many things that work in this movie, like the performance of Oscar Winner Joaquin Phoenix (THE JOKER) as Napoleon. He plays him as an enigmatic figure who is over-compensating for a lack of…something. Bravery? Self-Confidence? Height? That’s the problem, the film never delves into it, it just gives us a quirky character - strongly played by Phoenix - who is, obviously, using his power and skills as a General to cover up a flaw…whatever that is.
Vanessa Kirby (Oscar Nominated for PIECES OF A WOMAN a few years back) is equally strong and enigmatic as Napoleon’s Empress, Josephine. Kirby’s performance is, probably, the strongest in the film as she plays Josephine as strong and independent, living by her own rules and knowing that she has the powerful Napoleon at her beck-and-call. But, again, we never really find out the person behind the facade and her scenes with Phoenix/Napoleon fall flat for there never is any really love or passion between the 2 of them, just a “baby boy” fawning all over Josephine and a manipulative (we think) social climber using this “baby boy”.
4x Oscar Nominee (but never a winner) Ridley Scott (GLADIATOR) knows how to produce an EPIC and he puts together some EPIC Battle Scenes and Napoleon’s Emperor Inauguration scene is one to behold (which is why you should see this film on the largest screen possible) but these scenes seem isolated and separated from the rest of the film.
And, there, is where the problem of the film is. We have an interesting performance by Phoenix, a strong performance by Kirby and EPIC scenes from Scott, but they all seem isolated and in their own film and never quite gel together to build any emotional connection. All seem cold, flat and calculated. There is none of the passion that Napoleon says he has for France.
Go to marvel at the craft of the film, leave feeling unfulfilled, emotionally by NAPOLEON.
Letter Grade: B-
6 Stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Morbius (2022) in Movies
Apr 5, 2022
The latest Marvel offering is Morbius. Michael Morbius (Jared Leto) grew up in Greece under the care of Dr.Emil Nikols (Jared Harris). In this universe, Emil is Michael’s Mentor. This story takes
bits from the comic book but it clearly isn’t canon. It is an adequate anti-hero origin story for Phase 4 which gives us the backstory of Morbius’ creation.
Morbius has a rare blood disease. As a child, he made his best friend Milo/Lucien (Matt Smith), a promise to find the cure for their shared illness. Michael, in his quest for the cure, became the youngest scientist to win the Nobel Prize from his development of artificial blood.
He works with fellow scientist Martine Bancroft (Adria Arjona) who becomes his love interest.
Morbius has been working on vampire bats and the abilities within their blood. Once the formula has stabilized, he begins human trials on himself. In doing so, the serum that he has developed transforms him into a vampire that needs human blood to sustain his existence.
The film seems to have dropped the trail to lead the audience to logical conclusions. There are questions that need to be answered which would help flesh out the actions of the characters.
Why the serum, if the reason is to create a cure, why did the bat and human combination mutate instead of the blood changing?
There are points throughout the film that feel like critical explanatory lines were edited out.
Some scenes had witty banter between Michael and Milo. It would have been good to see Morbius enjoy his transformation from his weak, ill state to the Vampire.
The film was good. It definitely could have been better with more information. I wanted to understand motivation by the actors indicating motive or have red herrings thrown through the film.
The best parts for me were the moments where he stumbled upon his new abilities. He observes them like the scientist he is and takes it as data, in order to understand the changes.
The CGI was muddy, in trying to show movement as quick. What it looked like was trying to
convey speed, but in doing so, ended up having what showed up as squiggly lines instead.
I liked it, but didn’t love it mainly for what it seemed to lack, continuity. I think for an origin film, the character needs to be brought out as clean as possible in order to develop solid character traits.
If you go see the movie, there are two end credit scenes. There are a couple situations that you go see the movie, there are two end credit scenes. There are a couple situations that lead into the Multiverse of Magic. I am definitely looking forward to that film.
3 stars out of 5
bits from the comic book but it clearly isn’t canon. It is an adequate anti-hero origin story for Phase 4 which gives us the backstory of Morbius’ creation.
Morbius has a rare blood disease. As a child, he made his best friend Milo/Lucien (Matt Smith), a promise to find the cure for their shared illness. Michael, in his quest for the cure, became the youngest scientist to win the Nobel Prize from his development of artificial blood.
He works with fellow scientist Martine Bancroft (Adria Arjona) who becomes his love interest.
Morbius has been working on vampire bats and the abilities within their blood. Once the formula has stabilized, he begins human trials on himself. In doing so, the serum that he has developed transforms him into a vampire that needs human blood to sustain his existence.
The film seems to have dropped the trail to lead the audience to logical conclusions. There are questions that need to be answered which would help flesh out the actions of the characters.
Why the serum, if the reason is to create a cure, why did the bat and human combination mutate instead of the blood changing?
There are points throughout the film that feel like critical explanatory lines were edited out.
Some scenes had witty banter between Michael and Milo. It would have been good to see Morbius enjoy his transformation from his weak, ill state to the Vampire.
The film was good. It definitely could have been better with more information. I wanted to understand motivation by the actors indicating motive or have red herrings thrown through the film.
The best parts for me were the moments where he stumbled upon his new abilities. He observes them like the scientist he is and takes it as data, in order to understand the changes.
The CGI was muddy, in trying to show movement as quick. What it looked like was trying to
convey speed, but in doing so, ended up having what showed up as squiggly lines instead.
I liked it, but didn’t love it mainly for what it seemed to lack, continuity. I think for an origin film, the character needs to be brought out as clean as possible in order to develop solid character traits.
If you go see the movie, there are two end credit scenes. There are a couple situations that you go see the movie, there are two end credit scenes. There are a couple situations that lead into the Multiverse of Magic. I am definitely looking forward to that film.
3 stars out of 5
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Fantastic Four (2005) in Movies
Aug 14, 2019
In 1994, a low budget film was created in order to preserve the film rights to one of Marvel Comics popular series The Fantastic 4. Created by comic legend Stan Lee, the comic tells the ongoing tales of four people who were endowed with amazing powers after accidental exposure to an element in space.
The film was never released and has gone on to become a popular bootleg amongst comic fans. The ensuing rights for the film were also sold, and for almost a decade Fox has worked in bringing the comic to the big screen.
After years of languishing, the film finally got on the fast track and under the helm of Director Tim Story and features a dynamic cast headed by some of the biggest emerging superstars in Hollywood.
Ioan Gruffudd stars as Reed Richards, a brilliant yet recently bankrupt scientist who, along with his friend Ben Grimm (Michael Chiklis), is visiting famed scientist Victor Von Doom (Julian Mc Mahon), in an effort to get his latest venture funded.
Reed is convinced that an approaching storm in space is the key to unlocking vast amounts of genetic secrets and that the shielding on Doom’s space station allows for safe study of the very rare phenomenon.
Doom agrees to the venture in exchange for 75% of all revenue generated from the findings and that he gets to assign certain people to the mission. Among them are Sue Storm (Jessica Alba), and her pilot brother Johnny (Chris Evans). The fact that Sue is Reed’s ex is a source of tension within the group, as she is obviously still hurt and bitter over Reed’s inability to look at her and life in ways that are not based upon analytical science.
Despite the issues, the crew arrives at the station and the test is going according to plan. That is until an unexpected situation arises, which causes the team to get caught in the storm with the shields lowered, exposing them all to the storm’s radiation.
Back on earth, the crew awakens to find themselves in quarantine and suffering no ill effects from the accident. The failure of the mission is of great concern for Doom. His investors are using this as a reason to pull their support, which in turn is causing his stock to drop rapidly.
In time, Reed, Sue, Johnny, and Ben start to show amazing abilities resulting from their exposure to the storm. Johnny can become a human fireball, Reed can stretch his body to amazing lengths, Sue can become invisible and project force fields, and Ben has become a living wall of rock, capable of great feats of strength.
Since Ben is no longer able to pass as a human, he feels like a freak and is shunned by his wife, causing him much anger and depression. It is due to this that the team becomes noticed by the media who dub them the Fantastic 4 after watching them in action.
The resulting fame causes the team to withdraw, save for Johnny who basks in the glory and attention heaped upon him. It is against this changing dynamic that the team must find a way to restore themselves to their normal state and to discover what is causing their new found abilities.
The Fantastic 4 are not the only ones who changed. Doom is becoming more and more angry and violent as he blames Reed for the failure of his company. Victor also has the ability to hurl deadly bolts of energy from his body which is quickly becoming metallic.
As fans of the comic know, it will not take long for Doom and the Fantastic 4 to face off, paving the way for a final confrontation. While I went in not expecting much from the film, I must say I was surprised. Yes, the film has a thin plot, and fairly basic characters and action, but it is also above all fun.
The dynamic between the characters is enjoyable, as is the humor which accurately captures the tone and feel of the comic. Some purists will take exception with some of the liberties taken, such as Doom being on the trip to space and other variations on his character which are not part of the original comic.
Alba and Evans tend to come off at times as airheads but they stay true to their characters throughout. Gruffudd plays Reed with modesty and charm that works well in the film and shows that he is a star on the rise. Praise should be heaped upon Chiklis and McMahon who could easily have become lost behind their costumes. Theygive very human and compelling performances. Chiklis captures the duality of Grimm as he battles his despair over his physical appearance with his desire to do what is right. McMahon does riveting work as the man pushed over the edge and becomes fueled by a desire for revenge and power. The fury and evil upon his face and in his walk shows him as a man of menace and danger.
I for one would have liked to have seen a bit more action in the film but as it stands, it is not as bad as some of the trailers hinted that it might be. If you do not mind thin plots and characters, you may be able to sit back and enjoy this film for what it is, a simple summer escape. Here is hoping that we will see the “Fantastic 4” up on the big screen as the next franchise series from Marvel.
The film was never released and has gone on to become a popular bootleg amongst comic fans. The ensuing rights for the film were also sold, and for almost a decade Fox has worked in bringing the comic to the big screen.
After years of languishing, the film finally got on the fast track and under the helm of Director Tim Story and features a dynamic cast headed by some of the biggest emerging superstars in Hollywood.
Ioan Gruffudd stars as Reed Richards, a brilliant yet recently bankrupt scientist who, along with his friend Ben Grimm (Michael Chiklis), is visiting famed scientist Victor Von Doom (Julian Mc Mahon), in an effort to get his latest venture funded.
Reed is convinced that an approaching storm in space is the key to unlocking vast amounts of genetic secrets and that the shielding on Doom’s space station allows for safe study of the very rare phenomenon.
Doom agrees to the venture in exchange for 75% of all revenue generated from the findings and that he gets to assign certain people to the mission. Among them are Sue Storm (Jessica Alba), and her pilot brother Johnny (Chris Evans). The fact that Sue is Reed’s ex is a source of tension within the group, as she is obviously still hurt and bitter over Reed’s inability to look at her and life in ways that are not based upon analytical science.
Despite the issues, the crew arrives at the station and the test is going according to plan. That is until an unexpected situation arises, which causes the team to get caught in the storm with the shields lowered, exposing them all to the storm’s radiation.
Back on earth, the crew awakens to find themselves in quarantine and suffering no ill effects from the accident. The failure of the mission is of great concern for Doom. His investors are using this as a reason to pull their support, which in turn is causing his stock to drop rapidly.
In time, Reed, Sue, Johnny, and Ben start to show amazing abilities resulting from their exposure to the storm. Johnny can become a human fireball, Reed can stretch his body to amazing lengths, Sue can become invisible and project force fields, and Ben has become a living wall of rock, capable of great feats of strength.
Since Ben is no longer able to pass as a human, he feels like a freak and is shunned by his wife, causing him much anger and depression. It is due to this that the team becomes noticed by the media who dub them the Fantastic 4 after watching them in action.
The resulting fame causes the team to withdraw, save for Johnny who basks in the glory and attention heaped upon him. It is against this changing dynamic that the team must find a way to restore themselves to their normal state and to discover what is causing their new found abilities.
The Fantastic 4 are not the only ones who changed. Doom is becoming more and more angry and violent as he blames Reed for the failure of his company. Victor also has the ability to hurl deadly bolts of energy from his body which is quickly becoming metallic.
As fans of the comic know, it will not take long for Doom and the Fantastic 4 to face off, paving the way for a final confrontation. While I went in not expecting much from the film, I must say I was surprised. Yes, the film has a thin plot, and fairly basic characters and action, but it is also above all fun.
The dynamic between the characters is enjoyable, as is the humor which accurately captures the tone and feel of the comic. Some purists will take exception with some of the liberties taken, such as Doom being on the trip to space and other variations on his character which are not part of the original comic.
Alba and Evans tend to come off at times as airheads but they stay true to their characters throughout. Gruffudd plays Reed with modesty and charm that works well in the film and shows that he is a star on the rise. Praise should be heaped upon Chiklis and McMahon who could easily have become lost behind their costumes. Theygive very human and compelling performances. Chiklis captures the duality of Grimm as he battles his despair over his physical appearance with his desire to do what is right. McMahon does riveting work as the man pushed over the edge and becomes fueled by a desire for revenge and power. The fury and evil upon his face and in his walk shows him as a man of menace and danger.
I for one would have liked to have seen a bit more action in the film but as it stands, it is not as bad as some of the trailers hinted that it might be. If you do not mind thin plots and characters, you may be able to sit back and enjoy this film for what it is, a simple summer escape. Here is hoping that we will see the “Fantastic 4” up on the big screen as the next franchise series from Marvel.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Gemini Man (2019) in Movies
Nov 10, 2019
Will Smith plays top US hit-man Henry Brogan who is making the world "safer" one bullet at a time! With the mirror telling him his age, Henry hands in his firearm (not withstanding the arsenal under his stairs) to spend more time going fishing and doing the crossword.
But all is not well when Henry's 'one for the road' hit turns out to not be quite what it seems.
Teaming up with marina manager Danny (Danny??) Zakarweski (Mary Elizabeth Winstead), the pair go on the run from operatives of a government-funded black-ops organization called Gemini. Gemini is a private semi-military organization (didn't we just go here with "Angel Has Fallen"?!). These 'baddie goodies' would rather see Henry - and all who know him - fed to the fishes rather than have him catching them.
But one of these guys, under the direct command of Gemini-boss Clay Verris (Clive Owen), looks kinda familiar...
Let's focus on the positives for a minute. This is a spy movie that has all of the polish that the recent "Angel has Fallen" didn't have. Some nice photogenic locations fly in and out again (Georgia, Budapest and Colombia: the latter for no obvious reason I can remember!). It occasionally reminded me of a glossy Bond film, but without Bond.
There are also some high-class special effects (the special effects coordinator is Mark Hawker). A moonlit CGI Gulfstream with a zoom into the cockpit is particularly impressive.
Some of the action set pieces also entertain. A Will-on-Will bike chase is well done, and I've not seen a bike used as a hand-to-hand weapon in this way before!
And Will Smith is no doubt a class act, with his 'youngification' (I'm not sure what the official word is) also being effectively done. I also enjoyed Mary Elizabeth Winstead, who was great in "10 Cloverfield Lane". The lady has real screen presence.
But man oh man, that script. Let's name the guilty parties in this film: the scriptwriters David Benioff (Game of Thrones), Darren Lemke and Billy Ray. (I'll put Ray last in the list, since the story was by Benioff and Lemke and this has the smell to me of Ray - who has a history of some great scripts like Captain Phillips under his name - being drafted in to steady a listing ship).
Some of the dialogue in this film is not just a bit dodgy. It's head in the hands groan-worthy (and I actually did at times: fortunately the cinema was barely half full and I was on my own in the whole row). And some of it is just plain offensive. Henry meets his old pal Jack Willis (Douglas Hodge) on his yacht where he explains his wife is on a trip to Paris as a scantily clad dolly-bird wanders past. Henry comically rolls his eyes at this adulterous behaviour, with some sort of "Jack, what are you loike!" comment. Cringe-worthy.
Will Smith, Mary Elizabeth Winstead and Benedict Wong (their ally, adding some comic relief) are clearly good actors. But the script often makes them look utterly vacuous and stupid. And Lee seems to have a "good enough, move on" approach to the filming. One jaw-dropping moment has Will Smith telling the others that they are going to Budapest. "Budapest?" Winstead and Wong are supposed to say in union, but mistime it. "Can we do that again?". Nope. It's on the screen.
As for Clive Owen... sorry, he's really not in the same acting league, and the script does him even fewer favours. As he says at one point "It's like the Hindenburg crashing into the Titanic". I couldn't have put it better myself.
"Uncanny Valley". You know this phrase. The Princess Leia and Moff Tarkin scenes in "Rogue One" is the classic example. Effects that don't quite work on the big screen. "But" - you say to yourself - "Dr Bob just said that the 'youngification' of Will Smith was done really well?". And I'll repeat again that it was. It's on a par with Samuel L. Jackson's 'youngification' in "Captain Marvel". Where something strange happens is in the film's overall projection. Ang Lee has tried again with his experiment of filming at a massive 120 frames per second..... five times the normal movie frame rate of 24 fps. And the quality of the picture - particularly during high-speed action scenes - becomes outstandingly good! But equally it just doesn't 'look right'.
When the human eye presumably works at an equivalent "fps" of thousands of 'frames per second' you'd think that it should all be fine. But for some reason I just found it distracting. Presumably the audiences for "The Jazz Singer" thought the same about sound; and those for "Gone with the Wind" and the "Wizard of Oz" about colour. Maybe we've seen the future, and its the new norm that we just need to get used to. We'll see.
Ang Lee's "Life of Pi" was extraordinary. His "Hulk" was one of the poorest of the Marvel canon. Unfortunately, this movie is at the "Hulk" end of the spectrum. Which is a real shame. The duo of the 51 year old Smith and the 35 year old Winstead work really well together. They have great chemistry, but, you'll be relieved to hear, avoid any icky love interest.
What a shame. With a different script, and some good production values, this could have been a very different story.
(For the full graphical review, please check out https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2019/10/18/one-manns-movies-film-review-gemini-man-2019/ )
But all is not well when Henry's 'one for the road' hit turns out to not be quite what it seems.
Teaming up with marina manager Danny (Danny??) Zakarweski (Mary Elizabeth Winstead), the pair go on the run from operatives of a government-funded black-ops organization called Gemini. Gemini is a private semi-military organization (didn't we just go here with "Angel Has Fallen"?!). These 'baddie goodies' would rather see Henry - and all who know him - fed to the fishes rather than have him catching them.
But one of these guys, under the direct command of Gemini-boss Clay Verris (Clive Owen), looks kinda familiar...
Let's focus on the positives for a minute. This is a spy movie that has all of the polish that the recent "Angel has Fallen" didn't have. Some nice photogenic locations fly in and out again (Georgia, Budapest and Colombia: the latter for no obvious reason I can remember!). It occasionally reminded me of a glossy Bond film, but without Bond.
There are also some high-class special effects (the special effects coordinator is Mark Hawker). A moonlit CGI Gulfstream with a zoom into the cockpit is particularly impressive.
Some of the action set pieces also entertain. A Will-on-Will bike chase is well done, and I've not seen a bike used as a hand-to-hand weapon in this way before!
And Will Smith is no doubt a class act, with his 'youngification' (I'm not sure what the official word is) also being effectively done. I also enjoyed Mary Elizabeth Winstead, who was great in "10 Cloverfield Lane". The lady has real screen presence.
But man oh man, that script. Let's name the guilty parties in this film: the scriptwriters David Benioff (Game of Thrones), Darren Lemke and Billy Ray. (I'll put Ray last in the list, since the story was by Benioff and Lemke and this has the smell to me of Ray - who has a history of some great scripts like Captain Phillips under his name - being drafted in to steady a listing ship).
Some of the dialogue in this film is not just a bit dodgy. It's head in the hands groan-worthy (and I actually did at times: fortunately the cinema was barely half full and I was on my own in the whole row). And some of it is just plain offensive. Henry meets his old pal Jack Willis (Douglas Hodge) on his yacht where he explains his wife is on a trip to Paris as a scantily clad dolly-bird wanders past. Henry comically rolls his eyes at this adulterous behaviour, with some sort of "Jack, what are you loike!" comment. Cringe-worthy.
Will Smith, Mary Elizabeth Winstead and Benedict Wong (their ally, adding some comic relief) are clearly good actors. But the script often makes them look utterly vacuous and stupid. And Lee seems to have a "good enough, move on" approach to the filming. One jaw-dropping moment has Will Smith telling the others that they are going to Budapest. "Budapest?" Winstead and Wong are supposed to say in union, but mistime it. "Can we do that again?". Nope. It's on the screen.
As for Clive Owen... sorry, he's really not in the same acting league, and the script does him even fewer favours. As he says at one point "It's like the Hindenburg crashing into the Titanic". I couldn't have put it better myself.
"Uncanny Valley". You know this phrase. The Princess Leia and Moff Tarkin scenes in "Rogue One" is the classic example. Effects that don't quite work on the big screen. "But" - you say to yourself - "Dr Bob just said that the 'youngification' of Will Smith was done really well?". And I'll repeat again that it was. It's on a par with Samuel L. Jackson's 'youngification' in "Captain Marvel". Where something strange happens is in the film's overall projection. Ang Lee has tried again with his experiment of filming at a massive 120 frames per second..... five times the normal movie frame rate of 24 fps. And the quality of the picture - particularly during high-speed action scenes - becomes outstandingly good! But equally it just doesn't 'look right'.
When the human eye presumably works at an equivalent "fps" of thousands of 'frames per second' you'd think that it should all be fine. But for some reason I just found it distracting. Presumably the audiences for "The Jazz Singer" thought the same about sound; and those for "Gone with the Wind" and the "Wizard of Oz" about colour. Maybe we've seen the future, and its the new norm that we just need to get used to. We'll see.
Ang Lee's "Life of Pi" was extraordinary. His "Hulk" was one of the poorest of the Marvel canon. Unfortunately, this movie is at the "Hulk" end of the spectrum. Which is a real shame. The duo of the 51 year old Smith and the 35 year old Winstead work really well together. They have great chemistry, but, you'll be relieved to hear, avoid any icky love interest.
What a shame. With a different script, and some good production values, this could have been a very different story.
(For the full graphical review, please check out https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2019/10/18/one-manns-movies-film-review-gemini-man-2019/ )
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Big Hero 6 (2014) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
Genuinely Moving
The Marvel Studios movie train has been non-stop over the last few years, from Iron Man to The Avengers, it shows no signs of slowing. Now though, a take-over by Disney has ensured both studios enter into rather unknown territory.
The first film from this collaboration is Big Hero 6, an animated superhero film in the same vein as Pixar’s The Incredibles. But does it reach those dizzying heights?
Big Hero 6 follows Hiro Hamada, a 14-year-old robotics prodigy as he goes about his life in the fictional city of San Fransokyo alongside his brother Tadashi. Hiro has lost his way after a family tragedy and it takes his brother’s robot Baymax to help find himself again.
The story unfortunately is the film’s weakest link, being predictable at best and downright clichéd at its worst. In this respect, Big Hero 6 falls well short of the standards set by the majority of Pixar’s movies.
Thankfully, the visuals are absolutely stunning, a match for Disney’s best, if not quite up to the level of last year’s How to Train YourBig_Hero_6_Poster_2 Dragon 2. The city of San Fransokyo is beautifully realised in sweeping, gloriously colourful shots that show of the animation best when they’re from above.
The characters themselves are rendered in painstaking detail and in particular sequences it becomes difficult to tell the film apart from a live-action feature.
Vocal performances are also very good. Ryan Potter plays Hiro as a vulnerable, pre-pubescent teen who by the end of the film comes to realise just who he is exceptionally well. James Cromwell, Maya Rudolph and Damon Wayans also lend their recognisable voices to people in the film.
However, by far the stand-out is Baymax, a hilariously funny healthcare robot. Disney’s animators should be given plaudits for crafting a character which despite its lack of facial features and emotive tones is so engaging to watch.
Unfortunately, when Baymax evolves into super-Baymax, his characterisation suffers and the funny, caring nature of him is lost somewhat.
The final third of the film delves into generic superhero fodder, but picks up again just before the end credits role with a deeply emotive.
Big Hero 6 also gets increasingly dark the further into the movie you get, the comedic elements get muddled in a plot which isn’t quite sure which way it wants to go and young children may find it a little to scary to stomach.
Thankfully the negatives here are far outweighed by the positives and Big Hero 6 steamrolls itself into a moving finale which leaves itself open for a sequel nicely.
Overall, from stunning visuals to engaging characters, Big Hero 6 continues Disney’s penchant for creating fun and watchable films. Despite a lack of originality, the character of Baymax makes up for most of the other shortcomings and ensures the generic story is genuinely moving.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/02/05/genuinely-moving-big-hero-6-review/
The first film from this collaboration is Big Hero 6, an animated superhero film in the same vein as Pixar’s The Incredibles. But does it reach those dizzying heights?
Big Hero 6 follows Hiro Hamada, a 14-year-old robotics prodigy as he goes about his life in the fictional city of San Fransokyo alongside his brother Tadashi. Hiro has lost his way after a family tragedy and it takes his brother’s robot Baymax to help find himself again.
The story unfortunately is the film’s weakest link, being predictable at best and downright clichéd at its worst. In this respect, Big Hero 6 falls well short of the standards set by the majority of Pixar’s movies.
Thankfully, the visuals are absolutely stunning, a match for Disney’s best, if not quite up to the level of last year’s How to Train YourBig_Hero_6_Poster_2 Dragon 2. The city of San Fransokyo is beautifully realised in sweeping, gloriously colourful shots that show of the animation best when they’re from above.
The characters themselves are rendered in painstaking detail and in particular sequences it becomes difficult to tell the film apart from a live-action feature.
Vocal performances are also very good. Ryan Potter plays Hiro as a vulnerable, pre-pubescent teen who by the end of the film comes to realise just who he is exceptionally well. James Cromwell, Maya Rudolph and Damon Wayans also lend their recognisable voices to people in the film.
However, by far the stand-out is Baymax, a hilariously funny healthcare robot. Disney’s animators should be given plaudits for crafting a character which despite its lack of facial features and emotive tones is so engaging to watch.
Unfortunately, when Baymax evolves into super-Baymax, his characterisation suffers and the funny, caring nature of him is lost somewhat.
The final third of the film delves into generic superhero fodder, but picks up again just before the end credits role with a deeply emotive.
Big Hero 6 also gets increasingly dark the further into the movie you get, the comedic elements get muddled in a plot which isn’t quite sure which way it wants to go and young children may find it a little to scary to stomach.
Thankfully the negatives here are far outweighed by the positives and Big Hero 6 steamrolls itself into a moving finale which leaves itself open for a sequel nicely.
Overall, from stunning visuals to engaging characters, Big Hero 6 continues Disney’s penchant for creating fun and watchable films. Despite a lack of originality, the character of Baymax makes up for most of the other shortcomings and ensures the generic story is genuinely moving.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/02/05/genuinely-moving-big-hero-6-review/