Search
David McK (3832 KP) rated The Batman (2022) in Movies
Apr 3, 2022 (Updated Dec 20, 2025)
"I am vengeance!"
Batman.
First debuting in DC Comics, 1939, and now one of the most popular superheroes of all, amongst the 'holy trinity' of Superman, Wonder Woman and Batman
It's often forgotten and/or overlooked in his numerous movies to date that those initials (DC) actually stand for Detective Comics, with Batman - on the pages - sometimes also known as The Worlds Greatest Detective.
This is the first of his movies that I can think of where that aspect of his character is portrayed - sure, there hints of it in 1989s Batman, but only hints. Here it's full force, front and centre, with Batman - only his second year as a Vigilante - working alongside Jim Gordon and a proto-Catwoman to track down and apprehend the serial killer known only as The Riddler, who is leaving clues behind at all his kills.
A very different portrayal of that character than Jim Carrey's version in 'Batman Forever'.
This is also a very long film - nearly 3 hours - that, I felt, is in danger of outstaying it's welcome, with very little in the way of superheroics. More of a police whodunnit with costumed characters, maybe. There's also a perfect 'cutting-off' point at just after the third act, with - I guess? - a studio mandate for the fourth act tacked on, which is probably more along the lines of what to expect from a Batman movie.
As for Robert Pattinson as The Caped Crusader? I kept expecting him to sparkle. Unfair, I know (to type cast him as the vampire from Twilight), but I do think he may have swung too far in the other direction when portraying Bruce Wayne; here very much an emo goth kid rather than the swaggering heir to the fortune he is oft shown as. In fact, there's very little of Bruce on display: he spends most of his time, in costume, as Batman. This was a conscious decision, or so I have heard, to show how Bruce is in danger of losing himself to that persona. I'm also struggling to think of a single key 'stand-out' moment in line with 'Batman Begins' rescuing Rachel or 'The Dark Knight' "he's the Hero we need ..." bit: the Penguin car chase, perhaps?
So, yeah, a very different cinematic take on The Dark Knight, indeed.
First debuting in DC Comics, 1939, and now one of the most popular superheroes of all, amongst the 'holy trinity' of Superman, Wonder Woman and Batman
It's often forgotten and/or overlooked in his numerous movies to date that those initials (DC) actually stand for Detective Comics, with Batman - on the pages - sometimes also known as The Worlds Greatest Detective.
This is the first of his movies that I can think of where that aspect of his character is portrayed - sure, there hints of it in 1989s Batman, but only hints. Here it's full force, front and centre, with Batman - only his second year as a Vigilante - working alongside Jim Gordon and a proto-Catwoman to track down and apprehend the serial killer known only as The Riddler, who is leaving clues behind at all his kills.
A very different portrayal of that character than Jim Carrey's version in 'Batman Forever'.
This is also a very long film - nearly 3 hours - that, I felt, is in danger of outstaying it's welcome, with very little in the way of superheroics. More of a police whodunnit with costumed characters, maybe. There's also a perfect 'cutting-off' point at just after the third act, with - I guess? - a studio mandate for the fourth act tacked on, which is probably more along the lines of what to expect from a Batman movie.
As for Robert Pattinson as The Caped Crusader? I kept expecting him to sparkle. Unfair, I know (to type cast him as the vampire from Twilight), but I do think he may have swung too far in the other direction when portraying Bruce Wayne; here very much an emo goth kid rather than the swaggering heir to the fortune he is oft shown as. In fact, there's very little of Bruce on display: he spends most of his time, in costume, as Batman. This was a conscious decision, or so I have heard, to show how Bruce is in danger of losing himself to that persona. I'm also struggling to think of a single key 'stand-out' moment in line with 'Batman Begins' rescuing Rachel or 'The Dark Knight' "he's the Hero we need ..." bit: the Penguin car chase, perhaps?
So, yeah, a very different cinematic take on The Dark Knight, indeed.
Lee (2222 KP) rated Aquaman (2018) in Movies
Dec 14, 2018
A very enjoyable DCEU movie!
Before I begin, I just wanted to describe my feelings on the state of the DCEU up until now and hopefully this will be a good indication as to whether or not you're going to agree with me when it comes to Aquaman. So, as I'm sure most people will agree, so far the whole thing has been a bit of a disaster. A rush to try and bottle what Marvel have spent the last 10 years crafting and achieving, with just a handful of below average and inconsistently toned movies. I liked Man of Steel, and I didn't mind Batman V Superman, although I do understand why many people were disappointed. I really enjoyed Wonder Woman, and I found a lot to like within Justice League too. But as for Suicide Squad, well that one was just a ridiculous mess. And with all the uncertainty around the future of Henry Cavill and Ben Affleck in their roles as Superman and Batman, it seems DC still have a long way to go in terms of laying solid foundations for some decent universe building to rival Marvel.
So that brings us to Aquaman, probably the only other character of interest from Justice League who has yet to get his own origin/standalone movie. We got glimpses in Justice League, tastes of the underwater water world, and brief appearances from Amber Heards character Mera, so it's good to be able to expand on what has the potential to be a really strong, interesting character. And under the direction of James Wan, hopefully another welcome deviation from the dark, dull earlier DC movies that received so much criticism.
As far as origin stories go, things get off to a strong start. Lighthouse keeper Thomas Curry finds Atlantean queen Atlanna (Nicole Kidman) washed up on the rocks one day and takes her in to care for her. They fall in love, eventually giving birth to Arthur. A few years later and it's clear that Atlanna cannot stay. She returns to Atlantis, promising that she'll return to him one day, leaving Thomas to raise Arthur. When we join Arthur again, it's one year following the events of the Justice League and the defeat of Steppenwolf. Taking care of a bunch of hi-tech pirates who have boarded a submarine, but still finding time to return home to dad for a few beers and a laugh with the locals. He's left the world of Atlantis behind him, having been banished for being a half breed, and feeling anger at the treatment his mother received for giving birth to him. It's not long though before things all start kicking off and he had to return to life under the sea. Half brother Orm (Patrick Wilson) is looking to wage war on the surface world in retaliation for all the destruction and pollution within the seas, and begins trying to gain support from the seven kingdoms. Meanwhile, one of the pirates Aquaman encountered earlier has got his hands on some Atlantean technology, becoming Black Manta and vowing to get his revenge. During an undersea meeting with Vulko, aid to Atlanna and the man responsible for training Arthur as a child, Arthur is urged to find the lost Trident of Atlan, a magic artifact that once belonged to Atlantis’ first ruler. By wielding the trident, Arthur can reclaim his rightful place as king, hopefully uniting the worlds of land and sea.
There is a LOT going on here, and luckily for the most part, it all works relatively well. The quest for the trident is a bit like an Indiana Jones quest - Arthur and Mera have to undertake a trek across, and below, the Sahara desert, a trip to Sicily, a perilous boat trip and a journey to a hidden world deep within the ocean. The Black Manta storyline seems a bit unnecessary and annoying at times, although does provide some great action (and a setup for a sequel). The underwater scenes involving Atlantis and the other kingdoms are absolutely beautiful to look at, very detailed and imaginative, but these are the areas that unfortunately begin to let the movie down. Culminating in an epic underwater battle involving thousands of different creatures and weapons, the movie ends up as just another DCEU CGI overload.
Despite that, I actually had a lot of fun with this movie, and I particularly loved the action. Fluid, balletic fight scenes, with the viewpoint flowing above and around those involved, we follow a character as he powers through walls and roofs, pulling out to reveal and follow other characters in action, the direction of these scenes is extremely effective. Overall, this is definitely a strong step up for the DCEU and a worthy standalone movie. I just hope they can now keep this momentum going.
So that brings us to Aquaman, probably the only other character of interest from Justice League who has yet to get his own origin/standalone movie. We got glimpses in Justice League, tastes of the underwater water world, and brief appearances from Amber Heards character Mera, so it's good to be able to expand on what has the potential to be a really strong, interesting character. And under the direction of James Wan, hopefully another welcome deviation from the dark, dull earlier DC movies that received so much criticism.
As far as origin stories go, things get off to a strong start. Lighthouse keeper Thomas Curry finds Atlantean queen Atlanna (Nicole Kidman) washed up on the rocks one day and takes her in to care for her. They fall in love, eventually giving birth to Arthur. A few years later and it's clear that Atlanna cannot stay. She returns to Atlantis, promising that she'll return to him one day, leaving Thomas to raise Arthur. When we join Arthur again, it's one year following the events of the Justice League and the defeat of Steppenwolf. Taking care of a bunch of hi-tech pirates who have boarded a submarine, but still finding time to return home to dad for a few beers and a laugh with the locals. He's left the world of Atlantis behind him, having been banished for being a half breed, and feeling anger at the treatment his mother received for giving birth to him. It's not long though before things all start kicking off and he had to return to life under the sea. Half brother Orm (Patrick Wilson) is looking to wage war on the surface world in retaliation for all the destruction and pollution within the seas, and begins trying to gain support from the seven kingdoms. Meanwhile, one of the pirates Aquaman encountered earlier has got his hands on some Atlantean technology, becoming Black Manta and vowing to get his revenge. During an undersea meeting with Vulko, aid to Atlanna and the man responsible for training Arthur as a child, Arthur is urged to find the lost Trident of Atlan, a magic artifact that once belonged to Atlantis’ first ruler. By wielding the trident, Arthur can reclaim his rightful place as king, hopefully uniting the worlds of land and sea.
There is a LOT going on here, and luckily for the most part, it all works relatively well. The quest for the trident is a bit like an Indiana Jones quest - Arthur and Mera have to undertake a trek across, and below, the Sahara desert, a trip to Sicily, a perilous boat trip and a journey to a hidden world deep within the ocean. The Black Manta storyline seems a bit unnecessary and annoying at times, although does provide some great action (and a setup for a sequel). The underwater scenes involving Atlantis and the other kingdoms are absolutely beautiful to look at, very detailed and imaginative, but these are the areas that unfortunately begin to let the movie down. Culminating in an epic underwater battle involving thousands of different creatures and weapons, the movie ends up as just another DCEU CGI overload.
Despite that, I actually had a lot of fun with this movie, and I particularly loved the action. Fluid, balletic fight scenes, with the viewpoint flowing above and around those involved, we follow a character as he powers through walls and roofs, pulling out to reveal and follow other characters in action, the direction of these scenes is extremely effective. Overall, this is definitely a strong step up for the DCEU and a worthy standalone movie. I just hope they can now keep this momentum going.
Andy K (10826 KP) rated Brightburn (2019) in Movies
Oct 19, 2019
I like the idea of a horror superhero genre but...
Brightburn is a classic modern example of a great idea, with mediocre execution.
The classic "Superman" story is turned on its head in a way when a spaceship falls to Earth with a baby within. The young couple who live on a farm decide to adopt the infant as their own. Now 12 years old, young Brandon starts to feel differently. He is compelled to seek out his mother ship now locked inside the depths of a barn where he seems to receive unknown demonic instruction.
Things aren't going well at school either. He injures a young girl's hand after an incident where she fails to catch his fall while playing a game of trust during their physical education class. Afterwards, the girl's mother has some distasteful words to say about Brandon which he overhears and his lust for retribution emerges.
The lack of specific direction or even which genre this movie wanted to inhabit is its biggest flaw (which means bad screenplay). At some points it was underdog outcast teen drama and at others darkened house jump scare or even some scenes involving gruesome gory horror. The first half of the short 90 minutes was devoted to establishing Brandon's status at school and with his family and wasn't terribly interesting while the 2nd half was just the standard gruesome kill after gruesome kill which were cool I guess, but won't stay with me.
Going in, I really thought the film was going to be more epic and concentrate on his emerge and then quest for world domination (which was only shown during the end credits) which I think would have been way more interesting, similar to Chronicle which was done in a much more interesting way than this.
Maybe they were hoping for huge success so the 2nd film could've explained more of the origin story. I guess I don't mind that nothing as to the source of the spaceship or the creatures within were explained. I don't need every plot point spoon fed to me, but it was a wasted opportunity to create a new completely original super villain universe which they could've drawn from indefinitely.
Is Brightburn supposed to be an antihero? Are you supposed to root for him to avenge the wrongs he has had in his ife or are you simply supposed to cringe like you would when Jason or Michael hack into a sex crazed teenager?
The classic "Superman" story is turned on its head in a way when a spaceship falls to Earth with a baby within. The young couple who live on a farm decide to adopt the infant as their own. Now 12 years old, young Brandon starts to feel differently. He is compelled to seek out his mother ship now locked inside the depths of a barn where he seems to receive unknown demonic instruction.
Things aren't going well at school either. He injures a young girl's hand after an incident where she fails to catch his fall while playing a game of trust during their physical education class. Afterwards, the girl's mother has some distasteful words to say about Brandon which he overhears and his lust for retribution emerges.
The lack of specific direction or even which genre this movie wanted to inhabit is its biggest flaw (which means bad screenplay). At some points it was underdog outcast teen drama and at others darkened house jump scare or even some scenes involving gruesome gory horror. The first half of the short 90 minutes was devoted to establishing Brandon's status at school and with his family and wasn't terribly interesting while the 2nd half was just the standard gruesome kill after gruesome kill which were cool I guess, but won't stay with me.
Going in, I really thought the film was going to be more epic and concentrate on his emerge and then quest for world domination (which was only shown during the end credits) which I think would have been way more interesting, similar to Chronicle which was done in a much more interesting way than this.
Maybe they were hoping for huge success so the 2nd film could've explained more of the origin story. I guess I don't mind that nothing as to the source of the spaceship or the creatures within were explained. I don't need every plot point spoon fed to me, but it was a wasted opportunity to create a new completely original super villain universe which they could've drawn from indefinitely.
Is Brightburn supposed to be an antihero? Are you supposed to root for him to avenge the wrongs he has had in his ife or are you simply supposed to cringe like you would when Jason or Michael hack into a sex crazed teenager?
Crazy Taxi Classic
Games and Entertainment
App
Hey hey, come on over and have some fun with Crazy Taxi, SEGA's ground-breaking, open-world driving...
Joe Goodhart (27 KP) rated Supergirl (2016-) Vol. 1: The Killers of Krypton in Books
Nov 30, 2020
This was a solid book, really made me care about Supergirl as a character, something I have not felt since Peter David was writing it! Marc Andreyko has a genuine caring for the character, as she is written strongly, without pandering to the fanboys out there. And while I know Kara is not a real person, under Andreyko's hand, she felt very real!
The story follows up on the tail end of MAN OF STEEL (which, as I said in my review, exceeded my low expectations, helping to have faith anew in Brian Michael Bendis). She says goodbye to her cousin, Kal-El, as she heads to space to follow the trail of Rogol Zaar, and to determine if he was not lying when he claimed to have destroyed Krypton. Best of all, she won't be alone: Krypto will be along for the journey! And what a journey it is!
Some questions are answered, but new ones are generated, as a conspiracy within the Guardians of Oa! There's a lot more to it than just that, but I like my reviews, like my initial readings, to be Spoiler-Free! You'll have to read it for yourself, and I am certain that, like myself, you will not be disappointed!
And speaking of "not being disappointed", let me talk a bit about the equally enjoyable art. The majority of this volume was drawn by Kevin Maguire (who I adored here, as much as his work in the 80s on JUSTICE LEAGUE INTERNATIONAL), but he was also support the likes of Emanuela Lupacchino, Evan "Doc" Shaner, Lan, Medina and a bit of Karl Kesel, too! All involved were totally on their game, turning in art that remained consistent with Maguire's style, so as not to derail the story. Everyone deserves a big, hearty round of applause!
However, there was one thing in it that caused me to give it four Stars, not five. And, that, unfortunately, would be Dan Jurgens' Christmas-themed story. While the message was truly heartfelt and appreciated, the actual dialogue, as well as the story itself, was just not as good as I recall Jurgens being. And that's a damned shame, because some of my best Superman memories involve his stories from the 90s! Ah, memories!
And, that my friends, is a wrap! I hope you will check this one out, as it is the probably one of the best Supergirl stories in far too long! I truly hope DC treats Marc Andreyko right, because he is all aces!
The story follows up on the tail end of MAN OF STEEL (which, as I said in my review, exceeded my low expectations, helping to have faith anew in Brian Michael Bendis). She says goodbye to her cousin, Kal-El, as she heads to space to follow the trail of Rogol Zaar, and to determine if he was not lying when he claimed to have destroyed Krypton. Best of all, she won't be alone: Krypto will be along for the journey! And what a journey it is!
Some questions are answered, but new ones are generated, as a conspiracy within the Guardians of Oa! There's a lot more to it than just that, but I like my reviews, like my initial readings, to be Spoiler-Free! You'll have to read it for yourself, and I am certain that, like myself, you will not be disappointed!
And speaking of "not being disappointed", let me talk a bit about the equally enjoyable art. The majority of this volume was drawn by Kevin Maguire (who I adored here, as much as his work in the 80s on JUSTICE LEAGUE INTERNATIONAL), but he was also support the likes of Emanuela Lupacchino, Evan "Doc" Shaner, Lan, Medina and a bit of Karl Kesel, too! All involved were totally on their game, turning in art that remained consistent with Maguire's style, so as not to derail the story. Everyone deserves a big, hearty round of applause!
However, there was one thing in it that caused me to give it four Stars, not five. And, that, unfortunately, would be Dan Jurgens' Christmas-themed story. While the message was truly heartfelt and appreciated, the actual dialogue, as well as the story itself, was just not as good as I recall Jurgens being. And that's a damned shame, because some of my best Superman memories involve his stories from the 90s! Ah, memories!
And, that my friends, is a wrap! I hope you will check this one out, as it is the probably one of the best Supergirl stories in far too long! I truly hope DC treats Marc Andreyko right, because he is all aces!
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated Suicide Squad (2016) in Movies
Sep 1, 2019 (Updated Sep 2, 2019)
Yikes
I, like many of you, really like comic books. So in this day and age, where films like Elektra, The Spirit, Catwoman, Daredevil etc, are just a horrible joyless memory, it takes something truly special to make you nearly hate comic book movies forevermore.
Suicide Squad is that something truly special.
After being saddened by the underwhelming Batman vs Superman, I had my hopes set high for SS. The trailers looked fantastic. I couldn't wait to see characters such as Katana, Enchantress, Harley Quinn, Deadshot etc, finally have their moment in the spotlight. I couldn't wait to see what Jared Leto brought to the table as The Joker. I was ready to be shown that BvS was a one off misstep, and that the DCEU properties were ready to take their place amongst comic book film royalty.
I'm almost cross at myself for being so very silly.
Where to begin - I guess characters.
I have no problem with Margot Robbie as Harley Quinn. I thought she was fine. The script is terrible in places but that's not her fault.
Another character that suffers from the script is Deadshot. Again, I have no problem with Will Smith (except that the movie threatens to become the Will Smith show on occasion), but the script turns him into a tool to spout one liners and name check the movies title.
Enchantress is just a weird gyrating CGI embarrassment that is given little room to do anything else.
Everyone else is a waste - Katana, Killer Croc, Diablo - all so boring.
Same goes for Boomerang (although I get the feeling that Jai Courtney genuinely tried his best with what he was given)
And then there's The Joker. I can't honestly tell whether I liked him or not - he was hardly in it! Although his brief appearance was more interesting than the rest of the film for sure.
The whole film is set to a soundtrack of 'cool' rock songs that I would have put on a mixtape when I was 12, and they're relentless. It feels like every two minutes another song is obnoxiously blasted into my poor eyes and ears.
The film feels like one huge trailer. It's edited and chopped up jarringly, and it's a film that evidently has suffered from re shoots and studio meddling.
I refuse to believe that the same man who directed the damn good 'Fury' is solely responsible for this car crash.
Hopefully, James Gunn can keep the suits at bay and deliver a home run with the next attempt...
Suicide Squad is that something truly special.
After being saddened by the underwhelming Batman vs Superman, I had my hopes set high for SS. The trailers looked fantastic. I couldn't wait to see characters such as Katana, Enchantress, Harley Quinn, Deadshot etc, finally have their moment in the spotlight. I couldn't wait to see what Jared Leto brought to the table as The Joker. I was ready to be shown that BvS was a one off misstep, and that the DCEU properties were ready to take their place amongst comic book film royalty.
I'm almost cross at myself for being so very silly.
Where to begin - I guess characters.
I have no problem with Margot Robbie as Harley Quinn. I thought she was fine. The script is terrible in places but that's not her fault.
Another character that suffers from the script is Deadshot. Again, I have no problem with Will Smith (except that the movie threatens to become the Will Smith show on occasion), but the script turns him into a tool to spout one liners and name check the movies title.
Enchantress is just a weird gyrating CGI embarrassment that is given little room to do anything else.
Everyone else is a waste - Katana, Killer Croc, Diablo - all so boring.
Same goes for Boomerang (although I get the feeling that Jai Courtney genuinely tried his best with what he was given)
And then there's The Joker. I can't honestly tell whether I liked him or not - he was hardly in it! Although his brief appearance was more interesting than the rest of the film for sure.
The whole film is set to a soundtrack of 'cool' rock songs that I would have put on a mixtape when I was 12, and they're relentless. It feels like every two minutes another song is obnoxiously blasted into my poor eyes and ears.
The film feels like one huge trailer. It's edited and chopped up jarringly, and it's a film that evidently has suffered from re shoots and studio meddling.
I refuse to believe that the same man who directed the damn good 'Fury' is solely responsible for this car crash.
Hopefully, James Gunn can keep the suits at bay and deliver a home run with the next attempt...
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated Justice League (2017) in Movies
Oct 11, 2019
Oof
I had a horrible horrible feeling that Justice League was going to be rubbish. After the double whammy of raw sewage that was BvS and Suicide Squad, my hopes for a third ensemble film weren't high at all.
The finished result was worse than I thought it was going to be be though...
Firstly, we will start with the characters - a collection of some of the finest heroes the world of comics has to offer.
Batman, who I thought was the best part about BvS, is relegated to a boring and tired waste, who acts as occasional comic relief. It doesn't help that at this point, Ben Affleck seems completely uninterested in even being involved (can't blame the guy).
After a pretty good solo outing, Wonder Woman has gone from an empowered female badass, to someone who mopes around about her ex boyfriend (but is still admittedly badass).
The Flash (one of my favourite DC characters) is LITERALLY useless from start to finish.
Cyborg has the remnants of a potential interesting back story, but the rushed nature of the whole affair gives us next to nothing there.
Aquaman isn't too bad, but is there, like Batman, for light comic relief whilst he shouts generic gym-bro nonsense everywhere.
Superman, when he turns up, is ok. Just not really given much to do - it's all just a big mess.
The villain of the piece is Steppenwolf, a bland, forgettable and generic CGI demon who has little-to-no impact as he shouts his way through the bare bones narrative.
Talking of the CGI, it's just not that great, again. I'm not sure how this keeps happening with the amount of money being pumped into these things?
The third act of the film is draped in CGI, and it all looks cheap! And I just can't get my head around it! Ahhhhh!
(I'm not even going to talk about Henry Cavill's now infamous and hideous CGI mouth)
When it comes to the DCEU, the better films have been the solo outings, and it really shows here - the three characters who had not yet appeared properly at this point (Cyborg, Aquaman, and The Flash) just seem hugely wasted in a movie that is obviously trying to play catch up with the MCU - something that's not necessary! DC has a wealth of great source material to draw from, and it's yet to be utilised properly!
It would seem that going forward, Warner Bros are concentrating more on these solo films, and judging by the putrid mess of Justice League, that's is definitely the right direction to go in.
The finished result was worse than I thought it was going to be be though...
Firstly, we will start with the characters - a collection of some of the finest heroes the world of comics has to offer.
Batman, who I thought was the best part about BvS, is relegated to a boring and tired waste, who acts as occasional comic relief. It doesn't help that at this point, Ben Affleck seems completely uninterested in even being involved (can't blame the guy).
After a pretty good solo outing, Wonder Woman has gone from an empowered female badass, to someone who mopes around about her ex boyfriend (but is still admittedly badass).
The Flash (one of my favourite DC characters) is LITERALLY useless from start to finish.
Cyborg has the remnants of a potential interesting back story, but the rushed nature of the whole affair gives us next to nothing there.
Aquaman isn't too bad, but is there, like Batman, for light comic relief whilst he shouts generic gym-bro nonsense everywhere.
Superman, when he turns up, is ok. Just not really given much to do - it's all just a big mess.
The villain of the piece is Steppenwolf, a bland, forgettable and generic CGI demon who has little-to-no impact as he shouts his way through the bare bones narrative.
Talking of the CGI, it's just not that great, again. I'm not sure how this keeps happening with the amount of money being pumped into these things?
The third act of the film is draped in CGI, and it all looks cheap! And I just can't get my head around it! Ahhhhh!
(I'm not even going to talk about Henry Cavill's now infamous and hideous CGI mouth)
When it comes to the DCEU, the better films have been the solo outings, and it really shows here - the three characters who had not yet appeared properly at this point (Cyborg, Aquaman, and The Flash) just seem hugely wasted in a movie that is obviously trying to play catch up with the MCU - something that's not necessary! DC has a wealth of great source material to draw from, and it's yet to be utilised properly!
It would seem that going forward, Warner Bros are concentrating more on these solo films, and judging by the putrid mess of Justice League, that's is definitely the right direction to go in.
Madefire Comics & Motion Books
Book, Comics and Entertainment
6.3
Rate It
App
Featured App Store Editors' Choice with Best of July, Best New Apps, (July 2014) and Best of 2014...
Ross (3284 KP) rated Doors: Twilight in Books
Mar 24, 2021
Great idea, poorly executed
The idea behind the Doors books is that of three different versions of a story with a shared beginning, but the stories diverge when the characters go through one of three (actually five but two are ignored as far as I'm aware!) doors. A team of people, each hired for their own area of expertise, are tasked with rescuing a rich German man's daughter who has wandered down into the mysterious cellar of their former family home, where a series of doors are believed to lead to strange new places.
The first quarter of these books is identical, with the damsel in distress being introduced and the team coming together and being given their tasks. At this stage, there is next to no organisation around their approach, it really is simply a bunch of people heading into the unknown and being drastically under-prepared. When the team quickly find the missing and take her back to the surface, the reader is left somewhat taken aback at the speed with which it was resolved. This is nothing compared to how the reader feels when the team go back looking for the real missing woman, simply based on their employer's assistant's momentary mistake that the woman's eyes were the wrong colour. This is not challenged by anyone in the team, who head back downstairs. It's a bigger WTF moment than the Batman vs Superman 'Martha' fiasco.
As with some of Heitz's Dwarves books, I think this suffered from fairly poor translation, as a number of phrases and words just are not clear. At no point did i really know where the team were heading, forwards or backwards, which door they went through etc.
And the promise of heading into the future was very much an empty one. Some members of the team briefly find themselves in near-future Frankfurt and there is a short section of the book which adds no value and has no connection to the rest of the book whatsoever. Thereafter, there is just some cliched mysterious dark maze adventures, with some unexplained conspiracy around the use and beginnings of the doors and their purpose. (I am currently around 80% of the way through the 'Colony' book, having mercifully skipped the first, repeated, quarter, and am starting to realise that there is likely to be an overall story arch that only becomes clear once the reader has read all three books).
This book, and the series as a whole, offered so much potential and teased so much, but this one at least completely failed to deliver for me.
Advance copy received from NetGalley and the publishers in exchange for an honest review.
The first quarter of these books is identical, with the damsel in distress being introduced and the team coming together and being given their tasks. At this stage, there is next to no organisation around their approach, it really is simply a bunch of people heading into the unknown and being drastically under-prepared. When the team quickly find the missing and take her back to the surface, the reader is left somewhat taken aback at the speed with which it was resolved. This is nothing compared to how the reader feels when the team go back looking for the real missing woman, simply based on their employer's assistant's momentary mistake that the woman's eyes were the wrong colour. This is not challenged by anyone in the team, who head back downstairs. It's a bigger WTF moment than the Batman vs Superman 'Martha' fiasco.
As with some of Heitz's Dwarves books, I think this suffered from fairly poor translation, as a number of phrases and words just are not clear. At no point did i really know where the team were heading, forwards or backwards, which door they went through etc.
And the promise of heading into the future was very much an empty one. Some members of the team briefly find themselves in near-future Frankfurt and there is a short section of the book which adds no value and has no connection to the rest of the book whatsoever. Thereafter, there is just some cliched mysterious dark maze adventures, with some unexplained conspiracy around the use and beginnings of the doors and their purpose. (I am currently around 80% of the way through the 'Colony' book, having mercifully skipped the first, repeated, quarter, and am starting to realise that there is likely to be an overall story arch that only becomes clear once the reader has read all three books).
This book, and the series as a whole, offered so much potential and teased so much, but this one at least completely failed to deliver for me.
Advance copy received from NetGalley and the publishers in exchange for an honest review.
Jesters_folly (230 KP) rated The Suicide Squad (2021) in Movies
Aug 4, 2021
The Suicide Squad is a (possible) reboot that may or may not follow on from Suicide Squad and (or only) Birds of Prey. Honestly I'm not sure that even DC knows what's going on with their movie time line. Anyway, Margot Robbie and Joel Kinnamen return as Harley Quinn and Rick Flagg to lead another team of criminal misfits on an impossible mission (or, if it's a reboot like James Gunn says then it's the first time they are together and we ignore that Flagg askes Harley why she's back in prison or that Waller's team are checking who has worked with who). This time task force X are sent to the island of Corto Maltese to find and destroy 'Project Starfish'.
Ok so 'The Suicide Squad' is a good film, it looks like it has learned form the problems of the first film and incorporated the humour from 'Birds of Prey'. Firstly It's not as formulaic as the first film, a problem that is caused by the premise of 'Task Force X', if each member of the task force is chosen because they have a skill that is useful for the mission then you would expect that skill to be used and the first film took this too literally, each member had a scene where they did their thing then they just faded into the background and 'The Suicide Squad' avoids this by focusing on the characters was, well characters and not powers.
The film is very action driven and very violent but, unlike some of the other recent DC films it's not dark, it has more of a 'Grindhouse' feel than the dark, brooding style of the Batman/Superman/Justice league films (I liked those but they were a bit heavy in parts). The Suicide Squad has humour in it, some of which is quite immature but it fits the tone of the film. The violence and humour is some what balanced out by the comic book feel the film has, King shark, Weasel and Staro are both some what cartoony in appearance and some of the costumes are straight out of the comic books and I think that this is what managed to keep it at a (UK) rating of 15 because (and I know I've said this) it's violent, it's bloody, people get ripped apart and there is torture and lots of talk about killing children.
Somehow 'The Suicide Squad' is a fun watchable film and defiantly one of the better DC films, don't be put of by the original Suicide Squad (no 'The).
Oh and also there's a, after credit scene that set's up for a film that's been announced so stick around until the credits finish.
Ok so 'The Suicide Squad' is a good film, it looks like it has learned form the problems of the first film and incorporated the humour from 'Birds of Prey'. Firstly It's not as formulaic as the first film, a problem that is caused by the premise of 'Task Force X', if each member of the task force is chosen because they have a skill that is useful for the mission then you would expect that skill to be used and the first film took this too literally, each member had a scene where they did their thing then they just faded into the background and 'The Suicide Squad' avoids this by focusing on the characters was, well characters and not powers.
The film is very action driven and very violent but, unlike some of the other recent DC films it's not dark, it has more of a 'Grindhouse' feel than the dark, brooding style of the Batman/Superman/Justice league films (I liked those but they were a bit heavy in parts). The Suicide Squad has humour in it, some of which is quite immature but it fits the tone of the film. The violence and humour is some what balanced out by the comic book feel the film has, King shark, Weasel and Staro are both some what cartoony in appearance and some of the costumes are straight out of the comic books and I think that this is what managed to keep it at a (UK) rating of 15 because (and I know I've said this) it's violent, it's bloody, people get ripped apart and there is torture and lots of talk about killing children.
Somehow 'The Suicide Squad' is a fun watchable film and defiantly one of the better DC films, don't be put of by the original Suicide Squad (no 'The).
Oh and also there's a, after credit scene that set's up for a film that's been announced so stick around until the credits finish.