First Mutations (X-Men, 2000)

X-Men kind of set a template for Marvel films that they have stayed fairly close to and it has served them well. Get a director with some real film cred, and the rest will follow. X-Men is certainly proof that it is an effective approach.

Really, it was the hiring of Bryan Singer (then most recognized for the Usual Suspects) that got actors to take notice. Most of the actors admitted no familiarity with the comics, and Bryan was not a fan of the series when he came on board. While having a non-fanboy running the show ruffled some feathers (especially when it was revealed that none of the X-Men would be wearing costumes), it really seemed to miss the point.

A good storyteller need not be a fan to tell a great tale about these characters. Patrick Stewart’s lack of interest in Sci-Fi did not stop him from becoming a beloved Star Trek Captain or Professor X. And many of the actors opted to research their characters by reading the comics. Sir Ian McKellan devoted an extensive section of his website to Magneto, he found simple ways to connect the characters to real life.

Of course, the big issue was Wolverine. Hugh Jackman was way to tall to play the runt. Oh, the frustrations comic fans are forced to deal with. Along with the previously mentioned news that Singer was ditching the costumes in favor of leather uniforms. So, things were stacking up against it in the eyes of fans and creators.

The film begins in the early 1940’s. A concentration camp to be specific. Weakened and fearful Jewish families are herded through an iron gate. The Nazi soldiers begin to separate out children. One young boy and his parents reach for each other, and as the young boy becomes more frantic, we notice little things. The metal in the gates starts to reach back towards the boy-and he and the soldiers holding on to him are dragged towards the warping gates. After knocking the boy out, the soldiers stare in confusion at the mangled gates before them. Next is an introduction to Rogue (Anna Paquin). She is in her room with a young man and they start to kiss…suddenly, he starts to appear sickly, veins seeming to grow across his face. She starts screaming as the boy convulses before her. These are dramatic starts for a very ambitious film. A few years earlier Batman and Robin crashed the comic book movie boom. And yet, Singer was taking the X-men seriously.

The film quickly works to bring all the characters together. and there is little time wasted in creating the team, tying it around Wolverine and Rogue.

The film, despise an easy premise, suffers from the problem from so many first films for a franchise…”Introductoritus”. It is a large ensemble, and I get wanting to put in all sorts of stuff for the die hard fan to get excited over. But it is a big cast and that means some folks will get glossed over. Halle Berry’s Storm is flat and pretty lifeless. Some of it is the writing, some is the performance. Hugh Jackman does a terrific job as Wolverine. He is convincing as a loner, yet the (sibling like) bond with Rogue is believable. As his his friction with Cyclops and the magnetism with Jean Grey. Unfortunately, Marsten’s Cyclops is often kind of boring when not interacting with Wolverine. Their verbal sparring is definitely a highlight of the film. It often feels like the film really is not sure how they want to portray Storm and Cyclops.

But in the end, Storm gets the biggest shaft in character development. Some of the film’s worst lines come from Storm. There is the scene where she and Wolverine are discussing the coming war between mutants-those who wish to peacefully co-exist with homo sapiens and those who wish to rule as homo-superior. She tells Wolverine at least she has chosen aside. As if merely choosing a side gives you some nobility (hint-it does not). I mean, yeah, she chose Professor X’s side…but what if she had chosen Magneto’s side? There is also the infamous “what happens to a toad when struck by lightning” gag. It falls flat. It was a contribution of Joss Whedon, who swears that it was all Halle Berry’s delivery that resulted in it being so ridiculed.

Both Patrick Stewart and McKellan give rousing performances, while Hugh Jackman proved that he could embody Wolverine even though he was of average height. Stewart and McKellan really provide a sense of a longstanding friendship that is needed as the foundation of the story. The effects were solid for the time, many mutant powers from the comics really came to life.

On the other hand, the film is so busy introducing the concept and the characters, the plot seems under developed. It is a pretty herculean task to try and bring a single character with over forty years of backstory to a finite two hour movie. Trying to bring the X-Men-full of hundreds of characters together cohesively? You have to choose who you want to focus on, knowing you will deal with complaints either way. Singer, Tom Desanto and David Hayter struggle valiantly to bring together character and story, but really, it fell mostly on the side of character development. Understandable, as the X-Men have a rich cast to choose from.

Toad and Sabertooth come off as pretty bland and one dimensional for most of the film, not contributing much until the end.

For Singer, this was easily his most ambitious film to date. Not so much in story, but in cast size, and general scale. But he does a pretty solid job with the film overall. He seems to understand the sense of scope a film like this needed-in spite of his background in smaller films, he seemed to transition quite well to the grand scale needed for the X-Men.

The film’s overall plot is probably less memorable than it’s various character moments, and in that sense, the movie is hurt. What could have been a terrific film is simply a good start…it is just a set up.

July 25, 2016 0

Temporary Apocalypse (X-Men: Apocalypse, 2016)

There is a scene in X-Men Apocalypse where, as a group of students are leaving Return of the Jedi, Jean Grey states “But we can all agree the third movie is always the worst.” It is a pretty clear shot at X-Men: The Last Stand. That was the movie Apocalypse Director Bryan Singer skipped and is pretty widely seen as a disappointment after X2. Except, whether they realized it or not, the joke is kind of a jinx.

See, X-Men: First Class and X-Men:Days of Future Past? They were quite good. They are entertaining and filled with terrific performances and nice use of characters from the vast history of the X-Men Comics. After the Last stand and the damage done by X-Men Origins: Wolverine the series went back to the beginning. Introducing us to Young Charles Xavier and Magneto. McAvoy and Fassbender brought characters we knew as aging leaders to young men trying to make the world a better play, but always coming to odds with how to do that. Then, in Days of Futures Past, they brought the past and future together, to try and fix the timeline, fixing the flaws of Last Stand and Wolverine.

And this brings us to X-Men Apocalypse. I was looking forward to it, as it was most of the team that brought us the last two installments. Yet again, the central focus is the relationship between Xavier (McAvoy), Magneto (Fassbender) and Mystique (Jennifer Lawrence). Beast (Nicholas Hoult) retuns, as does Moira Mactaggert (Rose Byrne). We are also introduced to a younger Nightcrawler (Kodi Smit-McPhee), young Cyclops (Tye Sheridan), young Jean Grey (Sophie Turner), young Storm (Alexandra Shipp) and Jubilee (Lana Condor). Of course, smartly, the film brings back Evan Peters as Quicksilver…and he steals the show a lot…again.

First, the good. Again, as I said, Quicksilver is just fantastic. Yeah, he is not really like his counterpart from the comics. In the comics, he is arrogant, impatient and snippy. This is explained in the comics by Quicksilver essentially seeing life as being a continuous wait at the DMV, at least when he has to move at the rest of the worlds pace. Evans approach is more of a lighthearted goofball who enjoys and savors his speed. And it really works.

The performers are good choices. I like that they kept the faith element for Nightcrawler. I know his creator never cared for that addition…but I always liked the combo of swashbuckler swordsman Christian who happens to look like a demon. Setting young Storm in Cairo was a nice touch, acknowledging her history from the comics. There are a lot of great visuals. And yet…

The story is just a mess. There is so much going on, so many introductions, characters get lost. Jubliee, who was a pretty big character in the comics for over a decade is barely a side character. We never even see her mutant powers in action. Angel is just a random passerby in the film, for all intents and purposes. Both he and Psylock (Olivia Munn) get precious little to do and zero character development. The film routinely feels like it is advertising “There will be a deleted scene on the blu-ray fans!” as it transitions from moment to moment. Maybe those deleted scenes will make Apocalypse feel threatening. When some of us expressed concern about the pictures of Apocalypse on Entertainment Weekly’s cover last year, we were told to not assume this was the final look, they will Fix It In Post, so to speak.They did not. Or at least not enough. In spite of hiring a terrific actor (Oscar Isaac), Apocalypse just never feels as frightening as the film keeps telling us he is.

And it is clear the film is going for epic. But it just never feels that way…because the film takes forever to get through it’s big dramatic moments. There is a sequence that is supposed to be the big Jean Grey moment. She walks dramatically into battle towards Apocalypse. There is a standoff going on the mental plane involving the psychic characters…and the film spends a ridiculous amount of time on dramatic shots of Jean Grey walking. And walking. And walking. Instead of being thrilled by a big moment, I was just wanting them to get to the moment.

And there is a dramatic image from the trailers…that turns out to be the filmmakers taking a cue from Superman IV: the Quest for Peace. The film just shambles along from scene to scene, never feeling coherent or particularly great. And after the last two films? A pretty big disappointment. I mean, it is okay, but it was a real drop after the last two films. And Deadpool. It is okay for an X-Men movie means it might be slightly better than the Last Stand.

May 28, 2016 1

Player vs Player (Captain America: Civil War, 2016)

Captain America: Civil War was a risky gamble. It has a bloated cast. I mean, Captain America is joined by practically everyone (Except Thor and the Hulk). The film was also going to be introducing us to a couple Major Players in Both the Black Panther and Spider-Man. There was always the possibility that this would be so bogged down, we would have Marvels first failure…the first Marvel film that outright sucked.

And the film should be a huge mess. We are being introduced to characters left and right. And as usual, the villain of the film is pretty thin. And yet, somehow? The film works. It stand and manages to remain extremely engaging. The film is dealing with the fallout of collateral damage we have seen through the previous films. All that destruction we have seen through the Avengers, Thor, Captain America the winter soldier. Culminating in an event in this film in which an attempt to save people kills several visiting Wakandans.

The United Nations is determine to intervene. And Tony Stark, after being confronted by an angry and heartbroken mother (Alfre Woodard) whose son died in Ultron’s Sokovia attack, is determine to see it happen. He, quite understandable, sees a need for Oversight. And this is what sets off the Conflict within the Avengers. Steve Rogers is certain that being shackled and having to get permission to fight the bad guys is a bad idea. We of course, sympathize with Cap, but one of the things the film does very well? The character motivations. They make sense. You understand why they choose the way they do. And the the fact that certain characters miss the villain’s big plan is quite believable.

The film is action packed, but not at the expense of the overall story. The characters get meaningful exchanges and yet, the film avoids feeling overly bogged down by a sense of self importance. The events matter, questions are asked, but without the self aggrandizing approach other Super-hero films had recently. Not naming names. The cast does great work with the script they were given. They bring the characters to life.

And then there is the humor. This is by no means a light film, but it has very effective humor. The film is not afraid that if we laugh we might miss “the important and heavy epic story being told”. These people are friends. They have history. They care about each other. And that is what gives the story it’s real conflict and weight. But it is also those established relationships that allow the fun.

Of course, the big question was…Spider-Man and the Black Panther-will they work? It is nice that we do not get an origin story (it should be pretty clear that T’Challa was already the Black Panther, he is not becoming the Black Panther for revenge). But he does get a nice story arc focusing on the thirst for vengeance, leading him to wisdom in his new role as King. Chadwick Boseman plays T’Challa as young, confident royalty. And yet, when he suffers lost, he gains a restrained ferocity.

And Tom Holland? He is Spider-Man. The portrayal of Spidey in this film was almost instantly lovable. His rapid fire chatter was dead on. He looked great in costume and his position of siding with Tony makes complete sense. I am genuinely excited to see both Spider-Man and Black Panther’s solo films.

James Gunn (Director of the Guardians of the Galaxy films) said this was the best Marvel film to date. And, in the end, if it is not actually the best? It is pretty darn close. This is a terrific adventure and worth seeing.

May 9, 2016 0

Kevin Smith Was Right

No, really. Smith recently commented on Batman v Superman. He had the following to say:

“The movie I felt like didn’t really have a heart. It was certainly f—–’ humorless, there was nothing funny going on in that world whatsoever.”

And you know what? He is right.*

I get what Zack Snyder and Christopher Nolan were trying to do. They were trying to make this major hard edged epic film. They were trying to make something that “transcended” popcorn and super-hero movies. When asked why there was no post credit scene in Man of Steel like Marvel does, Nolan scoffed and stated that real films do not do that. He walked it back a bit, but I suspect he meant it when he said it. And of course, Snyder can be endlessly quoted about the epic tone and nature he is trying to create for the DC Movie universe. That tone is big, full of grim consequence (though it is dishonest to pretend Marvel’s world lacks consequences, as the films are often having results that impact other films as well as their various television shows). This, of course makes it rather hilarious that Warner Brothers defended the critical reaction to the film by claiming it is just fun.

While I tried to remain spoiler free in my review? This is not going to avoid them. At. All. If you want to see the movie (or Man of Steel for that matter) yet, and do not want anything-including the end of the film-ruined? Stop reading.

Man of Steel was pretty problematic in how it set up Superman. First there was the whole troubling Johnathan Kent stuff. Johnathan had some genuinely great moments of fatherly kindness. When Clark asks if he can just keep pretending to be Johnathan and Martha’s son, and Johnathan responds with “You are my son.” That is a perfect moment. Yet, just moments before, Pa Kent suggests that maybe Clark should have let his fellow students die in a bus crash, rather than risk exposure. Rather than be saved by Clark, Johnathan lets himself be engulfed by a tornado. Clark could have saved him and they could have explained it to the towns folk in Smallville as…well, an amazing story of survival.

Clark does not appear in costume to the world until after Zod arrives. You might not think it matters, but trust me, it creates a problem for Batman v Superman. It would have helped the story immensely if Superman had some heroics before Zod arrived. It would build Superman up in the eyes of the public.

In Batman v Superman, we are first introduced to Bruce Wayne during the Superman and Zod fight. And this is, in fact a great scene. Wayne is shown as aggressively, passionately devoted to protecting his employees. He helps a man pinned by a beam, he saves a child from falling debris. This does set up an understandable distrust of Superman and Superman’s power. But when we meet his alter Batman…well, Batman has hit hard times. Batman has become bitter and vicious, now branding criminals with his batarangs. He is mired in bitterness and anger. Batman is kind of at odds with Bruce Wayne. Bruce is a man we see saving people. Batman is a guy brutalizing people and marking them for death.

This is not necessarily an entirely invalid presentation of the character. A lot of critics note how he shows little regard for killing people. And this is true, but the idea that he is to busy trying to fend off a whole lot of guys who are trying to kill him is pretty fair. It is kind of like asking why a soldier shot a bunch of guys shooting at him. Batman actually is mostly a fighter. And the scene where he saves Martha Kent? Awesome. When he tells Martha “I’m a friend of your son’s”? That is something I wanted to see in a movie featuring Batman and Superman.

But I digress, the problem with introducing us to this Batman as the entry into the new DC Cinematic Universe? We get hints of a backstory that implies Batman has been through hell and lost a whole lot. And yet, we are never introduced to the hero that Batman was, which would open doors to juxtapose with the hero he is now. It has no weight to simply hint that he has “gone through hell”. We needed to know Batman for this to resonate.

It is similar with Superman. We get brief shots of him coming in to save people in disasters. But we have not known Superman as Superman long enough for the questions about his “godhood” to come into play. And his alien nature is more heavily focused, how distant he is. Clark seems to have little humanity of his own, with Lois practically his sole tether to humanity. Although Snyder suggested killing Zod was to show why Superman abhors killing, one of our first acts of Superman in the present is to save Lois from a warlord by slamming into him at full speed pushing him through multiple walls, an act that most certainly would have killed the man. This was a terrific opportunity for the filmmakers to be creative in saving Lois from the guy in a non-lethal way, but they opted to have him casually take the guy out. So, killing Zod did not cause Superman to take preserving life all that seriously.But that is not what the scene is for. It is set to show Superman being setup as dangerous.

By giving us very little Superman time as hero? It pulls the rug from the potential emotion and ethical questions being posed. These are big questions, but we do not see enough of Superman as heroic savior to truly sell the hero worship that some people are supposedly rebelling against. We know there is distrust because the film makes a point of telling us there is. Superman does not seem to enjoy helping people in this universe. He seems to almost do it begrudgingly. He always looks so serious in the moments we see him saving anyone. Superman barely cracks a smile. There should be a juxtaposition between Superman and Batman in attitude. Superman should be questioning the methods of Batman. In an early John Byrne comic, there was a story where Batman and Superman first meet. In the comic, Batman forces Superman to help him by suggesting that he planted a bomb on an innocent person in the city. Superman is bothered by this…until he discovers that the innocent person was Batman himself. It was a really good moment in establishing their overall nobility and where they were ultimately on the same side. Superman is the beaming hope, Batman is the hero needed to deal with the darkness in life.

And yet, Man of Steel and Batman v Superman give us a Superman who is every bit as grim as Batman. One of the things that might have helped is if, in Superman and Batman’s first meeting, Superman had been less the authoritarian and more friendly guy trying to reason with Batman. Superman trying to reach out, being rebuffed by Batman would encourage Superman to be frustrated, as he cannot get through to Batman. Batman, of course, so distrustful that he has no time for what he misinterprets as a false piety.

Also, it would have been better, story-wise, for Superman to bristle at the God talk. He should have refuted that point, but whenever anyone calls him a God? He seems totally indifferent.

But there is nothing really separating Superman and Batman besides powers. Both are angry. Both are insolent and self centered. In fact, Batman (the greatest detective) and Clark Kent (the great investigative journalist) both are easily manipulated by Lex Luthor. Both are easily goaded into fighting. Superman at least has a decent reason, Luthor is threatening to kill his mom. Batman is sent off the edge by a package that pokes at his personal pain (the loss of his parents). He does not question it, he just assumes that it is time to take Superman out. Frankly, the inciting incident makes no damn sense. Luther sends in a guy to testify against Superman and the guy is basically a powerful bomb. This would appear like an assassination attempt on Superman, not like Superman acting as terrorist. But in Batman’s mind the right thing to do is not to try and determine who blew up the court room killing a countless number of people…it is, “Superman must be stopped.” This is a messy story point at best. It makes no damn sense for Batman to fall for this at worst.

Luthor is more than a bit of a mess. They were clearly trying to re-invent him as a new character we have never seen before…but it never comes together…he is to much the petty child, bitter and oblivious. They try and give him lines that make him sound like he has motivation, but the truth is? It all feels hollow. One bit of inspiration would have helped the character was to really invest him with a sense of nobility. A belief that he was really doing this to protect people from alien threats. That he distrusts aliens and therefor distrusts Superman. And that is not effectively done here. Eisenberg’s jittery performance leaves him feeling a lot less ominous. And he stoops to kidnapping and willing to kill Martha Kent (in a pretty clear nod to the Killing Joke, but substituting Martha Kent for Barbara Gordon and Lex for the Joker). It just makes Luthor seem cheap. I am not saying Luthor would not kidnap Martha. I am saying a strong Lex Luthor would not allow the kidnapping to be traced to him.

In my second viewing of the film, I found myself frustrated with Perry White. On the one hand, Fishburne has a lot of fun with the role. His reactions when he cannot find Clark Kent is some of the few times you get to laugh. But at the same time, Perry White being absolutely uninterested in hard news seems…wrong.

Honestly, there was no need to have flashbacks to Martha and Thomas Wayne being killed. That was so hammered into us in previous films and television…and nobody has found a way to make it feel like a necessary sequence.

Please understand, I wanted to totally be wrong about this movie. I wanted to believe maybe they cracked the code. And for a few moments at the beginning (aside from the unnecessary showing of the Waynes getting killed)? I thought we were on our way there. People have actually suggested the lack of humor is a good thing. It is taking the themes seriously. Except, humor is not only something we turn to in good times. In fact, we often turn to humor in tragic times.

As I have said, I do not think the film was an absolute disaster. I think the 29% Rotten Tomatoes rating is a bit overdoing it. And I do not have quite the hate for Snyder that some do. The visuals are nice. There are shots that, yes, inspire excitement. Cool shots of Superman and Batman…and Wonder Woman? She is great. She comes out of this unscathed. Part of that is the film barely develops her. But she is cool in the big fight with Doomsday.

Some critics, such as Kyle Smith of the New York Post claims that Batman v Superman is to smart for Marvel fans. Except, I am a Batman fan. I am a Superman fan. I am a Wonder Woman fan. I like these characters. But attempting to suggest that this film is just to heady for folks because it deals with big themes? Well, that ignores that it does not deal with the big themes very well. And Marvel films are constantly addressing the end results of what their heroes do. The attack in New York (from Avengers) was addressed in other Marvel Films and TV shows. The heroes constantly question what they have done. Age of Ultron was all about how far is to far to protect the world. Civil War is all about how people are afraid…the results of heroes running around without supervision. And we have seen Tony and Steve enough that we know those characters. We have gotten to know them. There is emotional punch to seeing them in conflict.

And in the end, that is what Frustrates me here. We have a Superman who does not really consider earth his home until the last moments of the film-right before he dies at Doomsday’s hands. And this Superman? We have barely known him as an audience. And we have known this Batman even less. If WB had been building up to this over the course of several films? Do you realize what a gut punch this movie might have been? We had Man of Steel and he is killed one movie later because Zack Snyder wanted him out of the way to allow Batman to build the Justice League. And it all feels far too calculated, there is no power to the beats of the film. If Ben Affleck’s Batman was one we were connected to prior to this film? It might have been very powerful. The film skates over this by giving fans iconic imagery to fall back on. Those great moments are not great because the film earns them, but rather the film cheats by expecting the audience to fill in the blanks with an excited reaction to “Scenes We Always Wanted to see!”

I wish that Batman v Superman was smarter than the Marvel movies. I wish it was as epic in it’s storytelling as it is in it’s visual representations of famous comic book panels and covers. I wanted the movie to be great. It thrilled me when early reports were that this was an awesome film, not anything like we feared. But when you can say “It is not as terrible as people say, but it was not that great” and it is a defense? Well, that is how folks defend a movie like God’s Not Dead. My first viewing of the film, I told someone that Marvel has nothing to fear at this point. My second viewing did not really change that.

I want WB to start making movies at least as Strong as the Avengers or Captain America: the Winter Soldier. This movie is not it. Maybe the extended cut Blu-ray will change my mind a bit…but I am not holding my breath at this point.

*Since I started writing this? Smith saw the film a second time and basically said he found the film’s heart…it was in the audience. And I am sorry…No. That is a terrible defense. The audience should not have to bring the heart to the film.

April 1, 2016 1

Super Pals In Conflict (Batman V Superman:Dawn of Justice, 2016)

This film has been both hotly anticipated and less than interesting depending on who you ask. In fact, the talk at the beginning of the week was that people had seen the movie and loved it. It was starting to look like Deadpool all over again. The early reaction made me wonder if my preconceptions were fair. Then, as the week progressed and more official reviews started to come out? It started to suggest my low expectations were warranted. Of course, I still felt I needed to see the film before declaring it a dud or success.

I am inclined to say it is better than the (at the last time I checked) 30% Rotten Tomato rating. But it is not truly great either. Clocking in at two hours and forty minutes, it is reaching for a standard of epic. Snyder and Nolan have emphasized that their films are different than those of Marvel. And it is true…the Marvel films, to a large extent, combine humor, adventure and suspense. Sure, some do it better than others. But they are lively fun films. Snyder has describe wanting his DC Cinematic Universe to be more epic Greek Myth.

Affleck actually works well in the role. There was plenty of online hemming and hawing…but Affleck’s Batman was pretty strong. Jeremy Iron’s Alfred worked very effectively for me. I enjoyed the larger screen time to Laurence Fishburne’s Perry White. He seems to be having a lot of fun as the tough Editor in Chief of the Daily Planet. I liked Amy Adam’s Lois Lane in Man of Steel, and she is just as good here. In spite of criticisms of the Man of Steel, I like Henry Cavill and feel he gives us the best Superman we can hope for given the material. I also liked when they focused on Lois and Clark’s relationship. I also enjoyed the brief time given to Gal Gadot’s Wonder Woman and find myself looking to her solo film now.

The weakest link of the characters was Jesse Eisenberg’s Lex Luthor. The character never feels as brilliant or as menacing as he should. Instead he just comes across as weird and quirky.

I can appreciate that they tried to make the destruction of Man of Steel a real sticking point that Superman has to face. That his heroics can even see negative results. This does really give a plausible motivation to Batman. The Batman we get in the film is cynical and has given up hope, rather than seeing Superman as that hope, he becomes determined to stop Superman. When Lex Luthor manipulates events, Batman falls over the edge. This actually works pretty well. It is an old comic book trope where two heroes meet, not realizing they are on the same side and fight, before realizing they are on the same side. The first Avengers film did this in very entertaining fashion in about five minutes. Here, Superman and Batman spend a majority of the film in distrust.

However, the film is just so packed with advance planning for the cinematic universe, they start forcing stuff into the film to prepare us. This also becomes confusing on telling apart dreams from memories from possible future events…at one point I was trying to determine if Bruce Wayne was having a potential prophetic vision. The film also lacks a strong central antagonist, and the introduction of Doomsday for the final battle just makes the film feel overloaded. The film feels bloated and confusing, and could use some streamlining.

It is also obvious that the criticisms of the Man of Steel’s massive destruction really stung Snyder. At points a general points out that they cleared an area, a newscast points out that the workday is over and everyone had gone home…Batman explains he chose a particular area for a fight because it was abandoned…the filmmakers really want you to know just how many people are not getting killed.

The movie is full of iconic visuals of Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman, and that is what they feel like. “Remember this panel from Dark Knight Returns?!” But they do not enhance the story. And Snyder’s cynical approach infects even the color grading. It is almost a dull and faded world. I am missing vibrant color in the DC Universe.

In the end, like Man of Steel…there are things I really did like. There are things I really did not care for. The film just misses the mark in a way that bums me out. I want to leave a movie starring Superman feeling hopeful and happy. I cannot say that here. The film never earns it’s deeper questions of hero worship and power, or the repercussions of Superman’s actions. I appreciate that they tried to aim for depth…it just is not as deep as they would like us to think it is.

March 25, 2016 1

Marvelous

So, I recently wrote about how some feared what the success of Deadpool meant for the future of comic book and superhero films. And it looked like we were getting a glimpse of those fears being realized. There was first the announcement that the Superman vs Batman Blu-Ray would have an ‘R-Rated’ edition. Then they announced a go for the third Wolverine as an ‘R’.

There are reasons I think those were possible before Deadpool, but I think it did play at least a minor role.

However, proving that this may not be the trend it appeared to be, Marvel has announced they will not be making their Cinematic Universe a haven of ‘R-Rated’ super-hero films. This is welcome news. The Marvel Cinematic Universe has skewed comfortably PG-13. They are not little kid safe…but older kids on up have been able to enjoy them. Parents have been able to take older kids and teens and enjoy the films. They were not to risqué (Guardians of the Galaxy pushed that envelope the most).

I am glad to see Marvel sticking to the plan, rather than being distracted by Deadpool dollars.

March 5, 2016 0

The Danger of Deadpool’s Victory

So, since the last time I talked about Deadpool, I was proven very wrong. Deadpool was a hit with critics and audiences, receiving a lot of praise. There are people who did not care for it, but the movie broke records nobody expected.

I am happy to be wrong here. I am glad it has succeeded. And I think there is room for both family friendly super hero films and ‘R-Rated’ super-hero films.

On Twitter a week or so back, I got involved briefly in a discussion that was inspired by a tweet that stated that “Nothing Good Can Come From Deadpool’s Success.” I took the opposite side, arguing I do not think it means all super-hero films are suddenly going to go hard ‘R’.

Then in a couple days time, we saw announcements of the next Wolverine film will be ‘R’ and there will be an ‘R’ rated “super cut” of Superman vs Batman. And I do get the concern, though I am not ready to admit defeat. The Wolverine is not surprising, and they have skirted the violence of the character for over a decade.

Going back to X-2 we were being given pitches that we were about to see the Wolverine the last film did not deliver. We got a more violent cut of the second Wolverine film. At best, the success of Deadpool let them know that the ‘R’ is not the kiss of death.

In regards to Superman and Batman…Warner Brothers has always seen dark and gritty as the key to success. When Superman Returns did not succeed quite as big as the WB had hoped? They cited that it was not Dark Enough. When the Dark Knight succeeded they felt vindicated and even suggested that this is how they would fix Superman. When Green Lantern failed Warner Brothers blamed the film for not being dark enough.

Yet Man of Steel was dark and grim. And it seems the DC Universe was already on this path, well before Deadpool.

What is sad, is there is a lesson to be learned from Deadpool’s success. Deadpool was not a dark and grim take on super-heroes. It was a fun and bizarre ride. It had dark humor, and lot of it. But it was funny and intentionally so. The creators (from the writers to the director to the stars on) got the character. They knew and were faithful to their source.

Deadpool proves taking a big risk is worth doing. Films that know who they are? They are what studios should take a chance on. Truth their creatives, don’t micro manage. Letting the creators be free often produces positive results. Micro-Managing everything gives us studio vision and less interesting films.

February 26, 2016 3

Four or Five Moments (Deadpool, 2016)

Tim Miller’s Deadpool is hilarious and fun. A darkly comic take that brings the pages to life by simply understanding the character. The movie is also extremely crass, full of over the top cartoonish violence, raunchy humor, some nudity and plenty of profanity. This is not for everyone, and if you find those things hard to get past, I would recommend skipping this one. It is also not for your kids. This film earns it’s ‘R’ rating.

Honestly, it is a bit amazing this film got made. While attempt to parody and mock super-hero film have been attempted, they are really never successful. They never seem to understand the thing they are lampooning. Miller, Ryan Reynolds and the writers Rhett Reese and Paul Wernick have given us a surprisingly clever film. It is a bit amazing that they even got the opportunity to make it. After the disaster of X-Men Origins: Wolverine (The first attempt at playing the character by Reynolds), the idea of a Deadpool movie was shelved by the studio.

Then, somebody leaked test footage of a sequence that was created to pitch the shelved film. The response was so overwhelmingly positive the film got greenlit and Miller and Reynolds went to work.

And what they gave us is one of the most unique super-hero movies we have seen, while still fitting into that world. Reynolds bring snarky charm to Deadpool, also known as Wade Wilson. Wilson has been experimented on and his latent mutant genes activated. He takes damage, but due to a healing factor, all his wounds fix themselves. So, like a real life Wile E. Coyote, he gets abused relentlessly, but keeps coming back. A lot of the film’s humor comes from this.

There is a running gag that Colossus is always trying to get Deadpool to change his ways and join the X-Men. And along with the sullen Teenage Negasonic Warhead, he spends the film trying to get Deadpool on that path. And these two characters are great additions. They fit into the world well.

The real success is pulling off the character of Deadpool. Constantly cracking wise, he spends the film talking to the audience. In one scene Colossus is startled by a comment from Deadpool, not understand why he made his comment. Deadpool explains that he is not talking to Colossus…he is talking to “Them”. Them is the audience. Wilson is constantly breaking the fourth wall. Instead of narrating the film, he just turns and talks to the audience. He is fully aware he is in a movie universe.

One of the other fun aspects is that Reynolds is merciless to himself. There are numerous slams of his previous film outings and even a slam on himself as a talent. And the film’s opening credits (which kept me laughing even after I got the gag, it just stayed funny) effectively let you know the film’s sarcastic attitude. This is not your regular X-Men movie.

Of course, the movie is definitely set in the Fox Marvel X-Men Universe. This has caused some consternation among some geek sites, as they cannot reconcile the difference between Daniel Cudmore’s Colossus in the previous X-Men films and the version we see in this film, who appears older and is voiced by Stefan Kapicic with a thick Russian accent. This is pretty easy to reconcile, as the Days of Future past altered the timeline. It is entirely possible Colossus came from Russia when he was older.

I found myself liking all the characters in Wilson’s circle. There was an oddball charm in his relationship with Vanessa (Morena Baccarin). His roomate Blind Al (Leslie Uggams) is a riot. T.J. Miller’s bartender (he runs a bar for mercenaries) Weasel is a fun character (his best line comes right before Deadpool goes to take out his villain, Francis (Ed Skrein). Francis really hates Deadpool because he is so mouthy…and Deadpool refuses to call him by his chosen villain codename… Ajax.

Anyways, while I have repeatedly expressed concern that the film will not be successful for precisely the reasons I enjoyed it, I am more than pleased if it succeeds, as it could open the doors to more creative takes in superhero films. There are a lot of them on the slate, and it would be great if they all sought to set themselves apart from the crowd.

February 13, 2016 0

Green Flashes

I had not paid attention to this before…but I realized this week, some of the same people that gave us the Ryan Reynold’s Green Lantern brought us Arrow, Flash, Supergirl. This includes Greg Berlanti and Marc Guggenheim. And I have to say, in some ways it is very obvious.

The film draws heavily on characters from the comics, though sometimes to poor effect. Amanda Waller, for example. She is simply a scientist named Amanda Waller. That is supposed to a cool Easter Egg for fans. But aside from getting her race correct, the film gives us an uninteresting scientist…not the Wall.

Based on the Flash? This would seem mystifying. The Flash does Easter Eggs extremely well. Except, there is also Arrow. Arrow is problematic most of the time. Relying all too much on Flashbacks and a darker tone than appropriate for the Green Arrow…it has gotten by on a likable cast. But from the first season, it was incredibly obvious that the creators of Arrow did not want to make a Green Arrow show, but a Batman show. They just could not get the greenlight for it. The same thing happened on Smallville.

And we see the same problems in 2011’s Green Lantern. There are some great things in the film. Marc Strong’s performance as Sinestro stands out. However, the film was designed to kick off a franchise. And yet, it makes Hal Jordan’s first fight against a universe sized threat. Where do you go from that? Instead of keeping it small, allowing Hal to save the planet, rather save the entire universe right away.

There are no other future Lanterns introduced. I mean, seriously, you want an Easter Egg? Introduce John Stewart in the film(He was cut from the script).

In addition, when this film came out, Marvel was only a year away from the hotly anticipated Avengers. DC and the WB had a very prime opportunity to start building that shared universe they desperately wanted. The script even considered showing Clark Kent in a brief cameo as a candidate for the ring and the film has a sign for Central City. It was cut on the idea of not relying on other heroes. So, we ended up with a closed universe. This could have opened the door and with a better setup than we got from Man of Steel.

I was disappointed, in the end, with Green Lantern because it falls short all to easily. Seeing what Berlanti and Guggenheim have pulled off on the Flash makes me wonder how much involvement they had in the final product.

January 22, 2016 1

Suicidal Glee

Folks are talking about the new Suicide Squad Posters…and drawing comparisons to the Superman V Batman posters.

Here is the new trailer:

Uh…and here is the most recent Batman v Superman:

Notice anything? Like the posters? The trailer for the Suicide Squad suggest an energetic and fun film. I was not sure how well the Suicide Squad would translate, after all, it is comprised of established bad guys from the DC Universe. There is a sense of goofiness amid the grit and violence. The attitude coming across is not grim.

Batman V Superman? It seems like a dour and angry affair. Nobody cracks a smile (aside from Lex Luthor). It is trying so hard to scream “Epic”, it misses that there should be cheer. It should be inspiring.

Suicide Squad (like Deadpool) is showing a gritty violent side paired with a wink and a smirk. A bit of joy, almost. Batman v Superman? It pairs gritty and dark violence with a joyless intensity. And I wonder how that can be. How is it that the band of bad guys forced to be heroic looks way more fun than Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman???

January 21, 2016 0