Midnight Special movie review

If I ever needed an example of a movie that's a giant fart, I now have it: Midnight Special

I actually liked that the film had realistic dialogue and rather than heavy exposition, the actors actually got to act/emote to show their implied history, relations and emotions. The music was also nice.

However, the characters were much closer to bland than interesting. The boy, Michael Shannon and Kirsten Dunst were kinda interesting, but mostly it was the mystery surrounding them.

The film is a parental character movie masquerading as sci-fi. I personally don't enjoy movies that feature specific genres and don't actually use them; they rarely work for me (Looper is another one that missed the mark).

There were lots of great elements and ideas that ultimately amounted to a limp chase movie. As for the ending? Ugh...

Batman: The Killing Joke movie review

Batman: The Killing Joke was disappointingly mediocre...

The new opening was interesting, telling a nice story fleshing out Batgirl and her relationship (both figurative and literal) with Batman. I didn't even mind the implied sex between the two. However, the overt sexualization of Barbara left a bit to be desired...

Some of my main issues with the movie:

1. Who's story is this? Batman is the third most important character behind both Batgirl and The Joker, with no character receiving a proper arc/throughline, so the story feels disconnected. As they had decided to mess with source material by adding a new prologue, I would have loved if they embraced it more to modify the structure overall and taken some more risks (e.g. start with the Batman confronting Joker scene at the beginning, then flesh out relationships and characters more). While some may complain that Batgirl lacks agency (both in this and the source material, which is a topic for discussion), if anything, Gordon is the afterthought plot device in this film

2. The tone - Something about the story wasn't connecting with me/sucking me in, trying so hard to be dark that it took away from the story. I'd argue the film never really has a chance to breathe and live on its own once it starts adhering to the source material. The choice in tone even impacts the voice acting, which also felt disconnected, like it was missing something or just wrong. As legendary as both Kevin Conroy and Mark Hamill are, their voices felt out of place.

3. The visuals - Brian Bolland has such an iconic take on the Joker, yet the movie wasn't able to properly emulate it. The art styles change throughout the movie in a way that's unfortunately distracting. Sure, there is changing art direction in the source material, but it didn't translate very well.

On a side note, I was very curious how the film would handle the recently "controversial" ending, in which some believe Batman finally kills the Joker. Had the film been adjusted to center more on Batman's experience and how the Joker was actually pushing and testing Batman, or that the events impacted him more than Joker's target of Gordon, especially the new additions with Batman's relationship to Batgirl, it would have been so wonderfully bold if DC had Batman finally break and kill the Joker.

Overall, the new Batgirl prologue is interesting and could be a fun-yet-dark supporting episode for Batman Beyond, but after that you're probably better off reading the source material. I'd rank this on the lower end of the DC animated movies, particularly for Batman stories. For reference, two of the ones I really enjoyed were Under the Red Hood and Dark Knight Returns; I did not like Year One.

My 5 highly recommended wrestling matches

I was fortunate to help be in the pilot episode of a wrestling video series discussing top five favorite matches. The top three will probably long be in my top five, though the bottom two were tough to pick. There are so many great matches to recommend.

Check out the conversation below.

Green Room, Someone Marry Barry and Ghost Town movie reviews

Quick reviews of recently watched movies:

1. Green Room - Fucking intense, one of the best of 2016. A slow build thriller that continues to push the limits of tension up to the very end. Patrick Stewart can be a great villain. Make sure you have audio adjusted so you can hear things clearly. Definitely RECOMMENDED, somewhere between good and great. (Available on Amazon Prime)

2. Someone Marry Barry - A very funny, yet contrived movie about two obnoxious assholes who fall in love. There are actually some nice life lessons to gleam and the characters are fun, if you're willing to let go of questioning things and role with the film tropes. Casually RECOMMENDED. (Available on Netflix)

3. Ghost Town - There are some fun ideas/moments, but other movies do it better. It's difficult when two of the leads (Ricky Gervais and Greg Kinnear) are assholes, not to mention the third, Tea Leoni, falls into the female love interest trap. NOT RECOMMENDED unless you're really intent on seeing the movie. (Available on Netflix, expiring soon)

Star Wars Rogue One, Strike Two

(Note: This review involves SPOILERS)

It could be argued that when George Lucas first started creating Star Wars, he was the indie filmmaker (Rebel Alliance) going up against the big film studios of the day (the Empire). As "Star Wars" became a global franchise, there was a transference of power, with George Lucas eventually becoming that which he despised - the Emperor.

The creation outgrew the creator.

We first saw this with the transitions of the directors of the Original Trilogy. This was further solidified with the prequels, when Lucas himself was out of ideas. This has been firmly established and cemented since the Disney purchase in 2012 and the subsequent releases of both The Force Awakens and now Rogue One.

Some might argue that Star Wars ended in 1983, with everything since being a bastardization of the franchise, losing the heart and soul of the auteur origins which combined serialized space adventures with Japanese aesthetics and operatic themes, replaced slowly by consumerism, nerddom, nostalgia and self-indulgence. It has become its own cult and religion, yet lacks a central creative force to drive home what the brand and big picture are.

Case in point, let's look at the most recent entry in the franchise: Rogue One.

There are many great ideas and a few good moments in Rogue One, but the heart and soul are lacking. It's a dead, hollow movie, The resurrected carcass of Darth Vader is an apt metaphor for what Disney did with Rogue One - a glorious magic act playing off the "oohs" and "aahs" of nostalgia on one hand, meanwhile distracting from the other hand which is an empty frame for an emotionally moving story that's not there.

But I tend to be critical, so let's get some positives out of the way...


The Good
The cinematography may be the best thing the movie has going for it. Each planet had a great look, particularly the last one - Scarif. The action was largely clean and a number of shots were on point.

Donnie Yet as Chirrut Îmwe and Wen Jiang as Baze Malbus. Easily the two best new characters in the film, as they had a wonderful rapport, with a fully implied history and fleshed out characters (actual motivation!). That non-Force users were so trusting in the Force did wonders to re-establish the spiritual element of the Force, that it's not simply about Midi-chlorians....

Going in a different saga/story direction - It was great to see a non-Force, non-Skywalker entry into the franchise. This fleshes out the universe in a powerful way, regardless of the execution

The final act on Scarif - It wasn't perfect, but this is the movie we should have had


The OK
Michael Giacchino's score was simply OK. Listening as a standalone, it riffs reasonably well off John Williams' classic takes, but actually used in the movie is random. There's also a relative lack of memorable themes. This is his second take on Williams' style and while much better than Jurassic World, still falls short of confidence for potentially taking over the main series. There's promise, but he's not there yet; and I'm sadly not sure if he'll get to it. Part of it may be input from director Gareth Edwards, so hard to fully say.

K-2SO - The design of the converted Imperial Droid is nice, but the character is a ripoff of Star Wars: Knight's of the Old Republic's HK-47, among other tropes. Several of the jokes hit, but a good half of them were misses, with the eventual death of the droid also missing any deserved gravitas. It's a fun character, but the obsession by fans is lost on me.

The CGI of certain characters - Tarkin went back and forth between good and bad, but on the whole was surprisingly decent. We're getting closer to surpassing the Uncanny Valley. I didn't mind Leia at all, if only because she was so brief.

James Earl Jones as Vader - While it was nice to hear his voice again, something felt off. I don't believe it was so much Jones' age, so much as the audio engineering on his voice.


The Bad
Honestly, I could be quick and dismiss most of the movie in the "Bad" section, as the first two-thirds could have been significantly recut and shrunk before getting to the main thrust of the film - the final act on Scarif. The film was reminiscent of Man of Steel (easily the worst movie I've seen in theaters in the past decade, if not ever), with it's many conveniences and contrivances, but not yet nearly as bad; it's more like a bad Transformers sequel.

For the sake of time, let's try and fire off some quick ones...

The cold opening - Please don't do this again. It didn't work and wasn't good (particularly the musical cue that was almost Star Wars, but wasn't). Also, no more time jumping within a single movie - stick with moments unless you're REALLY going to follow a character and do a better job of establishing growth, motivation and an arc. Unless you want to go hard into James Bond territory, complete with big new villains and everything, then yes, I'd support that (on the condition of being a good movie).

Jyn Erso (Felicity Jones) - She's a weak character with no motivation. Her cold demeanor wasn't cool, it was boring. She had a great look, but stiff dialogue for her drab persona, which only broke when she saw the holographic message from her father (which is bad character direction because she expressed no emotion prior and the relationship wasn't built properly to merit a reaction). That she suddenly tries to become a leader of the rebellion and ambassador for hope came out of left field, or at least a poorly developed relationship (of any variety) with Cassian. She was also robbed of her story arc by not defeating Krennic.

The father-daughter story - This also didn't work. We never saw the bond between them, just that Galen was pulled away. Mads also either didn't have great material or just didn't care, because his acting was stiff. This served no purpose in the movie.

Jyn's mom - You're a terrible mom, abandoning your child. Would have been better if you had died off-screen prior to the film to further establish the father-daughter relationship. You offered absolutely nothing.

Cassian Andor (Diego Luna) - Also a poorly developed character. There were interesting ideas, but the backstory was poorly developed, along with also having no motivation. Your role as an assassin could have been better fleshed out. Even his "fake death" saving Jyn moment was bad. He robbed her of her story arc.

Orson Krennic (Ben Mendelsohn) - A fun idea for a villain - a middle-manager wanting more power - but ultimately a weak character. Take's a lesson from MoS' General Zod - yell when in lieu of an actual character. He's nothing more now than another example of Star Wars amazing ability to create great looking, well-cast villains that end up trash/wasted: Boba Fett, Darth Maul, Dooku, Grievous, Phasma, to name a few.

Tarkin - Could have been removed from the movie and not skipped a beat. Completely unnecessary.

Saw Gerrera - Dear god was this character and Forest Whitaker's acting terrible. Absolutely awful and added nothing to the story, besides another bad father figure for Jyn. The idea of him was better than the execution. More on that below...

The dialogue - So much of the dialogue was rough, to say the least (which is sadly a Star Wars tradition). Most of the Rebel Alliance scenes were flat, Jyn and Cassian's chemistry was flat, the aforementioned Vader and Krennic scene was flat, Krennic and Tarkin was flat (and, again, unnecessary). Mads was bads.


The Egregious Errors
Darth Vader - I'll be direct: Darth Vader is a broken character. Absolutely broken. His arc was perfect in the Original Trilogy - from brute enforcer, to big bad, to redeemed father. The prequels were an unnecessary exploration of a whiny child-killer. Rogue One offered nothing worthwhile other than to further highlight how broken Vader is - his scene with Krennic offered nothing but boring dialogue and awkward visuals (the cinematography with the fog and red lighting did not look good, with the devilish "meanings" being cheesy and on-the-nose). Also, Darth Vader should NEVER have said a pun; providing crass, sass and sarcasm, yes, but a pun? Especially over such an iconic action of his? Terrible creative choice only meant to service fans. As for the final end sequence of the film - Darth Vader is a villain, he is not a badass. The sequence was fascinating from a Force and choreography perspective, but when a crowd roots for a child-killing villain because it's "cool" signifies to me there's something wrong with the storytelling (and audience). Basically, Vader's inclusion throughout the film felt like bad video game fan-service and fanfilm territory.

The excess - Sure, budgets and technology and everything are better today than any time prior, but there's such a lack of proper scale with the films now. Just because something can be done doesn't mean it should be done. I loved the "less is more" approach of the Original Trilogy, if partly because of budget and technology restraints for the time. However, it gives the world and stories more life and a better sense of scope. With Rogue One and Disney's coffers, pretty much anything was possible, including the resurrection of the dead.

The lack of "big feel" moments, aka heart and soul - For the first two-thirds of the film, things just happened with the film just on auto-pilot. It wasn't until the arrival on Scarif when the actual story started happening. There were a couple genuinely sad moments (particularly the death of Churrit), but director Gareth Edwards proved his amateur skills by not featuring any "big" moments. For an example of a "big feel" moment, see the lightsaber duel on Bespin in Empire between Vader and Luke. That entire sequence is a master class of direction, choreography, music and writing. Another? The climax of A New Hope when Luke is doing his Death Star trench run - the tension and music were superb. One more? The drama and emotion of the final duel between Vader and Luke on the Death Star bridge. Even the Sarlacc pit has its moments.

Rogue One had zero big moments (the two Death Star attacks were nice visual effects, but lacked dramatic oomph, with the first one being corny/stupid thanks to Saw and second being excessive with no emotional impact. They also take away from the destruction of Alderaan.


The Missed Opportunities 
The trailers set up wonderfully setup Rogue One to be a dark, mysterious spy/thief film a la Ocean's Eleven in the world of Star Wars. Watching a scrappy band of Rebels take on the monolithic and all-encompassing Empire. Were Jyn and others going to go deep undercover to infiltrate the Empire? Was one already a spy? Would have been significantly more interesting than the crappy father-daughter story we had.

The option of the war/conflict highlighting the similarities between the Empire and the Rebellion were lacking, despite being entirely on the table; it was barely hinted. Same with the disparate nature of the Rebel Alliance, where Saw and his guerrillas are opposite sides of the same coin with regards to their tactics (tactics which were barely explored). Saw's design is actually a very intriguing riff on Vader's, complete with the breathing apparatus, but nothing was present in the movie.

Hell, we didn't even get the big, epic, Saving Private Ryan space war film this could have been. Had the final third been stretched out over the course of the film, that would have been something.


Conclusion
So little of the film emotionally resonated. Things just moved and fell flat. Which makes Rogue One an incredible disappointment, though not without a few merits. Sad thing is, I can tell there's a legitimately good movie hidden within the depths of Rogue One.

As someone who grew up after the Original Trilogy was released, I've had the luxury of not having to wait for future installments, with the privilege of being able to see everything at once. It's hard to predict where the Star Wars franchise is going, but if the two most recent entries are any indication, they're derivative and hollow. Or to ape a different franchise, Star Wars is going where every man has already gone before, which means I'm losing reasons to continue watching.

I grew up loving the franchise, so I hold it to high standards, not simply as a "Star Wars" entry, but as a potentially magical movie experience. The worlds, the music, the visuals, the action, the characters, the sweeping drama, the tense action, the magic and spirituality - that's what Star Wars is to me. TFA had elements of it, but nothing that wasn't already in the Original Trilogy; one could say TFA is a condensed rehash, for which I'm guessing is a "holdover"/"setup" movie until Episode 8 kicks things into actual gear. However, I'm not sure I have the patience to give Disney much more of a chance.

It's hard to give Rogue One a recommendation, even as a spectacle film (the derivative and contrived Avatar was a better example of an event movie). Sadly, Disney's Star Wars is currently sitting at two strikes. I sincerely hope Rian Johnson can deliver a hit, otherwise I'm contempt with the idea that Star Wars did truly die back in 1983.

4/10

Arrival movie review

Arrival is thought-provoking, to say the least.

Perhaps expectations were a bit high, but I found the plot to be rather ho-hum, if not above-average, with several of the dialogue choices being very basic; the world potentially going to war felt rather expedient/convenient for the sake of the narrative. However, the direction of the film, particularly combined with the score (big shout out to Jóhann Jóhannsson), created a solidly other-worldly feel. That the film was also shot to look like a drab, rainy day was an intriguing choice.

By far the best part of the narrative/experience was the ending, which took the film from alien-first encounter to a deep philosophical thought piece (with a brilliant title). It re-presents the film in a whole new light, transcending it to top-notch storytelling (albeit mildly gimmicky), even if the story wasn't as great as the storytelling itself.

Similarly, I absolutely love that Arrival presents the idea of language being the forethought of perception and reality in a dynamic way. Having studied several languages, I've long been in agreement with this sentiment - it's fascinating to see this idea played out in the way it was done in Arrival.

As for acting, Amy Adams carries the movie well. This is easily her best alien invasion film. Jeremy Renner is his typical Jeremy Renner self, which is whatever (he's a less angry, more smug Marky Mark?). Forest Whitaker is fine in his supporting role, which is maybe more of an extended cameo. The rest of the acting is forgettable. On the acting and character note, the relationship between Adams and Renner comes out of nowhere, only serving the purpose of the twist.

All in all, Arrival gets a solid RECOMMENDATION. It's a very good, arguably great movie. From this, I am very curious to see Denis Villeneuve's upcoming take on the Blade Runner sequel, particularly from the score perspective.

Westworld season 1 review

Westworld... high production values, took a few episodes to get to its story, yet ultimately... it falls flat on its face. It presents such lofty ambitions yet falls short. To break the series down to its components, here are other examples of things done better and save time:

Once Upon a Time in the West - A great western with an excellent villain, lame love interest, interesting "mystery" character, social commentary and a nice twist

Jurassic Park - When creations rise up against their masters (also by Crichton!)

Run, Lola, Run - On loops and learning

Groundhog Day - Also on loops and learning

Blade Runner - I think the second half/ending is a weak action sequence, but does a nice job of calling AI life into question

Ex Machina - AI learning

Her - AI learning

Robocop - Using memories to reclaim humanity (and be a badass revenge/Jesus movie)

ON CHARACTERS

The series has some very nice thoughts on life, emotions and consciousness (I LOVED that it called out human habits being an additional system/layer; that we don't necessarily have as much free choice as we think). However, the narrative was messy, using a gimmicked framing device with numerous flawed characters. Some issues...

Dolores - She's been doing this loop for years, hard to really get invested when she's programmed to be like this

Robert Ford - Good guy, bad guy, good guy, bad guy. His booking is messy, to say the least. Why is he doing most of the things he does? Outside of the narrative structuring, it doesn't really work

William - One brief period with Dolores and he becomes a monster? Ok.... Unbelievable romance (a recurring problem in Hollywood)

Lead writer guy - WTF is the point of you? You should have been fired long ago

Maeve - Could have been great, then twist! And more mystery box crap. Falls victim to her own programming. Pulling an Ex Machina would have been better

Felix - How were you even hired to begin with? Oh right, probably a game by Robert...

Teddy - Don't care about you. Your narrative was very messy.

Bernard - Actually, pretty well done,

Despite the character issues, the acting is generally very solid, with particular shout outs to Anthony Hopkins, Thandie Newton, Jeffrey Wright, Jimmi Simpson and Ed Harris.

ON THE WORLD
However, there are some other issues that are squint-worthy, particularly with the world building:

1. The safety protocols don't make sense - guns don't work on guests, then they do, then they only do when convenient; yet the hosts can punch and beat up the guests, though (but not enough to leave a mark?). Also, if the Man in Black was desperately seeking a deeper level of the game, as the majority shareholder, couldn't he have easily requested a version of the game with no safety protocols??

2. How the company is run - which is to say POORLY. There is so much incompetence. Unless, it's all part of Robert's game, which makes his arc and narrative so convoluted...

And another issue with the story - convenience! Particularly in the last episode (how convenient the two villain helpers of Maeve don't get ANY injuries and are up against some Stormtrooper-level security guards). There was also some in the second-to-last episode, but I don't remember. The sex scene with Maeve and Hector was blatantly pretentious/stupid.

Some remaining questions:

1. What happened to the security guy taken out by the native tribe?

2. Why was Elise killed? Or is she even dead?

3. Why exactly was Teresa killed (vs something else)?

4. How much of an asshole is Robert that he set himself up to die and kill so many people with him? His goal was to build murder bots?

5. Why would I care about a second season of this when they botched so many ideas in the first season? Seriously, they spent so much time on this world, which Robert was the god of, and we get a tease for other worlds at the end that had no devoted time. Again, how is the business run??

OVERALL
Westworld has the same problem as Looper to me - using a gimmick narrative device (blurred timelines vs time travel) half-assedly to tell an emotional story that falls flat when broken down. if you can't actually tell a coherent story with your devices, you're doing it wrong, in my book.

Also, why couldn't anyone explicitly tell the MIB the purpose of the maze? They kept dodging saying it's "not for you" - why not say it's a journey of personal discovery, or the maze is in the mind to try and achieve consciousness? Dumb storytelling/bad dialogue choices... Not to mention who allowed the maze references to be placed everywhere, including the inside of a scalp?

All this said, I did find the series enjoyable and compelling (binge watching parts of it), just really, really flawed. It does a number of things well and a number of things poorly. Is it interesting with fascinating ideas? Yes. Is it a bunch of narrative smoke and mirrors? Yes.

Odd Thomas quick review

Odd Thomas was a disappointing movie. Both the acting (by the two leads) and writing were flat, though general direction and cinematography were alright. I'm not sure if the original source material is better, but I have little to no interest in checking it out based on this movie. The comedy was underwhelming, action not good, though the minimal horror elements were alright.

It's a weaker version of Constantine, which is already unfortunately weak.

It's currently available on Netflix, but not sadly recommended. I really wanted to like this, as I enjoy the late Anton Yelchin, but it sadly didn't coalesce.

Black Mirror season 3 review

Black Mirror season 3 is its best season yet, primarily for the ideas. It does a good job of telling cohesive stories and being philosophical; it's better than Westworld season 1, in that regard. Arguably, the season gets better with each episode.

Specific episode thoughts below, in the order in which I enjoyed them...

1. Nation of Hate - I enjoyed the detective story, liked both leads and enjoyed the commentary on social media and government surveillance, as well as consequences of speech and actions. The general conceit of the bees was kinda dumb, though, and it was probably a bit on the long side.

2. Men Against Fire - Perception is reality and everyone is being lied to! Enjoyed the commentary on the military and how soldiers aren't treated well (they're commodities). The eugenics element and commentary on humans was also good. Was it lacking a bit something? Yes, but I liked the topics and ideas.

3. San Junipero - Really enjoyed the commentary on the afterlife and digitization of personalities. Didn't really buy into the love story (both are in love after one or two encounters? ok... I could understand with Yorkie, but not Kelly). The acting from both was rather good, though Yorkie was a bit annoying initially, along with some stilted dialogue earlier on. It was fun to watch how it played with the tropes from different eras. Would have been nice if there was something more to the guy who was interested in Yorkie (maybe he was a shell digital representation or dead). Was a loose thread, but not really the focus.

4. Shut Up and Dance - This was fine. That the focus was on trolling was interesting, but it lots steam for me rather quickly - it seemed rather apparent they were screwed no matter what. Also, reminded me of the movie Nerve, despite not seeing it. Little twist at the end was interesting. The kid's acting was also interesting, in that it wasn't a typical kid.

5. Playtest - Also OK. Some of the ideas were interesting (evolution of gaming, tapping into the brain, calling parents while we can), but the general gist of a horror story made it too apparent that reality was going to be messed with. The specific ways in which it occurred were certainly interesting, and the final reveal of the length of time was interesting, but... wasn't as good as it could have been.

6. Nosedive - Fun idea about heightening social rankings, but the general "tragedy" of the story was so on-the-nose and trite. BDH's big speech was cringe-worthy to watch, but entertaining. It does make me want to disconnect from social media more. Basically, felt rather by-the-numbers.

When Star Wars and Seagulls collide

Prepare to have this stuck in your head. Just remember, in space - no one can hear you squawk.

The backpack part and refrain may be the best parts.

I've loved their music remixes since "Morning Dew," if not the original "Black Friday" remix.

Available on Amazon here

Finally watched the pilot to Westworld. Thoughts with minor spoilers...

I largely enjoyed it as the first chapter in an ongoing story, so the slower pacing was tolerable. It did get particularly slow in the middle, but what can you do.

Easily the worst part of the episode was the music - the title sequence felt like a Game of Thrones rip-off (not surprising), the general score was whatever, and then the crowning achievement of crap: the cover of "Paint It Black." It was a bad cover and didn't fit the scene (felt forced). It's like they were going for Battlestar Galactica's "All Along the Watchtower" cover and failed miserably.

Also, there were some stupid (world-building) moments, which presumably will be built on but I'll call out now:
1. The engineer (is that her job?) lady kissing the whore IN THE WIDE OPEN. Unless your job is to QA the bots like that, you're going to be having a talk wtih your supervisor. Skipping the kiss and teasing her intrigue would have been a better way to go.
2. The dialogue writer is shitty with dialogue. This is a multi-million if not billion-dollar experience and they get a hack writer as the lead?
3. Similarly, why introduce a coup/climb the corporate ladder/nefarious ulterior motives for Westworld in the first episode? That scene could have been cut to shave time and placed in a later episode. Let Jeffrey Wright and Anthony Hopkins fuck up a bit more.
4. Back to the business of Westworld - this is a huge, highly resourced entertainment/electronics company and they do no real QA before releasing updates to their consumers? What in the fuck?!

What self-respecting company wouldn't have a beta environment with beta testers to test out the potentially dangerous and life-threatening robots. Maybe if they want to save expenses, but if there are fatal flaws and the company gets shut down, they have no business. I thought Jonathan Nolan had gaming experience...

A couple quick things I liked:
1. The "programmed" state of some of the narratives, with branching options. It was interesting to watch how the robots behaved when new elements would be introduced (e.g. robots being distracted or humans interfering). This helped to show how game-like the world is.
2. The fly narrative. A simple tactic, nicely executed.
3. Ed Harris as the Man in Black. Dig it.

I am definitely curious about the show and look forward to watching the next few episodes. This has me intrigued in a way that Preacher did not.

The pilot gets a solid RECOMMENDATION as a very good episode, just shy of greatness (though it may be arguably great).

Quick assessments of the Princes in Disney Princess movies

For fun and per request from a friend, and as a "sequel" to this column, here are some quick assessments of the Disney Princess movies with regards to their messaging based on the Princes (apologies to my Disney fan friends):

Note: I haven't seen some of these movies in awhile, so these may be off...

Snow White - You only need two skills in life: singing and kissing. You don't need a name, though, but you do get to embrace your necrophilia. Also, be handsome.

Cinderella - Get her some shoes and you'll win her heart. Also, money and charm don't hurt. And be handsome.

Sleeping Beauty - Sometimes your parents can pick out a hottie for you, especially when you come from money. Also, use that money to learn how to use a sword, because you're going to have to fight to protect her. And be handsome.

The Little Mermaid - When the world is at your fingertips, you can wait for the right girl to come to you. Through song (avoid the silent ones). Also, use your money to learn boating. And be handsome.

Beauty and the Beast - It doesn't matter what you look like on the outside, as long as you have plenty of money and servants to help you find a pretty girl who sees the inner you. An inner you who is handsome (with money and servants... and a library).

Aladdin - Lie and manipulate your way to success, until it backfires and you realize being true to yourself is the way. Of course, getting REALLY lucky and having the support of Robin Williams certainly helps. Also, being cute is the poor man's handsome.

Pocahontas - When in doubt, Mel Gibson your way out

Mulan - Be a Man. You must be swift as a coursing river, with all the force of a great typhoon, with all the strength of a raging fire, yet mysterious as the dark side of the moon. Also, have no respect for women (unless they act like men (and kinda look like one)). And be handsome. And manly.

Princess and the Frog - Don't entirely remember... When you have money (or don't and pretend to), it's OK to be a manipulative, obnoxious and entitled brat and use women for your pleasure/survival. Also, be handsome.

Tangled - Eh... this is taking too long, so... work your way up the ladder of life, keep some secrets, be handsome.

Brave - N/A

Frozen - Be an evil conniving bastard who can sing, dance and has money, or be a total clown dimwit. Either way, have looks.

Moana - Be The Rock

Feedback is welcome in the comments.

Quick assessments of the Disney Princess movies based on the lead

For fun, here are quick assessments of the Disney Princess movies with regards to their messaging based on the lead protagonist (apologies to my Disney fan friends)..

Note: I haven't seen some of these in awhile, so they may be off (friend corrections are noted below the list)

Snow White - Dated and no

Cinderella - Being oppressed sucks, but wishing for a man to save you vs taking your own actions? No (*friend correction below)

Sleeping Beauty - HELL NO (yay being molested while sleeping)

The Little Mermaid - Fuck you, Ariel, you entitled child. Keep changing yourself for your man more, you stupid piece of shit

Beauty and the Beast - Stockholm syndrome. No (*friend correction below)

Aladdin - Lie and manipulate your way to success, until it backfires and you realize being true to yourself is the way. Of course, getting REALLY lucky and having the support of Robin Williams certainly helps

Pocahontas - Eh... there's a degree of empowerment, but it's for the purpose of romance... Also historical inaccuracies

Mulan - Being empowered, yes and breaking flawed norms/traditioms. This is good

Princess and the Frog - Indifferent/don't remember (*friend correction below)

Tangled - Largely OK? Characters seem independent, yet also goofy/dorky

Brave - Not too shabby. Wanting independence, with a focus on family bonds

Frozen - Eh... the sisterly message is great, but both characters are pretty bad

Moana - TBD

I'm very curious about Moana, particularly since there's apparently no romance element.

Friend updates
When I first posted this list, a few friends had pointed out some corrections for the following (these are verbatim and definitely welcome feedback; the above were admittedly flawed quick thoughts for fun):

*Friend 1: Princess & The Frog - work hard to make your dreams come true - you can't wish on stars - but don't let the joys of life pass you by. Best Disney Movie.

*Friend 2: That is a misunderstanding of Cinderella on a core level. She was not waiting for anyone, let alone for a man, to save her. She was trapped in an abusive household, and she wanted a night off of being a slave to her family to be happy - and equal - for once. She did take her own actions whenever she could, and then used the support system she had when she couldn't. Excellent.

*Friend 2: Ariel wanted to be human long before she met Eric, and Part Of Your World is about how she, existentially, feels complete among humans and not merpeople. Eric gave her a focus point, but she would have made that deal sooner or later. And the thing is... she didn't change for Eric at all, really. She changed her body for her, but her personality remained exactly the same. Eric fell in love with her genuinely. (Sidenote: the entire story makes more sense once you realize it is a metaphor about class relations (HCA original) or a queer coming out story (Disney). Can elaborate on that one.)

*Friend 2: Beauty and the Beast is definitionally not Stockholm Syndrome, as Belle never considers the Beast an authority figure and does not align herself with him over the course of the movie until he changes his behavior. In fact, because Belle is actually in charge in their relationship and the Beast aligns himself with *her*, you could make an argument for Lima Syndrome, if you wanted. But that still rests upon the Beast holding her captive, and it's established very quickly that "holding her captive" is a flimsy formality in their relationship. Belle does whatever she wants from day one.

*Friend 3: Beauty and the Beast is in no way Stockholm Syndrome. Belle is actually one of the strongest feministic characters Disney ever created. She is intelligent in a world that only respects brutality, she is kind and loving, she fights WOLVES head on, and every action she does for the first two acts of the movie are to protect her family and her town. The third act was to literally break out of a prison cart and prevent a mob from murdering an innocent man.

TL;DR: Belle's a badass and a nerd, and easily one of the greatest female characters created.

Also, debunking your Stockholm Syndrome: http://thefederalist.com/2016/08/10/7-reasons-beauty-and-the-beast-is-not-a-tale-of-stockholm-syndrome/

*Bonus: Here is the version with regards to messaging based on the Princes.

Jaws (1975) movie review

For a film from 1975, Jaws still largely holds up very well. It has a pretty classic structure that can be found in films made after, such as Predator (which I'd argue perfected the idea in this movie) and Jurassic Park (which was Spielberg's SIGNIFICANTLY improved attempt).

A threat falls upon an area, with a key person trying to rectify the threat, while facing some opposition from the local community, which allows for some solid social commentary on greed, with a cartoonish-yet-human mayor (the suits!). It then comes down to a few people taking on the thread heads-on. It's a very reasonable structure that mostly does what it needs to do.

The only real flaws stem from the films tonal shifts. Though starting out as a potential horror movie, the film then turns into a bit of a buddy/adventure movie. While the comedy and human bonding during this portion is excellent, the shark-chasing parts with the more upbeat musical score took me out of the movie. By the time it got to the ending, a good degree of the drama and tension was removed. Combined with the rather abrupt editing (particularly the death of Quint and actual conclusion by Brody), it felt rushed.

Then again, when viewed as a product from the 70s, leniency can be given.

Jaws was absolutely a precursor for both Spielberg and Williams, which is probably the most special reason to watch it, at this point. With Williams score, he has hints of so many of his big movies to come: Superman, Raiders, Star Wars, Last Crusade and more.

Best parts of the movie:
1. Human dialogue throughout (it's really good)
2. Quint
3. Richard Dreyfus
4. John Williams' score
5. Roy Scheider (his understated performance may be slightly higher)

Worst parts:
1. The occasional awkward editing
2. Some tonally out-of-place Williams music

It's a classic for a reason and RECOMMENDED at the very least from a film history perspective. It's not perfect, though, so expect some elements to be a bit dated, such as a relatively even or slow pace.

Clue remake casting

Slightly old news that Clue is being remade (which I'm fine with), so here's my current casting thoughts, which were actually made with friends in the summer of 2015:

Mustard - Nick Offerman
Peacock - Kristen Wiig
Scarlett - Tina Fey?
White - Julia Louis Dreyfus
Delivery lady - Kristin Chenoweth
Yvette - Kate Upton
Green - Robert Downey Jr or Aziz Ansari
Wadsworth - Tom Hardy, Christoph Waltz, Leonardo DiCaprio or Colin Firth
Mr. Body - ?? (Christoph Waltz?)
Plum - Jonah Hill? Maybe Chris Pine

Thoughts? And yes, while the above cast is fairly white, non-white actors are 100% welcome (these were just quick-thoughts from more than one year ago). Stephen Root and Kate McKinnon would also be great additions.

The World is Made of People

Controversial (not really?) rant of the day:

Can we please stop saying how either "politics" or "the system" is broken? That oversimplifies the actual issue:

People don't know how to communicate or work together

If everything is a social construct, which it largely is, the root of that is PEOPLE. People have created basically everything on this planet. It requires people working together to do so.

If something isn't working, it's more than likely because the people aren't working together, for potentially a variety of reasons.

Politics isn't working? Perhaps because certain people are stalling the process. Perhaps because certain people don't know how to listen or keep an open mind. Perhaps because people don't know how to communicate or do what's best for the future/collective rather than just the present/individual.

This works similarly to any large organization. Whether it's a corporation, a city, a school - any sort of collective where people are unwilling or unable to work together will stall progress.

People are the greatest resource on this planet. If we can learn to work together, then we can achieve almost anything.

The Mermaid (2016) movie review - STEPHEN CHOW!!

STEPHEN CHOW!!

The trailers (American?) did not do The Mermaid any justice, presenting it as more of a hard action movie. In actuality, this is more of a return to form for director Stephen Chow, returning to his 90's comedy-romance(-action) roots.

One could argue that if you've seen one of his 90's comedy-romance movies (whether he acted or directed), you've seen them all, but The Mermaid has a few nice differences.

For one, it feels more cohesive. There's a core story that flows very well, with each of the main characters feeling fleshed out and motivated.

Two, there are some great themes, such as the most obvious environmentalism, commentary on wealth and class, personal growth and love.

Three, while his 90's films typically feature an amazing guy who may be down on his luck falling in love with a "loser" girl (somewhat haphazardly), this one features a woman who isn't anything close to a loser. She's dedicated (to her family, friends, self), strong, funny, can fight and more. There may still be some cultural challenges, but it's a refreshingly different direction. The guy is still on the wish fulfillment side, though, but is also the protagonist who grows the most during the journey.

Long story short, it has some great visuals, GREAT comedic sequences (Chow would be a perfect choice for Looney Tunes), great themes and is a LOT of fun.

A solid RECOMMENDED (with a personal bias towards HIGHLY because it's Stephen Chow). Catch it as soon as you can.

X-Men: Apocalypse movie review

Where to begin with this dud-filled piece of dudly crap that is X-Men: Apocalypse... perhaps with some positives:

1. The costumes were generally pretty good
2. Storm - she gets a solid yes

And those may be the only good things I have to say about this movie. I'll give some neutral credit to the music and music selection, though the X-Men series on the whole, for something that's a good 6-plus movies in now, has still FAILED to create a proper score with recurring themes, leitmotifs, etc. The closest thing to is it John Ottman's title credits theme (done with wonderful aplomb in Days of Future Past).

The X-Men series has a great distinction, to me, of having every entry be generally entertaining, though flawed in various degrees. Yes, even both X-Men 3 and X-Men Origins: Wolverine were fun (though perhaps the heavily negative bias set my expectations super low); the musical scores of both definitely helped, as well.

Yet here we are with Apocalypse... I was excited for the film when the teaser at the end of DoFP first played, but shortly after had a sinking feeling in my gut when it was announced that Bryan Singer was returning to direct.

Bryan Singer is not a good director.

At the very least, not anymore. Or if he is, he certainly needs a LOT of help with writing and should consider changing some of his Hellfire Club (inner circle); they are doing him no favors. For example, DoFP's future sequences were the best parts, but the 70s-set character driven story with Magneto, Professor X and Mystique was boring as hell. The one great sequence being Quicksilver, which was a mere 40ish minutes into the movie and created such a stupid loophole that was underutilized (recruit the damn guy!).

Which leads us to the convoluted, poorly edited, mediocre-acted mess that is Apocalypse.
Point blank: who's story are we following? I don't care about anyone or anything that's happening due to three reasons:

1. Recycled storylines/a sense of been there, done that
2. Too many characters/not enough screen time
3. Things happening for no good reason

There's no point in going into the details for any particular character, as they're all underwhelming and poorly developed, save for maybe the new gen of kids. As well, any time something interesting is about to happen (e.g. Quicksilver and Magneto), the story goes into the wrong direction.
Mystique/Jennifer Lawrence doesn't care at all about being in the movie, followed closely by Magneto/Fassbender (though whether he's acting as a burnt-out character or just being himself is another question). McAvoy as Prof X has never really done anything for me (save for Fassbender's Magneto). Neither of the two have the gravitas of Patrick Stewart of Ian McKellan, story taking place earlier in their timelines be damned.

And FFS Oscar Isaac's Apocalypse... So much wrong. The writing is certainly the biggest travesty, but Isaac himself was miscast. Such a thankless role. The creative direction here, again due to the writing, was so bad that it's hard to really properly comment. The changing consciousness, absurd power levels, random story direction and lack of actual comic book characterization similarities form a giant suffering of underwhelming (I have no idea if that sentence/phrase makes sense, but I'm going with it). Michael Clarke Duncan would have been awesome. The Rock would have been awesome. Hell, James Earl Jones in makeup would have been awesome.

Also, why are we even leaping decade by decade? Who oversees the story direction for this franchise? Are they trying to make it like a TV series or movie serials? Gah...

The editing is bad, jumping around with poor character choices. Again, convoluted. Hell, it's so bad it's making my review convoluted. I have no idea what direction I'm going in, the film has rubbed off on me that much...

Psylocke. Have to mention her, so she can be just as "there" as she was in the actual movie.
For a film that goes out of its way to make fun of X-Men 3 and the third entries of trilogies, I'd rather watch that one any day. Singer even re-used some of the same ideas fans hated about that entry! What stupidity is this?

Apocalypse is a hot mess of a movie and a great example of how important story construction and paying attention in the editing room needs to be - so much to cut from this film, yet I'm not sure if there's enough of a core story present to save it.

Bland, unfocused, messy, stupid.

I watched the extended cut of Batman vs Superman after this, which looks like the Godfather in comparison.

You know what would have been better than this? Hire Stephen Sommers to remake his remake of The Mummy but using X-Men, with Apocalypse as Imhotep. Follow the young kids as they're on a random trip to Egypt and accidentally summon Apocalypse, who falls in line with the Brotherhood as they piece him back together, etc. etc. Make it more of an adventure/event movie.

Long story short... NOT RECOMMENDED, with a Bret Hart-approved 4/10.

The Power of Music and Visuals - Star Wars and James Bond fan edition

LATE one night, my friend Richard and I both happened to be up. We were discussing the following student-made video, which creates a James Bond-inspired title sequence for Star Wars: The Empire Strikes Back (though it borrows from the original trilogy) and features Radiohead's alternate title song for Spectre entitled "Spectre":

The video above lacks the audio track due to Youtube's fun, however, the full version can be found at Vimeo here. Second however, the above video being muted helps, as this whole post is about alternate songs that could work for the above video and was the reason my friend Richard and I stayed up until 4am or so one day.

We tried numerous videos, some for their general sound and others for their themes, starting them at various points in both videos to try and see what syncs best. I've included some starting points, but feel free to experiment. Regardless, it's a fun educational example of how impactful audio and visual syncing can be.

Without further ado, here's essentially an adaptation of our conversation... (personal favorite is probably #5)

1. "Skyfall" - Adele
Richard started the night (or morning) out strong, as, surprisingly, or not, the song syncs almost perfectly. It helps that both versions of Spectre (Sam Smith's and Radiohead's) continue in the vein of Adele's deservedly multi-award-winning tune.

2. "Live and Let Die" - Paul McCartney and Wings
As Richard said, " apparently, James Bond music is so formulaic." As the songs typically revolve around the basic Bond theme, that holds true. It also helps that "Live and Let Die" is one of the best Bond songs.

3. "Nobody Does It Better" - Carly Simon
As a personal favorite Bond song, I was curious how this one synced. If you start the song when it first cuts to the lightsaber, it has only a few blips, but hot damn that ending.

For other Bond songs, Richard said Goldfinger works, but both Goldeneye and Casino Royale break the formula. I'm abstaining on links in order to move onto some more experimental fun, such as...

4. "Thunderstruck" - AC/DC
Something was telling me this could be a fun song and it didn't disappoint. Start the actual song as soon as the SW video starts. It misses spots, but syncs really well with others.

5. "Simple Man" - Lynyrd Skynyrd
My next submission. This one is thematically really fun. It can be started at various times, either with the beginning of the video or when cutting to the lightsaber; the latter of which syncs better at the end. As Richard said, "Lol, wow, Simple Man totally changes the genre of the film."

6. "Uno" - Muse
Richard: "I'm enjoying this Muse song starting from the shot of the lightsaber from the front."

7. "The Dark Knight Theme" - Hans Zimmer and James Newton Howard
Switching to a different film franchise, Richard suggested starting the video about two seconds ahead of the song.

8. "Cat's In the Cradle" - Cat Stevens
Another thematic one. This one has some EXCELLENT moments, particularly in the middle, if started from the beginning. Syncing from the lightsaber also works ridiculously well. As Richard said, "Awesome. My judge of a good match now is whether or not a big beat lands right on the laser shooting from Vader's eye, and Cat's in the Cradle does not disappoint."

9. "Danger Zone" - Kenny Loggins
Richard: "Oh man, WHY DIDN'T I THINK OF THIS SOONER."

With that, Richard was tapped out, but his final contribution inspired me to try one more song...

10. "Push it to the Limit" - Paul Engemann
Start the song a smidge before the video. Side note: Paul Engemann went on to be part of the band Device, which created the spectacularly awesome 80's album 22B3 (partially streaming on Amazon Prime). Highly recommended.

That ended our late night of fun music and video syncing.

But wait!

There's more...

Coda, courtesy or Richard; "The video also goes well with The World is Not Enough, as well as the top two tracks from "Iron Eagle" - One Vision by Queen, and Iron Eagle by King Cobra. Lol, just in case you're still not sick of this."

And with that, I hope you've enjoyed the ride.

The Omega Men - comic book review

The Omega Men is a wonderful example of a comic book that's an allegory for what's going on in the world today - our obsession with war and materialism, how they drive us, how we're being led by narratives to fight each other, that many see the world in black and white when there are MANY more options, that war and violence beget war and violence.

If we want to break the cycles, we truly need to find other ways.

Excellent pacing, art direction and use of the medium. It's a solid story, for which The Omega Men is HIGHLY recommended.

Kubo and the Two Strings review

To anyone who's a fan of movies, please go see this.

Kubo and the Two Strings is an absolutely stunning, beautiful, gorgeous movie and a breath of fresh air amidst a sea of forgettable blockbusters. It is largely everything I can want in a movie:

• Top-notch animation/production values
• Amazing soundtrack by Dario Marianelli
• Stellar art direction and costumes
• Great (adult) themes
• A solid (dark) fantasy/folk story plot
• Great villains
• Good comedy and humor (for both kids and adults)
• Heart-wrenching sentimentality and emotion
• Did I mention the soundtrack? It's really good

There is very little about it I didn't like and it's easily Laika's best yet (note: I've yet to see Boxtrolls, but meh).

However, is it perfect? No. I can understand some arguments about how the voice casting could have been more culturally sensitive, as well as how some of the themes/ideologies may come across too heavy-handed. But I'm willing to forgive both of those because the film is just that good.

One other area people may complain about is the relatively straight-forward plot, which consists of gathering items in order to defeat the villain(s). However, this is offset by some rather sly comedy that leans more adult/meta. I can understand how some may find it disconnecting, but it worked for me.

Regardless, I LOVED this movie and HIGHLY recommend it. I saw it in 2D and would gladly go back to see it in 3D. Hell, I wanted to instantly rewatch it, which is rare.

Please, if you love cinema, go see this movie. It deserves to be on any best of 2016 list and NOT just in the animation category - declaring it now.

Again, if you are a fan of movies, please go see Kubo and the Two Strings. Then listen to the soundtrack on Spotify or buy it from Amazon.

The Brother from Another Planet movie review

The Brother from Another Planet is a surprisingly enjoyable movie about the immigrant experience told through the story of an alien's first encounters on Earth.

Joe Morton is wonderfully endearing as the completely mute alien known as The Brother. The film features some downright excellent scene work which occasionally manages to have great social commentary (it's seriously top-notch stuff, particularly for 1984), while also including some fun absurdist moments, particularly from the dynamic duo of writer-director John Sayles and David Strathairn (yes, that David Strathairn) as two character who could fit perfectly in SNL sketches. The music selection is also a nice hodgepodge of songs, with a few being personal standouts.

However, TBFAP is missing just a little something to hit real greatness (it could click or gel more), but it hits the right spots enough to be satisfying, if not moreso.

Easily recommended if you can find it.

The Mummy (1999) movie review

Stephen Sommers' The Mummy is a fun serial throwback rollercoaster ride with gun fun characters, good humor and good action. Is Rick a little too machismo? Is Evelyn a little too damsel? Perhaps, but they have enough moments to round themselves out, particularly Evelyn (while the film skews heavily male, it had some solid feminist moments that come across very naturally).

Yes it's a 90s movie, complete with cheesy CG, but the art direction works. The movie may have some cringe worthy moments with regards if you read into the social portrayals, but on the whole it works (it may lose some steam towards the end).

Also, solid soundtrack by Jerry Goldsmith.

Very fun and recommended.

Predator 2 quick review

Predator 2 is not a good movie. It's a solid premise (changing the location from the jungle to the urban jungle), but it's a victim of 90's filmmaking - plot driven with characters you don't care about (and are generic stereotypes). Seriously, where did the 90's style of camera angles/cinematography and editing come from? It's not horrible and Danny Glover is OK, but the film is incredibly flat, bland and boring. Even the Alan Silvestri score is a weak rehash of the original film.

A shame it set the Predator franchise back so long, as it's a great concept; Predators was a fun return to form and I'm looking forward to the supposed Predator 4 by Shane Black.

Stranger Things review - thank you, more please!

SEMI-SPOILERISH WARNING (but not specifics)

A big YES to Stranger Things! A very fun and enjoyable 80s throwback filled with Spielberg, John Carpenter and Stephen King references, among others (it has a more kid-friendly True Detective season 1 vibe, as well as a bit of a darker The Lion, The With and The Wardrobe vibe). It might have some familiar tropes and and a slightly anti-climactic ending, at least with regards to the bad guys, but the 8-episode season leaves me wanting more, which is ultimately a good thing. It's a great start to the world and characters.

Two particular highlights are the John Carpenter-meets-Daft Punk synth soundtrack and the opening title sequence. On the whole, though, it has great sound design and visual aesthetic.

RELEASE THE SCORE! I WANT TO LISTEN TO IT MORE! (please)

I can't wait to see what the second season has to offer!

Hopes for the second season:

1. A slightly more cohesive story or a jump to an anthology-style series
2. Creative consulting (or episode direction) from either Cary Fukunaga (True Detective) or David Robert Mitchell (It Follows)
3. While they're 90s shows, any aping from either Twin Peaks or Eerie, Indiana
4. Character flashbacks that may be based more on forshadowing rather than in-the-moment emotional bits, or dumping them (they were nice, but also fluffy)
5-10. Other fun references to the 80s (Wes Craven?), maybe some gaming stuff
11. Generally, more of this

Highly recommended, flaws and all!

Naked Lunch review - beware of food poisoning

Oof, Naked Lunch is not a good movie. I was looking forward to it, as it stars Peter Weller and is written/directed by David Cronenberg, but it's a poor hodgepodge of "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas" (either the book or the movie), Clive Barker (Hellraiser), John Carpenter's "In the Mouth of Madness" (credit to H.P. Lovecraft) and David Lynch (in general) that doesn't amount to anything. It has some decent ideas, but the narrative is incoherent, the characters are unrelatable and worst of all - the movie is boring.

I had a feeling the movie would be an early 90s clunker when Howard Shore's crazy jazz soundtrack kicked in... at least the puppetry is decent?

Not sure there's anything worth recommending in this one, much to my disappointment. Actually, Roy Scheider is pretty awesome, but almost criminally underutilized.

Captain America: Civil War review, AKA Marvel’s most masturbatory movie yet

(And while jacking off may feel good in the moment, it can have messy consequences.)

 

Going into Civil War, I had reasonable expectations and a decent amount of excitement.

 

Captain American: Civil War is a two-fold experience for me. If I approach it with my brain completely turned off, then it’s a surprisingly fun action movie with lots of great character moments, a solid bad guy and is a worthwhile entry as one of the better “episodes” of the Marvel Cinematic Universe.

 

Then again…

 

If I decide to turn on my brain to use even a modicum of thought, the film decreases in value, with that balance tipping the more I critically analyze the film. Even through a critical lens, here’s my general breakdown (SPOILERS):

 

Good

1. The characters are well-established at this point; I particularly like Tony Stark’s PTSD and the budding relationship between Vision and Scarlet Witch
2. Introductions: Black Panther had arguably the best introduction in the movie, as his arc worked very well. Zemo also was a great new introduction as a villain with much more personal motives than just world destruction, global domination, etc. As for the biggest new character, Spider-man is definitely a scene stealer, but more on him below
3. The big action scenes: there were two great action set pieces – 1) the much hyped airport fight and 2) the ending (but what about the other action scenes? See below)
4. Humor: Civil War’s humor is good, but has some flaws (again, see below)

 

Not so good

1. Self-reflection and themes: I really enjoyed that Civil War went a bit meta to discuss the state of the MCU thus far, calling out the previous movies and their rampant destruction – it asks the characters (and the viewers) how do we deal with the consequences of our actions when our actions often have negative consequences? The film unfortunately ends up becoming more of the same, with resolutions only occurring via action. Yes, it’s an action movie, but Civil War was so close to actually having a message.
2. Themes part 2 – Politics: I like that the film raises the question on regulation, but it does not answer it or come close to answering it. Perhaps it was simply to spawn debate amongst the crowd, but come on, you’re a big giant movie, say an answer, because there is one and the film wasn’t close to touching it (hint: it’s inbetween, leaning much closer to Team Cap; more on that below).

 

Bad

1. Emotion is the driving force: There is such little actual thinking in this movie it’s mind boggling. No character at any point stops to actually think about their actions, nor do they consult anyone. Everyone has already formed their opinions, based on their emotions, then they just… go. A genius mind like Tony Stark’s can’t think to discuss the idea of registration? Nobody wants to board out the pros and cons? Nobody realizes there are other options? Civil War is maybe one of the best examples in film of either super incompetent powerful people or powerfully incompetent super people.
2. The plot: Speaking of the above, while the characters are mostly OK (or at least in line with previous depictions), the characters are only behaving the way they are to service the plot and story Marvel and the Russo brothers want to tell. Tony Stark may get some leniency due to his PTSD, but that’s weakly touched upon. Black Widow could have been great, but just does what Black Widow does. Again, nobody talks things out or thinks things through. It’s all in service of the action. There is such little growth and solid character arcs (save for Black Panther).
3. The tone: Is it trying to be exciting? Humorous? Mysterious? It touches on many different tones as it crosses genres (action, comedy, political thriller, satire/social commentary) and is definitely dark, but never actually commits to one and falls short of all by the end, because…
4. The pacing: Let’s be honest, this is one of the key areas where the film breaks down. The first act/third is great with its idea of exploring the reality of the Marvel movies thus far, regarding the actions of the Avengers (granted, it rings hollow because it doesn’t raise accountability of any other mass militia/global organization; but that’s a different story). Then, as they’re starting to touch on some good high-level ideas, it branches off to a lengthy Spider-man introduction. Yes, the scene is incredibly fun, but it’s so randomly out of place; more on that below. Then the big airport action to round out the middle, followed by getting back to the feud between the two main characters and revelation of the villain in the final act. While the first and third acts make sense, they are so derailed by the second act that it hurts the pacing significantly. Also, who’s story are we following – Captain America’s or Iron Man’s? Because the shift in focus is so awkward, with Iron Man really stealing the story come the credits.
5. Spider-man: Yes, he’s definitely a highlight and Tom Holland is now easily in the top two live-action Spider-men (Yes, I like Maguire; no, I didn’t care for Garfield), but his lengthy introduction detracts from the actual story and plot of the movie. Sure, he made the airport scene incredibly fun, but it once again raises the question of a character not stopping to think things through. Captain America pretty much calls this out and while Spider-man acknowledges it, HE DOESN’T ACTUALLY STOP TO THINK ABOUT HIS ACTIONS OR WHY HE’S FIGHTING. But he keeps fighting because fighting is both fun and funny, right? Last point, and Jesus Christ, Tony Stark brings a… 16 year old? To a fight with SUPERHEROES. People who’ve been fighting for years. The mother freaking Avengers. He brings a 6-months experienced teenager to a fight. What the actual fuck. Pure teenager fantasy malarkey which only highlights the maturity level and target audience of this movie.
6. Treatment of the villains: Really Marvel? This is the time you decide to shake things up and save a villain? Granted, I like Zemo, but really? Neither Red Skull nor Roman nor anyone else? I hope you have something nice in store. Also, once again you build up minor villains in a previous movie only to nonchalantly kill them off (Crossbones in this, Baron von Strucker in Ultron). You’re getting to be almost as bad at offing villains as George Lucas in Star Wars.
7. Scarlet Witch: While I liked her budding romantic relationship with Vision and don’t mind the plot of having someone confined to tow the political lines of safety (ours or theirs???), why make her so incompetent in the first place to toss a human explosive into a building? She launched Crossbones straight up – why send him sideways? Just WTF, so dumb. Again, a move to advance the plot.
8. The weight of it all: Once again, another movie comes and goes with little to no consequence. Sure, WarMachine is injured and The Avengers are fractured, but everything will be back to relative normal in a movie or two.

 

Civil War had such a great premise going in – to regulate superheroes or not. It’s such a smart move to discuss providing resolution and restitution for previous damage and even having the team conflicted on the method, but to have the answer to fighting and regulation be more fighting and wanton destruction? Bravo, Marvel. Then again, maybe they answer this in a future movie. Then again, it’ll probably be like Civil War, aka another chapter in the never ending saga of Marvel.

 

I wish the Marvel Cinematic Universe were more like the three Nolan Batman movies, where each one had unique themes and purpose, while still building out the world. With each passing Marvel movie, it just becomes more of a wankfest (Civil War was basically a Marvel orgy). And yet… I’m getting exhausted with watching the same anti-climactic movie over and over. I’m left with virtual blue balls, where I want the climax of Thanos and the Infinity Stones to finally come so we can move on to something else. Until then, Marvel continues to yank my chain.

 

But perhaps I’m expecting too much from pop culture. Perhaps I’m expecting too much for mainstream characters to have thought, to be challenged and actually grow in a movie. While I applaud the MCU for turning into a TV show, they’ve unfortunately become one where there’s a ton of filler with little actual payoff. If I wanted to watch Dragonball Z, I’d just watch the anime.

 

Here’s hoping Doctor Strange has some actual philosophy and growth. Let’s see superheroes do some actual good in this world for once.

February 2016: Reflections on the year thus far - Persevere in Positivity

2016 is off to a very interesting start. We've had quite a number of impactful deaths already: David Bowie, Alan Rickman, Umberto Eco, Harper Lee, Antonin Scalia, Dave Mirra and Angus Scrimm, to name a few.

While it's easy to get lost in the sadness, I'm simply grateful to be alive in a time when such remarkable people are alive. Every generation has its set of heroes and it's nice to keep in mind that, while our heroes may not last forever, new heroes are born every day.

We persevere. We celebrate. We live.

Every day is an opportunity for us to rise to the occasion. It may only take a moment.

That said, we don't need to be famous to make an impact in a person's life. Sometimes, the little interactions can have the greatest impact. Spread kindness and happiness, watch the world grow in a positive direction.

Top trilogy contender: Kung Fu Panda series

The Kung Fu Panda series is EASILY one of the greatest, well-rounded trilogies in cinema. They each provide a wonderful balance of great art direction, action, comedy, sentimentality, voice work, music, philosophy and, possibly most importantly, message/heart.

So rarely do I see movies that have clear messages and the KFP trilogy has a clear one: be you. Celebrate yourself and be supportive of each other. We're all different with our own backgrounds and circumstances that make us who we are and that's what makes us special.

Supposedly there are plans for an additional trilogy of Panda films, but I don't care. The first three movies are a wonderfully complete trilogy of heart, with so much focus on being yourself and relationships.

Sure, the villains could use more screen time/monologuing and John Powell is sorely missed in the third film, but they are a great, great, great set of movies.

I HIGHLY RECOMMEND watching all of them. Check out KFP3 while it's in theaters.

Batman: The Dark Knight Returns 2-part movie review

I rather enjoyed the Batman: The Dark Knight Returns two part animated adaptation. The soundtrack by Christopher Drake was particularly enjoyable, sounding reminiscent of the Tron: Legacy soundtrack, with hints of Batman Beyond. While watching Part 1, it made me think this is probably the closest we would get to a John Carpenter Batman movie, who could have done a very interesting and potentially awesome adaptation of TDK, or Batman in the 80s, in general.

I enjoyed Part 1 more than Part 2, as it had better themes and story (Batman coming back). Part 2 came across like random chapters. Granted, part of the problem is the source material, but it would have been nice if the story were streamlined a bit to focus on fewer things and given more of an overarching story. Currently, it's just Batman doing cool stuff and being badass (which is not in itself a bad thing). Would be nice if there were more focused themes like aging (such as Wrath of Khan), social commentary (such as They Live) or satire (such as Robocop). It does talk about society standing up for itself and Batman being a role model, but it's not the central focus.

Peter Weller did a decent job as Batman, but Michael Ironside may have been a better choice. Carrie Kelley's voice (Ariel Winter) and the Mutant Leader's voice (Gary Anthony Williams) were solid, although the rest of the voices were largely forgettable.

The animation was great, adapting Frank Miller and Klaus Jansen's work wonderfully, albeit it a way that's cleaner for animation.

Batman: The Dark Knight Returns gets a solid RECOMMENDATION. Check it out if you have 2.5 hours and want a fun Batman 80s movie. It'll probably be better than Batman vs. Superman.

First Podcast: Star Wars The Force Awakens

Two friends and I go in-depth on Star Wars: The Force Awakens in an epic 3-hour podcast:

In the podcast, we discuss the how the film relates to the original trilogy, including its use of the old characters, how it uses the new characters and where it can go in the future. Spoiler: I sing at one point and we all endorse Ryan Coogler as a director on a future Star Wars movie.

Ant-Man movie review

A surprisingly pleasant fluffbuster (fluff blockbuster), Ant-Man is a somewhat awkward standalone movie in the Marvel pantheon (in the sense of "why?"), but has enough ties and references to the rest of the universe to make it a nice addition to the series.

While Ant-Man is a tired retread of Iron Man's arc in his first film, AM has a better final act, although it's villain, Darren Cross, is arguably as weak as Iron Man's first villain; the main reason being that he's evil for the sake of being evil - very surface-level character depth even though they try to play off a fatherly/successor angle with Michael Douglas' character. Speaking of which, Michael Douglas does a satisfying job as Hank Pym, the original Ant-Man; I can't wait to see more of his character in the sequel. Paul Rudd and Evangeline Lily do their job, but the real standout is Michael Pena's character, who, while starting out as a near-cringe-inducing stereotype, ends up being the breakout character of the film by the end (won't spoil too much). Some of his dialogue is a bit confusing, particularly his last joke (which doesn't really work), but he's fun and an excellent example of playing a character to the height of the actor's (or writer's) intelligence. 

In addition to the tired retread of the story, a lot of Marvel's weaknesses become more obvious in AM - particularly the ongoing story arcs/building from movie to movie (or lack thereof) and general lack of lead female characters. A majority of AM was about sidelining Lily's character, but there's a reasonable payoff for why. Still, 12 movies in (and seven years later) and it's largely white male superheros everywhere - granted, Black Panther and Captain Marvel are on the horizon, but they are both at least two years down the road. Come on Marvel. 

Here's hoping Phase 3 has more of an ongoing film-to-film story, playing out more like an episodic mini-series than the drawn-out standalone films we've been getting. Time to blow out the universe, highlighting new characters while still continuing an overarching story. If Marvel wants an example of how to do this right, they can look no further than rival DC's Justice League Unlimited. 

Despite the complaints, Ant-Man gets a RECOMMENDATION for having good enough pacing, acting, action and humor to make it an enjoyable experience.