“SPIDER-MAN: FAR FROM HOME” (✫✫✫)

SOURCE: Sony Pictures

Your friendly international Spider-Man.

How are we still getting more Spider-Man movies? More to the point, how is it that we aren’t even tired of them yet? You would think that after a second reboot, six live-action movies, an Academy Award-winning animated feature, and appearing in three different team-up movies that people would become exhausted from everyone’s favorite web-slinger by the time his third sequel came around. But if anything, Spider-Man: Far From Home shows there’s still a few tricks up his webbed sleeves, as well as a few other surprises that will keep Spidey fans guessing for what’s next for the amazing wall-crawler.

By the time Spider-Man: Far From Home swings around, the young and bright-minded Peter Parker (Tom Holland) has already been through way more than your average teenager has been. He defeated his first super villain the Vulture (Michael Keaton) and threw him behind bars. He went to space and fought a mad intergalactic titan alongside Iron Man (Robert Downey Jr.), a sorcerer, and a ragtag group of galaxy guardians. Then he disintegrated into thin air, only to be restored to his former self just in time to watch his friend and mentor die right before his very eyes.

At this point, Peter has been through way more in two years than I have in my entire high school career. He’s incredibly exhausted from living the superhero life, and he has just the perfect escape from it all: a summer trip to Europe just for himself and his classmates at Midtown High.

Unfortunately, superhero shenanigans follow him even all the way to Italy. After arriving in Europe, Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson) recruits Peter to fight against the Elementals, a powerful group of multi-dimensional entities that embody the four elements. Now with the world teetering on the brink of destruction yet again, Peter needs to team up with a new mystical superhero named Mysterio (Jake Gyllenhaal) to defeat the Elementals and save the world once more.

One of the most special things about Tom Holland’s Spider-Man is how he manages to keep Peter Parker feeling fresh and new, despite the fact that his story has been adapted onto film a whopping 11 times now. That’s because at the heart of it all, Tom portrays Peter not as a larger-than-life superhero, but as a kid hesitantly thrusted into a position of power and responsibility. Tobey Maguire possessed a similar sense of humility in Sam Rami’s Spider-Man movies. In both franchises, both actors approach their characters not as comic-book heroes, but as people filled with their own wants, desires, doubts, and aspirations.

That personable aspect was something Holland was missing in his first solo entry Spider-Man: Homecoming, trading out serious drama and character development for snappy quips, gadgets, and gizmos. The Spider-Man in Far From Home, meanwhile, has grown up. He’s become swamped from the hero’s life, and in being caught up in all of the hysteria and politics of superhero mania, he just wants one summer off to feel like a kid again.

His desire for a normal life is a relatable one, and a motive that Holland’s Peter Parker shares with Maguire’s Spider-Man. If I had to compare Spider-Man: Far From Home to its predecessor in one word, it would be “more.” It’s everything you love about Spider-Man: Homecoming, just more of it. More high-stakes superhero action and fight sequences. More dazzling visual effects and CGI. More of the personable, charming, and adorable likability of Tom Holland’s Peter Parker. More awkward high school romance, more funny and on-the-spot quips and one-liners. Whatever you’re looking for, Spider-Man: Far From Home has more of it.

If I had any qualms with Far From Home, it would be perhaps that it doesn’t go far enough with its premise. Spider-Man has had four successful film franchises now, all of them great for very different reasons. Tobey Maguire’s Spider-Man focused on the human aspect and the emotional burden he carried on his skimpy shoulders. Andrew Garfield was a snappy and sarcastic teenager that perfectly captured the rebellious aspect of the character. Into The Spider-Verse was a brilliant exploration of the Spider-mythos itself and showed how anybody could become a great Spider-Man. And Holland’s Spider-Man is a great exploration into Peter’s youth and his coming-of-age story.

But the thing that the other movies have one leg up on Holland’s Peter is that they had the confidence to explore their ideas and portrayals of Spider-Man more deeply. The MCU’s Spider-Man, meanwhile, still seems too reliant on the larger cinematic universe and its implications towards this Spider-Man. Can we please just like and appreciate this Spider-Man for the hero he is and not in comparison to Tony or Cap? Spider-Man has always been a stand-up superhero because he’s the little guy standing side-by-side next to the bigger guys. Far From Home is more than content in being in the Avengers’ shadows, and meanwhile I just want Holland’s Spider-Man to step out and create his own.

Regardless of where you stand on the Spider-spectrum, Spider-Man: Far From Home is a clever, exciting, and visually-dazzling Spider-Man movie that pushes the wall-crawler in all-new, head-spinning directions that you may not have been expecting. Fans who are thinking that Spidey’s days are numbered after the epic events of Avengers: Endgame are sorely mistaken. I think everyone’s favorite web-head is just getting started.

Advertisements
Tagged , , , , , ,

Taika Waititi Returns To Direct ‘Thor 4’

The God of Thunder isn’t done with the MCU just yet.

After the events of Avengers: Endgame, many comic-book fans are wondering what would become of Thor Odinson. After all, the last thing fans saw of him was that he joined up with the rest of the Guardians of the Galaxy as they set out in search of Gamora throughout the cosmos. Where will their adventures lead them? What would come next for the mighty Thor?

Whatever that may be, we now know at least one thing that it will lead to for sure: another sequel. According to The Hollywood Reporter, Thor: Ragnarok director Taika Waititi will return to write and direct the fourth movie in Thor’s expanding saga. This will be the first time a Marvel superhero will get a fourth solo movie and the second time a tetralogy will be developed in the MCU outside of the Avengers movies.

I’m very mixed at hearing about this news. On one hand, I’m excited that Chris Hemsworth isn’t done as Thor just yet and am looking forward to seeing what new adventures are in store for the hammer-wielding thunder God. Waititi revitalized the character wonderfully years ago when he directed the stylish and retro fantasy flick Thor: Ragnarok. The sky is the limit for anything else he can do with the character and his story, and I’m eager to see those changes and creative decisions he may bring with them.

On the other hand, Thor’s story has already ended several times now, first in Thor: Ragnarok, then in Avengers: Endgame. Yeah, it was assumed he was going to appear in Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3, but I presumed that was going to be more of a cameo than a serious leading role all its own. It would have been perfectly fine to wrap up Thor’s story the way it did and give some sort of filler explanation as to why the character is no longer on-screen. Instead, he’s coming back for a whole new installment. If we really are going to get a fourth Thor movie, can this actually be the last one? What will Thor’s newest conquest be? Will Beta Ray Bill make an appearance? And for Pete’s sake, can we at least get Enchantress in there as the new villain???

There’s another unintended consequence as a result of Waititi coming back to helm Thor 4: now his attention is diverted away from the live-action Akira remake. For those of you that don’t know, Waititi was slated to direct the live-action remake to Katsuhiro Otomo’s Akira, which tells the story of two warring bicycle gang members after one of them gets uncontrollable telekinetic abilities. Seeing his work on the visually dazzling and emotionally enriching Thor: Ragnarok made me excited at the possibilities of what he could do with a live-action Akira at his fingertips. But since he’s coming back for Thor, that means Akira will inevitably get delayed… again. Can we seriously just throw Christopher Nolan onto the project and call it a day guys?

What do you true believers out there think? Are you excited to hear that Thor is coming back to the big screen, or do you wish that his story ended with the rest of the Avengers in Endgame? Whatever you think, comment below, let me know.

– David Dunn

SOURCE: The Hollywood Reporter, Gizmodo

‘Captain Marvel’ Actress To Take Over As 007

In one swift motion, Metro Goldwyn-Mayer just made a casting decision that is sure to piss off both racists and misogynists alike. Brilliant.

The most recent installment of the 007 series, Bond 25, is due for release in April of next year. Once again starring Daniel Craig in the titular role and directed by Cary Fukunaga (Beasts of No Nation), the 25th film in the franchise follows James Bond post-retirement who’s called back to service after a potential global crisis hits MI6’s desk. The film features a star-studded cast, including Blade Runner 2049’s Ana de Armas, The Hunger Games’ Jeffrey Wright, and even Bohemian Rhapsody’s Rami Malek as the franchise’s newest Bond villain.

However, none of these names come close to the biggest casting shocker of them all: Lashana Lynch has officially been cast as the newest 007.

Who? You would be forgiven for not immediately recognizing her. Her most notable role up until now was as Carol Danvers’ best friend Maria Rambeau in Marvel Studios’ first heroine outing, Captain Marvel. Now The Daily Mail confirms that she has been cast as the newest MI6 agent in the upcoming film and has taken over Bond’s codename after his retirement.

There are so many aspects to this casting news to be excited about, but let’s start with the biggest one of all: the casting array for 007 has just exploded into a vastly wider margin. Years ago, there were massive debates on whether 007 could be a woman or an actor of a different race. Indeed, people damn near went up in flames when they learned that Idris Elba might be the newest James Bond. Now we live in a world where both of those casting decisions are absolute possibilities. From here on forward, anything is possible for 007. In the future, he could be a man or a woman. He could be white or black. He could even be gay or straight. Such potential would not have even been conceivable 10 years ago. Now they are. It opens the franchise up to so many realms of possibilities. Who knows where the series could go from here?

It also confirms an intriguing fan theory about James Bond – that 007 is just a code-name and not specific to Bond himself. So for the purists out there who were worried about how this would muck up the franchise continuity (such as myself), there’s no need to be concerned anymore. Now that 007 is confirmed to be merely a cover identity instead of a person, what could happen next? Will Lynch’s 007 go on to be featured in her own spinoff? Maybe star in future sequels? What if other installments brought back Sean Connery, Timothy Dalton, and Pierce Brosnan for cameo appearances? The possibilities are endless.

I would be remiss if I did not mention Lynch herself. How do I think she’ll handle the role of 007? Quite honestly, I don’t know. I haven’t seen enough from her to make that judgment call. I did like her quite a bit in Captain Marvel, but who’s to say that she’ll handle this role just as well? After all, this is 007 we’re talking about here. That’s not just any walk in the park, especially since she’ll be featured right alongside Daniel Craig’s Bond himself.

That being said, other actors and actresses have taken over bigger roles in even lesser prominence and absolutely crushed the part they were playing. Tessa Thompson was essentially a no-name actress before she was cast opposite both Apollo Creed’s son and Thor in Creed and Thor: Ragnarok. Tom Holland was literally a child actor in the disaster flick The Impossible before he was cast in one of the biggest franchises of the decade as the MCU’s Peter Parker and Spider-Man. Those actors killed it in their respective roles. Who’s to say Lynch doesn’t have it just as much in her?

At the moment, there’s too little to tell in too soon of a time. We’ll have to wait for the first trailer to come out and see how good Lynch really is in this new role she inhabits.

In the meantime, let’s be grateful that strides of diversity are being made in Hollywood and mainstream blockbuster franchises. I eagerly await the narcissistic rage-tweeting of the closeted white nationalists out there who are utterly enraged at this casting decision. At the very least, let’s enjoy their frustration at knowing the new 007 is a black woman.

– David Dunn

SOURCE: The Daily Mail, Buzzfeed

“TOY STORY 4” Review (✫✫✫)

SOURCE: Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures

Toy Story 3: The Epilogue.

Pixar is great at many things. One of the few things they’re not as good at is making sequels. The Cars franchise, for instance, was the animation studios’ first attempt at making a trilogy, and it was so lackluster that it exhausted all of the joy prevalent from the first movie. Monsters University was a fun and spiffy little prequel to Monsters Inc., but it evidently lacked the heartstrings that the first one was so good at pulling. Do we even need to get into how Pixar made us wait 14 years for a sequel to The Incredibles?

Time and time again, Pixar has demonstrated that it can do sequels, but often not as well as their originals. The only real exception to this has been the Toy Story franchise. Ever since Woody (Tom Hanks) and Buzz Lightyear’s (Tim Allen) first adventure together 24 years ago, their characters have matured and grown, not unlike Andy himself did between the three movies. Toy Story introduced Woody, Buzz, and their need to feel affection as toys. Toy Story 2 continued their adventures as the fear of abandonment grew as quickly as Andy did. Then Toy Story 3 capped off the trilogy beautifully, showing that while all things end, there are also new beginnings that come with those endings. That’s all part of growing up.

In Toy Story 4, the toys are back yet again as they’re trying to help their new owner, Bonnie (Madeleine McGraw) through kindergarten. Unfortunately, there’s not much they can do since toys are not allowed at Bonnie’s school. But in a moment of sudden inspiration, Bonnie makes herself a toy during arts and crafts using popsicle sticks, pipe cleaners, and a spork and names it “Forky” (Tony Hale).  When it surprisingly comes to life, Forky is horrified at his appearance and tries to throw himself away in the garbage, since he is made out of literal trash. Now determined to help Bonnie get through kindergarten, the toys band together to protect Forky from everything for Bonnie’s sake – including the trash can.

Watching the first few frames of this movie, I was reminded of the child-like joy that Toy Story always brought me when I experienced this franchise for the first time as a kid; how it’s raggedy-dolled characters always flopped about in a clumsy fashion and how their small world became big as they explored new places and met new toys. There’s a good reason why Toy Story is widely considered to be Pixar’s flagship franchise: it’s because it demonstrates what the Academy Award-winning studio can accomplish.

Toy Story 4 is no exception to Pixar’s creativity and imagination. For instance, when Bo Peep (Annie Potts) is re-introduced after her absence from Toy Story 3, she’s given a new look and feel that’s different from her docile, delicate appearance in Toy Story 2. She’s no longer a helpless shepherd waiting to be rescued by Woody the cowboy. She’s much more fearless and versatile now, using her cane as a weapon to fend off hostile toys and using a mobile car disguised as a skunk to make her way around. Watching her in this bolder, more daring fashion reminded me of how original Pixar can be, putting a different spin on older characters and ideas to make them feel fresh and new.

The voice talent in their characters is equally exceptional, with Hanks and Allen reprising their roles and feeling as familiar and welcoming as they’ve always been. Yet there is an assortment of newer characters to also appreciate here, and all of them have the voice talent to back them up. There’s a Canadian stuntman action figure named Duke Caboom played by Keanu Reeves, and he possesses the impeccable skill of being the best crasher out of the motorcycle circuit. There’s a hilariously fluffy duo in Ducky (Keegan Michael-Key) and Bunny (Jordan Peele), two stuffed animals way too sarcastic for their own good who have an unhealthy obsession for cartoon violence and mischievous shenanigans. Perhaps the funniest is Forky himself, who is going through an existential crisis questioning whether he’s a toy or trash. I practically died laughing in my seat as I watched his several attempts at throwing himself away along with Randy Newman’s aptly-named tune “I Can’t Let You Throw Yourself Away.”

So the animation, the voice acting, and the perfectly-timed comedy is all on-par with the rest of the films from the Toy Story franchise. Where it falters is in the relevance. And to be fair, that isn’t necessarily Toy Story 4’s fault. If anything that’s the fault of Toy Story 3, since it ended on a note so powerful and profound that anything after that would feel like a redundancy.

Still, that begs the question: why did Toy Story 4 have to get made? I couldn’t give you a good reason why. The only reason I can think of is that Toy Story 3 made over a billion dollars and a sequel was bound to make more money. But that’s a profit-driven rationale, and Pixar isn’t usually known for making something that isn’t story-driven first and market-driven second. And don’t be mistaken: there’s definitely a message, and a purpose, here behind Toy Story 4.

The problem is it isn’t a necessary one. Toy Story 3 capped the trilogy off perfectly and beautifully with a message saying that while all journeys end, that doesn’t mean they’re the only ones and there are new adventures to experience out there. Toy Story 4 ends on a note similar to Toy Story 3, and since the two endings are so similar, neither of them feels like the definitive conclusion of the franchise. Even if this is the quote-unquote “last” Toy Story movie, who’s to say Pixar won’t change their mind later on? Toy Story 3 was supposed to be the last movie, and Pixar backtracked from that after it was the highest-grossing movie of 2010. Who’s to say Toy Story 4 won’t get the same treatment? Or for that matter, Toy Story 5?

On the surface level, Toy Story 4 is a fun, energetic, and joyful little sequel that brings you back to the classic days of being in the playroom with the toys. Through that simplicity, Toy Story 4 is a rewarding experience, even if it isn’t as fulfilling as one. But it also reminds me of a depressing truth about cinematic franchises: throw enough money at it, and studios will be incentivized enough to make a sequel, even if the story doesn’t at all call for one.

I’m glad I got to see the toys one last time. I just hope it really is the last time.

Tagged , , , , , ,

“DARK PHOENIX” Review (✫1/2)

SOURCE: Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures

Goodbye Fox, hello Disney. 

Dark Phoenix represents a fatigued franchise on its last legs, a whipped dog that’s gone on for way too long that desperately needs to be put out of its misery. Well, if you need to administer euthanasia, let me be the first to volunteer. If there was ever a case to make in favor of the Disney-Fox merger, Dark Phoenix would be the main arguing point.

In this thankfully final installment of the rebooted X-Men series, Dark Phoenix follows the X-Men, now highly popular celebrity figures, as they venture out onto a space mission to save a stranded NASA crew after being struck by a solar flare. After Jean Grey (Sophie Turner), Nightcrawler (Kodi-Smitt McPhee), and Quicksilver (Evan Peters) make their way to the shuttle to rescue the astronauts, Jean gets left behind and absorbs the full impact of the blast. Miraculously, she survives, though not without some monstrous side effects.

You see, the solar flare Jean absorbed was not a solar flare at all: it was an ancient entity known as the Phoenix, a powerful consciousness that contains vast cosmic abilities. Now possessed by the Phoenix force, Jean has to resist its temptations and rescue her friends from herself, before she loses control and kills everything she has ever loved.

If this plot feels like a retread, that’s because it is. Dark Phoenix was first adapted to the big screen in 2006’s The Last Stand, where Famke Janssen’s Jean Grey lashed out at everyone human and mutant alike with her psychic abilities. That film was lambasted all around, with critics disliking its heavier emphasis on action and visual effects while fans hated how flippantly the movie killed off some of its series mainstays.

I am one of the relative few that enjoyed X-Men: The Last Stand, mostly for the social-political questions it imposed and how significantly it racked up the stakes from previous installments. However, even I must admit that the Phoenix side plot took an obvious backseat to the rest of the film’s main storyline. Fox could have easily split both of the movie’s premises in half, devote more time to both subjects, and make two fantastic movies from it. Instead, they crammed both storylines into one movie and halved both of the experiences for us. Frustrating for passionate fans of the franchise, but it didn’t compromise the overall experience for me.

Here the Phoenix storyline is given the full treatment in Dark Phoenix. And after watching both movies, I now desperately want the Phoenix storyline to take a backseat.

Where do I begin? For one thing, the movie completely fails to follow through on the consistency of its own storyline. If you saw X-Men: Apocalypse, you will remember that the Phoenix force emerges from Jean at the end of the movie to defeat Apocalypse and save her friends. Yet here, it is explained to us that the Phoenix force possesses Jean after the space mission, several years after the events of Apocalypse. The really negligent part? Writer-director Simon Kinberg was responsible for writing both movies. How does he miss a Juggernaut-sized plot hole that large and fail to correct it, especially when it’s in his own screenplay?

But it’s not just Kinberg’s writing that is completely lackluster; his direction is equally as sloppy and misguided. Take for instance the X-Men’s space mission, where they’re roaming around in zero-gravity on the shuttle despite having no space suits or helmets on. What, do mutants not need oxygen to survive? Did I miss that lesson in Mutants 101? The production design itself is also surprisingly lazy, with the costumes and the makeup on Jennifer Lawrence’s Mystique so clearly lacking the detail that she looks more like a cosplayer than an X-Man. And one scene between Jean Grey and James McCoy’s Professor X was downright laughable. She manipulated his legs to make him walk in what was supposed to be a terrifying demonstration of her new powers, but his posture was so clunky and awkward that I was wondering if he was auditioning to be Pinocchio for a live-action remake.

The movie’s saving grace lies in the performances, which are as poised and passionate as they have always been in the previous movies. That doesn’t change the ridiculousness of the plot they’re in, or how every line of dialogue is essentially copied and pasted from former and better movies. Mind you that other bad X-Men movies came before this one. X-Men Origins: Wolverine was just as silly and ridiculous, and X-Men: Apocalypse fumbled over its monotonous plot line too many times to count. But at least they tried to tell a coherent story. Dark Phoenix doesn’t even look like it’s making an effort to. It feels more like the writer, director and producers handed in the towel and just gave up, because Disney was going to take back ownership of its characters anyway. The X-Men deserve better treatment than that, even if they are being rebooted in the Marvel Cinematic Universe.

The really dumb part about all this is that Fox already had the perfect ending to its franchise in Logan, which felt like the last period of the last sentence of the last page of a fantastic journey you just went on. Dark Phoenix tacks on an awkward “but” at the end of that sentence for no reason other than to add words to the page, and it ends up tainting the entire franchise because of it. When Disney inevitably reboots the X-Men for the MCU, let them use this movie as a lesson for what not to do going forward. Dark Phoenix, meanwhile, deserves to stay buried beneath its own ashes.

Tagged , , , , , ,

“POKEMON DETECTIVE PIKACHU” Review (✫✫✫)

Pika, Pika, Clue.

There are two special achievements behind Pokemon Detective Pikachu’s success. One, it’s a good live-action Pokemon movie. Two, it’s a good live-action Detective Pikachu movie. I didn’t think either of those things were possible, let alone in the same movie. And yet Pokemon Detective Pikachu astonishes, not because it gives in to the sensationalism and redundancy of its franchise, but rather because it fills it with its own wonder, joy, and fascination to the world that it’s building. Future video game movies would be wise to take notes from Detective Pikachu, and maybe a few Pokeballs along with it.

In this adaptation to the worldwide Nintendo phenomenon, Pokemon Detective Pikachu follows Tim Goodman (Justice Smith), a former Pokemon trainer who renounced the trainer’s life after his mother died when he was a boy. Now pursuing a mostly uneventful career as an insurance agent, Tim is reluctantly pulled back into the world of Pokemon when he gets a fateful phone call: his father, a police detective named Harry, died in a car crash while working an investigation.

When Tim ventures back into his late father’s office to collect his things, he makes two shocking discoveries: his father’s partner Pikachu (Ryan Reynolds), and that he can understand him. After getting over the fact that he can understand a Pokemon, Pikachu informs Tim that he believes Harry is still alive and that he’s trying to track him down. Reinvigorated with a newfound sense of hope for his father’s survival, Tim teams up with Pikachu to solve this mystery, because he’s not just any Pikachu – he’s a detective Pikachu.

One of the first elements you notice about Detective Pikachu are its visual effects. I know, I know, good visual effects are a common compliment in today’s CGI-driven industry. Still, Detective Pikachu dazzles, not just because of its exquisite computer graphics and fast-paced action sequences, but also in the overall design and rendering of its Pokemon.

In one of the film’s earliest scenes, Tim ventures out into a grass field to catch a Cubone, which is basically a tiny dinosaur with a skull on its head. In just the first few frames, I was mesmerized at how real the Cubone felt; how it moved, behaved, and reacted with hostility like a wild animal really would as opposed to the cartoonish expressions you’ve become accustomed to from the Japanese anime. As the movie went on, I was further entranced as Tim entered Ryme City and was exposed to this vibrant, colorful world filled with Pokemon and trainers alike. The fire-breathing Charmanders and water-pumping Squirtles waddled down the streets like miniature Godzillas, while the ghastly obese Snorlax dozed off at the intersections like an oversized blue Garfield. Watching these creatures fill the screen all at once was like playing “Where’s Waldo?” with Pokemon, and it was a complete joy to watch as you eagerly waited to see which Pokemon would pop up on the screen next.

Of course no Pokemon shines brighter in the film than Pikachu himself. That’s to be expected, given the fact that he’s been the series’ flagship character ever since his debut in the first batch of games back in 1996. What I’m surprised by is how brilliantly Ryan Reynolds’ offbeat personality matches with the electric little fuzzball. Reynolds has made a name for himself as the merc with a mouth in the R-rated superhero movie Deadpool and its sequel Deadpool 2. How on Earth was this notoriously sarcastic scoundrel supposed to play one of Nintendo’s most cute and cuddly icons? By not being cute and cuddly at all, that’s how. Detective Pikachu isn’t the same as the other renditions of the Pokemon where he simply utters “Pika pika” all the time and zaps people. This private-eye, caffeine-addicted Pikachu has a personality to him, one that has no qualms with conniving detective schemes and swearing in PG limitations. Reynolds’ Pikachu reminded me of… well, me honestly. Perhaps that’s why I identified with him so much.

The rest of the film’s appeal is relatively straightforward. The plot, while mostly unspectacular, has a few hard-hitting comical and emotional beats to it that keeps the film moving and interesting. The performances by the human actors are reliably serviceable, if not as impressive as Reynolds’ natural charm. And the music by Henry Jackman is especially notable, with its beats and tunes throwing back to the classic battle themes that buzzed on your Game Boy whenever you entered into a Pokemon battle.

What ultimately sets this movie apart from other failed video game adaptations is the child-like love and affection it has for its franchise. So many video game movies fail to capture the same magic that their arcade counterparts initially possessed because movie studios are always more focused on the plot beats and not the emotional aesthetics behind them. Pokemon Detective Pikachu is a different story. It not only enjoys its simplicity: it thrives on it. It has fun with it as it delivers an exciting, funny, even heartfelt adventure that does the Pokemon legacy justice. Pokemon Detective Pikachu has got the live-action treatment down. Now if only Sonic the Hedgehog could be given the same thing.

Tagged , , , , ,

Warner Bros. casts Robert Pattinson as ‘The Batman’

D752_Q_WwAA2QK7

DC has a new caped crusader. And incidentally enough, he used to be a vampire.

Although its been rumored for several days now that Twilight actor Robert Pattinson was in the running to take over the role of Bruce Wayne in the upcoming Batman movie by War for the Planet of the Apes director Matt Reeves, it was confirmed by The Wrap earlier today that Pattinson has officially signed on to portray the dark knight in what is being described as a prequel to the character in Batman V. Superman. Pattinson will be the seventh person to portray Batman on film after Ben Affleck vacated from the role earlier this year.

To say that fans have a mixed feedback to Pattinson’s casting would be a severe understatement. Since Pattinson’s most well-known role prior to this announcement was as the hundred-year-old vampire Edward Cullen in the God-awful Twilight series, many fans understandably see him as his sullen, mopey, emo-like character in those movies. But that wouldn’t be a fair assessment to Pattinson’s talents – especially when you consider how much his career has moved beyond Twilight since then.

For instance, right after his first two Twilight films he portrayed Tyler Hawkins in Remember Me, a penanceful film about a troubled youth, his rocky relationship with his father, and a brewing romance with an art student from NYU. His follow-up drama Water For Elephants had him starring alongside some dramatic heavyweights such as Reese Witherspoon and Christoph Waltz, and he surprisingly held his own alongside them. And just after wrapping up the Twilight series he starred as billionaire Eric Packer in David Cronenberg’s Cosmopolis, and he was just as chilling and calculated as the real Bruce Wayne would be.

What I’m saying is that people are jumping the gun on this casting and definitely judging Pattinson way too soon. The guy has a lot of talent, and I’m personally very excited to see what he will do with the role.

Plus, Affleck’s performance as the Bat was actually one of the few good things about Batman V. Superman. If Affleck can do a good job, Pattinson has just as much a shot at doing the role justice as well.

What do you guys think? Are you excited that Robert Pattinson will be playing DC’s newest Batman, or do you wish Edward Cullen would just go back to the shadows? Comment below, let me know.

– David Dunn

SOURCE: The Wrap, Screenrant

“AVENGERS: ENDGAME” Review (✫✫✫✫)

SOURCE: Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures

Avengers, assembled. 

It’s hard to believe that we live in a time where it’s now possible to watch a 22-movie saga in the movie theater. It was only 11 years ago when Robert Downey Jr. told the world that he was Iron Man for the first time in 2008. Even back then, the idea of fitting six superheroes into one team-up movie in The Avengers seemed overstuffed – not to mention incredibly self-absorbed. Now we’ve gone through the Marvel Cinematic Universe’s entire journey as it grows and culminates into an emotionally-charged epic in Avengers: Endgame – one that earns every frame of its three-hour runtime.

The most impressive part of all this isn’t how many super-powered characters they’re able to fit onto the screen all at once: it’s how it’s able to retain its heart while doing so.

Taking place after the events of Avengers: Infinity War, the Avengers are left crippled, broken and devastated after Thanos did what he promised to – collect all six of the Infinity Stones and wipe out half of all life in the universe, reducing many of the Guardians of the Galaxy, Doctor Strange (Benedict Cumberbatch), Black Panther (Chadwick Boseman) and even Spider-Man (Tom Holland) to dust.

Humanity has tried to move on from Thanos’ fateful snap. Time and time again, the Avengers are told they need to do the same.

But none of them can forget how much they’ve lost.

Now resolved to make Thanos pay for everything he’s done, the original Avengers assemble with the likes of Ant-Man (Paul Rudd), War Machine (Don Cheadle), Nebula (Karen Gillan), and Captain Marvel (Brie Larson) for one last fight to protect all that they hold dear.

As Doctor Strange said in Infinity War, the Avengers are in the Endgame now.

One of the immediate things that strikes you about Avengers: Endgame is how drastically different it feels from the rest of the movies in its cinematic universe. Every movie so far, from Iron Man all the way to Black Panther, has retained some sense of euphoric joy and enthusiasm, fulfilling these superhero fantasies that never fail to make us feel like kids again. Even in Infinity War, which ended on a cripplingly devastating cliffhanger, started with a sense of scale that made our inner comic-book nerd scream in excitement.

But Avengers: Endgame does not start in a joyous tone. Indeed, it is very mournful and reflective – as somber as a funeral and twice as quiet. This makes sense, of course, considering the consequences of Infinity War carry over into Endgame. Still, I was surprised at how much this movie chose to immerse itself in the Avengers’ loss and tragedy. There isn’t even a lot of action to take in for the first two acts of this movie: it’s all just character development as these heroes suffer from the greatest defeat they’ve ever experienced in their lives. That level of penance and guilt is rare in an action movie, and even rarer still in a Marvel superhero blockbuster.

It isn’t until the third act when the movie explodes into the pure comic-book fun and madness that you’ve become accustomed to throughout this franchise. And rest assured, dear reader – I won’t spoil anything here. What I will say is that I felt fulfilled to every bone in my body and then some. There are several iconic moments from this franchise that have blown us away in the past, from the Chitauri invasion in the first Avengers movie to the titular battle between Captain America (Chris Evans) and Iron Man in Captain America: Civil War. The climax in Avengers: Endgame blows everything else we’ve experienced out of the water and shook the entire theater to its core.

Words simply can’t do justice to what I felt as the Endgame drew near.

And in its closing moments, Avengers: Endgame brings something that is especially rare in the superhero genre: closure. While franchises as big as the Avengers are great at taking us on fun, meaningful journeys with our heroes, the thing about journeys is that they have to have an end to them. Most of these franchises are usually missing those, and I can tell you why they do: it’s because most studios would rather continue piling on the sequels and keep churning out a cheap profit, even if their stories should have probably ended a long time ago.

The special thing about Avengers Endgame is not only does it have a definitive ending for some of its characters: it’s that it relishes in providing that. It takes pride in the fact that it’s able to give some of these heroes the sendoff they deserve: the peace and resolution they’ve fought so long and hard for. It’s like seeing one of your childhood friends move away start a family and raise their own children. You’ll no doubt miss them and you’re sad to say goodbye, but you’re happy that they’ve finally reached their happy ending at the same time.

Keep in mind that Avengers: Endgame is not a perfect movie by any means, and in many ways, it’s actually seriously structurally flawed. Since the movie is built up on so much on the rest of the franchise, much of its appeal relies on nostalgia and fan service and not so much on its own setup and execution. When I say this movie is the climax of a 22-movie saga, I mean it. You would not enjoy this movie as much if you’ve only watched the other Avengers movies, or skipped out on a Thor movie here or there.

Yet, I couldn’t care less about the movie’s narrative shortcomings. Why? Because it’s so blasted fulfilling and impactful regardless. I had no idea a decade ago how much this universe would grow beyond 11 years and 22 movies – how expansive this world would become, or how much it would mean to the millions of fans who have passionately followed it all these years.

Avengers: Endgame is exactly what it purports to be – the resolution to these heroes’ journeys, the culmination of years of storytelling, and the end to this multi-year saga that we’ve all become a part of. To say it meets our gargantuan expectations is a severe understatement. It is nothing short of a cinematic epic not unlike Ben-Hur or The Lord of the Rings – one that we definitely won’t forget anytime soon.

Excelsior.

Tagged , , , , , , , , ,

“CAPTAIN MARVEL” Review (✫✫)

SOURCE: Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures

Not so Marvelous. 

Trolls ruin everything. First, they have to assault Black Panther with a plethora of negative Rotten Tomatoes reviews just because it’s Marvel’s first predominately Black superhero movie. Now the trolls attack yet again by swarming the internet forums with degrading attacks towards Captain Marvel – only this time it’s because a woman is leading the charge.

The really pathetic part is that the trolls’ extraneous hatred for this movie is completely unnecessary. There’s plenty to dislike here in Captain Marvel, and none of it has to do with her being a woman.

In this prequel to all of the 20-plus movies in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, Captain Marvel follows Veers (Brie Larson), a Kree alien who has the power to harness and project solar energy. She and her Kree kind are at war with a race of shape-shifting aliens called the Skrulls, but in the midst of one of their battles, Veers is left stranded on a strange planet called “Earth.” It’s then that she starts to see flashbacks to a life she doesn’t remember.

Now Veers has to retrace her steps to learn where she really came from and become the hero she was destined to be: Captain Marvel.

Like with any other Marvel movie, Captain Marvel has mesmerizing visual effects – equal parts spectacular, breathtaking and stunning all at once. Whether its Veers taking on a horde of Skrull soldiers or flying high through the sky in an epic and explosive space fight, Captain Marvel’s fight sequences are dizzying, high-octane and exciting. It’s no secret that Marvel films are a dominating force at the box office. Captain Marvel continues to reinforce the reasons why.

The film also has an irresistible sense of style and a really nice throwback to 90’s nostalgia. There was one fight sequence in particular where No Doubt’s “Just A Girl” was playing, and the moment was so self-aware and infectious that I couldn’t help but grin from ear-to-ear.

All the same, there is much that doesn’t work with Captain Marvel. Take the film’s lead as one example. Now don’t get me wrong, I love Brie Larson. She was mesmerizing in her Oscar-winning performance for Room, and she was a spit-firing force in Trainwreck and Free Fire. But her natural charisma and charm are essentially non-existent here, her blank face looking so dull and clueless that she looks like she’s searching for the cue cards for her next line.

Part of that problem is the material she’s provided to work with. While amnesia narratives play a relevant role in other superhero movies (see the X-Men and Captain America movies), Captain Marvel’s feels forced and unnecessary – like the filmmakers needed to differentiate between the usual superhero riff-raff and tried to switch things up. I appreciate them trying something different, but the amnesia plotline just inhibits Larson’s talents as an actress. Instead of letting loose with her personality and having fun, Larson just looks confused and out of place – as if she wandered onto the wrong set and the camera just kept on rolling.

Then there’s the film’s politics. Yes, dear reader: Captain Marvel possesses a political message. And before you ask, no, it’s not about feminism, but instead about immigration. And to be fair here, I have no problem with political themes being used in a superhero movie. In fact, plenty of movies in the MCU have had political undertones in them prior to Captain Marvel. Iron Man possessed a message on international terrorism and war profiteering. The Captain America movies covered the birth, evolution, and eventually the loss of the American dream. And do we even need to cover Avengers: Infinity War and Thanos’ obsessions with overpopulation and scarcity of resources?

Time and time again, Marvel has demonstrated that it can integrate political conversations fluidly into a high-stakes action blockbuster. If you really want to get into it, Thor: Ragnarok and Black Panther also carried themes about immigration – and they carried them well. But Captain Marvel feels way too forced. Instead of just focusing on being a powerful superheroine anthem for today’s female generation, it has to throw in an extra political philosophy in there just for good measure. Movies aren’t good just because they have generic messages in them. Like any other great picture, it has to be done well. And in the case of Captain Marvel, it’s distracted, unfocused, and way too on-the-nose to take seriously.

Keep in mind that I do not dislike Captain Marvel because it’s Marvel’s first prominent superheroine movie. In fact, I’m frustrated that the internet trolls have poisoned this movie’s dialogue so much to the point that whoever voices their disapproval are instantly written off as misogynists instead of those who simply have a differing opinion. The demographics do not affect a movie’s quality, and liking and disliking a film solely because of who is in the lead has always been wrong and divisive.

The movies should be allowed to succeed – and fail – based on their own merits. Captain Marvel certainly has no issues performing the latter.

Tagged , , , , , ,

Top 10 Non-MCU Movies

It’s here, at long last – the Endgame.

With the Marvel franchise going on 22 movies strong and counting, it seems impossible to think that an era is about to come to an end with Avengers: Endgame, which is releasing in theaters this weekend. I personally don’t believe it is the end. For one thing, Spider-Man: Far From Home is scheduled for release later this summer, despite Peter’s seeming demise in Avengers: Infinity War. Sequels for Black Panther, Doctor Strange, and Guardians of the Galaxy are also slated for production as well. And with Disney’s recent acquisition of 20th Century Fox, that gives Marvel a slew of new characters to bring into the fold of their cinematic universe, including the Fantastic Four, the X-Men, and Deadpool.

Still, Avengers: Endgame does seem to be the big finale for a lot of big stars that have been attached to the series for a long time now. Samuel Jackson, for instance, has been attached to the series as Nick Fury ever since 2008, playing the one-eyed S.H.I.E.L.D. director a whopping nine times and counting. Chris Evans has been attached to the series nearly as long as Captain America ever since his first movie in 2011. And don’t even get me started on Robert Downey Jr., who has played Iron Man now 10 times for over 10 years.

It does seem like there will be a finality to Avengers: Endgame when it comes out this weekend – although how exactly remains to be seen. Still, if anything, let’s be grateful that we’ve gotten to go on this 20-plus movie journey together, alongside Earth’s mightiest heroes.

With that being said, let’s take a look back at some of Marvel’s best, leading up to Avengers: Endgame.

– David Dunn

Tagged , , , , ,
Advertisements