rate-out-of-10 - Tumblr blog

rate-out-of-10 · 6 years

Text

THE CLOVERFIELD PARADOX REVIEW

A surprise movie release, The Cloverfield Paradox debuted on Netflix just after the Super Bowl last night. Setting out to further explore the universe initially set up with 2008’s Cloverfield, The Cloverfield Paradox gives us a more definitive answer as to where the catastrophic species’ originated from. The Cloverfield (now) franchise is turning into a promising one, especially after the surprise hit 10 Cloverfield Lane in 2016, however The Cloverfield Paradox never quite breaks through the barrier between a safe, seen-it-all-before Sci-Fi film and fresh take on the Sci-Fi/Horror genre.

WARNING SPOILERS AHEAD

CHARACTERS/PERFORMANCES

I am a big fan of Cloverfield (2008) and was immediately excited to hear about its expansion with future spin-off/anthology films. 10 Cloverfield Lane held up to its hype for me, and I became very intrigued with this film upon seeing its cast, it looked like another film that was going to be led by plenty of strong performers. Daniel Bruhl (Captain America: Civil War [2016] and Rush [2013]) has always impressed me, alongside of Gugu Mbatha-Raw who we all remember from the heartbreaking Black Mirror “San Junipero” episode. David Oyelowo (Selma and A United Kingdom), Chris O’Dowd, and Elizabeth Debicki are also featured. They all perform well enough in their roles, but there wasn’t much substance to any of them. This is a fault within the writing, mostly, however.

Other than Mbatha-Raw’s character, Hamilton, no one felt particularly special. They each had their own quirks and distinctions between them that made them all unique, however the film didn’t quite build up any relationships between them. We were meant to take the premise of them being up in a space station for two years has forced them all to cohabitate together, but that’s not a strong enough way to relay personal relationships. We needed more form each character beforehand for the events later in the movie to hold any real value. I don’t want to be guessing at who’s going to die next, I want to feel and be affected by them.

There were also parts of the film where the dialogue seemed to be too ‘on-the-nose”. Take Donal Logue’s cameo for instance. Donal shows up for two minutes simply to give us a direct foreshadow/explanation for what is literally going to happen through the rest of the film. He saying the phrase “breaking through to other dimensions and unleashing monsters, creatures, demons…” is literally all you need to connect this back to the original Cloverfield. With that practically given away, you are now only meant to watch the film for its final connection to the rest of the universe. None of what we get, though, has any weight to make this a strong standalone.

And this is important, because if the creative direction for this series is not for them to be direct sequels or prequels, but anthology types where we get bits of information and background on different spots in the timeline, then each film has to be thought of as a strong standalone film first, connections to the universe should come later.

In other spots, the actors didn’t seem invested either. Just watch the scene where O’Dowd’s character, Mundy, loses his arm in a freak-ish way and you’ll know what I’m talking about immediately. Only cheesy one-liners and relatively unchanged emotions follow and it forced me to roll my eyes a few times.

For what it’s worth though, I will say I generally liked everyone in the film. As I said before, the cast all performs well enough, there are bits that are very engaging and strong that will keep you entertained.

WRITING/DIRECTION

The Cloverfield Field Paradox was directed by Julius Onah, who seemed more interested in creating a “trapped in space” horror film than a clever Sci-Fi thriller. The writing team of Oren Uziel and Doug Jung seemed to have scraped for originality. Some smaller twists felt genuine and smart, but the movie never got to soar above anything we’ve already seen in this genre.

The film paced itself messily, sacrificing some human connection with angry turns of plot to keep the film moving quickly. The film also had the bad habit of giving us one foiling plot device, followed by a lull where our cast recovers, and just when they get going again, we get another foiling plot device. By about halfway through the ordeal, I began to wonder if the writers ran out of gas.

The film feels like the creative team was trying really hard to give us a great iteration within Cloverfield’s lore and not. It also felt like they were trying to do new and inventive things with the Sci-Fi/Horror genre and not. It was a weird 50/50 pull all the way through. There would be something that would grab my attention and keep for a bit but ending with a low-payoff. This is not something that you’d want from a film that’s meant to carry on a strong up-and-coming franchise.

I was impressed by the visual quality, I will say. JJ Abrams’ production money apparently goes a long way. The spectacles from space and the horror effects very all nicely made. Perhaps my favorite moment, visually, was the flash-frozen water. It was original, fascinating, and one of the only parts where there was emotional weight that wasn’t attached to Hamilton.

FINAL RATING: 5.5/10

Cloverfield (2008) is my favorite film within the now-dead found-footage genre. It was refreshing, grand, exciting, and intriguing. 10 Cloverfield Lane was a wonderful departure, a great standalone film, and a smart connection to the original. The Cloverfield Paradox never quite feels like a connection, until it’s explicitly given to you outright, and never feels like a strong Sci-Fi/Horror standalone, it just merely hits the notes that those films are meant to. It disappoints me because I really wanted to like it the entire time, but by the end my anticipation for it never felt satisfied. Gugu Mbatha-Raw is the standout here, it’s worth watching for her.

#cloverfild #10 cloverfield lane #the cloverfield paradox #sci fi #horror #thriller #science fiction #space #alien covenant #monsters #movie #movie review #film #review #film reviews #jj abrams #gugu mbatha-raw #black mirror

1 note · View note

rate-out-of-10 · 6 years

Text

THE SHAPE OF WATER REVIEW

Writer/Director Guillermo del Toro (Pan’s Labyrinth, Hellboy) has a very specific style; he lavishes in gorgeous set design and floods the screen with particular emotions. The Shape of Water may not only be one of the best films to come out 2017 but it may be Guillermo’s best. In many ways, The Shape of Water soars (or swims) into beautifully unique territory.

WARNING SPOILERS AHEAD

CHARACTERS PERFORMANCES

The film stars the extremely talented actress Sally Hawkins. In this role, Sally barely mutters a word. Her character Eliza is mute and relies on sign language, body language, and facial emotes to convey her character, and she does so beautifully. She is truly a princess in this post-war stylized fairy tale. She’s cute, she’s funny, and she’s a very honest character. Sally Hawkins was nominated for a Golden Globe for her performance in this film. Alongside of Sally we have her character’s neighbor, Giles, played by Richard Jenkins, who is a struggling older artist. Giles was very likable and very funny. He grounded the film a lot and spoke the minds of the audience through certain scenarios. Richard provides a lot of comedic relief as well and his relationship to Eliza resembled a lovely/sweet middle ground between a father/daughter and two best friends. Richard Jenkins was nominated for a Golden Globe in his role. Michael Shannon takes the “antagonist” role in this film, portraying Richard Strickland. Strickland is an obtuse character, specifically meant to evoke regressive ideals. As the film is set somewhere in the 50s/60s, his attitudes towards race, religion, and life are all transparent, and it eventually comes full circle against him. Shannon commands the screen while he’s on, not shying away from his character’s grotesque personality. And while I hated the character, Shannon definitely gets props for making me hate him so much. In a supporting role, Octavia Spencer plays Eliza’s close work friend. Octavia supplies much of the comedic relief but also plays her stern, strong woman of color. She often faces micro-aggressions, namely from Strickland’s racist, back-handed comments, but each scene is handled wonderfully by Octavia. Octavia has a knack for easing tension in films but never breaking it. Octavia Spencer was nominated for a Golden Globe in her role for a supporting actress. Doug Jones who plays our monster or “Amphibian Man” (as he is credited as) needs to be commended. He often plays CGI/body suit characters (Abe Sapien in Hellboy, Fauno in Pan’s Labyrinth) much like Andy Serkis, but his talent can’t be overlooked, especially here. He puts on a wonderful performance in the film’s other non-speaking role.

WRITING/DIRECTION

Guillermo del Toro blends several genres in The Shape of Water, like horror, suspense/thriller, fairy tale, noir, and sci-fi, but competently crafts a romance filled with a ton of heart and genuineness. This may be del Toro’s best film simply due to the immaculate set production (very reminiscent of the BioShock universe) and cinematography, however the well written characters and wonderfully paced film earns your engagement. The film moves very fluidly from moment to moment, scene to scene, effortlessly, allowing the viewer to believably take some things for granted, and get completely immersed in others. The only pieces of the film that I take a sort of an issue with is Giles subplot of him trying to land a job (or get one back?), it just didn’t fit quite into our focus and felt weak compared to much of the film. The film, as wonderfully paced and well-written it is, does take more of a typical turn in terms of story development. It all felt engaging but a race to escape the “bad guy” felt a little cheesed. Of course it is an integral part of noir films of old, and The Shape of Water makes a lot of old school call backs to old films, so that’s why I understand the choice, but the film had plenty of potential for a more unique way of threads being finally tied up in the story.

The Shape of Water is slated for a very promising awards season as well. As I stated before Sally Hawkins was nominated for a Golden Globe for Best Actress, Octavia Spencer for Best Supporting Actress, and Richard Jenkins was nominated for Best Supporting Actor; however the film did win two of its Golden Globe nominations: Guillermo del Toro for Best Director and Alexandre Desplat for Best Original Score. It’s other nominations included Best Motion Picture – Drama and Best Screenplay.

FINAL RATING

9/10

With all that being said, The Shape of Water takes its odd circumstances, and some outlandish happenings, all in stride. It’s romantic and sexual themes never felt trivialized or condescended. The film also flourished with LGBT and racial commentary that still resonate strongly through today’s world. The film is wonderfully set, acted, and written. It may not be for everyone, it may feel a tad slow or tediously tension-filled, but there’s something very beautiful and genuine at the film’s heart. The soundtrack alone emits an infectious romantic tone. The Shape of Water is incredibly well rounded and can please audiences who favor many different genres.

#the shape of water #shape of water #guillermo del toro #horror #sci fi #science fiction #movie #romance #movie review #review #film review #sally hawkins #doug jones #richard jenkins #michael shannon #octavia spencer

14 notes · View notes

rate-out-of-10 · 6 years

Text

STAR WARS: THE LAST JEDI REVIEW

Two years ago, Disney launched a new Star Wars saga after their purchase of LucasFilm, with JJ Abrams at the head. The Force Awakens burst onto the scene in 2015, introducing us to new characters, reacquainted us with old ones, thrusted us into a new conflict in the wake of the Empire’s destruction, and spectacularly recaptured the magic of Star Wars to many fans and critics alike. Now, with Rian Johnson (Breaking Bad, Looper) taking up the writing and directing responsibilities, Star Wars: The Last Jedi pushes new boundaries for the universe, and is nothing like any Star Wars we’ve ever seen before, and there’s good and bad in that.

WARNING: SPOILERS AHEAD

PERFORMANCES / CHARACTERS

Our cast of new and old returns in The Last Jedi; and they all, universally, put on impeccable performances. Daisy Ridley returns as our promised light-side Force user and puts on her best performance in this one and proves that she can be powerhouse actor. Adam Driver reprises his role of Kylo Ren, our troubled dark side Force user. Driver is amazing in this role, taking all that he learned from TFA and improved in every aspect. John Boyega as Finn puts on a strong show in some areas, but can be unremarkable in others. The writing behind Finn felt a little lackluster in some key spots, mostly in the second act. Oscar Isaac as Poe Dameron is brought down to ground level in The Last Jedi. He feels like a real character here, Oscar showing his wonderful range often through the film. Mark Hamill gives us something to awe at in his performance of the legendary Luke Skywalker. Hamill perhaps plays his best performance in the role, wonderfully showing Luke’s age and his conflict. And of course we have the late Carrie Fischer returning as our space princess, Leia Organa. Carrie puts on a great show as her final performance in the iconic role, I did have a flurry of emotions seeing her on screen. Tackling Leia with the passing of Carrie Fischer is a tall order for the next installment, but Leia’s role in this movie was really well done. I only wish we saw more of her. However, Leia’s show of her Force capabilities was a wonderful sequence.

Aside from everyone’s strong performances, the writing team seemed to have the intent to focus on smaller, intimate pieces of each character. Rian Johnson does a great job empathizing with most of the cast. Putting these characters’ flaws on full display and challenging them. While the more intimate character writing should be commended, there are some instances where the writing, the direction, for some characters feels rushed, or some not genuine. Perhaps the most controversial characterization was that of Hamill’s old Luke Skywalker. Luke has always been a symbol of hope in Star Wars lore, so to see him as cold and resentful as he is here, is odd. I will say that I commend Rian for wanting to take the character into new territory, however this Luke doesn’t resemble the Luke we’ve all come to know. Not that that’s a bad thing, it’s just his progression into this state doesn’t seem to be believable. Luke always saw the light, even in his long-since corrupted father, Darth Vader, and eventually turned him back to the light; so why could he not do the same with Ben Solo (Kylo Ren)? Perhaps the weight of being a mentor factored into his guilt? Some key catalysts behind Luke’s new characterization remain unknown, locked away. I understand the “I blame myself for the rise of Kylo Ren and the death of my new order of Jedi” aspect, but Luke never struck me as a person who’d give up and exile himself. Or even to go as far as cutting himself off from The Force entirely. It seemed so out of character for him, and Rian didn’t quite justify this choice for him enough for me to get fully behind it. I can understand it, appreciate it to a degree, but I’m not fully sold on it unfortunately. But I will say, upon seeing the film twice, Luke’s final sequence, his death, is a wonderful send off for him. Finally being at peace with himself, saving The Resistance, but also in pain after exerting himself so much, he releases himself unto The Force, much like his previous mentors, Yoda and Obi-Wan. Also like his masters, I’m sure we’ll see more of Luke in a Force ghost state.

Another bold character choice in The Last Jedi is the fate of Supreme Leader Snoke (played by the versatile Andy Serkis). Now this is a personal anecdote but, I wasn’t a fan of Snoke to begin with. I realize there is a lot of intrigue behind him and JJ Abrams certainly set him up to potentially be the big bad guy, but that’s unoriginal in the scope of Star Wars. Snoke was on the fast track to being The Emperor 2.0, no matter how much we could’ve learned about him, where he came from, why he’s so powerful, etc. Rian Johnson making the choice to end him here was the best choice for this saga to continue into new territory. Now Kylo Ren takes up the mantle as a main antagonist, but he’s not fully antagonizing. He’s a dynamic character, a villain who is very conflicted in what he’s doing, and that’s a game changer for Star Wars. We’ve all come to know these stoic, single-minded villains (Vader, The Emperor, Grievous, Dooku) who all just exude evil. Finally we get Kylo who is established from the beginning as a troubled individual constantly conflicted with the path he’s on. He feels the most human. This makes for a more dynamic and powerful pay off in the final film. Although, as much as I approve of this change in course direction, Snoke’s death did feel anti-climactic. If we weren’t going to learn of him more in this movie (we could still in Episode 9), we needed to at least see his power on full display. Sure, he is given more to do and shows off some of his true capabilities, but we needed to see more of him in order for his death to be earned. He could’ve still died at the hands of Kylo while impressing us with his power. I was a little disappointed to see this “oblivious” stunt we’ve really already seen with Emperor Palpatine.

Now, on the smaller scale, the treatment of an intriguing new supporting character, Captain Phasma (portrayed by Gwendoline Christie), is continuously disappointing. Phasma has a cool image with that chrome armor, but also as a female Stormtrooper leader. But instead of her ushering in a new type of Stormtrooper, we get a lackluster demise. Essentially written off in The Force Awakens, Rian Johnson had the opportunity to save this character, but instead chooses to let her die. Phasma has become a Boba Fett level let down in this new saga.

Each character is given the opportunity to show their more intimate, personal colors in The Last Jedi. Rey, most notably, grapples with her self-worth, her potential, and her lineage. Much of which she comes to terms with on her own, showing her off as an independent, strong character. She continues to own her strong female protagonist role, which is important. One very significant aspect to her character is tackled in The Last Jed: her parents. Another Rian Johnson course correction choice. Rey’s lineage is nothing. Her parents are nobodies, just drinkers and gamblers who sold her off for money. I think this speaks volumes about Rey. Star Wars has always had strong themes of family, lineage, destiny, and the like, but finally we have a character that comes from nowhere, from nobody, and continuously proves herself to be important. We already have a strong role with Kylo Ren dictated by his familial lineage to the Skywalkers. Why would we need two characters like that? Why does she need to be anybody? Tied to Obi-Wan, or Snoke? That would’ve been a weak character choice, because suddenly her power, her strength, isn’t about her at all, it’s about who she came from. Rian Johnson’s move to make her “a nobody” is powerful, and makes Rey far more impressive.

WRITING / DIRECTION

The Last Jedi is a visual marvel, let me start off by saying that. When the action gets going, the movie shines, it soars above a lot of the competition. There are several sequences that are unlike anything we’ve seen in Star Wars before. In many ways, The Last Jedi could be seen as the best film of the whole series yet. The CGI is top notch, and with some amazing set pieces, brilliant cinematography, wonderful performances, and that genius John William’s score, The Last Jedi is a gem in many ways. But there are also a few things that hold the film back from the gold star, gold standard of Star Wars. First of which is its dramatic action. The film starts out wonderfully. It’s exciting, tense, and engaging. But as the second act begins, the lengthier chunk of the film, the movie comes to a screeching halt. The pacing of the film stops in its tracks. We’re taken to three different areas, following our main trio (Rey, Finn, and Poe), but what we experience them doing can feel very unengaging. Rey’s experience with Luke can feel very trivial at times, although it’s the most interesting of arcs in the film. Our interest in Rey’s Jedi future is what keeps us engaged, even when she’s just following Luke around while he fishes and milks some aliens for blue milk (I’m still not sure how I feel about that). Rey carries much of the film through this mid-lull, especially with her chemistry with Adam Driver through their Force connection.

Poe Dameron’s position in the film is supposed to work in the audience’s favor, as he is impatient and eager to make a stand against the First Order, while Vice Admiral Holdo (played by Laura Dern) has plans to play the long game. There are a few reasons why this arc didn’t work too well, but the main reason to scrutiny I have is Holdo. Holdo plays her cards close to her chest very needlessly. While The Resistance is being chased by the First Order (in the slowest space chase EVER), she decides to fly just out of range of the First Order’s cannons for no reason given (until towards the end). She’s immediately unlikable. Poe stages a mutiny against her, and not even that gets Holdo to just share her plan. A lot of what comes into fruition within this plot line is completely undone and rendered useless later on as well. Plus, if Holdo shared her plan, we could’ve avoided the whole Finn and Rose casino sabbatical, side quest all together.

Finn and a new character, Rose (played by Kelly Marie Tran), go off ship to find someone else who can get them onto the First Order’s lead ship, that’s been tracking them through light speed, undetected. The premise of this plot line is weak. It takes us completely out of the main issue at hand. And to add more hurt to the out of place quest, it’s not even an interesting sequence. Any time they cut to Finn and Rose on this separate planet looking for some guy, I felt my soul roll its eyes. Sure Benicio Del Toro is in this part, but his character was a plot device, and a weak one at that. This whole sequence just needed some stakes to it rather than diverting our attention to a completely unrelated area. I was never really compelled with this side quest, it’s the real culprit of why the film seemingly halted. The one good bit that this part of the movie gave us is the introduction to some young, slave kids who seem like they’re going to usher in a new era of Force users/Resistance fighters. Are these kids going to be a part of the saga that Rian Johnson is heading up after this trilogy comes to a close? At least there was that little bit of intrigue.

Something I did want to touch on with The Last Jedi is Rian Johnson’s creative direction with the saga and how it’s in stark contrast to what JJ Abrams seemingly laid out in The Force Awakens. I’m not upset that this movie for taking liberties with some things, as I have stated earlier, but I want this saga to get on some stable ground. Say what you will about the prequel saga, but they were all distinctly under George Lucas’ vision and there’s no disputing that. They may not be the best individual films, but they all felt intrinsically connected to the universe set up in the original trilogy. From The Force Awakens to The Last Jedi, however, it feels like the creative differences between Abrams and Johnson are in direct contrast. This leads the saga to feel a bit shaky. Especially when you consider all the plot points and themes that were set up in TFA and almost abandoned in TLJ. Again, there’s Snoke’s part and Rey’s parents, but also Kylo’s obsession with following in Vader’s footsteps (I did find this to be a positive course change though, kill the past), and the Knights of Ren seem to have faded out into obscurity (however there is room for them to make an appearance in Episode 9). JJ does have his work cut out for him for Episode 9, however I feel like Rian Johnson’s moves in The Last Jedi will force JJ to brave new narrative avenues in the next installment. Much of the reluctance from the fan base on JJ’s return is the fear he’ll just stick to the status-quo of Star Wars. He’ll hit the checklist of “What Makes A Good Star Wars Movie” but won’t do anything to push the envelope and do something a little more daring with the universe and the characters. I don’t think there’s any arguing against what Rian Johnson did was very daring. Johnson takes a lot of risks and I respect that a lot, even if there are a few that don’t quite hit.

FINAL RATING: 7.75/10

The parts in The Last Jedi that work, work phenomenally well; contrarily, the parts that don’t, stick out plainly. There is a lot to love about this movie, but with this movie comes a good bit of uncertainty and unsteadiness. Rian Johnson makes a lot of bold choices, pushing the envelope of what we know as Star Wars, but some of those choices falter in their execution. I will commend this film though for making several call backs to the original trilogy and even the prequels without it feeling like a copy, kind of like The Force Awaken’s basic plot structure and how it closely resembled/imitated A New Hope. The movie can be a lot of fun and provoking, but there’s plenty that this movie leaves to be desired. I think general audiences will come out of this movie very happy with it, but the Star Wars followers like myself have a chance to really enjoy it, but I’m sure will find at least a few things to be irked about.

#star wars #star wars the last jedi #the last jedi #the force awakens #sw #sw tlj #luke skywalker #darth vader #sci-fi #science fiction #review #film review #movie review #out of 10

2 notes · View notes

rate-out-of-10 · 6 years

Text

JUSTICE LEAGUE REVIEW

The DC Cinematic Universe continues to trek on, giving us a proper “team up” film. Many argue that Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice was DC’s first team up followed by Suicide Squad’s villain team-up, but really we’re all looking for DC’s answer to Marvel’s Avengers in the MCU. Justice League, directed by Zack Snyder, is an ambitious undertaking, with it having to directly compete with Thor: Ragnarok at the box office, and also show that DC is also perfectly capable of offering a quality superhero movie. Other than Wonder Woman this passed summer, DC has had trouble garnering enough positivity for their shared cinematic universe. Justice League doesn’t quite lift the DC universe to new heights, but it does surpass its previous hero movie outings, with the exception of Wonder Woman of course.

SPOILERS AHEAD

CHARACTERS & PERFORMANCES

Justice League had a lot cut out for itself. It was introducing not one new hero, but three new heroes. Aquaman (played by Jason Mamoa), The Flash (played by Ezra Miller), and Cyborg (played by Ray Fisher). It goes without saying that a solo outing for at least two of these characters (my picks would be Aquaman and The Flash) would’ve benefitted this movie greatly. Arthur Curry has a tremendous world for us to explore, Atlantis, and the history of Atlantians is very rich. But here, we don’t get much of that, and understandably so; you can’t delve too much into that in the team-up film, but that’s precisely the reason why a solo film revolving around Jason Mamoa’s character would’ve been really cool. Especially since Mamoa’s take on the Atlantian is very likable and down to earth. Alongside of that, Ezra Miller’s Flash is very kid like. He’s a little immature, but it’s mostly because of his inexperience with being a “hero”. He puts it very plainly himself in the movie: “I’ve never really done battle. I’ve just pushed some people and ran away.” He’s a lighter character, often supplying the comic relief, as Barry Allen does, and being able to see him and his struggle with his father and that backstory could’ve been very compelling and would allow us to empathize more with him when he’s put into these “world ending” situations. Instead we’re just eager for him to get over his anxiety and run fast. As for our third newbie, Cyborg, his back story and introduction could’ve very well remained here in the JL team up, but with more of a focus on his struggle in adapting to his new body and capabilities. Cyborg sometimes feels brushed over through this movie. Ray Fisher does an admirable job with the character, but there isn’t much to like about him here. And I think that’s because we don’t the character focus we need on him since the movie is trying so hard to divide time between all these heroes, Batman and Wonder Woman included, plus the extra burden of the introduction of two other heroes. Justice League suffers in some of the same areas that BvS did. Much of the characterization from our newcomers feels a little rushed and not genuine.

As for the three heroes we are already acquainted with, Batman, Wonder Woman, and Superman, we get strong performances from them. Gal Gadot’s Diana Prince is as wonderful as ever, she remains the shining light she’s always been. Henry Cavill’s Superman feels revitalized in a much better way. As wasted as his death and return was, it was a nice sequence to see Superman command the screen, but not hogging from the other heroes. I was never against Bat-fleck, he was strong in the BvS and he remains so here. I could tell, though, that the writers lightened up the tones with his character in this movie. He doesn’t seem at all as gritty, angry, or murderous as he was in BvS, at times he’s actually pretty funny. I think it served the character for the better overall. One thing had me smiling through the film and engaged was how the cast worked together. I felt a great chemistry between everyone, even with Superman’s short appearances towards the end of the film, everyone’s energy together worked very well. I’m going to say it again, I’m sorry, but this is also another reason why some more solo films prior to this would’ve benefitted this movie greatly.

One thing in particular that pulls the movie down a bit is Steppenwolf (played by Ciaran Hinds). We get a cool backstory sequence to him about a war he waged ages ago on Earth against the old Greek gods and Amazons, Atlantians, and ancient humans. It was a cool sequence visually, but we don’t get much else to wonder about through the rest of the movie. Sometimes Steppenwolf seems extremely powerful and formidable, other times he’s like a palpable rag. Also, the CGI for the character just did not look up to standard. I think much of the effort went into making Cyborg look really cool, and the leftover budget and time was thrown on Steppenwolf. He doesn’t look terrible, but he does stick out like a sore thumb. His character also felt like more of the same. Just a looming threat, building an army, or plotting in the background while we focus on our heroes figuring things out. He just simply passes as a villain. One thing that felt better, however, was the climactic fight against him with all the heroes helping out in their own ways. With how Steppenwolf was characterized and how he played out, it was a good enough fight.

WRITING & DIRECTION

Zack Snyder’s worlds also feel a little cold, gloomy, and dirty, and Justice League feels no different. Aside from our heroes not feeling quite so stoic and angry in this movie, this “darker” take on the DC comics world remains. Much of the scenery makes the world look like it’s about to rain all the time. And that’s just Snyder’s thing I suppose. What really gets me about his direction is how jumbled his movies are. Justice League feels noticeably more grounded than Batman V Superman specifically. It has a clear intent and it doesn’t masquerade as anything other than a superhero/comic film. Batman literally walks around saying, “I’m building/assembling a team of people with special abilities”. I respect Justice League for narrowing its scope and supplying more fanservice.

The film also has some impressive fight sequences. Flash specifically gets a lot of attention with a lot of slow-motion shots of him running through the Speed Force. We even get a nod to The Flash racing Superman (that was very exciting for me)! Our alien bug soldiers didn’t look too menacing, I will say. They suffer from the same thing Steppenwolf does, they just look off. They just look like insignificant filler creatures who are there to provide our heroes something to consistently punch. But to that soundtrack, the mindless punching of non-essential bug looking monsters doesn’t seem all that bad, it can sometimes feel pretty epic.

From a writing standpoint, it’s more apparent that when DC has a more stable focus, whether it be with a clear villain, or the process of building a team, just those small pieces of creating a story, the universe can really improve. JL feels a lot more like a genuine superhero film. It has some pacing issues, especially through the muddled character introductions and progression of some, but it can shine when they give their characters a chance to be together and interact, and just be heroes. The overall plot of Justice League wasn’t spectacular, it wasn’t groundbreaking, but it at least felt more focused and that should be commended. It shows that DC and their writing team is looking at critic reviews from fans. I think this movie is another step in the right direction for DC, not quite as significant as Wonder Woman, but it at least gives the universe a bit more stability.

Also, we’re set up for another villain oriented movie? We get out first look at Deathstroke and Lex is out of prison talking about making “a league of our own”. I wonder if this is something that will build which each solo film to come, or just something for Justice League 2. We’ve already got some villain looks from Suicide Squad so it’ll be interesting to see where our villains are led. I will give DC some extra props putting in the effort at least to arch the villains across films. Marvel hasn’t really done that other than Loki, and if you count Thanos.

FINAL RATING

7.25/10

Justice League is a solid step up from its predecessors. It has a clearer focus in terms of story and it gives our heroes some more chances to shine. It is, however, bogged down a bit by rushed introductions to characters, a lackluster villain, some messy CGI spots and appearances of some characters, namely Steppenwolf, and a basic seen-it-before plot. I still feel as though DC should have waited on this and gave us some more character work through solo films, this way Justice League would feel truly earned. It doesn’t quite here. Who cares if it’s what Marvel did? Marvel did it right: building the universe from the ground up with its focus set on the characters, rather trying to get these iconic faces together and get them fighting aliens and stuff. Hopefully DcC is counting Justice League as a win, despite its weaker box office opening numbers, and they go and build some interesting characters with the several solo films they have slated for the future. They’ll need to do that.

3 notes · View notes

rate-out-of-10 · 6 years

Text

STAR WARS: BATTLEFRONT II REVIEW

Two years after the mixed bag that was the rebooted shooter, Star Wars: Battlefront (2015), developer DICE is back with production company EA to bring their Star Wars license to new heights, and hit the notes that were promised in the original game. Battlefront II takes a lot of cues from fans and critics of the first, in many ways is an improvement on the original while keeping the parts did work well, like the fantastic sound score, graphics, and gameplay.

NOTE: My review of Star Wars: Battlefront II is based off my experience with the game on PlayStation 4.

A Much Needed Story

Probably the most substantial addition to Battlefront II is the inclusion of a full cinematic campaign. Battlefront II takes place at the end of the Return of the Jedi (1983) film and mainly follows an Imperial Inferno Squad member, Commander Iden Versio. Overall, the campaign I thought was very well done. Cinematics were top notch and the voice casting was great. Iden Versio became a standout character by the end. She began as somewhat very stoic and unemotional, but through the campaign she opened up quite a bit and became a very strong personality on screen. What the campaign did unexpectedly well was the inclusion of switching perspectives through the story. There are missions placed intermittently where you play as Luke Skywalker, Princess Leia, Han Solo, and Lando Calrissian. I was very surprised by these segments, mostly because I wasn’t expecting to play as heroes. Luke is the first you play as in the campaign and I was stoked to have that saber in my hands and have the power of The Force. The game is also interlaced with several flying sections, having you pilot TIE fighters and X-Wings. The variance of gameplay was fantastic. Also, you could customize Iden’s loadouts through the story too. You begin each mission with an already curated loadout that the developers thought to be good to play with through that particular mission but there are creates you come across that allow you to choose different abilities and specials and weapons. You’re also able to access this menu upon death. The campaign started out extremely well. The opening mission has you take control of a droid first thing and break Iden out of Rebel containment. It’s a stealth section to kick off the story that I very much appreciated; but once you free Iden and take control of her, the action kicks up immediately as you begin blowing away Rebel soldiers. By the end of the campaign I was feeling very excited and was enjoying myself very much. For what it is, a story that now exists within the film canon, it’s really good.

If anything negative can be taken away from the Battlefront II campaign is that it was pretty short. Maybe 5, 6 hours at most. I wish they would’ve delved a little deeper into Iden and her loyalty to the Empire, her relationship to her father, Admiral Versio, her friendship with her Inferno squad mates, Del and Hask. The pacing of the campaign felt very quick, jumping from moment to moment, battle to battle, without ever taking a substantial breath. It was fun, don’t get me wrong. It never felt dull or played out too much; I was very happily drawn into the story. But I will also say that the perspective of playing from the Imperial perspective was fun and intriguing, however it was over far too quickly, as Iden defects and reluctantly joins the Rebels. It’s just another drawback from how short the game was. Also, there was a section where you play as Han Solo who is trying to procure top secret information regarding the Imperial occupation of Kashyyyk, the Wookie home world. I was excited to drop in on the planet and free the Wookies that have most likely been living in slavery and tyranny since the ending of Revenge of the Sith (2005). Will it be a part of a future story DLC? I sure hope so, I definitely don’t want to wait for Battlefront III to have that answered.

Speaking of a prospect Battlefront III, I did not like the cliffhanger ending that the campaign ended on. The epilogue section has you playing as Kylo Ren decades after the main events of the campaign, and that was fun and all, but after the events of this final chapter, you’re itching to get the controller back in your hands and play as an older Iden and fight the early spawn of The First Order. But it leaves you hanging, almost insultingly. With the pushback on the first game’s lack of campaign and story, this game’s campaign had to be definitive, and part of that definition comes from conclusiveness, but we don’t get that here unfortunately.

Gameplay & the Multiplayer

The first Battlefront game brought the excitement of Star Wars to next-gen consoles in a big way. Classic locations and hero characters battling it out on beautiful maps backed by the iconic John Williams score. Battlefront II brings back all of those iconic aspects, thankfully. The game feels smooth and authentic to the Star Wars universe.

Before I get into the online multiplayer I do want to talk about the “Arcade” mode that was placed in the game. The first Battlefront had a place in the game they passed off as “missions”, where they were actually just a short few mini-missions and the Survival game mode (basically horde mode) on the multiplayer maps. Battlefront II’s Arcade section of the game has a section for “Battle Scenarios” where there are eight missions on both the Light Side and the Dark Side and they’re basically bot matches, you just get to control heroes. There’s also some Split-Screen arcade parts where you can load in bot matches with some customizable options and either play together as allies or versus each other. Aside from the Split-Screen bot games, I’d would have completely substituted out the Battle Scenarios for Galactic Conquest. I know I’m probably the millionth person to ask for Galactic Conquest back from Battlefront II (2005) but it’s a staple to the Battlefront franchise now, and to willingly omit that game type in place of useless and boring Battle Scenarios, it’s a little insulting and lazy. There are plenty of locations in this game that could’ve supported Galactic Conquest. It could’ve gone through all three eras, starting in the Clone Wars, through the original trilogy’s Empire, and then in the sequel’s First Order Era. It could’ve been a great addition that could be played solo or split-screen; I’m not even asking for online, just solo or split-screen, that’s it. That would’ve been great. But no. We get Battle Scenarios instead.

Another piece of the multiplayer is the Star Cards and gear customization. To a lot of pushback, Battlefront II has an in-game currency and crafting system for players to purchase new items and abilities. The micro-transactions is a big piece of controversy for the game, it came under a lot of fire pre-release for its questionable loot crate system, many people were afraid that the game is pay-to-win. But since the early release for Deluxe edition owners, the general manager at DICE, Oskar Gabrielson announced that they were going to suspend the in-game purchases of crystals within the game and focus on progression through game play. I have to give points to DICE on this one. I have no doubt it was the execs at EA that pushed for micro-transactions and give props to DICE for basically going against their major publisher for their players.

But other than this, the game still has a few problems within the progression. There are now four basic classes (Assault, Heavy, Officer, and Specialist) and each has their own unique abilities and special weapons to use. What makes these classes a little underwhelming is that the weapons they have are extremely limited. Each class has only four guns to use. To make matters worse, the guns aren’t too different from one another. There needs to be more variance with the class weapons. However the special star cards you can get for the classes do vary a good amount and they each have their own use on each map with each game type. Hero characters return and they’re a lot of fun to play. Jedi, specifically, got a tune up. I use to favor the gunner types like Han Solo, but now for reason I like the Jedi more. Perhaps it’s the additions of Kylo Ren and Rey. Finally, you’re able to use heroes based on your in-game performance. You earn Battle Points through games via kills, objective plays, etc. and you can choose to play a hero by spending those points in-game.

There is a lot of give and take with the multiplayer in Battlefront II. The game type list has shorted to five modes, but I really enjoy each mode. Heroes vs. Villains returns and gets a nice tune up. There aren’t any random troopers ruining the hero fights anymore; instead it’s a 4v4 match with each player as a hero. Each round, there is a Target player that the opposing team has to eliminate. First team to 10 eliminations wins. This is a lot of fun. It gives everyone the opportunity to play as some of their favorite heroes. There are a lot of tense moments through these matches and great 1v1s. Boba Fett still destroys everything, some heroes still need to be rebalanced. The major game type in the Balltlefront II is Galactic Assault, a 40 player dynamic objective mode. Galactic Assault is a lot of fun. The games rely heavily on teamwork, some games can be tense, close battles, or completely one-sided blow outs. The games that last are the best ones. There’s plenty to enjoy in these game types for the competitive gamers and the casuals.

Final Rating 7.75/10

It’s a definite improvement upon the working formula that was introduced to us in the first Battlefront. Game play remains tight and enjoyable, and the visuals and sound design/score is impeccable. Battlefront II is definitely one of the best looking games out right now. The campaign is admirable really. Iden Versio is likable and is well written. I really wish it were longer allowing the story to explore this extended piece of the universe more deeply, but I enjoyed the campaign very much overall. The multiplayer is a mixed bag, yet again. The game play remains strong and the game modes are truly fun in their own right. However, the progression and loot system is where the game begins to rust up. Battlefront II needs to be straight forward with its progression. A basic reward system based on gameplay achievements and time is the clearest way to move forward with the future of Battlefront. I hope DICE takes these lessons into serious consideration and push even further to make the best Star Wars game possible. But for now, this will do just fine. Future free DLC is very exciting; I hope in-game tune ups and restructure is also on the menu.

#star wars #battlefront #star wars battlefront #ea #dice #gaming #video games #review #game review

1 note · View note

rate-out-of-10 · 6 years

Text

THOR: RAGNAROK REVIEW

Thor: Ragnarok is the 17th film in the Marvel Cinematic Universe; and this is just counting the feature films, not any of the TV series. I’m not going to spend too long on how monumental that is, but it’s worth mentioning. Also, with the first two solo Thor movies getting mixed reviews from audiences and critics, the fact that Thor: Ragnarok, the third solo Thor movie, and (again) the 17th MCU movie, is so well received and by all accounts a great movie is pretty astounding. Marvel and Disney have continuously knocked it out of the park, they have the winning formula.

SPOILERS AHEAD

CHARACTERS AND PERFORMANCES

The Marvel universe is filled with wonderful characters, everyone has someone to connect to and love. Thor: Ragnarok might be the best example of how vast and colorful Marvel is (alongside of the Guardians movies, of course). Our man Chris Hemsworth returns as Thor, and the fit has never been better. Hemsworth has always seemed to shine brightest along with his other Avengers, but here in Ragnarok Thor comfortably fits the main stage and our center of attention. Chris is extremely charming and funny in his role in Ragnarok, hitting a stride and comfortability with the character that’s so easy to see. Honestly now, Hemsworth and Thor are inseparable images, it’s never been clearer. Next to Thor is perhaps another fan favorite, Tom Hiddleston as Loki. I’ve always enjoyed Loki to an extent, I felt as though he was a bit flat in The Avengers (2012), but he’s always been welcomed on screen. Here in Ragnarok, he seems stuck in a mischievous loop. Perhaps it’s the start of an arc for Loki, but I wish I saw something different from him here. Just as something seems to look like its turning for the best, he falls back into the same old, same old. The ending of the film, where he finds himself heading back to Earth with Thor and now all of Asgaard on a big space ship is perhaps to be the best place for him to land, but we’ll see. I was probably most excited to see Mark Ruffalo’s Bruce Banner/The Hulk in this. I was excited to see how he’d fit in, the backstory of him winding up with Thor, and to be honest I just missed Mark Ruffalo. Mark is so kind and gentle and the perfect counter to his Hulk. Banner is funny and just a fish out of water, like Thor is too, and it’s fun to see their chemistry flare on screen. Hemsworth and Ruffalo share the screen phenomenally well, they are just too fun. Also joining the cast, in spectacular fashion, I definitely wanted to highlight is Tessa Thompson as Valkyrie. Tessa was mysterious at first, but felt like a friend by the end. She was wonderful and empowering. I can’t wait to see more from her.

Now the big thing to talk about is Cate Blanchett as Hela, the Goddess of Death, and Thor’s long lost sister. Marvel has had its run-ins with flat, choppy, all too typical villains, and while I don’t think Hela fits that description, she doesn’t surpass it too far either. Hela is a lot of fun to watch on screen during battles and Cate looks incredible in the role (don’t get me started with that perfect eye flare when she stops Mjolnir), but her character progression is what I take issue with. It feels as though she’s more of the same with the rest of Marvel’s misstep villains. She actively looms in the background of the plot, building her army, scheming, and just being all around menace to Asgaard, but she never exceeds it. She wasn’t the worst Marvel has offered, but she’s not top tier either.

Now, Thor: Ragnarok is loaded with colorful and interesting supporting characters, as well. Jeff Goldblum’s Grandmaster was hilarious and you could just tell he loved every minute of what he was doing. He was just having fun and allowed himself to dive deep into the melodrama of his character. As well as Jeff Goldblum, the director himself (Taika Watiti) takes up a hilarious CGI role in Korg. In a movie loaded with comedy, Korg somehow manages to stand out as one of the funniest additions to the movie. And of course we get our Doctor Strange appearance from Benedict Cumberbatch. He really just has a smaller role, moving the plot along, but it is worth mentioning the direction of Strange’s character. He seems to be mastering his mystic arts quite well and his outfit is just so comic-book, it’s glorious.

WRITING AND DIRECTION

As Thor’s third film, the writers and director, Taika Watiti, had to make Ragnarok definitive. Kenneth Branaugh’s Thor introduced us to the character, his world, and his family in Shakespearean fashion. The first Thor (2011) isn’t my favorite of the MCU, but I respect it immensely because of Branaugh’s Shakespearean eye for drama. It was a great, creative direction to go in for Thor’s introduction. Thor: The Dark World (2013) made a much more streamlined superhero movie. It’s not bad, but it’s just all too obvious of a movie, plus with the MCU’s debatably weakest villain to date, it made for a weak second outing for solo Thor. Ragnarok decided to take Thor as far away from what he (and we) knew and twisted the movie into something that was just fun. That, I can tell, was the main topic in the production meetings. This movie was just made to have fun. Yes, it advances our main characters and sets the stage for some big things to come, but all in all Thor: Ragnarok is just fun. It never takes itself too seriously, it takes itself for what it is, and it was great to see that. One thing that made Spiderman: Homecoming (2017) so infectious was how it took what it was doing with a grain of salt, and brought us away from the world ending threats and gave us smalltown, neighborhood Spiderman. Ragnarok does something similar where the stakes are indeed high, but the emphasis of character is what moves the movie forward. Sure, there were plot convenience issues, but they’re barely worth mentioning. Ragnarok stands out because it’s truly one of the best examples of character driven storytelling in the MCU, for our heroes. The plotline with Hela is really the only spot where the writing falters, but the film never dips too low, and hits high points consistently.

The first act of the film might be the area where I had to push through, but that’s only because the lighthearted approach was, at first, off-putting. I didn’t quite grasp what the film was trying to do, what it wanted to be (as some critics say), but once I allowed for the film to take me on this colorful, fun, and exciting journey with its characters, the film became immensely enjoyable. That’s what I’d say to first time viewers, expecting a hard hitting, more dramatic movie, especially after Age of Ultron (2015) and Civil War (2016), this movie is meant to be energetic and easy-going, while moving our characters forward in wonderful ways.

Thor: Ragnarok, in addition to wonderful characters, has some wonderful set pieces and CGI sequences and a kick ass soundtrack to boot. Led Zeppelin’s “Immigrant Song” is the lead take away track from the movie, but the original score has a great 80s Sci-Fi vibe, like a brighter Blade Runner. Aesthetically, visually, the film does a wonderful job, right down to the costumes; it’s grand.

FINAL RATING: 8.75/10

#thor #marvel #mcu #thor ragnarok #film review #movie review #comic books #chris hemsworth #cate blanchett #tom hiddleston #super hero #out of 10 #reviews #review #writing

9 notes · View notes

rate-out-of-10 · 7 years

Text

DESTINY 2 REVIEW

Here we are. Three years later and Destiny 2 is finally in our hands. Bungie has put a lot of work into building Destiny into the goliath it is today. With three raids, a dozen strike missions, a bunch of DLC content, and a ton of loot, Destiny was objectively massive. Destiny 2 has a lot riding on it, with it being the sequel to a game that many thought didn’t need a sequel, just a consistent stream of DLC and updates. What exactly did Destiny 2 build on? Is it a vast improvement from the first game? What will returning players find new and exciting? Is it a big enough draw for new players, or even players that abandoned the first game?

REVIEW NOTE: This review of Destiny 2 is based off of my experiences with the game on Xbox One.

Destiny 2 seeks to up root all that Destiny built from the get-go. The game begins with a brilliant cinematic of The Tower falling at the hands of a special Cabal force called “The Red Legion”. This was a very divisive start and I appreciated it a lot. It gave returning players a sense of loss (our loot! No!), and new players a fresh start, not feeling at all left behind from the first three years of this universe. Our Light is taken away and for the first time in centuries, humanity and the Guardians are vulnerable. I was excited to see how this new dynamic would play out through the campaign, but it only lasted a quick 2 or 3 “missions” until you are given your power back. It was a bit underwhelming. Sure, I have a lot of fun with my Super abilities, but the campaign seemed to be afraid of delving deeper into more groundbreaking territory. There is a line spoken by one of the characters in a side quest that really sums up how I feel about the campaign: “Don’t venture further than you have to, Guardian.” The encounters you’re faced with through the story feel very barren and recycled quite a bit. There are some new pieces, yes, such as the involvement of cinematic cut-scenes that fleshed out some of the returning characters, as well as the new ones a bit. But these weren’t enough to make the story feel authentic. The game often falls into the same traps the first did. Wave combat, mini bullet sponge bosses, or all too convenient plot points. It was nice to have a real villainous face to latch onto, and Dominus Ghaul was really great to look at, but he still felt bland. The final boss fight against him, where he has harnessed the power of the Light, could’ve been a spectacular one, capping the story mode off nicely. But it was short, too easy, and didn’t feel like a nice staple to this story. Throughout the story mode, the general feeling of troughing through it comes up quite often. Though, it’s not a bad campaign, I’ve played much worse before. Luckily the voice work from the cast keeps it from feeling too trivial (yes there are some annoying cheesy one-liners here and there). You can play through the campaign and get comfortable with the controls, all the new gameplay dynamics, get a feel for all the different enemy types, and also acquire some pretty nice loot (that may be the most significant draw to finishing the story mode).

Now the “end game” content is clearly the reason why we devoted players sink countless hours into the game. The loot system is very competent now, which should be a no-brainer compared to the trash heap that Destiny was at launch in 2014. By the end of the first game’s tenure it was a mammoth of content and loot and the loot system was fixed dramatically through that time, and it’s essentially moved right over into Destiny 2. This is the copy & paste stuff I don’t mind at all. The loot system needs to feel competent and rewarding and we need to feel the time invested in the game reflects back with the armor we wear and the weapons we have. Exotics don’t feel all too much locked behind closed doors as they once did. In fact you’ll snag a couple through the story mode. Destiny 2 gets players off to a fast start with acquiring some great gear early on. Some things are definitely welcome additions, like the in-game maps of the areas you can explore, lost sectors (aka mini-dungeons), and the ability to travel where you want, or from activity to activity, without having to go to orbit every single time. Thank you, Bungie, but these are things that many come to expect from exploration centric RPGs and MMOs.

The Leviathan Raid is massive and action-packed. And this is the sort of thing where Destiny 2 shines. Rewarding loot, interesting encounters with changing dynamics that stress teamwork and a game plan, and grand epic scenery and scope. It’s not my favorite Raid that we’ve seen, but it’s still jam packed with content and rewards. The strikes in Destiny 2 feel and play mostly fresh, with some new gameplay elements added to them (but that might certainly be because I haven’t played them to death yet). But my general complaint about all the “end game” is that there isn’t enough. A handful of strikes, repetitive public events, and a raid isn’t enough for me to feel the game is full. It feels much more populated than the launch of Destiny, but that’s not really saying much. Destiny 2, in terms of content doesn’t feel like a real step up. We’re given dates for the first two DLCs for year 1 of Destiny 2, but honestly it irks me to think that Bungie plans on keeping content hidden from us until they decide to sell it to us later. The micro transactions in the game are deplorable. Why do I want to pay for “Silver”? Why wouldn’t you, Bungie, just have all the content you can muster in the game at launch, and have us earn the gear through challenges and more strikes and quests? Don’t lock away stuff from the get-go and make us buy a season pass right from the start. This was one of the biggest complaints we had for the launch of Destiny.

Now, the menu and character pages were revamped somewhat. Instead of a “Primary, Special, Heavy” load out, it’s now a “Kinetic, Energy, Power” loadout. This allows for some more varying weapon combos. For instance, I can equip a kinetic Scout Rifle, a solar damage Auto Rifle in the energy weapon spot, and one of the new grenade-launchers in the Heavy spot. It’s an interesting change of pace for the game, but not a needed change. I would’ve much rather Bungie add some of the new weapon types that they did and keep the old loadout system, and maybe focus on adding a bunch more weapons and gameplay dynamics. There are new subclasses for each character type as well, and most of the old subclasses return. I’m still a bit sad that my favorite class for Warlocks, Sunsinger, is gone. I may just go back and play the first game to relive the glory days of my self-revive. But each class now has different subsections that cater to players who are more defensive/support oriented, and others who are more offensive/attack oriented. I’m very excited to find my favorite build for all my characters. As of right now, my favorite Warlock build is Voidwalker with the Attunement of Hunger subset. The leveling system that Destiny introduced in The Taken King expansion essentially returns intact, but a few slight differences. Now, engrams drop with a set power level when they drop, so decrypting them immediately is the best way to go, rather than sitting on them until you get to a higher level and open them up to a higher level. Factions work slightly differently in Destiny 2 as well. Instead of aligning yourself with a faction and leveling up to get gear from them, there are different factions on each explorable planet and completing activities (public events, adventures, lost sectors, etc.) there grant you Tokens, for the faction of that planet, you can turn in for gear. It’s a nice change I think and gives me reason to go and patrol the planets and complete the challenges on each planet. For some reason, Bungie thought “one time use” shaders were a good idea, and it costs currency to apply them to your weapons and armor. It wasn’t a good idea.

Perhaps the most significant change to the Destiny layout is the introduction of in-game clans. Players can now form clans and keep track of their clan activity and achievements in game. This is much needed improvement to the playability of the game. Now clan members can share loot when they finish certain activities. Like if your clan mates complete the Nightfall strike without while you were at work, all you have to do is go the Tower and meet with Hawthorne and she’ll give you some loot for your clan completing that activity. It’s a nice add that promotes more people being a part of groups and playing with more people. However, solo players aren’t left out. With the addition of Guided Games, solo players can find fireteams, in the game, to help them play activities that require more than one player. How it will work with the Leviathan Raid, we will see, but it’s a nice thought nonetheless.

PvP doesn’t get much of a touch up in Destiny 2. The team sizes switch from 6v6 to 4v4. New maps and new game modes don’t really make the game standout from the previous entry. The PvP is still remarkable well-balanced, and the loot you can acquire from The Crucible can be great. It’s fun to play for a little while, but its simply not my style of play. Other PvP oriented players may find a lot to enjoy from The Crucible since it's a very easy game to pick up and learn very quickly. It also can be very rewarding as you get better and play more competitive modes and Trials makes its return.

Destiny 2 isn’t an overhaul of the universe, it’s not a giant leap forward for the series; it’s simply just another iteration in the franchise. Returning players will have enough to latch onto to keep them going for hours on end, new players will find something worthwhile here for sure, since the game feels a bit more streamlined to appeal to a wider audience, but perhaps those players who gave up on the first game at any point will feel that Destiny 2 is just more of the same. Some areas of the game shine and are spectacular, and other drag on and feel bland or precarious. Graphically, the game is one of the best looking titles right now, the same was said for the first game, and the sound system and score is impeccable. Bungie knows what they’re doing in these regards, for sure. Whether you’re a returning faithful Destiny player or a newbie, there’s a lot stuff here for everyone, however some may feel there’s more than enough, and others may feel it’s all the same and not enough.

FINAL RATING: 7/10

#destiny 2 #destiny #bungie #gaming #video game #xbox #xbox one #ps4 #playstation #review #game review #video game review

0 notes

rate-out-of-10 · 7 years

Text

IT REVIEW

Stephen is somewhat of a mogul when it comes to book-to-screen material. He has plenty of material that’s been adapted to both the big screen and the small screen. In 1990 the original adaptation of King’s novel, IT, starring Tim Curry, made a permanent mark in the horror genre and gave kids more reasons to hate and fear clowns. And with it being 27 years since the original IT came out in a two-part mini-series, and since Pennywise returns every 27 years, it’s the perfect time to reinvent the demonic, child-eating clown, and director Andy Muschietti (Mama) was definitely up for the challenge.

WARNING SPOILERS AHEAD

CHARACTERS / PERFORMANCES

IT is a story centered on a group of young children, Bill (Jaeden Lieberher), Richie (Finn Wolfhard), Beverly (Sophia Lillis), Ben (Jeremy Ray Taylor), Mike (Chosen Jacobs), Eddie (Jack Dylan Grazer), and Stanley (Wyatt Oleff). The kids form “The Losers Club” and are all terrorized by Pennywise, the Dancing Clown (Bill Skarsgard). All these leading kids do an incredible job in their performances. Every character has levels to them and they’re given the appropriate amount of attention for us to see how each one is unique. Jaeden Lieberher does a great job showing the depth of despair and loneliness Bill feels after losing his brother Georgie (Jackson Robert Scott). Plus his stutter was believable and not at all forced or made out to be comedic in the slightest. Perhaps the real standout in this cast, I have to say, was Sophia Lillis. Throughout the movie her character is faced with some real troubling and dark things, not only is a demon clown trying to terrorize her, but her pedophilic/abusive father, as well her rumored reputation of being a whore around school. Her character has to deal with some pretty traumatic themes and scenes, and Sophia handles it all with the utmost competence. She was a showstopper and I can’t wait to see what she becomes later in her career, I think she has a great one ahead of her.

And now moving on to who we all really wanted to see: Bill Skarsgard as Pennywise the clown. This interpretation of Pennywise was clearly on the darker, more monstrous side, but it worked really well. You could tell when he speaks that he’s not of this world and he’s really giving his closest approximation of human behavior. Bill does a wonderful job setting himself apart from Tim Curry’s Pennywise, and I respect that very much. He was more menacing, but also darkly comedic in some key areas. I was like 5 or 6 years old when I saw the original IT and it stuck with me for a while, but here I never felt truly irked by this clown. It’s obviously a different interpretation and I’m much older now and have a true respect for films on a deep level, but in all I don’t think this Pennywise will be one to stick into people’s minds and scar them like I think Tim Curry’s did for many. I’m not comparing though, Bill did a great job; I think it’s just the style of the films.

WRITING / DIRECTION

The film takes place in the late 80s, so obviously some artistic themes and arcs that were popular in movies back then were very present to begin with. Perhaps the most identifiable 80s cliché was the over-the-top bully, Henry (Nicholas Hamilton), and his gang of mean boys. He wasn’t given a clear motive as to why he does what he does until towards the end of the movie, but at that point he falls under Pennywise’s control. At several points I felt he was just more of an annoyance than anything else. You’ll be asking yourself, “Really? Do you not have anything better to do, psychopath?” But regardless of the cliché bullies in the film, IT is very well written. The kids all felt real, their banter felt real (I talked a lot like those kids when I was their age), and the writing and attention given to each character and their life was very compelling.

One thing that holds the film back from being a potential landmark horror film is the awkward pacing throughout. There are a lot of moments of anxiety wrenching horror, since each kid is singled out by Pennywise at some point and shown their living fears, but in too many instances are we just shuffled along to the next bit, not being allowed to settle into our fear. In those instances the film actively sabotaged itself, and then some more with tension breaking one-liners that have no business being there. I felt frustrated with the composition with the film too much.

Aside from missed writing/editing bits, there is a lot to marvel at in IT. Scenery and costumes were lovely. The cinematography and direction here was impeccable. They managed to capture moments of dark horror and then blend elements of a youthful, bright coming-of-age story. There really is plenty in this movie for every movie goer. But where the movie shines, it may feel a bit “done before”. Especially with the popular series Stranger Things, which draws a lot from Stephen King horror and character themes, people may feel the film often repeats things we’ve all seen, but I don’t think it takes away from the film too much.

FINAL RATING: 8/10

#it #stephen king #horror #clowns #bill skarsgard #finn wolfhard #sophia lillis #movie #movies #films #film #film review #movie review #review #reviews #out of ten #out of 10

1 note · View note

rate-out-of-10 · 7 years

Text

THE DEFENDERS REVIEW

After three independent shows, with a total of four seasons in all, we finally see Netflix’s MCU heroes come together in the team-up series The Defenders. It’s an ambitious undertaking, even after the lackluster last series before the team-up, Iron Fist, and this show had to fire on all cylinders, and while it didn’t hit every mark, it gave you plenty to enjoy.

WARNING SPOILERS AHEAD

CHARACTERS / PERFORMANCES

The stars from their respective series return in The Defenders. Charlie Cox (Daredevil) continues to impress as the “Devil of Hell’s Kitchen”. Matt Murdock is a character that we’ve seen the most of compared to the others, so it makes sense that he’s one of the more well-rounded people on screen. Season 2 of Daredevil brought out some of Matt’s worst fears and his inner turmoil between the two lives he lives. In The Defenders we see him making real strides to be an example good guy, without the red suit and horns. But of course, The Hand comes back around and throws him down the same hole he’s been trying to claw out of. Charlie Cox puts on an impeccable performance throughout this series. After not seeing her for a while, Krysten Ritter returns as Jessica Jones. The hard-headed PI with super strength and a drinking problem. Krysten puts on a good performance as Jessica, however her persona feels a bit tried here. Much of her dialogue feels so cheesy, and like she says the same thing like twenty times throughout the show. I was also a bit sad for a time that her ability was never properly showcased. I felt as though she was just there to throw in some aggressive comic relief and be the one in disbelief through the entire series. She did have some shining moments throughout though, like her kicking that SUV into the Chinese restaurant, toppling Elektra. Mike Colter (Luke Cage) was a standout performance in this series, and he needed to be. Some of the criticisms of his series was the stoic acting from the cast and the cheesy “tough guy” dialogue throughout. Of course, there was more of the same here with Luke, however Colter felt more comfortable in his role especially around the other main heroes. The last to join the Netflix crew, Finn Jones as Iron Fist redeems himself in this series. Iron Fist had its flaws but by the end there was some content to be excited about and I think Finn rode those coattails into The Defenders rather well. He’s still somewhat stubborn, but his personality is fleshed out a bit more around these other characters, and he became much more likable, compared to his solo series’ first season.

The connector to every series, Claire Temple played by Rosario Dawson, makes her appearance, however she never feels needed. For a good while she’s treated as Luke Cage’s baggage, especially since the writers made the strides to rekindle Luke and Jessica’s relationship. Rosario just felt a bit lost to me, and I felt disappointed by her interactions with everyone. There wasn’t anything there between her and Matt Murdock. I was excited for her to play a bigger role in connecting everyone, but sadly she wasn’t as needed as I felt she was. Simone Missick returns as Detective Misty Knight from Luke Cage. Misty felt utterly behind and clueless throughout the show. She always has a strong presence on screen (props to Simone), however she was portrayed as somewhat arrogant, even when she’s right. It wasn’t until the finale that she isn’t as glanced over. Jessica Henwick returns as Colleen Wing, one of the few saving graces from Iron Fist. In The Defenders however, she is barely given anything to do. Until the finale she’s on the sidelines, and I felt so bad for her, and not in a good way. She should’ve been given more to do, it felt way too inorganic for her to be as sidelined as she was. I’m glad to see her struggle with Bakuto finally resolved, but she wasn’t used properly as a whole. Then there’s Stick played by Scott Glenn. He’s as stoic as ever in this appearance, but leads our heroes down the right path, despite his controversial means. He’s not any more likable than his past appearances, but he stays true to what he’s always been. There are a bunch more familiar faces in this show, but that’s generally all that they are. The likes of Foggy, Karen Page, Jeri Hogarth, Malcolm, and Trish all take a back seat. They have small arcs, I guess, but none truly integral to the series. Just the familiar faces we know from separate series finally making it into the same room.

The Defenders did an admirable job bringing together all five fingers of The Hand. And it was interesting to watch their dynamic playout on screen with everyone there: Alexandra (Sigourney Weaver), Madame Gao (Wai Ching Ho), Bakuto (Ramon Rodriguez), Murakami (Yutaka Takeuchi), and Sowande (Babs Olusanmokun). To see the in-fighting between them, their clash of personality, and their individual goals kept me interested in their side of the story very well. Weaver specifically put on a great show. She approached the character with grounded-ness and with a realistic worldview. I enjoyed seeing her play out on screen. I was happy to see them all portrayed as formidable opponents as well, however it was whenever necessary. Much of their arcs felt cut short or flat, plus some deaths felt inept for people of their stature, Sowande’s and Murakami’s for instance. Too quick, too easy. Elodie Young returns as Elektra Natchios, or the Black Sky as we’re lead to believe. She had an interesting role to play, however predictable it was (the whole getting memories back because of the love she has for Matt). I enjoyed her performance overall though. By the end, she turned villain again and I just couldn’t put my finger on why it all played out that way. It felt all too much for the sake of plot.

WRITING / DIRECTION

Bringing these characters together is a tough game to play, but Marvel has made good on team-ups so far. Bringing these heroes together to fight The Hand, the enemies that only Daredevil and Iron Fist seemed to concern themselves with was the natural direction to go in and I was excited to see it all unfold. The series only being eight episodes felt a little disappointing upon hearing of it. However, the Daredevil series was the only one that could competently handle a thirteen episode arc. Jessica Jones, Luke Cage, and Iron Fist all could have benefited greatly from shorter seasons, ten episodes maybe. Especially Iron Fist. The Defenders felt competent enough with the eight episode season. It allowed the show to endorse itself and not push too much. I hate a prolonged storyline, filler episodes and scenes, I think they’re garbage. I’m glad to see the series take off running as fast as they could, and bring these characters together in the simplest of ways, and have it be entertaining throughout.

There were a lot of great action pieces, plenty to catch your eye, but some felt all to cliché and disingenuous. Some characters were overpowering one minute, the next they could barely stand their ground. I understand that they were facing highly skilled and trained people, like Elektra, or The Hand leaders, but I don’t see how Luke Cage can be knocked out by a basic roundhouse. In Jessica Jones we saw he couldn’t be stopped until Jessica shot him point blank in the temple with a shotgun. Some character capabilities were simply at the mercy of where the plot needed to go, and that’s a shame to misuse these characters like that. But even still, there was a lot of action to marvel at, it was badass much of the time. Dialogue was a hurdle yet again. I never felt like the dialogue in the Daredevil series was as close to as horrendous as Iron Fist was, and throughout Luke Cage. The Defenders isn’t the worst offenders, but there were cringe-worthy lines that felt all too “tough”, some too “comic-book”, and others were just annoying or irrelevant. These pieces just clash with the entire feel of the world we’re meant to be immersed in.

As a general note, the writing and direction did do a good job keeping the pace strong with the plot. The show didn’t feel like it dragged too long, not too much filler, or slower boring pieces. And that’s great. It was clearly the eight episode mark that benefitted the show. There were definitely parts that could’ve been delved into more, and with more episodes I’m sure we would’ve seen those things, but it would’ve ultimately detracted from the main point of the series. I was happy to see the show take a definitive direction and stuck with it throughout.

FINAL RATING: 8/10 – Good Marvel Fun.

It’s not groundbreaking, as Daredevil was, but it does its job very competently. It gets you excited for the team up and I think it delivers on its promises. Would I have liked to see more? Definitely, but not if it would just convolute and detract from the story unfolding. There were some underwhelming bits like the dialogue and some over-looked characters, as well as non-character driven events and decisions that hurt the overall fluidity and enticing nature of the show. But The Defenders is a good show. We see our Netflix Marvel group come together, we watch them kick ass and save the day. Sometimes it does need to be as simple as that.

#marvel #mcu #netflix #the defenders #defenders #luke cage #daredevil #jessica jones #iron fist #television #tv #comic book #comics #review #film review #movie review

2 notes · View notes

rate-out-of-10 · 7 years

Text

ATOMIC BLONDE REVIEW

As the craze over graphic novel to film adaptations continues to grow, we begin to get more “off the wall” comics joining the scene. Based off the comic The Coldest City by Antony Johnston, Atomic Blonde sets itself in the late eighties, just before the Berlin Wall is taken down. Director David Leitch (co-director on John Wick) brings his unique action style to the film yet again. Leitch’s background is mostly stuntwork, so he knows how to choreograph some impressive fights, plus mixed in with an interesting 80s pop/rock soundtrack, Atomic Blonde has a fulfilling personality.

WARNING SPOILERS AHEAD

CHARACTERS/PERFORMANCES

Charlize Theron takes up the mantle of the Atomic Blonde herself, an MI6 spy named Lorraine Broughton. Much of who Lorraine is is hidden away from the screen. However, Charlize does a wonderful job encompassing the role with little scenes to herself. Getting to know the character almost comes exclusively from seeing her interact with others, as well as watching what she drinks: a Stoli’s vodka on the rocks. At first she only seems to be a very surface level character, who comes off like she’s cooler than she is, but as the film progresses that dividing line fades away and she convinces you that she deserves your full attention. Charlize, again, does a great job in this physically demanding role and absolutely owns the character. She commands the screen in every scene. And what is very relieving about the character is that she isn’t sexualized at all. There is a bit of nudity involved with this role, as well as a sex scene, however they never compromise what you see in Lorraine. She doesn’t grab your attention by the way she looks, that’s secondary, she’s written and played extremely well; you know she’s in charge by who she is.

James McAvoy plays a lone-wolf type agent, David Percival, who has “gone native” in the streets of Berlin. James is erratic, driven, and a little unpredictable, and it’s really fun to watch play out. He’s not the charmer I’m used to seeing him as, but he has a lot of charisma in this role. Even if David is a morally grey character, you tend to enjoy his presence throughout. Sofia Boutella plays an alluring secondary role as a French spy named Delphine Lasalle. While her character seems to have been implemented to throw a wrench in Lorraine’s life and her job, she’s a welcome addition. Sofia is gorgeous in this role and I wanted to see a little more of her, but her well-done romance with Lorraine served both characters well. It was also very refreshing to see a convincing homo-romance that didn’t feel politically pushed or anything. It was a wholesome addition and breaks the mold. The rest of the supporting cast does great jobs as well. John Goodman and Toby Jones play their interrogative roles well; same to Roland Moller as the KGB head.

The film does have a lot of expendables, as is normal for action films. But the thing is, those feelings of expendable-ness seems to cross over into the main cast at times. Throughout the film, it’s made apparent that characters need to do things, and it’s only relied on duty alone for the audience to believe their motives. However, as the plot thickens throughout the film, character motives become somewhat irrelevant, or just ignored. McAvoy’s character, specifically, is shadier than he lets on, and by the end, you just have to take for granted that “oh he’s a double agent” and move on. But characters are meant to be understood and reasoned with. But here, even with Lorraine, we get some base motivation that is supposed to carry us through the entirety of the film, but it isn’t really enough.

WRITING/DIRECTION

David Leitch relies heavily on his eye-candy of action sequences to carry you through the movie, and it works for the most part. Much like John Wick, the fight sequences are expertly choreographed, and are brutal and believable. The first act of the film’s pace is all over the place, though. It’s simultaneously trying to sell you on the 80s rock style meshing in with the dark Berlin atmosphere, while also trying to set up a typical spy plot-line. It feels too messy to begin with and for a good portion of the first bit of the film, I wasn’t particularly sold on the idea it was putting forth. The film is set up as a (tried and true) flashback story, where Lorraine recounts the events of the last week (or so) to her superiors. It’s a concept we’ve all seen a hundred times, and I think it just spoils parts of the story. We’ll never feel Lorraine is in real danger because we already know she makes it out. It’s a creative choice that I think needs reworking by writers all over. “The List” is a secret list that has top secret info that if the Soviet KGB gets it, it spells trouble for England and America, it’s a bit typical if you ask me. It’s not the worst thing in the world, sure, but it’s definitely pulling the film down a tad where it could be considered one of the best spy-action movies ever.

On a side note, the comparisons to Jason Bourne and James Bond, I think, are useless endeavors. Why compare Lorraine to male spies who came first in the movie world? Why does it matter? Lorraine is a bad ass, Charlize does remarkable work; why do we feel the need to ask “is she the female James Bond?” Because she isn’t. She’s Lorraine Broughton, the Atomic Blonde, and she’s enough, in every way. Instead of trying to bring up female characters by comparing them to past male equivalent characters, we should keep them independent. I know it’s fun to compare these sorts of things, but a lot of the time, these comparisons hurt the character more than it helps. Lorraine is a bad ass, regardless of who you compare her to.

FINAL RATING: 8/10

Atomic Blonde is eye candy for the action film fan, and enough for the spy/thriller fan. Charlize commands the screen in her role, and it’s a definitely worth commending the lack of sexualization of Lorraine’s character, and even incorporating the casual idea that Lorraine is bisexual, I think, is very important for future films such as these. Especially those with a female lead. The movie does a great job portraying its atmosphere, as well as its stylistic personality, but it tends to feel a bit flat in the departments of character motivation as well as the overarching plotline. But all in all, Atomic Blonde is really fun, and you can’t help but feel a bit of an adrenaline rush in a few parts, especially that ~8~ minute fluid one-shot brutal action sequence. It was one of the best pieces of filmmaking I’ve seen all year.

#atomic blonde #the coldest city #comics #comicbooks #movie #film #movie review #film review #review #action #charlize theron #spy film #james bond #jason bourne #john wick #james mcavoy #out of 10

3 notes · View notes

rate-out-of-10 · 7 years

Text

DUNKIRK REVIEW

The man behind the Dark Knight Trilogy, Inception, and Interstellar, Christopher Nolan, is back with the WWII epic, Dunkirk. Dunkirk is focused on a battalion of British troops backed up against the coast of Dunkirk, France. The beach is just a boat trip from France to England. British attempts at a full rescue have been thwarted by German aircrafts, since they hold Dunkirk. With home on the horizon, civilian ships from England set sail to help bring the 400,000 stranded soldiers home.

WARNING SPOILERS AHEAD

CHARACTERS / PERFROMANCES

Nolan’s films have a tendency to show off some incredible performances, as well as have some very interesting characters. Dunkirk offers some brilliant pieces of acting, but without any character you can really latch onto. The film chronicles the rescue through three different perspectives: Tommy (Fionn Whitehead), a soldier stranded on Dunkirk, Farrier (Tom Hardy), a British pilot headed for Dunkirk, and a civilian boat comprised of Mr. Dawson (Mark Rylance), Peter (Tom Glynn-Carney), and George (Barry Keoghan). All the performances here were very believable and compelling; Fionn Whitehead’s performance being the most compelling and striking. Harry Styles put on a great performance, I will say. In his acting debut, he genuinely impressed. Cillian Murphy also did a great job, and same to Kenneth Branagh. But again, there were no true standout characters here, despite the wonderful performances.

It’s always tough to convey character with little dialogue, and I’d say the first 20 minutes or so has one line. The film is very atmospheric in that way. But the film didn’t allow you to connect fully to the characters. You were aware of their situation and felt their desperation via great storytelling and cinematography, however almost every character was underdeveloped. It was clearly deliberate, almost making the focus be on all of the troops while also giving you a set of people to focus on. Make no mistake, it generally works.

However, this is actually out of character for Nolan where he usually has some great character work in all of his films. Without a strongly written protagonist, even just one, the film feels a bit barren. It makes the film a tad bit stretched too thinly, as all the characters we’re meant to identify the film with don’t truly standout from one another. I couldn’t have told you the names of any of the characters when I left the theatre without the help from IMDb. Also, I have to say everyone looks the same, save for a few distinct characteristics. At times I felt detached from the characters because I really didn’t know who was on screen. This is clearly perpetuated by the all-white 99% male cast, which I understand is for historical accuracy, but it’s weird regardless. On a separate note, the focus on narrative and atmosphere does serve the film well throughout. I appreciate that we were really only to focus on what was happening and Nolan didn’t feed us some cliché backstories or even just forced characterization. We were only to focus on their struggles on getting off the beach of Dunkirk. So there are pros and cons to this approach.

WRITING / DIRECTION

Where the writing lacks in the character department, the storytelling holds it up. The film goes back and forth from not only three different perspectives, but different times where the characters all kind of intersect by the end. One part, following the soldiers on the beach, plays out through the week before rescue titled “The Mole”, the next segment is “The Sea” following the civilian boat headed for Dunkirk a day before the rescue, and then next is “The Air” following Tom Hardy’s pilot an hour before the rescue. Each piece weaves itself in and out of each other, very cleverly I might add. It was definitely a unique choice to progress this story sort of non-linearly. The different perspectives serve the film very well when they begin to intersect and our main characters’ paths cross.

Perhaps the most impeccable part of the film, though, was its cinematography and score. Nolan has a knack for creating some brilliant and grand scenes, and with Hans Zimmer creating the musical atmosphere, how can you lose? Hans’ score is extremely clever, using a ticking clock throughout the film, and even when there isn’t a clock, the songs resemble a ticking. The film’s atmosphere was remarkable. The whole film is executed with precision and it’s inspiring. The film progresses almost carefully, building suspense, but not having it feel like its dragging. There’s always something pulling you to keep watching, and the film’s shorter than Nolan-usual run time suits it well. Dunkirk could’ve run into some issues if it were any longer, but Nolan managed to have it feel like a complete experience in its 100 minute run time. In addition, war movies tend to try to grasp the brutality, intensity, and the carnage of WWII, but Nolan expertly crafts the movie in a way where it captures the sheer desperation and anxiety that comes with waiting for your rescue or your death.

FINAL RATING – 8.25/10

Dunkirk may be remembered for years to come as a great war movie, telling a seldom told tale about WWII. Christopher Nolan’s trademark cinematography and Hans Zimmer’s score are truly the most captivating pieces of this film. Aside from that, the film's clever storytelling and on-point performances by the whole cast bring the film to near soaring heights. The only things really holding the film back is its lack of real character development. I would’ve loved to feel really attached to these characters, not just the actors’ performances, and that holds the film back for me a bit. Nolan had the workings of something that could be considered a WWII masterpiece, but it falls slightly short of it, but it’s great nonetheless.

1 note · View note

rate-out-of-10 · 7 years

Text

VALERIAN AND THE CITY OF A THOUSAND PLANETS REVIEW

Acclaimed director Luc Beeson (The Fifth Element & Lucy) takes on the vast and intricate universe of Valerian & Laureline, a ground-breaking French Sci-Fi comic series that started in the 60s. Luc Beeson has stated that he’s always wanted to make the comic series into a film, but until James Cameron’s Avatar, he didn’t think we could technologically do it. But now in 2017, CGI has become another pillar in the film industry and suddenly Luc Beeson has all he needs to bring the world of Valerian & Laureline to life. However, the life Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets leads is a bland and messy one.

WARNING SPOILERS AHEAD

CHARACTERS / PERFORMANCES

The characters of Valerian and Laureline are considered top-tier in the comic world. Both are individualistic and unique, Laureline being considered a great representation of strong women in Sci-Fi, especially at the time. But here, in this adaptation, both characters fail to capture anything resembling interest. Actors Dane DeHaan (Valerian) and Cara Delevingne (Laureline), for some reason, bore. They are uninteresting faces in a universe filled with life and intrigue. It makes no sense why our two leads can’t hold this film up. Perhaps it was the writing, but even then it seems like Dane DeHaan wasn’t even trying to show a genuine emotion. Even when his character is falling through space, he’s monotone and uninterested. Cara had small moments, but barely worth mentioning. At first, Laureline seemed to be a beacon of hope for the film, like she’s a real individual, a strong-minded woman. But as the movie title has made abundantly clear, this is about Valerian (for some reason). So, naturally she winds up as typical as you can get by the end. I’m simply confused on how these two can actually add nothing to the film at all.

And it’s not like they had strong support either. Every other person in this film was completely forgettable. Clive Owen plays Commander Arun Filitt and he was just dreadful. A plain “villain” that offered zero interesting characteristics. Behind him there was Sam Spurell as Five-Star General Okto-Bar and it’s just more of the same. Not a single being, save for a few of the Mul aliens, had any layer of character. It was pitiful really. Even Rihanna couldn’t save this mess. Her random character, Bubble, was just another thing carelessly thrown in, and killed like fifteen minutes later. I didn’t care for a single bit of it.

Also, the film is all around poorly acted. As I said before, Dane DeHaan was a bore, and Cara wasn’t much to speak of, and most other characters were forgettable. But it seemed like every line spoken was some sort of cliché or some horrible attempt at comedic relief. I couldn’t find a real reason to care for anyone, and the acting gave me more reasons to leave the film rather than stay until the end. I, of course, wound up sitting through it all, but it was really only to solidify that my thoughts throughout will be confirmed.

WRITING / DIRECTION

Perhaps the most painful part of the movie, and it really pains me to say, was the writing. Valerian has some of the worst dialogue I’ve heard. It was a chore to listen to these characters talk to one another, and that’s just sad. I don’t think I got through one conversation without face-palming or rolling my eyes. Aside from the dialogue, the whole plot-line and pacing of the film was messy, to say the least. The movie could barely keep your attention, if at all, with what was going on. It didn’t give you much reason to care for what was happening.

The opening sequence of the film is the only real redeeming piece of film in here. It was a beautiful opening, generating so much life and promise and starts the film off wonderfully. Even the transition to Mul, where we meet these gorgeous pale beings who are gentle, somewhat primitive, but are interconnected to their planet. It was a brilliant start, I’ll say. But once our focused shifts to our human leads, Valerian and Laureline, the film seemingly drops off so steeply by shoving this hetero-romance in your face. Really? We are set in a universe that is inhabited by some incredibly stunning alien creatures and worlds, and yet we get some bland, forced romance to worry about? I don’t find romance intrinsically bad but to have it just thrown together and continuously slapping you in the face throughout the film was annoying.

I can’t stress enough Luc Beeson’s poor use of this intricate and gorgeous universe, it’s almost pathetic honestly. The film couldn’t even excite you when action/fighting/chasing was happening. They all felt trivial. When the movie made the rare attempted at character building or plot building, it all felt extremely disingenuous. The backstory to how the planet Mul was decimated and its inhabitants were nearly eradicated was maybe an honorable attempt at creating interest, but everything before it made you feel numb. I’m a lover of epic space battles, but this here was a poor attempt at anything of the sort. It was space battle mimicry. And if a movie centered on alien conflicts and space can’t catch the attention of me, then the film is flawed to its very core. It’s bad.

Final Rating – 3.5/10

I’m a sucker for aliens. I’m a sucker for space. Valerian and the City of A Thousand Planets had an abundance of both, and I could barely sit through it. As I stated before, the film has some gorgeous creatures and things to explore, and through the first twenty minutes or so, I was so excited for what I was going to experience. But so much potential and possibility was wasted on bland characters, a weak and messy plotline, and a forced romance that had no business being there. Valerian is perhaps the best example of muddled, cliché sci-fi that does absolutely nothing for the genre. It’s just here now and I guess we’ll just have to wait to forget about it.

#valerian #valerian and the city of a thousand planets #sci fi #science fiction #sci-fi #film #movie #movie review #film review #review #out of 10 #dane dehaan #cara delevingne #space #comics

1 note · View note

rate-out-of-10 · 7 years

Link

One of my topic articles on Word of the Nerd! Go check it out! If you haven't subscribed to Word of the Nerd yet, please do! Like on Facebook, follow on Twitter!

0 notes

rate-out-of-10 · 7 years

Text

SPIDER-MAN: HOMECOMING REVIEW

Since 2002 we’ve seen two actors take up the mantle that is Peter Parker/Spider-Man, Tobey Maguire and Andrew Garfield. Now, with the MCU’s continuously expanding universe and a partnership with Sony, a third joins the fray, Tom Holland. Spider-Man is one of the most recognizable icons in all of pop-culture, so when Spider-Man: Homecoming was announced and that Marvel Studios and Sony came to an agreement to allow Spider-Man to join the MCU, there was a lot of excitement. In addition, we got a wonderful taste of the new take on the web-slinger in Captain America: Civil War (2016), so a solo movie showcasing what this iteration was all about, naturally the hype was extremely high. And it really pays off in the end.

WARNING SPOILERS AHEAD

CHARACTERS/PERFORMANCES

It should be made known that this interpretation of Peter Parker is a younger kid than the past two live-action ones, specifically a 15 year old high school sophomore. Tom Holland is the youngest to play the role to date, and he fits it like a glove. Not only does he look the part being so young, but his whole demeanor and personality is immature, but in the best of ways. He’s quick-witted, and about as blown away as audiences are while he’s pulling off his super stunts. Tom Holland is a refreshing take on a character we all know, and have seen on the live-action screen twice before, and that’s great. He owns everything about Peter, the awkwardness, the genius, and the whimsy and outgoingness of Spider-Man. He’s perfect for the role. Alongside Tom Holland, he has his best friend character, Ned played by Jacob Batalon. Batalon plays the comedic role well enough, however I personally feel that there were too many bits of him just derailing scenes. He was funny, don’t get me wrong, however the film is filled with humor so to have a character that was there almost devoted as the comedic relief seemed a bit tried. His relationship to Peter, however, felt very genuine, so the constant gags he plays always feel in character. From a villain perspective, Michael Keaton’s Adrian Toomes (The Vulture) isn’t anything groundbreaking, but here he works very well with what the film is going for. He is realistic and felt mostly justified with what he was doing, however some jumps in motivation were a bit stark, which made Toomes feel a tad bit under developed. Nonetheless, Keaton plays him very well, with confidence and with just the right amount of broodiness that he didn’t feel at all like another cheesy, weak Marvel villain. On top of Adrian Toomes’ evil doing, I appreciated the humanistic approach to him and his team. When the world is now wracked with aliens and monsters, people of course will start to try and get ahead just to survive, but then to profit. It was a nice commentary on how humans react when they feel outgunned or up against a wall. A “force hand” to The Vulture’s character was very apparent.

Among the top stars in Homecoming, Robert Downey Jr., and Jon Favreau reprise their roles as Tony Stark and Happy Hogan respectively. I’m glad that this film didn’t try too hard to bank on Iron Man, he was a very welcome supporting character, an awkward mentor and a person that Peter thinks very highly of. I’ve missed Happy, not seeing him since Iron Man 3 (2013), and the same goes for Gwyneth Paltrow as Pepper Potts. These characters were all very welcome on screen. The other cast of characters including the rest of Peter’s classmates like Laura Harrier as Liz, Tony Revolori as Flash, and Zendaya as Michelle were all great to see. The diversity in the casting of the film is very commendable as well. It felt like a real diverse high school in a real city. It’s often seen as a little thing, but roles like these do carry a lot of weight and it’s very refreshing to see. On another beat, the younger take on Aunt May (played by Melissa Tomei) worked well with the younger take on Peter as well. She didn’t feel out of place, and honestly, I kind of preferred it. I did want to chime in on the MJ talks too. Zendaya plays a role named Michelle Jones, and at the end of the film she says “my friends call me MJ”, a clear emulation of the known character Mary-Jane, “MJ”, and Peter’s wife in the comics. There’s no real content in the film to say that she is the “new MJ” but regardless, she’s a different character entirely, as seen by how she carries herself here. The nickname is really the only place where the two characters cross. Regardless of future intent for the character, like her potentially becoming Peter’s love interest, she’s not Mary Jane. Her nickname of course pays homage to the “original MJ”, but that’s it. This is Marvel taking artistic liberties, with both diversifying its casting, as well as creating a unique, but still recognizable, universe for Spider-Man.

DIRECTION/WRITING

Director Jon Watts and his writing team had their work cut out for them, crafting a fresh take on the character of Spider-Man as well as blend him in with the established MCU. Skipping the original story completely was the absolute best decision for the film. Instead focusing on Peter’s dealings as Spider-Man, his desire of becoming an Avenger, and his really being a young, naïve kid. This is a grounded, small-scale approach to Spidey. He’s never in downtown Manhattan for example, he’s swinging from smaller building, and using what’s around him to get around. There’s even a bit of him swinging into a gold course where there nowhere to swing so he ends up just sprinting across the screen muttering, “This sucks”. The plotline as well is very small compared to the “world ending” stories that we’ve gotten used to seeing from Marvel at this point. It was refreshing to take a step back and focus on building Peter and Spider-Man, and establishing him, before anything else. The writing is very strong with Peter’s character. I will say though, that there were several bits throughout the film that had great dramatic potential, but were undercut by daft attempts at comedy. Spidey is always going to quipping, that’s a given, but here I felt like the writing was trying way too hard to add humor in not-needed places. I wanted to take things a tad bit more seriously, but I feel like I wasn’t allowed to.

As a storyline goes, it hits all the generic notes, but it relies a lot on Tom Holland’s character to do the heavily lifting. His character is meant to draw in viewers, and if done right, whatever Peter is doing, people should be invested in it. Like I said, it’s a small scale film, and it definitely plays on a lot of cheesy elements (typical high school, typical romance, the same Peter Parker troubles we’ve all seen before), however the film generally does a great job with allowing those things to work with the script and have it still feel exciting, rather than tried. Homecoming paced itself generally well, too. There were some parts that felt a little rushed, some of the high school sequences felt a bit lackluster as well. Almost like they were in there because they had to be, but they didn’t carry too much weight. What really moved the film along was Peter himself and whenever Spidey was on screen. There were some great fight sequences, the ferry scene being the most notable. Spidey was quick, quipping the whole time, and showcased some amazing talents. I very much enjoyed “Karen”, Spider-Man’s computer that Stark put in his suit. I loved seeing the high-tech suit, something we hadn’t seen before. There were some great action scenes throughout, the ferry scene being the most notable. It being the clear height of the film, where we get a real showdown between Spider-Man and Vulture, a great scene with Peter trying to keep the ship from breaking off, as well as Tony confiscating the Spider suit. The movie was in full swing by this time, and Peter’s transition back into his make-shift suit through the end of the film didn’t feel spoiled at all. Heading back to the roots was a nice direction to go in, especially to give a glimpse to what Spidey was before Tony’s suit.

I think Homecoming started in the best of ways. After being introduced to Adrian Toomes during the clean up after the “Battle of New York”, we get a first person, video footage perspective of Peter when he is first picked up by Tony in Civil War, to when he gets his new suit, as well as him filming while he’s waiting for his queue to swing in and take Cap’s shield. I thought that whole bit was extraordinarily clever and the best way to introduce Holland’s Peter into this movie. Separately, it isn’t abundantly clear when this film takes place. We do get an ”8 Years Later” stamps after we see Toomes cleaning up New York; we’re obviously somewhere in between Civil War, as Cap is cited as a war criminal now, and the events of Doctor Strange and the Earth bit of Guardians 2 isn’t mentioned at all. I also have to give a great commendation for Cap’s troll of a post-credits scene. After Gunn’s clever post-credits bombardment in Guardian’s 2, we get Cap doing a PSA announcement on “patience” and how it’s so important, even when faced with something so disappointing when you waited a long time to get to it. I see you, Marvel.

Final Rating: 8.5/10

I think Spider-Man: Homecoming is exactly where the MCU needed to go with Spider-Man. It didn’t waste too much time getting to him, it gives Tony and Happy, new Spider-Man gadgets and things, and it was an all-around good time. There may have been some issues with the comedy undercutting some important, potentially dramatic scenes, and the plotline being a generic one, but the film is a lot of fun regardless because Tom Holland alone reels you in and keeps you smiling. It’s small scale, and to some it may feel a tad bit underwhelming, but for the character of Spider-Man, this is where we needed to see him. In a “friendly, neighborhood” setting. It worked really well, and I can’t wait to see what’s in store for Spider-Man in the future. I really hope he’s here to stay because: objectively, this is a great movie and Tom Holland is wonderful, but subjectively, Spidey is my favorite in all of Marvel comics, so I really want him to stick around in the MCU.

#spider man #spiderman #spider-man #tom holland #marvel #marvel comics #mcu #superhero #comic #comic books #robery downey jr #review #film review #movie review #out of 10 #peter parker

1 note · View note

rate-out-of-10 · 7 years

Text

WONDER WOMAN REVIEW

Superhero films just keep getting bigger and bigger; Marvel seems to always make a smash hit every single year, and DC seems to have been trying to catch up. With Wonder Woman, the first female-lead superhero film since 2005’s (flop) Elektra, hitting theaters this weekend, DC has gained some major ground. Director Patty Jenkins expertly crafts a believable world for Wonder Woman to dwell in and made Wonder Woman the all-around best film that the DC Cinematic Universe has put out thus far, and very well may be the most important superhero film that’s ever come out.

SPOILERS AHEAD

The character of Wonder Woman is a huge undertaking for any actress, I’d say it was even harder for Gal Gadot, someone who was relatively unknown in the States until now, to convince people she was right for the role. She’s previously done some work in the Fast & Furious movies, but once she was announced as the chosen one to play the role of the Amazonian princess, Diana, aka Wonder Woman, she was met with some criticism. But her smaller performance in Batman v Superman seemed to have raised some eyebrows, mine included, and here in her feature length debut in the role, she’s engulfed Diana in the best of ways. Gal Gadot pierces through the screen with intensity, purity, strength, and innocence. Her Wonder Woman is powerful, virtuous, noble, and forthright, she is just wonderful. She has a smile that just makes you proud. Gal almost effortlessly molds the innocence and naivety of Diana in the world of man with her confidence and independence. Other than herself, Gal had some prominent back up in the film as well, specifically Chris Pine in the role of Diana’s human love, Steve Trevor. I can’t think of a movie where Chris Pine wasn’t good. He has an infectious personality on screen, he’s always enjoyable to watch. His approach to Steve’s awkwardness around Diana was great; he’s continually surprised by Diana and it always confuses him how she can always do that. Chris and Gal have natural chemistry on screen, when they joke, when they fight, when they connect, through the whole film their relationship always felt genuine. Their romantic subplot wasn’t ever in your face either, it felt natural and was done so delicately and with grace, I respect it a lot. I wish I could have seen more of the Amazonians of Themyscira, but what we got was definitely enough. To see all these strong women training and fighting, moving so fluidly and gracefully was invigorating to watch. I could only imagine how a little girl felt watching these powerful women command the screen. My only complaint when it comes to the characters of the film is essentially everyone else besides the Amazonians, Diana, and Steve Trevor. They assemble a rag-tag group of guys to show Wonder Woman the different facets of humanity, however I wish they felt maybe more important, maybe a group of strong ladies would’ve taken it further. They didn’t seem to do anything of importance except just be there. They all had some nice moments individually but not enough to convince me that they’re worth watching. Next, there were three villainous figures: Ludendorff (Danny Huston), Dr. Poison (Elena Anaya), and Ares (David Thewlis). Ludendorff and Poison were the ones who commanded most of the evil appearances, however they were excessively generic. I think when you bring a movie into WWI or II, you can just use Germans as evil doers without much depth added to them. Poison had some intrigue, but we never really learn much of her, all she really spent time doing was marveling as gas clouds and being melodramatic. Then there’s Ares, and he wasn’t much at all exciting. His best moment was the reveal that he’s been around the entire time as Sir Patrick, but after that his intrigue faded away with excessive CGI and just an awkward appearance. He kept that mustache for thousands of years? Really? It might have had something to do with the casting choice that made it a bit ridiculous to see. When Ares formed his armor with the weapons and plating scattered around the airfield at the end, that was a cool moment, but David Thewlis just wasn’t Ares. A change in form or appearance might have gone a long way. Gal Gadot, Chris Pine, and the Amazonian women really steal the show for me, the rest were just bearable in a sense to keep the film moving forward.

Wonder Woman starts out incredibly strong, giving the warriors of Themyscira, and a young Diana, time to shine. The concentration on the world building of Wonder Woman was fantastic. It didn’t feel mashed up or rushed, like the other three DC films that have come out thus far. The movie paced generally well, even when the action was at a low point in favor of exposition, there were still bits to draw you in. Sure it can feel a little slow at times, I definitely wanted to see more of Wonder Woman kicking ass, but the slower bits did serve some nice character building, specifically for Diana. Gal was always great to watch whether she was clearly a fish out of water, or standing strong and noble against sexist men, or just smiling. You’re always rooting for her, but you’re also waiting for her to be enlightened. In parts, she’s very naive when it came to the conflict of Ares and mankind, and at the end when she has that realization of who humans really were, after Steve’s sacrifice, a feeling of relief and excitement washes over you. The action sequences were glorious too, Zach Snyder’s trademark slow-mo shots were all over the place, but I was happy with them because I liked watching Wonder Woman kick some serious ass. The final battle between her and Ares may have been very CGI’d and perhaps a bit underwhelming, but the showcase of Diana’s maximum power was great to watch. Beating overwhelming odds in superhero movies will never get old, perhaps that’s because superheroes were built off that premise. I also marveled at the set-pieces; Themyscira, London, the trenches, they all were wonderfully designed, Themyscira being the most colorful of all the landscapes. One thing I did want to bring up was the choice of the WWI setting. It was a bold choice to introduce Wonder Woman in this war-torn time, some people wanted to see her introduced in the modern day, and where I can see that being perhaps a bit cooler, it wouldn’t make much sense to the DC timeline for this universe. In the modern day, Superman and Batman specifically are prominent figures already, Batman already having a long history. If there wasn’t much of a record of Wonder Woman before Bruce discovered her picture and secret file, why would the modern day make sense? It serves her well to be in a time where technology wasn’t all over the place, so the only real evidence of her existence is the one photograph taken of her, that’s what makes it significant. If she emerged closer to the modern day, her ambiguity would be lost. Question that remain from this time, though, is how does she really age in this canon? Is Themyscira somehow suspended in time? How did she age there? Is ten years to an Amazonian in Themyscira, 50 years, or a hundered years, in the world of man? How did she seemingly not age through the rest of human history up until BvS? Did she not interfere in WWII? Vietnam? The Civil Rights era? There are a lot of questions about Wonder Woman and her history that come from this movie, however they don’t really pertain to this film specifically. These are just things that should maybe be fleshed out through the rest of the DC films.

After a film like this, what’s next really comes into question for the DC cinematic universe. Wonder Woman blew all the past films (Man of Steel, Batman v Superman, & Suicide Squad) out of the water. Will Justice League have a monumental payoff like this one did? Or will the rest of the DC universe be just as flat as where we left off with it prior to Wonder Woman? There are plenty of DC movies slated for the near future, but the rocky start it’s gotten off to may hurt the success of their first team-up film. Especially since DC seems to just want the team up to happen more quickly than Marvel’s. We don’t get an Aquaman, Flash, Cyborg, or even a solo-Batman film until after this first Justice League movie, set to release this November. It’s a questionable timeline to have. I would’ve appreciated their creative choices a lot more if we got the films in this order: Man of Steel, The Batman, Wonder Woman, Suicide Squad, Batman v Superman, and then Justice League. With the multitude of cameos in BvS of the other “meta-humans”, plus Batman and Wonder Woman’s solo films would have already introduced them, the team-up would have more of a payoff. But then again, Justice League isn’t out yet, these are just my feelings as of now and they could change. Wonder Woman is the shining example of what DC has needed and it captures Wonder Woman so epically that my excitement for DC has been revitalized to a good degree. My final rating for Wonder Woman is:

8.75/10. In a word: wonderful.

Wonder Woman does a plethora of things right, and when the movie is going great, it’s going great. Gal Gadot does an amazing job with the character, Patty Jenkins directs with fierce integrity and puts on a show that is tremendously impressive. Wonder Woman may be the most important superhero film to have ever come out, and it earns that praise. The flaws with supporting characterization, a decent lack of villainous intrigue, and a not-too-impressive main villain finale doesn’t take away too much from Wonder Woman herself. She’s a shining light in this grim world that DC has built up and I’m excited to see where she will lead the universe to in the future.

#wonder woman #gal gadot #dc #dc comics #dc movies #dceu #dccu #review #movie review #film review #superheroes #comics #out of 10 #reviewing #justice league #superman #batman #aquaman #the flash

2 notes · View notes