Reviews

Okay so right off the bat, I am not a die hard star wars fan. I simply enjoy them as good entertainment and good movies. I am not this die hard fan who collects star wars merchandise or care much about the EU. I am more fan of other stuff, but star wars never captured me the same way it did with the others. Why do I say this? Because its an incredible achievement for me to be this much extremely disappointed in a franchise that I don't care much about.

Okay so before we go into why this piece of junk sucks, there are some positive elements: 1- The technicality is indeed impressive. This is probably the best star wars film in visual style, and choreogrpahy as well as special effects. It effortlessly combines CGI with puppetry and looks very real and convincing. 2- Most of the performances were pretty solid and on point. Daisy Ridley gives a good performance that makes her poorly written character somewhat likable. Mark Hamill does his best to bring Luke Skywalker in a different light and succeeds. And that's about it.

Now about why this movie sucks: it is laughably written, so lazy and so poor that I am stunned by some people who defend this piece of shit WHILE attacking the haters. Now I am not against anyone's opinion, if you like this movie, that's totally fine. But by god is the writing here atrocious. Any kind of depth, motivation, backstory or basic writing for a movie is a big middle finger to anyone searching for any hint of the questions left from the previous movies. Remember how Rey wanted to know about her parents? Thrown out of the window in the most lazy form of writing. Speaking of Rey, yeah she is a Mary Sue, still perfect and achieves training very easy without any form of hardship whatsoever. And my god, what they did to Luke was just.....ugh. I mean I can understand they want to take the character in a different path, but there is absolutely no proper explanation for this sudden shift of the character. It gives you just headlines but no actual context of why he hates the jedi, why he wants to kill Kylo Ren (which is bullshit btw). The writers never thought of proper motivations. Kylo Ren is an emo kid with barely any memorable motivations.

And for Snoke, yeah this has to be one of the most boring, unoriginal and unimaginative villains in a blockbuster film. Just some guy want to rule with an iron fist but no backstory, no proper motivation etc. And yeah, while palpatine was mostly a character that wasn't written well, at least he had a much better personality. He was menacing but fragile. Over the top but devilish. Snoke is just a gimmick.

Now if you're a star wars geek, chances are you gonna either like it (which is in the minority most likely) or gonna REALLY hate it. I'm not a geek myself of this series like I said, but there is so much disrespect and complete screw ups with the continuity that makes you facepalm or cringe. One example is when Luke is found by Rey in the island and then tells her to leave him alone, yet in the force awakens he had a map for people to find him in case the galaxy was in danger again. Yeah apparently Disney doesn't even care about their own continuity either. And another thing for example is The force which isn't ambiguous anymore. Remember when ghost Yoda and Obi Wan appeared, you couldn't tell if they are actually real or just a psychological attachment from the characters? Yeah now Yoda is actually solid. I mean actually solid as in he can hit you and you can feel it. And can summon lightning from the sky. Um......what? I know it doesn't matter to critics or online youtubers, but for people who do follow this franchise will be disappointed.

So yeah this movie is mostly flashy spectacle over substance. It may be the reason why this movie is breaking billions at the box office. After all, most audiences don't care about film quality anymore.

Black panther's reception from the audience and critics seems to be more focused on the 'representation of black people" than the actual movie. And before going deeper in the review, I want to respond to the "black representation" overhyping the movie. Since a lot of people praise the movie for positive portrayal of the black race, as if its the only AND first one to do so, have people forgot about previous movies that portray black heroism? Hidden figures, mandela, long way to freedom, shaka zulu, get on up, 42? How about south African art cinema to appreciate and know the real culture? Nope? Just a mediocre superhero movie? Do people want to stay away from the African culture and act like black panther is the real deal? It doesn't even reflect Africa except in the most superficial ways (costumes, traditions etc). Now I have nothing against African culture of course, but people should stop treating this as some sort of a savior for the black people. A super technologically advanced FICTIONAL African country won't help save anyone. Its just fantasy empowerment, nothing else. Now that I have rambled enough, It's time to talk about the movie itself:

The movie by no means is bad, but its not great as critics say imo. It lacks depth and interesting layers. It lacks emotional investment like let's say winter soldier, logan and iron man. I simply don't care about the story or the characters. They fall flat and one note that I become bored, save for few characters (Killmonger, Shuri) despite the cast doing the best they could. Chadewick Boseman, Michael B Jordan and the rest of the cast are all perfect choices and they do their best to make the characters engaging, but only Michael B Jordan succeeds the most out of them.

The movie in the first act suffers from boring exposition and poor characterization, where it simply introduces these characters and the world of Wakanda but its not very interesting until the ritual and fighting begins. (Although Killmonger's backstory contains interesting points. Speaking of killmonger, he is easily the best character in the movie. He is interesting, you sympathize with his ideals even though his methods are questionable. He's a great villain who is a good challenge to the king

The cinematography and CGI in this movie can sometimes be good, but other times it can be horrible. The best bits of it are in the hand to hand combat on the mountains, the ritual scenes etc. Other times it feels bad like the car chase scene where it lacks levity, creativity and erotic actions sequences. It becomes even worse in the third act, with the rhinos, and the train fight scene, which yes is as bad as people say. In fact, it looks straight out of a ps2 video game.

Overall, the movie is not bad, but its also not great. Would I recommend it? Mostly to the MCU fans and those who love black panther, but its not a great movie. It lacks depth and interesting drama.

"To be born is to have a soul" says K, in the new sci fi epic extravaganza. In 1982, blade runner was a new look at futuristic society with the mind of Ridley Scott behind it. Just like the original, the film was a box office tragedy, and yet getting appreciation from film buffs everywhere. Villeneuve has always played with the themes of human morality, giving an existential look and critical study of society and corruption. And this movie is no different. In this movie, Villeneuve shows a Utopian, yet nightmarish and haunting. In 2049, K is living the life he wants with his girlfriend Joy, a highly advanced artificial intelligence program designed to satisfy the need of its customer. As its old predecessor, this movie blurs the line between human feelings and artificial one. Humane ambiguity gives this movie the depth and main theme it analyzes. One can argue she is real, as seen by her bond with K and her experiencing of rain for the first time.

This futuristic take shows governmental manipulation and corruption in the way it tries to satisfy false needs to the customers, and how they seek perfection in their products but sacrifice their own humanity in the process, killing and destroying an innocent life that did not even get the possibility to live, and maybe even grow on its own. "Real memories are illegal" shows the government refuses the existence of humanity.

With Villeneuve's artistry combined with legendary cinematographer Roger Deackens, they both give a future that's erotic and mythological, that has this somber aura. The spectral imagery create unforgettable environment and powerful moments.

Just like the rest of Villeneuve's movies, political and social consensus come into play and give the depth, challenging the viewer's perception and their very own human feelings

Ryan Gosling personifies human curiosity, with his mastery of minimal acting, giving a focus on body language that contradicts his facial expressions. This is seen in various moments such as in the beginning when he kills Sapper Morton, he shows little attention to his surrounding, yet his body is always on guard. Harrison Ford gives a career defining performance, with his take being a broken, isolated person.

Thanks to Villeneuve and Dickens' artistry, Villeneuve created another sci fi masterpiece that should become a classic in years to come.

The 90s were a very interesting and great time for animated films. With hit after hit, becoming classics, even the ones that didn't do well gained more appreciation over time. After all, it was the same year in which the highest 2D animated grossing movie came out, the lion king, and also the birth of CGI animated film with toy story. And, in my opinion, the best American animated film of the era (I say American, because the best was easily princess Mononoke) was the prince of Egypt.

This film truly is one of the most beautifully animated movies of all time, combining classical hand drawn art with 3D computer graphics, giving a new life and style to the story. The architectural design and scope is absolutely breathtaking.

Speaking of the story, its about, who else? Moses himself. Its a different re-imagining than the epic one by acclaimed director Cecil B Demile, as this film is more family friendly and more Disney-esque. And, believe it or not, this actually is the better movie. It never dumbs down itself to kids, or is too childish to adults, it just has the perfect balance. There is the typical humor that is funny, but there is also an underlying tragedy between all of this, and its done wonderfully and maturely. The best thing about this film is that there is no real villain. Its just a tragic misunderstanding of the characters lost in their paths. Ramses wants to honor his father by being the best pharaoh he can be, while Moses wants to do his job as the prophet of God and save his people. Its a great battle of epic proportions.

The characters are done superb in the film. Moses is very much relatable, kind and empathetic. You really feel the weight and responsibility given to him. Ramses is also given good amount of depth. They are both brothers who love each other, but their path lead to a tragic rivalry that neither want to partake in it, adding even more drama that truly gets you invested in it. And its all supported by great voice acting who are all pitch perfect for the role. The side characters are done pretty good as well.

And the songs, by god are they amazing. The singing in this film gives me goosebumps every time I hear one of them. Deliver us, when you believe, through the eyes of heaven and of course, the plague. They are all used to further the story, sometimes even visually. I dare to say they are much better than vast majority of the Disney songs.

Prince of Egypt truly helped transcending the animation with its story, its artistic style, its writing etc. I adore this movie and can't get enough of it. Truly a work of art

Last of the mohicans is directed by Michael Mann, and it stars Daniel Day Lewis, Madeleine Stowe, Russel Means and Wes Studi. The film depicts depicts the French and Indian war in 1757.

This film is absolutely amazing. It holds no punches back in the depiction of war, both dramatically and in the way it exploits the violence of it. It's an authentic portrayal and unbiased as much as the director can. While the director caters more towards the settlers, giving them more reasons than just land, he also gives layered reasons for the natives as possible, to make the war more engaging and believable

So the story revolves around mostly Hawkeye, the main character, and Cora, who are caught in the middle of the conflict. Hawkeye just wants to find his true self, as he is the adoptive son of Chingachgook. Between his intriguing past, his dedication and unconditional love for Cora (though the love story and chemistry I find to be the weakest part of the film, but still solid), all of this within the war going on, makes him a well layered character to follow, and its all powered by Daniel Day Lewis' fantastic performance. All of the actors do a great job, and I can't think of a single bad performance. Even side characters are given such weight. It reminded me of the dark knight, where Jim Gordon has such presence thanks to the writing and acting. Same happens here.

One of the main positives (that's an understatement) is how the film balances acting in a full circle. The movie doesn't just rely on dialogue (as good as it is), it also gives priority to body language and facial expression, adding more depth and natural progression to the characters. It makes them more human and relatable.

And there is something to be mentioned: Magua has to be one of the most underrated film villains to ever come. Sympathetic, ruthless, honorable are just some of the words to describe the character, excellently portrayed by Wes Studi. His motivations and hatred for the English is fleshed out, from a tragic past, full of blood, it is understandable why Magua took such a bloody path of hatred and violence.

The movie looks and feels magnificent. Whoever did the cinematography truly deserves an Oscar. Its visually enlightening, the camera work is graceful, giving you a complete vision of everything going on the screen as you can get, and the color palette adds a unique atmosphere to the film. they add an epic and beautiful scale to give you a full experience of the movie. It's arguably the greatest adventure movie ever made. And of course, how can anyone forget the iconic and great musical score? Every time it hits the screen, it gives me goosebumps. You feel like its telling a story to you.

What more can I say? The film is excellently crafted with such care and passion that no film buff or fan should skip. Truly amazing.

Thor:Ragnarok, the very movie that got crazy praise, the movie that everyone is gushing over it. The movie that people claim it "brought back" the fun in superhero movies. But is it really worth all of this high acclaim? I can safely say that it doesn't. Just another over- hyped, generic garbage from the MCU.

And to make stuff clear, no I don't hate "fun", and I am no elitist (be it as a comic book fan or as a movie Buff). I simply want a quality movie, no matter how its done or constructed. And this movie cares less about all of this and focuses way too much on humor that it overshadows other important elements of the movie.

To explain myself, I have nothing against escapism. When the movie sells itself and doesn't lie about its nature (whether its a heist, a simple action film or just a comedy), I don't go there expecting a cerebral masterpiece. But I don't expect it to be a mindless filler that's sole existence is to kill 2 hours of my time without any other context or purpose whatsoever.

So far, the movie is getting insane reputation, having high praise almost as other great comic book movies such as logan and the dark knight. But for these two movies, I can understand why logan and the dark knight get such high acclaim. Both completely reinvented the superhero genre in their own unique ways, by giving moral subtext and an engaging story. Thor:Ragnarok doesn't care about such. And yet its praised for its entertainment factor. Now ask yourself: is there really anything worth of such praise aside from how much "fun" the movie is?

I still don't understand the praise for this movie. Its entertaining, but it is a bad movie. It's another proof that the MCU cares more about avengers movie than having a satisfying film. It exists solely to fill in the wait for infinity war.It suffers what other comic book movies do: there is no conclusion or a satisfying ending. They're focusing way too much on the next projects. Character development is almost non-existent, as well as character relationships. All of the relationships rely on cheap, gimmicky comedy instead of seeing real characters interacting with each other. None of the characters feel natural. In fact, it feels like the actors are merely cosplaying.

And as usual, marvel shows they have no respect for the source material. I'm no comic book elitist, and my knowledge of Thor isn't that of a die-hard one, but I know enough to spot when the character is bastardized. I'm sorry, but a Thor who cracks jokes left and right while being captured and his home world being destroyed isn't who Thor is. Thor was more of a noble warrior who speaks in ye old English, almost Shakespearean style. The previous movies failed not because of the tone, but because the writing and acting was lazy, thus you don't care about him. And this movie suffers pretty much the same problem.

And the other stories, as well as the hulk and Valkyrie, feel wasted. They are used unwisely. Both deserve better than just being in a film. In fact, planet hulk should have its own movie, not being a pointless subplot in a Thor film.

And about the whole "fun" aspect, I hate that. I hate that mentality in which the movie is praised simply because its fun. Getting all of this love just because you are entertained. But aside from that? The movie has nothing to it. Its being treated like its the first fun comic book movie we had in years. Have people forgotten about guardians of the galaxy vol. 2? Or was it generic and forgettable that people DID forget it? Overall, over-hyped garbage that doesn't deserve any of the praise. One of the worst marvel movies, and the most disappointing movie of the year (even though I had no expectations)

Every film lover has that movie in which he disagrees with the masses, both critics and audiences. And maybe its not one film, its more than 5. For me, the wolfman is one of those movies. Earning only 38% on rotten tomatoes and damned as the worst monster movie by the president of universal studios, the film sadly failed. I am here to tell you, with all due respect to different opinions, that they may be wrong.

The beauty of the film is that it holds nothing back. This is one of the far better remakes in the horror genre, and probably one of the better remakes in general. It delivers a simple Greek tragedy story in a beauty and the beast kind of story. The story of a man tragically cursed to become the werewolf. Lawerence isn't the villain, far from it. In fact, he does his best to protect people from his other devilish werewolf form, including his love, Gwen. The film does its best to get you invested in Lawrence' tragic path, and it succeeds. Both heroes, the wolfman and his love, are forced to make harsh and horrible decisions not by their own will. And that makes it so interesting.

The themes of loss and torture are done beautifully in the film. In fact, it is sometimes even disturbing. I still can't understand why critics said the film lacks scares. Sure its not one of the scariest movies, but it has a Gothic, beautiful atmosphere that builds tension and suspense. The film also doesn't JUST immediately show the werewolf, it keeps it in the shadows, which is very clever.

Gwen is a great example of a properly done female character and as the love interest. She's strong wielded, but compassionate. She can be fierce, but loyal. She was able to accept the dark and tormented side of Lawrence. They both have wonderful chemistry together on screen. They might just be one of my favorite movie couples. Gwen is also forced to take decisions she doesn't want at the end, as shown in the end.

And for the acting, its actually pretty great. Emily Blunt and Bennicio Del Toro give the best performances in the whole movie. Especially Benicio Del Toro, who gives a specific line which is supposed to be a threat as a cry for help and pain, done brilliantly.

There is also a beautiful sense of Gothic atmosphere in the film that almost feels artistic. Now are there flaws in the film? Sure. The CGI effects can be iffy at times, the gore can be a bit cartoony and the final werewolf battle can be too silly for other people to take it seriously. But for me, these problems didn't bother me much. Its a fantastic and underrated movie that I wish more people would appreciate it more. Best werewolf movie.

The avengers: age of ultron is one of the laziest, most uncreative, lackluster and poorly thought-out sequels to ever exist. The fact that this film got such positive reviews and many defenders of it astounds me. Just like its original predecessor, this movie is almost plot less. It has the most basic plot that you can imagine. The kind of plot that the likes of Michael Bay uses in his transformers movies. Just a sarcastic robot who wants to destroy humanity for vague reasons. (Once again, another awful MCU villain, but then again, its no surprise) And is also bastardized in the movie and treated as a joke.

The avengers team could not be more bland and uninspiring in this movie. Not as bland as the first one, but close. Ironically, the most human character out of them all was vision, and that partially is due to a solid performance from Paul Bettany, not the writing. The other characters are extremely dull. Black widow, Thor, Cap, Bruce and all are extremely boring who lack heart and depth. Especially captain America. Which is a shame, considering he is the leader of the group and is supposed to be inspiring.

The film is also poorly choreographed and shot. The film making felt incredibly amateurish for a supposed professional director. The action sequences were laughably atrocious, albeit entertaining. Some scenes were incredibly horrendous, that they felt like a video game sequence. In fact, video game cut scenes make a better movie than this. There were many scenes that felt forced and its only purpose is to just advertise upcoming movies (some that won't even happen).

And just like its predecessor, the movie lacks any kind of heart and emotion. This is because it only wants to focus on dull humor and mindless, poorly constructed action scenes. Instead of having actual good writing that develop the characters as human beings, they are just mindlessly working together and banter with each other. Why even bother with making the cabin scene if they don't eventually evolve?

Now some may think I am taking this way too seriously, since some people say this movie is JUST for fun. But if the comics had so much heart, creativity and soul, why the film can't have that? Oh yeah because the MCU needs safe choices in order to have guaranteed success. No need to have challenging themes or artistic merit, only soulless action garbage to keep you busy for a couple of hours.

Comic book movies have been through an impressive change over the course of the years. Superman 1978 peaked the audiences' interest in the genre, allowing superheroes to become big budget superhero franchises. And it kept growing bigger with other films like batman 1989. It wasn't until the mid 90s to the late 90s that this genre started to fall. With shitty ass movies like batman and robin and steel, people started to give up on the superhero movies. Fast forward to 2008, iron man and the dark knight not only gained the audience back, but they allowed the genre to grow in an unbelievable rate, giving birth to the MCU. There are still some crappy films both in the MCU, DCEU and some in FOX x-men. Enter logan, the film that dares to challenge the superhero genre. Logan is easily the best superhero movie of all time and for good reasons:

This is a phenomenal comic book movie. The most mature one as well. Now a lot of people say that this is a dark and gritty film and to an extent, they are right. But this is a film that gives us a harsh, harsh reality that wolverine, has to deal with. He is living in the shadow of his old self. He doesn't have his healing factor, making him incredibly vulnerable both physically and mentally. His physical health is awful, and works as a driver for living. The film is pretty simple in its plot. It's not about a hero in a spandex fight crime, it's about a survivor in a hostile world. Logan is trying to have a normal life but he just can't. He is constantly chased by his past and his animalistic nature, as well as his lone wolf attitude. He doesn't even seem to be happy taking care of his professor. He also meets X-23, played by Dafne Keen, who gives a phenomenal performance despite not given much dialogue. Their relationship is tragic and heartfelt to behold. It is truly tragic that all this time, logan does not care about the child, but when he finally makes a connection, he dies in the most brutal way possible. Seeing x-23 crying over her father was a giant tear jerker thanks to the emotions from these actors that they professionally display. Now there are other elements in the film to comment on:

1. The action: This is action done right in a superhero movie. Not only is it the best choreographed, but it is also fills you with intensity and adrenaline. It is brutal and does not hold back. The most impressive thing is that they finally made the action were you worry for the survival of this hero, that you're afraid he won't get out of the situation alive, which you don't see in big budget superhero movies like in DCEU or MCU

2. Simpler is sometimes better: This is a movie with not much complexity in its plot or a giant spectacle. As mentioned earlier, this is a survival drama film, which is most fitting for a character like wolverine. You did not need giant spectacle to deliver badass action sequences.

3. Letting the director do his job: Most superhero movies have studio interference that ruin the project at the end result (suicide squad, age of ultron, batman v superman etc). But since FOX gave up on doing anything due to the previous wolverine movies, they let director James Mangold do his job, and oh boy was the end result fantastic.

Yes, logan is truly a phenomenal superhero movie that is a marvel (pun not intended) to behold. Leaving clichés such as quips and witty dialogue in order to deliver a tragic character journey that leaves you satisfied and emotionally destroyed. It is a soulful film with a lot of heart. 10/10

Hollywood is in a strange state. The movies can't be more successful, with giant film franchises like cinematic universe. Yet somehow, a lot of people are getting bored of them due to being repetitive. Thankfully, directors like Dennis Villeneuve change this course with his bold, innovative films that challenge the viewers. And arrival is one of them.

Amy Adams stars as Louise Banks, a doctor in linguistics tasked with communicating with the aliens that have landed on earth. There is no explosions, no action sequences or portal in the skies to solve the issue, but instead they try to deal with interacting and understanding each other. As Louise crypts more of the aliens' language, she learns more not only from the cultural side, but finds a spiritual state in her self. The strength of the film lies in how the people react to this arrival of aliens. The social media and news of course spreads fear and paranoia across the globe, resulting in leaders, while having good intentions, take the wrong decisions.

The way Villeneuve executes the communication between Dr. Louise and the aliens is mesmerizing. Its atmospheric, other worldly and exotic. And it shows through the mind and talent of an auteur who knows what is he doing. He knows how to deliver an engaging style that helps the film. His psychological emphasis on the subject matter makes a movie unique unlike any other.

From a film making standpoint, this movie is a masterpiece. The direction that gives a moody feeling, and beautiful spectrum, is one of the biggest strengths of the movie. The way the conversation is shot and orchestrated is something to behold. Villeneuve created a sci film that feels operatic at its core but withing the modern age. The musical score is very beautiful and meditative.

Arrival isn't just about language and communication, it's also a journey about spiritual self, and your story within the realm of your reality. A beautiful masterpiece. 10/10

Now before you raise your torches against me, just hear me out. First of all, I do enjoyed this movie. It's highly entertaining but has tremendous flaws. It's not the masterpiece that fans and critics claim it to be, as this is a very clichéd, predictable movie that lacks heart and substance.

OK so what's good about the film? Well, surprisingly the humor works most of the time. It's by far the funniest MCU movie, and that's saying a lot considering I really hate the style of humor within the MCU. In this movie, humor comes from character interactions and situations, unlike in previous films that relied on cringe worthy one-liners. Though, some of the humor do make me cringe. And is the problem. They rely way too much on humor as a gimmick to sell this movie.

The characters are disappointing. They are so weak and one dimensional. Some of the characters feel disposable, and aren't needed in the film, like Ned, who is just there to crack jokes and gives over the top reactions, Flash is just a generic character, and Liz Allen almost has no identity of her own and has zero chemistry with Peter. There is no reason to care about them. Speaking of Liz, the twist is actually pretty good, and raises some stakes for Peter and his relationships with Liz and her dad.

But the supporting characters are a waste. Which is a shame, considering in the comics, the supporting characters had an impact on Peter Parker both as a person and as a superhero from an emotional perspective. Here, they barely do anything, and they don't even have any chemistry aside from the quips they throw.

Michael Keaton kills it as the vulture. He is menacing, empathetic and feels the most human out of all the generic, poorly written MCU villains.

Tony Stark felt wasted in the film. He's just there to provide a character arc for Peter. Now he is not the center of the film as the trailer showed us, but it barely touches upon their relationships aside from Tony trying to forbid Peter being a hero.

Now the action sequences, I actually found them boring, and had little investment in them, only the last fight with the vulture was pretty cool, but don't expect epic action scenes like the train sequence from Spider-Man 2 or the Goblin impalement in the first Spider-Man movie.

Overall the movie is serviceable, but its not the best Spider-Man movie. It's fun and entertaining, but lacks heart and substance. In fact, this feels like a pilot rather than an actual movie. It's just another mediocre marvel movie. It's on par with the first amazing spider-man movie. Not exactly a good movie. Just vastly over hyped because its part of the MCU

The hunt is a clever, well written and well made non trivial dramatic masterpiece that relies on the simple aesthetics of real life, which makes the film emotionally powerful and engaging. It is both disturbing and tragic with its story and its characters. The dialogues are very simple, but the actions and decisions of the characters speak for themselves. In fact, the characters never feel like movie characters. They feel like humans you can talk, relate and feel them, which is the biggest praise this movie can get. The real life part is what makes this movie strong, since everything feels natural and believable. Nothing feels superficial, forced or even a movie. The thematic concept of the film is so tragic and so disturbing, but also raises some questions. All of this is supported by phenomenal performances and beautiful cinematography. The film is simply perfection. Nigh flawless film making.

In the late 90s, summer blockbusters were really suffering quality. There were films like Godzilla, Armageddon, deep impact etc. Point is that these summer blockbuster movies only focused on special effects due to the groundbreaking effects of Jurassic Park, and forgot to give us engaging stories and compelling characters, which became tiresome. In 1999, the matrix was released and blew everyone's mind. The audience were talking about how deep and philosophical, cerebral film it is, something new and innovative. But is it really that? The answer is, to be honest, no.

The idea of a society that realize their reality is an illusion and have to fight authorities is not really new. It has been done in TV episodes, satire, books and many other medium. In fact, even anime did that idea before, just 4 years prior (ghost in the shell). The film is very much outdated, silly, pretentious and not as smart as the movie thinks it is.

There are major problems with the movie, particularly the characters. The characters are so dull, uninteresting and bland that it is so hard to get invested in them. Morpheus is your typical mentor figure, Trinity is a boring character, with so little expressions to show and have zero chemistry with Neo, the main character. There is no reason for her to be in love with him. There has not been a single scene which indicates they should be together. And as for Neo, he is as interesting as a plank of wood, having almost no personality, poor facial expressions. And to top it off, there hasn't been a solid proof why he is "the one". There isn't anything special about him, he doesn't have any leadership skills, he doesn't even know what AI is or what EMP stands for.

There is also another major problem. And it's a huge plot hole in the film. Why is there a matrix? Why is this system needed? The humans are planted, so why need to give them a matrix? All they need to do is just find a way to keep the human energy alive. The film is so pretentious, and has this confidence that is smart, but has one of the most cop out endings in a blockbuster movie. Trinity saves Neo with the power of love. How is something like that left in a "cerebral", "philosophical" movie, when it has an ending that belongs in fairy tales? It's stupid, forced and doesn't add up.

So for all the rant this review has, is the film terrible? Not quite. In fact, it's a decent movie with some clever ideas and analogies, and props for having a major impact on film making and actually trying to do something different in the action genre as well as blockbuster movies, but it's not really the masterpiece it is claimed to be. It's outdated and is deeply flawed. But to some extent, it is understandable why many people love it.

Each decade or so, at least one film comes that blows and captures the audiences' mind and heart. Whiplash is one of those movies, and for very good and understandable reason.

Whiplash is the first ever feature film directed by Damien Chazelle and features a strong cast, having JK Simmons and Miles Teller in the lead performance. The story follows an ambitious drummer who wants to achieve greatness. He is tutored by a psychotic mentor who uses any means necessary to bring the student's potential.

So the story doesn't sound that complex or new, why does the film gets this huge amount of praise and love? Well, for a lot of reasons.

First, this film is beautifully crafted. From the graceful usage of camera, lighting to the phenomenal cinematography, this film truly handles the art of craft in a way that benefits the experience of the film. You get immersed in the story and the conflict the characters face. The focused shots give a great detail of the picture. The lighting of the film gives an intense feel, with its shadowy, orange and green colors. It just amplifies the experience.

One of the other stronger points in the film is definitely the performances by Miles Teller and JK Simmons. Miles Teller gives a strong, passionate performance which fits his ambitious character. He is very relatable and you want to follow his dream till the very end. JK Simmons gives the best performance in the movie, with an eerie psychotic and intimidating performance, his character is one of the scariest mentors to ever come across the big screen. Surprisingly though, the character is not just some violent mentor. There is an incredible amount of depth that this character has. And even his violent nature plays an integral part to develop Miles' character.

The third act of the movie is possibly one of the greatest third acts in film history. This is the climax of the film that has been built up since the beginning, and it exceeds expectations with its subtle character development, phenomenal performances and fantastic film making. The film proves that one element of film making is not enough to inspire. All other elements matter, and the director shows this with his directing. His full control gives a near perfect film, with very few minor flaws.

Whiplash is not just a great film, its an outstanding masterpiece and one of the best modern movies that will possibly be seen as a classic in the future. Highly recommend it.

Elephant is a 2003 film directed by Gus Van Sant, which retells a fictionalized story of the Columbine shooting in 1999. Now the film has divided its viewers. Some say it's a unique film, others say it's pretentious garbage. The film is pretentious garbage.

According to some critics and people, they say that this film is supposed to simply let you experience the event. If so, then why is the presentation of the film so dull, devoid of any artistic expressions or creative takes? Why are the only styles used are either shots that follow characters that conclude to nothing in the end? Why does the director only show some green clouds? It's not a f***ing screen saver. The film is truly lifeless, devoid of anything. It has no personality, no sense of purpose or knows what it wants to give.

The film made me question a lot of things, but not the shooting. It made me question the dumb choices taken by the director. If the film simply wants to give you an experience, then why do we spend nearly the entire film trying to "build" these boring characters that is damn near impossible to get invested into them? Nothing they say is interesting, or presented in an interesting way. The style of the film is less than standard, so you can't even call it style over substance, because it has no style or substance. It's a pointless film that feels empty and is so egotistical of its self. Some of the shots look nice at best, but not impressive. Sadly, when these nice shots take place, the film takes a few seconds/minutes that feel like an eternity when it presents these shots. It doesn't add any mood, emotion or build-up, so it's pretty pointless.

The final shooting, which is supposed to be the main thing about the film, is done with no passion or care. This is the point where it should be tragic and grow emotional, but because you don't care about these dumb characters, you don't care about the final even. In fact, I feel quite bad for laughing at the end because of how terrible the shooting was done. It was shot in a dull way, acted poorly, the dialogue was hilariously bad and some of the killings felt over the top.

One last thing I should point out is that the script is mostly improvised, which explains why the dialogue is a piece of crap. None of the characters talk like a normal person you would relate to, or any sort of character you should relate to. Are these characters supposed to be sympathetic? Pure evil? The film doesn't even bother to ask these questions.

It is truly a shame because such an interesting concept can work, but not like this. Maybe under the hands of a more talented film maker, and done in a documentary style, it would have been a lot better. But sadly it turned out to be one of the most boring and terrible movies I have ever experience. I felt agony and I wanted to bring the nearest gun to kill myself. 1/10 and I am being generous

This has to be one of the worst modern superhero movies I have ever seen, possibly also one of the worst. This film has a lot of flaws so bad, so filled with it, it would take a lot of time to analyze it. THE PLOT: The story is a jumbled mess. There is no sense of focus to the film. It tries to answer what happens to Peter's parents, but later on it tries to add mystery when Peter finds the video about his father. Like, why? You already answered the question, why put this in? It just has no sense of pacing. And then there is Electro's sub plot which is forced, poorly fleshed out backstory with the most generic choices a film maker can think off in a superhero movie. This is a bottom of the barrel type of villain, even worse than terrible villains like Lex Luthor from bvs or the joker from suicide squad. On top of that, you also have Harry's sub plot, which is also phoned in, it is just there to add more torture. They try to make him this sympathetic and lost person who loses his family and friends, but here is the problem: THEY BARELY SHOW STUFF LIKE THAT. He barely has any chemistry with the rest of the characters, so why should we care about his arc?

THE WRITING: This is one of the worst, poorly written blockbuster movies I have seen. Just like suicide squad, they use cookie cutter dialogue. In the first scene with his parents, the dialogue is really clichéd. They don't talk like real people. Here is some of the dialogue in the plane scene with Peter's parents:

Mary Parker: "Did you see his face? He's never gonna understand" Richard Parker: "Mary, we've been through this. Our life, as we know it, is over. We're gonna spend every day from now on looking over our shoulders and never feeling safe. We can't do that to him. " Why should we even care about this if you don't even build up these characters? Aren't they supposed to be crucial to the plot? Why even bother to put them if there is no care?

I also need to point out that the humor here is terrible, like really terrible. I can point out my finger at the scene where Spider-Man strips the Rhino's pants and stop there, but I'm not gonna stop there. I've noticed that many of the dialogue is repeated a second time for some reason. I don't understand why. Did the director think it will add "drama"? Because it doesn't. It's just annoying.

THE DIRECTING: Okay so this is actually a mixed bag. Some of the directing is nice, like the scene where Spider-Man swings in the first 10 minutes, or the scene of his room shot upside down. But sadly, there is unneeded shaky cam. In the first ten minutes, when the "bad guy" tries to hijack the plane, there is pointless shaky cam to the point where it's hard to follow it. The choice for musical score is also very lazy. These are scores you find on YouTube for crying out loud. The only decent use of directing is the slow motion which does give some insight of details that matter, like when Spider-Man goes out of his webs in the scene he meets electro for the first time, but still there is poor direction.

THE CHARACTERS: I hear this a lot, Andrew Garfield is the best Spider-Man for some reason because he tells jokes or because he is more confident. But here is the problem. Peter started as a geek. From the first reboot, Peter is already a much more confident person. He doesn't need to be bullied or be seen as a nerd. Some of the choices he makes are also alienating. Like for example, he promises Gwen's father to not harm her, but he doesn't attend her funeral to support her loss. It really also doesn't help when Andrew Garfield gives a poor performance. Even when he does gives the quips, it just comes off as cocky, irresponsible and childish.

Gwen Stacy is the only decent character in this entire franchise. She is supportive, she is decently acted by Emma Stone, she is smart and uses her brains to help Peter, she is the one who actually shows more emotion and makes this "love story" more believable. But sadly, they just don't give enough focus, because the film is a mess. So, when the time comes for her to die, where you should be invested, it seems be a generic death scene for comic fans to recognize.

Electro: This is also one of the worst villains in a comic book movie. He starts off as this generic Edward Nigma rip off (Yeah for some reason, this sounds like a good backstory) who forcefully becomes Spider-Man because he saved his life, but then he turns on him because he thought he set him up, even though Spider-Man offered him help, so it just comes as contradicting and a continuity error, and becomes a forgettable, generic villain.

I know a lot of people love this movie and I respect that, but I personally just can't love it. In fact, I despise it. 

Suicide squad is the third entry in the DCEU franchise. After the extremely divisive film that was batman v superman, fans had high hopes in this film that it will save DC, having much potential. Unfortunately, it was terrible.

The film focuses on a group of villains: Harley Quinn, Deadshot, Captain Boomerang, El Diablo and Katana in which they must save the world. The film had several re-shoots obviously, as the film at first was supposed to be a dark, gritty film. But the changes ended up more like guardians of the galaxy, with its more colorful changes and witty dialogue. The film is absolutely terrible, giving so little for the characters to work with. Harley Quinn for example, isn't given much aside from her witty, cringe worthy quips and lunatic behavior. Most of the other members are also given very little that is not expanded enough to have any sort of interest. It feels manipulative when it tries to develop these characters. It gives you a small fraction of its backstory and thinks it will be enough to get some emotional investment. It is done so poorly and lazily that its laughable. The opening scene where the film introduces the characters is done terribly, where Amanda Waller is there to throw exposition for the characters, with the flashy texts next to the characters. It ends up feeling rushed and not giving the time it needs. With that said, Harley Quinn and Captain boomerang are fun to watch. While they don't have much to work with, Jai Courtney and Harley Quinn's performances make these characters enjoyable to watch. However the way they treat the joker here is just insulting, giving him less than 15 minutes of appearance and having very little impact on the story was completely unnecessary. He wasn't supposed to be in the movie like this.

The film's story doesn't add up. So in the film, Amanda Waller hires these criminals to combat meta-humans, but it doesn't explain why these criminals, who aren't trustworthy. Why not call upon the heroes like wonder woman or batman? It just doesn't add up. The funny thing is that the backstory of these characters, especially Harley Quinn with the joker, would have made a much more interesting film and much more engaging.

One other aspect is the directing of the film, which is extremely broken. It can't even do the most basic of film making, having clumsy editing with its flashy lighting when it introduces the characters, the colorful texts that are there to give exposition, the pop songs that feel completely out of place. It doesn't build a moment or give any sort of emotion. Just a pop song thrown there and there.

The action scenes are also terribly directed, with its dark lighting that doesn't give a clear sight what's going on, and the cut that makes it hard to follow. It's so broken that it leaves plot holes and continuity errors, to the point where it doesn't even feel like an actual movie. The scenes of the film are disjointed, and making the experience much more painful.

This choppy editing, lighting and pop music leads to an inconsistent tone. It doesn't know if it wants to be a dark, gritty emotional film, or a fun witty film with funny mischievous protagonists. it's unfocused and it ends up being confusing. The film is also needlessly dark in its lighting. It makes the film visually assaulting on the eyes

The film is a complete failure that it missed a potential opportunity to save the DCEU franchise. I can understand the appeal of the fans for this movie, but it was just a pain.

Iron man 3 is the 7th installment in the marvel cinematic universe, directed by Shane Black (Kiss kiss bang bang). The film follows Tony Stark being torn apart mentally while facing a terrorist, the mandarin. He starts an odyssey of rebuilding and retribution. When you read it like this, it can come as a powerful, dramatic conflict that can leap the boundaries of comic book movies to a whole new level. Sadly it doesn't. The biggest problem that people seem to have with this movie is the mandarin (We will get to that later). People seem to be very mixed about the way the mandarin was represented in the film. My two cents is that it is utter stupidity. Tony Stark in the film is a completely unlikable asshole. He has no charm, no charisma or any weight. The character is supposed to face a deep, mental conflict which is PTSD due to the events of the avengers, but that is embarrassingly downplayed. This conflict gives no emotional substance or levity. The way it is handled is completely superficial. In other films, such conflicts can be presented and supported by other elements of film making, such as camera movements, sound editing, crazy visuals and great acting. Unfortunately none of these elements are used in the film. They simply use a close-up shot and rely entirely on Robert Downey Jr.'s acting skills, which are terrible and hold no emotional value. All he does is staring and throw quips. The PTSD is also there as a plot device, appearing only when it is needed to, but never really doing anything to the character. Tony gets a nightmare, makes foolish decisions that almost cost his life and his loved ones, but it is all presented in a very dull way. It doesn't also help with RDJ's one note acting who can't do any dramatic performances. Another poor aspect of the film is the tone. The tone ranges from pretentious edginess to a Mel Brooks action spy comedy by the end. The movie has no idea what kind of theme or layer it wants to represent. The tone is inconsistent and that damages the movie. The writing in this film is absolutely stilled, the dialogue is awful, and the delivery is bland and poor.

Now to the main complaint of the film, the mandarin. Yes, the mandarin is completely ruined. Not just as an adaptation from the comic, but as a standout film character in general. Both of the characters, the terrorist and Aldrich Killian, are some of the worst film characters. The terrorist has no reason to attack America or give it lessons. What possible conflict does this terrorist has with America? Or at least what reasons does he has to do such acts? The film gives us no explanation or any reason at all. Just a random villain thrown there, with no backstory, no motivation, and no clever themes behind this. The second idiotic character, Aldrich Killian, has a laughably terrible origin story that you can't take seriously. His entire reason for hating Tony and wanting revenge is because Tony left him on the roof at a new year's eve in 1999 while wanting to present a new project to Stark. Just, stupid. And finally, to the twist. For some unknown reasons to me, some people claim that this twist is clever because it was unexpected and because it tells us not to trust the government. Now that can be a good idea, except for one thing:it is terribly executed. There is not smart writing, no build-up, no thematic elements, just a forced twist for a cheap laugh. And as always, marvel can never really create a soundtrack that can give a powerful, emotional impact for the viewer and to serve the movie from a dramatic standpoint. The musical score is dull, forgettable and serves no purpose. The visuals are also dull, giving no memorable moments or imaginative scenes to give a bigger experience of the film. It really saddens me that such awful movies can break such huge box office numbers and gain critical success. It is one of the worst blockbuster movies i have ever seen.

Doctor Strange is the latest installment in the marvel cinematic universe franchise and it is directed by Scott Derrickson (sinister, deliver us from evil). The story follows Stephen Strange, the top neurosurgeon who loses the ability to use his hands after a car accident and his quest for spiritual healing from the help of mystic arts. Much like most marvel movies, the plot of the film is thin and doesn't have much to tell. It follows the simplest form of film making without taking any creative risks or new ideas. The moving point starts at the tenth minute of the movie, the car accident. This is incredibly rushed because barely anything is known about the main character except that he is egotistical and a great doctor. The films gives no detailed insight about his humanity or how he interacts with the real world or how his life is. Nothing of that is given in the film, which weakens it. How is the audience supposed to emphasize with a character that was poorly built from the get go? And it doesn't stop here, the character is basically Tony Stark 2.0 but instead of the armor, he uses magic. Benedict Cumberbatch gives his best to breathe life in Stephen Strange, but the performance falls flat due to the weak script. The only charisma he has are the quips and jokes, which become tiresome really fast. The lack of any dramatic tension or internal conflict makes the character barely 3 dimensional. Stephen does change by the end of the movie, but it feels unearned. This film could have been a unique entry in the superhero genre due to its subject matter: a pure fantasy world filled with magic and other bizarre worlds. But, much like Thor (2011), all of this creativity is overthrown for the sake of decently conceptualized visuals and a generic story that offers no new perspective. The villain in the movie, while not as terrible as the mandarin or other bad mcu villains, is not great either. A mediocre villain with your typical, generic motivations. The film implies a conflicted past between Kaecilius and the Ancient One, but it is not explored. Just as the rest of mcu movies, Doctor Strange has no memorable musical score, and it barely even services the movie well. It doesn't add any form of weight or emotional levity. It is extremely superficial and used only as a tool to make the scenes less awkward or make it funny. Marvel is abusing the solo movies as well as the directors and audiences by giving movies whose sole purpose is to build up to future franchises. The one thing that was truly good was the visuals, which was not mind blowing as people say. Overall, not a terrible movie, but not a good one either.

Sausage party is the latest film of Seth Rogen. A film that might have potential in the beginning, but completely lost. The story focuses around food market who desire to be "chosen" by the humans, who are regarded as gods in the eyes of food. But, through a pretty much predictable twist, the food discover that humans are monsters who devour food. So the story could have had clever satire on the extreme sides of both religion and atheism, but sadly this is non-existent. Instead of having a thoughtful, clever and relatable commentary, we get extremely one sided and biased view on religion that is offensive and offers no insight. The film's basic message is that if you believe in God, then you are wrong or living a fantasy. That's it. Nothing clever or remarkable in such a message. It is a pure propaganda to shove atheism down people's throats without even giving any reasons whatsoever. The characters are extremely dull and one dimensional. In fact, they are down right racist stereotypes. It seems this is due to lazy writing, because the characters completely have no chemistry or any funny situations. Another thing is that the animation is very bland, generic and dull. And it is hard to believe that this is a style of animation, because there is no style to it. The comedy in this movie is pretty much nothing but shock factor without any soul or heart. This film is a complete waste of time. For some reason, people praise it for its clever commentary and having some brilliance hidden, yet i saw no such thing. And this movie has also one of the most unnecessary, stupidly insulting and one of the sickest (in a bad way) endings ever: food porn. Seriously? Food porn? What kind of sick minded human being thought this was funny or clever or had any sort of importance at all? It is only bizarre, weird and just uncomfortable. A terrible film.

Where the wild things are is directed by acclaimed film maker Spike Jonze, based on the novel by the same name. One must really admire the director's take on the novel, because it is truly beautiful, emotional and an intellectual study on the potent mindset of a child's psychology. What does that mean? Well, first let's look at what we got. We know that the kid, Max, is a hyperactive child with deep imagination. He always wants to play, but his mother and family have no time for him. And due to this, he creates an imaginary world where he interacts with imaginary beasts and desires to stay there forever. This is where people get heavily divisive: they complain for the lack of story. And in some respects, they are correct. The film in the beginning starts off traditionally as any movie, with introducing the characters, constructing the story and all that good stuff. It's when the child starts to go to the imaginary island that things get tricky. It's true that there is no story as in normal movies do, but then again, it doesn't need a story to tell. Think back when you were a lonely child, when you had no one but your own imagination. You probably created a world with your favorite characters to interact with. Now think of this: did your world had any plot story, or any sort of logic? Of course not. And this is exactly what the movie is, it is the boy interacting with his own world, telling his own story in his own unique way. He doesn't want to give you a plot, but for you to understand his emotions and what he is going through. It's his way of dealing with loneliness and understand things. In short, his world is run purely on emotion, and not logic. The child actor in this film is phenomenal. He gives an emotionally potent performance and you understand what he feels. This is also supported by beautiful direction from Spike Jonze, who clearly knew what he was supposed to do. The film is also beautifully as captivating as the writing, giving a very gritty and dark, but majestic world.The cinematography is also unbelievably well shot and focused. As for the music, both the musical numbers as well as the composed songs are very emotional and play their purpose when needed. It's a bold and risky movie that might not be for everyone, especially for young kids. If you want a typical movie with a flowing narrative then this is not for you. However, if you want a movie that dives deep into its characters in hope of understanding yourself, then this is the right film for you. a 10/10 masterpiece

The last air-bender. A film infamously known for being terrible. How terrible? Well it is so terrible that it's not only considered one of the worst movies of all time, but has lower rotten tomatoes score than batman and robin, as well as fant4stic. The film is fundamentally broken on every single level that it fails to be a good adaptation and a solid movie on it's own. So what is wrong with the movie? Scratch that, what is done right in the film? Absolutely nothing. Everything fails. So the film starts off with a narration(foreshadowing that everything will be done in exposition poorly) by a poor performance from the actress who plays Katara. We then start off with Katara controlling the water and causing her brother, Sokka to get wet(a failed attempt to capture the humor of the show). They then see something under the snow and find it's a giant ice sphere containing a young boy who turns out to be Ong.(his name is Aang actually). From that point the events start to go on. I say events because there is no story or coherent plot going on. It's just things happening and bunch of exposition. The acting is some of the worst i have ever seen in my life. Every character is either mopping or angry for no logical reason. There has never been an emotion that was actually believable or plausible. It is either bland or embarrassingly awkward. Another thing is that these character have no depth or personality. The dynamic relationship between characters is non existent. Nothing makes sense except for those who watched the show. Not because the film is faithful, but because they know what is supposed to happen. The film tries desperately to pander to the series without having a clear understanding of it. A prime example is with the protective nature of Katara. In the TV series, they form a strong bond that became unbroken. In the film, literally upon their first encounter, Katara decides that the boy is her responsibility. Another thing for the characters: none of them are done right. Sokka in the show was a comic relief, yet at the same time was a core character of the show and had depth and a strong personality. In the movie, he is just a mopy bastard who is angry all the time. Aang was a happy go lucky likable hero who evolves later on. In the movie, it is none existent. Another thing that was butchered(the show was bastardized) is the relationship between Sokka and the water tribe princess, who share absolutely no chemistry. In fact, there is no build-up or development to their relationship. As soon as they met, we are yet again given a bland and poor exposition from Katara saying that they became instant friends. There was no time spent with them. This makes the water tribe princess' sacrifice completely pointless since we did not build any connection. The princess sacrifices her life to give it back to the moon spirit because the fire nation general killed it to gain advantage in the war, since the water tribe gain their power from the moon. It was very tragic in the show but it felt pointless and a waste of time in the movie. Another thing is that the climax was so terrible, it's one of the most boring battles i have ever seen. Poorly done 3D converted effects. In fact, they were downright laughable. Nothing felt in actual danger, and the action sequences were boring. The writing was also terrible. There was no story or plot, except that one boring exposition that feels like homework(Doing homework would be much more fun than watching this actually) by Katara. It is sad that such a film with potential was not only wasted, but is in the list of worst movies ever made. A complete insult to the show and to cinema in general. 0/10

Kubo and the two strings is the latest Laika Studios film directed by Travis Knight. The film is nothing short of an astonishing achievement, especially in the animation department. It's a very artistic, beautifully animated revolutionary movie for all ages, most likely for adults. And not because it is gory, scary or anything like that, but because of the subtle and smart, intriguing ideas and messages that the film conveys. Kids can enjoy it for the cute talking animals and the perfectly executed action sequences, while adults can enjoy its melancholic, sad and emotionally character driven story with its subtle message and ideas. The best thing about this movie is the way it presents the message. It can be stretched and seen as the way you like it to be. It can be about family ties, it can be about love, about honor and heroism, about cultural heritages and keeping the stories of our old ancestors going on, or about how much important imagination is for children, which is a very strong and powerful message for the kids. The movie is very artistic in its music too. It's not just musical background, the music is played according to what's going on. It plays a very huge part especially for an emotional direction and the stories Kubo and the characters tell about their loved ones. Kubo and the two strings is nothing short than an instant classic and a beautiful work of art for all ages to appreciate and admire. 9/10

The avengers. One of the most hyped comic book movies of all time. After years of build-up with solo movies, the avengers is born. Is it good? does it still hold up? the answer is no. I admit, the first time i saw this movie in theaters, i was having a blast and enjoying it very much. However, the film gets worse for me each time i give it a second watch. The film is centered around Loki(played by Tom Hiddleston), who wants to take over the world, while the avengers work out their ways to stop him. It is as generic and lazy as it sounds. The film barely has any story or even character development/interaction. It's nothing but one liners and action. None of the characters have a defined personality. Tony Stark is a one dimensional clown, Thor is has the charm of a wood that speaks in a Shakespearean way, black widow and hawkeye are nearly the same, only their gender are different. Hulk has his moments, and captain America is one of the most boring comic book characters i have ever seen in this movie. It's basically a Michael Bay movie minus the women objectifying, but same level of obnoxious and out dated film making. One of the most overrated trash movies i have ever seen. This movie gets 3/10 from me