bodhi-13262's Reviews

Top Gun: Maverick (2022)

10/10

1 June 2022

Thirty-six years in the making, 'Top Gun: Maverick' has finally arrived after being extensively delayed from its original July 2020 release date. Does this long awaited and highly anticipated sequel soar as high as its predecessor?

1. First of all, I rarely ever give films a 10/10 rating, especially action flicks, but this one totally exceeded expectations. In recent years, superheroes and sci-fi fantasy blockbusters have ruled the box-office but the this year the crown goes to Tom Cruise. Not saying this film will break the bank but rather deliver something special that will surely resonate with fans of the original and those witnessing the glory of fighter pilots taking flight for the first time.

2. Tom Cruise proves himself a legend above all actors of his generation and present day. He surely has immortalized himself as one of the greats that can never be touched in this lifetime. Cruise carries this film with the same charisma and enthusiasm as he did 36yrs ago. Regardless of the controversy or what people might think of him, his will to perfect his films and the respect he has for art of filmmaking is yet to be rivaled by another actor.

3. It is no secret or spoiler that Val Kilmer appears in this film reprising his role as Tom 'Iceman' Kazansky, and despite his disability to speak, it never hinders the emotion he conveys when he's on screen. The new young pilots (who I thought I'd dislike) proved me wrong to the point where I actually felt for them and the dangers they found themselves in while flying. Majority of the weight falls on Miles Teller (Rooster) as he has the most screen time with Tom Cruise, and though their relationship may seem rocky at first, its the thing that truly is the heart of the film.

I can go on forever as to how fantastic this film is but there just isn't enough words. I was overwhelmed with joy from start to finish and found myself weeping tears of joy by the last 15mins of this film. 'Top Gun: Maverick' is the definition of why we fall in love with cinema. This movie is special in its own right and has an indescribable uniqueness to it that ultimately warms your heart and makes you want to take flight again and again.

2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

The Suicide Squad (2021)

8/10

A BloodSport of a GOOD Time!

9 August 2021

With writer/director James Gunn at the helm this time around to reboot the critically panned 2016 film, 'The Suicide Squad' manages to encapsulate and deliver far beyond what the first film failed to do.

1. Idris Elba (BloodSport) and John Cena (Peacemaker) absolutely steal the show above all the other villains in the film. Said characters have the most screen time and are absolutely hilarious whenever they interact with each other. Fan favorite Harley Quinn (Margot Robbie) does have her moments to shine but ultimately takes a back seat in terms of the craziness one would expect from her. Robbie is still perfectly fine as the character but just not as dynamic as the other leads.

2. The other supporting headliners of the film includes Polkadot Man (David Dastmalchian), Rat Catcher 2 (Daniela Melchior), Rick Flag (Joel Kinnaman) and King Shark (Sylvester Stallone). There is a reason I failed to mention the rest of the cast, but if you've seen the film......you know exactly why😉. Each aforementioned character is given their time to shine and are written well enough to where you actually care about their respective well-beings when the stakes get high.

3. The comedy is executed much better this time around and there are genuine laughs to be had. However, some running jokes land flat and are outright unnecessary at points (i.e. Polkadot Man's "Mom" joke). Other times it feels like the film could have been trimmed a bit as there are some forced scenes just to give certain characters extra screen time (i.e. King Shark and the aquarium of strange creatures/Harley Quinn's brief romance).

4. By now (if you saw all the trailers) we all know that Starro the Conqueror is the main antagonist who makes his appearance during the climax. I personally enjoyed the last sequence in parts but was expecting a more grandiose/hyped finale given the fun yet bloody tone set in the first two acts. However, Starro (despite having minimal screen time and no dialogue) is leagues better compared to what they did with the Enchantress in the first film.

'The Suicide Squad' is a fun and exciting blockbuster that I personally was dying to see again after it was over. Chances are we won't get another sequel for a while but I certainly want to see more of this villain-focused world expanded in the DCEU. All credit to James Gunn as he was certainly the right man for the job in fixing what was previously broken.

44 out of 91 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Army of the Dead (2021)

5/10

Zack Snyder's 'Zombie Squad!'

22 May 2021

Zack Snyder's first non comic-book film since '300' and 2nd zombie film of his directorial career, but does it deliver on the horror/action aspects it promises?

1. On the bright side, the cinematography and direction by Snyder is exceptional and some of the vast and wide shots during certain sequences are jaw dropping. He also knows how to direct action and there are a minimum of his signature slow-mo shots. I enjoyed the simple setup of there being a zombie outbreak in a now quarantined Las Vegas where an ex military team attempts a heist to secure 50 million dollars stashed in a hotel's vault. Little to no complexity to a story (especially horror ones) that are supposed to be action packed is always a good thing.

2. Though not the most charismatic lead, Dave Bautista is probably the most level-headed character who does things logically. On the other hand, the absolute worst addition to the cast is actress Ella Purnell who plays Bautista's bratty daughter who extorts her father into partaking in the mission. Her presence is an unnecessary and annoying one who's stupid actions near the end ultimately cost some people their lives. I hate when straight-forward films try to be more empathetic for no reason as the film tries to incorporate a romantic subplot that goes nowhere.

3. Apart from the daughter, there are a few other characters who do dumb things including revealing their alternative agenda to others and not expecting to get screwed over in the end. The film also tries to setup a possible sequel in the most ridiculous way possible at the very end which seems like a complete afterthought. Clever writing with funny dialogue could have compensated for the slow parts and lack of action sequences. I commend Richard Cetrone who plays Zeus (the King zombie) as he was indeed the next compelling character after Bautista.

4. I wanted to enjoy this film as it was sold as this fun horror/action/heist film based on the trailers, but it stumbles really hard after the first act. The middle of the film moves at a snail's pace until the climax and I couldn't overcome the slew of dumb/annoying characters. I applaud Zack Snyder for his film making but this was another miss for me. "Okay" is the perfect word for summing up the type of film this is. No doubt people will find this enjoyable, and I'm glad some find it entertaining, however, this didn't quite do it for me despite having lowered standards.

If you want to see a far better thrilling zombie action flick that genuinely delivers, go watch 'World War Z' or 'Train to Busan'.

1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Extraction (2020)

8/10

REDEMPTION BEGINS!

25 April 2020

Being the directorial debut of stuntman/choreographer Sam Hargrave, 'Extraction' delivers on all its premises. For a film I was in moderate anticipation of, I must admit, I was heavily entertained.

1. Written by Joe Russo, the plot involves mercenary Tyler Rake (Chris Hemsworth) who is tasked with recusing Ovi (Rudhraksh Jaiswal), the teenage son of an imprisoned Indian drug lord from a rival kingpin in Dhaka, Bangladesh. Whenever I watch action/thriller genres of film, I prefer simple plots and this does just that. The story never feels heavy-handed nor do the minor subplots ever disrupt the flow of the film itself. Each of the lead characters are given just enough backstory to where you feel for them by the time the suspenseful climax comes around.

2. The film is ultimately Chris Hemworth's to carry and he doesn't disappoint. You completely buy him as an action star and this film is undoubtedly the most physically intense and realistic action I have seen him do. Unlike Sylvester Stallone or Dwayne Johnson who are rather generic action stars, Hemsworth proves himself as also being a very formidable dramatic actor as well just by the sheer emotion he puts into his deeper characters including this one. All credit to Sam Hargrave as I was completely floored by his direction of each fight scene and the manner in which they were staged.

3. Unfortunately, as much as I want to praise this film, there are problems that need to be addressed. For some reason, the krytoninte of many action films are the generic villains and this one is no different. Priyanshu Painyuli plays the rival kingpin Amir who is responsible for the kidnapping, but he never has a formidable presence or seems like a legit threat in the overall story to where the film feels like there is no real antagonist. The same goes for Golshifteh Farahani (Nik) as her character is never fully developed either. The real dynamic is ultimately between Hemsworth and Jaiswal.

4. Unlike the 'Fast & Furious' franchise, the action never becomes unbelievably unrealistic or buffoonish to where it lost me. In fact, despite there not being anything new action-wise, the realism and the way the cinematographer captures it all is what has you most compelled. Its been a long time since I've felt such intensity and fear for certain characters during a climax especially within an action film. I should warn that there is a certain level of gore that may make some viewers squeamish as this type of action doesn't shy away from the graphic nature in which people are killed.

Had this film been released in theaters, I would have gladly paid to seen it on the big screen. I understand these types of releases are usually decisive among critics, but if you love R-Rated action, this is by far one of the more better ones in recent years. Much congratulations to Sam Hargrave because I honestly can't wait for his next directorial feature.

0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Star Wars: The Rise Of Skywalker (2019)

5/10

The Rise of 'Mary Sue'.

31 December 2019

Warning: Spoilers

With 'Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker' being the climactic ending to a nine-film story-arc and heavily divided trilogy in itself, does J.J. Abrams' final attempt to tie-up loose ends and save the 'Skywalker Saga' from a disastrous fate as 'The Last Jedi' exceed expectations?

1. Personally, this film is split down the middle for me and the following review is spoiler-heavy cause there are a few major points I feel the need to cover. As far as story goes, it appears pretty simple on paper. Unbeknownst to the galaxy, the diabolical Sith leader Emperor Palpatine survived his fatal fall at the hands of Darth Vadar and returns with sheer vengeance and a massive Sith Fleet to once again conquer the galaxy which forces the Resistance to undertake a journey in finding and destroying him once and for all. Pretty straight-forward of a plot right? Wrong! Despite the film rushing through the motions from the very first frame, the dramatic elements are interjected at random times throughout the film which belabors the story dynamic.

2. On a couple positive notes, the one story element which should have been pushed more so than the rest was the relationship between Kylo Ren/Ben Solo (Adam Driver) and Rey (Daisy Ridley). There is a better interplay between the two than how it unfolded in 'The Last Jedi' in which they both battle with the dark and light within them. With the termination of Snoke, Kylo Ren has now adopted the mantle of the First Order's Supreme Leader and enlists the 'Knights of Ren' to hunt down and kill Rey at the behest of Palpatine himself. With Driver probably being the most compelling actor and character of the trilogy, he is underused and has lesser screen-time than he did in the previous films. J.J. Abrams has always been a good action director and I had no problems with any of the action set-pieces this film had to offer. Coupled with the production designs and impeccable special effects, the action is quite entertaining on its own.

2. Now onto the problems. With part of the convoluted story involving finding a special device to aid in locating Palpatine, you realize just how useless some main characters are, particularly Finn (John Boyega). Apart from being a terrible actor, Boyega as Finn is reduced to nothing but a yelling/screaming tag-along who continues to have a hard-on for Rey. If you were wondering whether Rey and Finn ever hook-up...........no they don't. Side characters are introduced at the last minute with no real purpose to the overall plot rather than being there to propel segments of the story. Considering Carrie Fisher passed away well before filming, General Leia serves one purpose which I'll get to later. I can't help but think that Palpatine was re-introduced because Rain Johnson made the sole decision to kill Snoke in the previous film and J.J. Abrams was desperate to crow-bar in a familiar villain to end the saga with.

3. Ever since 'The Force Awakens' I had the inkling that the character of Rey was an attempt by Disney to subtly push a feminist agenda into the new trilogy. I foolishly gave them the benefit of the doubt thinking that Rey would be more human and relatable in the subsequent films, but I was proven wrong. Rey is undoubtedly the embodiment of a 'Mary Sue' in which, despite any external conflict/challenge, she remains a flawless and unrealistically strong female without any hint of weakness. One of this trilogy's cliff-hangers was the mystery behind her parentage, and needless to say, I was yet again underwhelmed. As it turns out, she is the granddaughter of Emperor Palpatine and he has been in search of her in hopes that she will take his throne to become the new Empress of the Sith. How does someone with hereditary powers of the dark side be able to resist elements of the same darkness and also be able to channel the light side of the Force? Bad storytelling I guess.

4. There came a point where this film almost turned me around and I had a slight sense of hope when it came to Kylo Ren as he relinquishes the dark side and turns to the light. During a vicious light-saber duel on the wreckage of the Death-Star, Kylo defeats Rey but Leia uses the last of her life force to subdue her son before he delivers the final killing blow to Rey. Leia ultimately passes away due to this which leaves Kylo the last of the 'Skywalker' bloodline. The film deceived me into thinking Kylo (now redeemed as Ben Solo) would be the actual hero of the story as he was finally brought back to the light by the love of his parents Han and Leia. Instead, Ben teams up with Rey to battle Palpatine but as this is a feminist story, Ben is knocked out of the fight and Rey is the one to summon the spirits of past Jedi to slay the Emperor in yet another "How the hell would that work?!" type scene.

5. Despite the rediculous nature of the climax, I still had a bit of hope, as Rey dies due to her exertions to kill Palpatine, she is brought back to life by Ben using the Force. Surprisingly, the two share a passionate kiss in that moment and I was thrilled to see a dynamic where rivals fall in love and possibly get married to continue the 'Skywalker' lineage. However, that was the better ending that played out in my head rather than on screen. In actuality, after kissing Rey, Ben dies and his body vanishes in Jedi fashion. The writing in this film is bland and near atrocious in some parts but the story is the most disappointing to say the least especially how things play out. J.J. Abrams must have been inspired by the final scene in 'RoboCop' (1987) when he wrote the final scene for this film cause that's how bad the writing is when you have to borrow from other films. Rey adopting the surname Skywalker for no reason at all was (needless to say) the final kick in the groin for me.

Never was I a major 'Star Wars' fanboy, but I highly admired the classic trilogy and the masterful storytelling/film-making it encapsulated. Those films were inspired, episode 7, 8 and 9 were not. I'm so glad the 'Skywalker Saga' is over because I (like many others) desperately want to move on with something new rather than being sold on nostalgia.

22 out of 54 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Joker (I) (2019)

9/10

Life is but a JOKE🤡.

5 October 2019

Being DC's first standalone film in years, 'Joker' is without a doubt the biggest risk Warner Bros. has taken in terms of revisioning this iconic character for the big screen.

1. The film's plot deviates almost entirely from the comics except for one storyline of the Joker having been a failed stand-up comic. Other than that, this is mostly a character study of a mentally ill man who deals with loneliness and the aggressive and unfair society he lives in that ultimately pushes him to a breaking point. Personally, I rather enjoy such stories that deal in harsh realities and how people deal with such. Director Todd Phillips without question proves his strength as a serious director with this film.

2. Ever since 2008's release of 'The Dark Knight', Heath Ledger has stood the test of time of being the best comic-to-screen adaptation of the Joker. While I still believe Ledger's portrayal captures the true chaotic nature of the character, Joaquin Phoenix's performance as Arthur Fleck/Joker is easily as equally Oscar worthy. I'm sure other reviews will elaborate a lot more on how brilliant Phoenix is in the part so it should be no surprise me saying it here.

3. This is an R-Rated film that pushes boundaries psychologically and causes the audience to ponder back and forth on how they should feel about Arthur himself as he begins his inevitable spiral into madness. There is also a clever approach to the filmmaking in which it makes one question as to whether what they're watching is real or not. If you've seen the trailers, you'd know that some other popular DC characters make an appearance in this film, but don't get your hopes up for a sequel of any kind cause this film isn't about them and it's clear that this is definitely standalone.

4. The rest of the supporting cast serve their respective purposes to where they don't detract from Arthur's story. The only other people apart from Phoenix to get a little more screen-time is of course Robert De Niro and Frances Conroy who plays Arthur's ailing mother Penny. My one complaint however is that Arthur's inevitable transformation into the Joker (as we know the character to be) comes in the last 30mins of the film. Despite the tension and suspense being high during the climax, the transformation should have been given a little more time to resonate rather than being rushed.

As of 2019, 'Joker' has not only been a genuine cinematic achievement in the comic book genre but in terms of a sheer character drama as well. This will obviously be in my top 5 films of the year and hopefully everyone can appreciate this gritty yet compelling look of a man who's life is no laughing matter.

1 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Once Upon a Time... in Hollywood (2019)

3/10

Overly Lengthy & Underwhelming.

31 July 2019

'Once Upon a Time...in Hollywood' is acclaimed director Quentin Tarantino's 9th film and one that surely will be closely observed by critics. As anticipated as any Tarantino film can be, does this one live up to the hype?

1. Set in 1969 Los Angeles, the story involves fading actor Rick Dalton (DiCaprio) and his stunt-double/close friend Cliff Booth (Pitt) as they try to salvage some acclaim in Hollywood within their twilight years in the industry. Firstly, as simple as that plot may sound, a film like this takes many turns and (as with most Tarantino films) stories converge. Personally, I expected intertwining story-lines but not such a dull script. With a run-time of 2hrs 41mins, this film could easily have lost 60-45mins as it is plagued with tons of unnecessary and dragging scenes. I don't mind lengthy films, but the biggest crime a lengthy feature can make is to be boring. Capturing the audiences' attention should be first priority.

2. The chemistry between DiCaprio and Pitt is no doubt the best part of this film. It's about time these two have worked together and they both do their best to keep you invested in their slice of the story. On the other hand, Margot Robbie as Sharon Tate is completely useless to say the least. Her character is there for no reason at all and contributes absolutely nothing to the overall plot. Her scenes should have been cut from the final theatrical version entirely. Many other A-list actors make cameos throughout but are in no way outstanding judging by performances. No disrespect to the late Luke Perry, but anyone could have played his part as he utterly insignificant in his short role.

3. This film succeeds a lot more when it shifts gere into comedy and focuses on DiCaprio and Pitt. The secondary plot (as shown in the trailers) involves the 'Manson Family', which leads to a rather entertaining and funny climax, but actual events are in no way depicted as they were in real life regarding the infamous cult and its leader Charles Manson. The script just didn't seem to quite find its voice or direction. The editing needed to be tighter, and again, a lot of scenes should have been left on the cutting-room floor. One film I really admire with a similar tone is 'Kiss Kiss Bang Bang' (2005) which is probably a better and more entertaining film than this. I found myself hard to stay invested in the story and was suffering from cinematic fatigue by the time it was over.

'Once Upon a Time...in Hollywood' is a clear definition of an overly ambitious film that aimed high but hit low. I'm an admirer of many of Tarantino's works, but this certainly isn't a film I'd wanna watch again in theaters or even on television.

23 out of 43 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

The Lion King (2019)

5/10

Slimy, yet......unsatisfying.

25 July 2019

'The Lion King' (2019) is yet another classic title in Disney's long list of live-action remakes. However, with acclaimed director Jon Favreau at the helm, will this film the mold to become something more than mediocre?

1. If you've seen the original 1994 animated film, there is nothing different in terms of scene, story and song in this remake. The goal was obviously to review the original and copy each scene with CGI effects. On a positive note, the CGI was breathtaking! From the vastness of the African plains to character designs themselves. If you thought Avatar (2009) was still groundbreaking with its CGI world, this film rivals that immensely. There was never a moment to which I though anything looked fake. The art department should be nominated for their work on this film cause this is as realistic as CGI effects will appear nowadays.

2. Overall, I had mixed feelings about the new voice-casting in this film. James Earl Jones' voice is obviously irreplaceable and I couldn't imagine anyone else as Mufasa. However, Jeremy Irons (original voice of Scar) also has an iconic voice and whilst Chiwetel Ejiofor does a good of a job as anyone can, Irons still seemed like the better fit. I was appalled to learn that Jeremy Irons himself approached Disney and was more than willing to reprise his role as Scar only to be rejected as the studio only wanted Black actors in the film's leading roles. The only other voice actor I had a problem with was Beyonce as adult Nala. Obviously she's an amazing vocalist but her actual speaking voice is too deep to the point where it is more so deeper than co-star Donald Glover's(adult Simba).

3. Lastly, the music of the original film is iconic in its own right and very much timeless. Of course the newer voice actors do covers of the original songs but to no greater effect. It serves its purpose but there is nothing special about it overall. There are some new song written for the film but they are God-awful! Having Pharrell Williams on board as the music producer on this was a terrible choice. Hans Zimmer knew just how to represent Africa with his organized orchestra headed by African singer Lebo M. who brought traditional African instrumentals to the original film. Here, injecting a hip-hop and R&B over-tone to the score was utter garbage and a slap in the face to Hans Zimmer's Ocarina's-winning work.

'The Lion King' is just an okay film. There honestly was so much potential to recapture the magic of the original but seemed like the film-makers were trying way too hard to make this great that they completely missed their target.

0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Venom (2018)

6/10

FLAWED, but still FUN:)

6 October 2018

Ever since his live-action debut in 2007's 'Spider-Man 3', fans have been eagerly waiting for the character of Eddie Brock/Venom to be redeemed. Now that the infamous anti-hero has his own self-titled film, does it deliver and surpass its predecessor?

1. Though this is a SPOILER-FREE review, it should be mentioned that Spider-Man/Peter Parker is in no way involved in the story/overall plot. The film makes no mention or subtly implies any connection to the Marvel Cinematic Universe and Tom Holland's version of the titular wall-crawler. The plot of 'VENOM' begins with the obtainment of extraterrestrial 'Symbiotes' by the shady 'LIFE' foundation and its CEO Carlton Drake (Riz Ahmed). Just like the comics, Eddie Brock (Tom Hardy) is an investigative and cocky reporter with a nose for controversial stories, hence leading to his run-in with the LIFE foundation and the 'Venom' symbiote. The film has a relatively strong start and I was impressed by how much I was enjoying the build-up. Although you may have to wait approximately 45mins to see Venom's full appearance, everything leading up to that is still quite enjoyable.

2. Considering how much of Venom's origin is derived from Spider-Man himself, the film actually found a way to have the character stand on his own two feet in a believable way. Despite there being some surprisingly funny moments, the overall script was in need of a "punch-up" re-write. It seems more effort was spent on the dialogue and banter between Eddie and Venom rather than the rest of characters. Riz Ahmend ends up being yet another generic "mustache-twirling" villain with an agenda that is never made clear and Michelle Williams (Anne Weying) serves very little to no real purpose other than being Eddie's former love interest that he still pines over, On the other hand, Jenny Slate (Dr. Skirth) does a better job with the material she has despite having minor screen-time. So not a terrible script, but nothing worth mentioning either.

3. Once we finally see Venom on screen, he looks fantastic. The CGI was cool and the design of the character appears like it was lifted directly from the comic-book pages. Tom Hardy also voices Venom and it is quite hilarious the way both he and Eddie have their back and forth. The biggest issue would not only be character motivations but the overall climax. As seen in the recent trailers, there are multiple symbiotes with varying agendas. This aspect is never fully explored and the film rushes past this to get to the action, which (unfortunately) falters during the climax. For one thing, the editing in this movie is completely choppy, especially during the symbiote fight at the end. The camera is too close to the characters fighting that its hard to tell who's who sometimes. Every action sequence prior was done so well that the climax ultimately was a huge let-down.

'Venom' in no way deserves the harsh critiques from both IMDB nor Rotten Tomatoes, because it is truly better than what its being portrayed as. The film has flaws but (in some ways) the good outweighs the bad. Lower your expectations, leave your baggage at the door, give the film a chance, stick around for the fantastic post-credit scene and I guarantee you'll have an enjoyable time for the very least.

3 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

The Predator (2018)

4/10

If it bleeds......it's probably dead:(

15 September 2018

Well...its been eight years since the alien hunter last stalked the silver-screen and now he's back and bigger than ever, literally. 'The Predator' is the fourth entry in the franchise (AVP 1 & 2 excluded) but does it have the spine to prove itself better than the original?

1. After hearing that Shane Black would be at the helm of this film, I was beyond excited. Not only am I a fan of Black and his directed features thus far, this one is undoubtedly the lesser of his works. 'The Predator' has an ambitious start but falters the more it goes on. This review is spoiler-free so no need to worry. The plot involves sniper Cpt. Quinn McKenna (Boyd Holbrook) encountering a Predator and its crashed spacecraft while on a mission in Mexico. With the government wanting to keep the events quiet, Mckenna is held in custody with a group of other military veterans. However, when a newly enhanced Predator arrives to Earth intent on a particular hunt, its up to the rag-tag platoon of misfits to stop him. As interesting as the story might sound, the writing and subplots ultimately weigh the movie down. Shane Black is famous for being a great script writer, but his talent doesn't shine here.

2. The one element a Predator film needs to have is horror, unlike this version which presents itself as more of an Action/Comedy. That being one major issue. another is the introduction of McKenna's autistic son Rory (Jacob Tremblay), who's purpose in this film is boarderline idiotic. Let's just say that this kid has a talent for something which makes him a target for someone so that they can use him for this other thing all because he's retarded. Makes no damn sense either way you approach it. If Tremblay was the only useless character in this film, that would be one thing but Olivia Munn as Dr. Casey Bracket, serves little purpose in the story. Not only do we not know what kind of doctor she it, but her reason for being there is to simply ponder on the revelation of something and partake in the action just to satisfy Hollywood's feminist agenda.

3. With Shane Black and Fred Dekker both contributing to the script, there are some funny moments scattered in between that will make you chuckle. Needless to say, the acting is sub-par overall. Sterling K. Brown, Olivia Munn and Jacob Tremblay are by far deliver the worst performances in this film. Not to say they all haven't proven themselves as good actors prior to this, but if this is the first film witnessing them in, you'd be severely disappointed. I suppose the action was well done with my favorite sequence being the one in which a captive Predator breaks free in the lab he is being held and proceeds the brutally kill everyone during his escape. With the exception of that sequence, never did I feel the suspense nor thrills I got from the prior films. Despite all the underwhelming performances, Trevante Rhodes as Nebraska Williams and Thomas Jane as Baxley, were probably my two favorite characters.

4. I like Boyd Holbrook as an actor but he is horribly miscast as the lead role in this film. He unfortunately plays his part as McKenna rather bland and lacks the charisma that Schwarzenegger, Danny Glover and even Adrien Brody had when carrying their respective 'Predator' films. I'll give credit to the design and make-up department as the practical Predator looked fantastic and scary whenever he had his brief moments. This is easily the most bloodiest and gory of the four films, but that still doesn't lend itself to the movie's credit. If it were up to me, I'd make a sequel from where 'Predators' (2010) left off, with Adrien Brody and Alice Braga still stuck on the Predator hunting planet. As distasteful as this film had become during the climax, the last 5-7mins of this movie was utter garbage. The big secret is not worth yours or anyone else's time waiting in that theater to see what it is.

I desperately wanted to love this film since I had such admiration for the previous ones. If nothing else, I wanted to be entertained at least, but it failed to deliver even in a fun way. I can see why Schwarzenegger refused to return for a cameo having read the script.

'The Predator' is not a faithful or even half-way decent sequel moving forward and is probably best suited for the small-screen as a rental. Though my faith in Shane Black hasn't been shaken by this, I honestly cannot and will not recommend anyone go see this "spine-less" Predator in theaters.

3 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Mission: Impossible - Fallout (2018)

7/10

"The FALLOUT of all your good intentions."

28 July 2018

'Mission: Impossible - Fallout' is the sixth installment of the series and Ethan Hunt's most daring mission yet. Being a more direct sequel to 'Rogue Nation', does 'Fallout' deliver to full effect if this is to be the last?

1. When a mission to obtain a trio of plutonium shells goes awry, IMF agent Ethan Hunt (Tom Cruise) must assemble his team once more and make amends before a notorious terrorist group unravels a sinister plan with catastrophic results. Not to start off on the wrong foot but one of the biggest complaints about this film is the story. I guarantee there will be NO spoilers but I must prepare any audience who goes to see this that the story is confusing if you don't follow it thoroughly. The plot/setup is delivered in an IMF message within two minutes of the opening five minutes of the film. Like always, these messages self-destruct once completed and is never revisited even in passing. Unlike the prior films, this one desperately wants move "story" out of the way and get to the action. Though I understand this is an action franchise, the story should take its time to play out rather than how it is rushed here.

2. Like I stated earlier, this is a direct sequel to the previous film, so regardless of the plot, you need to revisit 'Rouge Nation' before seeing this or else you'll be confused as to the presence of certain characters in this one. Speaking of characters, one of the best additions to the cast (since Jeremy Renner) is the "Man of Steel" himself, Henry Cavill. Cavill plays CIA operative August Walker, whom (if you've seen the most recent trailers) I can neither confirm nor deny is either an antagonist or protagonist in this film. Let's just say he walks a fine line, unless you're able to predict and follow the plot, you'd know what Cavill's character is about and where he's headed from the moment he pops up on screen. Despite him being portrayed as a badass in most of the previews, he's not as engaged in the action or shows his true potential as a combatant unlike Cruise. So if you're hoping to see Henry Cavill kick ass in this film, you may be a little disappointed.

3. The characters I didn't like however, were Angela Bassett and Vanessa Kirby. Firstly, Bassett plays CIA director Erica Sloan of whom August Walker (Henry Cavill) operates under. We all know Bassett to be an exceptional actress but her character in this is as shady as they come and you dislike her off-the-bat. It would be different if Sloan had redeemable qualities, but unfortunately, she doesn't. As for Kirby, her character is simply known as the 'White Widow', an arms dealer who's apparently bad at her job. Though Vanessa Kirby might appear to be "eye-candy" in this, she acts her part like an obsessed ex-girlfriend with crazy eyes. Every scene she shares with Tom Cruise and the way she stares at him, makes you think she just might try killing him in his sleep. Regardless of all that, the best character and only actress (apart from Michelle Monaghan) to return for a sequel, is Rebecca Ferguson as MI6 agent Ilsa Faust. Though Ferguson doesn't have much screen-time in this one as she did with the prior, her story ties in with Hunt's more organically.

4. Last but not least, Tom Cruise as Ethan Hunt himself and the impossible missions only he can make possible. These films just get better and better with its daring stunts and action set-pieces. From the Halo jump at the beginning to the high-octane helicopter chase at the climax, no other film can compare. Personally, the bathroom fight scene at the nightclub and the motorcycle chase through the streets of Paris were the highlights for me. I mean they were both very well choreographed and intricately planned that it felt more genuine and realistic than the rest. Not to say the other actions sequences aren't breathtaking and amazing, it's just preferences I guess. Though one might argue, when it comes to action, humor, a lighter tone and a more simplistic story, 'Ghost Protocol' is still the best of the series. I'd recommend people revisit that film as well as it delivers a better "race against time" plot than the current installment.

For Christopher McQuarrie to be the first director to return for a sequel in this franchise, he does a good of a job as anyone. Tom Cruise definitely carries this film as he usually does and works the hardest for this installment in particular than I've ever seen him before. Some flaws are unavoidable when it comes to story, script and despite me wanting to see some interesting characters (who meet their untimely fates) return, this is still worth the price of admission. So go see this mission.......cause it might be your last.

1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Avengers: Infinity War (2018)

9/10

Destiny has arrived...

28 April 2018

After a decade of spectacular films and cast of characters, the culmination of the entire MARVEL Cinematic Universe has led to this. 'Avengers: Infinity War' marks the first-half of what is to be a monumental cinematic event. With years of hype, does this film deliver and meet every expectation we've been hoping for?

1. This review is SPOILER FREE , but there will be mentions of certain sequences, however, I assure you there won't be any reveals. To make things simple, the mad titan Thanos (Josh Brolin) has finally decided to scour the universe in a hunt for all six infinity stones and deliver a balance to life and death that he sees fit. Blood will be shed and fear spreads as a fractured Avengers face their greatest threat as the fate of the world hangs in the balance. In all honesty, this film delivered on everything I wanted to see all whilst exceeding my expectations at the same time. One must remember that to fully appreciate this film, you had to have seen every MCU film prior to this. If you've missed films in between or if this in your first MCU experience, I'd heavily recommend that you catch up as soon as you can before seeing 'Infinity War' because you'd be utterly confused viewing this on its own.

2. Although all the characters are in one film, they're not all together (if you know what I mean). Certain Avengers are handling things in different places across the galaxy, so don't expect a unified team-up on this one. Everything has its place and I continue to stress that this is part one of two in the 'Infinity War' and Thanos' story. The three leading heroes (Captain America, Iron Man & Thor) are all on their respective quests until the ultimate convergence during the climax. Personally, the more intriguing story was Captain America's (Chris Evans) quest and the defensive actions in Wakanda, as well as Gamora's (Zoe Saldana) relationship with her adopted father Thanos. Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) and the Guardians' plot is a close second while Thor's (Chris Hemsworth) was the least compelling. Not to say having three different story-lines is a bad thing, rather than which is more entertaining to follow.

3. Thanos is by far the greatest CGI creation I've seen come alive on-screen since Gollum. The effects are impeccable and Josh Brolin delivers an outstanding motion-capture performance as the mad Titan himself. There is an ere of sympathy to Thanos that I found interesting and all credit goes to the writers. He is (most certainly) a force to be reckoned with and can definitely be placed in the category of the greatest cinematic villains in history. What was equally impressive were Thanos' minions/followers, 'The Black Order'. Corvus Glaive, Proxima Midnight, Ebony Maw & Cull Obsidian respectively, are badass characters all of whom I'm dying to see more of. The action is spectacular and some of which I've never seen before. It was hard to contain my inner nerd the more the movie progressed closer and closer to that spectacular climax. So as far as action goes......no complaints whatsoever.

4. The one thing I found a little campy and I guess the only flaw of this film is that Vision (Paul Bettany) and Scarlett Witch's (Elizabeth Olsen) relationship. As seen in the trailers, Vision has evolved to the point in which he can now generate a human appearance. It's insinuated that both he and Wanda are intimate (having sex), and that's just awkward and somewhat gross to think about considering Vision is still a robot/machine of sorts despite his intellect. Besides that, I must warn audiences who've been spoiled by the happy/hopeful/humorous MCU endings thus far, because 'Infinity War' has a rather dark ending. When it was all over, I was unable to move from my seat and just sat there for a few minutes to wrap my head around the final event and realization of the films climax. Its somewhat of a cliffhanger but not entirely, because the film does have a legit conclusion.

I felt fear and shed tears for certain characters as there is so much emotion tied into this film. Some sequences are truly heartbreaking despite the amazing action and moments of humor. Kudos to the direction of the Russo brothers and writers Markus & McFeeley, because 'Avengers: Infinity War' is truly one for the ages and a spectacle of a film. It it so fantastic that MARVEL has indeed succeeded the likes of DC and even Star Wars, as this is easily in the higher rankings of best comic-book films ever made.

2 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

A Quiet Place (2018)

9/10

They can't SEE you, but they can HEAR you.

7 April 2018

Fear comes in many forms and 'A Quiet Place' is no exception. Horror films typically get the worst reviews, but will critics be kind to a film that may or may not follow the generic monster movie formula?

1. The film takes place in a rural countryside in what seems to be a deserted Earth. Mankind is near extinction as mysterious creatures (with keen ears) hunt and kill anything or anyone that makes a sound. We follow the Abbott family as they live a (literal) life of silence in order to survive on their farm. Personally, horror is not my favorite genre, but when making a horror flick, the simpler the plot, the better the story. This film doesn't cheat the audience, it's simply a story about a family and their fight for survival. There's no major end-goal, explosive action or larger than life plot, and I loved that about this film. The key is to keep things simple, focus on the story, the characters and the suspense and this movies delivered on all of that.

2. I usually wait for Thriller/Horrors to be available on online streaming rather than go to the theater to see, but I made it my business to catch this one on the big screen, and I'm glad I did. What makes 'A Quiet Place' remarkable/memorable, is not just the horror aspect but the characters, situations and performances. There is not one bad performance in this film. John Krasinski and Emily Blunt are great as usual, but its the actors who play their kids that impressed me the most. Millicent Simmonds (Regan Abbott) in particular, plays the eldest child who's deaf. Unlike the other characters who speak in the film (at certain points), Simmonds has no dialogue yet delivers an almost Oscar-worthy performance.

3. I was surprised just how much this film resonated with me on an emotional level. I won't spoil anything, but there is a scene between Krasinski and his daughter (Simmonds) during the film's climax that literally broke my heart and had me drowning in my own tears. Since there is very little dialogue in the film and more communication via sigh-language and expressions, that made the emotions that more substantial. To be quite honest, I wasn't that scared of the creatures (when they're finally revealed) rather than their vicious and animalistic capabilities. The opening sequence alone lets you know just how ruthless these mysterious creatures are. I wished however, that there were more practical effects to intensify the already creepy atmosphere.

4. I wasn't a fan of the creature designs since they didn't appear all that menacing. That was honestly my only complaint about the film. This would have been the perfect job for creature effects artists like Stan Winston or Rick Baker to handle. John Krasinski deserves a lot of praise for his direction here. The man handles the camera well, the shots have a sinister beauty to them and the film flows superbly. I was literally on the edge of my seat from beginning to end. Never have I been so curious in a horror film constantly waiting to find out what happens next. The film has somewhat of an open-ending for a potential sequel, but its perfect the way it is, so please don't take any liberties Hollywood!

Given the opportunity, I'd definitely go see this again. And just a word of advice, if you live a world with monsters that will kill you the second you make a sound, in no way should you be having a baby when all babies do is make noise!!!

3 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Game Night (I) (2018)

7/10

Far more entertaining than 'Black Panther'.

24 February 2018

Only a mere week after the release of a MARVEL Blockbuster, 'Game Night' sneaks its way into theaters just in time for some unwinding laughter in the wake of the overly-hyped 'Black Panther'.

1. Max and Annie (Jason Bateman & Rachel McAdams) are a competitive gaming couple who host a "game night" every week for their friends. However, when Max's egotistical and over-achieving brother Brooks (Kyle Chandler) pops into town for a visit, he decides to compete with Max and host his own "game night" by setting up a kidnapping/mystery for his guests. However, when things don't go according to plan, Max and Annie ultimately find themselves in a game that turns more dangerous than they can imagine. The plot is simple, but its the clever writing that makes all the difference here. The movie has a few generic moments between Max and Annie, but they are brief as the story moves fast. Every scene has a carefully thought-out set-up that ultimately and surprisingly pays off unlike most recent comedies in the past few years.

2. While I thought his performance might be different this time around, Bateman plays the "Straight-man" once again as with every role he takes. Rachel McAdams is the stand-out of the two, as she seems to be having more fun with the role. Never have I been a fan of hers, but as far as comedies go, I wouldn't mind mind seeing her in more roles like this. Personally, the funniest charcter in this entire film is Ryan (Billy Magnussen), the couple's dimwitted friend. He may appear to be the typical dumb-guy to most, but he's more naive and charming than anything. Magnussen steals every scene that he's in and every time he spoke of did anything, it had me rolling. He also has a cute yet subtle romantic sub-plot with the new girl he's dating, but unfortunately, the film skips their resolution.

3. Kyle Chandler (Brooks) and Jesse Plemons (Gary) previously worked together on my all-time favorite drama-series 'Friday Night Lights', but it's refreshing to see them in this where they finally get to showcase their comedy chops. Plemons plays Max and Annie's neighbor who's also a recently divorced cop with a weird vibe to him. Despite his creepy tone, Plemons brings the humor in subtle ways and has a bigger role in the midst of things than one might think. Sharon Horgan (Sarah) and Kylie Bunbury (Michelle), I can't decide who I have the bigger crush on because they are the most gorgeous women (in a classical beauty sense) I've seen on screen this year. The film isn't flawless as some characters banter over irrelevant things while in risky and time constrained situations.

After their last feature 'Vacation', I didn't think there was any coming back for the writing/directing duo of John Francis Daley & Jonathan Goldstein, but they surprisingly redeemed themselves with this film. This is a comedy I wouldn't mind going back in theaters to see, because I had a good time and left feeling happy. My advice, skip seeing 'Black Panther' a second time and go see this, it won't disappoint:)

10 out of 24 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Black Panther (2018)

5/10

"Different" isn't always "Better."

19 February 2018

Warning: Spoilers

The most anticipated MARVEL film since 'The Avengers' (2012), does the hype surrounding 'Black Panther' pay off in terms of it being an exceptional film, or does it falter under the weight of expectations?

1. There will be major spoilers scattered throughout my review so this is your last chance to stop reading if you have yet to see the film. The movie picks up a week after the events of 'Captain America: Civil War' as Prince T'Challa returns to his homeland of Wakanda and ascends to the throne as King. The plot on the surface is fine and delivers as expected, but the events that follow isn't anything new. Not saying that's a bad thing, but there was nothing that happened I wasn't surprised about. The more interesting subplot revolves around a past event in which King T'Chaka (John Kani) murders his younger brother N'Jabu (Sterling K. Brown) for trading Wakandan arms to various countries. It turns out N'Jabu had a son (Erik Killmonger) that grew up to seek revenge against the country that abandoned he and his father.

2. As much class and style he possessed for his brief stint in 'Civil War', Chadwick Boseman is not interesting at all as T'Challa/Black Panther. Not saying he's a bad actor, but he plays the character with such drawl and lack of charisma. He does not "own the role" as they say, so it's hard for me to buy into it. Michael B. Jordan was by far the most interesting and sympathetic character by far. He brings much needed life into an already dull film. Jordan steals the show as Killmonger but unfortunately he has very little screen-time. After the sequence at the museum in the beginning, Jordan does not show up in the film until 40-45mins later. Killmonger is such a compelling character that by the time he finally pops up again, they rush through his story to where he feels under developed. I would wholeheartedly agree that he could have been the best villain of the MCU to date had the script-writers only incorporated him more into the story.

3. Andy Serkis was an interesting villain as Ulysses Klaue when he first appeared in 'Age of Ultron', but he's murdered by Killmonger halfway through so there obviously won't be any more development for him to say the least. Despite that, Serkis does make his presence known during the casino and chase sequence in South Korea. As far as action. there were only two sequences that I did enjoy, one being Black Panther chasing Klaue through the streets of Korea and Killmonger kicking the crap out of T'Challa to claim the throne as the new King. There honestly wasn't any other set-pieces I enjoyed or found mildly exciting. The final brawl between T'Challa and Killmonger on the subway track was awful. The CGI was weak and the overall fight was boring without any sheer tension or stakes.

4. Apart from Angela Basset and Forest Whitaker, the rest of the supporting cast is either annoying or flat, and the same goes for the humor in the film. If it was up to me, the script would have gotten an overhaul or placed in the hands of actual writers to modify or (better yet) rewrite the whole damn thing. Despite the camera occasionally doing unnecessary close-ups on the fights, the cinematography on the African plains were amazing. The design on Wakanda and the sets blew me away, however, we don't spend a lot of time on the environments to say I felt captivated by it. Maybe 'Infinity War' might do justice for this character once more, but as for now, the Black Panther himself is a weak and undeserving (so-called) hero. Imagine Thor lost his home of Asgard, lost most of his people and even lost an eye all in his last movie, and I truly believe he'd make a better King than T'Challa and actually have the balls to rule Wakanda.

'Black Panther' will undoubtedly sky-rocket at the box-office from all the undeserving false hype. Sure, kids will love it but there's no reason critics to honestly give such a mediocre film glowing reviews. Seeing it for what it, this movie is no better and probably lesser than some of the MCU film before it.

92 out of 215 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle (2017)

8/10

Never go swimming with a backpack!

30 December 2017

The infamous board-game as we know it has evolved, and this time it has taken the form a new system with new players. Having hit the reset button, does the 'Jumanji' from the 90s adapt as well as it does in the present day?

1. Picking up where we left off from the original 1995 film with the board-game buried under the sand on a beach, it is discovered once again. Neglected by its finder, the game transfers into that of an obsolete video-game system which is jump-started by four students serving detention at a local high-school. From that point, they all are sucked into the world of Jumanji and embody their respective avatars they choose to serve as in the game. Keeping this spoiler free, the premise within the game itself is nothing special or original in the least. The players are tasked with finding a certain sacred object of which they must journey and deliver to at a certain sacred place in order to return to the real-world. They all have their respective strengths, weaknesses and abilities which they must use and work together while on their journey. The plot may be simple, but it serves its purpose well enough.

2. This movie should be the blueprint for future comedies to show that raunchy, vulgar and excessive sexual humor isn't always necessary in making a film funny and entertaining. I thoroughly enjoyed this movie the same as I did with the original as a kid growing up. Though the presence of the late Robin Williams will surely be missed, I think he'd be proud of this film. Williams was a comedic genius during his time, but the humor delivered by both Jack Black (Prof. Osbern) and Kevin Hart ('Mouse' Finbar) will have your stomach in knots. Black in particular steals the show more so than Kevin Hart, seeing as his charter is embodied by the self-centered teenage girl Bethany (Madison Iseman). Black's acting and portrayal of his real-life counter-part was nothing short of outstanding. His gestures and voice in particular sold me on him being a girl trapped in a man's body. Don't get me wrong, Kevin Hart has his laugh-out-loud moments as well.

3. The action was surprisingly good for a family film. I'm not sure how well younger audiences will fare watching this as there are some frightening sequences as well as brief sexual references and innuendos throughout. Unlike the first, this sequel is PG-13 as it takes certain and surprising liberties I wasn't expecting it to. Whenever there's action....call Dwayne Johnson, who literally delivers a knock-out punch with his performance as the daring Dr. Bravestone. I must say, I enjoyed Johnson's comedic chops in this more than any other film I've seen him in thus far. Never having been a fan of the Jonas Brothers back in the day, Nick Jonas (Alex) actaully surprised me as to how good of an actor he is. I used to cringe at his acting during his Disney channel run, but I'm glad to see he's finally bettered himself. I suppose there's no point in hiding my undying love for Karen Gillan. She's beautiful, deadly, funny and a joy to watch on screen.

4. My only complaint and first major flaw of this film is the villain. Bobby Cannavale has proven himself as a good actor, but here he falters as the treacherous hunter/explorer Van Pelt. This movie would have been close to perfect had they not failed to include a worthy antagonist. Van Pelt could have been played by any actor to be honest. The character himself is weak and his goal is like any other cliche in which he wants the thing which the heroes have so he hunts them down to get back the thing that will give him power instead of the other thing happening. Apart from that, the cinematography and editing was phenomenal in this. The breathtaking scenery and shots of the various Hawaiian isles blew me away. Though not as cinematic in scope as 'Kong: Skull Island', it still urges me to want to visit Hawaii. If there was one other minor thing the film was weak in was the score. I felt Henry Jackman could have composed music more exciting.

With his last film being the atrocious 'Sex Tape', Jake Kasdan has redeemed himself and proven to also be a good action director. If you're hoping this film to be a tribute to Robin Williams in some way, it really isn't, although it mentions subtle ties to the first. 'Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle' is by far one of the best comedies this year and is certainly on my top 10 list of best movies of 2017.

5 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Justice League (2017)

6/10

Give me 'Justice' or give me death.

17 November 2017

The long awaited live-action DC Superhero team-up we have all been waiting for has arrived. 'Justice League' brings our favorite heroes together, but does the film come together as well as the team does?

1. When an intergalactic foe (Steppenwolf) threatens all life on Earth, Bruce Wayne/Batman (Ben Affleck) reunites with Diana Prince/Wonder Woman (Gal Gadot) to assemble heroes from every corner to defend the world. With 'Justice League' being the 5th installment in the DC Universe, this movie undeniably feels a little rushed although it does have the appearance of a stand-alone film. It is quite obvious that DC and Warner Bros. are trying their hand at reverse engineering these characters by introducing them in one big ensemble and then gradually branching them off into their respective films. Is this DC's best movie? Not at all, but it's far from their worst.

2. One the positive side, Gal Gadot (Wonder Woman) is the most prominent character in the film more so than anyone else. If there's one person that gives life to this film.....it's her. The quiet moments between Gadot and Affleck (Batman) are by far the most interesting. There is a conflict between them in a sense of a love/hate relationship which hints at a possible budding romance. The other standout character was surprisingly Ray Fisher as Victor Stone/Cyborg. Maybe it's just me, but characters struggling to regain humanity that was stripped of them always resonates with me and Cyborg is just that. The least interesting member of the league however, is Ezra Miller as Barry Allen/The Flash. He clearly serves as the comic relief but he had more misses than hits. Most of his one-liners fall flat and the ones that do get nothing more than a chuckle.

3. The one person I wanted and expected more of was Jason Momoa as Arthur Curry/Aquaman. Momoa obviously has fun with the role but never quite proves himself to be the badass we know him as from the comics. For someone with super-strength and command of the seas, his range is limited mainly because of the script. I'm certain 'justice' will be done to his character in his upcoming solo film, but I was disappointed that he wasn't as engaged as he should be. Not to spoil anything or explain what takes place, but the brief moments we get of Henry Cavill in the film, he finally proves himself as the Superman fans love. Probably the best set-piece in the film involves him about half-way into the movie. That sequence in particular was far more exciting and thrilling than the climax.

4. Every moment in which all the league members communicate and talk amongst each other is where the movie succeeds. Despite being the only human of the team, Ben Affleck holds his own and works best in every scene he has with Gal Gadot. Ciaran Hinds as Steppenwolf is about as underwhelming as they come. Never is his ultimate plan thoroughly fleshed out nor his objective justified. All he serves as is just a plot device and a reason for there to be a 'Justice League'. The film drops Easter-eggs every so often including two post-credit scenes. If you can manage to be patient, the scene at the very end (not spoiling anything) hints at the possibility of the solo 'Batman' film (starring Ben Affleck) that everyone has been waiting for.

The scenes directed by Snyder, opposed to the re-shoots by Joss Whedon, are as knight and day. Not saying that's a bad thing, but the film feels very choppy without a proper flow. I wasn't bored but nether was I even mildly entertained. 'Justice League' is by far better than 'Suicide Squad', but until it establishes a stronger script, pacing and less over-the-top CGI action, it will not succeed at matching the standard of MARVEL.

3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Thor: Ragnarok (2017)

8/10

All hail the "Lord" of Thunder!

3 November 2017

Asgard's time has finally come as 'Thor: Ragnarok' not only completes its trilogy, but unleashes destructive entertainment and proves to be the biggest game changer in the MCU thus far.

1. Following the events of 'Avengers: Age of Ultron', Thor (Chris Hemsworth) returns to Asgard after his failed quest to locate the infinity stones. Learning that Loki (Tom Hiddleston) is still alive, he also discovers that Hela (Cate Blanchett) the Goddess of Death has come to claim the throne and lay siege to the peaceful realm. When both brothers are isolated on the scavenging planet of Sakaar, Thor must enlist the help of Valkyrie (Tessa Thompson) and the Hulk (Mark Ruffalo) in order to save Asgard and its people from Hela's rule. Though not the most original plot, the fall of a hero and his quest for redemption is always fun to see. MARVEL continuously has a knack for telling the simplest of stories in the most entertaining way, and this is no different.

2. Having never been a fan of the first two films, this is indeed the best of the bunch. Not only is it funny and action-packed, but also the most visually stunning film MARVEL have made so far. Ever since 2014, most audiences have been hung up on the comedic and unique style of 'Guardians of the Galaxy', and now I can safely say that 'Thor Ragnarok' is better in every way to those films. For a director handling a film of this scale for the first time, Taika Waititi is no short of a pro. He clearly implements his own style here while removing the dark tones of the first two and replacing it with a more lively and upbeat setting. Waititi's choice of cinematography and production design is nothing short of breathtaking.

3. I never thought portraying the character of Thor showcased Chris Hemsworth's acting ability to the fullest extent, but I was glad to be proved wrong this time. Hemsworth shows a different side to his character ranging from emotions of fear to exceptional humor. The chemistry between both he and Ruffalo lends to some of the more funnier parts of the film. Jeff Goldblum as 'Grandmaster' heightens the comedy aspect while Tessa Thompson's Valkyrie showcases a more serious tone. And of course, how could we forget the ladies' favorite, Loki himself. Tom Hiddleston can do no wrong as he never loses the charm, charisma and overall mischievous nature of Loki. On another unrelated note, Scarlett Johansson needs to move over because Cate Blanchett sizzles the screen in her skin-tight costume as the unbelievably sexy Hela;)

4. If I had any problems, the first would be that some of the characters felt underused. Idris Elba returns as Heimdall, but only serves as a single purpose to the plot. Worst of all, Karl Urban as Skurge could well have been non-existent. We all know Urban is a good actor, but he literally has nothing to do but stand next to Cate Blanchett and look intimidating. Only at the very tail-end of the film does he actually attempt to do something, but that's over in the blink of an eye. Other CGI characters (seen in the trailers) such as Korg, Fenris Wolf and Surter all makes appearances in this film, but I won't say what their involvement in the plot is since this is a spoiler free review. Other than a slight overuse of the 80s soundtrack, this is an all together/well crafted film.

Although not the best MCU film, it is by far the best outer-earth one. 'Spider-Man: Homecoming' still ranks as the best superhero and MARVEL flick of the year, but this is a close second. Be sure to stick around for the first post-credit scene at least. While short, it sets up 'Infinity War' more than any other film in this phase. The Guardians may have a talking raccoon on their side, but in the words of Tony Stark, "We have a Hulk!"

1 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

War for the Planet of the Apes (2017)

8/10

"I offered you Peace, I showed you Mercy..."

15 July 2017

'War for the Planet of the Apes' is the third and (supposedly) final chapter in the Apes trilogy, but is it the best of the bunch or do things go bananas at this stage?

1. Never have I been a major 'Planet of the Apes' fan until 2011 when 'Rise of the Planet of the Apes' evolved into theaters. Tim Burton butchered the possibility of a franchise in his Mark Wahlberg- starring vehicle which literally slipped on a banana peel, but all hope wasn't lost. When Andy Serkis teamed up with directors Rupert Wyatt (Rise) and Matt Reeves (Dawn & War), the Apes had a successful revival and the tides finally turned. This film is a great example of what a great trilogy should be like, but it would be a shame for this to be the final one since myself and other fans are just hungry for more because there is still much more potential left as far as story goes.

2. If any one person deserves an Oscar for an actor in a leading role, it would most definitely be Andy Serkis. His talent as an actor (at this point) is probably on par with Daniel Day-Lewis. Caesar the ape is by far the best CGI character/performance of this generation, even more so than Gollum. I can't stress enough how much I love this character, and WETA Digital's CGI has just gotten better throughout the years and the effects on this film surpasses even the likes of 'Avatar'. Karin Konoval (Maurice) and Terry Notary (Rocket) round out the cast of the original apes with a new addition of Steve Zahn as 'Bad Ape', who helps the group find their way in locating the military's base.

3. After a tragic event early in the film, Caesar is forced to find a ruthless army 'Colonel' (Woody Harrelson) who has rogue apes working along with his militia to eradicate their own kind. This film has a lot of underlying messages in it's plot along with eliciting sheer emotion in simple yet effective ways that one wouldn't expect from films like these. If you're going into this expecting balls-to-the-wall action, don't get your hopes up because it's not that. At times (especially in the middle) it feels more like a quiet and philosophical film to the point where it slows down to an unnecessary level. It's obvious early on that 'War' is the least action-packed of the three, so beware.

4. Apart from Caesar, the apes aren't any more evolved than they were in the previous, and I was hoping that at this point they were all fluent in speaking English rather than sign language. The undertones of slavery are expressed too much and has caused some controversy in social media. Some things needed to be more subtle instead of being overplayed. Most elements of the story aren't exactly new material, hence the reason why this film relies heavily on the outstanding performances. Director Matt Reeves does a great job once again and he definitely knows how to work with his actors to get such amazing choreographed performances. The film isn't flawless, and I hated that I didn't love it as much as I wanted to.

I wanted this to be great even though I cried and felt so much emotional connection to the characters. 'Rise' is still my favorite of the trilogy but I still hold this film in high regards. It truly is a spectacle and one of the best films of the year so far. Go see it, go bananas and go to WAR!!!

1 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Spider-Man: Homecoming (2017)

8/10

"With great POWER......comes a GREAT f#%king movie!!!."

7 July 2017

'Spider-Man: Homecoming' unleashes a whole new bag of tricks as the webcrawler swings his way back onto the silver-screen, but this time......he's (finally) part of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. With Sam Raimi's 2002 film and it's sequel being the most highly praised incarnations of the character, does Spidey have a successful rebooted homecoming?

1. Following the events of 'Captain America: Civil War', Peter Parker (Tom Holland) returns home (after his bout with the Avengers) to fight crime in his neighborhood of Queens NY with a brand new/hi- tech spidey-suit courtesy of Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) himself. Eager to impress Mr. Stark and join the Avengers, Peter unexpectedly crosses paths with the ruthless Vulture (Michael Keaton) and his associates, who are hell-bent on stealing parts and manufacturing advanced weaponry to sell on the black market for millions. For the most part, I had no problem whatsoever with the plot and found myself utterly compelled by the story even though it was quite simple.

2. As much of the Tobey MaGuire fan I am, all props to Tom Holland. He highly impressed me with his short stint in 'Civil War', but now he has proved why he is the definitive Spider-Man. Never before has the character been this true to his comic-book incarnation. Holland portrays him with just the right amount of humor, quirkiness and level of emotion that the character of Peter Parker truly is. Even though you see him appear in all the trailers, Robert Downey Jr. isn't in a majority of the film as it would seem. He serves just the right amount of screen-time while playing the pivotal role of Peter's mentor. Also, Zendaya's character of Michelle doesn't have a large role in this either.

3. She obviously will play a bigger role in the sequel, but as for now, she gets about several minutes of screen-time total. Laura Harrier (Liz) however, is more of the female lead in this (next to Marisa Tomei), as Peter's love-interest. Jacob Batalon fills the comedic shoes as Peter's best friend Ned. The two have great chemistry and they both add most of the humor in this film. Jon Favreau returns as Happy Hogan, who's job this time around is to baby-sit and monitor Peter to ensure he doesn't get himself into trouble......which he ultimately does lol. The main thing is that they all feel like real people dealing with real-life problems at times which everyone can relate to.

4. You can't have a great Hero without a great villain, and Michael Keaton hits a home-run as the film's antagonist Adrian Toomes/The Vulture. He's scary, ruthless and yet you still sympathize for him when you learn about his motives. Apart from Sebastian Stan as 'The Winter Soldier', Keaton stands out as one of the better villains the MCU has delivered thus far. Bokeem Woodbine appears as the secondary antagonist Herman Sholtz/The Shocker, and there are hints of other popular Spider-Man villains, but this review is spoiler free so I won't name them of course:) As shown in the trailers, Chris Evans does make a few cameo appearances as Steve Rogers/Captain America, but only in some funny P.E. instructional videos.

5. The dialogue is very humorous as it should be and the editing gives the film a nice flow to where I didn't feel the length. All of the action sequences were surprisingly great, especially scenes with the Vulture. It's fun to watch Spidey screw up, but he is amazing when it comes to all his spectacular stunts and web-slinging. The film isn't flawless though. Marisa Tomei felt underwritten to where she was a little too forgiving of her nephew's suspicious behavior/antics and once again, she never comes across as anyone's aunt. The climax was great, although I felt it refused to take an emotional approach and instead ended it generically. The very last scene of the film was pretty cheesy to be honest.

The movie sets up a (respective) sequel but it doesn't aim toward 'Infinity War' as one might think. There is an unexpected cameo by a female character with hints of previous MCU films throughout, so pay attention. Director Jon Watts does an excellent job here, and this is the kind of superhero flick that I would pay to see again.

3 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Wonder Woman (2017)

7/10

"I can save the day, but you can save the World."

3 June 2017

'Wonder Woman' lassos her way onto the big screen as DC unleashes it's 4th film of it's extended universe. With acclaimed female director Patty Jenkins at the helm, does this film finally surpass the critical stomping of both 'Dawn of Justice' and 'Suicide Squad'?

1. To be perfectly blunt, 'Wonder Woman' indeed (with the exception of 'Man of Steel') lifts the depressing curtain of the DCEU. This film exceeded my expectations by far and no one could wipe the proud smile off my face leaving the theater. After Superman flew across the sky in 2013, it took DC four years to raise the bar back up to a level in which I thought 'Man of Steel' succeeded (as far as origin stories go). Was it a flawless movie?......No. Does it succeed in parts where it's good?......in spades. When Wonder Woman/Diana Prince made her debut in 'Dawn of Justice', I can honestly say that I wasn't that impressed, nor was I a fan of Gal Gadot since I thought of her as a mediocre actress at best. However, I'm often glad to be proved wrong.

2. Having Zack Snyder (Man of Steel/Dawn of Justice) and David Ayer (Suicide Squad) at the reins up to this point, it took a woman like Patty Jenkins to finally turn things around. With 'Monster' being her claim to directorial fame, Jenkins will definitely be remembered for this now, as well she should be. Of course Gal Gadot will be the most outstanding hero of the DCEU, that is unless Aquaman, The Flash or Green-Lantern decide to steal the show in their respective films lol. Even tho I still think her acting is not on the level of great, Gadot does manage herself well enough to were I genuinely felt for her character as the film progressed. Being a guy, it's kinda hard to relate to a female lead based on my gender, but it doesn't divert from how good I thought she was.

3. However, the true acting spirit and the most relatable character to me, was Chris Pine as Cpt. Steve Trevor. Even though it's easy to get lost in his blue eyes, Pine steals every scene he's in and his chemistry with Gadot is easily better than that of Superman & Lois Lane. For the first time in this universe was I caught up in the love-story, and Chris Pine is just a beautiful man altogether;) Reading my review so far, you'd think my rating should be higher, but as I mentioned earlier, the film has flaws. Mainly....the villains, not the best, pretty weak and lazy; that's how I'd describe them. Apart from Dr. Poison (Elena Anaya) and Gen. Ludendorff (Danny Huston), there is a third antagonist who is revealed during the climax, but my review is spoiler free.

4. As with every DCEU climax, this one is no different as it boils down to a CGI-fest for the final sequence. Even though it's more focused than the other films' climax battles, it sorta (but not completely) takes away from the emotion the movie was trying to convey at that point. I'll admit that there was a moment in the last action sequence that got me a little teary-eyed in which Steve and Diana talk. The last time I cried was in 'Man of Steel' and I'm not too proud to admit it. Despite the heavy use of slow-motion shots in the very first action sequence when the Amazons storm the beach, everything from then on works really well. Audiences can now see the sheer power Wonder Woman possesses along with her superhuman skill- set and combat abilities.

I wish I could give this film a higher rating than I have, but with time to reflect, there were just some unforgivable errors made in which the DC filmmakers should have picked up on, seeing as how it costed them in the past. All in all, I had a great time, and despite it's flaws, 'Wonder Woman' was indeed a success.

0 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales (2017)

5/10

I have lived to tell the Tale...

31 May 2017

After a 5yr absence, 'Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales' is the fifth installment of the series and the continuing adventures of the infamous Cpt. Jack Sparrow. Having hit choppy waters since it's fantastic first film, does this one finally recapture it's adventurous fun?

1. Having embodied a character (at this point) more popular than Indiana Jones, the 'Pirates of the Caribbean' franchise would be truly lost without Johnny Depp as Cpt. Jack Sparrow. With wind in his sails, undying wit and drunken-luck on his side, it's hard not to love a character like Jack Sparrow. No matter which film(s) we like better than the others, Sparrow has stolen the show since 2003 and has undoubtedly grown on and become aware to every movie-going audience. I was delighted as anyone can be having him back on the silver-screen for what could be his final adventure. Needless to say, I couldn't help but think his luck and charm just might have run it's course with this film.

2. No doubt that Johnny Depp is in fact one of the greatest actors of our generation. He's an A-list star as well as a household name and now most notable to younger audiences for his portrayal of Sparrow. However, his characters on film may be immortalized, but Depp is in fact getting older and his fatigue does in show through this particular performance. Perhaps the blame can fall on the writing or the story as a whole, but the charm and wit we all love from this character is few and far between and solely replaced by drunken foolishness instead. We all look forward to what new mischief and tricks Jack has in stored, but I left the theater feeling as if he's now one big walking joke.

3. The plot revolves around Henry Turner (Brendan Thwaites) promising to rid his father (Orlando Bloom) of the Dutchman's curse by finding the Trident of the Greek God 'Poseidon'. In the case of Jack however, a former enemy who himself and his crew were enslaved as ghosts, are set free and seek revenge on Sparrow. As simple as this may seem, it unnecessarily becomes more convoluted. Karina (Kaya Scoldelario) a young astronomer gets involved, since she claims that she can navigate to the Trident's location by mapping the stars. Alas, even though she has more personality with her character than Thwaites, Scoldelario serves just a minor purpose to the plot and even less as a love-interest as she is utterly underused.

4. Having an Oscar-winning actor as the villain seems like a win/win scenario right?.....not exactly. Javier Bardem is indeed a great actor, but as the ghostly Cpt. Salazar.....he falters. Not only is he not as intimidating as one might think, but his Spanish accent is much too thick to where it's hard to understand his English. Bardem definitely falls short of the franchise's previous antagonists such as Geoffrey Rush (Barbosa), Bill Nighy (Davy Jones) and even Ian McShane (Blackbeard) to an extent. The film tends to work better as long as you focus on the characters that you've already invested in. The action scenes are done well, but never quite hits any exciting high-notes.

5. Besides fun and relate-able characters, the next important thing necessary in a 'Pirates of the Caribbean' film is.....the Caribbean. Not only was this installment filmed entirely in Australia, but it's glaringly obvious that set-pieces were missing. There are way too many digital back-shots that take away from the organic feel swashbuckling films supposed to have. Filming for this ended in the summer/fall of 2015, and my guess for it's delayed release was the massive amount of CGI and art direction added in post-production. Not saying that all the effects were bad, but the CGI on the ghosts and the final action sequence is quite glaring. For it's second film 'Dead Man's Chest' to have won an Oscar for special effects, this was indeed a huge step back.

'Dead Men Tell No Tales' amounts to be an average and mildly entertaining flick. Rating this out of the franchise's five films, this would be #4, with 'At World's End' being by far the worst. 'Curse of the Black Pearl' is definitely the best, and I sure hope the filmmakers find their stride as they did with the first and have a successful return-to-form if there is to be a sixth entry.

3 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Alien: Covenant (2017)

5/10

In space...no one can hear you (unenthusiastically) scream.

26 May 2017

'Alien: Covenant' is the second installment of the prequel films leading up to the original 'Alien' (1979). Being one of the most iconic monsters in horror-cinema, does the infamous Xenomorph lend itself to recapturing the scares as it once did?

1. Ridley Scott returns to direct his third entry in the 'Alien Universe', with he previous ones being both the original 'Alien' as well as 'Prometheus'. It is quite easy to see that Scott is in fact the most invested in this franchise seeing as he has stuck around this long. Being such an accomplished director, Scott brings his signature style into the film giving it a nice flow as things progress. The editing is great since everything moves at a decent pace and I was never bored throughout. To Scott's credit, he knows how to keep an audience entertained or at least engaged to some extent. However it would be unwise to compare this film to any of his highly acclaimed works.

2. This installment does in fact surpass it's predecessor 'Prometheus' on the grounds of it being a little more simple with the plot. When an unexpected accident occurs, members of a colonist crew are awakened on their way to a surveyed planet when they are intercepted by a random and mysterious transmission. To it's credit, the film wastes no time plunging the audience right into the action. After critics panned 'Prometheus' for being slow, boring and weak on story, the writers obviously got the message and tried their best to tighten things up with this one. As far as the scares go, I think audiences have become too familiar with the creature at this point to be in any kind of awe.

3. From the trailers, they tried to convey that the Xenomorphs no longer need to burst through people's chests, but their backs as well. If there's anything we learned from 'Prometheus', the 'Engineers' weaponized a specific black goo that......well......does anything convenient for the plot. For something that was never fully explained before, there's still not much of an explanation in this one as well. I honestly didn't care too much for wracking my brain around the science this film was pushing, just as long as we got the alien we love incorporated with creepy thrills for the least. As far as the black goo and spores, nobody cares anymore.

4. The action is surprisingly well done but the horror and gore is nothing we haven't seen before. The crew consists of fourteen people, but we only get to know Michael Fassbender, Danny McBride, Katherine Waterston and Billy Crudup (to an extent). Everyone else (as you figured) is just to be killed off. There is a twist near the end that really is too obvious to not see coming. Once again, I still regard this as being better than 'Prometheus', but still it seems to fail in recapturing the horror or deliver the same thrills for a film that finally reintroduces the Xenomorph. "Average" is probably the best word to describe this film.

Like I said, 'Alien: Covenant' is still entertaining, although I didn't feel cheated seeing this in theaters, it's still a middle-of- the- road sci-fi flick that doesn't quite exceed expectations.

0 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

The Fate of the Furious (2017)

6/10

My FATE is my own.

12 May 2017

'The Fate of the Furious' is the exhausting 8th entry of the prolonged series of criminal street racers turned super spies. Undeniably, this series has an enormous following since 2001, but after sixteen years on the streets, are these films finally running on empty?

1. The plot really isn't anything special to say the least. The film starts off with Dominic (Vin Diesel) and Letty (Michelle Rodriguez) enjoying their honeymoon in Cuba. However, nothing good lasts forever - enter Charlize Theron, who plays the mysterious 'Cipher' who almost immediately blackmails Dom with a serious yet unknown leverage that is revealed later in the film. No time is wasted as we are thrust into the fast-paced action. From the trailers it's clear that Dom betrays his team due to his reluctant affiliation with Cipher, but anyone with a brain-stem knows that that's something which hits a dead end lol.

2. F. Gary Gray has done some very entertaining and captivating films in the past, but it seems no matter the director, this series seems to follow a specific pattern at this point. Not that it's a huge complaint, but since the 4th film, the style of action seems to repeat itself even into this one. I give credit for how inventive the action and set-pieces are, but yet again, the film-makers can't help themselves but push things way over the top. The last action sequence in particular where the team travels to icy Russia to face Cipher and Dom in the final showdown, is where I drew the line of sheer belief. Words can't even begin to describe the pain.

3. If there was to be a comparison between this and the 'Mission:Impossible' films, I'd follow Tom Cruise any day. I can't believe I'd see the day when Tom Cruise's death-defying stunts would be more plausible that Vin Diesel and The Rock's. The underlying story of 'Family' is still beating like a heart without a body. For someone who was with this theme since it's inception, I'm utterly tired of these film constantly cramming down my throat the importance of family. Even though he wasn't the greatest of actors, Paul Walker really did bring some kind of balance especially with his story and background.

4. I gave 'Furious 7' a pass because it was in essence a farewell to Walker, although I enjoyed this one just an inch more. There should have been a new running theme in this film and left the family matters in the previous since it ended on such a perfect and emotional note. I know it's been said before, but Jason Statham and Dwayne Johnson are more of the outstanding characters as far as performances go. Charlize Theron does bring a fresh take for a female villain, but her role isn't as large as one might think. Vin Diesel and the rest of the cast don't really bring anything new as they play their respective roles as one-note as possible.

If you're an action and car junkie, then this is the movie for you. It's fast, it's loud and with as many close-up shots of women's butts as possible. Have at it.

3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Power Rangers (2017)

6/10

How late is Morphin' time?

15 April 2017

Haim Saban's 'Power Rangers' return to the big screen for the first time in twenty years. Headed by director Dean Israelite (Project Almanac) and with a script by long-time writer John Gatins, does this film produce enough fuel to successfully morph?

1. I suppose I'd start off on a good note and say that the story is pretty well written and has a nice flow to it. The credit really goes to writer John Gatins who's biggest screenplay credit is the 2012 Denzel Washington drama 'Flight'. The initial setup of all five characters was surprisingly well done. From Jason's (Dacre Montgomery) first interaction with Billy (RJ Cyler) in detention, to them all coincidentally running into each other at the quarry, everything has a nice organic feel. I didn't expect them to flesh out the main characters as much as they did, but somehow they pulled it off. Even the film's opening sequence gives Zordon (Bryan Cranston) a decent enough backstory which sufficiently explains how he becomes what we all know him as.

2. As a fan of the 'Power Rangers' since birth, I was especially excited to see my favorite (Jason/Red Ranger) back in action. Assigned as the leader of the Rangers, I think newcomer Dacre Montgomery was an excellent choice for the part. Not only does he reflect qualities of a leader as he mingles with the others, but his story seems to be the most developed among the rest. The three guys on the team undoubtedly have the better story arcs while the two girls felt a little lazy to be honest. I use the word "lazy" in regards to the problems the two face, because in actuality, they aren't really serious problems at all. Kimberly (Naomi Scott) is dealing with the sudden excommunication by her cheer-leading squad, while Trini (Becky G) is just distraught that her parents aren't in tune with her rebellious lifestyle.

3. All in all, there just wasn't a solid or believable enough stories to follow Kimberly nor Trini. Also, not only are the guys given better and relate-able stories, but their acting feels superior than the girls'. However, that can be overlooked as it's not that big of an issue. Bryan Cranston and Bill Hader voice Zordon and Alpha 5 respectively, and of course, when Bill Hader's part of any cast, humor always follows. I must give a round of applause to the make-up artists on this film, because it takes a tremendous amount of effort to make someone as beautiful as Elizabeth Banks to look ugly as Rita Repulsa. Banks' appearance as Rita is (of course) a swift departure from that of the TV show, but it's for the better. Let's just say she gives new meaning to being a space sorceress.

4. I honestly was in love with this movie for the first two-thirds, but the biggest problem hits at exactly the 90th minute. I'm not spoiling anything, but as a fan, there just wasn't enough screen- time when we finally get the team as full-on 'Power Rangers'. The film's running time is exactly 120mins, and we don't get to see the Rangers morph as a team until exactly 90mins in. At this point things are utterly rushed as they face-off against Rita and the giant Goldar for the climax. Even though the CGI could have used a little more rendering on the Zords, I was thoroughly impressed by them as well as the new Ranger suits. If the film-makers were to draw inspiration from movies of Michael Bay and Guillermo Del Toro to make the perfect blend of the fantastic Dino- Bot CGI and action of 'Transformers' together with the terrific giant Kaiju & Jaeger fights from 'Pacific Rim', this film would have been made awesome.

Dean Israelite does the best directing job he can, which I give him kudos for. I don't regret seeing this in theaters cause I do give this film lots of praise for successfully rebooting a franchise that was decades out of date. Had it not been rushed near the end with a better balance of the action against the drama, 'Power Rangers' would have a higher rating than I'm giving it. I still had a fun time and would recommend it to younger audiences despite the lengthy wait.

0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

bodhi-13262

Reviews

Tell Your Friends

Recently Viewed