Marval Movie

Superman Doomsday was the first of the DC animated straight to DVD line of movies, so it only makes senes that they would adapt one of the most pivotal stories to ever grace the man of steel. The Death of Superman (released in 1992) is still the highest selling comic book of all time.

The cast is a big departure from the crews previous cast of their other shows. Adam Baldwin is Superman this time and he is a much deeper tougher sounding Superman than we are used to hearing Tim Sale and/or George Newburn through the years, but it works well in this version of the world that they've created. Anne Hetch is Lois Lane and she is the strong cynical character that I'm sure everyone will like, I had some trouble hearing her the first time I saw the movie but as the movie went on and after repeated viewings it was obvious that she was a very good Lois. James Marsters is our Lex Luthor this time and just like Anne Hetch it was weird at first but over the course of the movie and over repeated viewings it became obvious he was the right choice. He's a more oily, despicable Luthor than the smooth, debonaire Clancy Brown.

The story is about the ultimate challenge that Superman has to face in fighting the great physical terror of the alien being named Doomsday, a creature of pure rage and destruction. Superman is pushed to his very limits and beyond, Doomsday will not stop ergo Superman cannot stop. Until eventually the victory costs the man of steel his very life.

The movie adapts over a years worth of comics into a seventy minute movie but it works because it keeps the focus of the story itself, what does  the the death of Superman mean? The movie shines because its their icon and their inspiration taken away, and what happens when peoples icons get taken away? they feel depressed or become bastards. I am a little torn weather or not the characters would act like this but its good enough characterization.

The movie also shines as an example to all the stupid people that say "ow Superman sucks because he's so strong and he's never in any real danger". Those people can suck it! because here he is in danger, he is in pain and still he keeps fighting, to the very end.

The music by Robert Kral, is just a real solid score. Its big and bombastic, which is essential for a superhero movie score but also sounds like Superman.

Superman Doomsday is a three act movie, but its also a very three act movie. Each act is distinguishable from the other and it even has a different director for each of the acts. Brandon Vietti handles the first and he's the perfect one to handle all the grim and gritty fighting with Doomsday. Lauren Montgomery takes on the heavy emotions of the second and she deserves great praise because I've praised her for directing great action scenes but she does great drama too. Then finally Bruce Timm, the man himself, handles the triumphant return of the third act.

Being that this is the first of the DC movies and they were liberated from the PG rating and were allowed to go PG13 they make the use of that freedom with letting characters actually die. However they cant have an R rated movie and looking at the movie they have some clever tricks to convey the deaths without making them too mature or gruesome, they do it by having Doomsday holding a soilders head, panning away and then hearing a crack, its very effective. Its also almost liberating to hear the characters speak some more mature words, like "ass" and "ow hell".

There is a hilarious joke within the movie where after Superman takes out a giant robotic spider controlled by Toy-Man a man in a observing crowd says "like we needed his to take out a giant spider, lame". This is a reference to the Superman movie Kevin Smith wrote in the late nineties named Superman Lives, it would have been weird. And guess what, Kevin Smith voices this character.

Superman Doomsday isn't the best of the DC Animated Movies but it was a really solid start to a really solid line of movies. It is also a dark Superman movie but with an acception to it, this still understands Superman and makes the right moves in making the story dark, while not defiling the character. Superman Doomsday is the darkest Superman story that can be allowed.

Rating: 3 1/2 stars out of 4

Ever since Man of Steel the DC movies have had to compete with MARVEL as well as distinguish themselves. Unfortunately their idea of distinguishing themselves is to make the image bleak and their Superheroes not so heroic. It has been one failure after another and now comes the time when Wonder Woman is to finally get her own movie. This does not stand on the shoulders of giants and history has been anything but kind to female Superheroes.

This is a glorious time to see your favorite characters from the panel adapted for the big screen. Except if they're female, of all these recent movies in the last ten years there has been no shortage of female supporting roles that have been well acted and developed, but sadly lacking for being on the title and main focus. So there is indeed a lot riding on Wonder Woman, because it cost hundreds of millions of dollars to make, because DC movies have been consistently poorly received and if this does badly it will probably set female driven action movies back another decade or so.

Firstly who is Wonder Woman? Well she is one of biggest names in the DC universe, her setting is usually mythology and she stands for truth. There are other elements I could get into but lets focus on this, she deserves respect and stands for honesty.

For me Wonder Woman was the best thing in Batman v Superman but maybe that's because she was only in it for about fifteen minutes. Well luckily it wasn't just luck, Gal Gadot embodies the character and is able to carry her own movie. She is a stern warrior able to take down any other fighter (with or without superpowers) but is also filled with optimism and compassion seeing the beauty in many things. It's a tough order to fill I wont lie, but Gadot fills it. She also masters her confidence in her own skin and the costume, embodying absolute nobility.

For the plot we open in modern day with Diana/Wonder Woman looking at an old photograph and how she had intentions of saving the world but something changed. We then cut back to years ago on the island of Themyscira where a great race of women named Amazons live, they don't interact with the rest of the world and have existed in peace for hundreds of years. This is told to us very beautifully through animation that looks like a moving Peter Paul Rubens painting. The only child on the island is Diana and she grows up with love form her mother Queen Hippolyta and taught the ways of combat by Antiope (Robin Wright). However, one day mans world finds it's way to Themyscira in the form of pilot Steve Trevor (Chris Pine), he's on a mission of importance for The Great War. When Diana hears of this she concludes that it must be Ares doing and must now leave her home.

Pine and Gadot make a fine on-screen couple, both are very attractive and the script gives them a lot to work with, from fun subject matters to discuss and the more heavy ones, from etiquette to duty and end goals.

The movies color pallet is varied from setting to setting. Previously the DC movies have drained nearly all the vivid color from their movies in an attempt for you to take them more seriously, it hasn't worked, they've just created something un-engaging to look at. This movie opens with more luscious colors while on Themascira then drains it when we move away from that, this shows a tonal shift for each setting. Plus there are some other setting where it's a warmer tones. This is a more realized and smart look for a movie.

Being that this is a Superhero in the middle of a World War, fighting soldiers it will inevitable draw comparisons to Captain America: The First Avenger. This isn't the worst thing for me because I like that movie quite a bit and there's nothing wrong with channeling a fun tone for your movie watching. However Wonder Woman and Captain America are very different characters and this is still it's own movie, so no harm no fowl.

This is, without question, the best DC movie to be released since Man of Steel. It is a Superhero movie that knows what a Superhero is, has color, a consistent tone and a lead character and actor that make you believe in them.

This is not a great movie, there are some basic logic and directorial choice movements that did have me questioning the moment as it played. I wish it was a modern day The Dark Knight, but it's not. It is however a solidly made movie, with a consistent tone and a message to deliver with a character that gets it right.

For fans of Wonder Woman I'm sure they'll be satisfied (I was). For others that seek an action, Superhero movie they will get that. For the people that aren't fans and go to this movie to be convinced, harder to say. I'm sure they will see her appeal and elements of why she is so loved by some. I wouldn't say this is the highest movie caliber the character is capable of but it does do her justice.

Rating: 3 stars out of 4

Of all the Superhero movies to come out in recent years I don't think there is one I can point to where it's appeal mainly goes to its star. To be fair there are co-stars and costume department and the director and the writers but without the special magic of Jason Momoa, who takes the concept of the character and fits it to his liking this movie would probably be dead in the water (pun intended!).

Opening the movie is a prologue of a man by the name of Thomas Curry (Temuera Morrison) runs a lighthouse and during one dark and stormy night, he sees a woman washed up onshore and un-conscience. He takes her inside and tends to her wounds, she is Atlanna (Nicole Kidman) who is the princess of Atlantis and has fled because of an arranged marriage. But this beautiful woman from a distant land, falls for this man of a different world and for a time love thrives and they have a son together named Arthur, but she has responsibilities and so her people come to take her back, leaving Thomas to raise Arthur alone.

Years later a submarine is being boarded by pirates, they take the ship but it's hit by something, not a creature, or a missile, but a man. For his introduction, you will have a smile on your face. Jason Momoa is such a larger than life character that is so happy to be onscreen that his joy is sent through the screen and right into you. He looks good with his top off (which happens a lot), moves with swagger and confidence and is either given or writes his own witty repartee which is even accompanied with a few notes of an electric guitar (a fun peppering of fun for the audience).

Joining Arthur is Mera (Amber Heard) a red-headed Atlantian that comes from a noble house and tries to bring Arthur to Atlantis to restore order, he wants very little to do with it but tidal waves keep damaging the shoreline so he's in for the ride. Mera has special...magic? Where she is capable of controlling the water itself. Heard and Momoa has good chemistry with witty banter that they sharply bounce off each other.

Director James Wan is most well versed in the horror genre, with movies like Saw, The Conjuring and Insidious under his belt but also directed Furious 7 so he's also cut his teeth on mainstream blockbusters. He channels more of his Furious 7 muscles here though there two moments when he gets to flex those horror skills of his. He has good control of his camera, knowing when to move it and when it should stay still and there are a few neat wipes used within it (though they are just for flash). He and cinematographer Don Burges even make use of the underwater segments with allowing the camera to drift in a fully around, above and below the characters.

Setting the movie primarily underwater, for the most part, helps give the movie a unique look from the other Superhero movies. Atlantis itself is as a city is impressive visual realization with lights that strobe-like cuttlefish and other deep sea creatures and the building take the shape of shells, fins and the bones of marine life. As well as that there are many other locations that we are given because of how the plot is laid out.

This whole movie has a getup and go, waste to time mentality. This is to its detriment because we never get a few precious moments to absorb what's been said, as soon as something has been explained Arthur gets up and goes to the place or fight someone (though he does seem to be that type of character). Same for other scenes with other characters, we are in a location and they spout their obrolan at a fast passe and as soon they are don't then the other talks and the scene immediately ends.

This is essentially a treasure hunt movie. With artifacts that need to be found and clues hidden in different locations around the world and one thing leading to another. These types of movies, like Indiana Jones, are good for keeping the characters and plot moving and allowing for different locations and action set pieces.

With all the incredible progress that's been made with computer animation in recent years, it's a shame that this movie looks so artificial. here are times when we are meant to be within a ship or an undersea castle of sorts or even have our heroes up against a creature from the deep and you will never believe it's really there. Adding to it ae very unconvincing capes that flow up and down and they are like flags of artificiality (I also have no ideas why you would need a cape underwater).

Music is used to heighten the emotion of the scene playing on-screen. Depending on the scene or on the tone of the movie itself it can be loud and aggressive or delicate and nuanced. Sometimes as well no music should be played and the image and the quiet are all we need. But during moments in this movie composer Rupert Gregson-Williams is as subtle as a sledgehammer. Especially during the second act where every emotion the characters express is accompanied by a tune, all dramatic images come with a BOOM and one moment where something dramatic is happening on-screen it comes with choir music. Such blatantly obvious as well as obnoxious use of music don't enhance but obstruct and make us aware of how the creators want us to view the movie.

Under Zack Snyders creative reign these movies have had a washed out or, murky, dark look to them. All the color is faded down and black is not used as a contrast but dominated the frame, accompanied by browns, bronze, and variations of grey with only a few other shades being allowed in, it is a very unappealing thing to look at. Here we get vivid, lush colors as well and a few darker setting for contrast. Each character has their own main color so they can be easily distinguished from another and pop-out against the environment.

This movie does not have one but three villains from the Aquaman mythos. Primarily there is Ocean Master (whose title they find a way of saying out loud and not sounding ridiculous) Arthurs half Brother that want the throne for himself as well as to declare war on the surface. Black Manta, a deep-sea pirate that is geared with special Atlantian technology that gives him an edge in the fights. It's a testament to the costume people that they took the original design of the large helmet and made it look good in the movie when by all means it should be hilarious. Finally, there's The Trench, a race of water-breathers that live in the deepest darkest part of the ocean and have become savage. They are the most recent installment in the comics and are really just Piranha men though are a definite threat. Anyone of these villains is enough to provide fuel for one movie and all three are here, none of them is throwaway and get their moments, it's just another example of the main kasus with the movie, it's rushed and cluttered.

In terms of DC movies, this is a much better step forward with recent debacles like Man of Steel and Batman v Superman. It is not as strong as Wonder Woman and in terms of a Superhero facing a different culture, this is no Black Panther. Though it is still an everyone is doing an admiral job is all their departments, but the special spice is it's star Jason Momoa that is able to take it on his broad shoulders and elevate it.

Rating: 3 stars out of 4 

Everyone knows who they are, they are the two greatest heroes in the world. One is the big-blue-boy-scout, he wears bright colors goes out at day and has the powers of a god. The other is the Dark Knight, he wears dark colors, has no powers and has to rely on his wits and gadgets. How could these two ever work together?

When you have two of the greatest superheroes working together you've got to have a threat that's big enough that calls for both of them to be together. Lex Luthor is a good start, how about Luthor as president? When the movie starts we see the nation in a state of panic because of some kind of financial inflation, and Luthor in the middle of this carnage steps up and gets elected as president.

Later we see Superman easily handling a car chase, and meeting up with a few heroes who are now under Luthor's employ as government agents, they talk about Luthor's apparent reform but of course Superman say "I'll never trust him, he's a sick man" to which Major Force funnily reply's "He's not the only one to sit in the oval office." Meanwhile there is a huge meteor heading for earth, this could be easily handled except that the meteor is made of solid Kryptonite, so along with the Luthor trouble Superman goes to Batman for strategic help.

The man of steel is played by Tim Daly, who is reprising his role from Superman: The Animated Series. He hasn't played the character since 2000 and he slips back into the role with great ease, he was always one of my favorite Superman's, he is strong and commanding but you can tell he is gentle by nature. Batman is played by Kevin Conroy who hasn't been far from the role since 1992 with Batman: The Animated Series, he may be my absolute favorite Batman, he's dark, direct, no nonsense and always carrying the emotional weight of being Batman. Clancy Brown also reprises his role as Lex Luthor, he too has also been one of my favorites he encompasses the slimy businessman side of Lex as well as the egotistical mad scientist.

The drawing style is very much focused on the strong man idea of superheroes. All the heroes here have very tight outfits and look as if they have been taking steroids with their cereal.

The real strength of the movie comes with the interaction with Superman and Batman and how different they are. There's a scene where the two need to break into a lab, they are spotted Superman says "Now I really do look like a criminal" to which Batman responds "It's done wonders for me." They have had different experiences, go about their duties in different ways but they are on the same side even if their personality's don't match up all the time.

The two best scenes are when a battered Batman and an injured Superman have to get to the bat-cave, none of them are in good condition to fight or even walk straight. Each one leans on the other and together they slowly work their way to their goal. The other really good scene in the movie comes later when Batman steers a giant ship to destroy the meteor, Superman punches Luthor and says "That was my best friend, and you just murdered him." This is a great scene because it shows how close the two have grown beneath all the jokes and differences and probably if you've saved the world and had your life saved by a certain person, you would consider them a friend despite all differences.

Public Enemies is a high flying adventure that does not rely on the gimmick of having these two icons together, it relays on the strength of the two characters, playing to their strengths and their weaknesses.

Rating 3 stars out of 4

This year Superman celebrated his seventy-fifth birthday, that's a long time. To some, its a wonder why Superman has lasted so long, they just cant get it around their heads why this big blue boyscout has lasted through World War II, the space age and then beyond everything that came after that and still lasting to this day. I know why. Well in any case to gaji Superman, he's getting two new comic series and a movie.

The movie starts as you'd probable expect it to, on the alien planet of Krypton, where the scientist Jor-El is speaking with the counsel telling them that their planet is doomed. This time Superman's father Jor El,  is played Russel Crowe. He's good, in what we've come to expect from Russel Crowe but if they are saying that Russel Crowe is the new Marlon Brando then they are sadly mistaken. 

Our villain this time (or is it again?) is general Zod, played by Michael Shannon. Shannon is a great talent, I'm a big fan of his work on Boardwalk Empire and when I heard he would play Zod I thought, OK. Shannon is truly threatening and menacing. He's not like Terrence Stamp and that goes for the back-story to, because they give the character more motivation and make him more understandable.

I would say that telling the origin story would be pointless at this point in human history, everybody already knows Superman's origin. But this time they've reworked some things so I'll let it slide. In fact the scenes with young Clark Kent are really well shot, its like Terrence Malick took over for these scenes. Kevin Cosner plays Clark's Earth father (good choice), his death scene is not as well handled as it was in the nineteen-seventy-eight movie but I did feel something for it. So well done on a good Jonathan Kent.

The movie's script is handled by David S. Goyer who is still one of the best storytellers in Hollywood and he draws inspiration and uses some lines from Grant Morrison's All-Star Superman and Geoff Johns Superman Secret Origins, so that's good. But frankly the storytelling here is choppy, moving from one scene to another and a way too heavy emphasis on action scenes.

Henry Cavill is our Superman this time, he already will be remembered because he is the first non-American to play one of Americas greatest icons (this is a sad day). He speaks well, is good looking and has some charisma (he's playing Superman he better have charisma). But he has very little body language, I think about what he was doing in most scenes and he was just standing up straight and delivering his lines, that's not very interesting of a performance.

Lois Lane is played by Amy Adams, a great mature choice to play the role. I'm glad they chose an older, more experience actress and didn't get some overly attractive page girl. However a persoalan I have with her is mostly just me as a Superman fan, why is she a red-head? Lois Lane has black hair, Lana Lang is the red-head.

Superman's costume in this movie I'm sure has stirred up more than a little controversy. My own personal thoughts, this costume is pure garbage. It looks terrible, it goes against all the basic design guides on how Superman should look. Why does his cape touch the floor? is that Armour, why does Superman need Armour? where is the underwear outside suit? sounds like a weird thing to comment on but its such a staple of the character so when I see him without it, it looks like someone yanked them off him. Also why is there no S shield on the back of his cape? that S logo is everywhere else in the movie but not on his cape, where its meant to be. I've heard talk that the old Christopher Reeve costume, by today's standards, looks cheap and "fancy dress like", wrong, Christopher Reeve wore that costume with grace and dignity and it glows with color. This costume looks weird and gaudy, its way too dark, but when they put it in the light I can see more of the textures of it and I feel like throwing up.

The visual style of the movie is like The Dark Knight meets Prometheus, at this point I'm sure your thinking "that sounds awesome" and indeed it is. Yes this is a movie with some interesting visuals, only not Superman visuals. The world of Superman isn't one where H. R. Giger does the concept art, if this was another superhero then I might be OK with it but this is Superman. Another issue with the visuals is that there is a server lack of color, this is Superman isn't it, where is all the color? the color pallet is so dark and murky.

As much as I dont like the overall look of the movie there are some shots in here that I've been dying to seen in a Superman, ow hell even a superhero movie. Like Superman emerging from his, was that the fortress of solitude? silhouetted with his cape flowing in the wind.

My worry for the interpretation for what some people may have for how to handle Superman in movies in modern day is that they think they have to do what was done in the Donner movie. In nineteen-seventy-eight the tagline was "you will believe a man can fly" well in this age I dont care so much on the flying, I need to believe in the man and they dont seem to realize that.

I was thinking that for all its flaws that this is a new Superman movie and for what they did it was well executed and interesting. But there is a scene in the ending which makes the movie unforgivable to me as a Superman fan, it cuts right to the core of the character and betrays everything that made the character an icon for seventy-five years.

This is an interesting attempt at adapting Superman for the new age but sadly they seem to want to tell a different story with a different character with Superman's powers. It seems on this attempt to make a Superman movie we have gotten misguided from what Superman really is. But in the journey to making that great Superman movie, we will stumble, we will fall, but eventually we will join him in the sun.

Rating: 2 stars out of 4

I once made a joke that if the new Godzilla movie sucks then at least we have Pacific Rim. Now that I've seen the movie that joke seems to be a genuine statement rather than some banter that I had with my friends.

The movie starts off in Japan (of-course), where a scientist named Brody (Bryan Cranston) is working at a local power-plant.  All seems well with him and his family until there is some kind of disaster, the plant gets damaged and there's a radiation leak and Brody' wife is a casualty. Cut to years later where Brody is still looking for answers and his son Ford (Aaron Taylor Johnson) has grown up and is a father and married (Elizabeth Olsen).

We then see that there is an egg at the center of the plant and it hatches. But what comes out is not Godzilla but a different monster. I genuinely applaud the marketing people because there was never a hint of this in any of the trailers or promotional material, this is a legitimate surprise.

But for the main attraction we do get Godzilla, we get the appropriate amount of buildup for him and then we see him and then he's gone, then we see him again for a bit then poof, gone again and it goes on like that through the whole movie. He does come with that all-mighty roar, one of the greatest sounds in movies (I'm calling it). When we see him its awesome, it really is but he's scattered through the movie. A little of Godzilla here a little Godzilla there, we never get to really soak him up and enjoy him. But still he's designed well and we see him do what he does best.

Throughout the movie there is a heavy emphasis on nuclear weapons and that's good because that was the reason that the Kaiju genre was created. Because of the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Godzilla was the living embodiment of the nuclear devastation. Godzilla and the nukes should always be tided together.

America specializes in long range warfare. They have tanks that can successfully hit their targets from over a mile away and yet it seems like whoever is manning these tanks and planes weren't told that because they are constantly getting as close as they can to Godzilla. There is a scene where fighter planes are either circling Godzilla as close as they can or flat out ramming into him. Why? Did they run out of ammo so they decided to throw themselves at him?

The Asian market is quickly becoming one of the most important markets for the box office, a movie could do badly in America but if it does well in Asia the movie could still be very profitable. So that's probably one of the reasons why this movie was made. Yet they constantly white wash the cast and situations, Ken Watanabe is the only real Asian member of the cast. There are American's working in Japan, OK I accept that but it seems that the power-plant where they work in the beginning of the movie only has a few Asian employees. Later on in the movie white Americans come into the military base and say that they'll be taking over. Why? How? What right do they have to do this?

There are only two actors that are able to get close to a good performance in this movie. The first is naturally Bryan Cranston, he is one of the greatest actors ever, so naturally he gives a very well felt, engaging performance. The second is Elizabeth Olsen who I know a little about but have never actually seen her in action through a whole movie until now. This wasn't the best thing to see her in first, but still she gives it her all. Its not even the others actors fault, I've seen their other work and their accomplished actors but their given nothing to work with or care about. The are as interesting and as well developed and little plastic toy soldiers.

It seems that CGI animators that work on these blockbuster movies really hate building. In Man of Steel they devastated building after building and now we have a Kaiju to trample every man made monument in sight.

My ow my there is a lot of gray in this movie. The smoke is gray, the buildings are gray and Godzilla himself is also gray so we get to see gray on gray upon gray. How unpleasing to the eye.

Director Gareth Edwards won claim when he made Monsters where he made the entire thing on his laptop. Well it seems I know what kind of director he is, he's a big effects effects effects director. The movie is well put together with its shooting and cinematography but there's nothing to hook in the audience so that we are invested. This is a soulless movie.

Its fascinating to think that everything that infuriates me in this movie is everything that Pacific Rim did right.  In Pacific Rim there was color, characters that we cared about and were interesting, you got to see the monsters in combat and there was a balance of the micro and the macro.

If at any point you don't know how to feel in the movie the musical score will be sure to let you know.  Every wide shot of destruction, or moment of build up there is a score which serves as Oow, Ah, or Wow! It is practically condesending.

To be as fair as I possibly can to this movie there was clearly effort put into it and at times there are some genuinely awesome moments in it, but its the equivalent of giving you a tiny taste of a delicious cake and then immediately taking the cake away. Godzilla is king of the monsters, but you wouldn't know it by watching this movie, still though long live the king.

Rating: 1 1/2 stars out of 4

Could this movie ever live up to its hype? Did it ever stand a chance against all the expectation that the fanboys have built up in their own minds and have fantasized about for years? No it did not. But it did stand a chance of still being good. Any movie has that chance.

At numerous times you will either be confused or have to hold yourself back from laughing at the imagery within the movie that, I can only attest, to Zack Snyder believing he has artistic ability (which he does not).  Images of such half-brained, delusional and uninspired creation you will have to look around to re affirm you are still in the real world.
 
The big deal that everyone has been talking about in anticipation, will be thinking about while watching and shall discuss after viewing is that this is the first live action, cinematic depiction of having a movie with both Superman and Batman on-screen at the same time. Most of the movie is build up and when they do interact (if you can call it that) they are just seeing who can be more macho, so we have two immature insecure males placed together. Ben Affleck was a unique choice to say the least, but he does bring a dark stoic nature and presence to the character. You see how the years of brutal crime fighting have worn away sympathy and the raw anger that bubbles under the surface. This is also the first time we are shown the grey and black Batman suit. Something we've seen plenty of times in the comics and animated universe but a first for live action so it helps to distinguish itself.

It is a staple for superheros not to kill. It's expected because they are made for children. I expect optimism while watching or reading anything superhero related. They can still be mature and deal with tougher subject matter, but they should always maintain their wholesomeness. At least with the established, long lasting ones. In Man of Steel Superman broke his most sacred of vows and killed his enemy. Now in this movie Batman is directly responsible for killing many of his enemies. Flat-out murder, without any regret or having to deal with any conflict that makes him a mass murderer. Those wholesome, optimistic days really seem to be long gone. 

All the characterization has faults, some are more competent than others. But the greatest failure goes to Jesse Eisenberg as Lex Luthor. Luthor is one of the most brilliant, controlling as well as enduring villains from superhero comics, a character with a dark warped but also brilliant mind. This is a weirdo that only has people around him because he pays them and/or is important.

Ever since the MARVEL has been gaining all kinds of  success with their line of movies, DC has been trying desperately to replicate it. They want to have a series of movies that build-up to Avengers (i.e. Justice League) but they lack the patience and careful planning that made that work. MARVEL gave each member of the team their own movie to establish themselves and built to the story that would call for them to be united. This is a forced hodgepodge of references, characters and story elements that shouldn't be in the same movie that makes it all a deformed clattered mess.

Included in the cast is the first big screen, live action representation of Wonder Woman (Gal Gadot). She has things to prove but I believe her as a competent warrior that knows how to navigate her way around a dance floor and a conversation with anyone. There is groundwork set-up and room for further development (within her own film)

The action scenes lack all forms of investment and . Never have we grown to care about the characters that are bashing together like plastic toys so no outcome matters. These were clearly the moments Zack Snyder cared the most about, he obviously didn't care about making the characters sympathetic or even believable. What we have is a juvenile boy that has been given hundreds of millions of dollars to enact his overblown playtime sessions that he would come up with while playing with his action figure on the carpet. With all the depth and nuance that comes with i.e. none. They are loud, flashy and with no care for anything grounded or with emotion behind them. Just noise.

When the climactic scene come and the two icons engage in battle you will have already abandoned any sense of caring.  It isn't even the last battle in the movie, when that finally rears its ugly head you might as well order take-out or message your friends. Hell, read what the person next or behind you is ordering for take-out, it will be more interesting than the barrage of lights and loud noises abusing your senses from the screen.

The hype was impossible to live up to. But there was always a chance for competence and it being well executed. The acting is fine, from some, the scale is grand. And from there-on I fail to think of anything else redeeming about the movie. It is simply a juvenile, waste of time and resources. These characters are capable and should be used for much better entertainment.

Rating: 1/2 star out of 4

A while after seeing Man of Steel and making very clear my dislike for it one of my friends posed this question for me "Is it that this is a bad movie or just that this is a bad Superman movie?" Interesting question, could it be that I'd be easier on the movie if it wasn't meant to represent my favorite character? Well it does have Supermans name in it and the filmmakers knew that, so either way no point dwelling too much on that. But now here is Brightburn which is clearly taking the concept of the Superman origin story but pushing it through a horror filter.

Taking the concept but not having it directly be the exact thing gives the creatives the freedom to twist, reinvent and add any kind of layer over it they wish. Creatively I'm sure that's a great luxury and could absolutely lend itself to some good stuff. But lets stay focused, we see a kindly young couple of the Breyer's, Tori (Elizabeth Banks) and Kyle (David Denman), they have a farm and are very much in love and want to start a family, it just doesn't seem to be in the cards for them, until one night they hear a loud crash outside and go to investigate, it leads them to the smoking crater, then cuts to years later and they are now parents of a young boy (any of this sounding familiar?).

The boy's name is Brandon (Jackson A. Dunn), he's a shy kid, that likes to draw and gets bullied at school. He's not what you would call the most sociable, but seems gentle and nice, except for one night when he seems compelled to go into the barn and something underneath is calling him. He also realizes that he has super strength, invulnerability, can fly and laser eyes (know of anyone else with those powers?). Underneath the barn is the pod that he arrived in years ago and it seems to send a message into his head. From here on he knits himself a red mask that resembles a gas-mask, dawns a red cape embraces the use of his super abilities.

From here on it is a series of him talking down each person that annoys him in extremely brutal and quite frankly fetishized ways. Not just due to the fact that the murderer has superpowers but that they dwell on all the gory elements we are just left to watch a series of brutal murders with the aid of superpowers

Everyone here is a very good actor, they sell the moments of leisurely downtime and humor and excel when they need to be scared. When Brandon toys with them like a cat with a mouse they are so worried about their lives and it shows. I've said it before but in an action movie you can have someone face down an insane threat and look cool as a cucumber doing it, but in a horror movie we need to feel the fear and one way you do that is to cleary show that the characters themselves are afraid.

There is the old saying "All power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely" but I prefer how Robert Caro put it "What I believe is always true about power is that it always reveals. When you have enough power to do what you always wanted to do, then you see what the guy always wanted to do." But maybe this is adding too much, the point is that this movie doesn't really have any of this in mind, is it that Brandon was always a psychopath? Did the message from his ship rewire his brain to make him perform these horrendous acts? I'm not sure and I'm also sure neither are the filmmakers. I just feel like they wanted to take the concept of a character that embodies optimism and hope and put their own, mean spirited bleak icing over it.

Ultimately this is a movie without a soul and means nothing. Is about a kid who just seems to be a bad seed and because he is of a species that has superpowers can inflict his sadistic tendencies upon helpless humans, or a case of a bad seed, or the corrupting ability of power? It says nothing about why someone would be like this, about the corrupting element of power or the redemptive or limits of parental love. It wants to take a concept about pure goodness and put it own, cynical, malicious spin on it and I have, frankly, no patience or appetite for it.

Rating: 1 1/2 stars out of 4

With the release and success of Superman Batman Public Enemies it only made sense to make the follow-up. So another direct to DVD movie was made with the next story arc used as influence.

The movie picks up right where the last one left off with Lex Luthor's impeachment and some meteors of Kryptonite falling to Earth. The last big chunk falls in Gotham bay, but this piece has more inside it, it has a young girl (that's naked for some reason?) who lingers to the city but lo and behold she has superpowers. Batman quickly deals with her and takes her back to the bat-cave. We then learn that this is Kara Zor-El (Summer Glau), Superman's cousin. While your watching the movie you will notice that Superman and Batman act and sound the same but neither they or the world looks the same.
 
The movies greatest strength is its beautiful character and background designs. The original comic was drawn by the late Michael Turner that specialized in the attractive. Everyone in the movie has thick eyelashes and full lips and the women have especially long sexy pelvises.

This is another movie directed by Lauren Montgomery. I said, way back in my first movie review, that "this girl knows how to direct action". And indeed she does, but now I see what she does so well, firstly they are so well choreographed with every fighter having their own style and it is the animation and sound that you feel every punch, kick and slam that the characters go through.

Kevin Conroy and Tim Daly respectfully return to their roles as the dark knight and the man of steel. But also Susan Eisenberg as Wonder Woman, still sounding strong and kind as the diplomatic princess warrior. Another returning voice is the great Ed Asner as Granny Goodness (yes Granny), he is so strangely comfortable and talented at playing this sadistic old woman, who would have guest?

With the expanded cast means that there is a lot of attention payed to them, that's good I like how the movie gives just about everybody their moment and never shortchanges them but the title of the movie is "Superman Batman" and unlike the first movie there is much less focus on the two of them pouncing off each-other, they don't really interact with each-other that much during the course of the movie.

This is a Supergirl origin story at heart, its just that there are others along for the ride. On one side that dilutes the impact of her story and character, on the other hand (the marketing hand) it makes sense because Supergirl is not that big of a character so they put Superman and Batman on the title so that will bring in buyers that wouldn't be intrigued by a girl superhero movie. I know I would have bought it anyway but this will probably work on sixteen year old boys that wouldn't buy something Supergirl, but if they do fall for it I think they will like to learn more abut this character.

Rating: 3 stars out of 4

Back in the sixties we had Star Trek, where a group of multi-ethnic people would travel into the stars for  the good of the planet and bring peace and equality to different planets and races. Now we have The Walking Dead., where a group of multi-ethnic people travel into a chaotic world where morality is virtually and illusion and the future barley seems to be worth fighting for.

Tomorrowland seeks to remind us of this fact and our situation while trying to get us out of our rut and give us a story were we can work towards something better.

We open with a young boy named Frank Walker (Thomas Robinson) who shows up to the worlds science fair of 1964 with a jet-pack. The judge of the entries David Nix (Hugh Laurie) seems fairly impressed but he asks Frank how it will benefit the world? Frank responds "It will inspire people."

Cut to years later were we are now in the present and are now introduced to a young adult named Casey Newton (Britt Robertson). She is full of bouncy, yet grounded fun. She is the daughter of a NASA engineer who is working on a platform that will be demolished soon, so she demolishes the equipment that will demolish the platform. In each of her classes every subject and teacher say the same thing, "the world is boiling up", "distopia", "Orwelion." And in all of them she asks the same question "Can we fix it?"

Casey gets into trouble one day and when her things are returned to her there is a pin with a "T" on it, when she touches the pin she sees Tomorrowland. She tracks down a source that may know about the pin, a pawn shop owned by a very odd couple (one played by Keagan Michael Key).

Tomorrowland itself is a world of a constantly clear bright sky and clean buildings of marble, steel and glass. The look and feel of the place is like something out of The Jetsons, art-deco and Star Trek. It is the kind of place were everyone (except philistines) would like to live, were being creative and smart are your qualification.

Eventually the trail leads her to Frank (George Clooney), now a man. He tells her to abandon her search but she is not deterred and youth clashes with old and a partnership is spawned. 

Brad Bird is a great director of animated films. He is considered one of the best living animation directors. I feel he adds a lot of cartoony physicality to this project. The action scenes and the way they play out are something that are executed with almost too much perfect timing to be anything other than an animated movie. That's not a bad thing, they are vary unique and most of the performances are quite funny.

Bird  also brings numerous creative camera angles to this movie. Though I appreciate any new visual techniques to movies I couldn't workout any of the reasons for these interesting transitions and just rather left me more confused about what I'd just seen rather than giving me some eye protein. A case of style over substance I fear.

What purpose does this film serve? Well obviously is got plenty of people a paycheck, it will more than likely make Disney its money back, but I hope it inspires people, I wish that the children go and see the movie and want to create something else and the adults will be a little less cynical and fight for a better tomorrow.

Rating: 3 stars out of 4

"You don’t feel as real if you don’t see yourself reflected in the media. There’s something very powerful about seeing yourself represented."
-Dwayne McDuffie

Black Panther is here to make up for lost time. It is not the first Superhero movie to have a black lead, that goes to Steel, but we are now ten years into these MARVEL cinematic movies and now they have enough capital and are allowed to explore other characters that are nonwhite people. It is here with a mission. It is here to give the spotlight to characters and actors that aren't Caucasian, to represent black culture in both Africa and America and deliver a message of legacy while proceeding forward.

In Captain America: Civil War one of the standout characters was Black Panther himself. Chadwick Bowesman embodies this character with his physicality and majesty with how he walks into a room or a fight and owns everything. This is a time where monarchy is a tricky subject, I wont throw my opinions in here but I do believe he is an engaging likable character so if people are able to pin down their beliefs for the sake of the movie I believe they'll be very appropriately entertained.

The country in Africa in which T'Challa reins is Wakanda. It is a city that has reached the pinnacles of modern technology. The buildings stand and pieces of modern art, shining bright underneath the sun and with high-speed trains that go from the skyline to the deep caves of the land itself.

The movie also comes with a generous color pallet. Many different, vivid colors are onscreen making it visually stimulating. In Wakanda the sets have colder colors of blues and whites and a characters costume has yellows, reds or green to make them pop, it is an effective way to make the people and surroundings instantly identifiable.

Director Ryan Coogler has already built an impressive resume for himself. His debue was the  poignant Fruitvale Station, then followed by the sublime Creed. So he is able to handle delicate moments of emotion and fight scenes. Something that I believe helps to sell the fight scenes is the sound, they have convincing punching sounds so when a punch or a kick lands you believe it. Coogler has made two very strong movies on a low scale and now he's proven he can handle a blockbuster, this is a man with a promising career.

The cast is ninety percent black, being that most of it takes place in Africa this just seems like a logical move but we've seen studios somehow whitewash stories that should include non-white people but they've found a way. I foresee people complaining about the filmmakers having an agenda and pushing it onto the audience, there have already been other examples of this. For that I say of course, yet if the cast was comprised of white men nobody would cry fowl, it is a case of people needing to rethink about representation.

Adding again to the immersion of black culture in the movie is the soundtrack by Kendrick Lamar. It's fast passed and even spiritual at times, using Hip-Hop and African instrumentals which distinguishes itself from the other MARVEL movies as-well as most other blockbusters that come out. 

This movie, like all the other ones, comes with a serving of jokes. Visual ones, one liners etc. I am fine with this because I believe that superheroes should be fun, they can be other things but if they're not fun something has gone terribly wrong. But I do take issue with that T'Challa seems to have changed to someone that is much more chatty. When we saw him before he was the dry, stoic one, are these movies incapable of having longer sequences of silence? 

Michael B. Jordan plays Erik "Killmonger" Stevens (yeah that's a pretty on-the-nose name). He clearly has an agenda that will link him with T'Challa, the writing clearly tells us that he's quite intelligent and Jordan brings his great physicality to the role where he is able to sleekly handle guns and perform hand-to-hand combat effortlessly making him a physical threat and the cherry on-top is his  tooth-filled grin that he has when walking into a fight, saying that he will take some malicious enjoyment out of this.

The plot holds a few surprises but none that will really shake you up during the experience. They do many clever things with the the technology and visuals and there are moments of laughter and the action is high concept but you also feel the impact. The movies true strength is in immersing itself in black culture and representing it before the mass audience.

Rating: 3 1/2 stars out of 4