Ben Affleck directing a solo Batman movie?

You don't sign on an Academy Award winning director as Batman and then NOT have him direct his own solo feature, do you? According to recent speculation, Ben Affleck is in negotiations to direct himself in an upcoming solo Batman movie, which will probably be released between 2018 and 2020.

The news circulating the Internet at the moment is that Ben Affleck will most likely direct an upcoming solo Batman movie sometime after the release of 2016's Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice. The news also states that Affleck is set to co-write the story alongside comic book writer, long-time DC collaborator and superhero geek Geoff Johns. A few questions have arisen from this news, questions I will give my speculative answers to. Just know these are my own personal opinions and guesses as to what might happen, this is not official by a long shot.


When will it be set?

There are 2 possible time periods in which the film could be set in. The first one is after the events of Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice and Justice League Part 1. It could tell the tale of a Batman post the formation of the Justice League as he tackles a new wave of crime and super-villainy in the city of Gotham.

Or, it could be set way before the events of Batman v Superman. I am strongly suggesting it isn't an origin story simply because we know exactly what that is and we've seen it before many, many times. However, it could take the opportunity to tell a story which has been hinted at in both the Batman v Superman and Suicide Squad trailers. It could take inspiration from "A Death in the Family", telling the story of how a certain Robin was killed.



Who will be the villain?

Batman has an illustrious rogue gallery, and really the possibilities for villains in this solo movie are endless. However, my personal theory is that the villain for this story will be none other than Red Hood, or Jason Todd.

For those of you that don't know, Jason Todd is the second Robin in the comic books who was killed by the Joker in the story arc "A Death in the Family". In the trailer for Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice, we see Bruce Wayne in the Batcave staring at a suit which presumably belonged to a former Robin. In this cinematic universe, I believe that that suit did belong to Jason Todd before he was killed by Jared Leto's Joker. The yellow graffiti "HAHAHA JOKES ON YOU BATMAN" was probably sprayed on the suit by the Joker after he killed Jason Todd. Batman keeps this suit in his Batcave as a constant reminder of his failure.

You see what I'm getting at here? For me, I believe that the solo Batman movie will take inspiration from the "Under the Red Hood" storyline in which Jason Todd returns to Gotham as Red Hood looking to settle a score with his former mentor who failed to protect him. If the trailers are of any valid indication of what could be teased at in Batman v Superman, then this storyline has a strong chance of being translated onto the big screen.

This brings me nicely on to the last question...



Do you believe the "Jared Leto Joker" fan theory?

No.

The fan theory states that in this cinematic universe, Jared Leto's Joker is actually Jason Todd. In my opinion, it is a waste of not just the character of the Joker, but wastes the possibility of having Red Hood appear in a live action Batman movie. If you're going to do the Joker, why not just give us the Joker? I don't think Jared Leto would've taken the role unless he was actually playing the proper Joker.

Those who believe this theory do have some evidence which could point towards it possibly being true, something we've already discussed. Is it possible that the graffiti sprayed on the Robin suit was done by Jason Todd himself sometime during his transformation into the new Joker? If they go this route, I suppose that aspect of the theory does make sense.

However, the rest of it doesn't not to mention the fact you'd waste 2 iconic Batman villains and another Jason Todd centric story which would be just as impactful. The more I think about it, the less sense it makes for me. What motivation would Jason Todd have for creating Harley Quinn? Is Jason's new Joker persona based off of an old Joker who he faced off against with Batman? Does the "old Joker" even exist in this universe? Would Batman's arch nemesis in this cinematic universe not be the real deal?

For me, this theory doesn't make any sense. I don't like it and I don't think we'll see it become true.




Having Ben Affleck direct himself in a solo Batman movie makes perfect sense to me and should this become official I will be very happy. Considering what we've been teased with in the recently released trailers, I think its possible that we could see a film which takes heavy inspiration from "Under the Red Hood" with a presumed dead Jason Todd returning as Red Hood. Yes, we could well see Jared Leto's Joker and Red Hood in the movie together... just not as the same person.

Thanks for reading,
Matt

Ted 2 Movie Review

With a ranging track record of the first Ted film and A Million Ways to Die in the West, Ted 2 could've landed on either side. In actuality, it lands somewhere in the middle.

Set a couple of years after the events of Ted, Ted 2 sees the continuing adventures of "thunder buddies for life" John and his walking, talking teddy bear Ted, played and voiced by Mark Wahlberg and Seth Macfarlane respectively. After the government no longer sees Ted as a real person, the thunder buddies set off on an adventure to get Ted's civil rights back. The movies plot literally goes all over the place to the point where basic cohesion of storytelling is lost and replaced by endless celebrity cameos and 80s references. It's pretty much the closest thing we'll ever get to a live action Family Guy, which I'm ok with considering I like the show.

Reviewing comedies is always an easy thing to do. I measure a comedy as to how much I laugh in it. And to its credit, Ted 2 does have a few moments of gut-busting comedy which made my eyes water. If you're a fan of the bleak and offensive humour Seth Macfarlane is infamous for then I think you will enjoy large sections of this movie and you will laugh considerably. A few of the celebrity cameos are actually pretty funny as well, one of which is quite possibly the funniest scene of any movie to come out so far in 2015.

However at times the jokes in Ted 2 fall flat on their face. For example, there is one point in the movie where they spoof an iconic scene from Jurassic Park where if it had cut 5 or 10 seconds before it did it would've been funny. There are a few times in the film where if they had ended the scene a little bit earlier, I feel the comedic effect would have been heightened making the movie more enjoyable. There are large sections of this movie with very few laughs which seem to drag it out a little. Also, a lot of jokes seem to be recycled. A reoccurring joke in a movie can be very funny and in this movie one of them is. However, there's like 4 or 5 of them.

The third act of the movie is a direct copy of the third act of the first Ted movie only masquerading as something slightly different. When you think about it, it's exactly the same thing only this time characters seem to swap narrative positions.

But I can't give a negative review of Ted 2 because there were a lot of times in this movie where I was laughing and laughing hard. And I think it would be stupid at this point to deny that Seth Macfarlane and Mark Wahlberg have amazing on screen chemistry as both Ted and John. Also, I thought Amanda Seyfried, who replaces Mila Kunis as the female lead, was a good addition to the cast. I thought her character bought a lot more to this movie than Mila Kunis did to the first one. The 3 of them have great on screen chemistry and play off each other well as a comedic trio.

Despite a lack of basic narrative cohesion and some repetitive comedic beats, Ted 2 was still a movie that had some real moments of Seth Macfarlane's comedic genius which made me laugh out loud. There are 2 scenes in particular that I am going to remember for a long time. As a comedy sequel, Ted 2 isn't half bad. It has its issues but it offers a fair amount of laughs. If you're a fan of Seth Macfarlane its worth a watch, if you hate the man then you'll hate the film.


Rating - C+

Thanks for reading,
Matt

5 Reasons to be excited for Daredevil Season 2

Daredevil is one of the best shows on Netflix and any other broadcasting network right now. The first season told a very personal and self-contained story of lawyer Matt Murdock who takes the law into his own hands in an attempt to topple the criminal hierarchy responsible for the decay of his city Hell's Kitchen. Season 2 of Marvel's popular show promises to be even more ambitious in terms of its scope and the characters from the comic books that they will utilise.

I'm very excited for Season 2 to drop, and here are 5 potential reasons why you should also be excited:




5) Karen Page's mysterious past

On more than one occasion in Season 1 are we eluded to the mysterious dark past of Matt Murdock's friend Karen. She also didn't come out of the first season with her hands perfectly clean; remember poor old Wesley? Despite the fact she may seem soft and sweet on the outside, there's a lot going on in her head. With Deborah Ann Woll signing on to Season 2, I'd like to see the focus on her character being the events which occurred to her before we meet her in Season 1 Episode 1. Maybe the show-runners have a few surprises in store for us?



4) The Hand vs. The Chaste conflict

Episode 7 was by far the most detached episode in the first season. It gave us another look into Matt Murdock's childhood and his relationship with his similarly blind trainer, Stick. The very end of that episode sees Stick converse with a heavily scarred man, Stone. These 2 are part of a group known as the Chaste. The Chaste is a warring faction with another group known as the Hand, the very group the assassin Nobu was a part of. Due to the presence of a new character coming to Season 2 who is part of the Hand, we may well see a very interesting and bloody conflict occur with Matt Murdock stuck in the middle of it all.



3) The possible return of Wilson Fisk

Vincent D'Onofrio's dramatic and nuanced portrayal of Murdock's adversary Wilson Fisk is the standout of season 1. At the end of episode 13, we see him staring at the walls of his prison cell, which likens to the "rabbit in a snowstorm" painting from earlier episodes. Fisk isn't called the Kingpin of crime for no reason, he will escape and make his return at some point. However, this may not be in Season 2 unfortunately. But he's too big of a character to drop entirely. I'm sure the show-runners have big plans for the MCU's best villain to date in the future. I shall eagerly await his return.



2) Elektra

You knew this one was coming. Elektra to Daredevil is like what Wasp is to Ant Man, you can't have one without the other. Marvel have cast actress Elodie Yung for the role, a decision they are very confident with. Elektra is the new character I was talking about, an assassin who works for the Hand. They could make her a villain, Murdock's ally or his love interest. If they do go the latter route, this could spark an interesting conflict between Murdock and his trainer Stick, who is part of the Chaste. Either way, I can't wait to see what Yung brings to the role of a very iconic character.



1) Punisher!!

Let's face it, this is the one we're all the most excited about. Jon Bernthal of The Walking Dead, Fury and The Wolf of Wall Street has been cast as Frank Castle or the Punisher and will have a huge presence in Season 2. With Netflix as the broadcast outlet, characters like the Punisher have an opportunity to be shown in their true light, with as much violence as possible. The dynamic both Daredevil and Punisher will have will be intriguing to say the least. They're both vigilantes with violent methods, although the Punishers are a lot more extreme. Whether they go up against each other (which seems to be the craze in upcoming superhero media at the moment) or work together, the inclusion of Marvel's most unforgiving and brutal anti-hero will make Season 2 a special one. According to Marvel, "sparks will fly".



So in 2016, you can add Daredevil vs. Punisher alongside Batman vs. Superman and Captain America vs. Iron Man to the list of superhero showdowns. 

Thanks for reading,
Matt

Inside Out Movie Review

Pixar is back!

Remember the days when Pixar Animation Studios would produce consistently great movies every single year? Well, if you're like me then you'll see Inside Out as a good omen that Pixar is still the great animation studio we know and love. Inside Out tells the story of 11 year old Riley who is enduring a very difficult and emotionally confusing time of her life; she is moving from her childhood home in Minnesota to San Francisco. The story constantly switches between Riley's world and the world inside Riley's mind. There we meet our 5 main characters; Joy, Sadness, Anger, Fear and Disgust, personified emotions.

Inside Out is everything that made movies like Monsters Inc and Finding Nemo great. It's fresh, it's clever, it's immersive, but most importantly it's emotionally involving. I can't remember the last time a movie made me cry like Inside Out did, and I'm not ashamed to admit I cried on 2 separate occasions. I feel as if this movie will be able to cater to everyone. If you have or have ever felt emotions (I mean of course you have) or any memories of your childhood and growing up, you will be able to relate to this film. Kids will enjoy the adventure, parents will enjoy the nostalgia. It's a complete win-win situation.

The premise of a movie which takes place inside the consciousness of a child with the main characters as personified emotions is genius. However, a lot of movies fail to live up to the initial genius of its basic premise. Inside Out is not one of those films. It's genius in both its premise and execution, in its style and substance. I would normally give a more specific plot synopsis when reviewing movies but this time I feel as if I would be spoiling a few of the film's surprises. Just know this, everything that seems to go on in your head, is explained brilliantly.

The film is gorgeous to look at, as you would expect. Pixar has created another vibrant and colourful computer-generated animation which is an absolute pleasure to behold. But as I've said before, Inside Out is beautiful not just visually but with the themes that it tackles and its overall premise.

It's as funny as it is emotionally involving. You will be laughing consistently not just at the surface level comedy (which thankfully isn't revolved around toilet humour), you will also laugh with satisfaction at how they explain what goes on in that head of yours.

The main characters are the 5 personified emotions, which all work brilliantly with each other and all have their various moments to shine. The film spends the most time on both Joy and Sadness as they're the ones who journey around Riley's mind, and both characters really add something different to the film coming from opposite sides of the emotional spectrum. However, my single favourite character is Anger, voiced by Lewis Black. And that's another thing I have to praise Inside Out with; the voice acting. It's all done brilliantly, making these characters come to life on the big screen. Its really fun and interesting to see not just how the emotions interact with each other, but how they cause Riley to react in the real world. That relationship exists in relative autonomy, it works both ways. So sometimes, the actions Riley does in the real world changes the world inside of her mind.

It's so hard not to spoil this film for people who haven't seen it as this movie is better off experienced knowing as little as possible. I'd suggest staying away from the trailers. In case you do want to watch one, I'll leave a link at the bottom of the review.

This review is shorter than my usual ones but its a very simple film to talk about. Its enjoyable for both children and for their parents, although I feel the parents will probably connect to the film emotionally from the first viewing. It may take a couple of years before young children really start to appreciate Inside Out's themes and messages. Its gorgeously animated, the characters all stand out, it's genius premise is executed pretty much perfectly. Its paced really well, there's never a dull moment. It's funny and it will make you cry. This film completely exceeded my expectations and I'm so happy Pixar is back on top form. I love this movie, and you will too.


Rating - A

Ex Machina Movie Review (SPOILERS)

A smart, low-budget science fiction film with something profound to say about humanity? Yes please.

Being a first time directorial effort from Alex Garland, Ex Machina is a very impressive film in all departments. Ex Machina tells the story of Caleb, who wins an online contest allowing him to travel to the secluded home of Nathan, the CEO of the world's most popular search engine. Here, he is tasked to perform the "Turing test" on an artificial intelligence Ava, to see whether or not she has a human consciousness. From then on, Ex Machina has some very profound and interesting things to say about modern technology, the nature vs. nurture debate, respecting one's own creation as well as what makes us human.

Ex Machina is a slow burning movie with tension which develops from the outset. Alex Garland allowed the tension to develop so naturally via his assured direction. It is for sure a movie with a slow pace, which works most of the time. It is slowly paced in the sense that while most scenes lead to an increase in tension or a quiet moment of character development, sometimes it takes a while to get there. There are a few scenes where it doesn't really amount to anything, which hurt the movie in terms of its pacing. But for the most part, I had a great time with Ex Machina. I like movies which make you think as an audience member, which is the biggest compliment I can give to any film.

I loved the way Garland directed this movie and most specificially how he utilised the location. Despite being located in beautiful countryside with expansive fields and beautiful flowing waterfalls, Nathan's house still feels incredibly cold, sterile and isolated.

However, Ex Machina is also really good because of its characters and the actors chosen to play them. Domnhall Gleeson played Caleb really well. Caleb, as a character, really hit the balance between being smart and intelligent alongside being socially awkward and emotionally confused. His performance was very convincing, and while his character's development is handled in a very obvious way, it still worked for the film. You feel as if Caleb actually develops as a person as the film goes on, and by the end of the film you will really care about him considering how much you know about him.

The best character in the movie was by far Oscar Isaac's Nathan simply because he was so hard to read. He's smart, eccentric, direct, he likes to drink, he likes to exercise, he's manipulative and at times aggressive. He is all of those things at once, like a real human being. That's what I liked about Ex Machina so much; the complexity of the characters. They felt like real human beings to me and that's down to the actors portrayal plus the attention to detail given in the script which allowed us audience members to latch on to characters who were very well fleshed out.

I can't finish the review without talking about Alicia Vikander, who played the AI Ava. While it would've been easy for her to act like a typical robot, Alicia added some very human perks to her performance. As a result, you as an audience member can constantly change you mind about whether or not Ava could pass as a human being.

The acting performances are all great as are the characters and Alex Garland's tension-geared direction. At times it has a slow pace, but for the majority of the time Ex Machina is an intriguing sci-fi which engages you and makes you think about the very nature of humanity. I liked the twist at the end of the film, but thought the very end was a little bit predictable. To talk about this, I will need to dive into some spoilers. You have been warned.



-----------------------------------------EX MACHINA SPOILERS-----------------------------------------------



It turns out that Caleb never won a competition, he was selected purposefully by Nathan. The role Caleb was supposed to play was never to perform a Turing test on Ava, in fact Caleb was the variable that was being experimented on. Nathan wanted to see if Ava could manipulate Caleb for her own self interests, by making Caleb want to help her escape. This reveal was a fantastic plot twist which made perfect sense in accordance to the rest of the film. It was an effective twist.

We the find out that Caleb had reprogrammed the security systems the night before meaning Ava was able to escape. Teaming up with Kyoko (who turned out to be an AI, which I was a fan of as I'm glad her character wasn't simply a loose end of the plot), Ava kills Nathan with no remorse or guilt. After fully dressing herself and looking like a human, she leaves Nathan's house with Caleb trapped inside, again with no guilt or remorse. For Caleb, his character arc ended in tragedy. Ava had been manipulating with his emotions from the very beginning and Caleb had become attached emotionally to Ava, like a real human being. Ava had simply been using Caleb as a means of escape.

Where Nathan ultimately failed was that he didn't respect the intelligence of his own creation, which led to his demise. Ava then boards the helicopter and the last shot sees her walk amongst other human beings in a public place. This shot was great as it focused only on Ava's and other people's shadows, metaphorically suggesting that Ava does in fact possess a human consciousness like those around her. But, this finale was quite a predictable one.

However there is still some ambiguity with the very end. In the film, Nathan and Caleb are discussing how there is a difference between a machine pretending to have human emotion and a machine which actually does possess these qualities. We don't know if this is the case with Ava. We know she spends the film trying to emotionally connect with Caleb so she can use him to aid her escape. But when she leaves, she leaves Caleb behind to die feeling no guilt or remorse. Were those feelings real? We are left to ponder the answer.



----------------------------------------END OF EX MACHINA SPOILERS-------------------------------------



Ex Machina is definitely a film to watch if you want something engaging and immersive. I had a great time watching it.


Rating - B+

Thanks for reading,
Matt

Ant Man - The Quantum Realm Theory

Marvel's latest proved to be another success at the box office. Despite knowingly embracing it's smaller scope, this new theory suggests that something we see in the third act of the movie may be very important as we move into Phase 3. Needless to say, this an official SPOILER WARNING. If you haven't seen Ant Man, continue at your own risk...

In the third act of Ant Man, in order to defeat Cross and the Yellowjacket suit, Scott needs to shrink down to subatomic level, and when he does he reaches what the movie dubs "The Quantum Realm". Here, the conditions of both time and space become completely irrelevant as Scott shrinks down to subatomic size. Scott recalibrates the Ant Man suit and is able to escape, giving Hank hope that his wife Janet can be retrieved from the Quantum Realm at some point.

So, how will the Quantum Realm (or the Microverse as it is dubbed in the comics) become prevalent in Phase 3? What movies should we expect to see it in?



Doctor Strange

It is possible that the Quantum Realm is an indication of what to expect within 2016's Doctor Strange, which will be directed by Scott Derrickson with Benedict Cumberbatch assuming the titular role.

It is clear that this Quantum Realm, accessible by shrinking to subatomic size, is another dimension. Doctor Strange is set to dive head first into inter-dimensional travel and magic for the first time in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. It is possible that the Sorcerer Supreme could in fact visit the Quantum Realm at some stage. Could it be that the metaphysical dimension in which Scott Lang shrunk down into is the source of the Sorcerer's power? I mean, magic itself hasn't been explained in the MCU yet, and the Quantum Realm could be a suitable explanation as to how Doc Strange can harness his magical powers.



Avengers: Infinity War

Bare with me on his one, because this is some trippy-ass shit. For the eagle-eyed of you, you may have seen a hint at Marvel's most powerful character yet; Eternity.

In the Marvel universe, we know that before the universe's creation there were 6 singularities. After the "Big Bang" scale event, the singularities were concentrated into 6 concentrated ingots; the Infinity Stones. We know Thanos is actively seeking these 6 stones from the post credits scene of Avengers: Age of Ultron as he wishes to harness the power of the completed Infinity Gauntlet and essentially become God.

But we also know that he is doing it to please one of the 4 Cosmic Entities, Death. Like Death, Eternity is a Cosmic Entity, a personified force of the universe. If that really was Eternity shown in the Quantum Realm, then maybe Ant Man holds the key to defeating Thanos. Maybe Ant Man shrinks down to the Quantum Realm in order to enlist the help of Eternity. If these Cosmic Entities do play a pivotal role in Infinity War I could see this theory realistically coming to fruition. If Thanos has the power of the completed Infinity Gauntlet, then the Avengers may need to enlist the help of a being which is more powerful than Thanos. And the Quantum Realm may hold the answer.


Regardless of whether these theories are correct or not, we know we are in for some trippy cosmic shit in Doctor Strange and Infinity War. The Marvel Cinematic Universe grows stronger and stronger, and similarly gets weirder and weirder.

Thanks for reading,
Matt

It Follows Movie Review

For those of you that don't know, I rarely review horror movies simply because I hate the conventional modern day horror film, I can't stand it's endless clichés and idiotic characters. But I was recommended It Follows as it was something slightly different, so I gave it a watch...

Directed by David Robert Mitchell, It Follows is a knowingly artsy and unconventional horror film telling the tale of 21 year old Jay. After having sex with a boy she likes, she finds out that he has passed on to her a curse whereby an "STDemon" follows her everywhere she goes. From then on, It Follows maintains a consistent medium level of slow burning tension. To that end, It Follows never has a moment really to stop and cool down as this demon will stalk Jay wherever she goes.

I've heard from critics that It Follows is one of the scariest movies they have ever seen. I saw the movie yesterday evening and slept on it pretty well actually. The biggest complaint I have with It Follows is that it is never really all that terrifying. Yes, the film consistently maintains a good level of suspense and tension throughout but unlike The Babadook (my favourite horror movie of all time) it didn't bother me or give me trouble sleeping at all.

It's still a gorgeous looking movie that was directed fantastically by David Robert Mitchell. The retro 1980s electronic score gave the movie almost a "Halloween" vibe, made even more evident by the homages Mitchell makes to the 1978 horror classic. This musical score combined with some breath-taking editing and cinematography were the driving force behind keeping the movie's tension at such an impressive consistency. Mitchell utilises patient editing techniques, lingering steady shots and 360 degree tracking shots all in a good variety. There was shot for instance which blew my mind as somebody who admires filmmaking. The shot tracks around the full 360 degrees clockwise; you start off by seeing Jay and one of her friends enter a library before panning around to the outside of the school where you see "It" is just slowly walking towards her.

Sometimes the camera will breeze past "It" without obviously focusing on "It", which I think escalated the tension even more as sometimes you have to think twice before you know whether or not a person really is "It". Sometimes you simply don't know. I was a big fan of how It Follows wasn't edited and shot in such an obvious way that most horror movies are. I only counted 2 false jump scares, which is a step in the right direction I feel for horror movies. I can bang on for days about how much I hate false jump scares in movies and thankfully It Follows didn't rely on them to create fear and tension.

I like all of the acting performances, particularly from Maika Monroe who played protagonist Jay. She convincingly conveyed the whole roster of varying emotions required, and was extra convincing in the scenes where she had to act up outright fear and confusion. I also liked how the characters didn't fit horror movie stereotypes, most notably Jay was a likeable, relatable and somewhat innocent girl. In some horror films, the main girl is an absolute slut and you want her to die. In It Follows, you like the character of Jay and you don't want "It" to get her.

To go on top of my initial complaint about It Follows not really being all that scary, I have 2 other major issues which detracted by enjoyment of the film. The first of which concerned the rules of "It". I understand that if "It" kills you, then "It" will start to re-follow the person who gave it to you and so on. I was just confused sometimes at the laws "It" had when interacting with the physical world. If you couldn't see "It", you would still be able to see how "It" could change things in the real world. For example, "It" can push people through the air and can throw objects. I feel as if some of these story elements could've been tightened up a little more, which would've made It Follows more engaging for me.

Also, the 2 boys in the story come across as predictable plot devices in the sense that you know exactly what purpose both of them will have as well as the fate which will eventually befall them. It does kind of spoil some of the surprises if you really think about it for too long, and as I said It Follows does sometimes fall into the category of being predictable.

Despite not scaring me that much, I was a huge fan of the consistent level of suspense Mitchell was able to create and sustain throughout the full runtime. It Follows boasts some excellent directing, cinematography and music, all of which combine to create a consistent atmosphere of dread and inevitability. For my own personal taste, I feel as if a few plot and character elements could have been changed slightly to make it a more enjoyable horror film. But It Follows has my respect as it didn't feel it had to adhere to modern day horror movie conventions. Originality in the horror genre is hard to come by, but it something you will find should you give It Follows a chance.


Rating -  B-

Thanks for reading,
Matt

Ant Man SPOILER Discussion

This is an official HEAVY SPOILER WARNING for Ant Man. If you have not seen the film, then please do not read any further. If you have, then please feel free to continue. You have been warned, now let's dive into Ant Man, spoilers galore!

If you haven't already, please take a look at my spoiler free review of Ant Man where you'll find out that I had an enjoyable time watching Marvel's latest effort. I'll also link you to an article I wrote last summer entitled "5 reasons why Ant Man could suck". It's quite a funny read considering how well the final edit of the film turned out.


Spoiler free review: http://movieswithmattharrison.blogspot.co.uk/2015/07/ant-man-movie-review.html


5 reasons why Ant Man could suck: http://movieswithmattharrison.blogspot.co.uk/2014/07/5-reasons-why-ant-man-could-suck.html




----------------------------------FINAL SPOILER WARNING FOR ANT MAN------------------------------




Ant Man while being the final entry into Marvel's Phase 2 is really the bridge between the events of Age of Ultron and next summer's Captain America: Civil War. If Marvel was trying to tell us anything about the current state of their shared universe it's that anyone can be a hero and join the ranks of the Avengers. You don't need super soldier serum or an infinity stone to be an Avenger which Scott Lang proves throughout the film. I can't wait to see him appear in Civil War.

The opening scene was great in that it slipped Ant Man straight into the MCU timeline as if it had been there from the very beginning. In 1989, a younger Hank Pym meets with Howard Stark, Peggy Carter and new character Mitch Carson in an unfinished Triskellion discussing Pym's revolutionary particle. Here we learn the distrust Hank has with SHIELD, he vows never to let his Pym Particle fall into anyone else's hands. I think it did a nice job of filing in the timeline as in the MCU currently, there is a bit of a gap between the 40s/50s and early 2000s.

Then we meet Scott Lang who has just been released from prison. Despite his criminal past of robbery.... sorry I meant burglary... Scott is actually a decent man, a relatable character. His main motivation for what he does in the film is his daughter Cassie. I did really enjoy their relationship, I think it did a good job at grounding the film emotionally.

Later on in the film, Scott performs a heist on Hank Pym's house. Here we get to see Scott the thief in action, and he is pretty smart when it comes to breaking into places and stealing shit. For example, to bust through a titanium door he freezes liquid nitrogen within it so it busts straight open. Despite successfully passing the heist trials, all he finds is a suit, and here the movie really kicks into gear. We find out that the entire heist had been set up and allowed to occur by Hank Pym, the former Ant Man. Within Scott Hank sees a son he never had, and believes that he is the one he needs.

I loved the scenes where Scott was training to be the Ant Man. Not only did he have to learn when and where to shrink down or up, but he also had to learn how to control the ants. I also bought into the explanations the movie offered concerning the Ant Man technology. The Pym Particle serum works by decreasing the distance between atoms and Scott can control ants using electromagnetic waves. Considering this universe showcases a walking tree and a talking raccoon, I easily bought into it. I also loved how they showcased how Scott can use different ants for different tasks; some ants are useful for flying on, others are useful to use as bridges and other structures. You really feel that as his training progresses, Scott really earns his wings (pun intended) as a superhero. Plus, any scene where he shrinks down to size is handled beautifully and is brilliant to watch.

I was also surprised not just how well the movie tied into things like SHIELD, but also the modern day Avengers. One of my favourite lines came from Hank after Scott asks why they don't just call the Avengers to break into Pym Tech to steal Cross' formula, to which Hank replies "they're too busy dropping cities out of the sky". The events of Sokovia are also referenced in a newspaper headline stating whether or not the Avengers are to blame. It is clear that the events of Ant Man occur after Age of Ultron and during the beginning of Civil War, which we'll come to later.

The scene where Scott learns that the SHIELD facility in upstate New York he has to hit is actually the new Avengers facility was an excellent reveal. And seeing Falcon and Ant Man fight each other was a well handled scene on both an action and a comedic standpoint. Again, this was another place whereby Ant Man tied in so organically with the MCU, plus it gave us a sweet fan service scene which I'm always down with.

As soon as Hank spoke about how if you don't regulate the Ant Man technology, you will forever shrink to subatomic size until you reach the Quantum Realm, I just knew that was what happened to Janet, Hank's wife and Hope's mother, the former Wasp. That reveal was handled well I thought and really gave emotional depth to the relationship between Hank and his daughter, both of which were tormented heavily by Janet's death. We also get a flashback scene of Janet's death whereby her and Hank are trying to disarm a Soviet missile and in order to do so, Janet shrinks into the Quantum Realm. It is also important to note that Janet is not actually dead, just existing in a micro realm somewhere. She can probably be bought back, which gives Hank a flicker of hope at the end of the film.

The final heist was a good scene. Darren Cross completes his version of the Pym Particle and you learn that Mitch Carson from the start of the movie is actually a representative of HYDRA. Again, another organic tie in. I think its also worth mentioning that Pym Tech is blown up in the process of the heist as well, leading onto the final confrontation between Lang and Cross. I did enjoy the final fight scene of the film whereby Scott and Cross in the Yellowjacket suit were fighting in Scott's daughter's bedroom. It did make me laugh when the Thomas the Tank Engine grew to 10 times its size and basically ripped off the wall. The shot which revealed Yellowjacket was an excellent shot done facing upwards from Scott Lang's viewpoint, but you could've easily predicted that the final fight would've involved Lang's daughter. Nevertheless, Cross is defeated, but to do so Scott must shrink down into the Quantum Realm in order to destroy the Yellowjacket suit.

That scene was visually impressive and full credit goes to the special effects team for pulling that off. Scott the finds a way to reverse the suit's effect and grows back to normal size. I really enjoyed the addition of the Quantum Realm in the MCU, and I think it poses interesting opportunities for future films particularly if they decide to bring back characters like Cross or Janet van Dyne.

In the film's final scene we learn that the Falcon is looking for Ant Man, which also links in with the post credits scene. Also, if you listen carefully Luis mentions something along the lines of "we got someone who jumps, we got someone who swings, we got someone who climbs up walls". This is our first MCU reference for Spiderman. Hype.



Mid credits scene

This scene sees Hank take Hope down to a secret room in his basement. Here, he unveils to her the first prototype of the "Wasp" suit he and Janet were working on. He says that now he is going to pass it on to her, to which she replies "about damn time".

I don't think we'll see her in Civil War, but that still isn't that unlikely. I think we will be seeing Evangeline Lilly as Wasp in Avengers Infinity War part 1, possibly in other Marvel movies if they decide they want to cross over. There were many questions as to whether or not Lilly would in fact become Wasp, and now those questions are put to bed.




Post credits scene

Located in a garage or basement somewhere, Cap and Falcon have finally found the estranged Bucky Barnes, or the Winter Soldier, in a dishevelled and confused state. Bucky is evidently stuck in some sort of vice from which he can't get out of. When Cap suggests to call Tony, Sam replies that even if he did believe them "the accords" wouldn't let him. Sam says he knows a guy.

To me, this means that this scene occurs right before the very end of Ant Man when Scott finds out that Falcon is looking for him. It seems to suggest that Ant Man's role in Civil War to start with is to try and help Bucky get out of the vice he is trapped in. This may also suggest that Ant Man may be joining Cap's side for Civil War.

What this scene also suggests is that the rift between Stark and Rogers has been growing ever since the end of Age of Ultron, and "the accords" are in fact the legislations placed by the government which sees all with superhuman abilities report to the government. It seems like Cap and Falcon have almost gone rogue from the rest of the Avengers in an effort to help Bucky. It poses some very interesting questions concerning Civil War, but seems to suggest that Bucky will have a big role.

The text "Ant Man will return" appears on screen, confirming His appearance in Civil War.



---------------------------------------END OF ANT MAN SPOILERS-------------------------------------------


Thanks for reading,
Matt

Ant Man Movie Review

Phase 2 has come to an end, and hasn't done so during a large scale explosion extravaganza, rather during a knowingly small scale heist film surrounding one of the Avenger's founding members in the comics.

Ant Man is directed by Peyton Reed and is the 12th instalment of the Marvel Cinematic Universe and the final film of its successful second phase. The film follows ex-con Scott Lang who is recruited by former superhero Hank Pym to become the new "Ant Man", a soldier who wears a suit with extraordinary capabilities of shrinking down to the size of an insect. Lang is trained by Pym and Pym's daughter Hope van Dyne in how to utilise the suit so they can pull off a daring heist to save the world. Pym's company Pym Technologies has been taken over by Pym's protégé Darren Cross, who wishes to release to the world the Yellowjacket suit. Pym, fearful of this technology falling into the wrong hands, coordinates this heist in an effort to stop him.

Before I continue with my review, I'd like to link you to an article I wrote last summer. It's titled "5 reasons why Ant-Man could suck" and was written during the film's troubled pre production. I must extend an apology to Ant-Man as my initial pessimism turned out to be completely unwarranted:



Link to the article - http://movieswithmattharrison.blogspot.co.uk/2014/07/5-reasons-why-ant-man-could-suck.html



Ant Man isn't just a heist movie set in Marvel's interconnected movie universe, but also acts as a "passing on the torch" film whereby former superhero Hank Pym is passing on the suit he wore for years and years onto a younger man. The movie, much like during its marketing campaign, excels when it acknowledges its small size. In comparison to Age of Ultron whereby an AI tried to wipe out humanity, Ant Man is exceptionally small in scale. This film suggests that sometimes in order to solve problems you need a little guy to do it. Sometimes, the Avengers can't always do the job. If you're a fan of the MCU like I am, you'll also appreciate the many references the film slips in there, some more obvious than others. Ant Man slips into the MCU seamlessly and is a very welcome addition.

Like the other Phase 2 movies, Ant Man is consistently funny throughout its 117 minute run time with laughs evenly spaced out. There was never really a moment where I was gut busting, but every moment I should've been laughing I was. A lot of the humour I think transmits from the acting performances given by the main cast, but I have to admit that the single funniest person on screen was Michael Pena, who played Luis. Talk about comedic timing and line delivery, his execution was spot on.

The opening half an hour of the film for me structurally was kind of choppy. The film had to give you a lot of background information before the Ant Man stuff really started to happen, which makes sense considering how this is a whole new area the MCU hasn't touched upon yet. For me, the film wasn't really that captivating from the very start. However, as soon as you see the Ant Man suit for the first time the film really kicks into gear.

Paul Rudd completely knocks it out of the park as our main hero Scott Lang. I loved his comedic timing, he was likeable and relatable due to the relationship he had with his daughter and as the film progressed, you really felt as if he was earning the hero label. As his training with Hank and Hope continues and he begins to master how to effectively utilise the Pym particle technology, you feel as if he has really worked hard for it.

Michael Douglas and Evangeline Lilly were both equally great as Hank Pym and Hope van Dyne respectively. Their characters I thought gave the film some good character depth and emotional resonance. Hank obviously feels guilt and remorse concerning the death of his wife and Hope's mother Janet, and Hope feels distant from her father who would never tell her the truth of her mother's demise. Despite the fact that Scott Lang's relationship with his daughter was the main focus of human relationships and interaction within the film, the relationship between Hank and Hope was played out masterfully. I give credit to both Douglas and Lilly for making that happen.

The action sequences all play out really well. The musical score is good and the CGI is always convincing. I never felt as if the ants were computer generated, they all looked real to me. Ant Man really succeeds during these action sequences which are a tonne of fun. To see Ant Man jump at someone, shrink down to size, dodge a bullet, crawl up a gun, toss a guy over his neck with his tie before turning to normal size is undoubtedly cool. But I was a big fan of the filmmaking techniques the utilised when Scott shrank down. The camera would blur out the background and sharply focus on Ant Man, which made the effect of shrinking down to the size of an insect a really cool and entertaining thing to watch occur on screen.

In terms of issues I have with the film along with its rocky start, I think at Peyton Reed's direction could have been more personalised and less safe. It is by far Marvel's most conventional movie so far. I just wish Reed would've added more of his own personal style to the way Ant Man was directed. I still think Reed did a good job with the film and he deserves a lot of credit, but his name won't be put up next to Joss Whedon, James Gunn, Jon Favreau or the Russo brothers.

My biggest complaint though is the character of Darren Cross, played by Corey Stoll. I feel like at times Stoll was guilty of over acting a tiny bit. Also, as a villain Cross (who later wears the Yellowjacket suit) was a generic evil guy who wanted generic things like money. They do try and give him a small back story as well as a small explanation as to why he may be turning crazy, but I didn't buy into it at all. He was functional in the action sequences, but had no charisma and wasn't all that menacing.

Considering how worried I was with this film this time a year ago, I have to say that Ant Man has proved me wrong and will turn out to be another success for Marvel Studios. Its the most formulaic Marvel film to date, but if the formula works and I had fun with the film then why change it? I had lots of fun watching Ant Man, and I think its worth seeing in theatres.



Rating - B

I will be doing a spoiler review for Ant Man after this one posts so please look out for that. Also, stick around for 2 scenes; one during the credits and one afterwards. And please listen very carefully just before the credits start to role for an awesome Easter egg you will definitely appreciate.


Thanks for reading,
Matt

5 Hilarious Moments from the Deadpool Comic Con Trailer

Out of the many comic book movies set to come out in 2016, Deadpool is the one which has the safest chance of being awesome, indicated by a gut busting teaser trailer given to us at Comic Con.

When Wade Wilson is diagnosed with terminal cancer in all of his internal organs, an ominous military figure offers him a cure, by initiating him into the Weapon X programme. This turns him into the infamous "Merc with a mouth", one of Marvel's most iconic comic book characters and perhaps the most popular amongst the fans.

If one thing is clear from the clearly intentioned Red Band Comic Con trailer it is that the Deadpool movie we have all wanted for years has more than likely hit the mark and hit it big time. Never before have we seen a comic book movie in which the main character knows he is in a film and is able to break the 4th wall between himself and the audience. It'll be the most interactive comic book movie ever made, and from the trailer it looks like it is the definition of fan service.

5 moments in particular really stood out, so I'd thought I'd count them down and share them with you:



5) Firing shots at Green Lantern

"We can make you into a superhero". "Just make sure my suit isn't green... or animated". It is no secret that 2011's Green Lantern did not go down with the fans, and for Ryan Reynolds to directly address that in the trailer was fantastic to see.



4) Seeing the Test Footage again

The only reason this movie is being made was due to the insanely positive reaction of the Internet when the Deadpool test footage was released at last years comic con. The overwhelming support from fans bent the arm of the studio, and our dream has now become a reality. It also showcases how Deadpool can really kick ass, and also indicates the very "in your face", violent action style director Tim Miller has adopted. I'm happy it has made it into the film.



3) The coolest name ever

Its always nice to see X-Men characters cross over into other films. In Deadpool, we will be seeing Colossus, or as Deadpool calls him "a big chrome cocklicker" or something along those lines. We also meet Colossus' protégé Negasonic Teenage Warhead. As soon as she said that, we all thought "that is the coolest name ever". Sure enough, Deadpool said that exact thing out loud. That's why I think Deadpool is going to be so popular amongst movie goers. He's ridiculously charismatic, but he also says exactly what you're thinking as an audience member, exactly like in the comics. If that doesn't make him relatable I don't know what does.



2) The Freddie Kruger comment

"You look like Freddie Kruger face-fucked a topographical map of Utah". I've got nothing else, that is funny shit.



1) The final line

What does Deadpool say after laying waste to bad guys? "I'm touching myself tonight". Again, I have no words. This was the moment when any shred of doubt I had concerning this film went away. This is exactly what a Deadpool movie should be like.



I shall only say it one more time, this movie looks like they've got it spot on. Ryan Reynolds as Deadpool, Tim Miller's handling of the action, the supporting cast, the ridiculously crude humour looks all spot on. I've only seen one trailer, but I am convinced that they've got it right. And it wouldn't have been possible if it wasn't for the reaction to the test footage released this time last year. So fanboys, give yourself a pat on the back. You guys made this movie happen.


Thanks for reading,
Matt

Suicide Squad Comic Con Trailer Review

The second trailer that exhibits DC's intentions of creating a cohesive cinematic universe. This time, it's the bad guys who have the limelight.

Well if the marketing team behind this trailer wanted to give off a crazed insanity vibe, then they accomplished their goal with flying colours. Never before have we seen a comic book movie where the focus shifts on to the bad guys, the evil people with maniacal and treacherous intentions. The droning musical score with the high pitched singing perfectly encapsulated what the film is going to be. It is almost fun in the most sadistic way possible.

DC are trying to build a cohesive movie universe and we've seen already that Batman v Superman is directly following on from the events of Man of Steel. What people may not know is that the events of Suicide Squad (or at least some of the major characters) will link into the past of Ben Affleck's Batman and Man of Steel in some cases. Because of how quickly they have to build their universe, I believe characters like Amanda Waller (and others like Lex Luthor) will be used as the connective tissue between the films. It could even be the case that Amanda Waller is mentioned in Batman v Superman, or maybe that heroes like Aquaman and the Flash are given nods to. In any case, I am loving the way it appears that these films are linking into each other.

Amanda Waller's narration at the start of the trailer pretty much confirms how the Suicide Squad has led on from Man of Steel. She says she has assembled a team of "the worst of the worst" and that she has "put them in a hole and through away the hole". What I took the most away from her opening speech was the phrase "maybe Superman was some kind of beacon for them to creep back from the shadows".  It suggests that before Superman these meta-humans with extra terrestrial abilities were around before being stopped or incarcerated. Now that a Kryptonian walks the Earth and the entire world knows about it, the creeps are coming out of their caves.

The shining light of this particular trailer is Margot Robbie as Harley Quinn, the mentally tortured doctor who the Joker meddled with to the point of insanity. This role was perfectly fan-cast in my opinion. She has the look down, but also completely sells the mentally damaged beyond repair side of a character which could turn out to be the best thing about the entire film... I'm serious. We see her hanging upside down from her cell, pretending to use her baseball bat as a gun as well as licking her prison cell bars. Margot Robbie plays insane pretty well, and what ever she is doing I don't want her to stop.

We see the rest of the Suicide Squad and to me, the other member which really stood out was Killer Croc. Deadshot did look pretty sweet in his full costume and Katana and Enchantress featured well when they were on screen, but to me Killer Croc really made me happy when I looked at him. He isn't as large as he is in the comics but I'm completely Ok with that. His face looks like it is mainly prosthetic make up with some CG enhancements, and it looks convincing as anything.

We also get another glimpse of Batman in this trailer. This time, he's riding on top of what looks like a Joker-themed Lamborghini with Harley Quinn either driving it or in the passenger seat. I said in my review for the Batman v Superman Comic Con trailer that in this universe Batman and the Joker have history, to the point where he has most likely already killed Jason Todd. I think this scene is a flashback told from Harley Quinn's perspective, how she has been involved with both Batman and the Joker. Many people thought that the final scene in the trailer could have been the Joker torturing Jason Todd, I strongly believe otherwise that it is actually Harley Quinn (or Doctor Harleen Quinzel) on the wrong end of the Joker's insanity. But if the Jason Todd and Under the Red Hood rumours are true then expect to see that mentioned within the film as a springboard onto the Ben Affleck directed solo Batman flick.

And finally, Jared Leto's Joker is exactly what I thought he should be... terrifying. Heath Ledger's performance as the Joker in 2008's The Dark Knight is my favourite acting performance ever, but it wasn't simply stunning due to the fact that it was purely crazy. Jared Leto's interpretation of the Joker might be the craziest one we have seen so far. Just by looking into his eyes you can see it and it honestly makes me kind of afraid. If it wasn't clear before it is now, the Joker is probably the threat which forces Amanda Waller to assemble Task Force X.

As a fan of DC comics I'm happy to see how they're trying to tie everything together and they're doing it in their own way. While they may never make up the ground on Marvel, considering their circumstances I think they're going about things differently with the intention of creating something unique. I can't wait to see the Joker, to see Margot Robbie as Harley Quinn, I can't wait to see David Ayer bring his action style to the forefront and I am so excited to see how it ties into Man of Steel, Batman vs. Superman, a solo Batman film and the Justice League Part 1.

The wait isn't going to kill me, it's just going to hurt me. Really, really bad.


Thanks for reading,
Matt

Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice Comic Con Trailer Review

DC is going all out in 2016, showcased by another terrific Batman v Superman teaser.

A second trailer for Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice has hit the web and naturally it gives me a lot to speculate and get excited about. One of the biggest complaints people have concerning Man of Steel was the destruction of Metropolis caused by Superman fighting General Zod whereby buildings were toppling over and thousands of innocents were being crushed by the falling debris. People hated how that seemed to have no repercussions for Superman during the film's conclusion. Now those fears can be put to rest as it seems the whole Batman vs. Superman conflict is mainly because of that event. This film seems like it flows so naturally from Man of Steel, and gives us both sides of the argument, the key ingredient necessary when it comes to creating tension between characters in movies.

We learn that both Gotham and Metropolis are geographically within close proximity of each other, and that Gotham was also impacted by the destruction caused by Superman and Zod. We learn that when that fight was going on, Bruce Wayne was there. We see a previously shown event from the perspective of someone on the ground. Ben Affleck's Batman has been described as a veteran, a tired, withered and seasoned soul who has years and years of crime fighting experience. What I am speculating is that during the events of Man of Steel, Bruce had given up being the Batman. However, this event was the trigger cause which has seen him come back into the field.

This trailer really dives into the psyche of Batman and the failure he must feel. He was there during the destruction of Metropolis and failed to save the innocents that died. This is shown to us by a newspaper headline smeared in red writing "YOU LET YOUR FAMILY DIE". We also get a glimpse and what I think is Jason Todd's Robin suit with "HAHAH JOKES ON YOU BATMAN" written on it as well, something Batman keeps as a reminder of his failure to save the former Robin from the Joker. The first piece of writing I think was written by Jason Todd himself (Red Hood) and the second by Jared Leto's Joker. There have been rumours that Ben Affleck will co-write and direct a solo Batman movie which many believe will take inspiration from Under the Red Hood. It is also speculated heavily that in this universe, the Joker has already killed Jason Todd. These small Easter eggs act not only as seeds for future films, but as other factors which torment and torture Batman's conscience, and push him over the edge.

For Bruce Wayne, Superman is simply the singular target for his rage. But in this trailer, we see more of the side of Team Superman. For example, we see that Clark Kent (Superman's alter ego), much like Bruce Wayne, hates the superhero persona of the other. We know Bruce sees Superman as an alien who has caused the death and destruction to things he holds close. We also know that Clark sees Batman has having a "one man reign of terror" over Gotham; he doesn't agree with the vigilante way of combatting evil. We also get to see via narrations by Diane Lane and Amy Adams what Superman means to people around the world, a symbol of hope. Who else will save them during natural disasters? Superman is all some people have in the world. It is showing us that there is division between how people view Superman but finally shows us how he positively impacts people's lives.

Lex Luthor also appears prominently in the trailer. I am still not on board with Jesse Eisenberg playing the character as for what I've seen so far, this isn't the Lex I wanted to see. I understand what they're going for but for me I'd rather see them take the character in another direction. I would've cast Mark Strong personally. We can't change that now though. What we can do is read into how Lex factors in to everything. Lex is very much in the anti-Superman camp, he hates him for what he stands for. We see him coercing with the Senator (played by Holly Hunter) and also in a scene with Superman whereby Kal El is kneeling before him for some reason. I loved the presence of Kryptonite in this trailer. We see it as a glowing green rock which Lex Luthor has in his possession.

The thing I didn't expect to see was General Zod's body being unzipped from a body bag. The theory going round the Internet is that Lex Luthor creates Doomsday using General Zod's body. My own prediction is he doesn't create Doomsday. However, I believe that Lex will fashion Kryptonite from Zod's body and use that against Superman. Maybe Bruce Wayne and Lex work together? Maybe Batman breaks into Lexcorp and retrieves it for himself? It is all speculation at this point.

I was happy with Wonder Woman's presence in the trailer though. Granted, she had no lines of dialogue given, but she still kicked ass. That one scene where she uses her bracelets to create that huge explosion was undeniably cool. When I saw her in costume, I bought into Gal Gadot has Wonder Woman, I saw it and liked what I saw. I just hope her acting is good enough for the character, but I am a little more optimistic than I was before.

I can't not talk about Jeremy Irons as Alfred. Despite having perfection (Michael Caine) to live up to, I must say this take on Alfred looks incredibly different to anything I thought I would ever see. He looks like he could kick some ass himself. But for me what stood out was Alfred's role in the trailer as Bruce Wayne's conscience. We know that Bruce is blinded by rage due to his own past failures and the recklessness of Superman while fighting Zod, and we see Alfred act as his guardian angel. He repeats his speech about how "rage can turn good men cruel", but also straight up says to Bruce "He is not our enemy", referring to Superman.

Any scene where Batman and Superman are squaring off with each other is brilliant and it looks like it could have genuinely transitioned from the pages of a comic book. Although the money shot of this trailer is by far my favourite part of all. We see Superman slowly walking towards a wrecked Batmobile, we see him rip off the top and stare down angrily at the Dark Knight. The Batman rises slowly from his seat and returns the stare. Anyone else would be cowering in their own faeces if Superman was that pissed off with them... not Batman. He simply gives him the "you son of a bitch" look before the trailer ends.

Obviously I'm beyond excited to see Batman and Superman go head to head, but also to see how it ties into the Suicide Squad, a solo Batman flick as well as the first part of the Justice League. Speaking of the Suicide Squad, expect another trailer review for that coming shortly.


Thanks for reading,
Matt

Terminator Genisys Movie Review

 

The X-Men Days of Future Past of Terminator movies, except this one doesn't make any sense at all.

 

Directed by Alan Taylor, Terminator Genisys is the fifth instalment of the Terminator franchise. Terminator 1 is considered amongst fans as a sci-fi masterpiece but also a chilling science fiction horror flick, and the second is considered by many (including myself) as one of the greatest action movies to grace the silver screen. Establishing itself as a franchise built upon great foundations, over time the franchise has decayed with disappointing 3rd, 4th and 5th instalments. The franchises has crumbled under its own weight of expectation and for the third time since 2003 we have been given a Terminator film which pales in comparison to the first 2.

The film takes place in an alternate timeline whereby when Kyle Reese was sent back to 1984 to protect John Connor's mother Sarah Connor from a machine which was sent back to kill her, John Connor is apprehended somewhat by Skynet. An alternate reality creates itself whereby when Reese arrives in the 80s, Sarah Connor is no longer the terrified waitress but the badass she becomes in T2 Judgement Day. This time, Judgement Day doesn't occur on August 29th 1997, but 20 years later. Having arrived there, both Reese, Sarah Connor and "Pops" (played by Arnold Schwarzenegger himself) find out that John Connor has become a Terminator and his mission is to ensure an app called "Genisys" is released. This app links together every one of your electronic devices and would have even been used by the military, which in turn would've lead to the nuclear fallout which causes Judgement Day to occur.

Right off the bat, the biggest complaint I have with Terminator Genisys is the execution of its plot. When you deal with time travel and alternate realities in movies, it can get confusing pretty quick, which it does in Terminator Genisys. The plot is so unnecessarily complicated and convoluted to the point where the script gains so many plot holes that the film collapses in on itself. It is not difficult to follow until a certain point whereby things stop making sense at all. Not only that, there are so many unanswered questions the film fails to address. For example, who sent the Terminator back to Sarah Connor when she was a child? This is left unanswered unconvincingly by the script.

What also annoyed me so much about this film were the people in charge of marketing and creating the posters and the trailers. I'm going to spoil some parts of the film now but to be honest, if you've seen the trailers or glanced at a movie poster for more than 3 seconds, you know. I don't dislike the idea of John Connor being a Terminator, but if that had been a secret reveal like the film was trying to make it look like it was, I would've enjoyed the film a whole lot more. John Connor being a Terminator is a huge twist, one that should've paid off massively. Again, my complaints lie with the story which didn't take its opportunities when it should have.

On top of a confusing and illogical plot are some other missed opportunities when it came to the film's emotional resonance. For a film to be enjoyable, you have to relate to it in some way and conveying real human emotion in larger-than-life scenarios is important for a sci-fi film. Unfortunately, there are moments in Genisys where a good moment of emotional resonance could've been achieved but was missed. For example, when Reese found out that John Connor (the man who had saved his life and grown up to be his best friend) was a Terminator, the potential drama that could've arisen from that scenario wasn't realised. If I had found out my best friend had become a tool of the enemy, I would've been immensely conflicted internally, something Kyle Reese just isn't.

But moving on to the biggest compliment I can give this movie, it is entertaining in quite a few areas. Arnie's portrayal of an aged T-800 (which they explained very well actually) was the standout of the film. At this point its accepted that Arnie has made this franchise and it is true that he was born to play the role of the Terminator. But the best aspect of this movie is the humour. Arnie's deliverance of one liners do not come off as cheese but as genuinely quite funny. "30 years and you only had to be in one place" "I was stuck in traffic". I think they nailed the humour of the Terminator films exactly like they did in T2, which is commendable.

As I said the film is fun in sequences with its purely digital shots, CGI and action sequences. However, no action sequence in the movie really stands out. They're filmed, edited and shot perfectly well, but they're nothing special. Nothing about the way they came across was that original or unique for me. The fight scenes between Arnie and either the T-1000 or John Connor didn't pack any sort of punch. Plus, the CGI in places was very questionable. It was good in places for sure, but if your T-1000 doesn't look as convincing as Robert Patrick's liquid metal Terminator in a movie which came out 24 years ago, you have an issue.

I liked Emilia Clarke as Sarah Connor, she really grew on me as the film progressed. But the script didn't give her enough to work with. Jason Clarke was also pretty good as John Connor the human, but didn't come across as menacing or frightening after Matt Smith's character turned him into a puppet for Skynet. The T-1000 of T2 was a genuinely frightening villain you were scared would kill our protagonists, thanks to James Cameron's direction and Robert Patrick's performance. In T5, the villain just isn't that menacing.

I've said in the past that I am not a huge fan of Jai Courtney. The reason why I was so disappointed with him as Kyle Reese was because I desperately want this man to show us why he is able to act in these massive franchises. I want him to express himself on screen, deliver a performance of genuine power and emotion, or at least express some personality. In Genisys, Courtney does the same thing of standing around stoically like a mannequin. Also, I didn't buy into the romance between him and Sarah Connor. She expresses that they simply can't fall in love for fear of creating another John Connor who would eventually become a Terminator. First, that makes no sense. Second, if it gets to a point where you are forcing it down my throat that these 2 simply are meant to fall in love and be together not because they have to but because they want to, I'm not buying it.

Terminator Genisys is perfectly watchable and entertaining in places, it isn't the abomination that Jurassic World turned out to be. Arnie's comedic timing and portrayal of the T-800 was brilliant, as was the film's comedic moments. But the rest of the acting performances (including that of JK Simmons who was completely wasted in a side plot which had no payoff or resolution) could have been so much better, the action was generic and the story had more holes in it than Swiss Cheese. I can't recommend you watching it.


Rating - C-

So far this summer, we've had 2 big hits and 2 big misses. Hoping now that Ant Man puts the 2015 Summer movie season back on track!


Thanks for reading,
Matt