Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice - Movie Review

Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice Review

A little over a month has passed since Deadpool was released, undoubtedly garnering significant financial success and attention, while also being rabidly wolfed down by many comic book fans of the character (admittedly myself included). Deadpool was a movie made specifically for the fans and was a decent film that didn't care too much about critical success. Fast forward to today, and we get this watery two and a half hour movie thrust at us, much like it's oversaturated genre.

Batman v Superman, a title to which this film does not deserve, is the most stupid comic book movie I have seen in quite a while. Unfortunately, when that average superhero film has the title "Batman versus Superman", and when we realize that comic book movies are not the only movies that exist, it brings that movie way below average. Warner Bros is counting on this to set up the Justice League movie, of course after making each separate character from the Justice League their stand-alone movie first. This film suffered from what I like to call 'Rise of electro-itis' in which it sets up another movie within the movie, instead of focusing on being a good movie itself.

The aspect of this movie that saved it from being worse than Man of Steel was Batman. I have but a few issues with Batman in this movie. There was a visually impressive and well shot opening credit scene in which the backstory of Batman is rehashed for the millionth time in film/novel/TV. Snyder should probably have removed that entirely, seeing as how everyone knows the story of Batman by now. Also, the portrayal of Batman is exceptionally bad-ass ... except for the fact that Batman is shown as a cold-blooded killer. Batman's biggest moral dilemma is about his personal promise he made to himself about never killing people, and to change that essential part of his character isn't an interpretation or unique spin, it's simply wrong. Just as how the 1989 Batman revealed The Joker as the one to kill Bruce Wayne's parents, which is totally incorrect to every storyline beforehand. It's almost as if this part of the movie was trying to sneak itself into the movie, as the camera always cuts or pulls a wide shot to never definitively show Batman killing people with his own hands. Besides that, Ben Affleck did the character a lot of justice. He was a fitting Bruce Wayne and Batman, and he was the right age for the timeline that the story is set in. Every scene with Batman was great, and his suit may be the best graphic novel-to-movie adaptation as it looks like it has been ripped right out of the pages of The Dark Knight Returns. I still prefer Christian Bale's Batman but regarding suit design, this one is the best. I was also surprised to see that the Flashpoint story ties into this movie to a slight degree. If you don't know what Flashpoint is, it's essentially an alternate dimension or possible future in which The Flash saves his mom from death by going back in time, changing the course of history from that point drastically. It also seems that it somewhat tied into the 'Injustice' storyline as well, in which Superman takes over the world and divides the superheroes. I'm thinking that this movie doesn't know how to handle Batman's moral dilemma at all, or is completely mixing Bruce Wayne up with with the Flashpoint Batman (The alternate dimension version of Batman where Batman is Bruce Wayne's father, and Bruce Wayne is dead) who uses guns and actually does kill people.

Most visual aspects of this movie are good, and the camerawork is very sleek, especially in the action. The color palette is way too dull for any fun vibes to project off the screen. The action scenes were done well and were wildly entertaining to watch. On to everything that made this movie disappointing. Henry Cavill is an ok superman and is way better than the goofy representations of him from the 70s and 80s. It doesn't matter since the acting from Henry Cavill is still awful. I've never really been impressed with Superman's character, and this movie did absolutely nothing for him, except for the very end of the film and some lazy and failed attempts at emotional moments. These 'emotional' moments with Clark Kent and Lois Lane were especially cheesy when placed in a big fight scene of all places, the one time that Amy Adams gets to have an 'emotional' scene. It's a shame that Lois Lane is even less of a human than her alien lover, as all that she ever does or needs to be for the story is a damsel in distress, and one irrelevant subplot.

With all the grim, dark film out there, it would be about time for Zack Snyder to stop maybe once with everything being sad and depressing. This movie is even darker than Man of Steel, due to the Batman aspect mostly intruding on whatever happy vibes existed in the prequel to this movie. The worst part about Man of Steel was how dark and depressing it was all the way down to the bland color palette about other superhero movies. Of all movies and superhero movies in general, a Superman film should be at least a little upbeat. To be honest, this movie is pretty unhinged and awfully structured, especially in the first half of the movie. The build-up to Batman and Superman finally butting heads for eight small minutes is dragged out way too long for anyone to feel invested. As shown in the trailer, Doomsday (another Superman villain) also comes along for the ride out of nowhere, without any explanation. Doomsday's Computer generated design is similar to that of a sludge and slime monster troll that needs to be put out of its misery. I feel like the appearance of Doomsday could have been handled at least a little better, and with someone who knows the look well. It's a shame that one of the coolest Superman foes is used as a device of no importance to the plot other than to serve as a reason for Bman and Supes to quit their feuding and team up with each other and Wonder Woman. Wonder Woman is in this movie for a couple of minutes at the start, only to return to the story 90 minutes later, so she was pretty useless. The music in this movie was co-composed by Hans Zimmer and Tom Holkenborg. These are probably 2 of the best active movie music composers working today, so it's cool to see them team up on something like this. Hans Zimmer is the composer behind the Nolan Batman movies, Pirates of the Caribbean, Inception and countless others. Tom Holkenborg is the genius composer behind Deadpool, Black Mass and Mad Max: Fury Road - my personal favorite soundtrack in a movie ever. I listened to a couple of tracks for the second time and thought they were okay. They are not Holkenborg and Zimmer's best work. Batman's theme was sluggish, and Superman's theme is only mediocre. Where credit is due, Wonder Woman's new theme was the best theme in the movie and was somewhat exciting to listen to rather than gothic and somber electronic music with orchestral instruments sprinkled in (over half of the soundtrack).

Out of all the cons I mentioned, I have saved the worst for last. Yes, ladies and gentlemen, I am referring to Jesse Eisenberg as Lex Luthor. Now, I have been informed that this Lex is Lex Luthor's son Alexander, who goes by Lex rather than Alex just to confuse the audience. Jesse Eisenberg is a good actor, don't get me wrong. He just did Lex Luthor all wrong. The Lex Luthor that we should have received should have at least been similar to the original father of this one, being cold, smart, calculating and deliberate. In this movie, Jesse Eisenberg was playing pretty much every role he's been in - a twitchy, nervous, anxious, jumpy and unstable person to some degree or manner. After seeing Jesse Eisenberg on screen for a while, I realized that he wasn't playing Lex Luthor. No, he was playing The Joker. It was in everything he did. His nervous tics, His ridiculous philosophies and random outbursts. After thinking about it this way, I feel like Eisenberg should have played The Joker in the upcoming Suicide Squad, as he is more qualified than Jared Leto. Nevertheless, Eisenberg didn't do the character justice in the end and was very awkward at times on screen.

In the end, this movie was underwhelming. The characters, the build up and the structure of this movie sort of fell flat in the end. It seems that the most heartfelt battle does not truly lie with Batman and Superman, but rather my opinions on this film. I have been waiting for this movie for around two years now and was stoked to see it. Every part of me wanted to like this movie, love even. It has been so long since the last Batman movie, brought to us by Christopher Nolan. But even I can't let my love of these iconic characters redeem everything this movie did wrong. I would say that any die-hard fan of Batman or Superman would enjoy this movie, even if it isn't too smart. I have a huge void in my heart from this movie. I do in fact plan on buying the DVD when it is released so that I can see if the director's cut is even a smidge better. I liked the Batman part of this movie and can't wait to see Affleck in Suicide Squad and any other Batman related things. But for now, this movie just didn't quench my thirst after the long, painfully hot, dry and longer wait.

+ Good action                       - Lois Lane is an object

+ Well shot                           - Doomsday's appearance and irrelevance

+ Ben Affleck as Batman     - Batman kills people!

                                             - Jesse Eisenberg as Lex OR Jesse Eisenberg as himself.

3.5/10

Shutter Island - Movie Review

Shutter Island Review

Shutter Island is a film about an island with a mental institution called "Ashecliffe Hospital," which houses the criminally insane. This movie is directed by the accomplished hands of Martin Scorsese and stars Leonardo DiCaprio, Ben Kingsley, and Mark Ruffalo. This film is unique, and it requires a lot of digestion after the first watch. Even if the movie doesn't do the greatest job keeping you on track with the confusing story, the story is different in its right. The studio took some risks with this movie, with a few story elements left to interpretation, which some audiences might find unsatisfactory. I like how the movie is adapted from its book by Laeta Kalogridis and Steven Knight to suit an audience that we can assume at least possess some inferential and interpretive thinking skills, which is a big part of how the movie makes up for its flaws.

It is tough to go over the plot details of this movie without giving anything relevant away. So much of this film relies on its articulated plot details, and everything in this film is deliberate. The start of the movie is Teddy Daniels (Leonardo DiCaprio) with his U.S. Marshal partner Chuck Aule (Mark Ruffalo) going to Shutter Island to investigate a case assigned to him. More and more supernatural things start to unfold on the island, and Teddy Daniels has to figure out what is going on. Anything else said would be giving the plot away. This movie has a great premise and has a few good things going for it. This movie mostly falters in the way it delivers the story to you. I feel like certain concepts in the story could have been introduced in a different order, or could have been added sooner. The reason I'm tiptoeing around the plot of the movie is that there is a huge plot twist out of nowhere at the end of the film, and the final shot before the credits leaves unanswered questions left for interpretation. The plot twist is really, superb because it is unexpected. This plot twist does bear flaws the more you think about it and makes the story even more confusing to piece together. This movie is great to dissect and think about, but I would be lying if I said that Shutter Island gets better with each watch.

I will give the film credit for being very engaging, and it handles the suspense well. There is also an abundance of weird dream sequences that were well done and didn't feel like a cheap narrative device. Like I said, this movie doesn't try to spell out everything for you, and it makes the most with its visuals to delve into Teddy Daniels' mind. There were a lot of interesting and obviously director-specific stylistic choices from Martin Scorsese that were fascinating to see, especially in the creepy dream sequences. There was a lot of restraint for the amount of special effects used in the appropriate applications, which is good to see in a genre which suffers a lot from that. There was not, however, a restraint shown for the music and the appropriate time to use it. The music was not an original score and was selected by Robbie Robertson. The music chosen suited the mood and the tone of the movie well and was a blend of bold, grand and haunting. The music is used in scenes that would otherwise be deemed as fine without it, like casual scenes, extreme wide shots and other scenes that made the music, or at least the particular music selected seem out of place. More held back and less in-your-face music would be subtle and add to the movie in these scenes, rather than be distracting.

After thinking about the plot twist at the end for awhile, I found that it was a little too far fetched. I still like the plot twist and enjoyed it, but there were events in the movie that didn't coincide and went against the logic of the plot twist. The final, ambiguous shot of the film pulls a double plot twist on you, so it's hard to know just exactly what to think of the story. [double plot twist - noun - 1. A plot twist and then another plot twist that directly invalidates the first plot twist's logic, meaning, reasoning and/or implications - 2. A plot twist and then another consecutive plot twist that reveals more information about the story and/or character/s that goes hand in hand with the first plot twist]. After pulling a double plot twist in this movie's case, it feels like a cheap way to go against the other plot twist's logic, where if something doesn't match up with one plot twist, the story can have an alternate one to use that makes sense according to that other plot twist's logic, and therefore is the seemingly correct one. Laeta Kalogridis (or whoever executed this in the movie), if you want to pull off two whole plot twists only five minutes apart from each other, you need to make sure the details in the movie supports both plot twists, not go against both to make one seem more right than the other. Also, to make the plot twist/s feel more genuine, the information given in exposition should have been more spread out over the course of the movie, and not have an overabundance of revealing all the necessary information in the last ten minutes of the film. There should have been more clues in the movie to make the plot twist make more sense by the end, where something confusing happens that is then revealed. It's hard to go over this in depth, but there weren't enough clues to make the plot twist as smart as it could have been. There should have been more moments in the movie to refer to that seemed out of place, for the sake of the plot twist being revealed. Instead, the reveal of the plot twist uses clues that no one would have ever been able to refer to since nothing out of the ordinary or weird was implied about these aspects of the story! The plot twist did catch me off guard, and added to my experience with the movie, but there was a lot of small details that could have been put into the film without that much hard work, besides some careful thinking, which could have made the plot twist's reveal feel less rushed.

Besides the story aspect of the film, the great colors, and camerawork, stylistic choices used and performances made this movie very entertaining to watch. I enjoyed Shutter Island for what it was, and this movie did a good job of at least engaging me in the story. The suspense was, again, done very well, and there were a lot of thrilling moments of this movie. After all the problems I discussed for this film, my biggest is that there isn't a whole lot of rewatchability to this film. I feel like I would watch it again for fun in around a year, or maybe even a couple months from now. The first time you watch this movie will no doubt be the most enjoyable. Watching this again, I could imagine picking up on a few more errors than I would have encountered for the first viewing, and feeling a little more dissatisfied.

+ Good suspense                   - Music used inappropriately at times

+ Very engaging                   - Some hiccups with the story arc

+ Good premise                    - Rare occasion where a movie needed more foreshadowing

+ Performances were great    - Not much rewatchability

+ Unexpected plot twist

6.2/10

X-Men: Days of Future Past - Movie Review

X-Men: Days of Future Past Review

X-Men: Days of Future Past is the seventh installment in the X-Men movie series, and came out roughly two years ago. Bryan Singer directs this movie, who directed the first two X-Men movies. This installment movie separates itself from all the other films and is my favorite X-Men movie.

So X-Men: Days of Future Past is about the dystopian future, where Sentinel robot drones seek out and kill all mutants and X-Men. The X-Men realize there is no way to save themselves from the sentinels and their inevitable extinction if they don't send someone's conscious back in time to change the course of history, and prevent the Sentinels from being initiated onto the mutants. The only one strong enough to go back in time is Wolverine (Hugh Jackman), and it's up to him to unite Professor X (James McAvoy) and Magneto (Michael Fassbender) in the past to prevent the grim future from happening. There is quite a lot of depth to this movie's plot, and I did enjoy many aspects of it. This movie exudes confidence from Bryan Singer, and I love how he can take X-Men back for himself after a couple of terrible X-Men movies from 20th Century Fox that put his work in the first two movies to shame. This movie is a sequel to one timeline of X-Men and another at the same time. The cast from X-Men First Class is the same, which is great to see. James McAvoy is great as Professor X in this movie, and Michael Fassbender is still killing it as Magneto. These actors are more prominent in this movie, and the dystopian future has less focus on it. Patrick Stewart and Ian McKellen are given a little less screen time, which is fine by me because they still sell their role. Peter Dinklage as Trask is also the antagonist for a portion of this movie, and he is fine. He always gives a good performance, even if he isn't too picky about his roles. Like how anyone would ever agree to star in an Adam Sandler movie based off of old video games is pretty beyond me. The performances that stood out the most to me in this film were James McAvoy, Hugh Jackman, Michael Fassbender and Evan Peters (Quicksilver). The characters all had great chemistry with each other on screen, and the majority/entirety of these actors performances was in the past. We also got to see a new side of Wolverine and young Professor X in this movie, with Wolverine being more reserved and less aggressive, and Professor X being at his lowest level, and mostly a junkie at the start of the film.

The best part about the characters in this movie is that you can identify with them. Except Trask, the character motivations are never confusing or unclear, so that at least you can understand one of the antagonists reasoning. Although Peter Dinklage gave as good a performance as any, there isn't that much substance to his character, and he didn't have that much motivation. What was a curious concept in this movie, though, was that there wasn't a clear, defined antagonist. The enemy is different for different characters and their perception of the unfolding events. This movie also had a couple of great action scenes, and some intense moments as well. There's a fantastic scene involving a lot of mutants that sets the third act into motion in Paris, where a lot of civilians witness mutant powers for the first time. The way they shot that scene with different excerpt shots that were meant to look like people filming on cameras from the 1970's added to the terror of the humans. As for the action scenes, they were all choreographed just fine and were kept to a minimal. I would say that for this type of movie that less is more, because it made room for more creative fight scenes that I won't spoil, but went beyond just average fist-fighting. One problem I had with this movie was that although the story was unique to the universe and striking, there were still a couple of predictable points in the film. The story this movie told was well thought out, but some character dilemmas or choices were easy to predict, which took me out of the movie somewhat, but didn't ruin the movie for me.

This movie has a lot of hope and emotion stretched throughout, and I like how well balanced all the characters roles and screen time is in this installment. Every person feels necessary to the movie. Bryan Singer did a great job with his return to the franchise. I liked how a part of this movie was a somewhat emotional and mental conflict, which can sometimes be hard to come by in superhero movies, where usually the conflict just lies with the antagonist. Bryan Singer did intentionally mess with the X-Men timeline, which I liked since it was a big middle finger to the terrible movies in the series. People who are supposed to be dead are still alive, vice versa and a couple of other changes that are confusing if you don't go into the movie with the knowledge that it doesn't build off the last movie. It's a kind of jerk move to disregard another director's work in the same franchise, even if it is terrible, rather than build off of it. But I can totally forgive this movie for it since it solves all the problems that X-Men 3 and Origins: Wolverine had. I had a great time with this movie, with a couple of fun Marvel references that seem to be obligatory in any Marvel movie. I will say that this is definitely Singer's franchise, and this movie just proves it.

+ Fleshed out characters                                        - Trask's character pretty open and dry cut

+ Compelling story                                                - Somewhat predictable at points

+ Great Acting

+ Confident directing courtesy of Bryan Singer

6.6/10

Sicario - Movie Review

Sicario Review

So I saw Sicario, the movie from last year that garnered a lot of praise, and was nominated for 3 Oscars. The directing by Denis Villeneuve was good, the film was edited well by Joe Walker, and the cinematography brought to us by Roger Deakins was fantastic. This film was well crafted, but where it starts to let down is mostly to do with the script and the characters in this film.

Sicario has a very nice premise, and it's about Kate Macer, an FBI agent who gets involved with the Cartel. An FBI raid in Arizona goes haywire, and she is then talked to by a task force leader from the CIA, Matt Graver about joining the task force in Mexico to further put a stop to the drug Cartels in Mexico. She quickly finds out that the operations going on are very much illegal, and has to decide if it is worth breaking the law in order to make Mexico a safer place in the slightest. This movie has a pretty great cast, with some recognizable faces like Emily Blunt (Kate Macer), Josh Brolin (Matt Graver) and Benicio del Toro (Alejandro Gillick). There wasn't anything too special with the Character interactions or dialogue, but at least it didn't take me out of the movie and wasn't cheesy. The film is very good at making its point and tone very clear. This movie is extremely dark, and I like how the dark themes were handled in comparison to events that may have actually happened, or if they didn't happen, it was most likely represented in this movie fairly similar. This movie is very dark, and there is a lot of messed up qualities to this film that make me wonder if it's intentionally trying to actually shed some light on the height of violence in Mexico around 2010.

There isn't much hope or anything to cling to in this movie. The gritty story is told in a gritty manner, and the environment this movie surrounds you with is very filthy. That's not to say that the camerawork or color palette makes this movie look bland because the cinematography in this movie was top notch. In fact, Roger Deakins very stylistically shot this movie, to showcase the brutality and to be more interesting to watch at the same time, so it doesn't feel like senseless violence. Another thing I enjoyed about this movie is that it keeps you on edge for the majority of the run time. The music by Jóhann Jóhannsson was very odd and eerie and was used sparingly. The music was mainly used as a tool for giving a sense of anxiety. The great music, combined with beautiful/odd shots of random objects, and closeups of seemingly random objects builds a lot of suspense. The way this film does it is incredible, with these oddly eerie scenes that give you a sense that something bad is going to happen soon. These riveting scenes have dramatic slow build, and there were points when I, unaware of it at the time, got a huge knot in my stomach. Even if there isn't that much happening to advance the plot in these scenes, it is still wildly entertaining. There is a great scene in an airplane where for some reason, I felt on edge with the eerie music and weird close-ups of objects with extreme attention to detail. I think that Denis Villeneuve decided to build suspense and anxiety in these random scenes to delve into the subconscious of all these professional agents who have seen their fair share of disturbing things. Using these scenes to emphasize the anxiety in these characters was a genius editing choice.

Where this movie starts to weaken is its screenplay. The story and premise for this movie could have had so much more done with it. There were great performances all around, though these actors did not have much to work with. I mean, sure, there were moments where the characters acted sorrowful and angry when they needed to, but there was nothing to really define these different characters. Besides the fact that the only thing that I could differentiate these characters from was their opinions on some situation on hand, these actors did a phenomenal job with what little direction they most likely had. There were a few character dilemmas that were done well, but there was nothing interesting or unique to make any of the characters feel all that special. There was not much dialogue to give us more information about these characters. Another thing revealed much later on in the movie, but still slightly unclear, is the main characters and all of their different motivations for the large, elaborate drug bust they are trying to execute. That only comes much later, and it is still unclear what Kate's motivation is. Nothing else besides that gives anybody a unique or special personality. I was surprised to see that by the end of the movie that Benicio del Toro was becoming the star of the movie,  rather than Emily Blunt. I was fine with that since I know that a spin-off is being made for Del Toro's character later, but I was annoyed with the fact that the Del Toro's character, Alejandro, got more of a resolution than Kate Macer. Since the majority of the movie led me to believe that she was the main character, I was a little weirded out to see her weave out of the majority of the last 20 minutes of the movie, and then a very brief scene at the very end with her. This turn felt sudden, and the studio was very obviously rushing to get the last act packed with screen time for Benicio Del Toro, to set up the spin-off. The ending was sad and left a bitter taste, but was fitting for the general overtone of the film.

In the end, this movie was put together very smartly. The characters were only mediocre, as well as parts of the script during the final act of the movie. Sometimes Emily Blunt's character motivation made little sense, and a lot of times there were missed opportunities that I felt could have been good places to insert some dialogue to let us learn at least a little bit about these characters. I have a feeling that the script was used more of a guideline than an actual script. This movie is worth a watch, even if it starts very strong and almost dies with a faint whimper in the concluding scenes.

+ Good acting all around                                         - Messy script

+ Interesting premise                                      

+ Good suspense building, good use of music      

+ Insane camerawork

7.9/10

Collateral - Movie Review

Collateral Review

Collateral is a movie from twelve years ago by Michael Mann and an excellent script by Stuart Beattie. It stars Tom Cruise and Jamie Foxx and showcases LA like a painting.

Collateral is a crime drama/thriller about a cab driver named Max (played by Jamie Foxx) who is seasoned with his directional skills in LA territory. An unsuspecting Max has a hitman named Vincent (played by Tom Cruise) in the back of his cab, paying Max a large sum of money to ensure that he takes him to five different locations and waits for him. Once Max learns that Vincent is a hitman, Vincent takes him as a hostage and threatens to kill him if he does not drive him to all his stops, or in reality, all five of Vincent's targets. This movie had a few thrilling moments, but in between these is some well-constructed dialogue. The screenplay is great, and I love the relationship between Max and Vincent. Most of the movie is them trying to make conversation in the taxi, usually by ridiculing each other for missed opportunities or no regard for consequences of actions. There is a lot of great character building in these scenes in the cab, where we learn more about these two men while they try to figure each other out at the same time. I also really liked to see Tom Cruise as the villain, after all being in heroic roles for the majority of his career.

Michael Mann makes this film look gorgeous, with stunning shots of the LA skyline, and somehow essentially recreates LA to look extremely colorful and beautiful. There was a lot of nice colors in this movie, like pale greens and washy blues. What impressed me with Collateral was how the film slowly winds up tension between these two characters. With each conversation they have, they start to resent each other more and more, and the final act of this movie was extremely well handled. The ending to this film was perfect, and the resolution made sense. That being said, I didn't have that many problems with the movie, but one thing I would have liked to see would be the splendid action scenes or intense moments spread throughout the film more. The last thirty minutes of this movie are extremely fast paced, but they should have had more of these incredibly good scenes.

While the pacing of this film is done well, they still could have added a few more action scenes to keep the audience interested. The dialogue in this film is smart, so the movie never dulls or feels boring. This movie was wild and unpredictable, and it had a genius concept for a movie.

+ Great Character building                                             

+ Gorgeous setting and camerawork

+ Some well directed intense moments

+ Character interaction and dialogue well written

10/10

Zoolander - Movie Review

Zoolander Review

In spite of the new Zoolander movie having not that many great things said about it, I thought I would talk about the older one.

So this movie is about a male model named Derek Zoolander (played by Ben Stiller) who one day decides that there has to be more to life than looking good. He gets an offer from a fashion designer named Mugatu, to be the face of a new line of clothing that is supposed to represent poverty. This new clothing line is all a front made by Mugatu so that he can trick Derek into being brainwashed to kill the Prime Minister of Malaysia when he comes to America to see the new line of clothing. Granted, it is an awfully clever and original premise for a movie. This movie was nothing even remotely groundbreaking, but it is pretty entertaining. Ben Stiller is really good in this movie, and Owen Wilson was okay. There's also that girl from Dodgeball, Christine Taylor. I wasn't impressed with much in this film. It's Ben Stiller, so expect a lot of stupid comedy, but in a way also a cleverly-stupid comedy. In a good way, like the way that Dumb and Dumber is cleverly-stupid, even though Dumb and Dumber did it better.

As for moviemaking, this movie is pretty bland. No fancy angles or camerawork, which is fair enough considering it is a comedy. The acting sufficed, and Ben Stiller's character is hilarious. What I didn't like about this movie is that some of the characters weren't all that necessary, or interesting. Christine Taylor's character wasn't that interesting, and it felt a little too similar to Dodgeball, both of which being Ben Stiller movies. Will Ferrel's character Mugatu was funny but wasn't a compelling antagonist. I would say that most every character is underdeveloped, irrelevant or uninteresting except Hansel (Owen Wilson's character) and Derek Zoolander. What this film did right are the jokes pretty much always landed, and they were ingenious. The pacing is excellent, and the movie is a light-hearted one. There is a certain silliness to this movie where you can tell that a lot of people probably had a lot of fun on set.

Since the movie came around in theaters about 2-3 weeks after 9/11, I can understand if people weren't in the mood or mindset for something this offbeat and silly. I do have to give credit to the originality of this movie for the premise. It is a pretty genius concept for a movie, for what plotline there is. It was hard to think of any specific joke that didn't land. Ben Stiller is really good at striking a balance between intelligent comedy, cleverly-stupid comedy, and tongue in cheek humor. The majority of this movie does feel like one big skit, where the plotline is only necessary for setting up jokes. In the end, this movie is a fun time, and it's very enjoyable, even if not a lot of thought was obviously put into many of the characters.

+ hysterical                                    - Most characters dull

+ Original premise                                    - Story not always cohesive

+ Derek Zoolander is a genius character 

+ Good pacing

6.7/10

Deadpool - Movie Review

Deadpool Review

So I saw Deadpool this weekend, and I had a great time with it. I have been excited for this movie for around six months, and I pretty much got everything I wanted out of it, though it has considerably more faults than other Marvel movies.

Deadpool is about a man named Wade Wilson who gets cancer and runs away from his girlfriend Vanessa looking for a cure. He then is tricked by Francis, the antagonist, who tells him that he will heal him when instead he intends to make him into an undefeatable mercenary. After put through numerous rounds of torture, Wade gains the ability to heal from any wound, making him virtually invincible. The comic book character of Deadpool is a pretty unique one, and the R rating helped separate this movie from other superhero movies. Deadpool would classify as a superhero movie since it's Marvel after all, but Deadpool is no hero and is often making a couple of wisecracks before and after killing his victims. I feel pretty indecisive about my feelings for Deadpool since I had so much fun with it while it did have a couple of recognizable errors.

What I had a huge expectation for in this movie was how true it stayed to the character of Deadpool, and I wasn't let down at all. Ryan Reynolds brings the best possible performance he can to this movie and his passion for Deadpool is visible in the movie. I feel like Ryan Reynolds is going to be almost inseparable from Deadpool from this point on, and I mean in the way that Robert Downy Jr is almost inseparable from Iron Man, and Heath Ledger is almost inseparable to The Joker. And yes, I really did just compare Heath Ledger's performance to Ryan Reynolds. Heath Ledger put a new twist on an already much-loved character with a lot of personality in the comics and gave the best possible performance he could have for the character. That's exactly what Ryan Reynolds does in Deadpool. I don't think there are that many people out there who could have played Deadpool off so well. I mean, everything from his delivery of jokes to his fourth wall breaks, to his insanity. There were a couple of other characters too, but I couldn't find myself caring about too many of them. I liked T.J. Miller in this movie, I liked Vanessa played by Morena Baccarin. But I didn't ever really care about Colossus or Negasonic teenage warhead, the only two X-Men in this movie. I mean, they were cool on screen and all, but were only in around 3 or 4 scenes in the movie, and were only relevant to the story towards the end of the movie. The opening credits jokingly reveal all the clichés that are about to unfold in the movie, like how the villain is British, and how it's directed by an overpaid tool. The villain in this movie was Ajax, played by Ed Skrein. His gimmick was that he couldn't feel pain, but couldn't heal like Deadpool. There wasn't really any backstory or anything given to us to be invested in for this villain, and he could be played by anybody. All of these clichés were a little more forgivable since the studio acknowledges it themselves at the start of the movie. Of course, they could have spent more time developing the villain if they really wanted to, but Deadpool's character was the star and evidently the first priority. That being said, I don't really need to restate everything the movie tells you it's going to be, and I'm at least glad the studio acknowledged it and didn't try to hide it.

The comedy in Deadpool is pretty on fleek.  And it's not all fart jokes, some of it is clever too. Ryan Reynolds even said himself in an interview that Deadpool 'has a pop culture joke cannon in his brain with unlimited ammunition.' If you've read any of the comics, then you would probably know everything there is to expect from Deadpool's character. The movie has a lot of gags, references, crude jokes, even more crude sex scenes and an abundance of 4th wall breaks. If you already like Deadpool now, you will probably love his portrayal in this movie. The script is really well written too, with only a couple of hiccups. Admittedly, some jokes just didn't land, and some were not timed well, and some were followed up by an actual smart joke that a lot of people may sadly have missed because people are too busy laughing at the previous joke right before it. Besides some of these mishaps, the movie is amusing, and these mishaps weren't too often, and the dialogue had an enormous amount of jokes to make up for some of the jokes that may not have landed. I laughed a lot in the movie, which was what I wanted out of a Deadpool movie. Deadpool's sense of humor feels like it's been ripped right out of the pages of the comics. I thought the comedy in this movie delivered well, for the most part, seeing as how most everything Deadpool said was a punchline or leading up to a later joke. The humor always seems to tie in well, and it never feels forced, which is something I was glad about.

One thing I was disappointed in was the lack of creative deaths in the action scenes. Deadpool is very much a badass in this movie, but I expected more creative deaths like in the comics. The writers for this movie, Rhett Reese and Paul Wernick, also worked on Zombieland, which had creative deaths in it too. There were a couple of creative deaths, but I had hoped for more. Aside from not many creative deaths, the action in this movie is well done and entertaining. It's shot well, and Deadpool's style of fighting is somewhat badass, and ninja like as well as comedic, using a lot of banter during these scenes. The action is clear, and there're not many jump cuts. The action is also really violent, and Fox went all out on this. There is dismemberment, decapitation, gut entrails and brains can be seen splatting when Deadpool gets a headshot. I loved to see this much profane, crude, over the top nonsense in a Marvel movie, and it was refreshing. I only wish there was more action because it was fun when it was on screen. There were only two big fight scenes in the movie, and I wanted just a little more. Overall the action was very enjoyable.

The soundtrack in this movie was really good. There was some original music and some actual songs. I liked the Hip-Hop/rock feel to the soundtrack, and I feel like it suited Deadpool's ghetto personality. Tom Holkenborg who did one of the songs in the soundtrack actually did parts of the soundtrack for Mad Max: Fury Road and Black Mass, and I like what he did with the soundtrack. Usually, Marvel movies are over 2 hours long, and I was surprised to see the film end around the 1 hour and 40-minute mark. When the movie ended, I really wanted to see more. It feels like the movie got cut short a little bit, and was almost ... incomplete. The action and the comedy was working really well for the movie. If it was, say, a half hour longer, that would be plenty of time that could be used to further advance the plot and show some of the less seen characters, as well as add a little more action. One thing the movie was doing brilliantly was sometimes having the comedy revolve around the violence and vice versa, which is exactly what I wanted in a Deadpool movie, and they could have done so much more with that if the movie was longer. I was also disappointed to see that the big action scene at the end was only with katanas. There had been some good shootout scenes before, and I was expecting a lot of gunplay at the final action scene since Deadpool gets all ready by loading a huge duffel bag filled with guns, and then forgets it. I wanted to see a little more shootout scenes, with a bit more gunplay.

Other than not having as much action as I had hoped, and not having enough creative and wacky deaths in the action, I enjoyed Deadpool for what it was trying to be. The movie didn't want to be taken seriously, and clearly didn't take itself seriously. This is probably the only Marvel that I would say could be a little longer. There wasn't any fancy camerawork, most of the shots didn't have that much variety to them, but at least they got the shots. Deadpool was essentially made because of the internet. If the fans didn't beg for more after the test footage was released around two years ago, then this movie would never have been made. I feel like this is the first time Fox made a movie specifically for the fans. I mean, Fox has a lot of great X-Men movies, but those were made to the directors style. This movie feels like it was made entirely for the audience, which did make it a lot of fun to watch. Deadpool has a few more faults than other funny Marvel movies like Ant-Man and Guardians of the Galaxy, which both had more variety to the cinematography, with Ant-Man being more vertical and being more about scale, and Guardians of the Galaxy about being good looking and showing it off with a lot more impressive camerawork. Ant-Man and Guardians of the Galaxy did have a little bit more though put into it as far as the development of characters. One thing that those two movies weren't, was an extremely violent hard R-rated movie, that didn't feel restricted at all by the rating. I hope this movie serves as an excellent example of a superhero movie that can be R-rated and still stay faithful to source material and more importantly to the studio, make a good profit. Deadpool had it's hiccups and faults but is definitely not going to stop me from buying it on Blu-Ray when it releases and seeing it in the theaters again.

+ Action is violent/unrestricted                           - Not much room for character development

+ Comedy is clever and funny                             - Could have more action scenes

+ Violence/comedy work with each other           - Should have longer run time

+ Does justice to Deadpool as a character           - Needed more creative deaths

6.8/10