Avengers: Endgame

Spoilers.

The least spoilery thing I can say to sum it up is: It's the same basic fan-servicing Marvel that we've been seeing recently -- but something's different, because I enjoyed watching it this time! But yeah, I'm not even going to try, friends. There are definitely spoilers here!

Endgame: the big secret. The actors knew nothing; no information was released during marketing; and fans go to extreme lengths to avoid spoilers before release day. Even I did it the "right" way and achieved about 97% blindness. And still. Not one thing was legitimately surprising. Maybe if I'd gotten an out of context spoiler, sure; but within the narrative of the movie, there were no shocks, or plot twists, or anything that you'd expect to be kept secret -- save for the mere two deaths. The OG Avengers use time-travel to bring back the dusted, defeat Thanos, and pass their torches to the next wave. Pleasantly straightforward.

I should probably mention that this doesn't help me look at Infinity War in an any better light. I wondered for a year if it might, but no.

Yep. I had fun. The time travel aspect was super comic book-y and cheesy in a nice way. They must steal the Infinity Stones from their past selves in previous movies and the Back to the Future Part II vibe was solid fodder for superheroing. Sometimes not used to potential; other times smart, neat, and fulfilling to the characters' individual stories. And the final showdown battle finally took this series to the scale at which they've always wanted to exist. Like comics brought to life. And when the ultra-high stakes come in (Thanos planning to kill them all) you instantly know the heroes are in for a satisfying win, so it's easy to settle back and soak it all up.

Tony is the most focused-on character. Fitting, since he has an ultimate end -- and started it all. He gets to marry Pepper, have a little girl, live a briefly happy life, have a restoring man-to-man with his dad, and then die a hero's death saving the whole universe. Nice. Cap was my personal favorite. Since time travel now exists, he lives out a normal life with Peggy. Nothing could be more satisfying. And I realize this is fan-service, with no veil or pretense attempted. I was primed to be okay with that fact by the continuous pulling out of the rug from under my hopes of simple enjoyment, and don't care if it worked. These were thoughtful ends that the characters deserved. About time they received them.

Throwback to when these two were the GOAT.

Even Natasha's death felt earned and meaningful. Her and Clint's friendship was one of the first things I fell in love with in these movies, and that scene they had together made it all conclude in a way that felt natural and right. The scene mirrors Gamora's Infinity War death, even with the same music, yet inverts aspects in profound ways. They fight each other out of love, which has never happened in the MCU before. The sad tone was uplifting, and the emotion unforced. Long-established and consistent characters dealt with respectfully. Strange to think that after using movie after movie to point forward to the next with relentless ferocity -- actual, final ends are given here.

But it's not all satisfying lovey-dovey goodbyes. There's Beer-Belly Thor, which is by far the worst iteration of Thor even conceived. The weight (unintended) of the abject failure he feels could have been so powerful were he not turned into a joke. The scene with his mother was nearly good even with that looming over it. On top of that, the "joke" isn't funny. I'd like to say nonsensical too, but I have no proof, so I'll just say it annoyed me -- especially after Thor was the greatest redeeming factor of Infinity War. I've always liked original Thor Thor best, so I wasn't expecting much... but that was just insulting.

Animated humanoids like Hulk and Thanos are impressive, but still fail to draw me in -- even in the way cyborgs and small CGI creatures do. 

I could devote a similar paragraph to Star-Lord, but I'll limit it to this: I hate, loathe, and despise what these films have turned Quill into. It makes me angry in a way that fictional things shouldn't, and this movie was the worst offender. The only mercy is his limited screen time. On the flip side, Nebula has never been more complex and involving. She continues to earn her spot on the team. Scott had the highest ups and the lowest downs: His reunion with Cassie had some of the most genuine MCU acting I've ever seen; and the time travel test was the "joke" that would never end. Yes indeed, the Marvel-brand jokes are still here, and bland as ever. It's impressive how deftly they skirted around Paul Rudd's comic abilities.

It's like the outline of the story had effort, with a nice and plain three act structure that kept the pace going, and thought-out building on past scenes -- but then the details were filled in by an MCU bot. Every tidbit and third line were a callback, and the rest stuffing. The dramatic scenes work by sheer force of will from the actors as they push real emotion through dialogue lacking any written personality. The Marvel-brand green screen and overly-CGI'd pastiness is at large too. The initial swell of the battle did have nice imagery with the portals though, and Vormir appeals, green-screened as it is. I genuinely liked one shot: the last one of Clint sitting in the water with the soul stone.

I thought it was nice how the movie was more or less bookended by farewell speeches from Tony. There is muddling around, but ultimately there's a simple, solid structure.

This movie exists because of past successes, like a greatest hit episode; no legs of its own to stand on, but enjoyable, nevertheless. Exactly what we expect from Marvel -- packaged as a tribute to those who got it started. The effort is nearly derailed by cringe jokes and mountains of CGI: There's lots of filler, lots of worthlessness, and lots that's recycled from the deep, deep, rut that Marvel has dug for itself. Sadly creative ruts aren't a factor for Marvel anymore. Their oodles of cash isn't earned due to quality craft, but to calculated marketing; and with these loyal fans, and the ability to fabricate and promote empty secrets, any kind of slop could've played on that screen and made the same amount of money.

Fortunate, then, that the slop they played for us was a relatively good time, made for pure, widespread enjoyment, and was relatively respectful; serving founding characters with one last dose of genuine progress and a hearty farewell. Almost not slop at all, at heart. Despite shortcomings and extended lapses into stupidity, at least there's a story here, used for the satisfying completion of the journeys of long-beloved characters. Despite everything, I'm glad I got to see the Avengers assemble for one last hurrah.

The Circle

Major Spoilers.

Is this movie trying to be what it appears to be trying to be -- a movie about a good idea taken too far -- or is it trying to be what it is -- the most disturbing and effective anti-technology, anti-mob-rule, pro-personal freedom horror movie I've ever seen?

It's a tough call, but to say it meant to be as horrifying as I found it would be to give it more credit than I'm willing to attribute...

What I expected based on the trailer and critical reception was a technology-cult movie, starring Emma Watson, with Tom Hanks as the seemingly-nice but really rather evil cult leader, and supported by John Boyega and Karen Gillan, that turns into an espionage-esque thriller in the end, a la Eagle Eye or Enemy of the State. Avoid-the-surveillance-to-save-the-world kind of deal. That wasn't it at all.

So here's what really happens: Mae (Watson) starts the film with a friend from her neighborhood, Mercer (Ellar Coltrane) who's notoriously off the grid and opposed to using social media. Mae gets an enviable job at The Circle, which essentially combines all social media and internet-things into one interface. She lives on-campus, and is strongly encouraged (and passive-aggressively peer-pressured) into taking part of the social media interaction with co-workers. It basically part of the job to be socially active in the community.

There was an underlying "off" element to it that was intentional. By the end I had no clue what it meant by it.

In her effort to further her popularity in this community, she shares a photo of a deer-antler chandelier Mercer made for everyone to appreciate. Next thing you know, he comes to her work to complain that he's received a plethora of hate-mail including even death threats from her followers, accusing him of being a deer-murderer. He doesn't kill the deer himself, it's hurting his business, and it's making him much more web-present than he's comfortable with. As they talk and she apologizes (she had no idea that would be the outcome) Circle community members gather around them, filming with their phones and calling him "deer killer" to his face. The scene is unsettling to say the least. But... casually.

Soon after, despite her thinking it all odd, and despite making friends with John Boyega, who it turns out, invented the interface and hates what it's being used for, she slips further and further into the social aspect, until, one day, for no determinable reason (or maybe I just can't remember) she does a thing called "going fully transparent" in which she wears a live-streaming camera on her shirt 24/7. This rockets her up in popularity, alienating her friendship with Annie (Gillan) who got her the job in the first place. She starts going to board meetings and participating in the furthering of the business.

One second she's scoffing at it, the next she's more involved than anyone.

A few ideas later, she's giving a presentation to the community, in which, because of the size that Circle users and her "fully transparent" stream-watchers has grown to, she makes an experiment. Can her millions of followers with their cameras track down a fugitive from justice? She starts a timer and it takes them ten minutes to locate and arrest an escaped convict. Then she asks for a suggestion from the crowd: who else should they find? Mercer, they say. She says no. They start a chant. Tom Hanks intervenes, and "encourages" her to give them what they want. Fine. She starts the timer, and less than ten minutes later, Mercer is dead; following a car chase with phone-wielding busybodies.

After that Mae goes home for a while to reevaluate her life. What was wrong with The Circle that it caused such a tragedy? Four days later she returns, goes full transparent again, and using her smarts and the pressure that her great following endows her with, essentially forces Tom Hanks (And Patton Oswalt? For some reason?) to join her in her full transparency, having already hacked their emails (even the super-duper-ultra-secret ones) and sent them out for the whole Circle community to see. The film ends with her having assumed control over the whole company by power of popularity alone, and revealing plans to force the whole world into participation and transparency.

Because people behave better when they're being watched; because secrets are lies; because withholding information from people is equivalent to stealing from them, and because participation in society is vital. Wow. For a moment, as the upbeat pop music played over the colorful pastel palate of the credits, I was downright angry. Then it occurred to me: perhaps that was the intention. If not for the upbeat credits and my conviction that Emma Watson would have never agreed to play that character if she saw her how I saw her, I might be fully convinced.

There's NOTHING this movie says that I agree with. I can't figure out what was meant sincerely and what wasn't!

So much sits so wrong, not just the part where she caused her friend's death and then doubled down on the promotion and distributing of the tool used to bring about his demise. She outs Hanks by force, and we the audience are never even told of anything he did wrong. Her friendship with Annie is repaired by Annie, when she quits her job and returns to the simple life in Scotland. She seems finally happy. Mae is happy for her. Then she immediately goes on with her final plan. She even plans forced participation in voting. And none of these things are argued against except that they will make you sick to think of them.

What I most found disturbing though, was the talking points that secrets are lies, (there's no rebuttal to that portrayed) and that not sharing an experience you've had with someone is really stealing from them. That's why Mae goes full transparent actually (there, I remembered). After she confusingly breaks the law to go kayaking at night, tips over and is only rescued because of surveillance cameras, she realizes that people wouldn't break the law if they were watched constantly, but even more importantly, realizes that because she didn't film her kayaking experience and share it with people (particularly those who are incapable of doing such a thing) she was selfishly stealing from them.

So, this movie says (and never offers a counter to this argument), if you watch a sunset, and don't take a picture for your Instagram feed, you're actually stealing from every person who would have seen it. The movie says this with such a serious, literal, "theme vocalized" tone that I'm having a hard time believing it meant it any other way. Based on the tone I picked up, it seems completely like the movie's intention was to show the ups and downs of technology, but ultimately to show how it's more good than bad. It succeeds in doing the opposite; but only by being terrible at doing the first.

The worst movie ever.... and it reads like prophesy.

Maybe the intention was to turn it all into the most subtle horror story of all time. Even then it's just plain bad. The plot is too convoluted, events are forced and senseless, the acting is terrible, the characters either bland (Mae) or wildly underused (everyone else) and it's completely lacking in style. It has the style of your average bland romantic dramedy, but there's no romance and the drama is sci-fi horror played like simple drama. Mae's actions are impossible to characterize or get behind, yet she's ever presented like a true heroine.

Perhaps two years ago when it was made it did come across as more extreme and obviously presenting a bad scenario, in which technology is used to destroy lives only to be further embraced for the damage by the masses -- but today it almost sounds... genuine. And that's the scariest thing of all.

Avengers: Infinity War

Major Spoilers!

Welcome to the latest greatest Marvel movie, where all your favorite superheroes come together against the super-villain, Thanos, a very reasonable crazy person who wants to destroy half the universe! They fight super hard for two hours and thirty minutes, and then Thanos destroys half the universe. It's great fun.

I Loki hate this movie. lol.

There's a filmmaking 101 rule. If, say, a bomb is introduced to the plot, and there isn't eventually an on-screen explosion, your movie is bad. You must detonate that bomb. That's why Iron Man flew the nuke into space and exploded the Chitari spaceship. That's why Ronan's plans of destruction via the Power stone are shown by The Collector as he explains the danger -- because you must show it. It doesn't have to happen for real, but it has to happen. This rule, which is religiously followed in action films, is the reason I wasn't surprised by the end of Infinity War. The end rolled around sans a preview of the destruction, so I braced for impact.

But that's not why I didn't like the movie. The reason why I didn't enjoy myself watching this film as much as I should have, is that I felt the need to brace for impact in the first place. I like plenty of these characters. In fact, I dislike none of them. But the MCU doesn't typically make it worthwhile to be invested in the plights or well-being of its characters, and this film is the worst offender of the lot. Thor, Gamora and Strange are pushed to develop more than most of the sea of characters this film possesses, but whether they receive a little attention, or a lot, this movie can't agree with previous films on what their established character is, or the directions they should take.

You'd think so little screen-time would keep away glaring inconsistencies, but no. Poor Quill was obliterated. 

It's an antihero movie from Thanos' perspective more than anything else. He wants to save the entire universe by destroying half the universe, (If you kill half the people, the rest will have more room and resources. Think about it!) and while his reasoning makes sense for a crazy person, he doesn't act crazy. He's just a big purple dude with a dream, and besides his partial-genocide plan, he keeps his evil deeds to a minimum. Are we supposed to sympathize? Because he achieves his goal at great personal loss does that make him deep? No. He's one-note, and it never makes sense why his goal is so important to him.

Conversely, every single hero's goal is clear: save the world, save the universe, save the people they care for. Viewers will latch on to that automatically; it's a fundamental part of a hero's being. Yet we are forced to watch them fail and give way to Thanos' character over and over. And with no ultimate triumph to make it worthwhile, it all becomes meaningless. This story has no reward. It kicks you in the head on intervals, tosses in a few neat fights, then pulls the rug out and waits for the praise to come rolling in. And fans, concussed, stagger away mumbling about how they "need to process this." You don't need to process it: it felt like one big sucker punch because that's what it was.

Half the "good" moments were just blatant rehashes of previous good moments. Thor's plotline was probably best because he has success before the final failure.

The film started out feeling very similar to flipping channels -- if every channel was playing a generic Marvel film. But the plot does tie it all together in a cohesive way, and as it puttered along I found myself more and more interested in the outlandish space locations and enjoying the odd awesome moment that lands among the unfunny, downright boring attempts at comedy and the even less interesting character development through dialogue. And every time a character died I would wait patiently for the next hint of joy.

Is it too much to ask that superhero movies be fun? It's not that they don't know how to have fun. I recall one particularly spectacular moment between Bucky and Rocket, and Spider-Man elevates everything by double just by having his face on screen. It seemed that the point of the movie wasn't to be entertaining (or heaven forbid -- interesting!) but to be a culmination of the past ten years. To bring it all together under one roof, and in one fell swoop... point to the next movie: because if the audience isn't talking about the next film in the series as they walk out of the theater, you're doing it wrong.

It's called The Avengers for a reason! They gotta have something to... to.... *Part Two opens* ...AVENGE!!!!

I'm sick and tired of it. I just want to enjoy a movie; to live in the moment of a fantasy world for a few hours, without the threat of anything being held back or saved for later. Marvel is on top of the world right now. They can do whatever they want, and fans will be in the theater, excited, and willing to give it a chance. And what do they do with this power? They give us crumbs. They leave a trail of them, promising more and more, and we follow, like the dutiful fans we are, clinging to the crumbs -- a great character, a favorite actor, a fleeting moment of joy -- and wonder why we don't feel satisfied.

There's not a lot objectively wrong with this movie. It's put together impressively well for being the monstrous task that it was. It mostly makes sense, mostly stays focused, and definitely does what it sets out to do. It often looks good, Thanos and his henchmen's CGI being a notable exception. It has a handful of memorable moments and many more that seem included dispassionately, out of obligation. Some humor is okay, some cringy. Some characters get quality attention, some... aren't even in the movie at all. Hello, Hawkeye? There are scores of nitpicks I could make, but it doesn't matter; the hard truth is, there's nothing this movie could've done that would've made me love it.

I'm not an overly emotional person by nature, but Marvel has taught me to be downright stone-hearted concerning their films.

Fact is, I don't watch superhero movies to see the heroes fail at the end. On the list of things I don't want to see in a superhero film, ultimate failure is top of the box office all year long. (Failure before the end, however, is equally necessary. It's backwards here.) And I know: I know they're going to fix everything, because Spidey has another movie coming, and Marvel will never kill off a cash cow before it's dry. Therefore, it's possible that in combination with Part 2, I will enjoy the story more. Yep, they have me on the hook for another year. Doesn't change the fact, though. The only enjoyment I got out of the end was being so detached that I was actually amused by the manipulative stupidity on display before me.

There's simply nothing here for me. I am a Marvel fan, but they sure do make it difficult. Forcing investment in a story that is out to manipulate me isn't an option, and I've been shortchanged too many times for it to come naturally. If you don't identify with that statement, you'll probably love this film. Since it banks on killing off characters it's important that you be invested. And good on you if you were invested and did like it -- I'm not here to be Gamora and suck the joy out of everything (I'll even admit her death scene and dynamic with Thanos was alright) I'm just here to complain that I found no joy to begin with.

Except maybe Spider-Man. Spider-Man is still great. Maybe I'm turning into a Sony-Marvel fan...

For a movie with no respect, no energy, and minimal creative effort, where the good guys put aside their differences, joining against a common enemy, only to fail miserably and wallow in a stale puddle of passionless tears, all in a blatant effort to build hype for the next film, Infinity War is about as good as you could possibly expect.

Upcoming Movie Roundup - December

I had a very productive Movie-November, watching Thor: Ragnarok, which was entertaining but far too shallow and irreverent (review here). Then Murder on the Orient Express, which was a lovely and well-performed production (review here). And then Justice League which wasn't the worst movie ever but sure did feel like it after all that promise and hype (review here).

Then I caught up on some other 2017 movies I missed in theaters -- Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets, which was better than expected and the most scifi fun I've had all year (review here); and Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales, which was worse than expected with low expectations, and really quite sad. I doubt I'll get around to reviewing it.

Also I forgot to mention it in November, but I also watched Netflix's Punisher, and it was fantastic. Frank Castle in all his jarringly violent glory. I just finished it last night, and it may be the most thoroughly great thing Marvel-Netflix has done. Review on that probably coming soon!

December looks to be slowing down a bit, mainly because I don't have much interest for Oscar-grab season. There's only one must-see for me -- Star Wars, of course, but plenty of others to keep a close eye on too. Are you excited for Star Wars 8? And is there anything else on your radar this month?


The Shape of Water
Dec 1st(limited); R
Sally Hawkins is great, Michael Shannon is great, Guillermo Del Toro is great, and his style of fantasy is great. The trailer is beautiful and unusual, and it looks like the kind of dark and serious fantasy I'd probably love. I won't be seeing it in theaters, but probably will someday. And reviews are saying it's great, so whenever I do see it, it will be with high expectations.




November Criminals
Dec 8th(limited); PG-13
Oh, I thought that after Baby Driver, Ansel Elgort would stick to grown-up movies. This movie screams teen movie that wants to be grown up so that's kinda awkward. It looks like it deals with serious issues, but then teen movies deal with serious issues they rarely do a good job. Based on a YA novel of the same name, which isn't necessarily a bad thing since novels are more likely to have cohesive plots than movies generally, so there is that. Still, I doubt this will be anywhere as good as it apparently wants to be. Also, it has the word "November" in it's title, yet is coming out in December...?




Bullet Head
Dec 8th(limited); R
Haha, this looks like the kind of movie I'd enjoy no matter how bad it is. Adrien Brody is always a plus. And there's also Antonio Banderas and John Malkovich... and some kind of monster that looks like a large zombie dog or something. Nice.




Star Wars: The Last Jedi
Dec 15th; PG-13
(Why no "Episode VIII" in the title??) Who needs any other movies this month -- we have Star Wars!! I'm very excited for this of course but also a bit nervous. I think because after Ep 7 we now have expectations about this trilogy so the stakes have been raised. From the beginning I was most excited at the prospect of Ep 8, because I expected it would take a darker turn like Ep 5 did (though hopefully it will be less similar plot-wise than 7 was to 4) and because I have loved all of Rian Johnson's movie's so far. He has excellent storytelling instincts I think, and always puts emotional umph into his films, while still making them super enjoyable and entertaining. But directors like him have been stifled by big studios before. Star Wars is only part his baby now, and he can't possibly have full control. But it may very well work out perfectly, so here's to that! The trailer looks gorgeous and intriguing... all the great new characters are here... the hype is hyping... I'm ready!




Beyond Skyline
Dec 15th(limited); R
This month's obligatory non-mainstream scifi movie apparently is this -- starring Frank Grillo. Apparently a sequel, or just set in the same universe as another movie I guess. It actually looks like a bigger film than most I mention, with some creative and well-animated aliens. Plus Frank Grillo does the tough-guy action hero very well. It probably won't be great, but it does look like pretty solid entertainment, and not the sort of thing that only a scifi-obsessed person would be interested to see. However, it is hard for me to tell, because I'm definitely scifi-obsessed.




Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle
Dec 20th; PG-13
And this is basically the same idea as the above movie: Probably some solid entertainment, and not much more. The only difference is that this is a big mainstream release, which will make all its shortcomings all the more disappointing. I do like the idea -- how they updated it -- but beyond that, it doesn't promise to be much like the Jumanji we know, or very worthwhile on the whole. The Rock, Karen Gillan, Jack Black and Kevin Hart star.




The Greatest Showman
Dec 20th; PG
More light entertainment, but I guess it's more appropriate here, being a musical loosely based on the life of P.T. Barnum, who was... a showman. In the movie, Hugh Jackman plays him, and creates a circus, and it all looks very razzle-dazzle. He's got a supporting cast of Michelle Williams, Zac Efron, Zendaya, and Rebecca Ferguson, and some original songs. If nothing else, it is sure to be entertaining show.




All the Money in the World
Dec 22nd, R
When I went to see Murder on the Orient Express, they played the trailer that had Kevin Spacey in it. This trailer was published two days ago... and now it's Christopher Plummer. I'm kinda wondering why Spacey was cast in the first place, because they had to use makeup to make him look old. Anyway, most of my interest in this movie is because of the last-minute tossing out and replacing, but ignoring that, the movie looks like a good movie. How much of a good movie, I don't know, but I doubt the change-up could have seriously effected the quality. It's not exactly the sort of movie I'd be eager to see unless it has a happy ending, but I certainly am curious. Michelle Williams stars, with Mark Wahlberg.




The Post
Dec 22nd(limited); PG-13
And what would December be without an Oscar-grab movie? Sure, others might also be Oscar-grabs, but this movie is literally nothing else. It ticks the right political boxes, teams up Meryl Streep with Tom Hanks and Steven Spielberg, and is so try-hard it's making me uncomfortable for it. I like Spielberg, but boy, not like this. I'll wait for Ready Player One.

Upcoming Movie Roundup - May

In April I was right about there not being any must-see new releases for me, though I am still interested in most of them for a someday/rental view. I did get to the theater twice, though, to see some repeats -- Kong: Skull Island, and La La Land -- and both were every bit as good the second time!

May has my most highly anticipated movie of the year (!!!!) plus a couple big releases that I'll certainly see eventually whether or not I go out of my way for them. The blockbuster season is beginning!

How does the month look for you? Anything you're particularly excited for? Let me know in the comments!


Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2
May 5th; PG-13
Do I even need to say anything? This has probably been my most anticipated movie ever since the day I saw the first Guardians of the Galaxy. I have a great amount of confidence in James Gunn, and his ability to write and direct something that is not only entertaining, but also unique, moving, and set perfectly to classic music. Then Chris Pratt is still the greatest thing since sliced cheese, and all this movie needs to win me is him and the other guardians, a handful of good jokes, some splashy visuals, and some groovy tunes, and all those things are already guaranteed. At this point, it's only a question of how good it's gonna be. Saving the galaxy again? You know it!




King Arthur: Legend of the Sword
May12th; PG-13
What's going on here? King Arthur getting the superhero treatment? Excalibur appears to have actual magical powers. Also, filmmakers continue to try and steal from the Lord of the Rings. So here's the thing: Guy Ritchie undoubtedly makes visually unique movies, which gives this one a good bit of appeal, and the plot doesn't look like the worst thing (although I'd bet it falls apart in the end a bit). I like Jude Law, but (as I mentioned last month) don't care for Charlie Hunnam. And it really looks like this trailer is desperate for attention. It certainly looks like the better side of casual popcorn-y action flicks, but probably won't be able to compete with the next Pirates film let alone the Marvel one. There's a little curiosity, but not much hope.




Alien: Covenant
May 19th; R
I recently watched Alien and Aliens for the first time, and then Prometheus, so now this film almost seems like required viewing -- so of course it has to push that R-rating further than I want to follow. Prometheus's disappointment was in not being so much of an Alien movie, but was otherwise very effective, so since this one truly features the aliens, it looks like an ideal blend. Visually modern, but referring back to the originals. I won't be seeing it in theaters, but now that I'm in the franchise... I don't think there's any escaping.




Everything, Everything
May 19th; PG-13
This month in sappy kiddie romances.... This one's based on a YA novel that I came across in a store and was surprised at how short and large-printed it was. More like a tween novel. But you gotta adapt those teen novels, so here it is. It's got Rue from The Hunger Games all grown up, Nick Robinson, and the lady from Nacho Libre, and looks just about as sappy and fluffy as they come. I looked up spoilers out of curiosity and it cemented those thoughts even more. Probably fans of the book are looking forward to it, and fans of the genre will watch it, but if it makes any kind of splash I'll be super surprised.




Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales
May 26th; PG-13
So here's how I'm reasoning right now: there's no way this franchise could get any worse, so maybe this one is actually good? No way to go but up sort of deal? Well... "good" is maybe pushing it, but it certainly does look better than the last one, and the one before that, so maybe a Dead Man's Chest level of good? I'd be up for that. Sides of appeal: a young Jack Sparrow, Javier Bardem, Brenton Thwaites, and Kaya Scodelario. Plus the animation doesn't look as messy as it has before. The trailer says "final adventure." Does that mean this is the end?

Upcoming Movie Roundup - April

March's highlight was %100 Kong: Skull Island for me with a visual feast of epic fun, buffet-style. (Read my very pleased review here!) I also saw Beauty and the Beast which was only just as good as it needed to be. (Read my review here to see where it went wrong and what it got right.) I still want to see Life, but a theater trip for it is currently up in the air.

Iron Fist was released on Netflix, and we watched it slowly and just finished it, more than a little disappointed. But there was a great superhero show after all -- in February's Legion. It recently wrapped up every bit as well as it began: appropriately crazy, beautiful, and terrifying.

This month I'm feeling a little cynical towards all the new releases, with no must-sees -- but at the same time, plenty of potential. So time will tell if my cynicism is warranted or not! What looks good to you this month, and what was your highlight from March? Let me know in the comments!


Colossal
Apr 7th; R
It's definitely an original idea that I would think would have to potential to be funny, but it's hard to tell whether the potential is fulfilled or not -- the trailer itself isn't funny at all, and the gimmick may cause more problems than it does provide humor. The trailer gives away a lot, but I still have questions about the mechanics of the premise. I don't care for Anne Hathaway at all, but she's balanced out by Dan Stevens who I'd watch in anything. Plus, however much like a rom-com it appears to be, it's still technically a sci-fi too, and that helps a lot. Mild interest here.




Gifted
Apr 7th; PG-13
This movie is full-on drama which is probably the least appealing genre out there to me, and yet it still looks interesting -- and not even because it starts Chris Evans. In fact, the thing that really grabbed my attention when I saw first saw the trailer was Jenny Slate playing a serious, apparently likeable character! I really want to see her do that. The story is just about as interesting as a drama can get, but I can foresee cliches and sappiness as well; it all depends on how it's told.




The Fate of the Furious
Apr 14th; PG-13
I caught up on the Fast and the Furious franchise before the 7th one came out and still didn't bother to see it in theaters, so that's probably a good indicator of where I'm at with this one, too. I also understand continuing on without Paul Walker, but a lot of the film's appeal is gone without him at the center of everything. Otherwise this looks to be a solid entry in a solid and long-running franchise. They're not getting lazy and sticking to the same fourmula by switching Vin Diesel to villain side (not that he's REALLY a villain of course) and the stunts are appropriately larger than those in the last movie. I expect this will keep the fun, popcorn-action series rolling along.




The Lost City of Z
Apr 14th; PG-13
I heard about this one because Tom Holland is in it, and was under the impression for a while that it was a fantasy movie of some kind. Then I found out it's based on a true story which is a big change. I'm not often a fan of true stories, and I'm not a fan of Charlie Hunnam either, who plays the lead. However, for people who are fans or those who don't care, the film does look good -- artistically filmed and artistically told -- and may very well be a worthwhile watch.




Norman
Apr 14th; R
Another that has Dan Stevens in a supporting role. Richard Gere is in the lead and apparently branching out from how we know him with an indie character piece. The characters seem complex and the plot doesn't feel overly familiar, and it has that dark but quirky indie style to it... but honestly if I ever happen to watch it it'll probably only be because of Dan Stevens... and probably also because it was free and I had nothing more interesting to watch.




Free Fire
Apr 21st; R
Sharlto Copley, Brie Larson, Armie Hammer, Cillian Murphy, Sam Riley, non-stop R-rated action-comedy. They had me at Sharlto Copley. Definitely the most wacky movie to come out this month, and also the sort of movie that doesn't need a good critic score to be enjoyable for those inclined. It's obviously meant to be ridiculous. It's R-rating is a little more than I'd prefer to have to deal with, but with this cast and the craziness of the trailer, it's gonna keep nagging me whether I see it or not.

Language warning for this trailer! I tried very hard to find a green band one, but I think in order for one to exist it would have to have no dialogue...




The Circle
Apr 28th; PG-13
Creepy. And this one's based on a book -- has anyone read it? After being disappointed with Emma Watson's Belle I'm not stoked at the idea of seeing her again, but maybe this will be a chance for her to redeem herself. I am eager to see John Boyega in something else though, and Tom Hanks and Karen Gillan are also in the cast. Being based on a book gives me a lot more confidence in the plot's quality than I might normally have. So far all signs point to this being the highlight of the month, though I'll need to be convinced a bit more before I shell out for a ticket. Maybe I should read the book...

Upcoming Movie Roundup - October

As I predicted, I didn't go to the theater in September. I am still interested to see The Magnificent Seven and Miss Peregrine's Home for Peculiar Children though, in spite of the not-fantastic reviews, and Deepwater Horizon a little more than before, because of the not-at-all-bad reviews.

I may not get to the theater again this month, (unless I make a point to go, which I may try) as there are no must-see-in-theater releases, but there certainly are a few very interesting releases that may become must-sees if they turn out as good as they look.

Did you see anything in September? Anything look good to you in October?



The Girl on the Train
Oct 7th; R
I read the book. And I enjoyed it, which was nice since I've been having bad luck with books lately. But after reading it and rewatching the trailer, I have very little interest and very little confidence in this film. Emily Blunt and Haley Bennett are well-cast I think, but otherwise -- even though I love Luke Evans and Rebecca Ferguson -- it's kinda off. Also the film isn't set in England, but NYC, which takes away a LOT of appeal for me. And what's the point of doing that, anyway? Unnecessary changes are indicators of bad adaptations for me. They've also amped up the sexiness a whole lot. So maybe they're trying to increase appeal and tweak it to be more exciting. It is an introverted story, and the book's strongest aspect was the writing style, which can't translate. If it releases to acclaim I'll probably watch it someday, but as of now they've lost me. We'll see if I'm the only one.



The Accountant
Oct 14th; R
This is an excellent trailer. And it looks to be a very unique story, and Ben Affleck is always at his best when he does the trifecta of writing directing and starring, so I'm pretty confident about this film's quality already. Based on the title only I was wondering how exciting it could be, but after watching the trailer, I think it's got that covered too.Very interested to see how this does.




The River Thief
Oct 14th (limited); NR
Ever since I saw Super 8 I've been waiting for Joel Courtney to be in more movies, and finally one has crossed my path. You can't tell much about plot from this trailer, but the write-up makes it out to be interesting and promising. And it certainly has a beautiful look to it which you can see from the trailer -- lots of great shots. In a lot of ways it reminds me of Mud, which is very appealing to me, since that one of favorite films. If it turns out half as good a Mud it'd still be a good movie!




Jack Reacher: Never Go Back
Oct 21st; NR
(I can't find a MPAA rating, but I'm assuming it'll be PG-13.) The first Jack Reacher film didn't impress me much, but right now the sequel's actually looking to be an improvement! Firstly, Tom Cruise doesn't just do sequels for the sake of doing a sequel. The way I heard it he wasn't even interested in a sequel until he had a good idea for one. Then there's the addition of Cobie Smulders who is excellent at being an action heroine. She might be the biggest appeal of this actually. And of course there's the fact that there's no Mission: Impossible film this year, so why not? You gotta have you Tom Cruise action flick fix!




Keeping Up with the Joneses 
Oct 21st; PG-13
I'm gonna go ahead and include this movie since I've watched the trailer twice now, though I'm not very interested in the film. And by "not very interested" I mean "really really not interested almost at all." The most interesting part is Gal Gadot who is cool, and it would be neat to see her play a spy... and comedy for that matter too. The premise is not bad, if typical, and could make for a fun action comedy, but based on the trailer, it's not gonna be of good quality in either the comedy or the action sides.




In a Valley of Violence
Oct 21st; R
I like the look of this movie. The trailer is very simple, exposition-heavy, and not terribly eye-catching, but that is actually what got my attention. It feels classic, like an honest-to-goodness straight-forward western tale of old. Ethan Hawke is the lead, John Travolta is the baddie, and Karen Gillan's there too. Yeah. I'm liking the look of this movie. A lot.

Guardians of the Galaxy

 This review is spoiler-free!

The unstoppable force that is the Marvel film industry has yet again done what seemed impossible in theory, and through the hands of James Gunn, has given us a superhero epic so out there it is literally in the far reaches of space, yet so familiar and welcoming that you have laughed and cried and fallen in love even before the opening credits finish.

If you've seen the movie, I'm sure you understand what I mean. After that glorious grin-inducing moment that accompanied the film title, assuring that my highest hopes for this movie were, and would be fulfilled, I sat back, relaxed, and enjoyed the crazy awesome ride.

It's obvious they all know how awesome they are.

Meet Peter Quill, ADKA, (also debatably known as) Star-Lord, AKA, Mr. Everything-is-Awesome-Sauce himself, Chris Pratt, who is now suddenly and universally acknowledged as the greatest action-hero-with-a-sense-of-humor since Harrison Ford was young and pretty. Quill has the cool brood of Hawkeye, the care-free lifestyle of Tony Stark, and the heart of Captain America, but more than that, he has a exuberant style all his own that had me grinning from ear to ear from the moment the character made his debut. Pratt is extraordinarily perfect for the role, and not only because he can dance; he brings a laid-back charm and fun humor, retro-style sci-fi coolness, and just the right amount of underlying heart and heroism. Technically, Guardians is about all five Guardians, but understandably, the film really belongs to Star-Lord; the rest just follow his lead.

Star-Lord. Legendary outlaw.

Gamora is green, but otherwise humanoid, but she more resembles a reptile than anything else. She's lean and lithe and agile, colder than a warm blooded creature has a right to be, and she might as well be covered in spiky scales with how often she lets anyone close to her. But it's all a front that she has built up over the years of a hard life, and underneath there is evidence of life waiting to be rekindled. Zoe Saldana is veteran actor of these types of movie, and this kind of character is her forte; she portrays every detail of her character with elegant ease -- even under all that makeup.

It's not easy being green. ... Is that unoriginal?

But her makeup is nothing compared to David Bautista as the huge, intimidating Drax. He is also green, but his entire ever-shirtless torso is covered in raised red markings. Pro wrestlers aren't exactly known for compelling acting skills, but there's few who could have pulled off this bizarre role as well and honestly as Bautista did, let alone other wrestlers. The Rock? Don't make me laugh. Drax has his own tragic past and a boiling rage as a product of it, but his way of speaking very literally and properly, like an ancient, solemn warrior makes a unique blend, and Bautista controls the balance with grace, and has some killer laugh lines.

"I like your knife I'm keeping it."

Vin Diesel never gets to show his face, but does get a very interesting character to play in the form of Groot. He's a tree. A walking tree with four limbs and a dumb smile. But most limiting is the fact that everything he says is said using three words: "I," "am," and "Groot." If he opens his mouth to speak he always uses his entire vocabulary, and always in the same order -- shortest word to longest. So Diesel, you might think, doesn't have much to do at all, but you might be surprised at how expressive inflections can be, so, combined with some high quality CG effects, he makes a surprisingly sweet and endearing and understandable oaf out of a tangle of wood.

And he has some very useful skills.

It doesn't seem possible, but Groot isn't even the strangest character of the group. That title belongs to Rocket, a raccoon who experimental cybergenetics has turned into a foul-mouthed little ball of fuzzy fury. Raccoons are already suspicious little characters, but when one has an unhealthy interest in explosives and big guns, and has the voice of Bradley Cooper coming out of him, things can get very strange very fast. But Cooper does a great job with the potentially tedious character. He's very often a source of snarky and smart-aleck-y wit, and has his humanized moments too, so we feel more of a connection to him than if he were just a cute but unusually dangerous furball.

Rocket likes the simple pleasures in life, like big guns.

Our main villain is Lee Pace as Ronan who towers over everyone in bright blue maleficence, and uses his epic deep voice to its full potential with power-crazed monologues that could have been terribly cheesy in any other less intimidating actor's hands. His hench-lady Nebula is Doctor Who's Karen Gillan, playing the creepy alien this time for an impressive change. There's no orange hair, or Scottish accent; she's only recognizable by her sarcastic attitude which is in fine form with an extra dose of bitterness in her character.

When they demonstrate how Nebula is a cyborg is super creepy and funny at the same time.

Typically for comedy, a moment is added with the sole purpose of being funny, so if it fails it's not only not funny, it's actually bad, with a pointless existence. With Guardians, the humor is a natural, inseparable part of the characters, and the story, and the ambiance of the whole film, so the "failure" of a joke never had a devastating effect, but every new successful, hilarious line or gag piled on the awesomeness. I also laughed a few times to relive the overwhelming glee from all the awesomeness.

And if there's one thing this movie just oozes with, it's awesomeness. It doesn't do anything halfway -- everything is given to us on a level that could easily overwhelm other aspects, but because everything is on that level, the movie instead soars to incredible heights. The look of the film is almost distinctly Marvel, except that it is almost exclusively set everywhere except Earth, and neither did anywhere conveniently look like Earth. The fullness of the space setting, creative sets, costumes, alien makeup, and the fantastic color scheme set this film as far away from others as it is set from them in distance.

What a view though... from all perspectives.

The plot is the one thing you could maybe say was overwhelmed by the dazzling proportions of other things. I wouldn't though -- to me the simplicity of the storyline was refreshing, and it wasn't at all lazy or predictable. Even though it was simple, it was smart; no confusing plot twists, or mind numbing mysteries, but smart and witty, and straightforward, (but not without its share of subtlety or details) and a little rough around the edges. That last one might sound like a bad thing, but it's not really. I am a firm believer that a film's qualities should mirror its heroes', and if there's one thing all the Guardians are together, it's rough around the edges. Unpolished is the exact right consistency, allowing the fun off-the-cuff feel to lead where it may.

The defining aspect of this film though, hands down, is the soundtrack. There's just something about snazzy 70's pop songs playing in background of a full-fledged modern space adventure that defies my capacity for comprehension of its groovy magnificence. And as if its being magnificent wasn't enough, the music is in the movie; we listen along with the characters, and it draws us in closer to the story. It even holds an important place in the narrative and Quill's character. His attachment to the last remnant of his life on Earth -- a Walkman with a mix tape titled "Awesome Mix Vol 1." -- is oddly profound.

Out for revenge. Also, Star-Lord's mask is the coolest thing EVER.

Now I can't very well review a Marvel film without mentioning the action. This isn't typical Marvel action though, because the biggest sequence is actually a spacecraft battle, which evokes thoughts of Star Wars more than a little, and is therefore a good thing, and also because our heroes aren't extremely super-powered, and usually fight like regular people (who are really good at fighting). Drax and Gamora are the best at hand to hand, but there's only one real hand to hand showdown, and it doesn't get much attention. Otherwise they just pummel people in neat ways. Rocket shoots and yells and Groot yells and grows wooden weapons. Interestingly, Quill is least lethal; though he can whack people with random objects with the best of them, his special weapon is diplomacy, which he uses to talk himself and others out of getting killed -- a skill that gets regular good use.

This was my favorite action sequence; it perfectly showcased everyone's strong suit.

It's an overused word, but it applies so well, so I'm going to use it one more time, and bear in mind that I'm not using it lightly: Guardians of the Galaxy is an awesome movie. It has made a star (and Star-Lord) out of a charming goofball who couldn't deserve it more, and made serious, seriously lovable characters out of an angry raccoon and a communicatively challenged plant. It was involving and engaging throughout just by focusing on having fun, and inviting us to join in the adventurous party. The slick sci-fi and the retro are mixed to astonishing perfection. Never too serious, never too flippant. Brilliant comedy. Explosive adventure. Bursting heart. And obvious spoiler alert: the Guardians save the galaxy.

They went all the way; fooled around and I fell in love with their cherry daydream, but I'm not in love, it's even more -- it's an escape with spirit into the sky. They had their doubters, but now things are gonna get easier, cause we want them back, and there ain't no mountain high enough to keep them from coming and getting the love, because (ooga-chaka ooga ooga) I can't stop this feeling, deep inside of me...

I--I-I--I-I'm (bum bum)

Hooked on a feeling (da da-da daa)

I'm high on believing (da da-da daa)

That you're in love with me!

Anticipating The Guardians of the Galaxy

Confession time: I have not, to the best of my memory, ever read a superhero comic. So I have no previous knowledge about this superhero sci-fi action/adventure comedy called Guardians of the Galaxy, but it's as highly anticipated for me as a Marvel movie can be. (Marvel movies can be anticipated to a stronger degree than regular movies, don't cha know?) I may not be a comic reader, but I am certainly a Marvel fan, and I knew I would see this movie the moment I knew it existed. But I don't devote entire posts to the subject of anticipating something lightly. Here are 7 reasons why my excited anticipation is so extreme:

1. The cast of characters.

An assassin, a thief, a raccoon, a maniac, and a tree walk into a lineup....

The last time Marvel gave us a cast this unprecedented it was 2012, and it broke box-office records. Of course this is pretty different -- none of these characters have previous solo films. But they all look pretty fantastic in their own way.

Bradley Cooper is voicing Rocket, the raccoon with serious anger issues. (In the normal way, not in the turn-green-and-grow-huge-muscles way.) He appears to be the character that everyone will either adore or despise. I plan on adoring. And Vin Deisel is voicing Groot. The "tree." He says everything by saying, "I am Groot." Should be hilarious.

Dave Bautista is Drax. Very large, green and red patterned skin, no shirts required. I tried to figure out what their Avenger equivalent would be, and I got stuck with Rocket and Groot, (combined, they make up the Hulk) but Drax's would have to be Thor. The crazy muscles help of course, but mostly because Drax's way of speaking is very Shakespearean, and the intricacies of language escape him.

Zoe Saldana is a mysterious alien again as Gamora, but this time green. And the pink hair ends is a good touch. (Everyone knows the pink goes good with green, right?) She also gets some very dramatic cheekbones, and I would be surprised if she is given every ounce of dry wit this movie has to offer. Obviously, she's the Black Widow of the group, but even if she wasn't a girl, she'd probably still get the title. She looks to be the best at hand to hand combat, and is a loner, emotionless, and scary. Oh yeah, and pretty.

And Chris Pratt is the hero that no one has heard of, Star-Lord. Or just Peter Quill. Of Earth. The movie hasn't even released yet, but he's still already the latest go-to guy for a charming and handsome leading action/adventure man. You could attribute it to all the weight he lost for this role, but are people really that shallow? Uhm... Well, Director James Gunn isn't; he was ready to cast him and give him a CG six-pack. Fortunately that wasn't necessary. Star-Lord is the Iron Man (charming and cocky) Captain America (sincere leader) and Hawkeye (epitome of cool) of this group all at once, and is as good-looking as whichever one you choose. But the best comparison really is that he's like a space Indiana Jones. So, basically, he's Han Solo.

Look at this picture and then tell me honestly that it doesn't remind you of Indy. I can just see him rubbing his chin, and then pulling out a bag of sand...

And of course as a diligent Doctor Who fan, I must mention Karen Gillan as villainous lady Nebula. She shaved her head for this role, and looks awesome. I mean just absolutely fantastic. I have no idea what her character will be like, but do not doubt of its incredible-ness. And I fully expect an epic battle between her and Gamora.

This is what happens when you stop traveling with The Doctor, Amy...

Neither do I doubt the incredible-ness of Lee Pace (aka Thranduil of the Hobbit movies) as Ronan, (the ACCUSER!) who is the main villain of this film. Keep rocking those eyebrows, elf-king. I look forward to your evil monologues.

The rest of my points are all very closely connected. There is: 2. The trailer. Which features: 3. The soundtrack. Which helps give the movie: 4. The unique style.

Here's the original trailer which introduces the characters with some humor and gives out a taste of the snazzy action, all to the tune of Blue Swede's Hooked on a Feeling:



And the second trailer, which makes a valiant attempt to show us a serious and epic film, but can't help adding in a little comedy at the end.



And here's something fun -- a trailer for the original Star Wars trilogy, in the style of Guardians of the Galaxy! It makes me want to re-watch Star Wars almost as much as I want to see Guardians.



It's really the music that does it. Speaking of, below is the official GotG soundtrack cover.

Seriously. It doesn't get more awesome than this.

And here is the track list:

1. "Hooked on a Feeling" Performed by Blue Swede
2. "Go All the Way" Performed by Raspberries
3. "Spirit in the Sky" Performed by Norman Greenbaum
4. "Moonage Daydream" Performed by David Bowie
5. "Fooled Around and Fell in Love" Performed by Elvin Bishop
6. "I'm Not in Love" Performed by 10cc
7. "I Want You Back" Performed by Jackson 5
8. "Come and Get Your Love" Performed by Redbone
9. "Cherry Bomb" Performed by The Runaways
10. "Escape (The Piña Colada Song)" Performed by Rupert Holmes
11. "O-O-H Child" Performed by The Five Stairsteps
12. "Ain't No Mountain High Enough" Performed by Marvin Gaye and Tammi Terrell 

 Retro meets sci-fi is one of my most favoritest things. And clever use of music in film is another -- when the music actually becomes a part of the film, not just something to listen to while there's no dialogue. I could put some examples, but really that's another whole post on its own. One I'll wait to write until I've seen Guardians, just in case it goes as I predict and has some of the best examples itself.

As for the style, well, I've never seen a James Gunn film before, so I don't know exactly what his style is. I do know that he was hired so that he could lend his unique style and flair to the film. And if any of what we're seeing here is at all a clue... with the overall overwhelming boldness... the quirky characters... the dark, gritty tone... with a shiny, space finish...

And just look at that color palette! The dark earth-tones contrasted with bright neons. Every single one of these pictures is a work of art in itself. Just look at the textures, and the lighting and the contrast...

Okay I'm getting a little of-topic. Photos and trailers have been misleading before, but if they were any indication, we're in for a real treat with this movie, and making it in the style of James Gunn was the right decision.

6. I have one final point to make. It's very simple, and gives the film the most credibility, and can be summed up in one word: Marvel. I trust that they know what they're doing (because they really really do) and am staking a ton of hope on the success and awesomeness of their latest film. I usually think it is unwise to set expectations so high and risk disappointment, but this is much more fun right now.

7. Wait wait, I forgot one. And this is, like, all my points combined. Very important. Look:

Their tagline is "You're welcome." People. Their tagline is "YOU'RE WELCOME."

So, tell me: on a scale of 1 to "dying," how excited for this movie are you? What in particular is most exciting to you? (I'm assuming you are at least a little bit excited since you made it to the end of this post.) (Did you notice I skipped number 5? I did. Just now. And now I guess I'll leave it.) And isn't that the absolute best tagline ever?