The Suicide Squad (2021) review

2016 wasn’t exactly the best year for the DC Extended Universe. Simply put, this was meant to be the year where the franchise would officially kick-start its efforts to rival the likes of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. And yet, while both of its 2016 releases did quite well at the box-office, with each grossing at least over $700 million worldwide, neither film managed to fare as well with critics. This was especially the case for the latter of the two films, Suicide Squad, despite it being one of the most anticipated films of that year. Not only did it boast one of the most notable marketing campaigns in recent memory, but the concept of a superhero film based almost entirely around supervillains allowed it to stand out amongst its peers. However, upon its release, the film was just as much of a critical dud as its fellow 2016 DCEU release, Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice. Now, admittedly, both films were negatively affected by studio interference that had a clear impact on what was ultimately released in theaters. In Suicide Squad’s case, it was the result of Warner Bros. trying to course-correct after BvS received tons of flak for its dour tone. Thus, what director David Ayer originally envisioned as a ‘soulful drama’ was drastically altered in post-production (to the point where, no joke, the final cut was handled by a movie trailer production company) in a failed attempt at making it more light-hearted. Despite this, however, its $746.6 million turn at the box office paved the way for a sequel, albeit without Ayer as its director due to his commitment to a different DCEU project, Gotham City Sirens. Thus, this new sequel ended up going in a different direction thanks to one James Gunn.

Now I know what some of you might be thinking… isn’t James Gunn more of a Marvel guy? And to be fair, you wouldn’t be wrong for thinking that. Since 2014, Gunn has mainly been known for his work in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. It all started when he took some of the most obscure characters in the Marvel universe, the Guardians of the Galaxy, and turned them into some of the MCU’s most popular characters with their first official solo outing, which still stands as one of the MCU’s most highly acclaimed and widely beloved installments. He then followed that up in 2017 with an equally successful (and arguably superior) follow-up, Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2. And just a few months later, before much of the MCU’s post-Endgame slate was even confirmed, a third Guardians film was set up with Gunn once again returning to write and direct it… but for a while, he wasn’t. I’m not going to focus on this next bit too much since, as many of you know, I don’t like to get into deep political discussions on this site, but basically, in 2018, Gunn ended up pissing off one too many a Trump supporter, who then proceeded to target him over old Twitter posts that he had made from 2008 to 2012 that featured… let’s say, dated attempts at humor. And while Gunn had already apologized for these tweets back around the time that the first Guardians of the Galaxy film was in the works, their resurgence resulted in Disney making the utterly shocking decision to fire him as Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3’s director. Thankfully, Disney eventually realized that they probably shouldn’t have given in to right-wing morons and Gunn was reinstated to his original job in 2019, with Vol. 3 currently set for a May 2023 release. But before all that happened, DC promptly stepped in to offer him the gig of the second Suicide Squad film, and it’s a good thing that they did because The Suicide Squad is yet another example of what happens when the DCEU realizes that it doesn’t need to take itself ‘that’ seriously to match the high quality of the MCU.

The South American nation of Corto Maltese has recently come under attack after an insurrection led by dictator Silvio Luna (Juan Diego Botto) and his second-in-command, Major General Mateo Suarez (Joaquín Cosío). All the while, one of their main associates, Dr. Gaius Graves AKA The Thinker (Peter Capaldi), has been working on a secret experiment codenamed ‘Project Starfish’ in Corto Maltese’s Nazi-era laboratory, Jotunheim. In response to this, government official Amanda Waller (Viola Davis) reinitiates her black ops unit Task Force X, which consists of some of the most notorious supervillains in the world who are forced to cooperate under the promise of a reduced prison sentence and the threat of death via explosive devices implanted into their necks. Once again under the command of Colonel Rick Flag (Joel Kinnaman), Task Force X, now consisting of returning members such as the unpredictable Harley Quinn (Margot Robbie) and new recruits such as mercenary Robert DuBois AKA Bloodsport (Idris Elba) and hard-edged vigilante Christopher Smith AKA Peacemaker (John Cena), travel to Corto Maltese to investigate. However, in their efforts to help the locals deal with Luna and his army, they soon realize that they’re dealing with a lot more than they had originally bargained for, especially when it comes to what ‘Project Starfish’ truly is.

I’ve often found the newer installments of the DC Extended Universe to be the antithesis of the franchise’s initial outings. Whereas the likes of Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice and Justice League (the ‘Snyder Cut’, specifically…) were overly dark and serious, which arguably wasn’t the best route to take for these iconic characters, films like Aquaman and Shazam felt far more natural when it came to embracing their comic book roots. And when it comes to James Gunn’s The Suicide Squad, it is probably the best example of this out of any post-Justice League installment of the DC Extended Universe, especially when compared to its predecessor. Regardless of all the issues that occurred during its post-production process, the original Suicide Squad utterly squandered the potential of its unique premise of focusing on supervillains by being a tonally uneven mess with an ugly visual style and a shockingly harsh mean streak. The Suicide Squad, on the other hand, doesn’t fall victim to any of that. It boasts far better visuals and effortlessly follows in the footsteps of Gunn’s Guardians of the Galaxy films by expertly balancing its strong emotional moments with its hilariously snappy dialogue. And while this next part isn’t necessarily the original Suicide Squad’s fault since it most likely had to maintain a PG-13 rating, The Suicide Squad fully embraces its R-rating. Simply put, this film can get so damn intense at times that it legitimately rivals the most graphic sequences from the likes of the Deadpool films and Logan. And yet, while this may seem like something that would make the film even harsher than its predecessor, Gunn’s skillful direction prevents that from happening.

Case in point, this film serves as another great case where Gunn manages to take characters who aren’t necessarily ‘heroic’ and give them such great character development that you come to love many of them by the end of it. Much of this is thanks to the outstanding ensemble cast that Gunn has assembled, whether it’s some of his most frequent collaborators, the few returning leads from the first Suicide Squad, or some incredibly exciting newcomers. Of course, you’ve got Margot Robbie returning as Harley Quinn in what may just be her best performance in the role to date as the film dutifully maintains the excellent retooled characterization that she was given in Birds of Prey while also fully capitalizing on the madcap personality that has made Harley such an iconic character. The far better-refined script and direction also results in stronger performances from those returning from the previous film, especially Joel Kinnaman, who gets to have a lot more fun as Rick Flag this time around instead of being the cold and stoic figure that he was in the previous film. Ultimately, though, the biggest standouts of the cast are its newcomers. Idris Elba headlines the film excellently as Bloodsport, who’s easily the most level-headed member of the group, and while he’s technically playing one of the more unlikable members of the squad, John Cena’s phenomenal charisma still manages to shine through as the hilariously douchey Peacemaker (It’s easy to see why he and James Gunn are going to be teaming up again for a Peacemaker series on HBO Max next year). And to close out the main cast, we have an outstanding trio of supporting players in Daniela Melchior as Cleo Cazo AKA Ratcatcher II, arguably the most sympathetic and ‘heroic’ member of the team, Sylvester Stallone as the voice of the fearsome but lovably goofy King Shark, and David Dastmalchian as Abner Krill AKA the Polka-Dot Man. He may be one of the weirdest characters that you’ve ever seen in the world of comics, but thanks to Dastmalchian’s wholly endearing portrayal, he’s truly unforgettable.

Simply put, The Suicide Squad is everything that the first Suicide Squad wasn’t. It’s a film that wholeheartedly embraces the concept of supervillains who are sent out on missions where they aren’t meant to survive but also succeeds in one of the main things that the previous film tried to accomplish: finding the humanity within its ‘villainous’ characters. Obviously, not every ‘villain’ in this film is meant to be ‘redeemed’, per se, but when you have a director like James Gunn who, above everything else, fully understands the importance of strong character development and emotional poignancy, it truly goes to show just how pivotal all that stuff is to the enduring success of the superhero genre. It’s the reason why the MCU has continued to be the cultural juggernaut that it is today… and why the DCEU struggled considerably out of the starting gate as many of its early films tended to emphasize style over substance. Ultimately, though, if you were to ask me why a film like this works better than something like Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice, I’d say that it’s because The Suicide Squad has a greater understanding of how superhero films should be like tonally. Sure, it can be serious when it needs to be, but at the end of the day, it’s a far better idea for a superhero film to embrace the goofier elements of its source material rather than it trying to be something that it’s not.     

Rating: 5/5!

Cats (2019) review

Your eyes aren’t deceiving you, folks… I’m about to review what has easily been the most infamous film of 2019, the film adaptation of the long-running musical, Cats. The musical made its London debut in 1981, five years before composer Andrew Lloyd Webber unleashed his biggest smash hit on the world, The Phantom of the Opera, and was inspired by the 1939 collection of poems titled Old Possum’s Book of Practical Cats written by T.S. Eliot. A year later, it would make its Broadway debut, and both versions of the show ended up being massive financial hits. To date, Cats is the fourth highest-grossing musical of all-time with a worldwide gross of over $2.8 billion, and it is widely regarded as the first ‘mega-musical’ AKA the theater equivalent of a cinematic blockbuster. Over the years, however, the overall reception towards the show has varied due to its many bizarre aspects, and sure enough, this mindset carried over to the announcement that a film adaptation was in the works as practically every major aspect of its production became a prime source of internet mockery. Sure, it was set to be directed by Tom Hooper, who had previously directed 2010’s Best Picture winner The King’s Speech and the 2012 adaptation of another legendary musical, Les Misérables, but the overall mixed reception towards the latter and the growing criticism of Hooper’s directorial trademarks didn’t help. And once the first trailer for the film was released, the internet recoiled at the sight of the bizarre project that was set to hit theaters which, when it ultimately did, was widely panned by critics and immediately regarded as one of the most disastrous films in recent memory. Thus, today we’ll be going over all the reasons why Cats is the utterly fascinating mess that it ends up being.

One night, a young white kitten named Victoria (Francesca Hayward) is abandoned by her owner on the streets of London. Immediately, she is approached by a group of alley cats who refer to themselves as ‘Jellicle’ cats. Through them, Victoria learns that tonight happens to be the biggest night of the year for the Jellicles, the Jellicle Ball. Every year, the Jellicles’ wise leader, Old Deuteronomy (Judi Dench), selects one member of their tribe who will ascend to the mythical place known as the Heaviside Layer and be reborn. And so, Victoria and the rest of the Jellicles begin to witness some of the most prominent members of the tribe compete for this honor, which includes everyone from the bourgeois Bustopher Jones (James Corden) to the elderly theater performer Gus (Ian McKellen). At the same time, however, the Jellicles must also deal with the actions of the sinister Macavity (Idris Elba), who will stop at nothing to ensure that he’s the one who gets chosen. And really, folks… that’s about it for the plot. As I’m sure those in the theater community will agree, Cats sports the very definition of a bare-bones plot that’s basically just a series of vignettes in which new characters are introduced and they have their big solo numbers. And while I can’t say much about how this translates to the stage since I’ve admittedly haven’t seen Cats in its original musical form, I have the feeling that it works a lot better there than it does on film. Here, that kind of plot makes the whole thing quite repetitive and it also doesn’t help that the film speeds through the story at a surprisingly rapid pace, which means that there’s never a point where it slows down to let us properly fathom any of its utterly bizarre moments.

But, of course, the one thing that will forever define this film’s reputation is how it brings the story’s feline characters to life. Ever since its debut, the musical has always relied on elaborate costuming and makeup to accomplish this. But as for the film, it opted to go the CGI route and utilize motion-capture to turn its cast into cats. And as you might have guessed, this was the main reason why the film’s initial trailer ended up becoming so notorious as many felt that its CGI designs were one of the most blatant examples of imagery that falls into the uncanny valley. And while I personally never found these designs ‘scary’ like the rest of the internet regards them as (in a year which also saw that same description apply to the sight of Will Smith’s Genie in his traditional blue form and the initial cinematic design of Sonic the Hedgehog), even I can agree that this wasn’t the right way to go when it came to bringing Cats to the big screen. Simply put, practically all the big stars in the film get some incredibly unflattering CGI makeovers. And despite all the behind-the-scenes videos that emphasized how the production utilized some genuinely impressive larger-than-life sets, this is a very CGI-dominated film in general, which means that the weaker effects don’t just apply to the characters. However, given the various reports that came out after the film’s release, this is ultimately something that you can’t really fault the VFX artists for since it’s now been well-established that this film was beyond rushed and they had an incredibly tense relationship with director Tom Hooper. In fact, it was so rushed that the studio had to send out a new version of the film to theaters (during its opening weekend, no less) to fix some glaring visual effects errors, namely the appearance of Judi Dench’s wedding ring on her hand in certain shots. However, from what I’ve read (and based off the version of the film that I watched on VUDU), this ‘updated’ cut didn’t make any noticeable changes, which means that, yes, you can still see Judi Dench’s wedding ring on numerous occasions.

And yet, arguably the most ironic aspect of this film is that, despite all its visual shortcomings and its strict adherence to maintaining the overall weirdness of its source material, much of its star-studded cast is still fully committed to the bizarre antics that they end up partaking in. Going back to this film’s behind-the-scenes videos for a second, the overall vibe that you get from the cast in their various testimonials is that they genuinely wanted to be there, and as crazy as it may sound, this enthusiasm can be seen in a lot of their performances. Legends like Judi Dench and Ian McKellen give it their all and while she may have arguably been a bit young for the role of the withered glamour cat Grizabella, Jennifer Hudson still gives the musical’s most iconic number, ‘Memory’, the emotional powerhouse of a performance it deserves. In fact, Dench’s casting as a gender-swapped Old Deuteronomy is quite significant since she was originally cast as Grizabella in the original London production of the musical but had to drop out at the last minute when she tore her Achilles tendon during rehearsals. But remember what I said earlier about how this is basically just a series of vignettes that jump from character to character? Well, because of that, most of the characters in this film are basically relegated to minor cameos which, in this instance, ends up applying to the most prominent members of the ensemble such as McKellen, James Corden, and Taylor Swift as the flirtatious Bombalurina, just to name a few. Instead, the film tends to focus more on the story’s supporting players, namely the trio of Munkustrap (Robbie Fairchild), Mr. Mistoffelees (Laurie Davidson), and Victoria, whose traditionally silent role in the musical is expanded upon to make her the main protagonist. However, the methods in which the film handles this change are rather mediocre and, at best, she just ends up being a generally passive audience surrogate. Thus, while I’m well aware that many have harped on Francesca Hayward’s performance in the role, this is ultimately another case like the VFX artists where you can’t really blame it on her since, to be perfectly frank, she didn’t have much to work with here.

So, yeah… as you might have guessed, there’s not a lot of positive things that I can say about this film. Now, granted, I’m not as repulsed by this film as the rest of the internet is, but it goes without saying that Cats is one of the strangest films to come out in recent years. Of course, a lot of this has to do with its questionable method of bringing the titular cats to life via CGI, especially since it’s now been made clear that the rushed production schedule that this film ended up having resulted in its effects feeling quite unfinished. At the same time, though, there’s also the matter of how this film ended up taking the musical that it's based on and doing almost nothing to try and work around its most bizarre aspects. Because of this, anybody who isn’t familiar with the musical going in will most likely be left completely and utterly dumbfounded by its strange and simplistic story. And yet, while this may seem like a case where it’d be more accessible to those who are fans of the musical, it seems like even that’s impossible (based on what I’ve heard) because of the radical changes that this film makes to both its plot and several of its musical numbers. It’s worth noting that the original plans for this film adaptation were to have it be an animated feature done by Steven Spielberg’s production company Amblin Entertainment’s animation division, Amblimation. And while this iteration of the project ultimately went nowhere when the division was shut down in 1997, it’s safe to say that this film probably would’ve worked a hell of a lot better had it been animated as originally intended.

Rating: 1.5/5

Fast and Furious Presents: Hobbs and Shaw (2019) review

The Fast and the Furious franchise has undoubtedly been one of the biggest film franchises in recent memory. While it has been around since 2001, the series truly started to hit its stride with its fifth installment, 2011’s Fast Five, which surprised many by being the first entry of the series to attract generally positive reviews from critics. For many, this was largely due to a new addition to the cast in Dwayne Johnson’s Luke Hobbs, a burly, no-nonsense agent working for the Diplomatic Security Service. While initially established as somewhat of an antagonist for series lead Dominic Toretto and his gang, Hobbs ends up becoming one of their key allies for subsequent films. Another major standout for the series came in the form of Deckard Shaw, played by Jason Statham. First introduced in the mid-credit scene of 2013’s Fast and Furious 6, Shaw effectively became the main antagonist of 2015’s Furious 7 but would later transition into an anti-hero in 2017’s The Fate of the Furious. And while Shaw’s new characterization proved to be rather controversial amongst fans given that he was responsible for the death of Han, one of the series’ main protagonists, many agreed that the scenes between Johnson and Statham were the best part of the film. As such, we now come to a first for the Fast and Furious franchise via a spin-off centered on its two most popular characters, Hobbs and Shaw. For this film, directorial duties go to David Leitch, who’s fresh off last year’s superior follow-up to 2016’s superhero smash hit Deadpool. What follows is exactly what you’d expect from a Fast and Furious film; a completely ridiculous but all-around super fun popcorn flick.

During a mission to retrieve a deadly virus known as ‘Snowflake’ from the mysterious terrorist organization Eteon, a group of MI6 agents are attacked by Eteon’s top agent Brixton Lore (Idris Elba), a former MI6 agent who’s been turned into a cybernetically-enhanced super-soldier. Almost every member of the team is killed save for team leader Hattie Shaw (Vanessa Kirby), who injects herself with the virus to avoid it getting into Lore’s hands. Thus, Lore and Eteon manage to pin the whole incident on her, forcing her to go on the run. In their efforts to track her down, the CIA recruits two special operatives for the mission; DSS agent Luke Hobbs (Dwayne Johnson) and Hattie’s brother, former British Special Forces agent Deckard Shaw (Jason Statham), who also happens to have a considerable history with Lore. The only problem is that, as exemplified by their past encounters, Hobbs and Shaw do not get along in the slightest. However, given that the virus within Hattie will end up killing her in a few days and will then be unleashed upon the world to kill countless more, the two ‘frenemies’ are forced to work together just to ensure that none of this ends up happening. And because Brixton Lore and Eteon consistently prove to be a massive thorn in their side, the three realize that they’ll have to embrace their familial roots if they want to stand a chance against their enemies.    

Nowadays, the ongoing narrative surrounding the Fast and Furious films usually revolves around how incredibly over-the-top they’ve gotten. What was once a simple street-racing franchise has now evolved into a series of films where its characters pull off incredibly ludicrous stunts that defy every single law of physics, whether it’s jumping a car across tall skyscrapers or driving them out of an airplane. And because these films consistently continue to up the ante when it comes to their insane action sequences, it’s legitimately gotten to the point where fans have been speculating for years now if the franchise will ever head into space. As for Hobbs and Shaw, it’s basically a full-blown superhero film at this point since the plot revolves around the titular duo taking on a genetically enhanced soldier who’s so powerful that he straight-up boasts that he’s ‘Black Superman’. As such, this film is ultimately yet another example of what we’ve now come to expect from this franchise. Simply put, if you’re among those who aren’t even remotely fans of Fast and Furious, then you’re clearly not going to get anything out of this since it basically maintains every single one of the series’ long-standing tropes. In fact, you’ll probably just look at this and lament how this franchise keeps managing to get even sillier with each new installment. But if you are a fan of this franchise, this film does continue to feature everything that you love about it, from the cheesy comedic dialogue to the action sequences that, no matter how insane they get, are still a lot of fun to watch. And while it does occasionally feel like David Leitch is being forced to keep some of the fight sequences under the PG-13 rating, there are still plenty of cases where he gets to show off his knack for excellent stunt choreography.

But perhaps the most surprising aspect of this film is how effective it is at handling what is easily the franchise’s definitive theme, the importance of family. Yes, as fans of the franchise are undoubtedly aware, Fast and Furious has constantly prided itself on the strong camaraderie between its main characters. However, it does seem like this bond has been tested in recent years, especially after Vin Diesel and Dwayne Johnson’s heated feud on the set of The Fate of the Furious that, as it turns out, was partially due to the announcement of this spin-off. Still, there’s no denying that family has always been a key element of this franchise’s success, and Hobbs and Shaw is quite arguably one of the best entries in the series when it comes to conveying this since it directly defines the character arcs of its titular leads. Shaw’s involvement in the plot primarily stems around the need to protect his sister (who he’s been estranged from for several years) while Hobbs ends up returning to his home in Samoa and reuniting with his family, who play a major role in the film’s finale. Now to be clear, this is still Fast and Furious that we’re talking about so this is by no means an Oscar-winning script; and yet, it could be argued that this one handles the ‘family’ aspect a lot better than some other entries in the franchise. And as to be expected, Dwayne Johnson and Jason Statham continue to be excellent in the title roles thanks in large part to their excellent camaraderie and the hilarious banter that stems from it. They’re then backed by Vanessa Kirby’s equally excellent turn as new female lead Hattie Shaw, with Kirby more than holding her own against her two main co-stars when it comes to the action sequences. And to close out the main cast, Idris Elba is clearly having a lot of fun in the role of main antagonist Brixton Lore, who does prove to be a considerable threat to the main characters despite a few instances where his characterization feels a bit one-note in favor of setting up a new overarching series villain in the currently unknown director of Eteon.

While it is primarily a spin-off of the Fast and Furious series, the fact that Hobbs and Shaw revolves around the franchise’s two most popular characters ultimately resulted in a situation where many people were looking forward to this film more than the impending Fast and Furious 9, which is set for a May 2020 release. And if that wasn’t enough, it’s been confirmed that Johnson and Statham won’t be returning for the ninth film due to their commitment to this spin-off. As such, only time will tell if this will have any sort of impact on Fast and Furious 9, especially given how Johnson’s involvement with the franchise was one of the key factors behind its unexpected resurgence. But as for Hobbs and Shaw, it’s easy to see why this one attracted so much hype before its release. Bolstered by the terrific camaraderie of Dwayne Johnson and Jason Statham, this film once again reinforces why Luke Hobbs and Deckard Shaw have become one of the best mismatched buddy duos in film since Martin Riggs and Roger Murtagh. Sure, just like the other recent installments of the Fast and Furious franchise, Hobbs and Shaw doesn’t let up in the slightest when it comes to the increasingly ludicrous nature of both its plot and its action sequences. Because of this, it’s clear that those who aren’t already fans of the franchise probably won’t be swayed by this new installment. But, of course, when it comes to the franchise’s devoted fanbase, they will most likely find this to be another solid entry in the series thanks to its great cast, highly entertaining action sequences, and solid direction from David Leitch. It’s already grossed over $588 million worldwide, once again reaffirming the Fast and Furious franchise’s status as one of the most dominant film franchises around.

Rating: 4.5/5

And don’t forget that there’s still plenty of time to vote for your favorite film from the Summer of 2019 in Rhode Island Movie Corner’s annual ‘End of Summer’ Fan Poll. Just head to the following link (https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/NQ3FZN2) to make your selection. Voting ends this Saturday, August 31^st; as Doctor Strange would say, “We’re in the endgame now…”

Star Trek Beyond (2016) review

As I’ve gone over quite a few times already these past few years, I am a huge fan of the J.J. Abrams-directed Star Trek films. The 2009 Star Trek ‘reboot’ not only introduced me to the franchise, as was the case with other franchise newcomers, but also ended up becoming one of my favorite films of all-time period. As a result, the sequel, Star Trek Into Darkness, was my most anticipated film of 2013. And while I personally really loved it, the same couldn’t be said for most long-time Star Trek fans. In fact, most Trek fans heavily despise the J.J. films for allegedly not staying true to the franchise’s roots and Into Darkness got a considerable amount of backlash for its re-imaginings of scenes from Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. So with all of that in mind, there was certainly a lot of pressure on the third of these J.J.-era (or should I say ‘Kelvin’ era as it’s recently been designated) films to adhere more to what made the franchise so popular in the first place. This time around, though, J.J. wasn’t available to direct due to his work on a certain other film that starts with the word ‘Star’. So in his place is Justin Lin and while a lot of Trek fans weren’t too pleased with the hiring of ‘another action director’, Lin’s work on the Fast and Furious films have made him one of the best action directors in the business. Plus, he made it clear that he was a Trek fan and with the addition of franchise star Simon Pegg as one of the film’s co-writers, it looked as if this new Trek film would fare much better with fans. And sure enough, Star Trek Beyond, the 13^th installment of this iconic sci-fi franchise, is one heck of an exciting space adventure. For fans of the J.J. films like myself, this is just yet another super entertaining film that maintains all of the things that made the previous two films so great. But for more hardcore Trek fans, they’re probably going to like this one better.

At the end of Star Trek Into Darkness, the crew of the USS Enterprise, as led by Captain James Tiberius Kirk (Chris Pine), set off on a five-year journey into uncharted space. As this film begins, the Enterprise is three years into the voyage and while things have been going fairly smoothly for the crew, Kirk is considering applying for a promotion to the position of Vice Admiral due to him beginning to really feel the monotony of being a starship captain. After briefly stopping at Yorktown, an advanced Starbase, the crew are sent out on a rescue mission when an escape pod is found and its sole occupant, an alien named Kalara (Lydia Wilson), says that her ship got stranded in a nearby nebula. However, this ends up being a trap as the Enterprise is ambushed by a swarm of alien ships led by their fearsome alien commander Krall (Idris Elba), who is seeking a mysterious alien artifact that the Enterprise had recently found. The Enterprise is destroyed but the crew manages to abandon ship and they end up on a nearby planet. With no ship and no way of sending out a distress signal, Kirk, along with his fellow crewmates; first officer Spock (Zachary Quinto), medical officer Leonard ‘Bones’ McCoy (Karl Urban), communications officer Nyota Uhura (Zoe Saldana), engineer Montgomery Scott (Simon Pegg), helmsman Hikaru Sulu (John Cho), and navigator Pavel Chekov (Anton Yelchin), as well as a new ally in Jaylah (Sofia Boutella), a scavenger who’s been living on the planet for some time, race to stop Krall before he can collect the artifact and use it to attack the Federation.

As noted earlier, one of the main issues that ‘Trekkers’ have had with the J.J.-directed films is that they don’t really feel much like Trek films. While I personally disagree with that argument, I will admit that out of all of these recent Trek films, Beyond is certainly the most Trek-ish of the bunch. The whole plot of Kirk and crew stranded on an alien planet definitely feels like something you’d see on an episode of The Original Series. By comparison, the last two films were more focused on the origins of the Enterprise crew before they set off on their five-year mission. However, if we’re talking overall execution, Beyond very much maintains the same level of action as its two predecessors. So with that said, I’m not entirely sure if this will win over every Trek fan because it’s still very much an action-oriented film and not necessarily a ‘cerebral’ kind of story as I find that some fans were wanting out of these newer films. But as someone who actually does prefer the action-oriented style of the newer Trek films, this film was right up my alley and I loved every second of it. The action is excellent as are the visuals and Justin Lin’s direction is solid throughout. Plus, amidst all of the action, the film makes sure to spend time further developing its characters, namely by giving them some effectively emotional character moments. Now I’ll admit that I don’t think this film actually has as much emotional depth as the previous two films but even with that said, there are still plenty of emotional moments in this film, like Spock struggling to cope with the idea of mortality following a recent tragedy (the details of which I won’t reveal here as they’re kind of spoiler-y).   

I don’t really need to go over the main cast that much because this is the third film that they’ve been in. Simply put, they’re just as phenomenal as they’ve been in the last two films. One of my absolute favorite things about these new Trek films has been the camaraderie amongst the main ensemble and I’m happy to report that this is once again the case here, resulting in plenty of humorous banter amongst them. Though with that said, it’s also a little bittersweet knowing that this is the last we’ll see of Anton Yelchin in the role of Chekov, as Yelchin tragically passed away a month ago in a car accident. So instead of focusing on the main cast, let’s focus on the newcomers, specifically Sofia Boutella as Jaylah and Idris Elba as the film’s main villain Krall. Boutella made quite an excellent first impression in her first ‘major’ film role as Gazelle, the main henchwoman of Samuel L. Jackson’s Valentine in last year’s Kingsman: The Secret Service and she’s once again excellent here. Simply put, Jaylah’s a pretty badass female lead but is one that is also very layered as well as shown in her backstory and her motivation of getting off of the planet. As for Elba as Krall, I must say that these new Trek films have done a pretty excellent job with their villains. I can’t say at the moment if Krall is as good as or better than Nero (Trek ’09) or Khan (Into Darkness) but Elba certainly makes the character a very memorable and quite intimidating adversary for Kirk and company. Plus, his main motivation and backstory are quite well-developed.

As someone who absolutely loved J.J. Abrams’ two Star Trek films, Star Trek Beyond most certainly delivered on everything that I love about these newer Trek films. The action and visuals are excellent, the plot is solid, and the characters are excellently handled in terms of both the performances and strong camaraderie of the actors/actresses who play them as well as the excellent character development that they get to work with. However, I’m well-aware that this film has a lot to prove as most Trek purists weren’t too pleased with the last two films. And while I personally will defend both the 2009 Trek and Into Darkness come hell or high water, I have the feeling that they’re going to like this film a whole lot more. Because while it’s still very much the action-oriented style that the two J.J. films maintained, the plot is certainly much more Trek-y in terms of its overall execution. So in short, thanks to the solid direction from Justin Lin, who proves to be an excellent successor to J.J., as well as the solid writing from writers Simon Pegg and Doug Jung, Star Trek Beyond is yet another fantastic entry in this legendary franchise. And for someone like me who grew up not with the Original Series but with J.J.’s films, it’s just another home run hit for the franchise’s modern era and I can’t wait to see what happens next for my favorite Enterprise crew. In fact, we already know one key detail of what will happen next as it was recently confirmed that Chris Hemsworth, who had a minor role in the 2009 film, will be returning in the next film to reprise his role as Kirk’s father George. Could this potentially be the last of the J.J.-era Trek films? We don’t know for sure just yet but needless to say I’m super excited for the new Star Trek IV, in which Kirk’s overall arc of trying to live up to his father’s legacy will no doubt come full circle.

Rating: 5/5!

The Jungle Book (2016) review

As many of you know, Disney’s current schedule of upcoming live-action releases is almost entirely consisting of live-action remakes of their animated classics. These last few months in particular have seen the company announce numerous proposed films, including a new Winnie the Pooh, a new Mary Poppins film, and The Sword in the Stone, just to name a few. This of course is following the highly successful box-office runs of films like Tim Burton’s Alice in Wonderland and 2014’s Maleficent. However, this new practice of theirs has attracted a considerable amount of controversy amongst certain audiences for the same reasons that basically affect any announced remake, namely the question as to why one would attempt to remake a beloved film like the many animated classics that Disney has produced over the years. I, on the other hand, am a little more optimistic that a fair amount of these ‘Disney remakes’ are going to turn out fine. That mindset developed for me after I watched last year’s live-action version of Cinderella, which ended up being my #3 favorite film of 2015. Not only was the film full of gorgeous visuals but it was also big on heart and the end result was a film that both honored the original animated classic that inspired it while also doing enough to distinguish itself as its own entity. You could pretty much say that it is solely because of that film that I’m generally optimistic about these upcoming Disney remakes. Because if you ask me, if at least a few of these remakes happen to be as well-made as Cinderella by filmmakers who clearly show a lot of affection towards the original film, then that would mean that the fact that all of these remakes are getting announced is nowhere near as bad as some may claim.

Which brings us to the latest in this line of ‘Disney remakes’, The Jungle Book. It of course follows in the footsteps of the company’s 1967 animated adaptation of Rudyard Kipling’s iconic novel of the same name. Unfortunately, that version is forever connected to a tragic point in the history of Disney Animation as it was the last Disney animated feature that Walt Disney himself produced prior to his death in 1966, just ten months before the film’s release. But even with the loss of the studio’s visionary leader, the original Jungle Book became an animated classic and served as a very fitting swan song for the man who was responsible for some of the most famous animated films/shorts of all-time. This new version is directed by Jon Favreau, who in the past gave us hits like the first two Iron Man films, the modern holiday classic Elf, and his most recent effort, the charming (and also hunger-inducing) indie flick Chef. And just like Kenneth Branagh last year with Cinderella, Favreau very much succeeds in regards to how his take on the classic story of the man-cub Mowgli both honors the original film that inspired it while also making its own mark in film history. The new Jungle Book is easily one of the best-looking films of the year, which is even more impressive considering the method in which the film was made. But those visuals are only the icing on the cake as this remake very much succeeds in capturing the heart of the original Disney flick without being a complete rehash of what came before.

The film of course follows the same general plot of both the original Kipling novel and the 1967 Disney animated version. In the middle of the Indian jungle, a young orphaned baby boy is found by the panther Bagheera (Ben Kingsley). Realizing that he has no mother or father to look after him, Bagheera brings him to a wolf pack, which includes the boy’s ‘adoptive mother’ Raksha (Lupita Nyong’o) and the pack’s leader Akela (Giancarlo Esposito), who then proceed to raise the young man-cub, Mowgli (Neel Sethi), as one of their own. Mowgli’s peaceful life with the pack is soon threatened, however, when the vicious tiger Shere Khan (Idris Elba), who hates man after being threatened by them via man’s great asset, fire AKA what the animals refer to as ‘the red flower’, threatens to kill him and anyone who dares to protect him. Realizing that he is in danger, Bagheera and the wolf pack agree to have Mowgli brought to the nearby man-village so that he will be safe from Shere Khan’s wrath with his own kind. But while on the way to the man-village, Mowgli soon finds himself coming across all sorts of characters, from the laid-back bear Baloo (Bill Murray) to the devious and hypnotic snake Kaa (Scarlett Johansson) to the imposing ape King Louie (Christopher Walken), all while being simultaneously hunted by Shere Khan.

You want to know the most interesting thing about this film? It was shot entirely on a soundstage. Just like all of its animal characters, all of the jungle locales in the film are basically done entirely in CGI. And while some may argue that this would make the whole film ‘too artificial’ as a result, it actually does really work in regards to make everything look so photo-realistic even when knowing that most of it was created by computers. As for the film itself, it takes on a much darker tone compared to the original animated film, which does sort of make sense because the predator animals in this story could be considered as being more menacing in a live-action setting. However, it doesn’t get too dark to the point where it would completely draw younger audiences away. And aside from three new renditions of the songs ‘The Bare Necessities’, ‘I Wanna Be Like You’, and ‘Trust in Me’, the film avoids going the same musical route of its animated predecessor. All in all, this results in the film’s overall tone and plot being a generally equal mix of both the original animated film and Rudyard Kipling’s original novel. But of course this film is more than just pretty visuals, even though said visuals could very much make the film a worthwhile theater experience all on their own. At the end of the day, Favreau very much succeeds in capturing the heart of the original animated film in this new live-action setting. He does this through many things, including the multi-layered characters who are just as memorable as they were in the original animated film and the story’s strong themes of friendship and courage.  

As Mowgli, newcomer Neel Sethi is the only major live-action actor in the entire film. And considering that he had to go through the entire film shoot interacting with locations and characters that weren’t primarily added in until post-production, he definitely pulls off the act of managing to make it all seem natural quite well. At the same time, he also succeeds in making his Mowgli both likable and also very clever, the latter of which is represented by the many ‘inventions’ that he comes up with throughout the film. As for the animal characters, this film features a pitch-perfect voice cast as every actor/actress is an excellent fit for their respective roles. Bill Murray’s generally laid-back demeanor perfectly fits Baloo, who in this version is more sarcastic than his animated counterpart but is still a loyal friend to Mowgli through thick and thin. Ben Kingsley more than brings the right gravitas to the role of the noble panther Bagheera while Idris Elba provides one heck of an intimidation factor in the role of Shere Khan, who in this version gets a bit more backstory as to why he hates man. Some of the animal characters actually get more to do in this film compared to the animated film, particularly the wolf-pack and Mowgli’s ‘adoptive mother’ Raksha who, despite everyone telling her otherwise, very much treats Mowgli like her own son, resulting in a particularly emotional scene near the beginning when Mowgli decides to leave for the man-village. As for the characters of Kaa and King Louie, who each have one major scene in the film, Scarlett Johannsson’s alluring voice fits perfectly in the part of the hypnotizing snake while Christopher Walken’s wackier persona is fitting for King Louie. At the same time, however, this King Louie is considerably different than the one from the original film, as he is just as menacingly imposing as he is in size.

Now before I list my rating for this film, let me be clear about something first. While I’m about to give it a rating that’s ½ a star higher than my rating for the original Jungle Book, that doesn’t automatically mean that I view this new film as the ‘superior’ version, which is a claim that quite a few critics have been making these past few days. Just like with the new Cinderella, I view this new Jungle Book as a complement to the original film and not something that’s meant to ‘replace’ it. The original Jungle Book is still an undeniable classic (and one that, for the record, is far better than what Screen Junkies recently made it out to be) and this new version helps introduce the story of the man-cub Mowgli and his adventures in the jungle to a whole new generation. And it very much is an excellent new take on this classic story. From a technical perspective, it’s one of the most visually breathtaking films in recent memory which is saying a lot considering that the film is basically 95% CGI. But at its core lies the same heart that defined the original with a terrific cast bringing these classic characters to life. So yes… this isn’t the end of Disney’s live-action remakes. There are a lot more on the way, perhaps even a bit too many at this point. However, both this film and Cinderella are more than enough proof that they can be done and, more importantly, be done very, very well. So in short, contrary to what popular opinion may be, I am genuinely excited to see what Disney comes up with next in regards to re-imagining some of the classic films and stories that have defined many a childhood.   

Rating: 5/5!

Zootopia (2016) review

You’ve heard me say it a bunch of times these past few years but I’ll say it again; Walt Disney Animation is currently in the middle of what can be referred to as either their second ‘Renaissance’ period or their ‘Revival’ period, the latter term I’ve recently come across online. After a string of lesser-received films from both a critical and commercial standpoint following the conclusion of the first ‘Disney Renaissance’, the studio finally started to get back on its feet once the duo of Pixar’s Ed Catmull and John Lasseter were brought in as the studio’s new President and Chief Creative Officer, respectively. Under their supervision, the studio has regained a lot of the creative clout that had been missing from some of their early 2000’s films and as a result, they have achieved much more success thanks to films like Tangled, Wreck-it Ralph, Big Hero 6, and of course their $1.2 billion behemoth Frozen. So what’s next for the House of Mouse? Well, this year will see them coming out with not one but two new animated features, a first for the studio since 2002. But as Inside Out and The Good Dinosaur proved last year, one film usually ends up getting more attention than the other early on. And in the case of Disney Animation’s 2016 releases, that film was Moana, their South Pacific-themed fantasy adventure that will come out this November. But, as me and my pal Kyle over at Kyle’s Animated World would argue, hopefully that didn’t take too much away from the first of Disney Animation’s films this year, Zootopia. And seeing how this film currently graces an impressive 98% on Rotten Tomatoes, which at the moment makes it the best-reviewed film of the year, suddenly Zootopia isn’t looking like the ‘lesser’ film anymore (which, for the record, is nothing against Moana. I’m sure that will be terrific too). And rightfully so as Zootopia is not only a well-made and well-animated entry in the Disney canon, as per usual, but also a strongly written tale with a timely message that we can all take note from.

In the world of Zootopia, those who are usually predators and those who are usually preyed upon live together in peace having evolved from following their natural instincts in order to coexist with one another. It is in this metropolis that rabbit Judy Hopps (Ginnifer Goodwin) from the town of Bunnyborrow dreams of becoming a police officer. But even after she is instated as the first rabbit officer in a force full of ‘predator’ animals, she is disappointed when her superior Chief Bogo (Idris Elba) assigns her to the mere position of meter maid. While all of this is going on, the police are investigating into a series of disappearances all over the city. And while she is kept off of the investigation at first, Judy manages to get the opportunity to ‘be a real cop’ for once when she volunteers to help find the husband of Mrs. Otterton (Octavia Spencer), one of the missing animals, on the grounds that she resigns from the force if she doesn’t solve the case in 48 hours. In order to find Mr. Otterton, Judy is forced to team up with fox Nick Wilde (Jason Bateman), a con artist who not only gypped her previously but is part of the species that is meant to be the ‘enemy’ of rabbits like Judy. However, Nick also happens to be one of the last to see Otterton before he disappeared, hence why Judy ends up having to enlist his help in order to find her missing person. Soon though, the two uncover a devious plot involving animals reverting back to their savage nature that poses a severe threat to the harmonious nature of the city of Zootopia.

Being a Disney animated film, the animation is of course terrific and very well-detailed as exemplified by the various districts of Zootopia, from the frozen landscapes of Tundratown to the district of Little Rodentia in which the main characters are giant-sized compared to the residents of that area. The film also maintains a solid energetic pace throughout and is full of hilarious moments, including the now famous scene from the trailer where Nick and Judy get the ID for a plate number at the DMV (‘Department of Mammal Vehicles’), where all of the employees are super slow sloths (a perfect analogy to real life as I’m sure many of us would agree). But what really makes Zootopia stand out is its writing. This is arguably Disney Animation’s most maturely-written script in years. It’s already great enough that the film is a fun and zany buddy cop comedy but then the film goes the extra mile by tackling issues like race relations (or ‘species relations’ in this case), prejudice, and bigotry. Right from the very beginning, the film establishes what will become a major point of conflict in regards to Judy and Nick’s relationship by showcasing the bigotry that rabbits have towards foxes, right down to Judy being given anti-fox spray (in other words, mace) by her parents. And all throughout the film, we see several instances where characters’ prejudices and bigoted attitudes come into play, with the primary example being, obviously, the ‘relationship’ between predators and prey. As a result, the character who is established as the villain of the story, who I won’t reveal here to keep this review spoiler-free, is a pretty darn well established villain in terms of their motives and the overall conspiracy that they’re master-minding. In short, everything in the plot comes together perfectly for a well-constructed tale of acceptance and how even the nicest people around can sometimes resort to stereotyping.  

Aside from its excellent writing, Zootopia is also full of great characters backed by a superb voice cast. Originally, Nick Wilde was meant to be the main character of the film before the filmmakers decided to shift focus to Judy, the small-town bunny who moves into the big city. Judy is a terrific protagonist whose optimism and ‘never give up’ attitude make her a very endearing character to root for, all of which is perfectly imbued through Ginnifer Goodwin’s performance in the role. Equally terrific is Jason Bateman in the role as Nick as the wild con man’s fast talking nature excellently matches Bateman’s comedic style. And while at first Wilde may seem like a no-good con man only looking out for himself, a key scene in which he reveals to Judy a crucial moment from his past that made him what he is today produces one of the most emotional moments in the entire film. And of course the two have excellent camaraderie which helps make their partnership work as well as it does. They’re backed up by an excellent supporting cast of memorable side characters where pretty much every character is matched perfectly with their voice actor. This includes Idris Elba as Judy’s tough-as-nails police chief Bogo, J.K. Simmons as the noble but occasionally ferocious mayor of Zootopia Lionheart, new Disney regular Alan Tudyk as small-time crook Duke Weaselton (an obvious play on his character from Frozen’s often mispronounced name (“Weselton!”)), and Shakira as Zootopia’s most famous pop star Gazelle, performer of the film’s catchy theme ‘Try Everything’.

It’s one thing to be a well-animated, well-voice acted, and very entertaining animated film. But that’s not all that Zootopia has to offer. Sure, all of those aforementioned aspects on their own would’ve easily made this a highly recommendable film worth checking out. But then this film ends up going above and beyond by imbuing its story with themes that are very much timely for the time of its release. What starts out as a fun buddy cop comedy ends up becoming a fable that combats racism and prejudice, notions that admittedly are still prevalent in today’s society. As a result, this film encourages us all to be more accepting of others and to not let the stereotyping of society cloud our judgement. And because of this, Zootopia is easily one of Walt Disney Animation Studios’ finest efforts. After all, one of the main reasons why Disney’s animated films became the classics that they are today was because they managed to overcome their own ‘stereotype’ of being seen as nothing more than ‘films for kids’ by managing to appeal to both kids and adults with their great and colorful animation, their superb storytelling, and the classic characters that inhabited these stories. That’s why the classics of the studio’s early days (e.g. Pinocchio, Cinderella) still very much hold up today and why their more recent films (e.g. Frozen, Big Hero 6) have allowed the studio to once again establish itself as one of the best animation studios in the film industry. And as a result, Zootopia is yet another excellent addition to the Disney canon.   

Rating: 5/5!