X-Men: Apocalypse (2016) review

While the superhero genre has come a long way since then, the original X-Men, released on July 14, 2000, was very much the first ‘big-time’ superhero flick of the 21^st century. And while he (nor most of the film’s cast, for that matter) may not have been that familiar with the franchise when he first started working on it, Bryan Singer ultimately ended up becoming one of the pioneering directors when it came to modern-era superhero films, later paving the way for other directors like Joss Whedon and the Russo brothers to leave their own mark on the genre. Singer then followed his first X-Men film up with an even more successful sequel in the form of 2003’s X2: X-Men United. And of course as we all know, he then left the franchise to work on other projects (most notably another superhero project in 2006’s Superman Returns), which then led to the films starting to drop in quality with a highly disappointing ‘threequel’ in 2006 and an even more mediocre spin-off in 2009. Thankfully the series started to get back on track in 2011 with director Matthew Vaughn’s 1960’s-set prequel, X-Men: First Class. But while he may not have directed the film, part of the film’s success, if you ask me, came from the long-awaited return of Bryan Singer to the franchise, as he served as the film’s producer/co-writer. Three years later, Singer would finally return to the franchise full-time as he helmed X-Men: Days of Future Past, inspired by the iconic comic storyline of the same name. And to put it simply, the film proved to be not only the best X-Men film to date but also one of the best superhero films period. It also officially cemented the franchise’s overall road to redemption by pulling a much-appreciated continuity retcon that erased the events of the series’ weakest installments from its official canon.  

So now we come to what is, at the moment, seemingly set to be the final film of the franchise’s First Class era: X-Men: Apocalypse. The new film sees the X-Men take on their greatest enemy yet in the form of the ‘original’ mutant En Sabah Nur AKA Apocalypse. With Bryan Singer back to direct, most of the First Class era cast returning to reprise their roles, and some very promising new additions to the cast, who wouldn’t be excited for the latest film in this great series? Well, if you recall my previous post on this film… apparently most of the internet. Yes, while the franchise seemed to be in good standing following not only Days of Future Past but also this year’s highly successful spin-off Deadpool, X-Men: Apocalypse, for various reasons, just didn’t get much positive attention online in the months leading up to its release, at least when compared to the other superhero film releases this year like Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice and Captain America: Civil War. And it looks like the internet’s general undermining of the film has now translated to its current critical reception, as the film sports a measly 47% on Rotten Tomatoes at the time that I’m writing this, which actually makes it the lowest rated film of the main series not counting X-Men Origins: Wolverine. And yeah… I don’t get it. With great action, great characters, and the always great direction from the franchise’s best director, X-Men: Apocalypse is yet another highly entertaining and overall just straight-up awesome installment of the X-Men franchise.

10 years since the events of Days of Future Past, telepath Charles Xavier (James McAvoy) has reopened his school for Gifted Mutants in Westchester, New York while both Magneto (Michael Fassbender) and Mystique (Jennifer Lawrence) have gone into hiding since the incident with the Sentinels in Washington D.C, with Mystique actually now seen as a ‘hero’ to many young mutants all over the world for her ‘efforts’ in stopping Magneto during the event. While all of this is going on, an ancient mutant known as En Sabah Nur (Oscar Isaac) is awakened from a centuries-long slumber by the cults that view him as the world’s first ‘true’ mutant. Once awakened, Apocalypse begins recruiting his new lieutenants, known as the ‘Four Horsemen’, in order to help him cleanse the Earth and preserve it for the strongest. These Four Horsemen consist of the weather-controlling Storm (Alexandra Shipp), psychic-energy wielding Psylocke (Olivia Munn), the bird-like winged mutant Angel (Ben Hardy), and Magneto, whose seemingly peaceful new life in Poland is destroyed when his past comes back to haunt him. When Apocalypse kidnaps Xavier as part of his plan for world domination, Mystique and Dr. Hank McCoy (Nicholas Hoult) AKA Beast are forced to lead a team of young mutants, including telepath Jean Grey (Sophie Turner), optical-blasting Scott Summers (Tye Sheridan) AKA Cyclops, and teleporter Kurt Wagner (Kodi Smit-McPhee) AKA Nightcrawler into a battle against Apocalypse and his four Horsemen with the fate of the whole world at stake.

I’m rather surprised that critics are taking issue with the film for being ‘overloaded’ with action. After all, this film is titled X-Men: Apocalypse, not X-Men: Minor Incident. If you ask me, the amount of action in this film is very suitable for this kind of story in which the X-Men take on an all-powerful god-like mutant. As a result, the action sequences in this film are excellent and are backed by some very impressive and obviously highly complex CGI work. And without giving too much away, this film’s Quicksilver scene somehow manages to top the equally terrific scene that came before it in Days of Future Past. In short, this is just yet another well-directed franchise effort courtesy of Bryan Singer. In keeping with the ‘time period’ theming of the past few films (e.g. the Bond-esque 60’s setting of First Class), this film’s 80’s setting is well-developed and the dialogue is punctuated with plenty of humorous lines that liven up the mood in just the right way, from Xavier’s failed attempts to hide the fact that he’s flirting with Moira MacTaggert (Rose Byrne), who had previously appeared in First Class but had her memory wiped by Xavier at the end of it, to one hell of a joke about trilogies at the expense of the original Star Wars trilogy. But even with the film’s great use of humor in mind, the film still manages to have some highly effective emotional moments, mostly in the form of key story beats for a few of the main characters. I mean I wouldn’t say that the film carries the exact same amount of emotional depth as some of the other X-Men films but it’s not like the film is completely lacking of it either, as I’ve seen some critics argue.

James McAvoy is once again great as the young Charles Xavier and while he may not be the main protagonist this time around compared to Days of Future Past, he still plays a vital part in the overall story. He also finally adopts the bald look that has defined the character in the comics as well as in the films when he was played by Patrick Stewart. However, for the second time in the span of three films, Michael Fassbender is ultimately the biggest standout of the cast, primarily because Magneto gets a lot of the film’s best emotional moments as he is shown to have started a family in Poland while trying to stay ‘low-key’ following the events of the previous film. As for Mystique, some have argued that Jennifer Lawrence ‘phoned it in’ this time around as a sign of her not being that interested in returning to the franchise. However, I thought that she was just as good as she’s been in the previous two films. And like how First Class was Magneto’s story and Days of Future Past was Xavier’s story, Apocalypse is arguably Mystique’s story as she finds that since the Washington incident, she has actually become a ‘hero’ for many of the younger mutants, even though she herself doesn’t see herself as one. It should also be noted that the character doesn’t appear in her natural blue form as much this time around compared to previous films, which I can definitely tell will be a problem for some fans. But considering how uncomfortable the makeup process for the character has been throughout these films (which, according to Lawrence, has recently been made easier due to the fact that the filmmakers just have her wear a full bodysuit instead of having all of the elaborate body-paint applied to her), I don’t blame her for not wanting to be like that throughout the whole film.

As far as the new cast is concerned, Singer and company did a pretty great job in casting new actors/actresses to take on the classic character roles of Cyclops, Jean Grey, and Nightcrawler, previously played by James Marsden, Famke Janssen, and Alan Cumming, respectively, in the franchise’s original film trilogy. Tye Sheridan gets quite a few really effective emotional scenes as Cyclops and fans of the character will be pleased to know he gets more to do this time around than he did in previous films. Also, as expected given their relationship in the comics, Sheridan forms a nice ‘chemistry’ with Sophie Turner as Jean Grey. I’ve seen a few articles online express criticism over her accent in the film but I personally didn’t really see anything wrong with it. Turner is excellent in the role and I’m certain that a few noteworthy scenes in this film will very much give X-Men fans hope that the character’s most iconic comic storyline will finally be done justice on the big-screen after the last attempt in doing so obviously didn’t turn out very well. Another character that makes a long-awaited return to the series is Nightcrawler, now played by Kodi-Smit McPhee. It might actually surprise some people that Nightcrawler ends up having quite a lot of humorous moments in the film and McPhee handles them quite well as the fact that this Nightcrawler is much younger than when he was played by Cumming in X2 shows that, at this point in his life, he can be rather socially awkward at times.

And finally, let’s talk about the film’s big baddie, Apocalypse, played by Oscar Isaac in a very unrecognizable turn due to the character’s great makeup design. Unfortunately, though, the character was continuously mocked online in the months leading up to the film’s release solely because of when the first photos of him were released, the internet made countless comparisons between him and Ivan Ooze, the villain from the Mighty Morphin Power Rangers film, even though subsequent trailers made it clear that he would very much look exactly like the character does in the comics. So with all of those jokes at the character’s expense out of the way, how does this big baddie fare in the film? Well overall I think that he was a decent villain. I’m not saying that he’s the ‘greatest’ comic book film villain ever and, not being a big comic reader, I have the feeling that some fans may not entirely be pleased with how the character is portrayed in the film. Still, Isaac did manage to make Apocalypse a pretty intimidating villain thanks to his strong commanding presence, especially when he’s flanked by his Four Horsemen; Storm, Psylocke, Angel, and Magneto. Granted, none of them really get much to do in the film, other than Magneto of course, but at the very least they each get at least one memorable moment in the film. So in conclusion, while this version of the character may not entirely live up to expectations, he’s still a pretty solid antagonist in his own right.

While I usually try not to bring in notes from other critics’ reviews to use in my own reviews, I honestly don’t get some of the criticisms towards this film. The action is over-done? If you ask me this film has just the right amount of action for a story of this scale. The film is emotionless? There are plenty of great emotional scenes in this film, many of which come from characters like Magneto and Cyclops. I could go on and on but I think you get the idea. This is most definitely a film that is far better than what its current RT score suggests, which I’m now certain is yet another sign of how this film has been getting the shaft in terms of positive buzz compared to other superhero films like Batman v Superman and Captain America: Civil War. In short, X-Men: Apocalypse is yet another highly entertaining installment in the franchise that has redeemed itself over the past few years, primarily by erasing the events of its weakest installments from its canon. It’s well-directed, well-acted, and features some incredibly awesome action sequences. Now with all of that said, would I say that it is ‘better’ than Days of Future Past? No, not really but understandably that is a very tough act to follow and I didn’t go into this film expecting it to be better than its immediate predecessor. With that in mind, this film is simply yet another well-made installment of the franchise and one that is most certainly becoming a very, VERY underrated entry in the superhero genre. Needless to say, I’m very excited to see where the franchise goes from here considering that this film is supposedly the final installment of the First Class era series.   

Rating: 4.5/5

Top 3 Reasons why 'X-Men: Apocalypse' is being Criminally Undervalued

If you were to ask me what my most anticipated film of the summer is now that Captain America: Civil War has already come out, I would tell you that my pick would be X-Men: Apocalypse. Following in the footsteps of 2014’s X-Men: Days of Future Past, which was not only the best X-Men film to date but also one of the best superhero films to date period, this new film sees the X-Men take on their most dangerous antagonist yet; the first mutant, En Sabah Nur AKA Apocalypse. Once again directed by the franchise’s creator Bryan Singer, the film looks to be yet another highly entertaining installment of a franchise that has very much redeemed itself in recent years following some mediocre entries. And yet I wonder… why is this film not getting a lot of hype online? Yes, despite all of the good things that have happened to this franchise recently, for some reason this new installment is being criminally undervalued online, especially when compared to the other superhero films this year like Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice and Captain America: Civil War. So today on Rhode Island Movie Corner, I’m going to go through the Top 3 reasons why X-Men: Apocalypse is not getting the attention online that it deserves. And no, none of these three points have anything to do with the film’s current critical reception which, based on its current RT score of 52% (at the time I am writing this), aren’t very pretty to say the least. But hey that didn’t stop me from seeing, and liking, Batman v Superman and it sure isn’t going to stop me from seeing this film opening weekend. Instead these are 3 arguments that I’ve been seeing online these past few months that have undoubtedly had a negative effect on the film’s reputation.

3. BRYAN SINGER

(2020 UPDATE: When this was first published, there had, of course, been some discussion over some of the sexual abuse lawsuits that Bryan Singer had gotten involved in at the time. However, this was before A.) the Weinstein epidemic was being properly addressed across the industry and B.) More allegations against Singer were made public around the time that Bohemian Rhapsody came out, so I'll openly admit that I didn't pay as much attention towards moments like this as I do now, and quite frankly, should've been doing all along. Thus, the following segment in which I heavily praise Singer's contributions to the superhero genre is not one that I'd reiterate nowadays.) 

Bryan Singer is very much one of the original pioneers of the modern superhero film genre. His first X-Men film back in 2000 was quite literally the first big superhero film of the 21^st century and it was a solid critical/commercial success upon its initial release. He then followed that up with an even more successful sequel in the form of 2003’s X2: X-Men United. And then he left to go direct Superman Returns… and as a result, the X-Men franchise started to go downhill with the highly disappointing X-Men: The Last Stand and the incredibly mediocre X-Men Origins: Wolverine. Thankfully, Singer returned to the franchise in 2011, albeit only as a producer/co-writer, for X-Men: First Class and then came back full-time 3 years later to direct Days of Future Past. By that point, the franchise had finally redeemed itself after its lackluster installments while also doing the smart move of pulling a continuity retcon that erased the events of those two films from the series’ official ‘timeline’. So in short, the series’ best installments have been the ones that Singer has been heavily involved with… and yet I find that his handling of the franchise hasn’t gone over well with ‘everybody’. Namely it seems like the big thing that most fans have been critical of in regards to his work on the franchise is how he has portrayed certain characters, specifically the fact that Wolverine has pretty much been the main character of the entire franchise at the cost of other characters’ screen-time, most infamously Cyclops. And while it is true that Wolverine has been focused on a lot in these films, I do think that the most recent films (not counting his second spin-off, The Wolverine) have done a much better job of giving other characters more to do. Case in point, while the main plot of Days of Future Past revolved around Wolverine going back in time, a plot-point that differed heavily from the comics, he actually wasn’t the ‘main character’ in that story; instead it was Xavier. And both First Class and Apocalypse have gone one step further by only having him appear via cameos, allowing the other members of the cast to have more opportunities to shine.

Ultimately though I have to agree with my friend Matthew Goudreau on the following argument; Bryan Singer really has been one of the genre’s best directors, up there with some of the more recent standouts like Joss Whedon, Christopher Nolan, and the Russo brothers. Of course we’ve already gone over the fact that he helped kick-start the genre’s modern era with the original X-Men. Without it, we probably wouldn’t be at where we are today as far as the genre’s most recent efforts are concerned. But probably one of the most interesting things to note about Singer’s work on the franchise is that, when he first started back in 2000 with the original X-Men film, he wasn’t actually that familiar with the franchise. In fact, as shown in the first film’s bonus features (on the X-Men 1.5 DVD release, to be precise), most of the cast were generally unfamiliar with the comics as well. And while obviously nowadays that would be a major cause of concern for fans due to the risk of the films straying heavily from their source material, ultimately it didn’t really affect the film that much, nor did it happen with X2. And I think it’s safe to say that as the series has gone on, Singer has become much more familiar with the comics, and yes I say that even when taking into account that Days of Future Past wasn’t a direct adaptation of the storyline that it was based on. So in short, I don’t think Singer gets as much credit as he deserves as far as his contributions to the superhero genre are concerned. You could say that he is the ‘unsung hero’ of superhero films and I salute him for all that he’s done for the genre.

2. APOCALYPSE’S LOOK

As many of you are no doubt aware, probably the biggest controversy surrounding this film was the result of when Entertainment Weekly released its ‘First Look’ coverage of the film back in July of last year, which included a shot of Oscar Isaac in costume as the film’s big bad Apocalypse. The internet subsequently tore this pic to shreds, making countless comparisons between Apocalypse and Ivan Ooze, the villain of the 1995 Mighty Morphin Power Rangers film, namely due to the fact that Apocalypse looked very purple-ish in the photo in contrast to the comics in which he looks blue. Now this isn’t the first time that a situation like this has happened to the X-Men franchise. In fact, the same exact thing happened with the previous film. Back in January 2014 when Empire Magazine unveiled a series of covers to commemorate X-Men: Days of Future Past, a lot of fanboys were very critical of the cover that showcased Evan Peters’ version of the character Quicksilver. Basically the fanboys argued that this new Quicksilver looked way too cheesy with his silver jacket, goggles, headphones, etc. Thankfully a lot of these critics were silenced when the film came out, as Quicksilver’s admittedly brief but undeniably legendary action sequence in the Pentagon proved to be one of the many highlights of the film. So now the same thing has been happening with X-Men: Apocalypse as the film’s main villain was heavily mocked in the months leading up to the film’s release just because of one photo. And while I am aware that some of the film’s current reviews haven’t been very positive towards the character’s role in the film, all of the pre-release backlash was pretty stupid if you ask me.

I mean these photos were released before the first official trailer was even released. So clearly, it wasn’t the fault of the filmmakers for how this whole thing turned out. Obviously not a lot of visual effect work had been done for the film yet so clearly Apocalypse wasn’t yet ‘fully developed’ from a visual standpoint. I mean, if you ask me, it looks like the purple hue that Apocalypse had in that photo was pretty much entirely due to whatever the lighting conditions were like at the time that the photo was taken (according to a recent quote from Oscar Isaac, the scene in question that this photo was taken from is one where Apocalypse and his minions are coming out of a portal that was lit purple). Because given what we’ve seen from the recent trailers, it looks like Apocalypse is going to look much more like he does in the comics than the internet had initially suspected based solely on that first photo. Heck, I also got to give the filmmakers a lot of credit because Oscar Isaac looks quite unrecognizable as the ‘First Mutant’. So in short, this is just yet another example of fans being WAY too judgmental about a superhero film before they even see it. Obviously as we all know, most of this prejudgment usually stems from superhero film castings. Whenever someone is cast in a leading role in one of these films, they are always subjected to much scrutiny regardless of how ‘good’ or how ‘bad’ their performances turn out, with the most prime/infamous example of course being when Ben Affleck was cast as Batman in Batman v Superman. And in the case of this whole Apocalypse thing, the main source of the internet’s over-reactions… was simply due to one bad photo. Ai yi yi… (and no, that was not a reference to Power Rangers)

  

1. ‘IT’S NOT DOING ENOUGH TO STAND OUT’

Oh boy, I got to address that damn ‘superhero fatigue’ argument again… dammit! Anyone who knows me knows that I can’t stand this argument, mainly due to the fact that there’s even an argument like this at all. Since the beginning of last year, there’s been a growing band of critics who have begun to condemn the superhero genre, which I find is mostly just due to the fact that these films have been so gosh darn successful these past few years. But considering that most of the superhero films released since 2008 have been at least ‘good’, I don’t see why them being successful is a ‘bad thing’. Thankfully one of the reasons why the superhero genre has managed to stay strong all the years amidst all of this backlash is due to the fact that studios have recognized one crucial thing; they need to keep doing ‘new’ stuff with these films. That’s exactly what Marvel Studios has been doing with the Marvel Cinematic Universe, going through various film genres from heist films (Ant-Man) to 70’s era spy thrillers (Captain America: The Winter Soldier). So with that said, I guess I can sort of see why a lot of people are dinging X-Men: Apocalypse for not really standing out amongst some of the other superhero films of the year, including the highly anticipated meeting of titans that was Batman v Superman, the equally grand-scale confrontation of heroes in Captain America: Civil War, the all-villains affair of Suicide Squad, and the unabashed R-rated escapades of Deadpool. In fact, I have the feeling that the highly enthusiastic response by fans towards Deadpool may have had a negative impact on Apocalypse due to the increased craving for more R-rated superhero stories. Case in point, I’ve seen quite a few articles online (mostly from BirthMoviesDeath.com) that have condemned the X-Men films for reasons that I previously mentioned in my first point about Bryan Singer’s handling of the franchise. 

However, I’m not going to take any of this into account when I see the film because the quality of the past few X-Men films have been more than enough proof that Fox is doing just fine with the franchise. Yeah as far as their Marvel films go they did have a pretty big stumble recently with their second attempt at a Fantastic Four franchise (emphasis on it being a ‘pretty big stumble’) but as far as the X-Men films are concerned, things have been going quite smoothly for them, most recently exemplified by the success of Deadpool. But like I said in my review of that film, that doesn’t mean that studios should make every future superhero film R-rated just because that’s what the fanboys crave. And for the record, it’s an extremely good thing that studios are making sure to maintain fresh ideas with the superhero films so that they can continue to strive amidst all of the scrutiny they’ve been getting recently. However, at the end of the day, I think quality is more important when it comes to these films and like I’ve been saying, most of the superhero films released since 2008 (both Marvel and DC) have been at least ‘good’. Obviously there have been a few stinkers over the years but I’d say that the ratio of good to bad superhero films is somewhere around 80%/20%, which is pretty good if you ask me. But like I said earlier, yes the reviews for X-Men: Apocalypse haven’t really been that good. But to reiterate a point I made in my Spoiler Post for Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice, that doesn’t mean that critics are always ‘right’. With that said, I will be going into Apocalypse not expecting it to be ‘better’ than Days of Future Past. But that’s not much of an issue with me because DOFP is a pretty tough act to follow. But under the great direction of Bryan Singer, I’m confident that this film will, at the very least, be better than what the internet is continually putting it out to be based on all of the reasons that I’ve listed in this post.

So those are the Top 3 reasons why I feel that X-Men: Apocalypse is being criminally undervalued by the internet. Anyone else feel that the internet has been giving this film the shaft in terms of its pre-release buzz? Be sure to sound off in the comments below.

Neighbors 2: Sorority Rising (2016) review

Summer 2014 had quite a couple of really good comedies, including one of the rare cases of a great comedy sequel in the form of 22 Jump Street. Another excellent comedy from that year was director Nicholas Stoller’s Neighbors, which starred Seth Rogen and Rose Byrne as a couple with a newborn daughter who find themselves having to deal with the very rowdy fraternity that ends up moving in next door, led by their president played by Zac Efron. What followed was an epic prank war between the two sides that was full of sabotages, betrayals, and a whole lot of airbags. But one of the best things about the film was that even though the fraternity in the film was technically the ‘antagonist’ to Rogen and Byrne’s characters, the film didn’t try to demonize them too much. And as I can at least certify thanks to my pal Matthew Goudreau, who is an alumnus of Sigma Chi’s URI chapter, the film also did a really nice job in portraying the brotherhood of fraternities, which I think definitely helped the film find a really nice audience at the box office ($270 million, to be precise). So now we have Neighbors 2: Sorority Rising. Stoller returns to direct and most of the first film’s cast return to reprise their roles in a film that basically follows a plotline that is ‘almost’ exactly similar to its predecessor. Except this time, Rogen and Byrne’s characters instead find themselves having to deal with a sorority, which brings up a whole new set of problems for them. But the question now is whether or not this ends up being a ‘good’ comedy sequel, something that is obviously very rare for the genre. So does it? Well… yes and no…

Since the events of the previous film, Mac (Seth Rogen) and Kelly (Rose Byrne) Radner have been living a peaceful life with their daughter Stella. With another baby on the way, the two decide to sell their house. While they do end up attracting a potential buyer, they learn that their house will be on ‘escrow’ status for 30 days, meaning that the deal won’t be finalized until that time and the buyers could back out of it if they find anything wrong with the place (e.g. another fraternity ends up moving in next door). And unfortunately for Mac and Kelly, yet another college Greek group does end up moving in next door to them. This time around, however, the group in question is the newly formed sorority Kappa Nu, led by Shelby (Chloe Grace Moretz) and her friends Beth (Kiersey Clemons) and Nora (Beanie Feldstein), who formed the sorority after learning that in the U.S., sororities are not allowed to throw parties while fraternities can. With the sale of their house on the line, Mac and Kelly once again find themselves getting into a major prank war in the hopes of getting rid of Kappa Nu. Thankfully this time around they get some extra help from their old ‘nemesis’, former Delta Psi president Teddy Sanders (Zac Efron), who joins their side after initially helping the Kappa Nu squad get set up, and was then ‘dumped’ by them for being ‘too old’, so that he could feel ‘valuable’ to someone.

Neighbors 2 is definitely one of those cases of a comedy sequel where the plot is almost identical to the one in the first film save for a few cosmetic changes. And like the original Neighbors, this film does have a bit of a slow start before it really starts to get into the humor. However, I didn’t really find this one to be ‘as funny’ as the original. Now don’t get me wrong there are plenty of funny moments in the film which, like the original, mainly stem from all of the pranks that both sides do to each other. However, I can’t really say that there were as many ‘laugh out loud’ moments compared to those in the first one, to the point where quite a few funny scenes from the trailer didn’t even appear in the film (e.g. LL Cool J’s cameo as Beth’s father). Case in point, this film ends on a much simpler note compared to the first film and while I do like the message that the ending conveys in regards to the strength of Kappa Nu’s sisterhood, it’s still rather disappointing that the film doesn’t end on a note similar to how the first film did with its epically hilarious fight between Mac and Teddy. But at the same time, this film can also be very much commended for its feminist themes, which of course are mainly exemplified through Shelby and her Kappa Nu sisters and their efforts in challenging ‘the sexist system’. But while the film’s feminist themes are genuinely well-handled, sometimes they admittedly come off a bit heavy-handed. By that I mean the film does kind of drill in the whole ‘sexist system’ thing to the point where it keeps doing so even after it already got its point across early on in the film.

One of the great things about the original Neighbors was that even though Mac and Kelly were the ‘main protagonists’, the film didn’t vilify Teddy and his Delta Psi brothers. For one thing, Mac and Kelly didn’t always make good decisions, especially in regards to raising their daughter, so it’s not like we sided with them all the time. Sometimes we really could sympathize with Teddy and his struggles in coping with the inevitability of graduation and moving on to ‘real life’, which was one of the main themes of the film; how one handles the idea of getting older. In the case of Neighbors 2 the same idea applies. We do root for Mac and Kelly, especially considering there’s more at stake for them this time around given that they’ve already bought another house and are highly dependent on the sale of their old house, but can also side with Shelby and her Kappa Nu sisters for their efforts in combatting the sexism directed towards sororities like theirs. Chloe Grace Moretz does a very solid job taking on the same kind of role that Zac Efron had in the first film, especially when she’s working off of her ‘sisters’ Beth and Nora. Their trio serves as a great foil to Kelly and Mac while also managing to be very sympathetic in regards to their aspirations to beat ‘the system’. Returning members of the cast are great once again; Seth Rogen and Rose Byrne continue to have solid chemistry and the two work off of Zac Efron incredibly well. And as for Efron, once again he proves to be a major standout thanks to his excellent comedic timing, as Teddy finds himself in yet another, as the film puts it, ‘quarter-life crisis’.

While Neighbors 2 hasn’t really gotten the same amount of positive reception that its predecessor did, I have actually seen a few people argue that this film was better than the first, mainly in regards to this one having more depth to it. And while I do understand where they are coming from, ultimately I do think that the first film was better. The sequel definitely does have its moments and once again benefits from an excellent cast. Plus, this film does do a nice job in terms of handling its feminist themes. However, this time around the jokes ended up being a bit more hit and miss. And as great as its feminist angle is, sometimes it’s a little bit too on the nose with it. So in short, Neighbors 2 was a bit of a mixed bag for me, which was rather disappointing because I really liked the original Neighbors. As far as comedy sequels go, I do think that it’s at least one of the better ones but I wouldn’t say that it was one of the ‘absolute best’ either. At the very least I can say that, like the original Neighbors, this film is worthy of becoming a new essential college flick. Because the great thing about both films is that they make a lot of effort to appeal to the college Greek community and while I may not be a member of any fraternity, both of these films do a nice job in conveying the brotherly/sisterly bonds of fraternities and sororities, respectively.

Rating: 2.5/5

Mad Max (1979-2015) Series Retrospective

So as I’ve made it clear quite a few times already in the past year, I wasn’t really a ‘big’ fan of Mad Max: Fury Road when I first saw it in theaters. As I’ve also stated numerous times before, that doesn’t mean that I ‘hated’ the film. I just felt that the internet had severely overhyped the film for me prior to its release; that can happen sometimes and it’s also happened to me for films like Edge of Tomorrow and Deadpool. Obviously, though, not being a ‘huge’ fan of the film basically meant that I was in the minority as the internet went nuts over this film… though maybe a bit too much. You see, the internet has become much more critical in recent years towards film over certain practices like heavy CGI use and a deluge of sequels, reboots, and remakes. So whenever it comes across a film that a lot of film fans really, really love, it’s endorsed like it’s the only film worth watching that year. That’s exactly what happened when the new Mad Max was released and that actually kind of pissed me off because as soon as Fury Road came out, all I heard for weeks were people saying that it was the best film of the summer and that nothing else compared to it. And to put all of this into perspective, this was in May; the summer season had barely started and yet already a lot of people were acting like it was already done just because of one single film. As a result, I started to get rather mad (pun not intended) at the film for stealing the thunder of some of the other great summer films of 2015, including my favorite from not only that stretch but the whole year in general, Tomorrowland, which was released a week later and yet was completely overshadowed by the Mad Max hype train. Really the only advantage that Tomorrowland had over it was the fact that it did beat Mad Max at the box office that weekend… and then proceeded to gross more than $100 million less worldwide. How ironic that a film that promoted a more optimistic outlook on the future and challenged the craze of the post-apocalyptic genre got overrun by a film from the exact same genre it was addressing.

Well anyway, it’s been more than a year since the release of Fury Road and I’ll admit that I’ve calmed down in regards to me being angry at it for overshadowing its competition. While I may not have been a big fan of it like the rest of the internet, I did acknowledge some of its biggest strengths that made up for the issues that I had with the film, for the most part. But ultimately I vowed that I would give the film a second chance to see if I would warm up to it after a second viewing. This time, however, I decided to approach this situation differently compared to when I first watched it. When I first saw it, I hadn’t seen any of the previous Mad Max films beforehand. And while some did claim that watching the previous films first wasn’t necessary in order to enjoy Fury Road, I do feel that not doing so put me at a disadvantage going in because at that time I had never seen any of them and was generally unfamiliar with the franchise. So this time around, I’m doing this in a much more proper manner and watching all three of the original Mad Max films, starring Mel Gibson in the title role that was later taken on by Tom Hardy in Fury Road, before I do my second run-through of the newest film. So with that said, grab your flame-throwing guitars, your silver spray paint that makes you all shiny and chrome, and proclaim “Oh what a day! What a Lovely Day!” and join me as I look back upon the Mad Max film franchise, from the original 1979 classic that started it all to its even more beloved sequel to its not as beloved sequel and finally culminating with Fury Road.

MAD MAX (1979)

We begin in 1979 with the original film that started it all, Mad Max. It was the feature film debut of director George Miller, who prior to working on this film was a medical doctor in Sydney. This experience in the hospital would actually play a major part in the development of Mad Max as the injuries sustained by characters in the film were directly influenced by what Miller witnessed while on the job. As for the film itself, it’s a highly engrossing tale of revenge in which police officer Max Rockatansky (Mel Gibson) goes up against a vicious biker gang when they threaten both him and his friends and family. For a film that was shot on a low budget of under half a million dollars (and for the record, this is in terms of 1970’s Australian currency), it is very well-shot as it is full of great action sequences and also boasts an excellent production design based around its dystopian setting, something which of course would become a staple for the franchise. The landscapes of Australia also help serve as a perfect backdrop for all of this film’s chaotic action. Mel Gibson, in what was easily his break-out role, shines in the role of Max while Hugh Keays-Byrne, who of course would return to the franchise years later in another famous villain role, gives the film an excellent main villain in the form of the biker gang’s leader Toecutter. All in all, even though this film would eventually become fairly overshadowed in terms of scale by its follow-ups, it’s still an excellently directed, well-acted, and well-shot action thriller that fully immerses you into this world of madness.

Rating: 4.5/5

MAD MAX 2: THE ROAD WARRIOR (1981)

Although the original Mad Max proved to be a worldwide critical/commercial success, it actually wasn’t that big of a hit here in the U.S., at least from a commercial standpoint, due to its distributor, American International Pictures, going through ownership changes at the time. It may have also had something to do with a disastrous ‘American dub’ that was instigated because the distributor supposedly feared that audiences wouldn’t understand the cast’s Australian accents. So as a result, when the sequel was released two years later, it was renamed to The Road Warrior and its connections to the previous film were underplayed in the marketing. Regardless, the film did perform much better domestically this time around, which is deservedly so because like its predecessor it is another excellent post-apocalyptic action flick. In a way, this is the same great visceral and sharply constructed storytelling of the original but now with the added benefit of a larger budget. Like before, the action is terrific, especially the big chase at the end. I can definitely see how much of an influence this had on Fury Road, not just through the similarities of their ‘chases’ but also because the film relies a lot more on visual storytelling than dialogue. Mel Gibson is once again excellent as Max and the film has its fair share of memorable side characters, from Max’s ally the Gyro Captain (Bruce Spence) to the imposing gang leader Lord Humungus (Kjell Nilsson) to Humungus’ highly intimidating and vicious lieutenant Wez (Vernon Wells). It could be said that The Road Warrior was the film that really catapulted the Mad Max franchise into its prime spot in pop culture history and I can definitely see why. This is one of those rare sequels that is not only as good as its predecessor but may arguably be better.

Rating: 4.5/5

MAD MAX: BEYOND THUNDERDOME (1985)

To put it bluntly, Mad Max: Beyond Thunderdome is generally considered to be the weakest installment of the franchise. Part of it may have something to do with the fact that this wasn’t fully directed by George Miller, who instead shared co-directing duties with George Ogilvie, who had starred in the 1983 miniseries The Dismisssal that he produced, following the death of Miller’s producing partner Byron Kennedy in a plane crash in 1983. Miller ultimately ended up only directing the film’s action sequences. But the major reason why this film is generally not as well-received as the previous two films (as well as its subsequent sequel) is due to its second half. For the record, the film starts out pretty much exactly like what you would expect from a Mad Max film with its excellent production design and visceral proceedings, as Max finds himself in the sordid community of Bartertown. But then things change when Max ends up getting exiled from the town by its ruler, Aunty Entity (Tina Turner). He ends up coming across a group of children who believe that he was their ‘flight captain’ who was meant to take them to ‘civilization’. As many have pointed out, these kids are sort of like the ‘Lost Boys’ from Peter Pan and as a result of this, the film ends up taking on a much more kid-friendly tone. Now I’m not saying that I ‘hated’ this part of the film but the shift from the franchise’s traditional hardcore action to a more light-hearted and goofier adventure is still rather jarring. I should probably also mention that this is the only entry in the series to be rated PG-13.

But that doesn’t mean that there aren’t any ‘good things’ in this film. Gibson is of course excellent once again as Max and Tina Turner is actually pretty darn good in the ‘main villain’ role of Aunty Entity, even though the character is absent for a good chunk of the second half due to the change in plot. Of course there’s also a few noteworthy side characters as well, most notably the duo that is ‘Master Blaster’. Heck, even the kids do a pretty fine job acting-wise. The action is still pretty darn good as is the production design, with this film in particular having some pretty nice cinematography. As Doug Walker (AKA the ‘Nostalgia Critic’) pointed out in his review of Fury Road, this film may arguably even be the most quotable of the entire series, from Aunty Entity repeatedly calling Max a ‘raggedy man’ to the iconic ‘Two Men Enter, One Man Leaves’ rule of Bartertown’s Thunderdome arena. However, at the end of the day I do have to agree with the general consensus in that this is definitely the ‘weakest’ installment of the series. Don’t get me wrong I still think it’s a pretty darn good film on its own merits but as a Mad Max film it’s a bit underwhelming as a result of its jarring shift halfway through that introduces a plotline that doesn’t really mix with the whole storyline of Bartertown. Ultimately Beyond Thunderdome would end up being the final Mad Max film to feature Mel Gibson and it would be quite a while, three decades to be precise, before the series finally made its return to the big screen.

Rating: 3.5/5

And on that note, here’s the big one…

MAD MAX: FURY ROAD (2015) - SECOND OPINION

And finally here we are at the latest installment of the Mad Max series, Fury Road. This was the first time that I had watched it since seeing it in theaters last May. And of course, as I’ve already mentioned, the first time I saw the film… I wasn’t ‘too big’ on it. I did like it and gave it a 4/5 rating in my original review but in some ways I felt that the internet had severely overhyped it. So for months I was left wondering why this film was being treated like it was the second coming of Christ. It got to the point where I admittedly was this close to using that scary word that I hate to use… ‘overrated’. But after waiting until last year’s awards circuit was over, I finally made sure to give it another chance. And fear not, internet folk… I warmed up to it the second time around. Granted, I still have some issues with it but I cannot deny the great things about this film. The action, predominantly done with practical effects in the modern age of CGI, is incredible and the production design is just as great as you would expect from a Mad Max film. This film also sports one hell of an amazing color palette as everything is bright and vibrant, very much different compared to most films in the post-apocalyptic genre. Charlize Theron is ‘Sigourney Weaver in Aliens’ level fantastic in the role of Furiosa, the ‘true’ main character of the film. But actually my favorite character in the film ended up being Nux, played by Nicholas Hoult. I thought Nux had the most interesting arc of them all; at first he’s a loyal War Boy of the Immortan who aspires to die historically on the Fury Road knowing that he’ll be ‘awaited in Valhalla’. But by the end, he ends up helping Max, Furiosa, and the Wives escape from Immortan Joe and I won’t lie… his death at the end of the film is a pretty damn emotional one.

But like I said, there are still a few minor issues that I have with the film and, like I said in my previous reviews of the film, they mainly stem from the writing. Now let me be clear, I’m not saying that this film needed a very complex plot. Not every film needs that and this film more than works without it because that’s obviously not the main intent of the film; instead it’s a visceral and kinetic action extravaganza and it very much succeeds in that regard. However, at the end of the day, this really is just ‘get from Point A to Point B… and then back to Point A again’ and Furiosa and Nux are the only major characters in the film that get any sort of major character development. While it’s really cool that Miller doesn’t make the Wives characters ‘damsels in distress’, to the point where even Splendid (Rosie Huntington-Whiteley), the pregnant Wife, gets in on the action and is even killed off halfway through (got to give the filmmakers credit for having the guts to pull off a ballsy move like that), only a few of them get much to work with, namely Splendid and Capable (Riley Keough), the latter of whom ends up having a sweet little ‘romance’ with Nux. And as for Immortan Joe, while he may be quite the badass-looking villain, I wouldn’t really say that he’s a badass ‘villain’. Sure he’s got a great intimidation factor, primarily emphasized by both his menacing look and his ability to lead his army of devoted War Boys, but at the end of the day he really doesn’t do much in the film other than drive around, make some speeches, and have what is admittedly a pretty awesome and gnarly death scene. As far as the villains that Hugh Keays-Byrne has played in the Mad Max series are concerned, I think the better of the two is still Toecutter from the original Mad Max.

And then there’s Tom Hardy as Max and… I still think he’s quite underused in this. Now like The Road Warrior, Max is more of an ‘outsider’ in the plot. Furiosa really is the main character of the film and that’s a great thing. While there have unfortunately been some fanboys who have been rather critical of this, the film deserves a whole lot of kudos for its strong feminist themes. However, the film really should’ve just been called Furiosa: Fury Road because Max really doesn’t factor at all into much of this. And while I am a fan of Tom Hardy and I do think that he does a good job with what he had to work with, ultimately I prefer Mel Gibson’s Max as I feel that there was more to his version of the character, particularly in the first film. Hardy’s Max is more of a blank, and arguably even a bit emotionless, slate. But despite the issues that I just laid out, I’ll fully admit it… I did warm up to Mad Max: Fury Road upon re-watch. It really is one of those films that gets better with repeat viewings. George Miller was in his late 60’s when he made this; one of the most insanely awesome action films of all-time. That’s amazing. And even though I do have some minor issues with the writing, this film truly delivers when it comes to the action and production design. Simply put, it is a finely-tuned and gorgeous looking action thrill ride.

Rating: …Yeah, I’ll bump my original rating up to a 4.5/5

So to finish this post, here are my rankings of the four films.

4. MAD MAX: BEYOND THUNDERDOME

3. MAD MAX 2: THE ROAD WARRIOR

2. MAD MAX: FURY ROAD

1. MAD MAX

Be sure to sound off in the comments below with your own rankings of this iconic post-apocalyptic action franchise.

Ghostbusters (2016): Why You Should Give it a Chance

(Disclaimer: Literally just a day after I started writing this, a second trailer for the new Ghostbusters film was released online. I’m only going to mention it here for now but the reaction that I have to the first trailer will basically apply to the new one as well.)

As a film critic, I strive to be as open-minded as possible when it comes to every new film that I see. Even if I feel that the film doesn’t look very good based on what I’ve seen from its trailers, TV spots, etc., I still give it the benefit of the doubt and hope for the best. Because if you ask me, it’s both fairly cynical and quite unfair to immediately write off a film before you even see it. Unless you have a time machine that allowed you to go forward in time to when a certain film is released, which I’m 100% certain no one actually has yet, there’s really no way in knowing that a film is going to be good or not solely based on trailers and the film’s marketing. And that’s exactly what has been going on with what has easily been one of the most controversial productions in recent memory; director Paul Feig’s upcoming reboot of Ghostbusters. In fact, this film has been so polarizing amongst internet folk that it recently become the most disliked film trailer in the history of YouTube; no other film trailer is even close to having that many dislikes. Damn! Clearly a lot of fanboys aren’t too happy with this female-led reboot of the iconic Ghostbusters franchise… and I’ll be perfectly frank in saying that all of this vitriol is rather embarrassing because all of these angry fanboys are prematurely judging a film without even seeing it just because it’s trying something with their beloved franchise that they don’t like. So today on Rhode Island Movie Corner, I’ll be addressing the two primary reasons as to why the new Ghostbusters film is attracting so much negative attention online. And with that in mind, hopefully this post will serve as some kind of encouragement for people to actually give the film a chance instead of just writing it off right off the bat, which is what the majority of the internet has been doing so far.

The Ghostbusters franchise obviously needs no introduction. It’s one of the most famous franchises in pop culture history. What started with the 1984 titular film written by the film’s stars, Harold Ramis and Dan Aykroyd, ended up becoming a worldwide phenomenon, spawning a 1989 sequel, a hit TV series in the form of The Real Ghostbusters, and a wide array of merchandise ranging from toys to video games. As far as the films were concerned, over the years there were many attempts in doing a potential third Ghostbusters film. However, this planned sequel ended up facing numerous setbacks over the years, namely the fact that franchise star Bill Murray routinely expressed disinterest in returning. Ultimately, with the passing of Harold Ramis in February 2014, it seemed as if this Ghostbusters III wasn’t going to happen, especially after it was announced that Ivan Reitman would not return to direct the film. And then, in August of that year, things changed when it was announced that Paul Feig (Bridesmaids, The Heat, Spy) was going to direct a new Ghostbusters film that would star an all-female group of leads. Melissa McCarthy, Kristen Wiig, Kate McKinnon, and Leslie Jones were then subsequently cast in the main roles for a film that will serve as a ‘reboot’ of the franchise; in other words, it seems as if the film will not be taking place in the same universe as the original films. So now the big question is this; Why is this new Ghostbusters film being subjected to some of the most vitriolic scrutiny that you’ll ever see, arguably even more so than some of the most hated films of all-time? Well, there have been two main reasons for this and the first is fairly obvious.

REASON 1: IT’S A REBOOT

Like any major reboot, this new Ghostbusters has been criticized by fans for one major reason; why reboot a film franchise when the original is so beloved (the first one, at least; the sequel, not so much)? Obviously this is a problem that a lot of people have whenever a franchise that they love gets some form of continuation but this has clearly been the one reboot, more so than any other, that a lot of people simply couldn’t tolerate whatsoever. But as for me, I’m not really part of that crowd. I guess you could say it’s due to the fact that I didn’t watch Ghostbusters until I was older. But you see, there is this stigma that the internet creates when it comes to sequels, reboots, and remakes in which fanboys claim that one ‘bad’ film ‘completely ruins a franchise’. In reality, though, that’s not really true because the previous beloved films in a series are still going to be there afterwards; it ain’t like they were destroyed in a fire or anything. If you didn’t like one entry in a franchise, just ignore that one and stick to the other films. Same goes for that argument of ‘[insert film here] destroyed my childhood’. No, your childhood wasn’t destroyed because of one film based off of a franchise you followed when you were a kid. So to put all of this into perspective, imagine this scenario. I’ve made it clear in the past that Back to the Future is my favorite film of all-time. A few months ago there was some talk about a potential continuation of the franchise which was quickly shot down by creators Robert Zemeckis and Bob Gale, who said that it’ll happen ‘over their dead bodies’. But if a Back to the Future remake/sequel/whatever does end up getting made some day, that doesn’t mean that I’m going to be all pissy about it and condemn the new film before I even see it. I will, at the very least, give it a chance because it at least deserves that. And so does this new Ghostbusters film.

But unfortunately there’s another big reason why this film has been getting a lot of backlash…

REASON 2: IT STARS WOMEN

Yep… as much as some have tried to deny it, which basically means that they’re only further proving it true, one of the major criticisms that fanboys have had with the new film is the fact that the film stars a group of women in the lead roles. Don’t believe me? Need I remind you of when Mad Max: Fury Road came out and there were a minority of fans who were angry at the film for having a feminist slant given the greater focus on characters like Furiosa and the Wives? Well the same thing is happening to the new Ghostbusters film… and this one isn’t even out yet. It really is pathetic that this is one of the main reasons why the film has been getting a lot of vitriol directed towards it. Despite all of the advancements over the years in regards to lead female roles in film, here’s one instance where the internet just can’t let that happen for one of its beloved franchises (Imagine how angry the internet would be if this happened to other male-centric franchises). That was even more evident when another Ghostbusters film was announced in March 2015 that was going to have a cast of male leads and be directed by the Russo brothers. While it looks as if this potential film isn’t going to happen due to the Russo brothers departing the production, I saw quite a few comments online from fanboys when it was still in development that said something along the lines of “I’m more interested in that than the female Ghostbusters film”. No joke. That’s seriously what some people were saying.

Now obviously there’s a bit more to this backlash than the two reasons I listed above. It also has something to do with how people have reacted to the first trailer. Now as far as the actual trailer for the film is concerned, I’m not saying that it was a particularly ‘great’ trailer but it’s far from being the worst thing either. It definitely isn’t worthy of all those damn dislikes, that’s for sure. Yeah there are a few scenes that are clearly being lifted from previous films but the visuals do look pretty darn good and I found that there were genuinely a few laugh-out-loud moments in the trailer, particularly at the end when Leslie Jones’ character continually smacks Melissa McCarthy’s character in order to get the ghost that has been possessing her out, even after said ghost has already been forced out (“THE POWER OF PATTY COMPELS YOU!”). I mean at the end of the day I’m fully aware that this could end up being a disaster. I’m not denying that. However, a good chunk of the backlash towards the film is quite pathetic; not the part about it being a reboot, because that was inevitable no matter how well the first trailer was received, but the part about the film starring women in the lead roles. Seriously internet, it’s 2016… grow the hell up, will ya? What’s so wrong about a bunch of women being Ghostbusters, a franchise that has been fairly male-centric for pretty much the entire duration of its existence? I for one am excited to see how this new film is going to turn out. It certainly has a good cast and crew attached to it and at the very least it has the support of Ivan Reitman and the original film’s cast, many of whom are making cameos in the film. And yes, they even managed to win over Bill Murray as well, which I think is at least a good sign. You can rest assured that I will be seeing this film when it comes out. In fact, I might even end up seeing it twice if only to support it in light of all of the unfair hate that it has been getting.    

Money Monster (2016) review

In describing the film Money Monster, I’m going to use a connection that I bet a few other critics have made as well in regards to the film. And that is the fact that this film shares quite a few similarities with the film Dog Day Afternoon, which I just so happened to have watched recently for a film class. Both films depict a stand-off situation that ends up becoming a nationally publicized event. And during this time, it is shown that the assailant actually isn’t really that much of a bad guy but instead just an average joe who’s down on his luck that’s committing said crime in order to take on those who wronged him. But whereas the main characters of Dog Day Afternoon were trying to rob a bank and basically kept messing it up, hence why the robbery in that film ended up turning into a standoff, the ‘criminal’ in Money Monster takes the host of a popular finance show hostage after a ‘tip’ that he got from a previous episode ended up majorly backfiring on him. What follows is a tense hostage situation revolving around a big bank conspiracy and a pretty darn well-directed and acted one at that. Director Jodie Foster, in her fourth foray behind the camera, gives us a film that not only succeeds in being a suspenseful thriller but also one that challenges the corruption of the U.S. economy, something that has clearly been on everyone’s minds in recent years (The Big Short, anyone?).

Lee Gates (George Clooney) is the host of the financial show ‘Money Monster’, which for years has been supervised by director Patty Fenn (Julia Roberts). About a month prior to the events of the film, Gates had suggested to viewers that they invest in IBIS Global Capital but the company’s stock ends up going kaput presumably due to a glitch in the trading algorithm that it runs on. And that ends up becoming a problem not only for the investors, who collectively lose around $800 million, but for Lee and the crew of ‘Money Monster’ as well. In the middle of a broadcast one day after the IBIS stock crash, a mysterious ‘deliveryman’ walks onto set with a gun. The ‘deliveryman’, Kyle Budwell (Jack O’Connell), takes Lee hostage and forces him to put on an explosive-laden vest. During this time, Kyle reveals that he was one of the many investors who got screwed over by the drop in IBIS’ stock, having invested his entire life savings, $60,000 to be precise, into it after following Lee’s advice. As both Lee and Patty try to keep things under control in the studio, as well as dealing with the police, led by Captain Marcus Powell (Giancarlo Esposito), once they arrive on the scene, they also begin to work with Kyle in order to figure out just what went wrong with IBIS’ stock. And as it turns out, there’s a lot more to this situation than just a supposed ‘algorithm glitch’.

Money Monster definitely delivers in terms of being a tense ‘claustrophobic’ thriller, at least in regards to the scenes where Kyle is holding Lee hostage in the studio. These scenes are well directed and edited and very much do their job in establishing both urgency and a palpable sense of tension throughout. While Patty tries to keep everything under control by communicating with both Lee and Kyle from the control room, Lee attempts to reason with Kyle in order to calm him down so that he won’t take his finger off of the bomb’s detonator. These are easily the best scenes in the film and they also do a very nice job at keeping things as ‘realistic’ as possible. The film also does a good job of maintaining a fittingly serious tone throughout, though there are a few moments of humor that lighten the mood from time to time, especially one particular scene at the end that, without giving too much away, sees the internet poke fun at one specific moment from the climax. Admittedly, the sequences set outside the studio are where the film starts to falter just a bit. I can’t really explain why but the overall ‘conspiracy’ that the film is working towards in regards to what happened with IBIS’ stock isn’t really as strong as the conflict that takes place within the studio. With that said, though, the film should still be commended for its efforts in challenging the corruption of the economy. And in some ways that corruption even comes from shows like ‘Money Monster’, which influenced people like Kyle enough for them to make stupid mistakes with their money by making disastrous investments. 

One of the best things about both this film and Dog Day Afternoon is that both allow the audience to sympathize with their ‘main criminals’ even when taking their not-so-honorable actions into account. Because as noted earlier, despite the fact that Kyle is the ‘gunman’ in this situation, we can sympathize with him in regards to how his financial losses seriously affected him, partially exemplified by a particularly emotionally devastating scene in which his pregnant girlfriend publicly berates him on live TV. Moments like that are very effective and Jack O’Connell handles them all excellently. As expected, he’s backed by a pair of excellent performances from George Clooney and Julia Roberts. Clooney’s trademark charisma is definitely on display here even though his character in this film can be rather smug at times, as shown in the early scenes when he is hosting his show. But once the main plot kicks in and the character becomes Kyle’s hostage, Clooney also does a nice job in conveying Gates’ fear, like when he first puts on the explosive-laden jacket and claims that he’s about to have a heart attack. As for Roberts, she’s also great in a role that serves as the mediator in this hostage situation while also having a solid camaraderie with Clooney. Everyone else in the cast is good as well but because the scenes outside of the studio aren’t really as strong as the ones inside the studio, the real stars of the show are Clooney, Roberts, and O’Connell.

Overall, Money Monster is a very solid real-time thriller that, for the most part, does its job in regards to establishing tension. This of course comes from the primary conflict that emerges between Lee Gates, Patty Fenn, and Kyle Budwell during a live broadcast of Gates’ show ‘Money Monster’. And during this hostage situation, the film does a very honorable job at critiquing the corruption of Wall Street. It isn’t even afraid to point the finger at shows like ‘Money Monster’ for, in their way, having a hand in said corruption. However, the film does suffer a bit when it comes to scenes set outside the studio, with most of these scenes serving as the third act of the film. The conspiracy plot that the film ends up focusing on isn’t really as strong as the suspenseful in-studio conflict. It may have something to do with the fact that this film has a fairly brisk runtime of only 98 minutes. It could be argued that certain moments in the plot are rather rushed over, particularly during the final third of the film. But despite the film’s shortcomings, the lead trio of George Clooney, Julia Roberts, and Jack O’Connell all do excellent jobs in their respective roles and the scenes involving their characters in-studio do make up for it for the most part. The end result is a film that may not be one of the best of its genre but is still a well-directed effort from Jodie Foster that at least does its job at being a solid and entertaining popcorn flick.

Rating: 3.5/5

Captain America: Civil War (2016) review

Sometimes it’s hard to believe that it’s been nearly a decade since the release of the first Marvel Cinematic Universe film, Iron Man, back in 2008. At that time, no one ever figured that this franchise would evolve into what it is today. After all, there had never been anything like the Marvel Cinematic Universe up to that point. And yet 8 years later, here we are… two whole phases into the Marvel Cinematic Universe with 12 films, 4 TV shows, and much more on the way. Marvel Studios has pretty much established itself as the most prolific force in the superhero genre, so much so that pretty much every other studio has been trying to emulate their success. And sure, the studio has faced some criticism over the years. There are some who argue that their films are ‘all the same’, even though in reality Marvel has actually covered quite a few different genres over the years from heist films to 70’s spy thrillers. And of course, there’s that damn superhero fatigue argument as well as the fact that some people actually think these films are ‘ruining’ the film industry, namely the fact that other studios have tried to use the ‘cinematic universe’ formula with non-superhero franchises. But here’s the thing… it’s not like Marvel was directly responsible for other studios implementing this formula into other franchises. All they’ve been doing is just continuing to produce quality films/TV shows. And now that the infamous Creative Committee that was responsible for incidents like Edgar Wright’s departure from Ant-Man is no more, clearly it looks like things are going to continue to run smoothly for what is easily one of the most critically and commercially successful franchises out there today.

I apologize if that last part went a bit too far into rant territory. Anyone who knows me knows I can get rather irritated when that fatigue argument comes into play. Anyway, kicking off Phase III of the MCU is Captain America: Civil War. Captain America: The Winter Soldier directors Joe and Anthony Russo, who prior to Winter Soldier had only been known for comedies, return to helm the final installment of the Captain America trilogy. And as some of you might have already guessed from the title, this particular entry takes inspiration from one of the most notable, and in most cases infamous, Marvel storylines of the past decade, Civil War. Written by Mark Millar (Kick-Ass, Kingsman: The Secret Service), this seven-part series saw the heroes of the Marvel Universe split between those who supported and those who were opposed to a new government act intent on regulating superhero activity in the wake of increasingly catastrophic superhero-related incidents. Specifically, this storyline saw Captain America, an opponent of the act, face off against Iron Man, who to the surprise of many supported the act, with each leading their own ‘team’ to combat the other. This new film follows a similar plotline but bases it within the overall context of the MCU’s lore and, as a result, doesn’t feature all of the characters that were in the original storyline. In other words, no X-Men and no Fantastic Four because they’re still over at Fox. And without having read the original series, it seems as if this version is a much more toned down affair compared to the comics. But given the generally polarizing nature of the original story, that might be for the better. Because yet again the Russos deliver another action-packed and character-driven superhero epic that pulls a lot of changes in regards to what will happen next for the MCU and its heroes.  

Captain America: Civil War opens up about a year after the events of Age of Ultron. During this time, it is established that public opinion towards the Avengers has started to wane in the wake of the countless international incidents that they have been involved in. And unfortunately the situation only proceeds to get worse for the team when a mission in Lagos, Nigeria ends up causing even more collateral damage. This immediately leads the United Nations into setting up the ‘Sokovia Accords’, a new act that would put the group under the control of an international governing body. This proves to be a very polarizing point of debate amongst the group’s members. Specifically, Steve Rogers (Chris Evans) AKA Captain America opposes it on the grounds that it hinders their ‘freedom’ while Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) AKA Iron Man supports it due to him taking responsibility for having started the whole ordeal with Ultron. The situation becomes even more complicated when Cap’s best friend Bucky Barnes (Sebastian Stan), who following his supposed death in 1945 was revived and brainwashed into being the Hydra assassin known as the ‘Winter Soldier’, is suspected of bombing a peace conference. As Cap tries to protect his friend, who claims that he wasn’t responsible for the bombing, the Avengers soon find themselves on opposite sides of ‘the law’. On Cap’s side there’s Bucky, Sam Wilson (Anthony Mackie) AKA Falcon, Wanda Maximoff (Elizabeth Olsen) AKA Scarlet Witch, Clint Barton (Jeremy Renner) AKA Hawkeye, and ‘new recruit’ Scott Lang (Paul Rudd) AKA Ant-Man. On Iron Man’s side there’s Natasha Romanoff (Scarlett Johansson) AKA Black Widow, Vision (Paul Bettany), James Rhodes (Don Cheadle) AKA War Machine, Wakanda prince T’Challa (Chadwick Boseman) AKA Black Panther, and ‘new recruit’ Peter Parker (Tom Holland) AKA Spider-Man.   

For the record, this is not a straight-up adaptation of Civil War, which is probably a good thing considering the storyline’s generally polarizing reception. As someone who hasn’t read that storyline, it seems as if the film takes on a less extreme atmosphere than the comics. Obviously the conflict between the Avengers is still there but in the comics, Iron Man apparently took on an extremely authoritarian role in order to hunt down anyone opposed to the registration act. Thankfully that’s not the case here. Despite what it may seem, Iron Man is not the ‘villain’ of the film and neither are the other members of his ‘team’. And that’s the cool thing about this story; the Avengers aren’t the ‘bad guys’ in this situation and yet it’s still interesting to watch them get into one hell of a moral debate over everything that’s happened since they’ve made themselves public to the world. Not only that, but both sides actually do have valid points to stand on instead of it seeming like the writers are favoring one ‘team’ over the other. Obviously that means that there are quite a lot of scenes where the protagonists talk with one another, perhaps more so than there are action sequences. However, the film is still a fun ride throughout and sports some particularly epic action sequences, once again highlighting the Russos’ talent for directing action with this film giving them the added benefit of having more characters to work with. Interestingly enough, while this did seem like it would be the most serious MCU film to date, it still maintains the generally light-hearted nature of the franchise in general. In other words, the franchise’s trademark humor is still there in droves, and I’m aware that this will turn some people off as there have been some who have been critical towards the MCU films for relying a lot on humor. However, I’ve never seen it as a problem with these films as there are plenty of great and emotional character moments in this film that are effectively balanced with legitimately funny bits of dialogue, mostly coming from the interactions between the characters. 

In the months leading up to the film’s release, there was some discussion over why the film was still being deemed as a Captain America story considering that almost all of the other main superheroes in the MCU (save for Hulk and Thor who, spoilers, are not in this film whatsoever) were in it as well. For those people, it seemed like Avengers 2.5 was a more fitting title. And yet, somehow, the Russos actually managed to make it all work. At the end of the day, Captain America IS the main character of the story. A lot of the plot revolves around him trying to protect his pal Bucky which of course brings him into a major conflict with Iron Man, something that has of course been previously teased in the Avengers films as a result of their numerous ‘squabbles’ with one another. Aside from Iron Man, pretty much every other ‘Avenger’ in the film is in a supporting role. But that’s totally fine because, just like what Joss Whedon did with the Avengers films, the Russos manage to give every major hero/heroine his/her own moment to shine. Also, similar to The Winter Soldier, this film actually does manage to get by without having a major ‘villain’, as the focus is more on the protagonists and their conflict with each other. With that said, this film does have a ‘villain’, Zemo (Daniel Bruhl) and, well… he really doesn’t add much to the story. So as far as that common argument that the majority of the MCU’s villains are weak is concerned, nothing here is going to change that for those who make that argument.

13 films in, there’s really no need to say much more about the franchise’s returning players; Evans, Downey Jr., Johansson, Stan, Cheadle, Bettany, Rudd, Renner, Olsen, Mackie, etc. They’re just as great as they’ve always been in these films, with all of them having played their respective roles at least more than once by this point. So moving on from that, this film introduces two new players to the MCU. The first is Black Panther, played by Chadwick Boseman. To put it simply, Black Panther is a badass and Boseman absolutely owns the role, both in terms of the action sequences and the character’s overall gravitas. But of course the most hyped element of this film was the return of everyone’s favorite web-slinger, Spider-Man. After being previously unable to join the franchise due to the fact that his character rights are owned by Sony, the recent deal between Sony and Marvel Studios has finally allowed the web-slinger to join the MCU. Now to be perfectly frank, as someone who did like the Amazing Spider-Man films (yes, even the second one), I was a little disappointed that they decided to reboot the Spider-Man franchise, for the second time in five years for the record, instead of just letting the Amazing series continue but with the added benefit of having Kevin Feige and co. in charge to make sure the franchise runs more smoothly in the wake of the second Amazing film’s mixed critical/commercial response. However, even with that said, I have to admit it… Tom Holland is a frigging excellent Spider-Man. Obviously Holland is the youngest onscreen Spider-Man to date as the new series is intent on focusing more on Peter Parker’s high-school years compared to the previous two series. And Holland absolutely owns it in the role, both in terms of the character’s natural wit and the fact that, at least in this story, he is a legitimate ‘outsider’ to the whole ordeal with the Avengers.

13 for 13 when it comes to ‘well-received’ films; there has yet to be an MCU film that has dropped below the fresh percentile on Rotten Tomatoes. Clearly that’s got to be a record when it comes to film franchises. And rightfully so as Captain America: Civil War is yet another sterling success for Marvel Studios. While the film does take inspiration from the Civil War storyline, it doesn’t strive to be a perfect adaptation, which I think many people will agree is a good thing considering the original storyline didn’t go over too well with everyone. By comparison, the film takes on a less extreme route in terms of its plot but still does a great job in conveying the moralistic conflict that the Avengers end up getting into. You actually do understand where both sides are coming from and neither side is meant to be seen as a ‘villain’ even though they are in opposition with one another. Pair that with some particularly excellent action sequences and plenty of great character moments, especially those involving the newcomers Black Panther and, of course, Spider-Man, and you have one hell of a superhero epic. Whereas Winter Soldier was proof that the Russos could handle an action film of this scale, Civil War is proof that they can handle a massive ensemble cast like this one even though the film is mainly focused on Captain America. And that’s very much a good thing because these guys are set to take over for Joss Whedon as Avengers directors with the upcoming two-parter epic that will be The Avengers: Infinity War. Clearly, that film couldn’t be in better hands.

Rating: 5/5!

The Marvel Cinematic Universe: The Story So Far

This past November, prior to the release of The Hunger Games: Mockingjay Part 2, I tried out an idea that I had been developing for new posts on this blog. Due to the fact that franchises play a key part in the film industry nowadays, I figured that it may be hard for some newcomers whenever they go into the latest installment of a franchise potentially without having seen any of its previous installments. So in honor of the release of what was the final installment of The Hunger Games, I did a post in which I recapped the events of the previous three films in order to A.) get newcomers up-to-speed with what’s going on in the story and B.) refresh the memories of those who have seen the films but may not have seen them in a while. And overall, it seems that a lot of you really liked that post based on its view-count. So as a result, I decided to continue on with this ‘Story so Far’ series and today I’m tackling the current king of film franchises. That’s right, I’m doing the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Back when it all started in 2008 with the original Iron Man, I bet no one would have expected that this would one day lead to one of the biggest franchises in recent memory. But now here we are just less than a week away from the release of the MCU’s 13^th installment, Captain America: Civil War, which also marks the beginning of the franchise’s ‘Phase Three’. So today, to keep everyone up to speed with what’s been going on in the continually expanding world of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, I’ll be going through almost everything that’s happened in the previous two phases/twelve films. The reason why I say ‘almost’ everything is because if I covered every single event that happened in the MCU up to this point, I’d be here all day.

Now this is going to play out much differently than the ‘Story so Far’ post for The Hunger Games. Instead of this post playing out like a straight-forward re-telling of the events of the MCU films, it’s more going to be like a bulleted timeline detailing specific moments from each entry in the franchise. Also, I’m not just going to do this in the order in which the films were released, starting with Iron Man and then finishing off with the most recent release, 2015’s Ant Man. Instead, I’m going to recount the events of the MCU in order of where they stand on what would be considered as the series’ official ‘timeline’. Now obviously there’s a lot to cover here so I’m restricting it to the most important moments in the franchise; in other words, the general plots of each installment. And yes, I’m also including the TV shows in here as well even though recently it seems like they’ve begun to stray away from the continuity of the films. Because if you ask me, until it’s clearly evident that they are 100% separate from the events in the MCU films, for now they are still a part of that continuity even if only in minor detail. For reference, I used the following websites (listed below) in order to construct this post. If you want to learn more about the MCU timeline, at least more than what I’ll be covering today, I implore you to check out the latter link which will lead you to an ‘official’ wiki site for the MCU. But for now, sit back, relax, and follow along with me as we go through the VERY long history of the world that is Marvel Studios’ Cinematic Universe two phases into its run.

http://www.cnet.com/how-to/marvel-cinematic-universe-timeline-avengers/

http://marvelcinematicuniverse.wikia.com/wiki/Timeline

*In 2988 B.C., the Asgardian army, led by Bor (Tony Curran), confront the Dark Elves of Svartalfheim before they can destroy the Nine Realms with the mysterious substance known as the Aether. Realizing that they’re in the middle of a losing battle, the Dark Elves’ leader Malekith (Christopher Eccleston) sacrifices most of his army and places both himself and his surviving forces into suspended animation. Bor then proceeds to hide the Aether to keep it out of enemy hands. (Thor: The Dark World)

*In the year 965, the Asgardians, led by Odin (Anthony Hopkins), confront the Frost Giants of Jotunheim when the latter group attempts to conquer Earth. After forcing them back to Jotunheim and then proceeding to steal their power source, the Casket of Ancient Winters, Odin negotiates a truce with the Frost Giant leader Laufey (Colm Feore). After the battle, Odin comes across an abandoned Frost Giant infant, who he then proceeds to adopts as his own, Loki. (Thor)

*In the midst of World War II, Brooklyn native Steve Rogers (Chris Evans) attempts to join the military but is continuously rejected due to his frail status. However, Rogers’ determination to join in the fight attracts the attention of defecting German scientist Abraham Erskine (Stanley Tucci), who selects him for a special ‘super-soldier’ project run by the Strategic Scientific Reserve. While the experiment does prove to be a success, transforming Rogers into a much taller and stronger figure, Erskine is killed by an assassin, resulting in Rogers being the only one to be subjected to the super-soldier serum. After initially being used solely for promotional purposes by a U.S. senator, Rogers soon joins in the fight for real as ‘Captain America’ as he and his squad, the Howling Commandos, take on the Nazi organization known as Hydra, led by Johann Schmidt (Hugo Weaving) AKA the ‘Red Skull’, who intends on using a powerful relic known as the Tesseract to take over the world. However, during his final fight with Cap onboard his weapons-loaded aircraft, Schmidt ends up getting ‘dissolved’ by the Tesseract. In order to keep the plane’s weapons from detonating in a civilian-populated area, Rogers ‘sacrifices’ himself by crashing the plane into the Arctic. (Captain America: The First Avenger)

*One year after the end of World War II, SSR agent Peggy Carter (Hayley Atwell), who was Cap’s love interest in The First Avenger, struggles to cope with his ‘loss’ while continuing to work for the SSR. She soon finds herself having to go against her superiors in order to help inventor Howard Stark (Dominic Cooper) when he is framed for supplying weapons to enemies of the U.S. With the help of Stark’s butler Edwin Jarvis (James D’Arcy), Peggy successfully prevents the organization known as Leviathan from using said weapons against the U.S. while also finally coming to terms with the loss of Steve. (Agent Carter: Season 1)

*One year after that, Peggy finds herself sent to Los Angeles on assignment in order to help LA SSR Chief Daniel Sousa (Enver Gjokaj) deal with a mysterious body found frozen in a lake (during a heat wave, no less). This investigation soon leads Peggy and co. into a confrontation with scientific prodigy Whitney Frost (Wynn Everett), who has created a substance known as Zero Matter which she ends up absorbing during this time. (Agent Carter: Season 2)

*Sometime after that, Peggy, after retrieving the mysterious serum known as the ‘Zodiac’ from enemy hands, is recruited by Howard Stark to be the co-head of his new organization: S.H.I.E.L.D. (Marvel One-Shots: Agent Carter)

*In 1988, a young Peter Quill is forced to witness the death of his mother Meredith due to cancer. As he tearfully rushes out of the hospital, he is then abducted by a group of space pirates known as the ‘Ravagers’ led by Yondu Udonta (Michael Rooker). (Guardians of the Galaxy)

*In 1989, S.H.I.E.L.D. associate Dr. Hank Pym (Michael Douglas) furiously resigns from the organization when he learns that they have been trying to duplicate his ‘Ant-Man’ shrinking technology behind his back. (Ant-Man)

*Many years later, genius/billionaire/playboy/philanthropist Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) ends up getting critically wounded while in Afghanistan for a demonstration of his company’s new weapon, the ‘Jericho’ missile. He is then captured by the terrorist group known as ‘The Ten Rings’, who blackmail him into building a ‘Jericho’ missile for them in exchange for his freedom. Instead, Tony, with the help of fellow captive Yinsen (Shaun Toub), builds a suit of armor powered by an arc reactor generator that Tony also uses to power the electromagnet that’s keeping him alive in the wake of his injuries. After escaping from the Ten Rings and returning to the U.S., Tony then decides to use his new suit of armor to take on those who have been using his company’s weapons on innocent people, becoming the superhero ‘Iron Man’. However, Tony soon finds himself in conflict with his business partner Obadiah Stane (Jeff Bridges), who is revealed to be the one who orchestrated Tony’s kidnapping. Stane collects the prototype suit that Tony created to escape from the Ten Rings and dons it to become the ‘Iron Monger’. After successfully defeating Stane, Tony then publicly reveals to the world that he is Iron Man. He is then approached by S.H.I.E.L.D. director Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson), who intends to talk to him about the ‘Avengers Initiative’. (Iron Man)

*After being exposed to gamma radiation as part of an experiment by the government intended to re-create the ‘super-soldier’ program, physicist Bruce Banner (Edward Norton) is transformed into a large green monster, the ‘Hulk’, and is forced to go on the run as a fugitive of the U.S. military. Years later, Banner, who has been living a low-key life in Brazil, tries to search for a cure for his ‘condition’. This soon leads to him returning to the U.S., where he reunites with his ex-girlfriend and fellow scientist Betty Ross (Liv Tyler) while still being pursued by her father, General Thaddeus Ross (William Hurt), and the military. During this time, Ross attempts the ‘super-soldier’ experiment again by testing it on soldier Emil Blonsky (Tim Roth). However, like Banner, the serum ends up having a negative effect on Blonsky, who then proceeds to transform into the monstrous ‘Abomination’. After stopping Abomination, Bruce then proceeds to go back into hiding and is seemingly now able to keep his ‘condition’ in check. (The Incredible Hulk)

*When S.H.I.E.L.D.’s overseers, the World Security Council, intend to recruit Blonsky into the ‘Avengers Initiative’, S.H.I.E.L.D. agents Phil Coulson (Clark Gregg) and Jasper Sitwell (Maximiliano Hernandez) sabotage their plan by having Tony Stark meet with General Ross instead (this was also the ‘post-credits scene’ for The Incredible Hulk) so that he and the military wouldn’t give Blonsky over to S.H.I.E.L.D. (Marvel One-Shots: The Consultant)

*Six months after revealing his identity as Iron Man to the world, Tony Stark is continuously pressured by the government into giving them his technology. While all of this is going on, Tony is also trying to find a replacement for his arc reactor’s palladium core as it has begun to poison him. He is soon confronted by physicist Ivan Vanko (Mickey Rourke), the son of a former associate of Howard Stark (whose older self is played by John Slattery) who builds an arc reactor of his own to seek revenge against Tony’s family for ruining his own family’s life, eventually gaining the help of Tony’s business rival Justin Hammer (Sam Rockwell). With the help of notes from his late father, Tony manages to create a new element that he uses in order to better power his arc reactor and, more importantly, not die. And with the help of his friend, Colonel James Rhodes (who, starting with this film, is played by Don Cheadle after being played by Terrence Howard in the first Iron Man), who had taken one of Tony’s previous Iron Man suits to become ‘War Machine’ for the military, Tony is able to defeat Vanko and his army of robot drones at the Stark Expo in New York. However, Nick Fury then proceeds to inform Tony that S.H.I.E.L.D. only intends to use him as a ‘consultant’ for the ‘Avengers Initiative’ due to his “compulsive behavior, self-destructive tendencies, and textbook narcissism”. (Iron Man 2)

*After briefly serving as Tony Stark’s ‘supervisor’ during the events of Iron Man 2, Agent Coulson is reassigned to investigate a strange occurrence in New Mexico. While on the way there, he subdues a few robbers at a convenience store. (Marvel One-Shots: A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to Thor’s Hammer)

*After he accidentally ends up breaking the truce between Asgard and the Frost Giants, Odin’s son Thor (Chris Hemsworth) is banished to Earth and stripped of his powers. While on Earth, Thor meets, befriends, and falls in love with astrophysicist Jane Foster (Natalie Portman). Meanwhile, back on Asgard, it is revealed that Thor’s brother Loki (Tom Hiddleston), who learns of his true identity as an adopted Frost Giant, had masterminded Thor’s banishment in order to take over as the ruler of Asgard. However, Thor ends up regaining his powers after proving himself worthy of them and returns to Asgard in order to confront Loki. During their battle, Loki seemingly perishes after falling into an abyss. However, it is later revealed that Loki did survive the fall and has taken control of Thor’s scientist friend on Earth, Erik Selvig (Stellan Skarsgard). (Thor)

*Scientists in the Arctic uncover the crashed aircraft that Captain America was in, resulting in Cap waking up in the present day and learning that he’s been ‘asleep’ for about 70 years. (Captain America: The First Avenger)

*S.H.I.E.L.D. begins to experiment on the mysterious Tesseract, recovered by Howard Stark in the 40’s following Cap’s ‘sacrifice’, with the help of Dr. Selvig. However, they are soon attacked by Loki, who takes the Tesseract and hypnotizes both Selvig and Agent Clint Barton (Jeremy Renner) AKA Hawkeye into being his minions. This leads Fury into finally bringing in the members of his ‘Avengers Initiative’: Iron Man, Cap, Thor, Hulk (now played by Mark Ruffalo), as well as SHIELD agent Natasha Romanoff (Scarlett Johansson) AKA Black Widow and Barton after he’s freed from his hypnosis. Together they take on Loki and his army of Chitauri alien soldiers as they attack the city of New York, after Loki brought them to Earth through a portal created by the Tesseract. While Hulk thrashes Loki around to get him out of the fight, Iron Man ‘sacrifices’ himself by sending a missile through the portal in order to destroy the Chitauri mothership. Thankfully he manages to get back through the portal just in time before it closes. With the day saved, Thor brings the imprisoned Loki back to Asgard while the Avengers go their separate ways for now. Meanwhile, in another part of the universe, a mysterious purple-skinned figure is notified of the failed invasion. (The Avengers)

*Tony begins to suffer from PTSD following his near-death experience during the Battle of New York. To make matters worse, a sinister terrorist known as ‘The Mandarin’ begins attacking various sites all over the U.S. When Tony goads him on after his former bodyguard Happy Hogan (played by Iron Man/Iron Man 2 director Jon Favreau) is injured in one of the bombings, the Mandarin destroys Tony’s Malibu home and Tony is forced to fly all the way over to North Carolina, where he begins to mount an all-out offensive on the Mandarin. As it turns out, the man who he thought was the Mandarin (Ben Kingsley) is actually a drunk British actor named Trevor Slattery while the real mastermind behind all of the bombings was scientist Aldrich Killian (Guy Pearce), who Tony had ignored years earlier while at a New Year’s Eve party in Switzerland. Tony defeats Killian with the help of Rhodey, saves his girlfriend Pepper Potts (Gwyneth Paltrow) from being subjected to Killian’s Extremis formula, destroys most of the Iron Man suits that he had developed since New York, and finally gets the shrapnel in his body removed once and for all. (Iron Man 3)

*After being arrested at the end of Iron Man 3, Trevor Slattery is put in prison and is interviewed by documentary filmmaker Jackson Norriss (Scoot McNairy). However, it turns out that Norriss is actually a member of the Ten Rings, who aren’t too pleased with Slattery’s recent portrayal of ‘The Mandarin’, particularly the real Mandarin. (Marvel One-Shots: All Hail the King)

*Agent Phil Coulson, who was believed to have been killed by Loki prior to the Battle of New York, is revealed to be alive and proceeds to form a team of S.H.I.E.L.D. agents to combat all sorts of threats in the wake of the first Avengers film. His team includes pilot/former field agent Melinda May (Ming-Na Wen), black ops specialist Grant Ward (Brett Dalton), engineering genius Leo Fitz (Iain De Caestecker), and biochemist Jemma Simmons (Elizabeth Henstridge). During their first mission, Coulson also ends up recruiting a hacktivist named Skye (Chloe Bennet) who is associated with the hacker group known as the ‘Rising Tide’. When Skye’s connections with the Rising Tide start to threaten her relationship with the rest of the team, she admits to Coulson that she joined the team because she’s been looking for her parents. (Agents of SHIELD: Season 1- Episodes 1-7)

*After Jane Foster accidentally comes into contact with the Aether, Thor is forced to bring her to Asgard for protection, as the release of the Aether awakens Malekith and his forces from their long sleep. When the Dark Elves begin to pose a serious threat to the people of Asgard as well as the Nine Realms in general, Thor is forced to do the unthinkable; ally with his brother Loki as he is the only one who knows of a secret way into Svartalfheim. During a fight with Malekith’s forces, Loki is seemingly killed. Thor, with the help of Jane and her friends, then proceed to defeat Malekith in London. Unbeknownst to Thor, Loki survived and has somehow managed to take Odin’s place as ruler of Asgard. (Thor: The Dark World)

*Coulson and his team continue to investigate strange forces on Earth. During this time, they learn of a mysterious figure known as ‘The Clairvoyant’ who is in charge of an organization known as Project Centipede that Coulson and co. have come across a few times. Coulson and May also learn that Skye is what S.H.I.E.L.D. refers to as an ‘0-8-4’, an object of unknown origin. When Skye is critically wounded during a mission, Coulson and the team head to a secret S.H.I.E.L.D. facility where Coulson was supposedly resurrected. It is here that Coulson learns that the drug that revived him, which is subsequently used to save Skye, came from the corpse of a blue alien creature. (Agents of SHIELD: Season 1- Episodes 8-15)

*Following the Battle of New York, Steve Rogers finds himself trying to adjust to modern life in Washington D.C. while also finding himself conflicted with S.H.I.E.L.D.’s arguably extreme tactics of espionage. When Nick Fury is supposedly killed by a mysterious assassin known as the Winter Soldier, Cap and Black Widow, along with Steve’s new friend Sam Wilson (Anthony Mackie) AKA Falcon, investigate into the matter. They soon learn that Hydra, who was thought to have been eliminated after WWII, still lives on and has taken over S.H.I.E.L.D. Steve also learns that the Winter Soldier is actually his best friend from the 40’s, Bucky Barnes (Sebastian Stan), who supposedly died during the events of The First Avenger. When Hydra plans to use a series of new Helicarriers to wipe out anyone who poses a threat to them, Cap and company go on an all-out offensive against them. They succeed in destroying the Helicarriers and, as a result of Cap’s fight with Bucky, it appears that Bucky has begun to return to his normal self. During this time, Hydra associate Baron von Strucker (Thomas Krestchmann) begins to examine the scepter that Loki had used during the Battle of New York. He is also shown to have two special-powered beings imprisoned; Wanda (Elizabeth Olsen) and Pietro (Aaron Taylor-Johnson) Maximoff AKA Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver. (Captain America: The Winter Soldier)

*During their hunt for the Clairvoyant, Coulson and his team quickly learn of the whole Hydra situation. It is revealed that S.H.I.E.L.D. agent John Garrett (Bill Paxton) is the ‘Clairvoyant’ and, to matters worse, Ward is also a Hydra mole and Garrett’s protégé. Without S.H.I.E.L.D.’s vast array of resources to help them, Coulson and his team are forced to take on Garrett’s forces by themselves. They succeed in both killing Garrett and imprisoning Ward. The season ends with Coulson, who is promoted to the role of ‘Director of S.H.I.E.L.D.’ by Nick Fury (who was forced to go on the run following the events of Winter Soldier), beginning to exhibit a strange fixation by carving mysterious symbols into a wall. (Agents of SHIELD: Season 1- Episodes 16-22).

*26 years after he is initially abducted by the Ravagers, Peter Quill (Chris Pratt) AKA Star-Lord comes across a mysterious orb artifact while on the planet Morag. He soon finds himself pursued by the subordinates of the Kree fanatical Ronan the Accuser (Lee Pace) and at one point ends up getting arrested along with Ronan’s defecting assassin Gamora (Zoe Saldana), adopted daughter of the Mad Titan Thanos (Josh Brolin) AKA that mysterious purple being seen at the end of The Avengers, and bounty hunters Rocket Raccoon (Bradley Cooper) and the tree-like creature Groot (Vin Diesel). Soon joined by warrior Drax the Destroyer (Dave Bautista), the group of misfits team up in order to stop Ronan from using the artifact within the orb, an Infinity Stone (which was also the power source of both the Tesseract and the Aether), to destroy the planet of Xandar. They succeed and Peter learns that he’s half-alien through his unknown father. (Guardians of the Galaxy)

…also, Howard the Duck.

*After defeating Garrett, Coulson and his team are now forced to operate in secret following the ‘fall of S.H.I.E.L.D.’ as seen in The Winter Soldier. They soon learn that the mysterious symbols that Coulson has been carving are a map to an ancient alien city, which they race to before it can be found by Hydra. During this process, Skye’s true identity is revealed as a member of the society known as the Inhumans when she gains earthquake-generating powers after coming into contact with a substance known as Terrigen Mist. She also finally comes into contact with both her long-lost father Calvin Johnson (Kyle MacLachlan), who reveals that her true name is Daisy, and mother/fellow Inhuman Jiaying (Dichen Lachman). (Agents of SHIELD: Season 2- Episodes 1-19)

*After being permanently blinded by hazardous chemicals as a kid, lawyer Matt Murdock (Charlie Cox) moonlights as a vigilante crime-fighter in the Hell’s Kitchen district of New York, effectively becoming the ‘Devil of Hell’s Kitchen’. His actions soon lead to him crossing paths with businessman Wilson Fisk (Vincent D’Onofrio), who intends to destroy Hell’s Kitchen and ‘rebuild’ it through his various dealings with the area’s criminal gangs. Matt, with the help of his best friend and fellow lawyer Foggy Nelson (Elden Henson) and their new assistant Karen Page (Deborah Ann Woll), is able to publicly oust Fisk’s true intentions, who is then subsequently arrested. (Daredevil: Season 1)

*After being ‘given’ a vision (courtesy of Scarlet Witch) of the Avengers completely decimated and aliens attacking the Earth unopposed, Tony Stark decides to use the energy from Loki’s scepter, recovered from Baron von Strucker, to power his ‘Ultron’ defense system. However, Ultron (James Spader) ends up becoming a sentient being hell bent on destroying mankind. Eventually the Avengers confront him in the city of Sokovia, which Ultron lifts up into the air as a means of destroying the world once it crash-lands back on Earth. With the help of Sokovia natives Wanda and Pietro Maximoff (who were initially opposed to the Avengers, specifically Tony Stark whose company manufactured the missile that killed their parents) as well as the being Vision (Paul Bettany), who was created from a synthetic body powered by both an Infinity Stone (the aforementioned ‘energy source’ from Loki’s scepter) and Tony’s A.I. Jarvis, the Avengers stop Ultron though Quicksilver is tragically killed during the battle. Afterwards, Tony and Hawkeye decide to ‘retire’ from the team while Thor returns to Asgard in order to investigate further into the ‘Infinity Stones’ situation that has arisen in the past year. This leaves Cap and Black Widow in charge of training the new members of the Avengers: Vision, Falcon, Scarlet Witch, and War Machine, in their new facility in New York. (The Avengers: Age of Ultron)

*The conflict between S.H.I.E.L.D. and the Inhumans gets nasty when Jiaying masterminds a plot to incite a war between the two parties so that the Inhumans wouldn’t be taken over by S.H.I.E.L.D. While initially torn between the two sides, Daisy helps Coulson and his team stop Jiaying from unleashing Terrigen Mist upon the world, revealing those who are Inhuman and killing those who aren’t. However, sources of the substance do end up leaking into the ocean. This leads Coulson and Daisy into forming a new team of ‘gifted’ individuals like her. The season ends with Agent Simmons being sucked into a mysterious alien monolith that S.H.I.E.L.D. had recently found. (Agents of SHIELD: Season 2- Episodes 20-22)

*Sometime after the events of Age of Ultron, Scott Lang (Paul Rudd) is released from prison after he was arrested for hacking his former company. Looking to turn over a new leaf so that he can be with his daughter Cassie (Abby Ryder Fortson), Scott is approached by Hank Pym, who along with his daughter Hope (Evangeline Lilly) recruit Scott into their plan to steal a new piece of technology, the Yellowjacket suit, from Pym’s former protégé Darren Cross (Corey Stoll), who is close to perfecting his own shrinking technology similar to Pym’s Ant-Man technology. During the set-up for the heist, Scott even ends up crossing paths with Falcon when the former has to collect a specific piece of hardware from the Avengers’ new facility. (Ant-Man)

*As more people around the world begin to be exposed to the Terrigen mist, S.H.I.E.L.D. begins to assemble a team of Inhumans, led by Daisy, to help them confront new threats. During this time, Grant Ward begins to rebuild Hydra following its ‘collapse’ to take on S.H.I.E.L.D. Meanwhile, President Ellis (William Sadler) creates a new task force, the Advanced Threat Containment Unit, led by Rosalind Price (Constance Zimmer), following S.H.I.E.L.D.’s recent fall from grace. While the two parties initially find themselves in conflict with one another over their handling of the Inhuman situation, Price ends up being one of the good guys as S.H.I.E.L.D. confronts Gideon Malick (Powers Boothe), a former member of the World Security Council and Hydra operative. After rescuing Agent Simmons from the mysterious alien realm that she ended up in after being ‘taken’ by the monolith at the end of the previous season, Coulson and Agent Fitz end up traveling to this realm when Ward and Malick plan on bringing an ancient Inhuman, Hive, back to Earth. While there, Coulson kills Ward and he and Fitz return to Earth after seemingly destroying Hive. However, Hive is revealed to have survived and has returned to Earth having taking control of Ward’s body. (Agents of SHIELD: Season 3- Episodes 1-10)

(And that’s all I’m going to say for now in regards to Season 3 of Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. due to the fact that, at the time I’m writing this, the season is not yet over. I’ll go into more detail over what happens during the second half of the season in my upcoming review of Season 3.)

*Years after her brief ‘stint’ as a superhero ended on a dark note, Jessica Jones (Krysten Ritter) has moved on from her past life and has set up a private investigation office in Hell’s Kitchen. However, her latest case leads her to have to once again confront the man responsible for ruining her life, Kilgrave (David Tennant), a man who is able to brainwash anyone he pleases. With the help of her friends, as well as another ‘gifted’ individual named Luke Cage (Mike Colter) who she falls in love with, Jessica is able to stop Kilgrave and kills him so that he won’t threaten anyone ever again. (Jessica Jones: Season 1)

*Following his defeat of Wilson Fisk, Matt Murdock soon finds himself crossing paths with another vigilante, Frank Castle (Jon Bernthal) AKA ‘The Punisher’, an army vet who seeks vengeance on the gangs of Hell’s Kitchen following the deaths of his wife and children. When the Punisher is captured by the police, Matt and Foggy risk the future of their firm by taking on his case to keep him from receiving the death penalty. While all of this is going on, Matt is also approached by an old flame, Elektra Natchios (Elodie Yung), who seeks his help in dealing with the Yakuza. (Daredevil: Season 2)

And that’s where we’ll end things for today. As you can see, the Marvel Cinematic Universe has come a very long way since the days of Iron Man. Phase 1, of course, was responsible for setting up the universe and its primary protagonists, from Iron Man to Captain America to more otherworldly beings like Thor. As for Phase 2, you could say that this was the Phase that set up some of the greater forces that are out there beyond Earth, particularly the cosmic side of the universe as explored in Guardians of the Galaxy. Later this year we’ll also be introduced to the mystical side of the MCU courtesy of Doctor Strange. And while we’re still a few years away from it, Phase 3 will culminate with the two-part epic that will be The Avengers: Infinity War as the Avengers take on the Mad Titan himself, Thanos. Simply put, it’s a great time to be a MCU fan and as I’ve been saying time and time again, I believe that Marvel Studios has yet to produce a ‘bad’ film/show. Have there been some weak ones? Sure, like Thor 2 or Iron Man 2. However, I’d argue that even their weakest are better than most entries in the superhero genre and considering that the Creative Committee that was clearly responsible for some of the franchise’s more controversial moves (e.g. the creative differences with Edgar Wright that led to his departure from Ant-Man) has now been disbanded, I’m confident that Phase 3 will turn out to be the franchise’s best lineup of films yet. So with that said, what Phase 3 films are you most looking forward to (aside from Civil War seeing how that’s coming out soon)? Doctor Strange? Thor: Ragnarok? Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2? Be sure to sound off in the comments below.