RIMC's Directorial Retrospective Series: James Cameron - Part 1 (Pre-Titanic)

 

(This retrospective is dedicated to the memory of James Cameron’s longtime producer Jon Landau (1960-2024))

In the film industry, there aren’t a lot of filmmakers who have a legacy as considerably vast as James Cameron’s. Case in point, at the time of this post’s publication, Cameron is responsible for three of the top 5 highest-grossing films of all time, and apart from a brief period where Avengers: Endgame overtook the top spot in 2019, a James Cameron film has been known for being the highest-grossing film of all-time for nearly the past three decades. Since 2009, that honor has gone to his ambitious sci-fi epic Avatar, and in 2022, 13 years after the original’s release, Cameron finally brought audiences back into the world of Pandora with Avatar: The Way of Water, a film that defied the odds to become just as critically and commercially successful as its predecessor. However, this was only the beginning of Cameron’s plans to continue the story of the Na’vi as he also has three more Avatar films in the works; the third, recently confirmed to be titled Avatar: Fire and Ash, was filmed in conjunction with The Way of Water and is being primed for a December 2025 release while production is currently underway on the fourth film, set for a December 2029 release. But as we begin the process of waiting for our third trip to the world of Pandora, it’s time to reflect upon the career of one of the most well-known directors in the industry. Yes, folks, it’s time for another edition of what has, admittedly, been a long-dormant series here on Rhode Island Movie Corner, the Directorial Retrospectives, where I take as complete a look as I can at any given director’s filmography. However, just like the Michael Bay retrospective that I did several years ago, this one will ultimately be much more than just a single post. Given the cultural impact of his last three directorial efforts, which have each grossed over $2 billion at the box office, I decided that it’d only be fitting to give both Titanic and the first two Avatar films their own full-length reviews. And so, without further ado, it’s time to see why today’s director can quite arguably call himself ‘the king of the world’ as we look back upon the pre-1997 filmography of the one and only James Cameron.

PIRANHA II: THE SPAWNING (1982)

James Cameron primarily got his start in the industry working in the visual effects department on films produced by Roger Corman, the legendary B-movie producer who also helped launch the careers of other filmmakers such as Ron Howard, Francis Ford Coppola, and Martin Scorsese. And in 1982, Cameron made his official feature-length directorial debut with the sequel to Corman’s studio New World Pictures’ 1978 release Piranha, which was one of the early works of another Corman protégé, Joe Dante. However, Corman was not involved with the sequel which, by all accounts, was an incredibly rough production for a first-time director like Cameron. For starters, due in large part to the production’s limited budget, the bulk of the film’s crew consisted of non-English speaking Italians; however, at the very least, they had enough experience in the horror genre to deliver what Cameron was looking for. Ultimately, Cameron’s biggest hurdle on the project was his frequent arguments with executive producer Ovidio G. Assonitis over the direction he was taking the film in. As a result, it’s been widely reported that Assonitis ended up firing Cameron after just two weeks and filmed the rest of it himself, though, admittedly, this has been debated over the years. Nevertheless, it’s also been reported that Cameron was forbidden from partaking in the film’s post-production process (to the point where he even broke into where the film was being edited in Rome to work on it before he got caught), thus resulting in a unique situation where there are technically two publicly available cuts of this film. Given everything that I just noted about its hectic post-production process, the widely released cut of the film that can currently be found on Blu-Ray is, by all accounts, the one that Assonitis was directly in charge of. However, Cameron did end up getting the opportunity to release his own cut of the film thanks to a distribution deal that he made with Embassy Home Entertainment. This version of the film is about ten minutes shorter but, at the time of this post’s publication, is only commercially available on the outdated video formats of VHS and Laserdisc.

(FULL DISCLOSURE: Now, despite what I just said about Cameron’s cut not having been released in years and, thus, only being available on older video formats, both versions of this film can currently be found on YouTube. For today’s retrospective (and since I’m sure James Cameron wouldn’t mind it all that much since he doesn’t bring this film up in conversation all that often (and really, can you blame him?)), I watched Ovidio G. Assonitis’ cut due to its better video quality. For those who are curious, some of the biggest differences between the two cuts include Cameron’s cut lacking scenes of nudity (which, by most accounts, was something that Cameron wasn’t involved with) and including a unique visual style that, like what Steven Spielberg did with the shark in Jaws, represents POV shots from the perspective of the piranhas.)

Really, though, all the crazy things that happened during this film’s production are ultimately more interesting to talk about than the film itself. Yes, at the end of the day, Piranha II: The Spawning is nothing more than your standard schlocky horror film that, like many other of its peers at the time, was mainly created to capitalize on the success of Jaws. The acting is hokey (not even future Cameron regular Lance Henriksen can save this one), all the characters are one-note, and much of the early parts of this film feel incredibly disjointed as it jumps from scene to scene and minor side character to minor side character. Thus, the only major thing that this film has going for it is its sequences involving flying piranhas (yes, you read that right, flying piranhas) that, given the film’s low budget, look incredibly cheap as hell. For what it’s worth, though, James Cameron was able to use some of the visual effect techniques used to create these airborne aquatic beasts to much better effect when designing the face-hugger animatronics in Aliens. Plus, if I were to give this film any sort of credit, the flying piranhas do give this sequel at least one major advantage over its predecessor since it allows for some actual on-screen piranha attacks (which, to be clear, is not a dig against the original Piranha, which is obviously still the better film by comparison). That said, though, this is also very much a ‘sequel in name only’ as none of the main characters from the original Piranha return for this film, which only references the events of its predecessor once in its entirety. And so, with all that in mind, it’s easy to see why James Cameron spent many years distancing himself from this project even though it technically counts as his directorial debut. To be fair, you can’t fault him for how it turned out given everything he had to deal with when he made it… but at the same time, it goes without saying that his subsequent directorial outings ended up being a lot better than this one.

Rating: 1/5

THE TERMINATOR (1984)

Luckily for James Cameron, there was ultimately one silver lining from the hellish production that was Piranha II as one fateful night in Rome during its post-production ended up becoming the catalyst for the project that truly launched his directorial career. After experiencing a fever-induced nightmare in which a humanoid-looking robot emerged from a fiery explosion, Cameron used this image to create a story about a young woman named Sarah Connor who finds herself hunted by a seemingly unstoppable cyborg known as a Terminator who was sent back in time from the year 2029 by Skynet, an advanced A.I. system that would gain sentience and wipe out most of humanity in an all-out nuclear war. All the while, Sarah is protected by a lone human soldier named Kyle Reese who was also sent back in time, albeit in his case by Sarah’s future son John, the leader of the resistance movement fighting against Skynet in the post-apocalyptic future and, naturally, the reason why she’s being hunted now. Upon its release, the film became an unexpected smash hit, grossing over $78 million on its modest $6.4 million budget and eventually spawning one of the most iconic science fiction film franchises of all time. Sure, many have argued that the franchise would ultimately peak with the two films that were directed by Cameron himself, with every other installment since then (only one of which saw any direct involvement from Cameron) failing to live up to the widespread acclaim of Cameron’s films, but nevertheless, there’s no denying Terminator’s ever-enduring influence on the sci-fi genre.  

However, even with all that said, it is interesting to look back at the first Terminator when compared to all the films that would come after it. Whereas everything starting with 1991’s Terminator 2: Judgment Day is a big-budget sci-fi action spectacle, the first Terminator… is decidedly not that. Instead, it’s more of a small-scale horror film that thoroughly maintains the horror genre’s well-established premise of a young woman hunted by an imposing killer. And thanks in large part to Cameron’s reliance on nighttime-set action sequences and the overall look and feel of a noir film with its seedy exterior locales and claustrophobic interior locales, the original Terminator has a surprisingly effective (and, when compared to its sequels, arguably quite refreshing) grounded atmosphere in which the sci-fi elements of its story are almost second fiddle to everything else that’s going on. Case in point, Cameron even manages to apply this low-key style to the sequences that showcase the post-apocalyptic future that Reese came from, which are naturally expanded upon in terms of scale in subsequent films. In other words, while there are undoubtedly some parts of this film that have become dated (e.g. the stop-motion animation movement of the titular antagonist when he’s nothing more than a robotic frame), Cameron utilized his minimal budget to its fullest effect in the same way that he works nowadays with the big budgets of the blockbusters that he’s very well known for. The result is a highly engaging action-thriller that’s fully bolstered by the strong performances from its three main leads: Arnold Schwarzenegger as the hulking Terminator, Linda Hamilton as the sympathetic heroine Sarah Connor, and Michael Biehn as the heroic warrior from the future, Kyle Reese. And while it’s probably safe to say that most Terminator fans tend to list its follow-up as their favorite installment of the series, this first film still holds up quite well on its own accord.

Rating: 5/5!

ALIENS (1986)

(DISCLAIMER: For today’s retrospective, I watched this film’s extended cut, which was first released on LaserDisc in 1991 (though, for the record, this is not in reference to what could technically be described as the film’s ‘first’ extended cut, which aired on CBS in 1989). I previously reviewed this film back in 2017 as part of a retrospective on the Alien franchise and did so by watching the original theatrical cut, with both versions of the film being available on its home media releases. In this instance, I decided to check out the Extended Edition for the first time since Cameron has gone on record stating that he prefers this version of the film.)

It's safe to say that things were going quite great for James Cameron after the success that he and his producing partner Gale Anne Hurd had achieved with The Terminator, which led to him netting other notable projects such as, most interestingly in hindsight, the screenplay for 1985’s Rambo: First Blood Part II. Yes, Cameron had a hand in developing the Sylvester Stallone-led action-packed follow-up to 1982’s First Blood; granted, Stallone would then go on to rewrite the script himself, but Cameron still got credited in the end and later went on record stating that his action sequences were the parts of his script that remained in the final film. Ultimately, though, Cameron’s first big endeavor after The Terminator would come when he was brought on to write and direct the highly anticipated sequel to Ridley Scott’s genre-defining 1979 sci-fi horror classic Alien. Unfortunately for Cameron, production didn’t exactly go smoothly for him as he had to deal with the standard filmmaking practices of the production’s U.K.-based crew, such as the daily tea breaks that resulted in lost production time. Cameron’s infamously aggressive nature and tendency to oversee aspects of the production himself also irked many crewmembers (to the point where the film’s original cinematographer Dick Bush was replaced because of creative differences over lighting), who felt that he wasn’t qualified enough to direct a film of this nature. It didn’t help that The Terminator hadn’t been released in the U.K. at that time and any attempts by Cameron to have his crew watch it were unsuccessful. Meanwhile, Hurd, in what was only her second film as a lead producer after Terminator, was viewed as being there simply because she was Cameron’s wife (at the time) rather than the stalwart producer that she’d become known for thanks to films like this and the long-running Walking Dead TV series.

But thankfully for all involved, Aliens proved to be just as much of a hit as its immediate predecessor upon its release. It earned over $130 million at the worldwide box office and was regarded by many as being just as good as the original Alien if not arguably better. As he would later go on to do with Terminator 2, Cameron injects a more action-oriented tone into Aliens’ plot, in which Lt. Ellen Ripley, the sole survivor of the Nostromo massacre, is brought in with a crew of Colonial Marines to deal with an alien outbreak on LV-426, the planet that she and her old crew had visited that set the plot of the previous film into motion which is now the site of a terraforming colony. However, unlike Terminator 2, which almost entirely abandoned the original’s horror beats in favor of its sci-fi action, Aliens does manage to maintain its franchise’s prolific status in the horror genre in all the right places. Even with the change in location from a lone spaceship to a derelict space colony, Cameron still gets to work with the Alien franchise’s trademark penchant for dark, foreboding, and horrifyingly cramped locales albeit with the added benefit of having its protagonists being forced to deal with more aliens this time around rather than just one. But, of course, as we’ve well established by now, Aliens is ultimately one of the first major showcases of Cameron’s talents as an action director, which is then bolstered by some strong visual effects work to bring its alien creatures to life. Sure, Aliens may not have had the benefit of the involvement of H.R. Giger, AKA the creator of the titular Alien, but with Cameron’s Terminator effects guru Stan Winston onboard to take his place… well, let’s just say that it’s easy to see why this resulted in Winston winning his first Oscar for Best Visual Effects at that year’s Oscars just like Giger and his team did for the original Alien back in 1979.

But amidst all the exciting sci-fi horror action, Aliens also boasts a strong emotional core thanks to, of course, Sigourney Weaver in the lead role of Ripley. This is, after all, the film where Weaver made history by being the first-ever lead star of a science-fiction film to earn a Best Actress nomination at that year’s Oscars. Not only does Weaver naturally evolve the character from being the first film’s final girl to the franchise’s badass action heroine, but she also imbues Ripley with a wonderfully powerful motherly persona thanks to the touching bond that she forms with Newt (Carrie Henn), the sole survivor of the LV-426 colony. This development is even more relevant when watching the extended cut, which includes a scene where Ripley tragically learns that her daughter Amanda died in-between the events of the first two films; a scene that Weaver was particularly incensed about being removed from the theatrical cut. They’re then joined by a terrific supporting cast that includes, among others, plenty of Cameron regulars such as Michael Biehn as Hicks, the most level-headed of the Colonial Marines with a good onscreen rapport with Weaver, Lance Henriksen as Bishop, a far more good-natured android than Ian Holm’s Ash was in the first film, and Bill Paxton as Hudson, a cocky Colonial Marine who’s the primary source of comic relief, especially once he realizes how out of his depth he is once the situation on LV-426 goes awry. With all this in mind, it’s easy to see why Aliens is not only regarded as one of the best sequels of all time but also one of the best films to come out of both the science fiction and horror film genres. Under James Cameron’s deft direction, the film effectively balances its franchise’s superb horror aesthetic with Cameron’s masterfully crafted action set-pieces, all while being bolstered by a top-notch cast of well-written characters who bring life to a world full of terrifying acid-blooded aliens. And as a result, the film more than holds its own alongside the Ridley Scott-directed masterpiece that came before it as one of the best installments of one of cinema’s most well-known and long-running horror franchises.

Rating: 5/5!

THE ABYSS (1989)

While science fiction may be the genre that James Cameron is best known for as a director, he has also been well known for his deep connection to the ocean, particularly by way of his extensive experience in the art of deep-sea diving. Not only has he participated in several significant (and sometimes record-breaking) dives over the years, but the vast and untamed world of the ocean depths has played a huge role in some of his films, including Titanic and Avatar: The Way of Water. But when it comes to the first real ocean-set film of his career (that is, if you don’t count Pirahna II, which I’m sure Cameron would prefer), that honor goes to his 1989 film The Abyss. Based on a story concept that Cameron had come up with when he was in high school after attending a seminar on deep-sea breathing techniques, the film follows the crew of a submersible oil drilling platform as they’re recruited by the U.S. Navy to assist a team of SEALs in the process of salvaging a nuclear submarine that has sunk in the Caribbean. Finding themselves in a race against time to recover the sub before Russian forces can get to it and instigate an international incident that could potentially kickstart World War III, they soon discover a mysterious yet fascinating sight of extraterrestrial origin. Production, to be perfectly blunt, was not a smooth one when it came to this film. Given the extensively complicated nature of creating the film’s underwater sequences, it goes without saying that the cast and crew found themselves pushed to the limit during a shoot that lasted around half a year. Lead actor Ed Harris reportedly punched Cameron after one scene nearly resulted in him drowning and lead actress Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio stormed off set while filming the sequence where her character drowns and is brought back to life after numerous takes wasted the production’s film stock.

In some ways, you could say that the negative publicity of the film’s production troubles (which were even referenced in its original theatrical trailer) might have ended up affecting its commercial performance as well; while it did make its $43 million+ budget back, it only made about $90 million worldwide, resulting in it being seen as the rare commercial dud of Cameron’s career. Critically, though, the film proved to be yet another success for him and became his second straight film to win the Oscar for Best Visual Effects. However, upon its release, it was soon made clear that the theatrical cut was, technically, an incomplete version of what Cameron set out to make. Due to a combination of a lack of time to finish specific visual effects and pressure from the studio to not have a runtime of nearly three hours (which is an incredibly ironic notion nowadays (especially given the length of future James Cameron films)), Cameron cut out a pivotal sequence from the film’s finale in which a bunch of giant waves are unleashed upon the world. But then, a few years later after Cameron scored his biggest hit yet with Terminator 2, his studio, Lightstorm Entertainment, secured a lucrative deal with The Abyss’ distributor, 20^th Century Fox, which, along with the funds for any future films of Cameron’s, included enough money to complete the climactic wave sequence. And so, in 1993, The Abyss’ ‘Special Edition’ was officially released which, along with the wave sequence, also included some other sequences that were taken out of the theatrical cut such as a few notable bits of character development and sequences that emphasized the part of the plot where the events of the film are tied around the threat of nuclear war, which was downplayed in the theatrical cut.

But whatever version of the film you end up watching, you’ll ultimately find yourself with a highly engrossing sci-fi thriller. Even with the Special Edition’s near three-hour runtime, there’s never a dull moment in this film as it does an excellent job of creating a suspenseful mystery plot, especially when it comes to how it expertly builds up the slow but gradual reveal of the alien creatures that the characters come across. Add in a great use of the narrowly confined setting of the oil crew’s underwater rig, which spends much of the film stuck thousands of feet underwater due to extensive hurricane damage, and you have a film that successfully crafts a real harrowing atmosphere amidst all its moments of pure spectacle. And on that note, as you undoubtedly guessed from earlier when I mentioned that this film won the Oscar for Best Visual Effects, it goes without saying that the biggest selling point of this film is its visual effects thanks in large part to the one and only ILM. Whether it’s the well-crafted underwater sequences or the various CGI effects that, for the most part, have aged relatively well, this film’s visual game still holds up immensely well even after three and a half decades. Casting-wise, Cameron doesn’t rely on a cast of big-name stars, but this allows for this film’s ensemble to have some phenomenal on-screen camaraderie. Ed Harris and Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio headline the film excellently as team leader Virgil ‘Bud’ Brigman and his estranged wife Lindsay while Michael Biehn gets to play against type for his third major role in a James Cameron film as Lt. Coffey, the leader of the SEAL team who starts to go insane as his ulterior motives begin to threaten the whole operation.

The Abyss is the only film of James Cameron’s post-1984 career that I’d never seen at the time that I started to write this, namely due to a reason that will be blatantly obvious to anyone familiar with this film and its post-theatrical release life. For the longest time, this and another James Cameron film, True Lies, went several years without any sort of home media release after they were released on DVD. Thus, when those DVDs of theirs eventually went out of print, the only legally viable way to watch either of these films was whenever they randomly popped up on premium cable networks. In the case of The Abyss, I did attempt to watch it a few times over the years, but I’ll fully admit that I never ended up getting too far into it whenever I recorded it; by comparison, True Lies tended to pop up a lot more often and, thus, was the one that I got around to watching first. Thankfully, though, this year finally saw both films get their first proper home media release in decades, which is fitting seeing how this happens to be an anniversary year for them both (The Abyss’ 35^th and True Lies’ 30^th). And in the case of the former, this will hopefully result in newer audiences finally getting a chance to experience what is easily shaping up to be James Cameron’s most underrated film to date as this highly engrossing and visually spectacular deep ocean adventure is yet another showcase of his unparalleled technical mastery.

Rating: 5/5!

TERMINATOR 2: JUDGMENT DAY (1991)

As successful as the original Terminator was, the idea of a potential follow-up wasn’t an immediate guarantee at the time due to Cameron’s commitment to other projects and, perhaps more importantly, the significant creative conflicts that he had with the studio that largely financed the film, Hemdale. Said conflict ultimately came to a head when studio chairman John Daly attempted to cut out the final section of the film where Sarah Connor and Kyle Reese are being chased by the Terminator’s robotic endoskeleton and he and Cameron nearly got into a physical fight over it as a result. To make matters worse for Cameron, he had been forced to relinquish half of his rights on the project to Hemdale just to get it made and had then sold half of what he had left to Gale Anne Hurd when the two divorced in 1989. But, by the following year, she and Cameron, along with Arnold Schwarzenegger and Stan Winston, sued Hemdale over unpaid profits, which was just one of the many lawsuits that the studio was tied up in at the time that would eventually lead to them filing for bankruptcy and officially shutting down in 1995. During this time, Schwarzenegger came up with a solution to his and Cameron’s problem by suggesting that the rights be picked up by another studio, Carolco Pictures, who he had just worked with on the 1990 Paul Verhoeven feature Total Recall. Carolco promptly did just that with an expensive $17 million deal… which then meant that Cameron had to be fully locked in for a sequel that he only had a few months to develop. He ultimately did so along with his longtime friend and collaborator William Wisher, his credited co-writer, and the result is a film that is not only considered to be just as great as its highly acclaimed predecessor but, in the eyes of many, was arguably even better by comparison: Terminator 2: Judgment Day.

Set 11 years after the events of the previous film, Judgment Day sees the Connor family once again targeted by the sentient A.I. program of the post-apocalyptic future, Skynet. But instead of having a Terminator sent back in time to kill Sarah Connor before she can give birth to her son John, this time Skynet sends a more advanced model, the shape-shifting liquid metal-based T-1000, to kill the now 10-year-old John. Fortunately for him, his future self once again sends a lone warrior back in time to protect him; it’s just that, this time, it just so happens to be a reprogrammed T-800 AKA the same kind of Terminator that went after his mom a decade prior. As I’ve repeatedly alluded to throughout today’s post, Terminator 2 took a much different kind of narrative approach compared to the original. Whereas the first Terminator was a low-budget sci-fi flick that crafted a noir-style atmosphere to go along with its horror-inspired premise… Terminator 2 boasted the largest budget of any film ever made at the time (which, by the way, was a record that James Cameron would then proceed to break twice more over the decade) and, thus, is a grand-scaled action extravaganza. Simply put, this film’s action sequences are second-to-none and they’re bolstered by, as to be expected from a James Cameron film, top-notch visual effects work. This time around, Cameron combined the two powerhouse forces that won his last two films the Best Visual Effects Oscars; Stan Winston with the robot prosthetics and animatronics and Dennis Muren and company over at ILM for the CGI effects such as the groundbreaking visual effects work to bring the T-1000’s shape-shifting abilities to life. With an all-star team like that, it’s not surprising to see that Terminator 2 became the third straight film of James Cameron’s career to nab the Best Visual Effects Oscar at that year’s ceremony.

But as great as both the film’s visual effects and action sequences are, this is then matched by a top-notch script as Cameron and Wisher do a fantastic job at crafting a natural follow-up to the first film full of phenomenal character beats that define the main protagonists’ character arcs. Linda Hamilton returns once again as Sarah Connor who, while far more battle-ready than she was in the previous film, is also now heavily traumatized by what she went through and for being cursed with the haunting knowledge of the dark future ahead; one can only imagine how this is then all complicated even further when she learns that she’s working alongside the same kind of unstoppable killing machine that once tried to kill her. But as for the Terminator, the first film’s main antagonist becomes this film’s greatest hero as an emotionless cyborg gradually gains a greater appreciation for humanity through his interactions with John Connor, for whom he becomes a surrogate father figure to. John makes his first appearance in the franchise here, played by Edward Furlong, who starts out as a cynical troublemaker but is soon forced to grow up faster than anticipated once he’s put through the same harrowing scenario his mother went through by being pursued by an even scarier antagonist in Robert Patrick’s cold and ruthless T-1000. Heck, even supporting players get some solid character moments like Joe Morton as Miles Dyson, an engineer at Cyberdyne who’s revealed to be the one who will be the primary catalyst behind the creation of Skynet but, once he learns what will happen, nobly steps up to the point of sacrificing himself to ensure that the group’s efforts to stop Judgment Day are successful.

In short, while I’m usually not one to be overly critical of blockbuster-type films for not being the most well-written or ‘smartest’ films ever made, I will concede that Terminator 2: Judgment Day is easily one of the best examples of a blockbuster that, above all else, ensures that its story and character beats are just as well-developed as its visuals and action sequences. Thus, just like what Cameron managed to accomplish with Aliens, Terminator 2 more than holds its own when compared to the first film… and is why many have argued that this is where the series ultimately peaked in terms of quality. Terminator 2 was the last film in the series to be directed by Cameron himself (not counting the 1996 Universal theme parks spin-off Terminator 2 3-D: Battle Across Time), and while the series would continue without him, it’s never managed to achieve the same level of success that it had with Judgment Day. The reasons why have largely varied from film to film, whether it was 2003’s Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines’ efforts to undo the optimistic ending of the previous film so that it could continue the story, 2009’s Terminator Salvation toning its action down to achieve a more marketable PG-13 rating, or… basically any major creative decision made on 2015’s Terminator: Genisys. Cameron did finally return to the series in 2019 by writing/producing Terminator: Dark Fate, but even that film couldn’t revitalize the franchise regardless of its efforts to return to its narrative roots. But regardless of where you stand on the Terminator franchise (case in point, yours truly has gone on record in the past admitting that he has liked some of the later Terminator films), it’s practically impossible to deny that Terminator 2: Judgment Day still stands as being nothing short of a masterpiece.

Rating: 5/5!

TRUE LIES (1994)

With a second masterpiece from the Terminator franchise under their belts, James Cameron and Arnold Schwarzenegger would team up once more (literally, in fact, because this is the most recent film that they’ve made together) on a project that would end up being considerably different than the films that made them both household names. Sure, it’s still the kind of big-budget action extravaganza (the first to have a budget of at least $100 million (though it should be noted that Terminator 2’s budget has sometimes been reported as having been over that threshold as well)) that we’ve come to expect from this dynamic filmmaking duo… but I bet that no one would’ve expected them to do, of all things, a remake of a French action comedy. Yes, 1994’s True Lies is one of the rare instances of a Cameron film that wasn’t based on an original story of his; instead, it’s a remake of a 1991 French film named La Totale!. Like that film’s plot, True Lies follows a man named Harry Tasker (Schwarzenegger) who’s an elite secret agent for a highly classified counterterrorist agency known as Omega Sector. It’s a profession that he’s kept secret for many years from his wife Helen (Jamie Lee Curtis) and their daughter Dana (Eliza Dushku), who believe him to be nothing more than a boring computer salesman. However, in his efforts to track down a terrorist group known as the Crimson Jihad, Harry soon finds himself having to balance his work life with his personal life when Helen [somewhat inadvertently] gets caught up in his daily proceedings. Upon its release, the film was both a solid critical and commercial success, ultimately earning over $378 million worldwide. And while, as I noted earlier when talking about The Abyss, both that film and True Lies spent several years without a proper home media release, True Lies did tend to be the more widely seen of the two because it popped up far more often on premium movie channels like HBO, Showtime, and Starz.

As a result, while it may be one of the lower-rated films of James Cameron’s career amongst critics, True Lies does seem to be well-regarded by many as another great addition to Arnold Schwarzenegger’s extensive resume of classic action flicks. Sure enough, True Lies delivers on being just that and then some when it comes to its action sequences. Cameron’s mastery of the visual medium is arguably the finest that it’s ever been up to that point with plenty of great action set-pieces that effectively mix practical stunt work with some solid visual effects work by his then-newly established visual effects studio Digital Domain, which didn’t keep Cameron’s Visual Effects Oscar win streak going that year (they lost to Forrest Gump) but still got nominated, nevertheless. But as we’ve noted, True Lies is also a comedic action thriller and Cameron handles the comedic aspects of the script quite well, undoubtedly helped by Arnold Schwarzenegger’s well-established action star persona as an unparalleled gold mine for great comedic quips. This also extends nicely to how Cameron unabashedly ups the ante when it comes to how utterly over the top this film’s action sequences can get. In other words, this all starts out relatively tame enough with an espionage sequence that feels like it was ripped straight out of a James Bond film… and then concludes with a scene where Harry Tasker pilots a Harrier Jet and kills the main antagonist by getting him caught on a missile that he then proceeds to fire at an enemy helicopter, all while delivering a classic Arnold one-liner, “You’re fired!”. On paper, that all sounds like one of the most insane things that I’ve ever typed… but thanks to Cameron’s strong direction, you’re fully hooked by this film’s gleefully chaotic nature.

But while True Lies more than succeeds with its action sequences and its sense of humor, there are, admittedly, a few parts of it that have aged considerably. For starters, being that this is a 90’s film, it goes without saying that its portrayal of its Middle Eastern villains now comes off as incredibly stereotypical to the point of being quite arguably culturally offensive. It may also help to explain why the 9/11 attacks have largely been cited as the reason why Cameron and Schwarzenegger never got around to making a sequel. But perhaps the most talked about ‘dated’ aspect of this film is that many have argued that it sports something that you wouldn’t normally see in a James Cameron film; a noticeable misogynistic streak. This mainly comes into play by way of the film’s primary subplot in which Harry starts to suspect that Helen is having an affair with a sleazy car salesman named Simon (Bill Paxton). His subsequent efforts to investigate this to the point of using his agency’s own resources to ‘capture’ her and forcefully coerce her into partaking in a staged ‘secret mission’ have been criticized by many as being excessively cruel. And to be fair, it doesn’t help that this whole sequence ends up overtaking the plot for nearly an hour to the point where main antagonist Aziz (Art Malik) and the Crimson Jihad are absent from the film for the entirety of that stretch of runtime. But if there’s any sort of silver lining to this, it’s that Jamie Lee Curtis, despite everything that Helen is put through in the film, does own her role. And as much as the film’s humor with Helen revolves around how utterly out of her element she is in the world of espionage, it is nice that, by the end, she becomes a spy just like her husband. In other words, while it may be Arnold’s name at the top of the marquee, this film quite arguably belongs to Jamie Lee Curtis, who deservedly won a Golden Globe that year.

In general, the film sports the usual strong ensemble for a James Cameron film. Arnold is, of course, the same great Arnold that he always was at the time, Bill Paxton is, as usual, a prime source of comic relief as the scummy con-man Simon; heck, even Tom Arnold, the notoriously polarizing comedian that he is, is an excellent foil to Schwarzenegger as Harry’s field partner Gib. And because of all this, True Lies still stands as a highly entertaining piece of cinematic bombast. Does that mean that it’s as much of a masterpiece as James Cameron’s other films? No, not really since its outdated global and gender politics does make it one of the prime examples of a film that you just can’t make today in the current landscape of the film industry. But without ignoring the more problematic aspects of its plot, there’s still a lot to love about this film, such as how it unapologetically presents some of the most delightfully ludicrous action sequences that have ever come out of a film from this era. Case in point, I’ve often seen a bunch of people refer to True Lies as the film that served as the peak for the kind of over-the-top action films that thoroughly defined the careers of stars like Bruce Willis, Sylvester Stallone, and, of course, Arnold Schwarzenegger. And simply put, it’s easy to see where they’re coming from when it comes to how one could potentially describe this film. You take arguably the most popular action star of the '80s and 90’s and pair him up with one of the best action directors in the industry to make the kind of film that the former is best known for (rather than the latter’s usual sci-fi-oriented fare) and you have a film that can best be described as ‘peak Schwarzenegger’.

Rating: 5/5!

This concludes today’s installment of Rhode Island Movie Corner’s Directorial Retrospective series on the films directed by James Cameron. As I noted in the intro, I decided to split this retrospective up into multiple parts simply because I figured that it’d be more appropriate to give his last three films their own full-length reviews given how significant they are within the pop cultural zeitgeist. With that in mind, the next time we return to talk about James Cameron films, we’ll be looking at the film that made him ‘the king of the world’, 1997’s Titanic. So, until then… well, I’ll let Arnold say it for me 😉…

Directorial Retrospective: Gary Ross

Welcome, ladies and gentlemen, to another installment of Rhode Island Movie Corner’s ‘Directorial Retrospective’ series. In this ongoing series, I look at the complete filmography of any given director in the film industry. Past installments have covered the likes of Michael Bay, Christopher Nolan, David Fincher, Quentin Tarantino, Tim Burton, etc. And while today’s director admittedly doesn’t have an overly extensive directorial filmography, he is a long-time veteran of the film industry who’s had quite a lot of success over the years. Yes, today, we’re looking at the films of director Gary Ross. This week sees the release of his latest film, Ocean’s 8, a female-led continuation of director Steven Soderbergh’s trilogy of films that started with the 2001 remake of Ocean’s Eleven. Like the trilogy of films that came before it (as well as the original 1960 film that the first film was based on), this film features an all-star cast that features the likes of Sandra Bullock, Cate Blanchett, Anne Hathaway, and Mindy Kaling just to name a few. It is the fifth directorial effort from Ross, who got his start in the film industry in the late 80’s. Prior to 1998, he was mainly known as a writer, having penned several hit films and even earning a few Oscar nominations for them. He officially transitioned into directing in 1998, and since then, he’s experienced a solid amount of critical success with his films, which include everything from a tribute to nostalgic family sitcoms to the first installment of a major blockbuster franchise. So, without further ado, let’s delve into the films of director Gary Ross.

To start things off, we’re going to do something a little different by featuring a few films that Gary Ross only wrote instead of directed as a pair of ‘Bonus Reviews’. These two films in question are also the ones that earned Ross Oscar nominations for Best Screenplay prior to him fully transitioning into directing in the late 90’s…

BIG (1988)

First, we have director Penny Marshall’s 1988 film Big, which Ross co-wrote and co-produced with Anne Spielberg, sister of the one and only Steven Spielberg. The film centers on a young boy named Josh Baskin who uses an antique fortune-telling machine to wish that he was ‘big’. To his surprise, his wish comes true and he finds himself transformed into an older man (Tom Hanks) who must now navigate the perils of adulthood, including everything from the cut-throat world of business to a blossoming romance. And really, Tom Hanks is what truly sells the film. In what was arguably his official ‘star-making’ role, Hanks perfectly embodies the part of a 12-year old kid in a man’s body, and the film does a nice job of showcasing how Josh continually possesses his childhood innocence even when he finds himself in a serious situation. This, of course, paves the way for some hilarious moments that highlight Josh’s ‘fish out of water’ situation that are nicely balanced with all the film’s charming moments, from the scenes where he romances his co-worker Susan (Elizabeth Perkins) to the iconic sequence where he and his boss Mr. MacMillan (Robert Loggia) play ‘Heart and Soul’ and ‘Chopsticks’ on FAO Schwarz’ big floor piano. And that’s Big in a nutshell; it very much wears its heart on its sleeve and it all works thanks to Tom Hanks’ pitch-perfect performance in the lead role. This is arguably one of those instances where the film may not have worked quite as well as it did if another actor had been in the part. But, of course, that’s not the case here, and it’s easy to see why Big (which notably celebrated its 30^th anniversary recently) is still considered a classic of the 80’s, as it’s one of the most unabashedly heartfelt films of all time without ever becoming too saccharine.

Rating: 5/5!

DAVE (1993)

Ross’ next Oscar nomination came through his collaboration with Ghostbusters director Ivan Reitman on the 1993 film Dave. In this political comedy, Kevin Kline stars as a temp agency worker named Dave who’s brought in by the Secret Service to take the place of the President, Bill Mitchell (also played by Kline), at a public appearance. However, when the President ends up incapacitated by a coma, Dave is forced to truly take over as the leader of the United States of America. Now, obviously, political comedy is a touchy subject nowadays given how the current political climate doesn’t really lend itself that well to humor. But, in the context of being an early 90’s political comedy, this film does succeed at being a light-hearted satire of politics at the time that’s not overly cynical while still having some edge to it. And while this ‘dramedy’ does tend to lean more towards the dramatic elements of its story than its comedic elements, the film does have a good amount of quality humor. Ultimately, though, the main selling point of the film is Kevin Kline in his dual role as Dave and President Mitchell. While the plot doesn’t really allow for any major opportunities for these two characters to interact with each other on-screen save for one moment in the beginning, Kline brings great charisma to the former role. He also has solid chemistry with Sigourney Weaver, who plays the First Lady, Ellen Mitchell. While Weaver technically doesn’t get that much to do in the film, the relationship that gradually forms between her and Dave is genuinely sweet. Plus, she does get to throw in a few great snarky comments here and there, specifically in the early parts of the film where it’s established that she and the real President aren’t necessarily ‘happily married’. In short, while Dave is very much a product of its time, it’s still worth checking out today (yes, even in these crazy political times) primarily thanks to the great lead performances from Kevin Kline and Sigourney Weaver.

Rating: 4/5

And now, onto Ross’ directorial efforts…

PLEASANTVILLE (1998)

For his first major foray into directing, Ross gave us a film that served as a tribute to classic 50’s era sitcoms like Leave it to Beaver and I Love Lucy. In Pleasantville, Tobey Maguire and Reese Witherspoon star as siblings David and Jennifer, who end up getting sucked into the world of David’s favorite TV show, the titular Pleasantville, via a special remote that puts them in the shoes of the show’s sibling characters, Bud and Mary Sue. And despite David’s best efforts to ensure that the two of them blend in properly, Jennifer’s devil-may-care personality soon leads to the town undergoing quite the colorful transformation (figuratively and literally). With that in mind, the best thing about Pleasantville is its use of color. As David and Jennifer spend more time in the world of the show, its black-and-white aesthetic is slowly but surely turned colorful, leading to plenty of great shots where black-and-white objects and characters interact seamlessly with those who are colored in. One can only imagine how arduous of a job the visual effects artists had to undertake to make this one of the best-looking films of its time that does a perfect job of representing the, for lack of a better term, overall ‘swellness’ of its old-school locale. At the same time, though, Pleasantville also offers some solid writing that delves into themes such as racism (e.g. whites separated from ‘colored’ folks) and freedom of speech. This is all paired nicely with terrific performances from Maguire, Witherspoon, Joan Allen and William H. Macy as their ‘in-universe’ parents Betty and George, and Jeff Daniels as Bud’s boss Mr. Johnson, owner of the local burger joint. Sure, some are bound to find a few plot holes here and there that put all the show’s changes into question, but all in all, Pleasantville is a charming tribute to a nostalgic past as seen through the eyes of an edgier modern mindset.

Rating: 4.5/5

SEABISCUIT (2003)

Half a decade later, Ross tackled his first historical drama with a film about one of the most famous racing horses of all-time, Seabiscuit. Based on the horse’s 2001 biography by author Laura Hillenbrand, the film follows the horse’s rise to fame in the 30’s and how it specifically affects three men; his jockey Red Pollard, his owner Charles S. Howard, and his trainer Tom Smith, all of whom end up overcoming their own personal demons along the way. Now admittedly, this film is a bit of a slow burn; heck, Seabiscuit doesn’t even show up until a little under an hour in as the film instead starts off by introducing and developing its three main leads. Still, for what it’s worth, the film is a generally engaging watch that does its job of conveying the importance of what Seabiscuit accomplished as a major underdog who inspired America whilst the country was forced to deal with the ramifications of the Great Depression. This is then balanced nicely with the storylines of Pollard, Howard, and Smith and their efforts to overcome their own personal struggles, from Pollard having to deal with partial blindness to Howard regaining his sense of optimism after a devastating tragedy to Smith just trying to prove his worth as a horse trainer. Because of this, the film is a prime example of a true ‘actors’ showcase’, benefitting from excellent performances from the lead trio of Tobey Maguire as Pollard, Jeff Bridges as Howard, and Chris Cooper as Smith. And while I’m aware that the film does tone down some of the darker elements of its true story (e.g. glossing over the ways in which jockeys maintain a proper weight), this doesn’t necessarily affect any of the story’s most essential moments. Thus, despite all the instances where it often ends up being a part of the generally predictable ‘sports film’ genre, Seabiscuit is a well-made biopic thanks to the solid direction from Ross and the excellent performances from its ensemble cast. And because of this, the film even managed to land a Best Picture nomination at that year’s Oscar ceremony along with six additional nominations, even though it ultimately didn’t win in any of its categories.

Rating: 4/5

THE HUNGER GAMES (2012)

Obviously, this is a film that I’ve talked about plenty of times before on this site. I did a review of it back in 2013 in time for the release of its immediate follow-up, Catching Fire, and then proceeded to ‘recap’ it as part of the ‘Story So Far’ post that I did for the franchise prior to the release of its big finale, Mockingjay Part 2. With that in mind, I won’t repeat myself too much here. Simply put, Ross did a solid job of adapting the first installment of author Suzanne Collins’ best-selling book series to the big-screen; with that said, though, this film has since become overshadowed by its three subsequent installments. The main reason why is quite simple, as many felt that director Francis Lawrence improved on the two biggest issues that they had with the first film, shaky-cam and quick cuts to tone down the most violent parts of this story of kids being forced to duel to the death in a nationally-televised event. I’ve personally never had much of an issue with these creative decisions, though it’s completely understandable as to why this was a problem for others. Heck, I’ll even fully admit that Francis Lawrence did fix these two issues once he took over the franchise, hence why I, like many, consider Catching Fire as the best installment of the film series. Still, like I said before, I do think Gary Ross deserves a lot of credit for at least getting the franchise started on a good note. In a time where the genre of films based on ‘young adult novels’ was dominated primarily by the likes of Twilight and several failed attempts at initiating similarly successful franchises, Hunger Games managed to vastly outshine its competition thanks to solid writing and a well-layered bunch of characters. It’s all highlighted by Jennifer Lawrence in her ‘star-making’ role as the series’ main protagonist, Katniss Everdeen, though she’s also backed by the likes of Josh Hutcherson, Woody Harrelson, Elizabeth Banks, Wes Bentley, and Donald Sutherland just to name a few. Because of this, while the first Hunger Games isn’t necessarily the best installment of its film series, it’s still a satisfying start to this global behemoth of a franchise that managed to get better as it went on.

Rating: 4.5/5

FREE STATE OF JONES (2016)

To conclude this retrospective, we have Ross’ most recent directorial effort and his second historical drama, Free State of Jones. The film tells the story of Newton Knight, a member of the Confederate army who ended up deserting them during the Civil War and then proceeded to lead an army of his own made up of fellow runaways and slaves against the Confederacy, which culminated with them forming their own government in Jones County, Mississippi. Like Seabiscuit, the film manages to be a solidly engaging take on this moment in history even if it’s not exactly a 100% accurate retelling of it. However, also like Seabiscuit, this two-and-a-half-hour film is one of those ‘slow burn’ types of films, and unlike Seabiscuit, it does tend to drag at times, specifically during the last third of the film after Knight and co. establish the titular ‘Free State of Jones’. The film also tends to suffer from having a rather disjointed narrative, specifically due to a subplot which delves into a different moment in history in which Knight’s great-grandson Davis is put on trial in 1948 for attempting to marry a white woman while he himself is partially of black descent. These scenes with Davis are intercut with Newton’s story but are hastily edited in to the point where they’re really nothing more than brief cutaways that don’t contribute anything to the main plot. Because of all this, it feels like the film is trying to do a bit too much from a narrative perspective even with its hefty runtime in mind. It’s a shame, really, because the film is a decently entertaining period piece that features a trio of great performances from Matthew McConaughey as Knight, Gugu Mbatha-Raw as a slave named Rachel who he falls in love with, and Mahershala Ali as Knight’s confidant Moses Washington. Ultimately, though, while it’s not necessarily as bad as its 46% rating on Rotten Tomatoes may suggest, Free State of Jones would’ve worked a lot better had some parts of it been trimmed.

Rating: 3/5

Directorial Retrospective: Matthew Vaughn

Welcome back to another installment of Rhode Island Movie Corner’s ongoing series of Directorial Retrospectives. This is where I cover the complete filmography of any given director in the film industry. Past installments of this series have covered the likes of DCEU director Zack Snyder, the master of ‘Bayhem’ himself Michael Bay, the dark and quirky gothic genius Tim Burton, and film buff favorite Edgar Wright. And today, we’ll be looking at the admittedly brief but still Grade-A directorial career of a filmmaker who’s been well-known for producing high-quality adaptations. Yes, folks, today we’re talking about director Matthew Vaughn. His newest film, Kingsman: The Golden Circle, a sequel to his 2015 effort Kingsman: The Secret Service, hits theaters this weekend and is shaping up to be an exciting, action-packed follow-up to one of the most entertaining films of 2015. And in honor of its release, today we’ll be looking at the past directorial escapades of the famous UK-born filmmaker. As I noted earlier, the interesting thing to note about Vaughn’s directorial career is that all 5* (soon to be 6) of the films that he’s directed have been adaptations of literary works. After getting his start as a producer on some of fellow director Guy Ritchie’s films, including 1998’s Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels and 2000’s Snatch, Vaughn has since moved into directing himself. Since then, he’s often collaborated with screenwriter Jane Goldman, who’s worked with him on all but one of his films, and comic book writer Mark Millar. And so, with that in mind, it’s time to put on your best finely-tailored suits and remember the words of wisdom spoken by Harry Hart (“Manners. Maketh. Man”) as we look at the films of director Matthew Vaughn.

LAYER CAKE (2004)

Vaughn’s directorial career officially kicked off in 2004 with an adaptation of author J.J. Connolly’s 2000 novel Layer Cake. Connolly himself wrote the screenplay for the film which, nowadays, is commonly regarded as ‘Daniel Craig’s James Bond audition tape’. Yes, it was thanks in large part to this film, in which Craig plays a drug dealer known only as XXXX who finds himself forced into doing some jobs for an associate of his, that eventually led to him being cast in the role of 007 in Casino Royale. And, sure enough, while XXXX and James Bond are entirely different characters, there are some instances in this film where XXXX’s actions feel very reminiscent of something that Craig’s Bond would do in one of his Bond films. Craig does a great job in the lead role while being backed by a solid supporting cast that includes the likes of Sienna Miller, Michael Gambon, and Craig’s future Bond quartermaster Ben Whishaw. The film itself is a sleek and entertaining crime thriller that boasts some cracking dialogue, excellent cinematography, and solid editing, which all helps to give it a stylish look and atmosphere. Sure, some parts of the story are admittedly a bit standard for the genre, but thanks to strong direction and a terrific lead performance, Layer Cake is a strong debut for Matthew Vaughn as a director. And yes, in retrospect, it’s easy to see why this film was one of the major contributing factors behind Daniel Craig’s casting as the U.K.’s most famous MI6 agent.

Rating: 4/5

STARDUST (2007)

For his next directorial outing, Vaughn turned to the works of famed fantasy writer Neil Gaiman; specifically, his 1999 novel Stardust, a story about a young man from a small village who ends up embarking on a grand adventure when he comes across a literal ‘fallen star’. This was also the first instance where Vaughn collaborated with screenwriter Jane Goldman, who’s been his most frequent collaborator ever since. I recall seeing ads for this film back when it came out in 2007. However, I didn’t end up seeing it in theaters, and that’s a shame because, having watched it now, I must say that I really loved this film. I found it to be a very entertaining fantasy adventure reminiscent of films like The Princess Bride and The Chronicles of Narnia. For one thing, the film benefits from an incredibly likable lead duo in the form of villager Tristan Thorn and the celestial being Yvaine (the ‘literal fallen star’ I mentioned earlier). Charlie Cox and Claire Danes have terrific chemistry with each other and are backed by some solid performances from the likes of Michelle Pfeiffer as the main antagonist, a witch who is looking to use Yvaine’s powers to regain her youth, and Robert De Niro as an eccentric pirate captain. I also really appreciated the film’s great sense of humor, like with the whole subplot revolving around the princes of the kingdom of Stormhold. In their efforts to become the next king, they all try to kill each other and when they do, they then appear as ghosts who basically form their own peanut gallery. Really, if I had any major gripes with this film, it’d be that some of the visual effects haven’t exactly aged well. In fact, I’d dare say that they were mediocre even for the time. Still, Stardust delivers when it comes to being exactly what it wants to be, a light-hearted and charming fantasy adventure that I’d argue is quite underrated.

Rating: 4.5/5

KICK-ASS (2010)

The other frequent collaborator of Matthew Vaughn’s is comic-book writer Mark Millar. Their first collaboration together turned out to be an adaptation of Millar’s 2008 comic Kick-Ass, the story of an average high-school student named Dave Lizewski who one day decides to be a superhero. The film, like the comic, is a satirical take on the superhero genre. It poses the simple question of ‘how come no one’s ever tried to be a superhero’ and then proceeds to answer that question in an unwavering manner… mainly by showing how dangerous it’d be if done for real because no one has the same kind of powers that characters like Superman or Spider-Man have. This farcical approach is well-handled by Vaughn and Goldman thanks in part to some of the hilarious instances in which the film juxtaposes its different bits of imagery. For example, one of the main protagonists is a young girl named Mindy (Chloe Grace Moretz in her breakout role) who constantly swears and goes around killing bad guys as the vigilante Hit-Girl alongside her father Damon AKA Big Daddy (Nicolas Cage in a hilarious standout role), who wears a Batman-esque costume. And while the final act of the film basically turns into exactly what it’s satirizing, Kick-Ass is a highly entertaining riff on the superhero genre thanks to strong direction from Vaughn and an entertaining ensemble cast. Ironically, though, Vaughn’s next project would end up being a film in the exact same genre that he had just satirized.

Rating: 4/5

X-MEN: FIRST CLASS (2011)

This is a film that I’ve talked about several times before, whether it was during an X-Men series retrospective that I did way back in 2013 or basically anytime that I brought it up while discussing its two follow-ups, 2014’s Days of Future Past and 2016’s Apocalypse. Thus, I’ll try not to repeat myself too much here other than the fact that, suffice it to say, I love this film. This was the film that effectively resurrected the X-Men film franchise after it had gone through a notoriously rough span in the late 2000’s. Part of this film’s success was due to the return of the franchise’s original director, Bryan Singer, as its producer/co-writer. However, it was ultimately Matthew Vaughn who took on the role of director for this installment of the series, and with it, he imbues First Class with a stylish James Bond-esque atmosphere. And while it does technically serve as the one thing that is commonly seen as a dirty word amongst film buffs, a prequel/soft reboot of the franchise, it does manage to be an effective take on the ‘origins’ of several of the series’ main protagonists. Specifically, the trio of Xavier, Magneto, and Mystique, all of whom are played excellently by James McAvoy, Michael Fassbender, and Jennifer Lawrence, respectively. But they’re not the only stars of the show, though, as this was arguably the first X-Men film to truly emphasize the franchise’s team element, something that was eventually perfected in its two sequels. Admittedly, some of the visual effects have dated a bit and not everyone in the cast is a perfect fit in their respective roles (e.g. January Jones as Emma Frost) but, all in all, I still really enjoy X-Men: First Class. Obviously, I know that this isn’t exactly saying much, but for being the dreaded prequel of a long-running franchise, it ends up being one of the best prequels ever made.

Rating: 5/5!

KINGSMAN: THE SECRET SERVICE (2015)

And finally, we end with Vaughn’s adaptation of Mark Millar’s 2012 comic series, Kingsman: The Secret Service. This was one of several big-name spy films to come out in 2015 alongside the likes of Mission Impossible: Rogue Nation and Spectre, just to name a few. It’s also another film that I’ve talked about before in the past, namely via my original review of it back in February 2015. So, again, I won’t repeat myself too much here. Simply put, this film is a balls-to-the-wall action extravaganza with a completely ludicrous plot and extremely over-the-top action sequences… and yet, that is exactly one of the main reasons why it is so damn fun to watch. Another reason why it works so well is because amidst all the crazy action in this film (e.g. the iconic/infamous fight scene inside a hate group’s church that’s made up of several long takes), it’s all backed by a great origin story in which its main protagonist, Gary ‘Eggsy’ Unwin, works to prove himself as the newest recruit of the Kingsman. Eggsy proves to be a very likable protagonist and is played excellently by Taron Egerton in what would end up being his breakout role. He’s backed by some great supporting players as well, including Colin Firth in an against-type role as Eggsy’s mentor Harry Hart, Matthew Vaughn regular Mark Strong as Kingsman tech guru Merlin, and Samuel L. Jackson as the charismatic and highly entertaining main antagonist Valentine. In short, while Kingsman may understandably prove to be a bit too much for some, it’s also an unapologetically wild tribute to the classic spy films of the 1960’s. And in an age where spy films tend to be a bit more serious nowadays (disclaimer: nothing wrong with that, for the record), this was a great new addition to the genre.

Rating: 4.5/5