Wonder Woman 1984 (2020) review

2017’s Wonder Woman doesn’t always get the credit that it deserves from the DC Extended Universe fandom for everything that it did for the franchise. At a time where most DCEU films were utterly savaged by critics, Wonder Woman was the franchise’s first genuinely well-received outing. In fact, it still stands as the best-reviewed DCEU film to date with a 93% rating on Rotten Tomatoes, and while certain parts of the DCEU fandom will feverishly try to deny it, the reason why it succeeded where films like Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice didn’t was because it was very much the antithesis of the early DCEU films. Instead of being an overly dour and overstuffed superhero epic, Wonder Woman was a predominately lighthearted but still emotionally powerful superhero adventure that was fully bolstered by Gal Gadot’s fantastic performance in the title role. Sure, she had already made a great impression when she made her franchise debut in Batman v Superman but it wasn’t until her solo film when she was truly given the chance to shine in a film that fully understood the importance of character and story. Ultimately, though, much of what made the film work was thanks to its director, Patty Jenkins, who made history as the first female director of a superhero feature from a major studio. Thus, Jenkins was wisely brought back to helm a sequel, which takes Princess Diana of Themyscira from the trenches of World War I to the more high-tech landscape of the 80’s, hence the title Wonder Woman 1984. And while it ended up facing the same unfortunate struggles that other blockbusters have faced thanks to COVID (i.e. getting delayed multiple times), WW84 has finally managed to see the light of day via a simultaneous theatrical and streaming release that allows those who are unable to see it in theaters to watch it at home via Warner Bros.’ streaming service, HBO Max. But no matter where it’s seen, Wonder Woman 1984 is another top-notch outing from Patty Jenkins that, just like its predecessor, is a prime example of the DC Extended Universe at its best which, given all the franchise’s early struggles, is very much a good thing.

It is 1984, and in the bustling metropolis of Washington D.C., Amazonian demigoddess Diana Prince (Gal Gadot) continues to operate as Wonder Woman, albeit in a relatively secretive manner that doesn’t conflict with her public persona as an anthropologist working at the Smithsonian. One day, Diana and her coworker Barbara Minerva (Kristen Wiig) come across a mysterious artifact known as the ‘Dreamstone’ that can grant those who find it the one wish that they desire the most. And sure enough, Diana and Barbara both end up inadvertently utilizing the Dreamstone’s abilities. Whereas the introverted Barbara wishes to become as strong and confident as Diana, Diana’s greatest desire results in the return of the love of her life, pilot Steve Trevor (Chris Pine), who had heroically sacrificed himself during the events of the first film. Unfortunately, these life changing developments are soon upended by the arrival of a new threat in businessman Maxwell Lord (Pedro Pascal), who seeks out the Dreamstone so that he can become the powerful figure that he’s always dreamt of being. In doing so, Lord ends up becoming the physical embodiment of the Dreamstone, thus allowing him to grant anyone’s wish and take whatever he wants from them in return. Naturally, this results in an endless array of conflicts that span the entire world, resulting in Diana and Steve embarking on a quest to stop Lord from going overboard with power and destroying the world in the process. And as Diana, Barbara, and Max all soon discover, their greatest desires come with even greater consequences.

 

If there’s one thing that can be said about this film, it’s that the 1984 part of its title is a 100% accurate indicator of what it truly is. Wonder Woman 1984 may be a modern blockbuster, but in execution, it is the spitting image of an 80’s film from the intentionally gaudy but still incredibly vibrant color palette that it sports to the overly extravagant outfits that the characters wear (e.g. Chris Pine in parachute pants… need I say more?). This is also reflected by the film’s primarily lighthearted tone which is then matched by its unabashedly old-school superhero plot with clear-cut heroes and villains. And while those two aspects of the film have admittedly been a major source of contention amongst critics and audiences, I’d say that they’re the key reason why it works as well as it does. In other words, while some may find this film to be overly goofy and cliché, it could very well be argued that it perfectly encapsulates what most of the films and TV shows from the 80’s were like from a tonal perspective. It should also go without saying that Patty Jenkins excellently maintains the same strong atmosphere that made the first Wonder Woman film such a hit, resulting in a highly entertaining homage to classic 80’s adventure flicks that’s full of great bits of humor that never overshadow the story’s powerful emotional beats. And just like the first film, Wonder Woman 1984 also boasts a lot of great action sequences and a suitably epic score. Whereas the first film’s score was done by Hans Zimmer protégé Rupert Gregson-Williams, this film’s score was done by Zimmer himself who, of course, was largely responsible for bringing the title character’s iconic theme to life in Batman v Superman.

 

It’s been well-documented at this point that Gal Gadot has basically been the DC Extended Universe’s MVP as far as its ensemble cast is concerned. As Wonder Woman, she has consistently established herself as a wholly charismatic leading lady and an indisputably badass action heroine, and sure enough, all this is once again reinforced by this film. Here, she trades in the innocent fish out of water character arc that she went through in the first film for one where, despite being emotionally hardened by everything that’s happened to her since she left Themiscyra, she’s still very much the kind-hearted heroine that we know and love. As for the heavily talked-about return of her long lost love Steve Trevor, the film’s handling of this plot-line feels like a natural way of doing the ‘resurrection’ concept that has always been common in the world of comics. And just like the first film, Chris Pine does a great job of being just as charismatic as Gadot without ever overshadowing Diana’s status as the main protagonist. This then brings us to the film’s main antagonists, and if there’s one advantage that Wonder Woman 1984 has over its predecessor, it’s that it has much stronger villains. It all starts with Pedro Pascal, who is delightfully over-the-top as the charismatic con-man Maxwell Lord while still managing to make him a surprisingly sympathetic tragic figure. This also applies to the other antagonist of the feature, Kristen Wiig’s Barbara, who gradually evolves from a meek introvert into the “apex predator” that is Wonder Woman’s classic foe from the comics, Cheetah. And while her final transformation may be a bit lacking visually, Wiig does an outstanding job at being Diana’s foil since her wish to become just like her comes at the cost of the good-natured and all-around sociable personality that she had before she used the Dreamstone..

 

I won’t be going over what I’m about to mention too much as I finish up this review, but I will say that I find it fascinating that a film that was shaping up to be one of the best-reviewed films of 2020 about a week ago… has suddenly become one of the year’s most polarizing releases. Yes, Wonder Woman 1984 has attracted some, to put it as nicely as I can, intense reactions from both critics and audiences. Basically, from what I can gather, it’s gotten a lot of flak for its light-hearted tone to the point where it’s been accused of being way too goofy instead of being a more serious and darker sequel. And yet, as I noted earlier, I’d say that this makes it a perfect representation of the era in history in which it’s set; plus, as I’m sure that I’ve made it clear at this point, I tend to prefer the superhero films that aren’t trying to distance themselves from the medium’s typically lighthearted proceedings. Case in point, Wonder Woman 1984 is a highly entertaining addition to the genre that, just like its predecessor, is fully bolstered by its terrific ensemble cast and Patty Jenkins’ excellent direction. In short, it’s another example as to why the DC Extended Universe has been a lot better than how it was when it was first starting out when it remembers that, when it comes to this genre, strong characters and a good story are always more important than whatever ‘cool’ action sequences those characters partake in. Simply put, no one does DCEU films quite like Patty Jenkins, and if you ask me, it’s about damn time that the DCEU fandom gives her the credit that she deserves for all that she’s done for the franchise.

 

Rating: 5/5!

Ralph Breaks the Internet (2018) review

In 2012, Walt Disney Animation released their 52^nd animated feature, Wreck-it Ralph. This tribute to both classic and modern video games centered on the titular Wreck-it Ralph, the main antagonist of a classic arcade game in a world where arcade characters can travel to other games and interact with each other via the power strip that their cabinets are plugged into. Having grown tired of being stuck in the role of ‘the bad guy’ for 30 years, Ralph embarked on a journey throughout other video games in the hopes of having his own ‘hero moment’. Upon its release, the film was a solid success with both critics and audiences, grossing over $471 million worldwide and serving as another contributor to Disney Animation’s recent revival when it came to the quality of their films. But perhaps the most notable thing that the film managed to accomplish was earning a genuine rarity when it comes to the studio’s filmography, a sequel. Oh sure, many of the classic Disney animated films have gotten sequels over the years, but they primarily came via the now-defunct direct-to-video division Disneytoon Studios and, to be perfectly blunt, usually weren’t of the same quality. Prior to this year, only two Disney animated films had officially gotten sequels that were given proper theatrical releases; The Rescuers (The Rescuers Down Under) and The Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh (Winnie the Pooh). Plus, those two films came out several years after their predecessors, which makes this year’s Ralph Breaks the Internet (AKA Wreck-it Ralph 2) even more of a unique phenomenon given that it comes out just 6 years after the original and was made by the same development team. But fear not, folks, as this film manages to maintain the same heart and snappy writing of the original Wreck-it-Ralph even with a major shift in its setting from the ever-changing world of the classic video arcade to the equally ever-changing digital world that is the internet.

6 years since their previous adventure, things have been going quite well for Wreck-it Ralph (voiced by John C. Reilly), the main antagonist of the classic game Fix-it Felix Jr., and his best friend Vanellope von Schweetz (voiced by Sarah Silverman), the main protagonist of the popular racing game Sugar Rush, at their home, Litwak’s Family Fun Center and Arcade. However, when Vanellope begins to feel that her game is starting to get a little predictable, Ralph’s efforts to fix that unintentionally end up resulting in the machine’s steering wheel to break. And to make matters worse, because Sugar Rush’s developers went out of business years ago, the arcade’s owner Mr. Litwak (voiced by Ed O’Neill) has no choice but to unplug the game, rendering Vanellope and the rest of its residents without a home. Not wanting his best friend to lose her game forever, Ralph comes up with the idea to travel to the internet via the arcade’s newly installed wi-fi router to find a new steering wheel on eBay. But while Ralph and Vanellope successfully enter the world of the internet and find the wheel on eBay, they soon find themselves dealing with another issue when they find that they don’t have the money to buy it. Thus, they decide to respond to a clickbait ad that promises that they can earn money by playing video games and are told to collect a valuable car from the popular racing game Slaughter Race. While their efforts to take the car are ultimately unsuccessful, Vanellope’s racing skills end up attracting the attention of its owner Shank (voiced by Gal Gadot) and the two begin to form a friendship that gives Vanellope a new perspective on life to the point where she considers staying there instead of returning to the arcade. This, of course, ends up being an issue for Ralph, who embarks on his own quest to collect the money that they need by becoming a viral star on the video site BuzzzTube with the aid of its chief algorithm Yesss (voiced by Taraji P. Henson).

Like the first film, Ralph Breaks the Internet presents a story concept that admittedly runs the risk of dating itself given its subject matter. In the first film, that came courtesy of its various references to classic video games that would most likely fly over the heads of younger audiences (e.g. a scene where a character inputs the iconic ‘Konami Code’). And in the case of the sequel, it’s through its internet setting. Because the internet is always changing, trends that are relevant now could end up becoming stale in the future, and this film does have a few references to current internet culture that will probably elicit some groans from certain crowds during future viewings. But just like the first film, Ralph Breaks the Internet manages to work around this thanks to its strong story. For starters, it does treat its internet concept in a serious manner, showcasing both the good and the bad of the global network (e.g. the first rule of the internet, ‘don’t read the comments’). This is then tied excellently into the main plot of Ralph and Vanellope both dealing with forms of insecurity, which then highlights the concept of how friendships change over time once Vanellope begins to express interest in staying in Slaughter Race. As for the animation, this sequel maintains the same great aspect from the first film in terms of bringing the internet world to life in a highly creative manner just like its predecessor did with the arcade world. In this instance, it portrays internet users as Mii-like figures in a bustling metropolis that’s home to all the essential websites, and it’s clear that the writers/animators did their homework when it comes to accurately portraying what these websites are usually like, whether they’re real ones or ones that are satirizing the real ones.

The original quartet of the first film return to reprise their roles and are all great once again. As Ralph, John C. Reilly continues to be incredibly hilarious as the well-meaning but not always bright video game ‘antagonist’. The same goes for Sarah Silverman as the ever-endearing Vanellope, and while Ralph Breaks the Internet is more of a Vanellope story this time around, the film still gives the two of them balanced roles in the story. But as for Fix-it Felix (voiced by Jack McBrayer) and Sgt. Calhoun (voiced by Jane Lynch), fans of the original will be disappointed to hear that they don’t factor into this film as much as they did last time. They do not join Ralph and Vanellope on their journey into the internet and thus, only appear in the beginning and end. At the very least, the two get a decent little subplot in which they find themselves in a tricky situation when they agree to take care of the Sugar Rush racers after their game is unplugged. And while he’s playing a different character this time, Disney Animation’s newest lucky charm Alan Tudyk (whose run with Disney started with the original Wreck-it Ralph, where he played the main antagonist King Candy/Turbo) is yet another standout as the all-knowing search-bar expert KnowsMore. As for the new additions to the cast, the most prominent is Gal Gadot as Slaughter Race racer Shank, a role that allows Gadot to pay homage to her role as Gisele in the Fast and Furious franchise while also giving her some of the emotional gravitas that she excelled with in Wonder Woman. Taraji P. Henson also manages to get some highly memorable moments in as the trend-savvy video sharing site algorithm Yesss.  

But of course, the most talked about aspect of this film is the sequence where Vanellope (who was revealed to be the ‘princess’ protagonist of Sugar Rush in the previous film) meets with all the Disney princesses. Every major member of Disney’s current Princess line (along with Anna and Elsa from Frozen and Moana from her titular 2016 film) makes an appearance in this sequence voiced by their current actresses (save for Snow White, who’s voiced by screenwriter Pamela Ribon). Now for some, this may seem like nothing more than the most blatant example of corporate pandering that Disney has ever put in one of their films. Heck, the sequence in question sees Vanellope travel to the popular Disney fan site Oh My Disney where there are even more cameos from the likes of Buzz Lightyear from Toy Story, Groot from Guardians of the Galaxy, and Eeyore from Winnie the Pooh… and yes, that’s just to name a few. Thankfully, though, this sequence is handled wonderfully, as it allows all these actresses to play off their characters’ common criticisms (and some of the admittedly dated aspects of their respective films/stories) while never betraying anything that made them so beloved in the first place. Plus, without spoiling anything, the scene seen in the marketing where Vanellope visits their ‘backstage area’ isn’t the only one that they appear in. And really, tell me that I’m not the only one who’s been genuinely curious at the idea of seeing all these princesses together in a feature film that’s not one of the Princess franchise’s direct-to-video projects. Because if this film proves anything, it’s that these ladies can indeed headline their own proper Disney film.

When this film’s premise was first revealed and then shown off in its first trailer, I’m sure that there were quite a few people out there who were fearful about Disney entering the same territory of another animated film, last year’s infamous release The Emoji Movie. After all, we’re talking about two films that are heavily based around the internet and feature several pop cultural references and instances of product placement. And in the case of this film, it would feature probably the most Disney-centric moment to ever be seen in a Disney film through the cameo appearances of its most famous female protagonists. Ultimately, though, without beating the dead horse that is the continued bashing of The Emoji Movie, Disney never stoops to ‘that low’ with Ralph Breaks the Internet. Co-directors Rich Moore and Phil Johnston and their writing team do an excellent job of maintaining an emphasis on the story rather than its setting, providing its characters with a unique spin on the concept of insecurity in a gorgeously animated and clever interpretation of the world wide web. In other words, this is not a film that relies solely on its pop cultural references or its Disney cameos; it’s just a well-written sequel that does manage to boast the same amount of heart as the original… possibly more, even. Yes, as is the case with any sequel that’s on par with the original, it’s currently up for debate online whether this is ‘better’ than the original Wreck-it Ralph. And while I personally can’t add to that argument just yet given that I’ve only seen this once, I can safely say that Ralph Breaks the Internet is another wonderful addition to Disney Animation’s current feature film hot streak.

Rating: 5/5!

Justice League (2017) review

For the past decade, Marvel Studios has dominated the superhero film genre thanks to the Marvel Cinematic Universe, which was an unprecedented success story as nothing like it had ever been done before in the context of live-action films. After starting out strong with a series of solo outings that slowly but surely began to lay down the foundation for a larger universe, the MCU truly hit it big in 2012 when it brought all of its main heroes together in what ultimately became one of the landmark entries of the genre, The Avengers. But while the Avengers have undoubtedly become one of the most famous squads in the world of film, there is another superhero team that is arguably more iconic than them. I’m, of course, referring to DC Comics’ own legendary superhero group, the Justice League. Ever since the group’s initial creation in 1960 as a revamp of DC’s Justice Society of America, the Justice League, made up of several of the company’s most legendary heroes including the Holy Trinity of Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman, has become a staple of the DC universe. Aside from their various runs in the comics, the team has also left its mark on other facets of pop culture, including several video games (e.g. the Injustice fighting games) and a bunch of hit TV shows, most notably the Justice League cartoons from the early 2000’s that were created by the team behind the iconic Batman: The Animated Series. And now almost six decades after their initial comic debut, the Justice League has finally hit the big-screen in DC’s highly-anticipated crossover event.

However, the journey that this film has gone on to make it to this point has been rather rocky, to say the least. A full decade prior to its release, a different iteration of Justice League was in the works under the direction of Mad Max creator George Miller. Ultimately, though, this version ended up falling by the wayside due in large part to the 2007-08 Writers’ Strike. It wouldn’t be until after Warner Bros and DC managed to successfully resurrect the Superman franchise in 2013 with Zack Snyder’s Man of Steel that the idea of a Justice League film was once again put into motion. And thus, the DC Extended Universe, DC and Warner Bros.’ answer to the MCU, was born; but again, things haven’t exactly gone smoothly for this franchise since its inception. While both Man of Steel and its 2016 follow-up Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice (which introduced Ben Affleck’s rendition of the titular Dark Knight) did perform solidly at the box-office, they also yielded an extremely polarizing response from both critics and audiences. Simply put, these films have had as many extremely devoted fans as they’ve had their extremely vocal critics. Thankfully, though, the franchise did manage to rebound a bit this year thanks to the long-awaited solo outing for DC’s legendary heroine, Wonder Woman, a well-deserved success story for everyone involved on that production, especially director Patty Jenkins and lead actress Gal Gadot. But now we turn our attention to director Zack Snyder’s third entry in the DCEU, Justice League, which… is once again proving to be quite controversial amongst critics. And to be perfectly blunt… this time I can see exactly where they’re coming from when it comes to this film’s biggest issues.

At the end of Batman v. Superman, Bruce Wayne AKA the Gotham City vigilante Batman (Ben Affleck) saw his faith in humanity restored following the noble sacrifice of his ‘nemesis’ turned ally Superman (Henry Cavill) against the monstrous creature known as Doomsday. Despite this, however, the world finds itself plunging into greater chaos following Superman’s death, effectively leaving it open for an invasion by the god-like being known as Steppenwolf (portrayed by Ciaran Hinds via motion-capture). Backed by his army of extraterrestrial creatures known as Parademons, Steppenwolf seeks to reclaim the three mysterious devices hidden on Earth known as ‘Mother Boxes’ that grant unparalleled power to those that use them. To deal with the invasion, Bruce and Diana Prince AKA the Amazonian warrior Wonder Woman (Gal Gadot) begin to recruit those who are just like them (referred to in the DC universe as ‘metahumans’) in order to form a team that’s powerful enough to take on Steppenwolf and his army in light of Superman’s absence. In the process, the two end up recruiting Arthur Curry AKA Aquaman, the ruler of the undersea kingdom of Atlantis (Jason Momoa), college student Barry Allen AKA the speedster known as ‘the Flash’ (Ezra Miller), and Victor Stone (Ray Fisher), a former football star who was turned into a cyborg after a near-fatal car accident.

Simply put, when this film focuses on what audiences came to see (namely, the Justice League in action), it does deliver on that front. There are tons of great character moments here and there to satisfy the DC Comics faithful who have been waiting to see these characters together onscreen for years. However... that doesn’t mean that this film is devoid of some major flaws. For one thing, it’s all over the place when it comes to its tone. This aspect of the DCEU has been a primary source of contention amongst critics as both Man of Steel and Batman v. Superman were heavily criticized for being too dour. Thankfully with this film, an attempt was at least made for it to be more light-hearted compared to its predecessors; and yet, despite this, its attempts at humor are hit and miss at best. It also tries to balance said humor with some of the more serious aspects of the plot, something that it doesn’t necessarily succeed at doing. Overall, it seems as if a lot of this film’s tonal issues were a direct result of the biggest moment that occurred during its production, when Snyder was forced to step away from the film due to the death of his daughter and Joss Whedon (who, of course, is no stranger to this genre) was brought in to oversee rewrites and reshoots. However, while watching this film, it becomes abundantly clear that Whedon was forcibly rushed when it came to the process of finishing it, resulting in not only those aforementioned tonal issues but also some dodgy CGI as well (e.g. the now-infamous attempts that were made to digitally remove the mustache that Henry Cavill had grown prior to reshoots that he had to keep for the upcoming Mission Impossible 6).

Among other things, this film is primarily tasked with serving as the proper ‘introduction’ of three new main characters to the DCEU; Flash, Aquaman, and Cyborg. Although the three of them had already technically been introduced in Batman v Superman via a series of brief cameos, this film serves as the first instance where they were each given a lead role. And overall, the film does do a decent job of establishing the DCEU’s iterations of these classic characters, as each main protagonist (both new and returning) does manage to get his or her own standout moment. Despite what I said before about the film’s humor being rather spotty, Ezra Miller’s Flash does get a lot of the best lines in the film as the inexperienced rookie who’s brought in to help deal with a daunting ‘save the world’ scenario. As for Aquaman, while it seems like a lot of his character development is being saved for his upcoming solo film next year, Jason Momoa does, at least, make a good first impression as DC’s often mocked aquatic-based superhero. Finally, with Cyborg, Ray Fisher does a good job of conveying the character’s inner turmoil given his tragic backstory. As for the returning heroes, both Gal Gadot and Ben Affleck are solid once again as Wonder Woman and Batman, respectively. Gadot continues to shine as the DCEU’s best protagonist, even amidst all of this film’s shortcomings, and Affleck still stands strong as the DCEU’s grizzled interpretation of the Dark Knight. And for those who weren’t too big on how Batman was portrayed in BvS, namely via his tendency to kill bad guys, you’ll be pleased to know that they do dial back on that characterization here.

Now, at the risk of delving into spoiler territory (though, really, everyone basically knew this already going in)… yes, Superman returns in this film after the character’s death in BvS. I won’t be getting into the exact specifics of how he’s brought back but I will say that, with this film, Henry Cavill has thankfully been given the chance to, shall we say, ‘act’ like Superman. Granted, I did think that he did a solid job in the previous two films that he appeared in but, at the same time, those films didn’t exactly give him the best material to work with, either. With Justice League, though, we finally get a Superman reminiscent of Christopher Reeve’s iconic iteration of the character from the original Superman films. But while all of the main leads get a solid amount of material to work with in this film, the same can’t be said for its supporting characters as they are all basically limited to ‘cameo’ appearances a la Flash, Aquaman, and Cyborg in BvS. This applies to not only returning DCEU players like Amy Adams as Lois Lane and Connie Nielsen as Diana’s mother Queen Hippolyta but also newcomers like Mera, Queen of Atlantis (Amber Heard), and J.K. Simmons’ version of Commissioner Jim Gordon, characters that are clearly being intended to have more substantial roles in future films. And as for the main villain, Steppenwolf… he’s practically a non-existent threat. Despite Ciaran Hinds’ best efforts in the role, the character gets nothing of value to work with here; no backstory, no sense of what he’s trying to accomplish, no indication of his relationship to another famous DC comics antagonist (and future big bad of the DCEU) Darkseid, etc.  In other words, he’s one of the genre’s weakest villains ever.

So before any of the hardcore DCEU fans out there get on my case because of what I’ve said in this review, let me be perfectly clear; I didn’t outright ‘dislike’ Justice League. As I said before, when it focuses on its titular squad of superheroes, it does lead to some great character moments between them. At the same time, though, the overall execution is quite sloppy. While I do appreciate the efforts that were made by Zack Snyder and company to avoid delving into the dour tone that many felt plagued Batman v Superman, the film still suffers from having a rather inconsistent tone. And while the main leads are all solid in their respective roles, the plot is basic, the humor is hit or miss, and the main villain is pathetically weak. In short, a lot of this feels rushed, which arguably isn’t that surprising seeing how this came out only one year after Batman v Superman. And while both Snyder and Joss Whedon tried their best to fix some of the most glaring issues that people have had with previous DCEU installments (save for Wonder Woman), it just wasn’t enough to overcome the immense time crunch that they were both clearly under. With that said, though, if you’re a long-time fan of DC and these characters, I bet that you’ll probably be satisfied with this long-awaited live-action adaptation of arguably the most famous superhero team in all of pop culture… who, quite frankly, deserved a hell of a lot better than what is practically the DC equivalent of Fan4stic. I wish I was kidding about that comparison, but I’m not; granted, it’s nowhere near as bad as Fan4stic, but it too is a case of a studio trying to salvage a reportedly disastrous cut of their tent-pole release only to make things worse in the process.

Rating: 2.5/5 (So yeah, my streak of giving every major superhero film this year a 5/5 rating officially ends here. Still, despite my issues with Justice League, this has been one of the genre’s greatest years ever, which is something that will certainly be emphasized in my impending ‘Best Films of the Year’ list. But as for this film… well, as much as I hate to say it, it is most likely going to end up appearing on… the other list…)

Wonder Woman (2017) review

(I’ve been informed by my peers that today happens to be ‘Wonder Woman Day’, which marks the 75^th anniversary of the iconic character’s debut. How fitting, then, that this occurs right at the time that her long-awaited feature film is about to have an epic opening weekend, hence why I made sure to get this review out on this big day. Enjoy!)

Admittedly, Warner Bros.’ attempts at creating a cinematic universe based around the characters of DC Comics, just like what Marvel Studios has been doing for the past decade with their Marvel Cinematic Universe, have had rather rocky results recently. It wasn’t that big of an issue at first when the series started in 2013 with the Superman reboot, Man of Steel. While the film did prove to be one of the most polarizing releases of that year, it was a solid commercial hit and effectively built up enough hype for future installments. But then, things got rough for Warner Bros. and DC in 2016. It’s a shame, really, because that was supposed to be a big year for them, as their two primary releases were some of the most anticipated films of the year. However, both these films, Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice and Suicide Squad, ended up getting completely savaged by critics. And unlike Man of Steel, while both films did do well at the box-office, it seemed like those who didn’t like them outnumbered those that did this time around. It certainly didn’t help matters when it became clear that both films were subjected to questionable editing jobs in post-production, resulting in the necessity for alternate cuts when they were released to home media. Thus, this year is an important one for Warner Bros., DC, and the ‘DC Extended Universe’. Because if this year’s outings end up attracting the same critical vitriol as their 2016 slate, it puts the future of this entire cinematic universe in jeopardy. Thankfully, they’re starting off big this year with a film based around a character who’s been long overdue for a cinematic adaptation; the Amazonian demigoddess known as Wonder Woman.

When it comes to DC, Wonder Woman stands right alongside Batman and Superman to form ‘the Trinity’, the most iconic trio of superheroes in the DC lineup. Created by psychologist William Moulton Marston in 1941, Princess Diana of Themyscira would go on to become arguably the most famous superheroine in the history of comics. However, it took quite some time before she made her debut on the big-screen. Prior to this, her most famous onscreen adaptation was the TV series Wonder Woman, starring Lynda Carter in the title role and produced from 1975 to 1979. However, efforts since then to make a Wonder Woman feature film, even from the likes of filmmakers like Joss Whedon, have come and gone to no avail. Wonder Woman ultimately made her official film debut in last year’s Batman v Superman, played by Gal Gadot, in which she was considered one of the primary highlights of the film. Now, Gadot headlines her own solo film, Wonder Woman, which is very much a big deal. It’s the first big female-led superhero film of this current era of the superhero genre (disclaimer: by ‘current era’, I mean everything since the MCU started back in 2008), and it’s also the first major summer tent-pole film directed by a woman. In this instance, that director is Patty Jenkins, best known for directing 2003’s Monster. She almost directed Marvel Studios’ 2013 outing, Thor: The Dark World, but she ended up leaving that project due to creative differences. Here, though, through her terrific direction and Gal Gadot’s fantastic turn in the title role, DC’s iconic superheroine gets the terrific film adaptation that she very much deserves.

Long before she ever got involved with the likes of Batman and Superman, entrepreneur Diana Prince (Gal Gadot) was Princess Diana of the hidden Amazonian paradise known as Themyscira, ruled by her mother, Queen Hippolyta (Connie Nielsen). Against her mother’s wishes, she is trained by her aunt, General Antiope (Robin Wright), to become one of Themyscira’s Amazonian warriors. One day, a pilot named Steve Trevor (Chris Pine) somehow manages to enter Themyscira when his plane crashes into the ocean. Diana saves him and he explains to her and her people that he’s a spy working for the Allies in World War I. He’s just recently stolen valuable information from a German weapons facility, where General Erich Ludendorff (Danny Huston) and his top scientist Dr. Isabel Maru AKA Doctor Poison (Elena Anaya) are developing a new form of mustard gas that threatens to cause millions of casualties if it’s completed. Believing that the war is being caused by the Amazonians’ mortal enemy, Ares the God of War, Diana leaves the safety of her home to help Steve get the information that he’s collected to his superiors in London. Eventually, the two end up going straight into the action, as Diana seeks to hunt down whoever Ares is so that she can hopefully bring an end to this dreadful war.

One of the main criticisms of previous DCEU films have been towards their overall tone. Compared to the more light-hearted affairs of the MCU, the DCEU films have been more serious in tone. However, most critics have felt that the DCEU films have gone too far with this idea to the point of being incredibly dour, which they feel is not the right kind of atmosphere for superhero films of this nature. That is not the case with Wonder Woman. Even amidst the backdrop of the dreadful First World War, there are plenty of great bits of humorous dialogue here and there to lighten the mood, primarily whenever Diana attempts to ‘fit in’ amongst society (e.g. in one scene, she’s seen trying out some ‘inconspicuous’ clothing and proceeds to question its use in combat). At the same time, our main heroine is given a terrific arc, as we see her go from a naïve young woman who’s unaware of what goes on outside Themyscira to a confident leader in battle. But then, as a result, her perception of humanity is changed dramatically when she learns about the true horrors of the war, something that carries over into her characterization in Batman v. Superman. This arc is handled terrifically in the film, yielding some highly effective emotional moments. As for the rest of the film, Patty Jenkins’ direction is fantastic and she uses the WWI setting to great effect, thanks in part to the film’s excellent production design. This also carries over into the film’s incredible action sequences. Yes, some of them do use the slow-motion technique that fellow DCEU director Zack Snyder is well-known for (though I don’t think he’s really used it that much in his DCEU films), but they do elicit some great results.

As is common with any superhero casting in the genre, Gal Gadot’s casting as Wonder Woman has gotten a lot of flak from certain fans, from her previous background in acting (e.g. her supporting role as Gisele in the Fast and Furious films) to, unfortunately, sexist jabs at her weight and physical stature by those who don’t think that she was the right fit for DC’s most famous heroine. Hell, some have even mocked her tenure in the Israeli army when she was younger (Who does that?). However, when I went to a panel that she was at during last year’s Rhode Island Comic Con, I felt that, offscreen, she very much conveyed all the great traits that audiences have loved about the character ever since she was first introduced back in 1941. And this translates exceptionally well to this film; she’s charming, caring, and most of all, a total badass whenever she gets into the action. She is paired well with Chris Pine who, thankfully, never overshadows Wonder Woman in her own film. Instead, Steve Trevor is just a natural sidekick who does share some romantic chemistry with Diana but, at the same time, is not just a simple ‘love interest’. The two of them are backed by a highly entertaining collection of supporting characters via the team that Steve enlists to help them out on the battlefield; Saïd Taghmaoui as a flirtatious spy named Sameer, Ewen Bremmer as Charlie, a sharpshooter who’s already been through the horrors of war, and Eugene Brave Rock as Chief, a smuggler. As for the film’s villains… eh, they’re ok. I mean, they work within the context of the plot but at the end of the day, they’re still kind of the weakest links of the film.

Fear not, DCEU fans, for I will not be making any sort of derogatory statements towards the previous DCEU films in this review of what has been the franchise’s first well-received outing. After all, as I’ve made it clear in the past, I am a fan of both Man of Steel and Batman v. Superman; heck, I even liked the latter BEFORE the Ultimate Edition came out (Suicide Squad? Eh, I feel that I may have been a bit too positive on that one. I’ll know if this is the case when I see it again). I will say, though, that I’m glad to see that the franchise has finally managed to catch a lucky break after a rough 2016, as Wonder Woman is most certainly one of the best installments of the franchise. Gal Gadot absolutely shines in the lead role of Diana and the direction from Patty Jenkins is fantastic. Together, they give us a terrific female lead who’s given an equally terrific character arc in a film full of emotional depth that captures just the right kind of tone to suit this legendary character. It’s a satisfying win for the two, with Gadot very much proving the critics who doubted her in the role wrong and Jenkins having a much-deserved blockbuster hit after she was forced to back out of directing Thor: The Dark World due to differences with Marvel Studios’ [now disbanded] controversial creative committee. And thanks to these two, the DC Extended Universe’s future looks much brighter thanks to a film that, let’s be honest, was too important to fail as the first female-led superhero film of the modern era. 

Rating: 5/5!

Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice - ULTIMATE EDITION Review/Discussion

As many of you know, when Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice was released in theaters this past March, things didn’t turn out as well as Warner Bros. had hoped for their big superhero epic that was set to start off DC’s own ‘Cinematic Universe’. The film was absolutely savaged by critics and even though, like its predecessor Man of Steel, it did have its fair share of fans this time around its critics were much more vocal in expressing their disdain for the film. And while it certainly did well at the box-office, grossing over $872 million worldwide, somehow it was still deemed a ‘box-office failure’ due to the fact that it didn’t reach the studio’s expected goal of $1 billion (this, folks, is why I’m not in the box-office industry… how nearly $900 million worldwide is supposed to be a failure is beyond me). But while many found the film to be quite underwhelming, a lot of folks were looking ahead to the film’s home media release. Because prior to the film’s theatrical release, director Zack Snyder had noted that his original cut of the film was around three hours long before it was cut down to the theatrical cut’s 151-minute runtime. But as for the original cut, Snyder confirmed that it would be released with the theatrical cut upon the film’s release to Blu-Ray, DVD, and digital outlets. And now with this new R-rated ‘Ultimate Edition’, fans finally get to see Snyder’s true vision for the film. So with that said, considering that I actually was a fan of the film’s theatrical cut, even when taking all of its faults into account, what are my thoughts on the ‘Ultimate Edition’? More importantly, can this new version of the film do enough to change the minds of those who didn’t like it the first time?

Well I’m pleased to report that the Ultimate Edition of Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice IS indeed the superior cut. The main reason for this is simple; because the film is allowed to breathe at a run-time of just over three hours, the film’s plot flows much smoother than it did in the theatrical cut. As a result, certain scenes that some folks felt were rushed and underdeveloped have much more weight to them. For example, a commonly derided scene in the film was the opening action sequence in Africa, in which Superman saves Lois from a group of terrorists but is then deemed as the one responsible for a series of deaths that occurred during the attack. The Ultimate Edition shows more of this sequence, not only showing said deaths (many of which weren’t actually seen in the theatrical cut) but also giving audiences a greater sense of what really happened and how Lex Luthor used this incident to turn the world against Superman. On that note, Lex’s overall plan to combat Superman is much more detailed in this version, namely in regards to how he blackmails certain people into doing his dirty work as well as how Lois investigates the whole conspiracy. Remember the scene in the courtroom where Superman wasn’t able to detect the bomb hidden inside Wallace Keefe’s wheelchair? Well as explained in the Ultimate Edition, the chair was lead-lined so yes, there was a reason why Superman didn’t notice it. As far as the action is concerned, there’s not really that much added in this cut. There’s more of the Africa attack, which has quite a few cases of bloodshed as soldiers are shot by Anatoli and his men, and the scene in which Batman brutally takes down Anatoli and his men as he rescues Martha is certainly much more intense with shots that no doubt had to be cut to appease the censors. But for the most part, the new additions are mostly story based.  

Now with all of this said, I can’t really say that this film will completely win over everyone who wasn’t a fan of the film’s theatrical cut. Because in terms of overall execution, this newer cut still maintains the same general style/vision of its trimmed counterpart. It’s still very serious in tone with only a few quips from characters like Alfred and Perry White to lighten up the mood. Jesse Eisenberg’s polarizing portrayal of Lex Luthor is still the same polarizing performance that you either liked or were annoyed by. The highly anticipated fight between Batman and Superman is still only a small part of a bigger story and no the Ultimate Edition doesn’t add anything to that scene. And the whole scene in which Wonder Woman views the video files on other meta-humans like Flash and Aquaman is still done in the same manner. Like with Man of Steel, it really all comes down to how you view the way this film’s story is told. And as for me, as I’ve gone over before, I was fine with plenty of the choices that Snyder made with this film, from how they introduced the other members of the Justice League to, yes, even that controversial ‘Martha’ scene that the internet constantly mocked. At the end of the day, the most important thing that the Ultimate Edition does is that it fixes quite a few narrative issues that critics/audiences pointed out when it was released, namely in regards to Lex’s whole conspiracy plan. And the choppy editing that sometimes plagued the theatrical cut in scenes like the Africa attack is much smoother as a result.

So the big question now is why did Warner Bros end up cutting so much out of the film when it was released in theaters? At this point I’m sure that it wasn’t due to the stuff in the film that would’ve warranted an R-rating, like the bloodier action in Africa or the brief glimpse of Ben Affleck’s butt during a scene in which Bruce takes a shower, because those additions are only minor at best. And besides, as we all know, the MPAA can be pretty damn lenient when it comes to stuff like that. No at the end of the day the bigger concern was why they cut so much out of the film to the point where it hindered the plot. Well with that said, it’s pretty darn clear as to why Snyder was forced to cut out so much… time constraints. As Snyder himself put it, he just didn’t have the same kind of creative clout that someone like James Cameron has to the point where he could get his full 3-hour long cut of the film released. But the thing is… even though the Ultimate Edition is 30 minutes longer than the theatrical cut, I still would’ve gone to see the film in theaters if it was released in its uncut form. I would have totally sat in that theater for three hours if it meant that I would be able to see the film as Snyder fully envisioned it. I do agree with the argument that if this cut of the film was the one that was shown in theaters, I bet it would’ve done much better with critics. Granted, I don’t think that it would’ve been outright critically acclaimed like some of the MCU films but at the very least I think it would’ve at least been on the same level as its predecessor, hovering somewhere around the 50% range on Rotten Tomatoes. 

So with all of this in mind, here are my thoughts on how people will probably respond to this Ultimate Edition. If you were someone who absolutely hated the film and pretty much everything in it, then it’s safe to say that you’re probably not going to like this newer cut any better because it’s still the same kind of film as its theatrical cut. But if you’re someone who didn’t hate it but was more on the fence about it (in other words, you’d give it a rating somewhere around 2.5/5 or so), then I think that at the very least you’ll like this newer version a bit more because it does fix quite a few of the narrative issues that most people had with the film’s theatrical cut. And as for those who did love the film when it was released, well, this newer cut is just going to be even more satisfying. Now like I said before, I did like the film as it was in its theatrical cut. Yeah it did have some major problems when it came to editing and the narrative but I do feel that Snyder managed to overcome that, for the most part, with an excellent visual style, impressive debuts by Ben Affleck and Gal Gadot as Batman and Wonder Woman, respectively, and a strong third act with an effective emotional finale revolving around the death of Superman. Since the Ultimate Edition was released, I’ve seen quite a few people online say that they’re not going to watch the theatrical cut anymore now that this superior cut is out. As for me, I’m not going to outright disown that cut because as I’ve been saying numerous times, it wasn’t ‘that bad’. But at the end of the day, the Ultimate Edition really is the true version of Batman v Superman. Here’s hoping something like this doesn’t happen again with Justice League.   

Rating: Originally I gave Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice, as it was when it was first released in theaters, a 3.5/5 rating. When I went to go see the film a second time, I actually bumped my rating up to a 4/5 because I got a greater understanding of the story’s emotional depth. So with all of that said, I will give the Ultimate Edition a 4.5/5 due to the fact that it did fix two major issues that most had with the film, resulting in a much stronger narrative.

Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016) review (400th Post!!)

In June of 1938, DC Comics launched its Action Comics series, which introduced the character of Superman, the ‘alien’ being from the planet Krypton who was sent to Earth by his father Jor-El when the planet was on the brink of destruction. Adopted by the Kents, Superman spent much of his childhood living in Kansas under the name Clark Kent before taking on the public persona of Superman as an adult. In doing so, he not only became DC’s ‘first’ major superhero but also arguably the most famous superhero of all-time. Just a little less than a year later, in May of 1939, DC debuted the character of Batman in the 27^th issue of their Detective Comics series. Batman, AKA Bruce Wayne, the billionaire playboy who took on the persona of ‘The Dark Knight’ after witnessing his parents’ murder at a young age, is arguably just as iconic as Superman if not more given all of the numerous adaptations of the character over the years from films to TV shows to video games. While DC Comics has created numerous superheroes over the years from Wonder Woman to the Flash to Green Lantern, Batman and Superman are easily the company’s most famous protagonists. That is very much exemplified by their track records on film because, to be perfectly frank, they are kind of the only major DC superheroes to find success in live-action on the big-screen. Superman pretty much kicked off the ‘superhero film genre’ with his 1978 titular film Superman, directed by Richard Donner, while Batman’s own titular outing from 1989, directed by Tim Burton, was another noteworthy entry for the genre. Both franchises experienced their own highs and lows over the years but they have also saw revivals in recent years. In the case of Batman, it was thanks to Christopher Nolan’s Dark Knight trilogy while Superman got a Dark Knight style reimagining in 2013 with Man of Steel.

Three years after Man of Steel, DC now begins its journey into establishing its own cinematic universe, just like Marvel has done over the past eight years, with the follow-up to Man of Steel, Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice. Man of Steel director Zack Snyder returns to direct as does the main cast of Man of Steel while Ben Affleck takes over for Christian Bale in the role of Batman. It is the first time that these titans of DC have appeared together in a live-action film so obviously there was a lot of hype surrounding the film because of that as well as the aforementioned fact that it’s meant to kick-start DC’s own cinematic universe. However, at the moment it is currently being slammed by critics, sporting only a measly 30% rating on Rotten Tomatoes (at the time I’m writing this). While this isn’t really that surprising seeing how Man of Steel also received mixed reviews from critics (that film has a 56% rating on RT) and was no doubt the most polarizing film of 2013, I assure you that this new film is nowhere near as bad as that RT rating suggests. Now don’t get me wrong as there are some issues with this film, namely in regards to the story and the editing. At the same time, though, there are genuinely some very good things about this film, particularly the visuals, the action sequences, and the performances of a few noteworthy newcomers to the DC ‘Extended Universe’ (that’s the term they’re going with for this new Cinematic Universe, from what I’ve heard). In other words, I’m certain that fans of the DC universe are going to be pretty satisfied with this long-awaited crossover involving the ‘Son of Krypton’ and the ‘Bat of Gotham’.

The film takes place 18 months after the events of Man of Steel, in which Superman (Henry Cavill) successfully prevented General Zod (Michael Shannon) from destroying the Earth in order to establish a new home for the people of Krypton. At the same time, however, Superman’s confrontation with Zod ended up causing a lot of collateral damage to the city of Metropolis. Because of this, Superman ends up becoming a controversial figure amongst various parties. One particular critic of Superman is Gotham billionaire Bruce Wayne (Ben Affleck), who of course as we know moonlights as Gotham’s vigilante Batman. Fearing that Superman, being an all-powerful alien, could pose a severe threat to the human race, Bruce begins an all-out defense against Superman, which soon sees the two superheroes coming into conflict with each other. At the same time, however, Metropolis tech mogul Lex Luthor (Jesse Eisenberg), who also views Superman as a threat as well as other ‘meta-humans’ currently out there, begins to experiment with both the remains of General Zod and the Kryptonian technology recovered from the battle of Metropolis, particularly the material known as Kryptonite, in order to combat Superman. Lex’s actions, which pose a threat to not just Batman and Superman but the whole world as well, soon force the two heroes to work together, serving as a precedent for future events in the DC universe.

So as far as this film’s primary issues are concerned, they mainly come from the story and the editing, particularly during the first twenty minutes or so. This film admittedly does start out on a bit of a rough note as the plot sort of goes in all directions in regards to what’s going on. Part of it does come from the editing, which can be rather choppy at times. In a way, that does sort of apply to the whole film; after all, this film does cover a lot of ground even in the fairly hefty span of 153 minutes. Not only does this film continue the story that began in Man of Steel but it also re-establishes the character of Batman while also setting up other characters like Wonder Woman (Gal Gadot). But ultimately, I did like how the film ‘set up’ the other characters. At the end of the day, this is still very much a Batman/Superman film and while I was worried that Batman was going to overshadow Superman in what was originally ‘his sequel’ (which I know some will deny but I do recall Zack Snyder stating at one point that he wanted to do a second Superman film before getting into anything Justice League related, and keep in mind that this was before it was revealed that Batman was going to be in it), the film actually is rather balanced in terms of their roles in the overall plot. Wonder Woman is basically the only other major DC lead superhero to have a ‘major’ role in the story but the film does feature some ‘cameo appearances’ from the likes of characters like Aquaman (Jason Momoa) and the Flash (Ezra Miller) and I do think that the film handled these ‘cameos’ well. They don’t overshadow Batman, Superman, or Wonder Woman, but they do their job in regards to setting them up for future films without them actually playing ‘a role’ in this film’s story. Stuff like this did keep me invested throughout even if the narrative did become rather unfocused at times.

But these problems do sort of become less prevalent as the film goes on and this is where Batman v Superman really starts to shine, namely in regards to its visuals. There’s no denying that Zack Snyder is one of the best ‘visual directors’ in the business. That is especially true whenever Snyder does a ‘comic-book’ film, like he did with 300 in 2007 and Watchmen in 2009. It’s been very much shown that Snyder really does have a talent in regards to translating the imagery of the comics to the big-screen and that once again shows with this film. So even if you’re not a big fan of this film, there’s no denying that it has one hell of an awesome visual style. That also translates well into the action sequences. Admittedly most of the action sequences are reserved for the third act of the film but when they do happen, they’re pretty darn epic, especially the fight sequences between Batman and Superman and quite frankly any action sequences involving Batman for that matter. Like Man of Steel, this film has attracted a considerable amount of flak for its overall tone; in other words, these films have been criticized for being ‘too grim’. However, I don’t entirely agree with that because while it is true that these films are much more serious compared to the lighter-hearted efforts of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, that doesn’t mean that they are completely ‘dour’. There are a few light-hearted quips peppered in here and there, particularly from Alfred (Jeremy Irons, who is, to put it simply, quite excellent in the role of Bruce Wayne’s trusty butler) and Perry White (Laurence Fishburne). Some of you might recall the rumor that DC was mandating a ‘no joke’ policy in regards to their upcoming films. Well based solely on this film I can tell you that this alleged ‘no joke’ mandate… was a load of bull.

Performance-wise, the returning cast of Man of Steel (Cavill, Amy Adams, Diane Lane, etc.) are as solid as they were in the first film. Ultimately though, the major focus for most people this time around was the newcomers; Affleck as Batman, Gadot as Wonder Woman, and Eisenberg as Lex Luthor. It’s pretty much guaranteed that any major superhero casting is going to be subjected to much scrutiny from comic book fans and Affleck’s casting as Batman is arguably the most controversial superhero casting of all-time. While Affleck has redeemed his career in recent years thanks to his directorial efforts with films like Argo and Gone Baby Gone, his previous turn in the superhero genre, 2003’s Daredevil, was clearly still in the minds of a lot of comic book fans. Thankfully, a lot of those critics are hopefully now eating their words because Affleck is superb as Batman. His take on the character is very much influenced by the older Bruce Wayne from Frank Miller’s iconic series The Dark Knight Returns and Affleck handles the role of the aged Batman perfectly. The controversy over Gal Gadot’s casting of Wonder Woman mainly stemmed from the fact that Gadot’s filmography prior to this film wasn’t necessarily that ‘illustrious’. But ultimately she is excellent in the role. Obviously she isn’t in it as much as Affleck or Cavill but once she ‘becomes’ Wonder Woman, man does she steal the show. And finally we come to Jesse Eisenberg as Lex Luthor, who of course attracted controversy on the grounds that some believed he ‘didn’t look the part’. As far as his performance in this film goes, it’s no doubt going to be one of the most polarizing elements of the film. Eisenberg does play the role in a fairly over-the-top manner. For some, this will be a bit ‘much’ but I will say that he does have some genuinely memorable moments from time to time and at the very least it feels like he’s at least doing something different in the role compared to what has come before.

At the end of the day, Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice may be attracting a rather negative reaction from most critics but that doesn’t automatically mean that the developing DC ‘Extended Universe’ is in jeopardy. I have the feeling that the next two films in this franchise, Suicide Squad and Wonder Woman, are probably going to fare better with critics. Still, I do feel that some critics have been overly harsh on this film. Some critics will deny it but I assure you that I have some clearly biased reviews from people who kept s***ting on this film before they saw it; in other words, they went into it already intent on hating it and that’s just unfair. Anyone who’s been following this blog the past few years will know that I used to be pretty darn critical towards this film in the years leading up to its release, mainly after it was announced that Wonder Woman was going to be in this ‘Batman and Superman’ film. But ultimately I realized that I was being totally unjust towards the film by being overly critical towards it despite the fact that it wasn’t even out yet. I’ve made it clear that I’m a bigger fan of what Marvel Studios has been doing with their Cinematic Universe but that did not influence my thoughts on this film in any way. And ultimately I will say that I did like Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice. Yes, there are some flaws, namely in regards to the film’s rather scrambled narrative. This is by no means a ‘perfect’ superhero film. But the things that this film does right truly are great, particularly the visuals, action sequences, and noteworthy performances from the likes of Ben Affleck and Gal Gadot, among others. A 30% on RT this is not… if you ask me, it should be in the same camp as Man of Steel and have a rating somewhere in the 50’s that represents the admittedly polarizing nature of the film. Ultimately though, I will say this… if you’re a fan of DC Comics, and if you did like Man of Steel I have the feeling that you’re really going to like this film no matter what the critics may say about it.

Rating: 3.5/5

'The Fast and the Furious' (2001-2013) Series Retrospective

Despite the tragic death of series star Paul Walker in a car crash back in November 2013, ‘Furious 7’, the seventh (yes, seventh) film in the ‘Fast and the Furious’ series hits theaters this week. Seriously, who would’ve ever thought that a film series that’s primarily about driving cars and ridiculous stunts would be successful enough to produce seven films? Most film franchises never get that far and even if they did, the films would really start to get bad after a while. But it’s surprisingly the opposite case with ‘The Fast and the Furious’ films; they’ve actually gotten better as the series has gone on. I’ll admit that I never really paid much attention to the franchise during its early years. The only major element of it that was I familiar with at the time was the multiple arcade game spin-offs, including the original ‘Fast and the Furious’ arcade game and its many follow-ups, including one for ‘Tokyo Drift’ and two ‘Super Bikes’ games that in hindsight don’t really connect to the series that much at all; hell, the second game doesn’t even carry the film series license. But anyway, I digress. I remember that it was after watching the Super Bowl commercial for the fourth film that I actually started to become interested in the franchise. I didn’t see the fourth film in theaters but I did watch it on HBO and since then… I have to admit I’ve actually become a fairly big fan of the franchise. So today, in honor of the seventh film’s release and in memory of Paul Walker, I’m looking back upon this beast of a franchise, from its humbler beginnings to its more recent bigger-scaled efforts. It’s time to ‘Ride or Die’ as we look at the ‘Fast and the Furious’ films.

THE FAST AND THE FURIOUS (2001)

As someone who was first introduced to the franchise through its later installments, I must say that it’s fairly interesting to see how far ‘Fast and Furious’ has come since it first started 14 years ago. Like with the ‘Harry Potter’ franchise, this is definitely a case where the series definitely got better over time. That isn’t to say that ‘The Fast and the Furious’ isn’t entertaining; it has a nice energetic pace that perfectly matches the, for lack of a better term, fast nature of the story and a lot of the car stunt sequences are pretty good. But with that said, you still have to admit that the film is a definite case of style over substance. Sure, this film’s not completely brain-less as there are some actual/legitimate bits of character development here, namely between the main characters, street racer/criminal Dominic Toretto and undercover cop Brian O’Connor, and Vin Diesel and Paul Walker work off each other really well. But suffice it to say this is not a movie that you go into expecting great writing. In fact, as many people have already pointed out, this is basically just the street racing clone of ‘Point Break’. Despite this, the first ‘Fast and the Furious’ film is still a fairly entertaining popcorn flick even if, in some cases, it’s become a little dated. Ultimately, though, it would take some time (about a decade to be specific) before this series really started to shine.

Rating: 3.5/5

2 FAST 2 FURIOUS (2003)

First I’ll give you a few seconds to laugh at that hilariously ridiculous title… done? Okay, moving on… so now we come to the second film in the series, this one being directed by John Singleton, who had previously been nominated for two Oscars for his work on his 1991 film ‘Boyz n the Hood’. As for ‘2 Fast 2 Furious’, however, unfortunately it ends up being the weakest entry in the franchise. Now despite what I just said, that doesn’t mean the film isn’t entertaining, because it is. Once again, a lot of the car stunts are really cool, especially the first highway chase and the scene near the end involving a whole mob of cars coming out of one warehouse. Leads Paul Walker and Tyrese Gibson have nice camaraderie with one another, with Gibson in particular being a real stand-out due to his great comedic ability which was put to even greater use in future films. Ultimately though, ‘2 Fast 2 Furious’ suffers from some fairly mediocre writing. Now to be fair, these films have never been known for their writing anyway but here it ends up being rather dull and generic, with a mediocre anti-climax and a generic villain. Plus, something I didn’t mention in my review of the first film is that both of these films have some rather poor/obvious CGI used during some of the racing scenes, namely during close-up shots of the drivers. Thankfully, this was improved upon in future installments. ‘2 Fast 2 Furious’, ultimately, is my least favorite entry in the franchise. I don’t think it’s bad, but like I said earlier, we still haven’t gotten to the series’ best installments yet.

Rating: 3/5

THE FAST AND THE FURIOUS: TOKYO DRIFT (2006)

After the first film which featured all four of the series’ main group of leads and the second film which only featured one of them, now we have ‘Tokyo Drift’, the only entry in the ‘Fast and Furious’ series not to have any of the main leads of the series appear in a major role, save for a pretty awesome cameo by Vin Diesel at the end. Because of this, ‘Tokyo Drift’ has basically been regarded as the most forgotten entry in the series, made even more evident by the fact that it’s the lowest-grossing entry of the series at the box office. But… it’s actually the most underrated of the series and, dare I say, I have to agree with my friend Augie in that I think this is even better than the first film. Sure, this film may not have Vin Diesel or Paul Walker but its cast gets through it pretty darn well without them. Plus, like with ‘2 Fast 2 Furious’, this film does give us another standout character that would later become a major character in future films, in this case Han (Sung Kang), despite the fact that he actually dies during the events of this film. So why does he come back in later films? Well that’s because, despite the fact that this was the third film released chronologically, it actually takes place after the events of the fourth, fifth, and sixth films, hence why Han appears in those films. ‘Furious 7’ will be the first film in the series set after the events of this film. Yeah… wrap your head around that one.

So what’s the main reason as to why this film works so well? It’s because of director Justin Lin, this being the first entry in the series that he directed. He gives the series a much needed boost in quality in terms of direction while also giving the series an edge that, in some cases, the last two films sort of lacked. This film also has the added benefit of being set in a cool locale, Tokyo, meaning that this film does manage to stand out even without the main leads in it thanks to its great visual look. The whole concept of ‘drifting’, which is pretty cool, really lends itself well to the fun action sequences that you’ve now come to expect from this franchise. So overall, ‘Tokyo Drift’ is the one entry in the series that really deserves more attention than it currently gets. If anything, you shouldn’t ignore this entry in the series just because Vin Diesel and Paul Walker aren’t in it. Sure, it may not necessarily be one of the series’ best, but it’s still really entertaining. This was the first entry of the series that really showed promise that the series could improve and you can thank Justin Lin for that as he managed to make an incredibly memorable ‘Fast and Furious’ film without any of the series’ main leads. But this would set the stage for those leads to make one heck of a return to the franchise they helped start in the first place.

Rating: 3.5/5

FAST AND FURIOUS (2009)

After nearly a decade since the first film’s release back in 2001, the main four leads of the franchise; Diesel, Walker, Michelle Rodriguez, and Jordana Brewster all reunited for a new film in the franchise, ‘Fast and Furious’, the second entry in the series to be directed by Justin Lin. But unlike the following two entries in this series, ‘Fast and Furious’ has been the least successful of the series in terms of critical response despite its commercial success at the box office. It only has a 27% score on Rotten Tomatoes… but overall I disagree with that rating. This is my third favorite entry in the series to date and I as noted in the intro, this was the first ‘Fast and Furious’ film that I ever saw, albeit on TV, not in theaters. This of course was after I had watched the Super Bowl commercial for the film, the first time that I really began to show interest in the franchise having initially not paid any attention towards it during its initial run. Overall I view it as being similar to the first film but with much stronger direction. Like I said before, Justin Lin gave the series new life and now with this fourth film, it has really started to shine thanks to the return of the main cast after they didn’t play a major part in the second and third films. So with that said, why then is this one not as liked by a lot of people? Well, from what I can tell, it’s because they feel the movie is ‘too serious’ for a ‘Fast and Furious’ film. And for the record I do see where they’re coming from.

The plot of this film revolves around Dom returning home to LA after learning that his girlfriend Letty (Rodriguez) has been ‘murdered’ (I use the term loosely because, well, you’ll see why when I start talking about the sixth film), looking for revenge against those who were responsible. This results in him crossing paths once again with Brian, who’s going after the same people for the FBI. Last year’s ‘Need for Speed’ was a similar situation, being more serious than both it needed to be and quite frankly what it was capable of being given its premise of street racing. But here, I didn’t mind too much when the film got serious because I do feel that there was some legitimate motivation for Dom and Brian to stop the villains unlike with previous villains in the franchise. Besides, there’s still a lot of awesome car stunts, from the opening tanker sequence in the Dominican Republic to the final chase scene taking place in the underground tunnels between Mexico and the U.S., though in the case of the latter, I am aware that there was definitely a lot of CGI used in that sequence, even though for the most part it at least looks a little better than it did in the first two films. Regardless, this is still a ‘Fast and Furious’ movie; it’s silly and over the top but still really fun to watch. Now that the main cast was back, it was time for the series to go off in a new direction which ended up taking us all very much by surprise.

Rating: 4/5

FAST FIVE (2011)

I think it’s safe to say that we were all surprised when we saw that this film, the fifth entry in a series that was more successful with audiences than it was with critics, was actually getting really great reviews from critics. It has a 77% rating on RT, way higher than any of the previous four films (which were rated 53%, 36% twice, and 27%, respectively). And suffice it to say… they’re right. At the time of its release, ‘Fast Five’ immediately made a name for itself as the best entry in the series. It achieved that by making the radical move of straying from the formula that had defined the series since the beginning though ultimately it ended up being the right move. Instead of its focus being on street racing, ‘Fast Five’ opts for a heist storyline a la ‘Ocean’s Eleven’ and ‘The Italian Job’. Seriously, there’s only one ‘street race’ in this entire film and they don’t even show it happening; they cut away from it before it starts. The second major change is that, unlike the previous films which only centered around 2-4 characters at a time, this is the first in the series to have a true ensemble as the film reunites Dom and Brian with nearly all of their primary allies from the previous films; Roman (Tyrese Gibson), Han, Gisele (Gal Gadot), Tej (Ludacris), etc… And third, and most importantly, there’s ‘The Rock’.

Yes folks, the addition of Dwayne Johnson in the role of DSS agent Luke Hobbs, who’s out to catch Dom and his crew, is quite frankly the best thing that could have ever happened to this series. Johnson really stands out amongst the members of the cast in what is simply a stand-out role. But with that said, this is probably the first entry in the series where the cast in general really shines. A key theme of the whole series has been ‘family’ and you really do see that with this cast as proven by their excellent camaraderie with each other. The action sequences are much more fluid than earlier films and of course, we got more fun and, in some cases, insane action sequences to enjoy. There’s the opening scene where Brian and Mia break Dom out of a prison bus, there’s the first fight between Dom and Hobbs, and who can forget the scene where Dom and Brian literally drag a frigging safe through the streets of Rio. And yes, at this point, the series has really begun to defy all sorts of physics but with Lin’s solid direction, a terrific cast, and most importantly a real sense of fun, ‘Fast Five’ easily stands out amongst the six ‘Fast and Furious’ films that have come out. Again, who would’ve ever thought that at the time of its release, the fifth film in this series would ultimately end up being the best up to that point?

Rating: 4.5/5

FAST AND FURIOUS 6 (2013)

For my original review of the film posted on May 23, 2013, click the link provided below;

(http://rimoviecorner.blogspot.com/2013/05/fast-and-furious-6-2013-review.html)

At this point, I think it’s safe to say that this series has now realized exactly what it is; it knows it’s silly and over-the-top and it doesn’t care. It just rolls with it and doesn’t try to be something it’s not. That’s the best way I can describe ‘Fast and Furious 6’; it’s ridiculous, fast-paced, and it keeps defying physics with every action sequence it does. Plus, this film pulls quite the heck of a retcon by having it be revealed that Letty survived the events of the fourth film, albeit being affected with amnesia in the process. But it’s still just so damn entertaining to watch. The same positives that I noted for ‘Fast Five’ are once again present here; a terrific ensemble cast that has terrific camaraderie, another batch of awesome action sequences (the tank chase, that fancy flip car, the whole finale on the world’s longest runway involving a crashing plane, etc…), and so on and so on. But at the same time, there are some things in this film that I feel actually do improve on the previous film. For one thing, this film has quite frankly the best villain of the series to date in the form of Luke Evans’ Owen Shaw. His whole philosophy of regarding the members of his crew as ‘expendable’ is a cool contrast to the ‘family’ dynamic of Dom’s crew. Another great addition to the cast is Gina Carano as Hobbs’ assistant Riley. Her fight scenes with Rodriguez are some of the most badass moments in the entire film. Because of ‘Fast Five’, this was the first entry in the series that I was really anticipating and sure enough it did not disappoint in the slightest. In fact, this in, is my opinion, the best ‘Fast and Furious’ film to date.

Rating: 4.5/5

Ranking time!

6. 2 Fast 2 Furious

5. The Fast and the Furious

4. The Fast and the Furious: Tokyo Drift

3. Fast and Furious

2. Fast Five

1. Fast and Furious 6