Mission Impossible - Fallout (2018) review

Over the years, we’ve seen quite a few franchises experience an unexpected resurgence, resulting in the truly rare occasions where their sequels end up being their greatest installments. This has certainly been the case with the Mission Impossible franchise, which has now been running for more than two decades. It all started, of course, with the original film adaptation of the hit TV series of the same name from the 60’s/70’s (plus a short-lived revival in the 80’s) that was released in 1996 starring Tom Cruise in the lead role of Ethan Hunt, an agent of the International Missions Force AKA the IMF. The film also served as Cruise’s official debut as a producer, as he had launched his own production company three years prior with his former casting agent Paula Wagner. Upon its release, the film was one of the highest-grossing films of the year, and this commercial success continued over the course of the series’ initial trilogy of films. The third entry of that trilogy, 2006’s Mission Impossible III, served as the directorial debut of a longtime writer/producer named J.J. Abrams, who then joined the franchise as one of its main producers alongside Cruise starting with the sequel, 2011’s Mission Impossible – Ghost Protocol. And under the direction of Brad Bird in his live-action filmmaking debut, Ghost Protocol became the series’ most critically acclaimed and highest-grossing installment to date. Plus, it also helped to revitalize Cruise’s career after some of the, for lack of a better term, tumultuous incidents that he got involved in around the time of MI:3 (e.g. jumping on Oprah’s couch).

Four years later, the series returned with its fifth installment, Mission Impossible – Rogue Nation. Going off the ending tag from Ghost Protocol, the film’s plot took direct inspiration from the TV series by introducing one of its most recurring elements in the form of a terrorist organization known as the Syndicate. And keeping in line with the series’ habit of picking new directors for each new installment, Rogue Nation was directed by Christopher McQuarrie, who got his big break in the film industry by writing 1995’s The Usual Suspects, which earned him an Oscar for Best Screenplay. But in this case, he was most notable for being one of Tom Cruise’s most common collaborators, having worked together on films like Valkyrie, Edge of Tomorrow, and Jack Reacher (which he directed). And upon its release, the film continued the series’ recent hot streak with both critics and audiences to the point where the question of whether Ghost Protocol or Rogue Nation was the series’ best up to that point was quite the legitimate debate. But the biggest thing to come from Rogue Nation’s success was that McQuarrie ultimately ended up becoming the first director who was brought back to helm another Mission Impossible film. And thus, here we are now with the sixth installment of this premier action franchise, Mission Impossible – Fallout. With McQuarrie back behind the camera along with Cruise and the other returning cast members from past installments, things are certainly looking up for a series that has gotten better with each new film. Sure enough, Fallout may just be the series’ greatest outing to date thanks to its thrilling action set-pieces and McQuarrie’s phenomenal direction.

It has been two years since IMF agent Ethan Hunt (Tom Cruise) and his team successfully managed to capture Solomon Lane (Sean Harris), the ruthless leader of a rogue terrorist group known as ‘the Syndicate’. Since then, the surviving members of the Syndicate have formed a new faction known as ‘the Apostles’ led by a mysterious fundamentalist named John Lark. And to make matters worse, Ethan and his team end up botching a mission in Berlin, resulting in the Apostles acquiring three plutonium cores that they plan on using to further their plans to disrupt the current World Order. Thus, to prevent the devastating results of a potential nuclear attack, IMF secretary Alan Hunley (Alec Baldwin) sends Ethan to Paris to hunt down Lark, where he’s set to collect the cores from an arms dealer known as the ‘White Widow’ (Vanessa Kirby). And due to Ethan’s misstep in Berlin, he is also put under the watch of the CIA, specifically director Erica Sloane (Angela Bassett) and her top field agent August Walker (Henry Cavill), the latter of whom joins along on the mission to ensure that Ethan and his team can get the job done. But as the mission goes on, Ethan soon finds himself forced to go down quite a few dark roads, one of which even involves him having to assist the Apostles in breaking Solomon Lane out of custody. And if that wasn’t enough, Ethan’s actions soon lead to Walker beginning to suspect that he is really John Lark, putting more pressure on Ethan to figure out Lark’s identity.

With a subtitle like Fallout, one could only imagine how effective this film is in creating tension. While the series has always done a nice job when it comes to handling this aspect, it’s arguably at its finest here because of how truly high the stakes end up being. Sure enough, this is only strengthened further by the film’s amazing action sequences. Not only are they shot and edited perfectly, but they’re even more visually stunning when viewed in IMAX, continuing the franchise’s trend of utilizing the format to great effect ever since Brad Bird got the ball rolling with Ghost Protocol (sadly, I never got around to seeing Rogue Nation in IMAX). It all culminates in the film’s epic finale, which is quite arguably one of the most intense finales in recent cinematic history given the grand scale of the stunts involved (which, of course, are done practically by Tom Cruise himself, headlined this time by him piloting a helicopter by himself), and the consequences of what would happen if Ethan and his team fail. Simply put, arguably this film’s biggest strength is how finely tuned it is in almost every aspect of its production, resulting in what is truly a beast of an action film. And the same could be said for Rogue Nation as well, meaning that as far as Christopher McQuarrie’s contributions to this franchise are concerned, he’s given us some of the sharpest writing and most kinetic action set-pieces that we’ve ever seen from it. This also extends nicely to the film’s collection of layered characters.

As I’ve stated before, one of the reasons why Ghost Protocol was such a game-changer for the franchise was because it was the first entry in the series to truly capture one of the definitive aspects of its source material, its team dynamic. In other words, whereas the previous three films were directly focused on Ethan Hunt, Ghost Protocol was the first to ensure that his teammates were just as well-developed as he was. As such, the only thing that held Rogue Nation back was that it somewhat reversed course from this; granted, it’s not like there wasn’t any of it in the film to begin with, but it also kept half of the team away from the action for about half the runtime. With Fallout, though, I’m pleased to say that it goes about this more like Ghost Protocol. Sure, Ethan Hunt is still the main character as always (in fact, this film gives Tom Cruise some of the best bits of character development that he’s ever gotten from this franchise), but McQuarrie also does an excellent job of giving his teammates quality amounts of screen-time by comparison. Rebecca Ferguson shines once again as the enigmatic Ilsa Faust (AKA the series’ best female protagonist by far) while Simon Pegg and Ving Rhames once again provide reliable support as Benji Dunn and Luther Stickell, respectively. And as for the villains, Sean Harris continues to be intimidating as all hell as the soft-spoken madman Solomon Lane. Finally, with the newcomers to this franchise, the biggest standout of them all is easily Henry Cavill. Not only does Cavill prove to be just as dedicated as Cruise is when it comes to doing the action sequences, but Walker also ends up being quite the excellent foil to Ethan Hunt given their roles in the story.

When Rogue Nation came out, I was part of the crowd that still preferred Ghost Protocol even through the former was practically almost just as good by comparison. In other words, while Rogue Nation does feature a superior villain, Ghost Protocol was better at balancing its main characters. But as for Fallout, this time I’ll fully admit that I’m siding with the consensus this time when I say that this is the best installment yet of the Mission Impossible franchise. And for those keeping track, yes, we’re talking about the sixth installment of what is currently one of the longest-running film franchises in recent memory. Simply put, this is one of those franchises that has genuinely managed to improve itself with each new installment. With Rogue Nation, writer/director Christopher McQuarrie produced some of the series’ most dynamic action sequences to date, and with Fallout, he somehow manages to refine them even more. The result is a true action spectacle that once again highlights why Tom Cruise is one of the definitive stars of the film industry. Like in every other installment of this series, it’s really him doing all the big stunts, and this series doesn’t shy away from upping the scale of them with each new installment (and yes, that’s even after Rogue Nation literally had him hanging off the side of a plane). And through it all, Cruise is backed by a phenomenal supporting cast who benefit greatly from this film’s excellent handling of the series’ iconic team dynamic. In short, this is a must-see in theaters, especially if you’re able to see it on the biggest screens possible, IMAX. Simply put, this is up there with the likes of its predecessor Ghost Protocol (plus Rogue Nation, I’m sure…), The Walk, and many of Christopher Nolan’s recent films as one of the prime examples of why IMAX is truly one of the best ways to see a film in our current age of cinema.

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…)

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 Man from U.N.C.L.E. (2015) review

2015 has been a banner year for the spy genre and what’s even more impressive is the fact that all of the major spy films that have been released this year are all very much different in regards to execution. The year kicked off with ‘Kingsman: The Secret Service’, which embraced the campier/over-the-top atmosphere of the genre that had been abandoned in recent years. Then in June there was ‘Spy’, a comedic flick that was surprisingly well-shot for a film of that genre. And just a few weeks ago, the ‘Mission Impossible’ franchise returned with a bang with yet another excellent installment in the form of ‘Rogue Nation’. Of course we have the next Bond film, ‘Spectre’, coming out later this year but for now we come to the latest 2015 spy flick, ‘The Man from U.N.C.L.E.’. Like ‘Kingsman’, it harkens back to the old-school era of the genre. In fact, this is actually based off of a TV series of the same name which ran from 1964 to 1968 on NBC and starred Robert Vaughn and David McCallum as American agent Napoleon Solo and Russian agent Illya Kuryakin, respectively, polar opposites who find themselves working together as part of the international espionage organization known as the United Network Command for Law and Enforcement (U.N.C.L.E.). Henry Cavill and Armie Hammer take on these famous roles in director Guy Ritchie’s modern-day adaptation. And while the film may ultimately lack the depth of the other spy films we’ve seen this year, it still manages to be a pretty darn entertaining action flick, mainly due to Ritchie’s talents as a visual director.

In the midst of the Cold War in 1963, CIA agent Napoleon Solo (Henry Cavill) helps German mechanic Gabby Teller (Alicia Vikander) escape from East Berlin in order to get her to help him and his superiors track down her father, a Nazi scientist who had recently been working for the U.S. government. But during their escape, they find themselves being pursued by KGB agent Illya Kuryakin (Armie Hammer), who they barely manage to get away from. The following day, Solo and Kuryakin suddenly find themselves being paired together by their superiors in a joint venture in order to investigate the owners of an Italian shipping company for whom Gabby’s uncle Rudi (Sylvester Groth) works for, Alexander (Luca Calvani) and Victoria (Elizabeth Debicki) Vinciguerra, a couple with ties to former Nazis who are using Gabby’s father to build them an atomic bomb. Despite their obvious contempt for one another, as well as the fact that they’re each given private instructions by their respective superiors to steal a vital piece of computer data for their governments and kill their partner if necessary, Solo and Kuryakin are forced to work together with the help of Gabby, who poses as Kuryakin’s fiancé, in order to prevent the Vinciguerras from getting the chance to use their nuke.

The film’s visuals are easily its biggest strength. Obviously the film’s production design is excellent in its period style, very much capturing the look and feel of the spy films of the 60’s just like how ‘Kingsman’ did a great job in harkening back to the more over-the-top tone and plotting of those films. Compared to some of the other spy films this year, this film is much simpler as far as the action sequences are concerned. In other words, you won’t be seeing anyone hang onto the side of a plane as it takes off from a runway or an all-out brawl break out inside a church. But Guy Ritchie more than makes up for that with his solid direction. The film moves at a solidly energetic pace and never drags at any point. Ritchie’s knack for visual flair also translates into the action sequences. Slick and kinetic, well-paired with a pulsating score by up-and-coming composer Daniel Pemberton, and from what I can tell mostly practical with both Cavill and Hammer doing a lot of their own stunts, these action sequences more than do their job in regards to thrilling the audience and for the most part make up for some of the film’s shortcomings as far as the writing is concerned.

Because admittedly, this film is sort of a major case of style over substance. In this case I’m not saying that this is a bad thing but it does mean that the film doesn’t have as much depth as something like ‘Kingsman’ or ‘Mission Impossible’. Each of the main characters get only very simple beats of character development (e.g. Solo’s criminal past, Kuryakin’s family history) and overall the story is generally straight-forward, not really pulling any major fast ones on us in terms of twists. But even with that said, the film definitely benefits from having an excellent ensemble cast. While Solo and Kuryakin spend most of their time bickering with each other, Henry Cavill and Armie Hammer have excellent camaraderie and the scenes of them going back and forth with each other are definitely one of the film’s major highlights. Both of them also prove to be very charming leads, with Cavill in particular showcasing off charm that would’ve made him a pretty damn good James Bond. Their leading ladies are even bigger standouts with both Alicia Vikander, in the midst of a breakout year having already garnered much acclaim for her performance in this year’s ‘Ex-Machina’, and Elizabeth Debicki, following her breakout turn as Jordan Baker in Baz Luhrmann’s ‘The Great Gatsby’, evoking classic Bond girls and femme fatales, respectively, with their performances. The film also features noteworthy cameos by Jared Harris as Solo’s CIA handler and Hugh Grant as Waverly who, minor spoilers for those who haven’t seen the show, becomes the head of U.N.C.L.E.

Unfortunately, it looks like this film is going to become one of the summer’s under-performers at the box-office, having only grossed $13 million during its opening weekend. It may not have been made on the type of budget that we see for superhero films nowadays, but that’s still not a solid number for a film that was made on a budget of around $75 million. And that’s sad because this film is pretty damn entertaining and is a prime example of pure film escapism. Sure it may also be a major example of a film that is style over substance but Ritchie’s style is so good that I can ignore that for the most part. The film is a fun thrill-ride from beginning to end thanks to its exciting action sequences and its solid cast, headlined by the charming trio of Henry Cavill, Armie Hammer, and Alicia Vikander. Like ‘Mission: Impossible’, I’ll admit that I went into this without having seen any episodes of the TV show that it is based on but having now seen it, I’m now encouraged to check out the show in the future. Obviously because of this, I can’t really say anything about how much this film stays true to its source material, and for the record this is basically a prequel to the TV series, but I will say that I had a lot of fun watching this film and if you’re looking for a nice simple spy action-adventure flick, then I think you’ll like this film as well.     

Rating: 3.5/5