Cats (2019) review

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

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

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

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

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

Rating: 1.5/5

Beauty and the Beast (2017) review

Disney’s been on a roll as of late with their live-action reimaginings of their classic animated films. Granted, this current trend of theirs isn't going over well with ‘everybody’, as I pointed out last time, but, for the most part, films like Cinderella and The Jungle Book have been major successes on both a critical and commercial level instead of just on a commercial one as was initially the case with these films. And for their latest endeavor on this front, Disney revives one of its most beloved stories for a new generation; Beauty and the Beast. The studio’s original animated take on the classic fairytale of the same name from 1756 was the second smash hit of the ‘Disney Renaissance’ era when it was released in 1991. In fact, it was so universally adored that it ended up being the first animated film ever to be nominated for Best Picture at the Academy Awards, a feat that has only been accomplished 2 other times since then by, fittingly enough, a pair of Pixar films; 2009’s Up and 2010’s Toy Story 3, which, of course, were released under the Disney banner. So, yeah, one could say that there was a lot of pressure on this new take on the ‘Tale as Old as Time’, directed by Bill Condon, who's no stranger to musicals having written the screenplay for 2002’s Best Picture winner, Chicago (not to mention directing 2006’s Dreamgirls, which won 2 Oscars), and features an all-star ensemble cast. After all, we’re talking about one of the most famous Disney stories of all time, meaning that this new film has a hell of a lot to live up to. Thankfully, Condon does do justice to this beloved masterpiece of a story with a highly enjoyable new take on Beauty and the Beast that respects its predecessor without being a direct carbon copy of it.

In a quaint little town in France, a young woman named Belle (Emma Watson) is a complete mystery to the rest of the people living there. Never once conforming to the expectations that life tries to set upon her, Belle spends most of her days reading, inventing things, and ignoring the advances of the town’s popular but egotistical local hunter, Gaston (Luke Evans), while also hoping to someday leave the confines of her ‘poor, provincial’ town. That day ends up coming sooner than anticipated when she goes to rescue her father Maurice (Kevin Kline), who had been taken prisoner by a monstrous Beast (Dan Stevens) that resides within a forgotten castle not far from town. To save her father, Belle ends up taking his place as the Beast’s prisoner. But, soon after, she begins to learn the big secret behind the castle and, more importantly, its mysterious owner. As it turns out, years ago, the Beast was a selfish and vain human prince who was cursed by an Enchantress after he had rejected her pleas for shelter. Turning him into a Beast, as well as turning his servants into enchanted household objects, she puts the Prince under the pressure of having to find true love in time before the last petal of the red rose that she initially offered him falls. And, thus, as Belle begins to become more and more accepted by the Beast and his servants, she does begin to fall in love with him, which soon causes problems once Gaston learns of the situation.

Now, admittedly, as far as Disney’s remakes go, this is more like Cinderella than The Jungle Book. By that, I mean that you shouldn't go into this expecting a lot of differences between this new version and the original. It's the same exact story with the same primary plot points. So, with that said, I know what some of you will inevitably say; “Why the hell remake a masterpiece then?” But I'm going to ignore that debate for now because, to me, it all comes down to execution, and I'm pleased to say that this film is very well-made in every possible way. Sure, it's still the same story as the original but I'd say that there are just enough new elements in here, as minor as some may be, that help differentiate it from the original (e.g. a new plotline that reveals why Maurice and Belle stayed in their provincial town for all these years). Visually, this film is a top contender for next year’s Oscar for Best Visual Effects, Production Design, and basically every other major technical award at that ceremony. Yes, a lot of the visuals in this are CG but they are done excellently. And as for the songs, well, what more needs to be said about them? They're the classic songs written by Alan Menken, Howard Ashman, and Tim Rice and are all handled brilliantly in live-action. You'll be tapping your foot along to the beat of ‘Gaston’, marvel at the grandeur of ‘Be Our Guest’, and awe at the beauty (no pun intended) of the title song, ‘Beauty and the Beast’. There's also some great new songs as well, including the sweet recurring melody ‘How Does a Moment Last Forever’, which is sung three times in the film (this includes the end-credits version sung by Celine Dion who, of course, sung the title song during the end credits of the animated film) and the Beast’s new big solo, ‘Evermore’.

One of the best things about the film, though, is its ensemble cast. Because, damn, does this film have one of the most impressive ensembles in recent history. Of course, it's all led by Emma Watson, who does a phenomenal job in the role of Belle. Simply put, she does justice to one of Disney’s most beloved heroines while also doing just enough to provide some nice little updates to the character here and there without ever going against everything that made her great in the first place. And I know that she’s gotten some flak for her vocal performance during the musical numbers but I thought she was fine in that department. Dan Stevens is also fantastic as the Beast, perfectly conveying everything that goes into the character's great redemption arc. As for the villains of the film, both Luke Evans and Josh Gad are clearly having a lot of fun in the roles of Gaston and LeFou, respectively. They ham it up in the best way possible, as Evans perfectly encapsulates our favorite manly but shallow villain while Gad brings new depth to the role of Gaston’s loyal lackey. Kevin Kline is great as well in the role of Maurice, as he portrays the character in a much more toned down manner compared to the original that fits very well with the new plotline that shows why he’s been so protective of Belle all this time. And of course, we can't forget about the Beast’s servants and man did they get a great cast for these iconic supporting roles; Ewan McGregor as Lumière, Ian McKellen as Cogsworth, Emma Thompson as Mrs. Potts, Gugu Mbatha-Raw as Plumette (Fifi in the original film), Audra McDonald as Madame de Garderobe the Wardrobe, and Stanley Tucci as new character Maestro Cadenza the Harpsichord.

And thus, Disney is now 4 for 4 with their recent live-action remakes. I mean, admittedly I don't think I can go as far as to say that it's the ‘best’ of these remakes but I can tell you one thing; it's a hell of a lot better than its current 71% score on Rotten Tomatoes suggests. Thankfully, that's still considered a ‘fresh’ rating but I have the feeling that some of the more negative reviews that the film has been getting have been a lot more stringent on comparisons between the two versions of this story. Like I said before, I can see why this is happening. Because this one is arguably the closest to its animated counterpart out of all the Disney remakes released to date, the word ‘unnecessary’ has undeniably been thrown around a lot. Maybe it is… but I don't care. I love the original (it is, after all, my 3^rd favorite Disney animated film of all-time) but I also love this new take on it, as its heart is very much in the right place. Plus, it is a genuinely well-made film in terms of its production design and visuals, not to mention having a fantastic ensemble cast to portray this story’s collection of iconic roles. Simply put, it's just an incredibly satisfying ‘feel good’ film and in this current time, this is exactly the kind of film that we need right now. Just ignore all the negativity in the world for a few hours (especially the negativity directed towards a certain element of this film; more on that in a bit) and enjoy a charming new take on a classic that we all know and love. On that note, to those who aren't big on these Disney remakes, don't worry, for the original animated film is still as perfect as it ever was. This new version is ultimately just like the remakes of Cinderella, The Jungle Book, and Pete’s Dragon; it's a nice complement to the original source.

Rating: 5/5!

(P.S. Well, I should probably address the big controversy surrounding this film because… oh boy. So, as many of you are aware, the film has been getting some flak recently from some audiences after an announcement that stated that it would have Disney’s first ‘exclusively gay’ moment involving the character of LeFou. Because of this, there's been quite a bit of heavy blowback from various parties; some countries banned the film unless cuts were made, a theater in Alabama refused to show it, and in Russia, it was given an adult rating. Yes, in Russia, this film is considered nearly as mature as, say, Logan. To all this, I say… this is one of the stupidest and most overblown controversies in recent memory. This moment that everyone keeps talking about is just one SMALL moment at the end of the film. Heck, if it hadn't been pointed out beforehand, I bet most of us wouldn't have even noticed it because the film’s quite subtle about it. Bottom line, Disney isn't trying to force an LGBT agenda down our throats; they're just trying to represent a wider audience. What the hell is wrong with that? Also, this backlash totally goes against the great positive messages of this film, namely, you know, accepting people for who they really are on the inside. So, yeah… this backlash is frigging stupid.)

The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies (2014) review

This may be a controversial statement in the minds of some people given the general reaction to this series, but I’ve been a fairly big fan of the ‘Hobbit’ movies. Do I think they’re as good as director Peter Jackson’s previous Middle-Earth trilogy, ‘The Lord of the Rings’? No, not really, but I do think that they’re better than what many people have put them out to be. Of course, the controversy surrounding this adaptation of the classic story of the same name from author J.R.R. Tolkien has mostly stemmed from the decision to split the book into three separate films which many felt was very unnecessary given that the book is only about 300 pages long whereas the ‘Lord of the Rings’ trilogy was based on three separate 300 page books. And sure, some of the problems that would’ve clearly emerged from padding the story out to three films have been present in the previous two films, such as a rather slow pace to start out the story in ‘An Unexpected Journey’ and sometimes feeling rather stuffed as far as characters and plotlines are concerned like in ‘The Desolation of Smaug’. Still, I do feel that these films have maintained the same great atmosphere and sense of adventure that ‘Lord of the Rings’ had, so much so that I can generally ignore a lot of the ‘downfalls’ of the previous two films. But now, the story of ‘The Hobbit’ finally comes to a close on film with ‘The Battle of the Five Armies’ and after seeing this final film, I can safely say that it is without a doubt the best film in the entire trilogy.

At the end of ‘The Desolation of Smaug’, Thorin Oakenshield (Richard Armitage) and his company of Dwarves, with the help of hobbit Bilbo Baggins (Martin Freeman) and wizard Gandalf the Grey (Ian McKellen), had finally reached their homeland of Erebor within the Lonely Mountain, which had been stolen from them years earlier by the vicious dragon Smaug (portrayed through motion-capture by Benedict Cumberbatch). The group tries to kill Smaug by burying him alive in molten gold but that plan ends up failing and Smaug escapes from the mountain in order to enact his revenge on the people of the nearby Lake-town for assisting the Dwarves in their quest while Bilbo and the Dwarves can only watch from afar. As ‘The Battle of the Five Armies’ begins, Smaug begins his attack on Lake-town and while he is ultimately defeated by bowman Bard (Luke Evans, and for the record don’t worry folks this is not a spoiler as it’s literally the opening sequence of the film), who manages to hit him with a powerful black arrow in the one weak spot in his armor, most of the town is effectively destroyed, leaving the surviving residents of Lake-town homeless.

After the surviving residents of the town elect him as their new leader, Bard travels to the Lonely Mountain to talk with Thorin about him and his company holding up their part of the deal that he had made with the people of Lake-town before they had left for the mountain; that they would give them a part of the Mountain’s vast collection of treasure, which would be really helpful for Bard’s group at the moment given the situation that they’re currently in. But Thorin, who has begun to fall to the same ‘sickness of greed’ that had affected his grandfather in the years before Smaug’s initial attack on the Lonely Mountain as he desperately searches for his family’s heir-loom, the Arkenstone (which unbeknownst to him has already been found by Bilbo, who has been hiding it from him due to his change in attitude), refuses to give up any of the gold. As a result, Bard forges an alliance with the Wood-Elves of Mirkwood, led by their king Thranduil (Lee Pace), who is also looking for a part of the Dwarves’ treasure, as they plan an assault on the Lonely Mountain while Thorin’s group prepares for this impending attack. But little do they all know that some other armies are on their way to the Lonely Mountain to seek control of it for their master, who of course was revealed at the end of ‘Desolation’ to be the Dark Lord himself, Sauron (also portrayed by Cumberbatch through motion-capture).

As many of you may have guessed from the film’s title, this is clearly the entry in the ‘Hobbit’ film series where the most action in the story occurs, which is perfectly summed up by the fact that the titular ‘Battle of the Five Armies’ is a 45-minute long sequence and boy is it quite a sequence (and no, I don’t care if this was just one chapter in the book… I’ll get into the whole ‘three films’ thing later on). As far as scale and scope is concerned this is easily the biggest out of all of Jackson’s Middle-Earth films and it truly delivers on the spectacle with some of the best action sequences of the entire series (even when counting what we saw in ‘Lord of the Rings’). But at the same time, the film still holds your attention from beginning to end thanks to solid pacing, meaning the film never really drags at any point. As the final film in this epic story, you can really see how everything has been building up to what happens in this film and in some cases how this trilogy will ultimately lead into ‘Lord of the Rings’. Having only seen those films once, I can’t really say how effectively ‘Battle of the Five Armies’ leads into the previous trilogy as a whole but from the perspective of a general newcomer to the world of Middle-Earth as it has been portrayed in film, to me it seems that it did do a pretty good job in paving the way to its successor trilogy with key references to ‘Lord of the Rings’ showing how things became the way they were. This is a prequel, after all.

But amidst all of the action, Jackson still manages to find enough time for character development, particularly with Thorin and Bilbo. This film is easily Thorin’s story as we see his descent into madness as he obsesses over finding the Arkenstone, succumbing to the same sickness of the mind that his grandfather was stricken with as we saw from the prologue of ‘An Unexpected Journey’. It’s a fascinating look into the psyche of this character who’ve we been with since the beginning of the trilogy and Richard Armitage is easily the biggest standout of this entry in the trilogy. But of course, as it has always been since the first ‘Lord of the Rings’ film all the way back in 2001, the cast is pitch-perfect from top to bottom. Martin Freeman provides a great amount of wit, charm, and also an everyman-like persona in the role of Bilbo, Ian McKellen is his usual badass self in the role of the equally badass wizard Gandalf the Grey, and while only a few of the members of the company of Dwarves, not counting Thorin (e.g. Fili, Kili, Dwalin, and Balin), get any major material to work with, they have a great sense of camaraderie amongst them. That’s been the case since the first film so in the scene where Thorin asks them if they will follow him ‘one last time’, you too are with them because you really felt that you were along for the ride with them. There may be a few characters from ‘Lord of the Rings’ featured here that may not have been in the original book, like Galadriel (Cate Blanchett) and Legolas (Orlando Bloom), but they are a welcome addition here, helping these films feel even more like a crucial part of Jackson’s Middle-Earth universe.

In 2001, Peter Jackson, who at that point was mostly known for splatter films and horror comedies, began a journey into the fictional land of Middle-Earth with ‘The Lord of the Rings’, a trilogy of films that became some of the most highly regarded films of the last few years. A decade later, he returned to Middle-Earth for another trilogy, this time based on the prequel to ‘Lord of the Rings’, ‘The Hobbit’. Some may argue that this second trip to Middle-Earth wasn’t as good as the first one due to the fact that they expanded a rather small book into three big films and in some cases that may be true. But thanks to great direction, a great cast, great visuals, and overall a great atmosphere, I do feel that the same magic that ‘Lord of the Rings’ had is once again present in ‘The Hobbit’, once again showing why Jackson was the perfect man to helm all of these Middle-Earth movies. That is again shown in the final ‘Hobbit’ film, ‘The Battle of the Five Armies’, which is easily the best film in the entire trilogy. Everything has been building up to this finale and it truly delivers in terms of the payoff and the overall spectacle as it is arguably the biggest Middle-Earth movie to date. At this point, it seems like this is the last film for Jackson and his crew in the world of Middle-Earth. Some may feel that this is a good thing given the more mixed reactions to ‘The Hobbit’ compared to ‘Lord of the Rings’, but me personally I’d like to say this to Mr. Jackson; thank you, thank you, thank you for all of the work that you’ve put into your six Middle-Earth movies. It was truly a once-in-a-lifetime cinematic experience that we may never experience again.

Rating: 5/5!

REVIEW EPILOGUE

(Because hey, if Peter Jackson can have multiple endings in ‘Return of the King’, I can have an extra ending to my review of the final ‘Hobbit’ film).

Now before I go, I’m just going to give my final thoughts on the one crucial point of debate in regards to this series ever since the fateful decision to split the story into three films; at the end of the day, was it a good idea? For some people, it wasn’t and I’ll admit that when it was first announced, I too was rather hesitant about it. But now, after seeing all three ‘Hobbit’ movies, I am now actually in full support of this decision, for a few reasons. The big reason why many felt that doing a trilogy of films was a bad idea was that ‘The Hobbit’ is only a 300-page book. However, ‘The Hobbit’ is not as simple a story as some may claim it to be. A lot of things do happen in the story; the characters are introduced, they go off on their journey, they encounter various obstacles along the way, Bilbo acquires ‘the Ring’, they reach Erebor, they face off with Smaug, Smaug escapes, attacks Lake-town, and is killed by Bard, and then multiple armies duke it out over control of the Lonely Mountain before Bilbo finally returns home to the Shire. And that isn’t even all of what happens in this story. Simply put, it can’t really be done in just one film. I know that some people feel that this should’ve been the case with these films but you know what would happen if we just had one ‘Hobbit’ film? Then we’d all be here complaining about how that one film rushed through the entire story. Sure, maybe it could’ve been done in just two movies (that was the original plan, after all) but as for me I’m glad that they didn’t just cram the ‘Battle of Five Armies’ into the second film like I heard some reports claim that it was going to be.

And besides, if anyone was worried about this story being padded out into three three-hour long movies like the ‘Lord of the Rings’ movies were, that wasn’t the case at all. Because while the ‘Lord of the Rings’ movies got longer with each new film, it was the other way around with ‘The Hobbit’ as the films continued to get shorter and shorter, with ‘Battle of the Five Armies’ being the shortest Middle-Earth movie of them all at only 144 minutes. But if the runtime wasn’t the issue for people, it was probably the fact that these movies were rather overloaded with characters and admittedly that is fairly true. There are a lot of characters in this story and while we are primarily following Bilbo and a company of 13 dwarves, only a few of them (not counting Thorin because he’s clearly the most important out of all of them) get any major bits of character development. But you know something? From what I hear, that was a problem in the book as well. In fact, in some cases the book is even more problematic in how it handles its characters, some of whom are barely in it, like Bard the Bowman. From what I hear, in the book he doesn’t appear until his big moment when he kills Smaug, so kudos to the filmmakers for actually giving him a much more substantial role in the film. And on that note I do like the addition of Tauriel in the movies, even if most of her role in the story revolves around her romance with Kili, mainly because it does add some much needed diversity to a pre-dominantly male cast (something that was the case in both ‘Middle-Earth’ trilogies).

In short, I feel that Peter Jackson and his crew were actually aware of the tricky situation they were in when adapting ‘The Hobbit’ to film. I think they knew that the book had some issues with pacing and character development so, as controversial as it may be for some people, I am in full support of the decision to split it up into three separate films. Because while ‘The Hobbit’ is technically a children’s book, it’s not as simple as people think it is. A lot of things do happen in the story so while many people might complain about these movies being over-long (which isn’t actually that much of a problem because they’ve been getting shorter with every film), I’d much rather spend nine hours in Middle-Earth getting to know these characters than just spending about three hours there not really getting to know them at all because the film would be going at an incredibly fast pace. And sure, not all of the characters get that much to do in these films, like most of the company of Dwarves, but while I haven’t read ‘The Hobbit’, from what I can tell the same problem occurs in the book as well and if anything, I think that Jackson should be applauded for expanding on certain characters’ roles in the story, like Bard the Bowman and Thranduil, and I also don’t mind the additions of Tauriel and other characters from ‘Lord of the Rings’ because in the case of the former, these films gain a solid female character in what is a pre-dominantly male cast and in the case of the latter, the appearances of characters like Legolas, Galadriel, and Saruman help this movie feel even more connected to the ‘Lord of the Rings’ films. I feel that Jackson actually did a really solid job at adapting a story that, like it or not, isn’t exactly perfect.

X-Men: Days of Future Past: SPOILER Post

WARNING!!!

The following post contains spoilers for the film ‘X-Men: Days of Future Past’. If you have not seen the film yet, please refer to my spoiler-free review of the film (link provided below) because I will be addressing key moments within the film. Continue at your own risk!

Spoiler-Free Review: (http://rimoviecorner.blogspot.com/2014/05/x-men-days-of-future-past-2014-review.html)

Like with pretty much every superhero film that comes out nowadays, there is quite a lot to talk about in regards to ‘X-Men: Days of Future Past’ that I just couldn’t talk about in a non-spoiler review… and I really mean it. Before I started writing this, I made a list of all of the points that I wanted to talk about in this post and there were at least 8 different elements of the film that I had listed that I wanted to talk about. So in that case, let’s not waste any time. Let’s delve further into what is no doubt the most anticipated film of the year for many people and why wouldn’t it be being that it’s an adaptation of an iconic ‘X-Men’ storyline, directed by the man who helmed the first two X-Men films (again like my previous review, I’m ignoring the allegations made against him because they don’t matter here), and stars a big ensemble cast of actors/actresses from both the original X-Men trilogy and the film ‘X-Men: First Class’ plus a few new additions as well. And at the end of the day, this film really delivers. Yes, ‘X-Men: Days of Future Past’ is not only one of the best X-Men films to date, possibly even the best, but easily one of the best films of this year so far.

So of course, this film features a big ensemble cast but at the end of the day, it mainly focuses on four characters; Wolverine, being that he’s the one who goes back in time to try and set things right, and the ‘First Class’ iterations of Professor X, Magneto, and Mystique. But the good thing here is that Wolverine doesn’t overshadow the other three which I’m aware is what some people were worried about and I can see why because Wolverine has basically been the main character of the film franchise since the beginning (he’s literally been in every film). Now, that’s not entirely a bad thing as Hugh Jackman has been fantastic in the role but in the original trilogy of films, he did overshadow some other members of the cast, most notably James Marsden as Cyclops. Here, his role in the film is handled very well while still serving as one of the main characters; Jackman of course is excellent again but he’s not the ‘main’ character in this film. Instead, he lets James McAvoy, Michael Fassbender, and Jennifer Lawrence lead the film. Plus, I have to say it is sort of funny how in a case like this where the X-Men of the future send someone back in time so that they can convince their younger selves to stop the dark future from happening, they end up sending the one member of the group who’s probably the least diplomatic out of all of them. Still, it fits well into the story considering that Wolverine, being the one who can heal himself, is the only one who could possibly survive going back many decades in time.

But of this cast, the biggest standout of the entire group would have to be James McAvoy as Xavier. In ‘X-Men: First Class’ the standout was easily Michael Fassbender as Magneto. Not only did he really channel Ian McKellen’s performance in the original X-Men trilogy through his own performance in that film, but it can be argued that ‘First Class’ was pretty much Magneto’s film as a lot of the story did revolve around him. Days of Future Past, on the other hand, is easily Xavier’s film. What I really love about both this film and ‘First Class’ is that this younger Xavier isn’t the Xavier from the original trilogy just yet. In ‘First Class’, he was a bit of a playboy before he ended up getting paralyzed and in ‘Days of Future Past’ it’s clear that everything that happened during the climax of the previous film has really hit him hard because he’s lost so much in the years since the whole Cuban Missile Crisis incident. He’s lost his best friend (Magneto), his foster sister (Mystique), and the use of his legs after a bullet deflected by Magneto ended up hitting him in his spine. However, in this film, we learn that because of a serum developed by Hank McCoy (Beast), he’s now able to walk again but he no longer has his telepathic powers. This, along with the closure of his school for gifted youngsters (partially due to the Vietnam War) has led to him giving up on his dream of humans and mutants living in harmony.

The writing for Xavier in this film is just fantastic as is McAvoy’s performance in the role. This Xavier has become a broken man after all that had happened to him in the previous film, meaning that he needs some guidance in order to get his life back on track and McAvoy perfectly captures the bitterness and frustration that the young Xavier is experiencing throughout this film. This film really shows the growth of Xavier as he slowly becomes the Xavier that we remembered from the previous trilogy. Speaking of which, let’s talk about that great scene between the Xavier of the past and the Xavier of the present/future (the latter of course being played by Patrick Stewart). This was just an excellent moment, mostly because the filmmakers weren’t trying to revel in the fact that they were able to get both Xaviers on screen together. It’s an effective character moment for the young Xavier as his future self inspires him to ‘hope again’ and this scene uses both the young and future Xaviers to great effect. Of course, as I said in my original review, Patrick Stewart and Ian McKellen are sort of just making cameos in this film, but regardless it was still great to see to these legends back in these roles once again. After all, this might actually be ‘the’ last time we’ll be seeing these two in these movies. We don’t know if that’s true yet, but if that ends up being the case, then I believe that they both went out on a very good note.

So while this movie is more focused on Xavier than Magneto this time, Michael Fassbender is of course excellent once again in the role. Heck, Magneto has his own qualms against Xavier for not being there to help him protect their fellow mutants. It’s revealed through some dialogue and some documents that Mystique comes across in Bolivar Trask’s office that pretty much every other mutant from ‘First Class’ aside from Xavier, Magneto, Mystique, Beast, and Havok (who makes a brief appearance in the scene where Mystique infiltrates a military camp in Vietnam) was killed, some of them through ‘Project Wideawake’, a military operation led by Trask, so this of course is keeping in line with Magneto’s views that humans are the enemy and this does help give a lot of contrast to his relationship with Xavier as he accuses him of failing their fellow mutants. Also excellent here is Jennifer Lawrence as Mystique; in fact, even better than in ‘First Class’. Here, we see her starting to become more like the Mystique from the original trilogy (as portrayed by Rebecca Romjin) in terms of her ‘cold-blooded killer’ nature. But at the same time, while her new outlook has certainly been influenced by her joining Magneto at the end of ‘First Class’, she’s still torn between the bitter views on humanity of Magneto and the compassionate/optimistic outlook on the future that Xavier has.

So seeing how this film mainly focuses on Wolverine, Xavier, Magneto, and Mystique, that means that most of the other members of the cast don’t get much to do by comparison. Probably the one who gets the most to do out of all of them is Nicholas Hoult as Beast (on that note, the makeup for him as Beast is much better here than it was in ‘First Class’) but even then he’s mainly just there to assist Xavier and Wolverine. As I said in the review, there’s also not really a definitive villain; Bolivar Trask is mostly just a side character. Still, that shouldn’t be held against this movie as Trask is in the film enough and of course Peter Dinklage is excellent as he usually is. Despite all of this, this is not that much of a problem because A.) The film does focus on the right characters, B.) Every member of the cast serves their purpose to the story well and C.) There actually isn’t any weak link in the cast. This is probably the first X-Men film where everyone in the cast is terrific. Unfortunately, some of the other X-Men movies, despite having really good casts, have each had their own ‘weak link’ in its cast, like January Jones in ‘X-Men: First Class’ or Svetlana Khodchenkova in ‘The Wolverine’. Here though, every member of the cast does a good job, even if some of them are only on screen for like a few minutes or so.

But an even greater aspect about this film in regards to its ensemble cast, which really help the action sequences in this movie stand out even more, is how it handles what can very much be referred to as the crucial dynamic of the ‘X-Men’ franchise; teamwork. Now most of the action sequences in this movie occur in the future and it is there where you really get to see the X-Men working together as a team. This whole team dynamic is done better here than in any of the other X-Men films that came before this one. And on that note, the action sequences in this film are terrific, especially the one at the end, which is easily the best climax out of any X-Men film as we cut back and forth between the past and the future as Wolverine, Xavier, and Beast look to stop Mystique and Magneto in 1973 while the X-Men of the future try to prevent the Sentinels from finding Kitty Pryde and Wolverine so that Kitty can keep Wolverine’s mind in the past long enough for him to complete his mission; otherwise, the future will stay the same and nothing will have been changed because of it. As noted before Wolverine goes back in time, this is pretty much the last chance they have in ending this war before it ever began so as a result, the final action sequence here is just fantastic in pretty much every aspect (pacing, cinematography, music, etc…).

Though easily one of the best moments in the entire film is the sequence with Quicksilver (Evan Peters) when he helps Wolverine, Xavier, and Beast break Magneto out of prison. You really have to feel bad for Peters considering all of the flak he got before this film came out. First, a lot of people were complaining about his character’s costume once it was first revealed and then he appeared in a Carl’s Jr ad which probably got even more negative attention, though I’ll admit that I’m not too certain as to why this ad in particular was ‘that bad’ (now the one with Mystique… that one I get but Quicksilver’s? Not really…). Of course, all of those complaints ultimately became pointless because the character was well-executed in the film. Peters really captures the character’s fun-loving but also occasionally pain in the ass personality and the scene where he’s running through the Pentagon preventing the guards from firing at Xavier, Magneto, and Wolverine is both fun and funny at the same time (he gives one guard a wedgie, he has another guard punch himself in the face, and this is all while he has headphones on and listening to Jim Croce’s ‘Time in a Bottle’… and that’s not even listing everything that happens during this scene). Heck, he even alludes to who his father may be when he mentions to Magneto that his mother ‘knew someone who could move metal (hint hint). It’s like the Hulk in ‘The Avengers’… Quicksilver’s not in the film that much but his scenes are so great that we’re left begging for more.

Now of course, one of the big things about this film is how it alters the timeline so much that certain events from ‘X-Men: The Last Stand’ and ‘X-Men Origins: Wolverine’ never occurred. In other words, the filmmakers were looking to fix the many problems that plagued both films in terms of the series’ timeline and in short, they do succeed here. In regards to erasing the events of ‘X3’, that occurs at the end of the film. After Wolverine returns to the future after his mission is over, he awakens back in Xavier’s school and finds that all of the other X-Men (including Storm, Beast, and Xavier) are all alive, and that also includes Jean Grey and Cyclops (both Famke Janssen and James Marsden reprise their roles here), who had both died in ‘The Last Stand’. As for ignoring ‘Origins’, that occurs at the very end of the film before the credits start rolling. Back in 1973, during the climax sequence in Washington, Magneto had impaled Wolverine with metal and thrown him into the Potomac River. He’s then recovered from the river by William Stryker (Josh Helman; on that note, the first scene between the two is very well-done as Wolverine initially starts to suffer some emotional turmoil when he (more specifically his future conscious) remembers what will happen between him and Stryker years later) who is then revealed to be Mystique in disguise. How this will affect Wolverine in the future is unclear but this can definitely be seen as an effort to negate the events of that film, just like the filmmakers had did just a few moments earlier in regards to ‘X3’.

Finally, let’s talk about the post-credits scene that is intended to set up the main villain for the next film; Apocalypse. Now, this scene is sort of similar to the post-credits scene with Thanos in ‘The Avengers’ in that you might have to read up on who this character is otherwise you might not realize who he is at first, though of course unlike ‘The Avengers’ it’s already been confirmed beforehand that the next film is going to be ‘X-Men: Apocalypse’ (set for a 2016 release) but one of my friends pointed out that the person featured in this post-credits scene doesn’t really look like Apocalypse from the comics (to quote him directly, he said that he looked like ‘some blue skinned 20 something in a robe’). Now, writer/producer Simon Kinberg has confirmed that an older actor will portray the character in the next film so we’ll just have to wait and see who will get cast in that role. Plus, comic book fans will no doubt note two things about this scene; that Apocalypse’s followers are calling him by his birth name (‘En Sabah Nur’) and that his servants, the Four Horsemen, are seen watching him from afar. And on that note, considering that Gambit is going to appear in the next film, maybe he’s one of them. Again, we’ll see how that turns out. 

X-Men: Days of Future Past (2014) review

(Note: Before I start this review, I want to address the recent controversy surrounding the recent allegations made against director Bryan Singer. True or not, these charges have no connection to this film whatsoever so it will in no way affect the following review.)

I’m fairly certain that, for quite a lot of people, ‘X-Men: Days of Future Past’ will be their most anticipated film of the year and there are quite a few reasons for why this is. It’s based on one of the most iconic storylines in the history of the X-Men comics, 1981’s ‘Days of Future Past’, written by Chris Claremont and John Byrne. Taking the director’s chair for this film is Bryan Singer, the same man who brought the film franchise to relevance in the first place with 2000’s ‘X-Men’ and 2003’s ‘X2: X-Men United’. It’s safe to say that when he left the franchise after that, the series began to go downhill with the extremely disappointing ‘X-Men: The Last Stand’ and the god-awful ‘X-Men Origins: Wolverine’. Thankfully, Singer returned (albeit only as a producer/co-writer) for 2011’s ‘X-Men: First Class’, which was certainly a return to form for the franchise. Heck, Wolverine even got a far superior solo film, ‘The Wolverine’, and the post-credits scene for that film set up what was to come for this film. Finally, because of this film taking place in different time periods, this film features one heck of an ensemble cast, probably the largest to date in the history of the franchise, consisting of members from both the original trilogy and the ‘First Class’ cast. But at the end of the day, will this film be able to live up to expectations? In two words… Hell yea!

In the year 2023, the mutant race is on the verge of extinction as a group of sentient robots known as Sentinels are in control, exterminating mutants left and right and they are even persecuting any humans who try to help them. In order to end this war in which the mutants are very much outnumbered, Professor Charles Xavier (Patrick Stewart) and Magneto (Ian McKellen) form a plan, with the help of Kitty Pryde (Ellen Page), who has the ability to send a person’s conscious back in time, to send Wolverine (Hugh Jackman) back in time to the year 1973 when the defining moment that led to the beginning of this war occurred; the assassination of Bolivar Trask (Peter Dinklage), the creator of the Sentinels, carried out by Mystique (Jennifer Lawrence). Once back in time, Wolverine finds the young Xavier (James McAvoy) and the young Magneto (Michael Fassbender) as he attempts to have them team up so that they can all stop this dark future from happening before it even begins. But this won’t be that easy, as there quite a bit of bad blood between the two following the whole Cuban Missile Crisis debacle in ‘First Class’.

Now while this is a very big ensemble cast, at the end of the day the film mainly focuses on four characters; Wolverine and the three main stars of the First Class cast; the young iterations of Xavier, Magneto, and Mystique (though thankfully, Wolverine doesn’t overshadow any of them here). As for the rest of the mutants featured in this film, they’re mostly just cameos, though some do get a decent amount of screen time like Beast (Nicholas Hoult) and Quicksilver (Evan Peters), the latter of which has one of the best sequences in the entire film. There’s also not really a definitive villain here; sure, Bolivar Trask does play a key part in the film’s overall story but he’s actually more of a side character here. So even though the bulk of this film’s ensemble cast isn’t given as much attention as the main characters, this film still does a great job at not only having quite the variety of mutants on display but by also really showing the ‘team’ aspect that defines this franchise as evident through a lot of the very well done action sequences. Also, if you’re still pissed about ‘X3’ and ‘Origins’, then don’t worry because this film basically says ‘screw you’ to those films in regards to what happens in this film and from what I can tell, that was the filmmakers’ main goal; to right the wrongs (mostly in regards to continuity problems) from those two films and they do succeed in doing so.

In ‘First Class’, the standout member of the cast was Michael Fassbender as Magneto, though James McAvoy did an equally terrific job as Xavier in that film. Here, McAvoy’s the big standout, not only because this is easily McAvoy’s best performance in the role to date (even though this is only his second film appearance in the franchise) but the writing for this character and the arc that he goes through in this movie is just fantastic, as he continues to grow into the Xavier that we know from the original trilogy (on that note, Patrick Stewart and Ian McKellen, like a lot of the other cast members in this film, are basically just doing cameos here but regardless of that, it’s really nice to see these two back). But of course, Fassbender is excellent once again as is Hugh Jackman (I’m not sure yet if this is his best performance in the role to date after his excellent turn in ‘The Wolverine’ but I’d say it’s definitely one of the best) and Jennifer Lawrence. In fact, the whole cast is great here; this is the first time in a while in regards to these movies where I can’t think of any ‘weak links’ in the cast (which unfortunately was the case with ‘First Class’ and ‘The Wolverine’, which both had one weak link in their casts).

Do you want to know how good this film was? It’s so good that I think that I’m actually becoming more of an X-Men fan than I had been before (I was a general fan of the movies but I haven’t read the comics or watched the 90’s TV series) because of it. This is definitely one of the finest X-Men films to date, if not the best. Not only does it erase the bad memories of ‘X-Men: The Last Stand’ and ‘X-Men Origins: Wolverine’ but in terms of its essence, this truly feels like an X-Men movie with plenty of mutant action and some excellent action sequences (this film also has the best climax in the entire franchise to date). I was hooked into this film almost immediately after it started and for what is certainly a lot of people’s most anticipated film of the year, this film really doesn’t disappoint. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again… thank god Bryan Singer returned to this franchise because it’s clear that he understands this franchise and now thanks to this film, the series’ chronology is far more consistent following the whole debacle of ‘X3’ and ‘Origins’ and hopefully he’ll stay for good this time as the series will continue on. It’s already been announced (and is briefly hinted at in this film’s post credits scene) what’s happening next.

Rating: 5/5!