Filmus Criticus: Justice League Doom (not a review, more like a rant)

Hey folks. I've been pretty busy lately, so I haven't had time to write any more proper reviews, but I thought that I can at least post something (that annoyed me) until I get back on track.

So I just saw JL:Doom - don't look at me like that! I grew up with this stuff, and it's amazing, nostalgia fuelled fun- and I have a few issues with some of the illogical crap in it.

(caveat: I know this is intended for a predominantly young audience, and I shouldn't go nit-picking every little thing, especially since it's based on comic book logic and there is a lot of poetic license; but some of this stuff would have been easily avoided and detracted (mostly) nothing from the story.)

Alright, so this is a list of annoying stuff that I saw during the movie (I was chatting with a friend after we both saw it and we decided to list all the absurdities that happened during the story):
(btw, full of SPOILERS)

1. At the beginning of the movie we see Batman obsessing about chasing down the tech that helped the Royal Flush Gang commit a robbery (actually he seemed pretty obsessed about the whole situation in general. I thought this was the start of some side-story about how Batman realizes his own limitations as being the only non-superpowered individual on the League and trying desperately to prove his worth, but nothing much ever comes from it. No big psychological analysis of the burden of being just one man among gods, or a touchy-feely conclusion of how everyone is special.

2. They mixed up Barry Allen with Wally West as the Flash. Wally is the funny, chatty, banter using Flash. Allen is the nerdy, awkward, moralizing and noble one. His entire back-and-forth with Mirror Master seemed out of place. Oh, and although there is one scene where we see him in this CSI clothes it doesn't really develop this aspect of his character. I get that the movie has a limited time frame for each character development, but if you're not gonna use it why did you bring it up?

3. Green lantern is always downplayed in Justice League stories. In this case he seemed both incompetent and unaware of his own powers. The kept going on and on about him having the most powerful weapon in the Universe, but apparently it doesn't come with any type of sensors or warning signals when the user is under attack by mind altering aerosolised toxins. I mean really? if the guy doesn't think of a construct the ring doesn't do anything? So when he's in space he is always thinking: FORCE FIELD SO I DON'T DIE! FORCE FIELD SO I DON'T DIE!

4. How come the villains don't kill anyone when they have the chance? (because it's a kids movie and bad things don't happen...)

5. What the hell was Alfred doing while groundskeeper Willy was bashing Batman's head in with his dad's headstone? Did he pick that exact time to go clean or do the laundry? Here's a thought: the person you have cared for his entire life just got the news that his parent's graves have been disturbed, how about you go with him to comfort the guy? Probably his shows were on at the time so he couldn't be bothered.

6. How did Bane get to the grave sites without anyone checking him? I say this because (although this keeps changing) I remember that Batman's parents, for some reason, are buried somewhere on Wayne Manor's surrounding land, just so that this kind of stuff doesn't happen. Maybe it was in a cemetery, I don't know, and no one tells us.

7. How did Savage know who Batman really is? Did I miss a scene or something, cause I never saw any evidence of this little (KEY) piece of information being explained. 

8. Add to that: what happens now that the bad guys know the secret identity of the members of the Justice League? Do they just hope they don't tell anyone? Do they just detain them indefinitely on the Watchtower and revoke their phone privileges? Or do they have the Martian Manhunter wipe their memories, and if so won't Batman have something to say about that (cough* that whole issue in Identity Crisis)?

9. Why didn't Flash just cut off his hand? If you have a bomb strapped to you, and it's not on a vital part of your body, then that body part is a liability and must go! I mean really, how worse would his life have been without that hand? (insert masturbation joke here). Oh, I know why, because that would have made sense, but since it's a kids movie bad things can't happen to nice guys...

10. Superman is an idiot. So in the comics and the series we see numerous times when Superman is just minding his own business, having a coffee or something, when all of a sudden he hears "Help me! Someone help!" from the other side of the planet and rushes off. From here we can infer that his special abilities work non-stop, without need for conscious control. But when he's hovering like a moron in front of the fake reported dude he doesn't seem to notice that the guy isn't exactly - how do I say this -  HUMAN! So, the fact that he doesn't Superman can't hear a heartbeat, or the blood rushing through his veins and arteries, or see sweat dripping from his face doesn't make him stop to think? How about you x-ray the guy to see if he doesn't have a weapon or a bomb strapped to him?

11. Superman is an idiot v2. So I don't know if Superman is faster than a speeding bullet, I have just never, ever, heard that exact comparison being made, ever, anywhere, not even in an opening title of a series or something... But, let’s assume he is, and even if he can't dodge or catch a a bullet from 1m in front of him, I'm pretty sure he can move faster than a guy/machine aiming a gun at him and shooting.

12. Martian Manhunter doesn't know chemistry. I don't know much about chemistry either, so I may be wrong on this, but if you're on fire, and water seems to be doing dick all to help, how about you decide to fly into the vacuum of space and see if that helps? Maybe removing the three components of fire may help your situation.

13. Einstein hates Superman. (MAJOR SPOILERS HERE) So there is this scene that I have to describe so that you get how dumb and nonsensical it is. There is this missile that is supposed to make an electromagnetic trail that leads form Earth to the Sun. When the missile reaches the Sun it will explode, creating a solar flare which will travel "at the speed of light" back to Earth kill people and stuff. Ok, so the missile launches, Superman follows and tries to stop it but fails. The missile manages to make it, it goes boom, and the solar flare starts. Superman gets back to Earth and warns everyone that the flare is coming and the have about 7min before it gets there (note: the distance from the Earth to the Sun means that an object moving at the speed of light will take 7min to make the journey). Ok, that cool, but how did Superman back to Earth before the flare?.... If the flare is traveling at light speed, but Superman arrived long before it (apparently instantly), then Superman is faster than the speed of light... (Superman 1, E=mc2 0).

14. Super Missile is super. I have a buddy who is an engineer, and I told him about the missile to the Sun thing, and he said that to his knowledge there is no material that you can make a missile out of so that it does not melt or disintegrate when it gets that close to the Sun. So what the heck is the missile made of? (probably Nth metal or some other thing that we are supposed to infer without being given any information). And second, how did the missile get to the Sun so fast? Is it also traveling using Superman propulsion mechanics? And didn't we just cover that Superman is the fastest being in the whole of Universe? Is the missile faster, or is Superman selectively forgetful of his speed?

15. Green Lantern can fly like 10 times the speed of light (by my comic book estimates/guess work). So the whole things in #14 and #15 make even less sense.

16. How was Superman talking while in space? I thought he held his breath in space, now apparently there is oxygen in space (maybe that's why MM didn't fly out of the atmosphere).

Ok, that's what I have so far. I'm sure there are more, but I'm not all that interested in finding them. I watched "And then there were none" just before this movie and I was in detective/logic mode.
I'm leaving the comment box open to all, so feel free to add your own or discuss mine, just don't expect me to care all that much.
Rant over.

Filmus Criticus: X-Men: First Class

This was not the soaring success I had hoped it would be. Although, in comparison to previous X-films this does rank at the top, but it is far from the way an X-men movie could be. The movie seems to be divided into three parts which appear to be separate movies entirely, with "part three" being by far the best one (and probably the reason you went to see the movie).

The plot itself was not terrible, although the trailer pretty much gives everything away. It does offer a completely different feel than any of the previous X-men movies, and after the Wolverine fiasco this is a refreshing reboot. The costume designs were the best I have see so far, they were colourfull, matched the more vibrant tone of the visuals and were more faithful to the ones in the comics, (I loved the fact that they used an almost identical helmet to the one Magneto uses in the comic books). The visuals were acceptable but at times did not fit the theme of the movie, either being underwhelming or Michael Bay-esc. The fight scenes were highly entertaining, especially Azazel’s cover strike scene, and every scene where Magneto was doing something. I would have liked it if the roster had a few more flashy, heavy hitters, or at least have Darwin do more impressive transformations than what he got to do.

A strong criticism that I have for the movie is that a significant proportion of the cast did not reproduce the personalities of the characters they were meant to portray in a very successful manner, nor did they offer an alternative interpretation better suited for the movie. Some of the issues could have been avoided by trying less to physically match the characters, like Emma Frost/January Jones, to their X-men Universe counterparts and attempt to find someone that is better suited to play the part. 

January Jones simply did not have that femme fatale air about her or the sophistication that some might have expected from her character, and it was difficult to take her role seriously as it was reduced to a blonde playboy bunny used solely for exposition and eye candy; they should have went for a more Basic Instinct Sharon Stone than the bitchy Elvira they ended up with. (I had a similar issue with Scarlett Johansson as Black Widow).

Bacon’s portrayal of Sebastian Shaw while highly entertaining, and at times quite brilliant, was not as dramatic and grandiose as he should have been. If they decided to use him as the main villain they should have at least given him a few decent monologues typical of a megalomaniacal super-villain; instead we pretty much uncovered the motivation for his plans from a few scattered and vaguely connected scenes.

Fassbender did a splendid job portraying both the troubled yet focused and opinionated Erik Lehnsherr, as well as a rising Magneto. The dynamic between him and Xavier was well constructed, but at times lacked the gravitas that one would have expected from two of the most important (future) leaders of mutant kind. I get that the movie wanted to keep the focus on who they were before they became Prof.X and Magneto, but this resulted in the in-movie transitions being to sudden and feeling rushed. McAvoy was a very convincing Xavier (although at times a bit over the top) and cannot be criticised for his acting, especially since he seemed to be the glue that held the plot together, so he had his work cut out for him from the start.

While I may sound highly critical of this movie it should not be interpreted as me giving it a bad review. I am as opinionated with respect to this movie as I have a lot (and I mean a lot!) of background knowledge of the X-men universe so I am fully aware of the potential it has, but also in light of the new standard that comicbook based movie have received due to films like Dark Knight and Thor. Overall I found the movie enjoyable, and a good combination of dialog driven and action based plot; maybe if they had made it a two-parter it would have had more fluidity (as paradoxical as that may sound), but I have serious doubts that even this one will make enough money for a sequel.

How far will this reboot go remains to be seen, at the moment it looks quite promising, especially if they continue on this path of making movies that more closely resemble the core concepts of their sources. So, my vote is to go see it. Oh and at a certain point there is a well-placed cameo that I think deserves some attention mainly because it adds some entertainment value to people who are fans of the series, while not taking away from the movie, which is, as past experience has shown us, not an easy thing to accomplish (although there are easter eggs galore throughout the whole movie).

Filmus Criticus: Tucker & Dale vs Evil

Best to think of it as Deliverance combined with The Man with One Red Shoe

  This movie should be considered a rarity in modern cinema. It’s been a long time since I’ve seen a horror comedy that I not only enjoyed, but can actually praise. “Tucker and Dale vs. Evil” is what I can only describe as comedic genius. It manages to accomplish what very few movies of this genre have: to successfully combine horror movie cliche with witty satire.

The story follows two hillbillies, Tucker (Tudyk) and Dale (Labine), on vacation to their recently purchased vacation home in the woods who, through no real fault of their own, get taken for psychopathic killers by a group of (entitled and judgemental) teenagers.

The main story starts after, while out fishing, Tucker and Dale stumble upon Allison (the female lead played by Katrina Bowden) while she is undressing to take a night swim in the lake. She gets startled by the two, slips, falls, bangs her head and ends up unconscious in the water only to be rescued by the heroic and kind-hearted Dale. The boys proceed to call out to her friends in the hopes they will come to her aid, but Dale’s call for assistance, “We have yer friend!”, is misconstrued as a warning that the psychopaths have captured Allison and that they are next. What follows is entertainment gold, and I recommend you go watch it to see what happens next.

“Misunderstandings” basically sum up everything that happens from the point the two protagonists first cross paths with the group of teenagers, to all the accidental, but hilarious tragedies that follow.

Overall, the story is well constructed and the characters are very well crafted. On one side we have the clumsy, socially awkward, and shy Dale and his best friend the pessimistic, and slightly arrogant Tucker (who is arguably just as dumb), on the other we have the douchebagiest, dial-turned-to-11, Chad (Moss), who due to a personal vendetta against all things hillbilly, decides that he must wage a one-man war against them; mind you he doesn’t do it to “rescue” the girl, he does it because he’s a self-deluded sociopath. This role reversal is more than just amusing to watch, its use of exaggerating the reflex reactions people generally have towards individuals that they find abnormal makes the story that much more compelling. It’s also really fun to watch the story unfold from both perspectives. The teenagers misconstrue every encounter with Tucker and Dale as confirmation of just how sick and disturbed the two are and of the danger they are in. While the boys are scared and confused at seeing, what they interpret as, “a bunch of college kids runnin’ around killin’ themselves”. It should be mentioned that Bowden does a decent portrayal of a misunderstood intellectual trapped in the body of a cheerleader, although some of her dialogue is as emotive as Hannibal Lecter.

The attention to detail and in-setting comedy is what gives this movie its edge, as it creates a nuanced comedic landscape. I found it quite amusing how the vacation house that Tucker bought seems to have been previously inhabited by an actual serial killer. That combined with the use of references and homages paid to the horror movies that were the source of its inspiration, which are made tastefully and do not overwhelm the audience, only serve to add to the overall plot.

 To make a movie like this work you need more than an interesting premise or large amounts of flimsy dressed co-eds, you need quality acting. (That’s not to say that there aren’t any flimsy dressed co-eds running around). What I consider to be the crucial element that made this movie so fun to watch was the spot-on comedic deliveries by Tucker and Dale. Their pseudo-philosophical back-and-forths about society and the current generation added a dimension to the characters that is rarely seen in horror-comedy movies. (But the creative and hilarious death scenes didn’t hurt either.)

The only criticism that I have for this movie is the overextended third act involving the heroic rescue of Allison. The movie should have ended after the cabin fire scene, continuing from that point wasn’t fatale to the movie’s plot but it did nothing to add to the overall story or the characters. It’s not a huge drawback, as it manages to keep a consistent tone throughout the whole movie, but I felt I had to criticise something.

Not to be questioned for its lack of educational worth, the movie also teaches us the valuable lesson of not judging other people based on appearance, preconceived notions and stereotypes. (It also confirms a long standing theory of mine that popped-collar, teenage douchbags are usually sociopaths.)

 [pro] highly entertaining; great acting; funny and smart.

 [con] a bit long; and some of the scenes are poorly edited.

Filmus Criticus: Next Three Days

The movie that didn’t know what it wanted to be.
 

   The only commendable thing about this movie is the way it manages to completely mislead the audience into thinking they are about to watch an action packed and emotionally charged drama (at least that’s the feel you get from any trailer or poster you’ve seen) involving a daring prison escape orchestrated by John Brennan (Russell Crowe) as a testament to the undying love he shares for his (potentially, *no spoilers) innocent wife, Lara (Elizabeth Banks) and keep his family together, only to discover that they are watching an hour and a half uneventful and disappointing drama about a guy who doesn’t know where to leave his kid while he goes out doing his “errands “ (*cough* planning the escape).
 

   From the title to the premise one would infer that the movie should be a fast paced action-drama. “Next Three Days” suggests urgency and time pressure, where the protagonist must get everything right or else there will be severe consequences and catastrophic failure; but is this reflected in the actual movie? Not so much. I mean sure, there are points within the movie where you may get a (false) sense that some fast paced montage is coming up and will continue throughout the movie, but those few and far between, and usually disappointing.  
 

   Regardless of the lack of action scenes, the chemistry between Crowe and Banks’ characters was inexistent (which is a really bad thing since it’s supposed to be a main part of the story), but that was mostly due to strange plot jumps not allowing the audience to get fully immersed in their relationship, and not due to the actual acting, which was ok. In the end, the movie feels more like a B-rate drama about the struggles of a man to reunite his family and refusing to let go of the devotion he has to his wife (the original plot of Pour Elle, the movie this is based on), and less about a cleverly planned prison break; so if you watch it with that in mind it may seem a bit more interesting and less disappointing.
 

   All things considered, as critical as I may be (hey, it’s kinda my thing) it’s still a pretty decent movie, even if it won’t blow your mind. If you have the opportunity, see it, but don’t go out of your way to get it.
 

[pro] Solid acting by the main cast; the movie tends to get a bit jumpy with the narrative but it is still very watchable.
 

[con] Horrible child acting; a constant sensation that they skipped through the third act; and it only gets really good in the last 15-20min; you’re better off just watching Pour Elle.
 

Filmus Criticus: The Green Hornet

A potentially great movie that went seriously wrong. The story of the movie, which is (loosely) based on the comic of the same name by George Trendle and Fran Striker, follows the exploits of young bachelor Britt Reid (Rogen) following the bland and emotionally empty, death of his father (as well as the only multi-dimensional character in the movie). In his quest for retribution, Reid decides to become a superhero, pretending to be a criminal, in order to……- ok, enough of that. I’m not going to go through the whole plot, as it is not really worth it, and other sites will provide it for you if you actually care that much. I’m going to give you my critique of the movie (and boy is there stuff to criticise).

The story is bad, seriously, there is no other way to express it. I will preface this by saying that I like the Green Hornet character, the Dynamite re-boot of the story on which this movie seems to draw from, is pretty good and is worth a read if you have the chance. But this movie just doesn’t work; the cast just does not fit with this type of movie. Rogen is still reprising the exact same role he has been doing for the past 5 movies, Chau is impossible to understand so I can’t comment on the dialogue and comes off more as a bratty kid than helpful sidekick/mentor and confidant. I don’t even have time to discuss all the bad things about Waltz’s character Bloodnofsky (not making this up), as I would need something comparable to the works of Balzac to cover all the problems with the character.

Overall, the plot has no fluidity, nor does it offer anything noteworthy that would make it stand out or salvage it from the overwhelming feeling of blandness it conveys. Maybe if they would have used a similar comic book character, like Green Arrow, who actually has some of the personality traits that Rogen was portraying, then it might have worked. But, the laid back attitude of the movie doesn’t  justify the innumerable ADHD moments, where it jumps around from drama, to comedy and hijinks, while occasionally going back to the “love triangle” between Rogen, Chau and Diaz’s characters, which can only be described as a bad sales pitch for There's Something About Mary  2.

[pro] The costumes and gadgets are very well designed; Black Beauty looks awesome; and it may improve sales of the Green Hornet comics.

[con] To many to list, but mainly the convoluted plot; the personality of the characters not fitting the theme of the story; and the constant feeling that I was watching spoof a of Batman Begins or Iron man.