jctundis Reviews

Evil Dead Rise (2023)

Very disappointing effort. Worst in the franchise.

[4/10 · 22 April 2023]

Let me preface this by saying I only recently watched the 2013 version of Evil Dead. I surprised myself with how much I liked it. I guess having a 10 year separation made the tone of it work, harkening back to the relentless and serious tone of the original 1981 movie.

So Evil Dead Rise. I didn't hate it... but I sure didn't love it. It has some great moments but is largely bland. Beginning with a very late 90s factory horror film, it does ratchet up the tension and has a tremendous title sequence.

It meanders for a bit before all hell breaks loose (in the usual way) with one great performance and some solid gore. However, it felt like the director was holding back. It wasn't nearly as intense as the hype would have you believe. I have to assume there's and extended, unrated cut coming at some point. It was a bit inconsistent in the f/x department right to the end with the finale having both the best and worst examples side by side.

Hate to say it, but the messaging is a bit heavy handed in it, too. Not that there was anything I disagreed with but there was just too much for this type of film -- it felt awkward and forced.

The mom (Ellie played by Alyssa Sutherland) is easily the best character in the movie. The best character in the last 2 movies. Her physicality and acting chops made every darkly sadistic, comic line land perfectly.

One of the biggest problems with the movie is that I really don't care about any of the other characters - and that includes the main protagonist (Beth played by Lily Sullivan). Not that Evil Dead movies are known for their characters' depth, but at least they're interesting. A large part of this rolls on like a one dimensional soap opera about maternal instincts which could work in a context with more time to develop relationships and personalities.

There were tons of callbacks to previous Evil Dead entries (some of which just did not work with the overall serious tone of this movie) as well as classics such as The Shining and The Thing.

Is it worth seeing? Sure! It has enough fun stuff to keep you engaged and the change of setting away from the cabin is refreshing. Is it a game changer for the franchise and the scariest film of the year? No.

Spider-Man: Far from Home (2019)

A couple of bright spots, but mediocre overall

[5/10 · 13 July 2019]

So, yeah, I finally got around to seeing Spider-Man: Far From Home. Meh. I know it's primarily a YA movie, but I expected more "pop" and fun judging from all the positive feedback I've heard. I was largely bored.

Other than Ned (or Ganke) all the supporting cast was lifeless to awful (looking at you, JB Smoove), having lost any charm they had from the first movie. Why anyone would be interested in this one-note, repetitively morose version of "MJ" is beyond me. Tom Holland is still fantastic as Peter/Spidey. Samuel L Jackson just looks tired and Jake Gyllenhaal phones in possibly the flattest performance I've ever seen from him. As with most MCU movies, the humor is plastic and forced. The writers also repeatedly screwed up the rules of the "blip."

On the plus side, there are some very cool action and F/X scenes - especially during the final battle.

There's also a scene in the middle of the movie that is EVERYTHING I've always wanted in an onscreen Spidey vs Mysterio confrontation. Pure magic!

Sure, the plot was always going to be 100% predictable (unless you've never read a Spider-Man comic or watched a cartoon in your life), but these movies aren't made for comic book fans. So I was fine with that, as long the execution was good. It wasn't bad... just mediocre. A nice, safe film for the family.

There are two post movie scenes - one mid-credits that screws up continuity, makes very little narrative sense, and looks awful - and a second one at the very end of one of the longest credit scrolls in history that ties directly into one of the worst MCU movies, is painfully unfunny, and seriously lowers my interest in seeing any further MCU product.

In the end Spider-Man: Far From Home is, with the exception of 2 extremely bright spots, a fairly banal, tween product for the masses. So of course, it's going to make a crapload of money (636 million worldwide and counting).

5.5/10

The Dead Don't Die (2019)

Jim Jarmusch and Tilda Swinton strike again!

[7/10 · 8 July 2019]

Obviously, this film is largely an homage to George Romero's zombie films (Night of the Living Dead, etc) but I also got a sense of the delightfully absurd a la Plan 9 From Outer Space. First and foremost, however, this is a Jim Jarmusch film -- a quirky, modestly paced, clever, slightly off kilter character study where events take place, but very little actually happens. His 2013 film Only Lovers Left Alive cemented Jarmusch among my favorite directors. That film also featured my favorite actress, Tilda Swinton...

Who makes a brilliant return in The Dead Don't Die as the long white haired Scottish samurai funeral home director... with a secret! I mean, she's amazing. Adam Driver is also great, and delivers the biggest laugh of the movie.

The messaging about consumerism does get a little heavy handed late in the film, and some of the fourth wall breaking might alienate some audiences (although it works for me here as a kind of commentary on the pointless foolishness of the zombie genre).

7.5/10

Midsommar (2019)

Another masterpiece for Ari Aster

[9/10 · 5 July 2019]

Director Ari Aster said this was a film about dependency which he wrote during a breakup ... and it shows. But it's so much more.

A commentary on religion, friendship, depression, identity -- all inside an extremely unsettling Swedish folklore, sex cult, horror story. And it's funny, too! Yes, all these ideas exist simultaneously in a brilliant and methodically paced film that frolics in the realm between all things Kubrick and the Wicker Man.

There are layers upon layers, clues given, and a deliberately hypnotic and hallucinigenic sensibility that lolls the senses so that the more graphic scenes of graphic horror hit with jarring impact. Moreso, to me, than in Aster's previous film Heritary (the best film of 2018). Not for fans of quick cut commercial fare, the timid or the squeamish, Midsommar is a beautiful, horrifying meta-gestalt that I look forward to viewing again.

Avengers: Endgame (2019)

35% awesome, 65% tedious

[6/10 · 27 April 2019]

Avengers: Endgame. Overall it was... ok. The intro got off to a quicker start than I imagined, and the expected final battle was certainly fun followed by a touching denouement. Those elements (barely) justify the film, in my opinion.

However, the intervening 2 hours is a tedious collection of scenes, lame jokes and awful characterizations wrapped around an extremely tired and poorly thought out plot device. Should you see it? Sure. How can you not after investing so many years in the arc? But most people I saw it with were ultimately (at least somewhat) disappointed.

Worst performance in the movie is easily Mark Ruffalo who has now solidified his legacy as the absolute worst Hulk and Banner ever committed to film. Thor was also terrible, but that's been a rapid devolution since Ragnarok.

Surprisingly, the movie was pretty much stolen by the stellar performance of Jeremy Renner, which should build interest in the upcoming Hawkeye series (even if it is just a vehicle to hand off the mantle). Scarlett Johansson also stepped up her game and was very impressive.

Captain Marvel (2019)

The most boring movie in the MCU oeuvre. No controversy required.

[2/10 · 7 March 2019]

Captain Marvel... hmmm. Well, you may have seen all the "controversy" surrounding this film involving bad advance reviews based on some foolish statements made by Brie Larson in the press that were blown wayyyy out of proportion. The expectation that it would be a relentless, hardcore feminist diatribe left many fans disinterested in seeing the film. After seeing it, I can tell you that there is quite a bit of feminist/girl power messaging in play, but it's the type of shallow, corporate, glad-handing that's going to leave actual feminists angry more than anyone else. Any scenes of Danvers' actual life or character development? You've seen them all in the trailer. The problem with Captain Marvel is that, while not being the WORST film in the MCU oeuvre, it is by far the most BORING. Stultifying, even. Larson's performance is so mind numbing and dull I started to wonder if she was actually a robot or clone that someone hit with a cattle prod off camera to induce some kind of jerky pseudo smile or other simulated snark. Simply awful. Jackson is OK as Fury, simply along for the ride playing the sidekick role (although the cat jokes get tired fast). The Starforce, one of the lamest creations of 90s Marvel, makes a seamless transition achieving the same level of "who gives a s#!t" that you would expect from a set of pathetic, low rent Guardians knock-offs. The Skrulls. Oh boy, we finally get real Skrulls! One of the biggest threats in the Galaxy!!! Annnnnd, you ruined them... that was fast. The effects in some scenes were OK, but large chunks of the film exuded such "cheapness" that I was wondering if I was watching the Inhumans again. And it was inconsistent. While Samuel L Jackson looked great in his CGI de-aged state, Clark Gregg looked like he was sculpted out of wax at times. Not sure what else to say about such an uninspired product. I'm sure any negative reviews of the film will still be labeled as "sexist" or what have you (and I do think the gender flip of Mar-Vell is insulting and unnecessary, so feel free to hate on me) but I'm starting to think the whole online controversy is being ginned up by Disney to distract people from the simple fact that they made a bad movie.

Halloween (I) (2018)

Couple of good scenes, but mostly a boring misfire.

[2/10 · 22 October 2018]

Not very good. Great opening scene, but then largely boring. Tension was off through the whole thing. Felt flat and predictable. Even the changes to the music were off putting. References to first film are way overdone. Couple of decent twists, albeit handled poorly, and an ok ending.

Spider-Man: Homecoming (2017)

Nothing to get very excited about

[6/10 · 11 July 2017]

Saw Spider-Man: Homecoming yesterday, and it was thoroughly... OK. Didn't love it, didn't hate it -- basically because there's not much there to care about either way.

It has a very shallow 80s teen film feel to it, like a live action Saturday morning cartoon. So if you can unlock your inner 12 year old and not think too hard about anything, you'll probably enjoy it.

The culturally diverse characters are completely two dimensional - full of stereotypical personalities, and all commercially constructed to be easily digestible and likable - which pretty much sums up the movie.

The dialogue is very light, complete with a perky, middle-aged-plus gmilf of an Aunt May. The plot is very basic, but with at least two stellar action sequences, solid cgi and a refreshing cast of villains from Vulture and Shocker, to early glimpses of Scorpion and Prowler.

Not much else comes to mind. Like I said, it's a very safe, cute movie, seemingly designed to get a substantial number of laughs and avoid controversy. Good one to take your kids to, or grandparents, or boyfriend/girlfriend who doesn't really care about the genre.

6.5/10

Wonder Woman (2017)

Easily the best DCU movie since 2008's Batman: The Dark Knight

[8/10 · 6 June 2017]

I saw Wonder Woman on Sunday night, and it's one of those rare movies that after mulling over I actually like a bit more than my initial opinion upon viewing. Not that I'm going to say it's some kind of tear inducing piece of theatrical perfection, because it's not. It has its faults like any other film: a superfluous and unnecessary framing sequence, the typical (albeit brief) pacing problems in the middle, repetitive action sequences (not counting the much lauded – and deservedly so – charge into "No Man's Land" scene) a cheesy ending (the levels and details of which I can't discuss without revealing major plot points) and a couple of lame jokes (how many times are they going to use the "Wonder Woman loves ice cream" gag?) – most of which can be blamed on the screenplay by the usual suspects, Allan Heinberg and Zack Snyder.

That being said, the positive things about Wonder Woman are legion in comparison.

Obviously, the casting of Gal Gadot worked beautifully. Being one of the only positive elements in the abysmal Batman V Superman movie, her quality as the lead is now amplified. She already had the attitude and presence for the character, now bolstered by a more muscular physique and clearer (yet wonderfully distinct) accent. Gadot made it look easy, projecting power and confidence in her moral obligation to the world, while also having those moments of somewhat vulnerable naiveté in a world she is only just discovering.

Patty Jenkins is a thousand times the director that Zack Snyder is. She understands the value of a solid story and consistent character development. It was wonderful to see supporting characters developed enough to actually care about them, and the way Jenkins maneuvered through the potential political minefield this project presented was masterful. Case in point – the aforementioned "No Man's Land" sequence. Not only was it a taught and exciting action scene, but the mutual respect and camaraderie that developed between the primary cast members was about as perfect a message about equality as one could hope for.

Even subjects like the suffragette movement in the UK, employment, sexuality (cleverly referencing the writings of a Greek muse to explain the obviousness of lesbianism on Themyscira) (Chris Pine's awesome "bathing beefcake" scene) and even the white man's treatment of Native Americans were handled with humor and grace (instead of a browbeating), reminding me of the work of Michele Fazekas & Tara Butters on the excellent and lamented Agent Carter TV series. Perhaps it's easier when working on a period piece in 1916 where there are examples of sexism so obvious and blatant that everyone can look at it and go "No, that is wrong." There's even a pseudo-bondage scene near the end for those hardcore fans of Wonder Woman's early comic years.

The supporting cast was excellent, with the possible exception of David Thewlis whose performance I found thoroughly uninspiring (especially in comparison to his work on the current season of Fargo) and some of Connie Nielsen's lines while trying to emulate Gadot's accent were a bit cringe inducing.

All in all, it's a very positive movie experience in terms of both theme and quality. I'm actually disappointed it didn't have a bigger opening weekend considering super hero movies are still in vogue and Wonder Woman is one of the top 5 most recognizable and popular super heroes in history! It's relatively family-friendly – aside from wartime violence (loud noises, deaths, etc) and the only love scene is alluded to but not shown.

8.3/10 Easily the best DCU movie since 2008's Batman: The Dark Knight

Logan (2017)

Low expectations met... barely.

[5/10 · 6 March 2017]

I honestly don't understand the hype on this film. Saw it last night, and while there are some great action scenes with a brilliant amount of gore (finally), the film is poorly paced, largely boring, and full of the kind of lame, trite action movie tropes you'd expect from James Mangold in the second half oh his career.

There is almost no correlation to Old Man Logan, instead becoming a hodgepodge of three other stories that I won't mention the titles of due to possible spoilers.

As the title of the review states, I went in with low expectations. The movie barely delivered on them. In fact, the more I think of all the lame story ideas and self referential garbage forced into the script, the less I like the film.

Star Wars: Episode VII - The Force Awakens (2015)

Nothing new under the sun...

[6/10 · 18 December 2015]

Sadly, not blown away by Force Awakens.

Beautiful special fx -- an almost perfect blending of digital and practical elements.

Solid casting, throughout. Like the new characters.

The story, however, was very safe and very predictable. Too much self reference and regurgitation of previous episodes. Not a bad movie, but it never really "took off" to me.

I don't want to outright bash the movie, but it's really just "ok" - which is the inevitable result of a Disney committee forged product that strives to give fans exactly what they (think) they want, and try to satisfy every possible demographic to make it an eminently consumable product. And that's what it is. Lucas hit it on the head when he basically said "yeah, people should like it."

You SHOULD LIKE IT. And I do. But I certainly don't love it.

Avengers: Age of Ultron (2015)

The Golden Age of Marvel movies is OVER

[5/10 · 5 May 2015]

This is a perfect example of how success can ruin a franchise. So much money is changing hands now that the Marvel movies are quickly descending into the pattern of dumbing down - attempting to satisfy the masses, resulting in inferior product.

While still somewhat enjoyable, the movie suffers from MANY flaws, and not all are the fault of Marvel/Disney - some are to be laid at the feet of Joss Whedon, justifying my initial fears of having the tween darling master of the Buffy-verse in charge of these films.

Specifically, the love stories Whedon fought so hard to include are stultifying and sleep-inducing - or just downright Lucas-level stupid. The dream sequences he championed are also all but useless time-killers.

The movie is loaded with SO MANY one-liners, it's impossible to take anything seriously, and the jokes become tiresome. Ultron is less a world threat, and more a sardonic stand up comedian. Everyone seems to want a piece of the popularizing Stark humor (even though a Stark spoken rape joke backfired horribly with feminist audience members).

There are some excellent action sequences, while at the same time there are several overdone CGI scenes that are almost unwatchable, much like a Michael Bay film.

The addition of Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch do absolutely nothing for the movie. Both actors give incredibly boring performances, and the power set of Scarlet Witch is unrecognizable in comparison to her comic book counterpart. Baron Von Strucker is also rendered completely useless after quite a bit of build up in previous films and TV.

The character of Black Widow is basically reduced to a whore (for the Red Room, for Nick Fury, whatever).

The brightest spot in the whole film is The Vision. They achieved something special with the creation and execution of that character.

Again, it wasn't entirely unenjoyable. I love these characters and am amazed to living in a time when I get to see them on the big screen, but with all these glaring flaws, I can only give it a 5 out of 10.

I am now very leery of all Marvel films going forward, and expect nothing more than a "joke-explosion-joke-explosion-joke-lame love story- joke-explosion" formula to dominate all future projects.

Guardians of the Galaxy (2014)

A fun, solid effort - but not without its flaws.

[7/10 · 4 August 2014]

So, with trepidation, I went to see Guardians of the Galaxy on Saturday night. It actually turned out pretty well. I thought the humor was going to be overdone, and indeed by the end of the film several jokes were falling flat. On the plus side, the pace was very fast, the soundtrack was… "ahem"… awesome, the FX were top notch and it featured the best filthy Jackson Pollock joke ever.

Chris Pratt as Star-Lord is OK with the humorous scenes, but when that wore thin there wasn't much left to expect from him. He's just not a very good actor when you're looking for depth.

The Drax character was performed very well by Dave Bautista (better known as Batista from the WWE). The writing could have been better though, as the dialogue sometimes felt forced in an attempt to define his race's particular mode of expression. It reminded me at times of the Star Trek: TNG episode "Darmok." But again, Bautista did a fine job.

Gamora was the biggest disappointment. Her character was ruined by non- committal, lazy writing. She's one of the biggest bad-asses in the Galaxy, and yet she is often portrayed as a damsel in distress – then suddenly an unstoppable fighter, then a damaged girl with daddy issues, then a victim, then a poor waif who must resist Star-Lord's advances – when in fact (if we were being faithful to the character) she would have screwed his brains out, injuring him in the process. You DO NOT F%$K with Gamora!

Rocket was great. They didn't over-think it, and just let Rocket be Rocket. Bradley Cooper did a great voice-over job.

Groot is Groot. Like Rocket, they just went with it. Thankfully they didn't overdo the "I am Groot" shtick. It was just enough to balance the annoying with the funny.

Ronan the Accuser was done well. He's even more severe than he is in the book, playing him up like a religious zealot.

There are plenty of Easter eggs to look for, especially in The Collector's base of operations. There's an absolutely fantastic appearance by Thanos, and as usual make sure you stay through the credits for a surprise cameo from an obscure and subversive Marvel character!

Even with its faults, GOTG is a fun ride and I am relieved to be able to recommend it wholeheartedly!

Maleficent (2014)

Jolie is masterful, but the character of Maleficent is ruined.

[6/10 · 31 May 2014]

The Maleficent movie. You know, it wasn't that bad. From a visual standpoint, it was really cool. I liked the play of dark and light. There were ominous scenes interspersed with colorful, playful ones - a metaphor for Maleficent's dual personality perhaps.

The biggest drawback? The story. My biggest "fear" going in was the obvious fact (judging from the trailers) that the film makers were going to turn Maleficent into a sympathetic character. They did that in spades, to an almost nightmarish neo-feminist ret-con level by rendering Maleficent into not just a sympathetic character, but a jilted lover, victim and full on hero of the Sleeping Beauty saga. Every male character was rendered callow or completely neutered. Maleficent, perhaps the greatest full-on villain in the Disney oeuvre, absolutely relishing in her wickedness, was forever altered into just another boring "warrior queen." We no longer have a personae we "love to hate" - we have a misunderstood soul we "feel bad for." But she does get a happy ending...

Anyway, the absolute best reason to see this movie is Angelina Jolie. I've been a fan for ages, and this once again illustrates why. Not only is she absolutely beautiful, but she is also both magnificent and malevolent in certain scenes that are magical.

X-Men: Days of Future Past (2014)

X-Cited to see the X-Men franchise in top form again!

[10/10 · 23 May 2014]

X-Men: Days of Future Past. Well, that certainly helped to wipe away my last poor movie experience (the awful Godzilla)! Great to have Bryan Singer back behind at the helm (after the abomination that was the Singer-less X-Men: The Last Stand). This movie attempts to streamline and tie together the two parallel X-Men franchises (original and the excellent First Class), as well as the two Wolverine movies (the first of which is best left forgotten) - and it does a superb job!

The story was engaging and fairly complex with some shocking moments. The f/x were top notch and almost seamless. Timeline conflicts between books and films aside, the characters were treated very well - with Blink being one of my favorites.

It might be blasphemous to say, but as much as I love Ian McKellan - Michael Fassbender may have surpassed as his performance as Magneto was fantastic, improving on his work in X-Men: First Class.

Jennifer Lawrence owns Mystique now. Yeah, Rebecca Romijn might have the better body, but Jennifer blows her away in the acting department - adding so much more depth to the character.

McAvoy, like Fassbender, improved on his character from First Class - and who doesn't need more Peter Dinklage?? He scores one of the best scenes in the movie when he speaks before Congress.

And Sentinels?? Not what I expected, but totally awesome!

Yes, there is some alterations to the time-line after this (and some minor conflicts that have yet to be resolved), as everyone expected, and I'm x-cited to see the next installment as we go back and "fill in" the new arc. I also can't wait for the Blu-Ray release as I'm sure there will be extra scenes aplenty, and there are so many easter eggs scattered throughout it's going to take a careful still-frame viewing to catch them all.

As always -- MAKE SURE YOU STAY UNTIL THE END OF THE CREDITS!!!!

Godzilla (2014)

Save your money. Avoid this awful movie. No joke.

[1/10 · 17 May 2014]

Just got back from Godzilla. Wow, what an amazingly bad film. So mind numbingly boring, it's hard to even express it. If you go, just hang out in the lobby, eat some popcorn, chat with your friends and then head in to the theater for the last 20 minutes. You'll have a much better time. Truly one of the worst theater experiences I've had in recent history.

Much of the CGI is darkened to hide its flaws. The green screen lines are easily visible (sometimes in scenes that are otherwise cinematically beautiful). The human characters are Completely one dimensional, uttering terrible dialogue the likes of which haven't been heard since Attack Of The Clones - and that includes Bryan Cranston who must have known that the lines coming out of his mouth were utter, nonsensical garbage.

The new monsters are using the same trite design mode established in Cloverfield (to much better effect), while Godzilla (who lumbers around like an arthritic 108 year old man) is held back until the final act and criminally underused.

Matthew Broderick must be dancing for joy knowing he won't be the Godzilla community's goat anymore.

Lost: The End: Part 1 (2010) Season 6, Episode 17

Lost focus + Lost opportunity = a series ruined by lazy writing

[25 May 2010]

I'm already sick of the "romantic vs pragmatist" argument. I loved the earlier deaths of Jin and Sun and the refusal to be separated, the back and forth tug of war between Jack and Sawyer and their respective love interests, even the "sacrificial lamb" aspect of Jack's character. Kate's line "Christian Shepherd? Seriously?" will always remain high on my chart.

However, the writers failed as storytellers, serving up religious platitudes and schmaltzy reunions, all the while invalidating at least 60% of the series with self-conflicting ideas and plot holes that lead to the inexorable conclusion that they really had no idea where the story was going, and preferred to serve up "geek-chic" moments of coolness without any intention of tying things together in any way whatsoever. Just distraction after distraction until we're finally spoon-fed a useless "god loves you, and love conquers all" ending.

That kind of thing is fine after the events of a story have been sewn together. The failure of the writers is that they served up a dénouement without ever giving us any kind of ending, just random "cool" scenes. What a waste, destroying any interest I had in re-watching the series.

This really applies to the entire final season of Lost. Except for a 4 episodes, the rest of the season was filler.

Star Trek (2009)

A for effort.

[7/10 · 11 May 2009]

Much like the first Star Trek movie, this one leaves a little to be desired. I guess the "odd numbered curse" lives on! The film moves at a breakneck pace at first, and then slows down significantly with the boredom alleviated with the timely arrival of Scotty, played brilliantly and with fervor by Simon Pegg.

Abrams made it clear that this was not a Star Trek film for Star Trek fans, and this shows most evidently in the characterization of Spock. I can't really explain without giving too much away, but from a writing standpoint... if this was to be a re-launch of all that made Star Trek great for a new generation of viewers then any future revelations about Spock or Vulcan philosophy in general have been rendered somewhat meaningless. Abrams tore away all the much discussed conflicts within the vaunted philosophy of logic, and with a bit of "gleeful contempt" as well.

The villain, Nero, is unmemorable -- as is the main plot. The only refreshing change, for good or bad, is that Starfleet makes no effort to fix things! But, of course, since Abrams and company have incorporated a much hackneyed plot device to create a "new re-boot reality" for Star Trek, they couldn't fix it now, could they? A quick assessment of the cast is as follows: Chris Pine plays an excellent Kirk. He's sexy, reckless and arrogant, but his presence is one of command.

Zachary Quinto should have been great as Spock, but his portrayal is too emotional at this early stage and it's very hard to accept him in this role. One particular relationship is also hard to believe.

Eric Bana's Nero is a lackluster villain and will be forgotten.

Although Bruce Greenwood is a bit too old for the role, he makes an adequate Christopher Pike.

Karl Urban is DeForest Kelly. He seems a bit out of place in a "Star Trek movie not meant for Star Trek fans" -- but he is an absolute joy to watch in every scene.

Zoe Saldana as Uhura is a bit more "stuck up" than her predecessor, but that's to be expected, I suppose. This is the 21st century:) She's edgy, and very sexy.

Simon Pegg, Simon Pegg, Simon Pegg. I want a full on Scotty movie!! John Cho makes for a (finally) kick-butt Sulu! Anton Yelchin as Chekov was a little harder to accept. The accent was so forced, and felt like another case of "gleeful contempt" on the part of Abrams. Making fun of the accent by engaging in a hyperbolic exaggeration of it. It's only clever when you don't notice it, but the accent is omnipresent in every Chekov scene.

Ben Cross as Sarek was a brilliant casting move.

Sure, as an old Star Trek fan (I began watching it with my dad in the mid '70s, and I was named after Jeffrey Hunter and even my middle name, Christopher, was chosen because of his Pike character) I can nitpick the heck out of this movie. The science is bad (a black hole is not a wormhole), some of the continuity changes make no sense (which makes one wonder why any effort at all was made to reconcile this re-boot with the original series), etc, etc. I could go on, but it would be giving too much away.

But, all in all, it was a fun ride and is one of (if not the) best looking films in the franchise. A little shallow, perhaps, but that seems to be par for the course this movie season. So, maybe it played like a cheesy TV show sometimes… but isn't that in the spirit of things? I definitely give it an A for effort. Something had to be done as the franchise had run dry more than a decade ago leading me to abandon the franchise (especially after the arrival of the far superior Babylon 5 series).

And remember. If you're going on an away mission, don't wear red!

X-Men Origins: Wolverine (2009)

Pretty good. Not great. Better than X-men 3.

[6/10 · 1 May 2009]

I saw the midnight showing last night.

Yes, the bootlegs been out - but it's missing several FX scenes as well as 20 minutes of story. I got a copy of it, watched about a half an hour late at night, and fell asleep. I didn't bother to watch anymore because I wanted to see the finished product instead.

It was pretty good. Not great. Better than X-men 3, but that's not saying much. Liev Schreiber (one of my favorite actors) pulled off Sabretooth nicely, and Ryan Reynolds was perfect as Wade Wilson. Will I Am did surprisingly well. The Blob was pathetic. Gambit was pretty cool, and there are some other cameos that played well.

Hugh Jackman's earnestness in Wolverine really helps. He seems to really love being that character.

A little disjointed at times (which often happens when you try to cram too many characters into a movie) and it looks like the money was cut off as some of the FX scenes toward the end are pretty weak.

I'd give it about a 6.5

Hamlet 2 (2008)

Rock Me Sexy Jesus!!

[9/10 · 1 May 2009]

The biggest surprise of my weekend was Hamlet 2. It's a stupid concept that went all the way round back to genius again. Great movie. Hilarious performances from Steve Coogan, Catherine Keener and Elisabeth Shue. Clever when it needed to be, sincere at times, and out and out stupid-funny in the best way at other times.

I guess a big concern with this movie is mindless vulgarity, which I personally have no problem with, but there's really none of that here. Sure, the main writer worked on South Park: Bigger Longer Uncut, and Team America - but Hamlet 2 has a lo more charm.

I gave it a 9. It does what a comedy is supposed to do - made me laugh out loud several times!

The Day the Earth Stood Still (2008)

The Day My Brain Stood Still

[2/10 · 1 May 2009]

My wife wanted to watch it because John Hamm is in it, and between Mad Men and 30 Rock he's the new heartthrob:) Unfortunately, it featured two of the worst, phoned in performances by John Hamm and Kathy Bates I've ever seen - and easily one of the worst scripts.

Some of the F/X looked pretty good, especially Gort, but that's about all it had going for it.

Truly awful. Just a bunch of special effects scenes strung together by what I guess passes for a script these days. Random, disjointed nonsense and stiffest, lifeless dialogue you're likely to see (and I'm not talking about Keanu).

I gave it a 2, and that was being generous.

The Spirit (2008)

What were you thinking, Frank!?!

[2/10 · 1 May 2009]

So, I finally saw The Spirit. Took a few tries to get through it, kept putting me to sleep.

Started off awful, then it got a little funny and clever, and then boring and forgettable.

Even the mindless violence couldn't keep me entertained.

Even going in with very low expectations, I was still disappointed.

I can't understand what Frank Miller was thinking. You wanted to make sure it got done right??? And this is what you came up with?

The worst thing is that this is the current mainstream touchstone for the great work of Will Eisner, and it's horrible.

Please don't judge Eisner based on this garbage. Go out and read A Contract With God, Dropsie Avenue or The Building. I've long been a fan of his post-Spirit work, but as a comic fan I felt obliged to watch this film.

I gave it a 2.

Watchmen (2009)

Adequate attempt at an unfilmable project. Dumbed down a bit.

[5/10 · 9 March 2009]

I've heard lots of people walked out, so it probably won't be in theaters long even with the blockbuster opening weekend. Friend at work thought it was the worst movie he'd ever seen, just couldn't follow it. But this is a visual film best served in a theater.

Overall, I *would* have given it an 8 (the scene on Mars went beautifully) - except the retarded new ending dragged it down to maybe a 5. Worth seeing. Adequate to the task. Great visuals.

Of course many people will like the new ending. It's been dumbed down for the masses. As soon as I heard the ending was changed last year, I predicted it - so it elicited a big yawn from me at the theater (and I don't blame Alan Moore AT ALL for divorcing himself from this project - the re-write is an insult). I can't explain how self-defeating it is without giving too much away for those that haven't seen the movie (but have read the book).

I thought there was plenty of action (and sex), but another problem is that everyone seems to be a jacked up super-hero who can punch through or get slammed through concrete walls, etc - when the only one with actual super-powers is supposed to be Manhattan. Another basic level corruption of the source material.

They changed Rorschach *slightly* by lessening his hrrrrm vocal tick and streamlining him into kind of a Batman-ish bada@@. He still says it a few times under his breath, as if to substitute it for hmmm. Like "hmmm. that's interesting" or as a non-verbal response to something seen - not a recurring pattern in his speech that adds to the "unpleasantness" of being around Rorschach. But other than that, Jackie Earle Haley did a fantastic job! There are several scenes that seem to have animated themselves straight from the comic page as that is Snyder's strength as a director, not his writing. If the new ending is any indication of his ability as a storyteller, his skills are pedestrian at best.

Overall I did enjoy the film and I am one of those people that was there in September '86 reading Watchmen #1 off the rack. But I can't let that pathetic ending slide, and it brings the quality of the entire film down.

The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (2008)

Fincher delivers another masterpiece.

[10/10 · 26 December 2008]

Saw "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button" last night. I can't resist a new David Fincher film. It deviates wildly from the F. Scott Fitzgerald story (which could be why I liked it so much). The performances, make up, and directing are all amazing. The screenplay is a little slow and meticulous (Eric Roth also wrote the screenplays for Forrest Gump, The Horse Whisperer, Munich, The Good Shepherd) but the directing made it work perfectly (give me Fincher over Mann, DeNiro, Redford, Spielberg or Zemeckis any day). It really doesn't feel like a two and a half hour film.

I could easily envision Oscar wins for Fincher, Taraji Henson, Brat Pitt and Cate Blanchett.

Be warned - it is a bit of a tear jerker. It deals with mortality quite a bit, as well as the usual heady subjects of love, loss, war, and redemption... with just the right touches of passion and joy.

10 out of 10

The Incredible Hulk (2008)

At last we can forget the Ang Lee debacle!

[8/10 · 21 June 2008]

Ahhh... at last I have a Hulk movie that I'll be happy (and able) to watch again.

The new Incredible Hulk is, first and foremost, an action movie. It's not Iron Man (which is a phrase that you'll probably see again and again as more Marvel movies are released). I gave Hulk an 8, while Iron Man got a 10.

Once again, Marvel has created a hybrid movie combining elements of the Ultimate Universe (most notably the origin), mainstream Marvel Universe and the classic TV show starring the late Bill Bixby (there are several nods to the show including the theme song and an appearance - and voice work - by Lou Ferrigno).

How does the CGI stand up? Much better than the Lee film. The daylight scenes are very impressive - and there is a scene in a rainstorm that is absolutely brilliant! No lame gamma-irradiated poodles in this one, folks.

What I'm really looking forward to now is the Blu-Ray release which will have all of the Edward Norton penned scenes (many of which constituted the original trailer) restored. The one thing that kept me from giving this movie a higher score was the feeling of "pulling back" from dramatic scenes. Norton is brilliant as Banner (as he is in most movies) and the dramatic punch that he will bring to the full length release fills me with anticipation. This is hinted at in a few poignant scenes before the viewer is thrust back into the action - and what action it is, especially when Tim Roth hits the screen.

I really hope Norton returns - a situation that is in doubt - and picks up with the villain that long time Hulk fans will recognize as being created during this film.

After being disgusted by the 3rd installments of Spider-Man and X-Men, I am fully on board with these new Marvel Studios productions. Bring on Thor, Captain America and The Avengers! HULK SMASH!