Wonder Woman (2009)

I don't remember how I found out about the existence of this version of Wonder Woman, but I'm a sucker for comic books movies and animated movies, and if you combine those two you get a film I can't say no to. 

After defeating Ares (voiced by Alfred Molina), the God of War, and stripping him of his powers, the Amazons led by Hippolyta (voiced by Virginia Madsen) reside in peace on their secret island. Then one day a pilot named Steve Trevor (voiced by Nathan Fillion) crash-lands on the island and Princess Diana (voiced by Keri Russell), the daughter of Hippolyta, is assigned to take him back to his world and capture Ares who has managed to escape and is planning his revenge.

Though I haven't read the comic books and it's different from Patty Jenkins's movie, the plot is fairly predictable and I found that many aspects of the story have been overly simplified, and it's a little corny too at times, but the fast pacing makes it enjoyable.

The characters, on the other hand, are way better than I was expecting. While the film's length does not leave room for a lot of depth --Diana isn't as clueless and naive as she is supposed to, and isn't that shocked about the differences in man's world, and Steve isn't as sensitive--, the characters have enough development and characterization to make us like them but most important care about them.

The voice acting, however, is what made this film more watchable for me. Each actor fit the role very well, and they do a pretty good job. Nathan Fillion's Steve Trevor is hilarious and easily the highlight of the film.

Warner Home Video

The animation, just like the plot, is kept quite simple and yet it's good. Each character has a unique design that makes it easy to keep up with them, especially the Amazons. The action scenes are quite good too.

Justice League (2017)

When it comes to DC, disappointment is often around the corner. The brilliant Wonder Woman (which I thought was going to be another disappointment, but wasn't) restored my faith in them and, in spite of what critics have been saying these days, I was pretty excited about Justice League. But how could I be not? I grew up watching that Justice League cartoon and I absolutely loved it. Same goes for this movie. For the first time, I can say I loved, truly loved a Zack Snyder film.

After the events of Doomsday, Bruce Wayne (Ben Affleck) asks for the help of Diana Prince (Gal Gadot) to assemble a team of meta-humans consisting of Barry Allen (Ezra Miller), Arthur Curry (Jason Momoa) and Victor Stone (Ray Fisher) to face a new threat, Steppenwolf (Ciarán Hinds) and his army of Parademons who wants to conquer the Earth.

The plot is very simple, basically like that of every single Marvel movie that has been made, it isn't particularly strong and it's predictable, but you know what, it works. In spite of its simplicity, the plot development manages to grab your attention and keep it. The result is a story that's engaging and thrilling from start to finish, beautifully paced, and doesn't have a dead moment. The running time (it could/should have been a bit longer though) flies. Or should I say runs like the Flash?

And it's him I want to talk about now, Ezra Miller's Barry Allen/The Flash. While there's very little character development (this applies to everyone), the Flash is the most characterized and Miller arguably gives the best performance in the movie. He is socially awkward, nerdy and neurotic but also fun and lovable,  and provides the film with a lot of humour. He simply steals the show, and now I can't wait for his solo movie. Also, I'm happy I didn't have to sit through 2 hours of Grant Gustin's terrible acting (he plays the Flash on the CW series, just in case you don't know it).

Warner Bros. Pictures

As for the others, Victor Stone/Cyborg is given a proper debut and his introduction, considering how short the film is, was very good. I was disappointed with Aquaman, though. I have no complaint about Jason Momoa, after all he does a good job and, although they only share a scene, the chemistry he has with Amber Heard is already beautiful; the thing is that he's barely in the movie. If you have seen the trailer, you basically have already seen all of him. However, no one compares to the weak villain. Steppenwolf isn't' that threatening and he is completely forgettable, so forgettable that I couldn't even remember his name as I walked out of the movie theater.

On the other hand, there's the return of Gal Gadot's Wonder Woman, Ben Affleck's Batman and Henry Cavill's Superman. Gadot is given a good amount of screen time and she uses it well. She has a great scene at the beginning (it gave me goosebumps) and she's got such a presence, it's impossible to look elsewhere when she is on screen. Affleck, and I can't believe I'm saying this, is great as Batman. Along with Miller, he was the film's comic relief. I'm still not very fond of Henry Cavill, but I enjoyed his Superman more than I did in the past.

And now it's time to speak about Zack Snyder's direction. Simply amazing. Like I said above, the pacing is beautiful, there's the perfect balance between drama and comedy, and the action is pretty good too. Snyder's slow-motion/sped-up finally has a purpose and it's used well. At some point, he had to step down because of a family tragedy and Joss Whedon took his place. He rewrote some scenes and shot some extra, but I didn't really like what he did. Also, the CGI looks pretty cheap considering the film's budget.

Wonder Woman (2017)

Genres

Action, Adventure, Fantasy

Director

Patty Jenkins

Country

USA

Cast

Gal Gadot, Chris Pine, Robin Wright, Danny Huston, David Thewlis, Connie Nielsen, Elena Anaya, Lucy Davis, Said Taghmaoui, Ewen Bremmer, Eugene Brave Rock, Lisa Loven Kongsli

Storyline

When an American pilot crashes and tells of a conflict raging the outside world, Amazons princess and warrior Diana (Gal Gadot) leaves home to fight a war to end all wars.

Opinion

Wonder Woman was one of my most anticipated movies of the year yet I didn't have any expectation. Actually, that's not true, I expected it to be a disappointment because that's all they do at DC Comics, they disappoint. Then, earlier this week, something completely unexpected happened, critics liked this movie and, although I'm not one of those people who let others' opinions influence theirs, it made me expect a great film. And Patty Jenkins's movie is that, a great DC movie that is way more than a superhero, superheroine in this case, flick.

The truly outstanding aspect about Wonder Woman is arguably the writing. It simply blew me away! And it's hard to believe Zack Snyder was part of it. I mean, the story is simple yet very well-thought and developed, it does have a nice final twist and it will hold your attention from beginning to end as it flows smoothly. It is a fantastic origin story and I feel safe to say that it does all the justice in the world to a character with so much to say. And it's way more involving than Superman's origins in Man of Steel.

And along with the story goes the characters. Although most of the characters are pretty shallow and underdeveloped - especially the villain I didn't even bother hating because we just don't get enough of them -, this is a film about Diana Prince aka Wonder Woman and her character is great. The character buildup is amazing and it allows the character to truly emerge and Gal Gadot to give a brilliant performance.

The best part, however, is what the film has to say. As Ares says, there are no good or bad guys when it comes to war, everyone is at fault. But most important is the message of hope and love the film manages to convey.

Wonder Woman still has some problems. There's a part that lingers way too much on humour and most of the time the jokes aren't even that funny. The visual effects are good but I feel like they could have done something more. And at last but not least, the action - I always complain about this in DCEU films. While "No Man's Land" battle is beyond spectacular - and gave me chills -, the final battle is great and the fighting is well choreographed, the slow motion is overused and annoying. Also, at times it feels like the action goes too fast.

All of that being said, kudos to everyone involved in this for making such a great and powerful movie that makes such a bold statement against the dominance of men, both in the superhero universe and in the real world.

Joss Whedon Jumps Ship To DC With BATGIRL

Well, this is an interesting development and it may delineate a somewhat troubled Warner Bros past with DC, and a new dawn of justice for the DC universe (you see what I did there?).

Joss Whedon is jumping from the Marvel Cinematic Universe to DC with the first ever BATGIRL tentpole. Whedon will write, produce and direct the movie which bodes extremely well for its likely success.

I'm at Cinemacon where DC showed off clips from WONDER WOMAN, AQUAMAN (concept art) and JUSTICE LEAGUE and I can't help but think that BATGIRL could be a carnivorous property, diluting the BATMAN brand. Personally, I've never enjoyed these spinoffs in the comics either - Marvel or DC. It just seems to be uncreative.

Enter Whedon. If anyone can change my mind it's him. He obviously has got some sort of concept in mind that will blow our socks off, so I am officially intrigued.

No other word on others being attached. More when I get it!

Source: Variety

MUST WATCH: New WONDER WOMAN Trailer!

It's finally here and it's looking like WONDER WOMAN may be getting the movie she deserves! I'm not sure what to make of the storyline yet as we just don't know the details, but visually the trailer rocks!

Gal Gadot is absolutely stunning in the role as we saw in BvS and the addition of Chris Pine here will pay off I think.

I'm loving the production quality, the attention to detail and of course, WW's Bracelets of Submission which, as you can see, easily deflect oncoming bullets.

Enjoy!



WONDER WOMAN is slated for release June 2, 2017. Stay tuned for more!

Suicide Squad (2016)

Genre

Action | Comedy | Sci-Fi

Director

David Ayer

Country

USA

Cast

Will Smith, Jared Leto, Margot Robbie, Joel Kinnaman, Viola Davis, Jai Courtney, Jay Hernandez, Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje, Cara Delevingne, Karen Fukuhara, Adam Beach, Ike Barinholtz, Scott Eastwood, Ben Affleck, Ezra Miller, Jason Momoa

Storyline

A secret government agency led by the ruthless Amanda Waller (Viola Davis) recruits some of the most dangerous villains on the planet to execute dangerous black ops missions and save the world.

Opinion

"Suicide Squad" has been the film that every fan of the genre has been waiting for. I was so excited about it, I still can't cope with the idea of a movie on my favourite characters. Yes, villains are my favourite. What intrigued me the most about the film was Jared Leto's Joker and Margot Robbie's Harley Quinn, so if you have seen the film, or read other reviews you probably know that I left the cinema half disappointed.

In a few words, "Suicide Squad" is a real mess - just like the most recent entries in the DC Comics cinematic universe. It is fun at times, but for most of its running time - more than 2 hours - it's just a bit tedious and unexciting "superhero" flick.

The plot is kind of a mess and quite illogical at times, and basically nothing is ever explained which is not fine. The most annoying thing though is that, just like the previous films, this one also started quite good, and it was very promising. Sure the plot has never been brilliant, but at least the villains were villains. That's right, after a while they all turn into good guys.

The biggest disappointment though is character related. First of all the character introduction feels misplaced, like they wanted the audience to know the characters but they had no idea how to introduce them, and after a 30-minute long intro you don't even care about the characters. That being said, let's talk about the Joker. He was basically all over the place in the trailer, but in the actual film he is barely in it and he has absolutely no purpose other than being Harley Quinn background story. If you remove him, you have the same film but way less incomes. The Joker isn't the only wasted characer here, the same applies for Katana and Boomerang.

But let's move onto the jokes. Something they are funny - I had a couple good laughs - but most of the time they are not. Often they are misplaced and feel very forced, and most of the time are those kind of jokes you have to explain but still don't find funny.

The soundtrack was great - I loved those songs so much I ended up buying the album -, but there is a terrible overuse of music. I loved the fact that every character has his/her own theme, but the music is all over the place. It is too loud, too distracting, and it accompanies everything. Literally. From action scenes to dialogue. Also most of the time the song choices don't make any sense.

The quite good action scenes are occasionally destroyed by attempts at character development and delivery of unfunny jokes.

And finally the acting. I'm probably the only one, but I didn't like Will Smith's Deadshot. He gives a performance that is something between "The Pursuit of Happyness" and "Men In Black", the first as his Deadshot is basically a good family guy, the second because of the jokes he attempts to deliver through the film. Viola Davis isn't menacing as she should have been since she is playing the ruthless Amanda Waller. But the worst has yet to come. The name is Cara Delevingne. Maybe she should have stayed in the fashion universe, because acting isn't her thing. She looks like a drunk girl at a party which is not how the bad guy - bad girl in this case - should look like. She is (supposed to be) the most villain of them since she plays the Enchantress, but the fact that I'm mentioning her character only now should give you an idea of how much the villain to this film suck.

And now the best part. Seriously, I'm not being sarcastic. Margot Robbie. She is beyond fantastic as Harley Quinn, absolutely mesmerizing, and she is so unpredictable on screen, it's a real delight watching her. And she has clearly done a lot of work with the character, especially on the psychological aspect. Then there is Jared Leto. Even though he is barely in the film, his performance as the Joker is truly mesmerising. He is not Heath Ledger, but he does a good job.

Ultimately the film isn't anything special, but Harley Quinn and that little bit of the Joker are worth the money.

Batman & Robin (1997)

Genre

Action | Fantasy

Director

Joel Schumacher

Country

USA

Cast

George Clooney, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Chris O'Donnell, Uma Thurman, Alicia Silverstone, Michael Gough, Pat Hingle, John Glover, Elle Macpherson, Vivica A. Fox, Robert "Jeep" Swenson, Vendela Kirsebom, Elizabeth Sanders, Jesse Ventura, Patrick Leahy, Jack Ingle, Eric Lloyd

Storyline

Mr. Freeze (Arnold Schwarzenegger) plans on taking Gotham City hostage by freezing the town into a permanent winter. In the meantime, a new seductive villainous, Poison Ivy (Uma Thurman), has appeared to cause a rift in the partnership of Batman (George Clooney) and Robin (Chris O'Donnell). While all this is happening, faithful butler Alfred is dying.

Opinion

Right when I thought no film could be worse than "Batman Forever" here's something to prove me wrong. I know I might have said this several times before but "Batman & Robin" is the worst comic book film ever made.

There is no real plot, it's just a little of this and a little of that, and the pitiful "story" a, is too family friendly - this is Batman, the Dark Knight, not the Colorful, Funny Knight - and b, drowns completely with all those characters poorly used. The writers basically threw in every single character that came into their minds, ripped their origins, and used them for some nonsense.

Let's have a look at Bane, for example. When I saw that kind of dumb bodybuilder whose only purpose in the movie was to be Poison Ivy's bodyguard I was shocked. Tom Hardy's Bane came back to my mind, and after that I felt sorry for comparing Nolan's film with this thing.

The screenplay is basically nonsense over nonsense, filled with utterly stupid dialogue and action scenes that makes no sense. Also, it delights us with a tremendously awful opening sequence where Batman & Robin suit up - I won't spoil it because it's hilarious to watch.

And at last but not least the cast. Every single actor manages to be dreadful and unwatchable. No matter how good some of those people usually are, they all manage to give absolute shit performances.

Batman Forever (1995)

Genre

Action | Fantasy

Director

Joel Schumacher

Country

USA

Cast

Val Kilmer, Tommy Lee Jones, Jim Carrey, Nicole Kidman, Chris O'Donnell, Michael Cough, Pat Hingle, Drew Barrymore, Debi Mazar, Elizabeth Sanders, René Auberjonois, Joe Grifasi, Ofer Samra, Ed Begley Jr.

Storyline

Batman (Val Kilmer) must battle Two-Face (Tommy Lee Jones) and The Riddler (Jim Carrey) with help from an amourous psychologist (Nicole Kidman) and a young circus acrobat who becomes his sidekick, Robin (Chris O'Donnell).

Opinion

Seeing Tim Burton's name in the opening credits tricked me into thinking this film would have been good. But like I just said, tricked me, because the utterly ridiculous "Batman Forever" is a disgrace to the Batman franchise.

I'm not even sure the film has a plot. Every single thing that happens is dull and extremely predictable, and nothing does really happen other than villains teaming up to fight Batman and Robin. There's also a pointless romantic subplot whose only purpose is to have a beautiful woman in the film.

But the plot isn't the only problem, no sir. The characters are a complete disaster as well. The villains, Two-Face and the Riddler, are both terrible, and instead of being menacing and threatening like villains are supposed to be, they are always trying to be funny, which would have been totally fine if the film was a comic book movies parody. But it's not.

Among the good guys, the Dark Knight's character is a complete disaster as well, but Robin's is definitely standing out. An orphaned acrobat turned crimefighter that never quite convinces of his struggle between darkness and light, and that ninja stuff he pulls off, absolutely stupid.

The film also feature a bloody awful Gotham City made of neons, psychedelic and flashy lights that are nothing like Burton's gothic atmosphere of the previous films, and awful costumes.

But if you're thinking it can't get any worse, you're wrong, there is the cast. Who even cast these people? Val Kilmer isn't convincing at all as Batman as he looks like a piece of driftwood the waves drag to the beach, Tommy Lee Jones frankly sucks as Two-Face, Jim Carrey is unwatchable as the Riddler, and Nicole Kidman, just like her character, is just a pretty face.

Batman Returns (1992)

Genre

Action | Fantasy

Director

Tim Burton

Country

USA

Cast

Michael Keaton, Danny DeVito, Michelle Pfeiffer, Christopher Walken, Michael Gough, Pat Hingle, Michael Murphy, Vincent Schiavelli, Andrew Bryniarski, Cristi Conaway, Rick Zumwalt, Anna Katarina, Paul Reubens, Diane Salinger

Storyline

After successfully defeating the Joker, Batman (Michael Keaton) must stop crooked businessman Max Schreck (Christopher Walken) and the grotesque Penguin (Danny DeVito) from taking control of Gotham City. Meanwhile, the Catwoman (Michelle Pfeiffer) also emerges with her own agenda in mind. 

Opinion

24 years ago Tim Burton, the great man behind the original "Batman" and other amazing films, brought to us "Batman Returns", a thrilling ride from start to finish that is worthy of its excellent predecessor.

The first thing you will notice in the film is Tim Burton's dark style, from set design to makeup - especially the Penguin's -, to the atmospheres, and the story he presents us certainly does not differ.

The director focuses on the characters of the Penguin and Catwoman, turning what could have been just a banal superhero flick into a sort of dark fairy tale that studies the torments of human soul, and to do that uses people that are different. While the Penguin is outcasted by society because of the way he looks, Selina Kyle aka Catwoman is because of her bland personality.

Unfortunately, once again happened what happened with "Batman", the villains are so well made, wonderfully written and amazingly portrayed by Danny DeVito and Michelle Pfeiffer, they end up obscuring the true protagonist of the film, the dark knight, once again overshadowed by the above mentioned characters. But that certainly isn't a good reason to hate on a film, and I sure do not hate on "Batman Returns".

The choice to focus on the Penguin's story is quite brilliant to be honest. It gives the film that melodramatic touch that needed, and it certainly adds emotional depth to balance the great action sequences - they are occasionally absurd though.

Michael Keaton reprises his role of Batman, and he still does a good job. Danny DeVito is simply spectacular as the Penguin, delivering the sinister character to perfection. Michelle Pfeiffer was the perfect cast for Catwoman, she delivers the character amazingly and, as much as I love Halle Berry, she is much sexier and cat-like than her. Christopher Walken deserves a special mention, he is brilliant as the megalomaniac Max Schreck.

Batman (1989)

Genre

Action | Fantasy

Director

Tim Burton

Country

USA | UK

Cast

Michael Keaton, Jack Nicholson, Kim Basinger, Robert Wuhl, Pat Hingle, Billy Dee Williams, Michael Gough, Jack Palance, Jerry Hall, Tracey Walter, Lee Wallace, William Hootkins, Hugo E. Blick, Charles Roskilly, David Baxt, Sharon Holm, Garrick Hagon, Liza Ross, Adrian Meyers

Storyline

When Jack Napier (Jack Nicholson) is transformed into the evil, Joker, he promises to take over Gotham City it is up to Batman (Michael Keaton) to stop him in his tracks before it is too late.

Opinion

After going through some tough weeks with the Superman franchise, I've made it to the first Batman film, the only DC Comics superhero they seem to be able to bring justice to - okay, forget about Joel Schumacher's films.

Dark, broody and charming, "Batman" is a spectacular achievement for superhero flicks and the credits goes to Tim Burton and a spectacular leading duo.

Tim Burton leaves behind the parodistic Batman TV series of the 60s and presents us a dark, terrifying yet fascinating Gotham City that is almost a character unto itself, and a human Bruce Wayne/Batman, sparing us the typical opening with Wayne's parents being killed - even thought it's shown later in the film - because after all this is not an origin film.

The story, concerning Batman as he faces his arch enemy, the Joker, is more than solid and it's elevated by top class storytelling, and is just a tiny part of a brilliant script that also features great dialogue, authentic comic style, and wonderful characters, Bruce Wayne/Batman, like I mentioned before, and the Joker.

Michael Keaton's Batman is a mysterious, enigmatic, threatening but at the same time fragile man, and he, before all, has managed to give the character that credibility that is often missing in superheroes. Then there's the Joker, Jack Nicholson's Joker. And I'm actually going to complain here, because he is so tremendous, he too often overshadows Batman. He arguably is the perfect cast to play the Joker, and brings to the character cruelty, mercilessness, still he manages to be gloomy and poetic.

Let me see what's left... the action! Though action isn't exactly what comes to your mind when you think of Tim Burton, he did an admirably job here. The action scenes are impressing but measured. Burton, as the great director he is, knows how not to overdo.

A suggestion? See this movie, it truly is a gem.

Superman Returns (2006)

Genre

Action | Sci-Fi

Director

Bryan Singer

Country

USA

Cast

Brandon Routh, Kate Bosworth, Kevin Spacey, James Marsden, Parker Posey, Marlon Brando, Tristan Lake Leabu, Frank Langella, Sam Huntington, Eva Marie Saint, Kal Penn

Storyline

After a long period in the space Superman (Brandon Routh) returns to Earth and once again must save the Earth from Lex Luthor (Kevin Spacey) who wants to create a new land and submerge the United States.

Opinion

In another review, about one month ago, I said that "Superman Returns" wasn't that bad. It has to be said that I saw the movie ten years ago, and in ten years my taste in films has changed a lot. And by a lot I mean that this film is not good.

Maybe making a sequel to "Superman II" after 26 years wasn't really a good idea. What Nolan did with "Batman Begins" a year earlier was purely brilliant, and Singer should have done something like that.

Instead, we got a story that takes place supposedly 5 years after the events of "Superman II" that thankfully ignores the events of "Superman III" and "Superman IV" but is weak, loaded with plot holes and relies so much on the Superman/Lois Lane love story that makes all the other characters unnecessary.

Singer didn't feel the need to develop any of the character other than Superman and Lois Lane probably because he assumed that everyone saw the first two films. To suffer the most from that is Lex Luthor that instead of appearing as a menacing man, he actually scares nobody. Also his plan is a rehash of 1978's Lex Luthor pathetic plan.

On the other hand, the musical score works well, the special effects are definitely improved - I'd be worried if they weren't, it has been 19 years since the last film - and the action sequences are pretty good and entertaining. But do they make up for the film's length? I'm not sure.

Worst of all, the acting. It is not bad, that's my point. It is completely wasted considering the poor outcome of the film. Probably cast because of his resemblance with Christopher Reeve - seriously, let's move on -, Brandon Routh does a fairly good job as Clark Kent/Superman. And so does Kevin Spacey as Lex Luthor: despite the poor writing, he does have a few chances to show how evil Luthor can be.

Superman IV: The Quest for Peace (1987)

Genre

Action | Sci-Fi

Director

Sidney J. Furie

Country

UK | USA

Cast

Christopher Reeve, Gene Hackman, Jackie Cooper, Marc McClure, Jon Cryer, Sam Wanamaker, Mark Pillow, Mariel Hemingway, Margot Kidder, Damian McLawhorn, William Hootkins, Jim Broadbent, Stanley Lebor, Don Fellows, Robert Beatty, Susannah York

Storyline

Determined to kill Superman (Christopher Reeve), Lex Luthor (Gene Hackman) creates Nuclear Man, an android that gets energy from the sun.

Opinion

A week ago I thought it was impossible to make a worse film than "Superman III". Today I think I won't believe in the impossible anymore.

A dreadful, painful to watch film, "Superman IV: The Quest for Peace" is a disgrace not only to Superman but to the whole superhero genre.

The story, if you can call it that, manages to be worse than ever with plot holes the size of the moon's craters - may the moon forgive me for mentioning her, but I had to since the Man of Steel goes up there to fight Nuclear Man - and has something like a million of uninteresting subplots that go nowhere. While the previous entry featured a drunk Superman kicking the shit out of Clark Kent - it was hilarious after all -, this one can claim a double date with Clark Kent, Superman, Lois Lane and Lacy Warfield that is one of the most depressing sequences in cinema history.

But the writing isn't the only problem. Not only the direction is non-existent, but everything else is just as bad. The editing is so poor it hurts. The cuts don't really go unnoticed as it looks like a butcher accidentally cut the film instead of meat.

The special effects join the party as well. They are terrible. T-E-R-R-I-B-L-E. How did you even manage to produce such poor special effects in 1987? Kubrick's "2001: A Space Odyssey" had better effects, and it happened 20 years earlier. Freaking unbelievable.

But the worst part has yet to come. The acting. Oh boy the acting. Christopher Reeve still stars as the Man of Steel and Gene Hackman is back as Lex Luthor but it is not any good. They both gives atrocious performances. Not to mention the supporting cast among which there are Mariel Hemingway, the same Mariel Hemingway who was nominated for an Oscar in 1980, and Jon Cryer who plays a guy even more pathetic than Alan Harper.

I'm so glad the original Superman series is over. I wouldn't have been able to deal with something worse than this. 

Superman III (1983)

Genre

Action | Sci-Fi

Director

Richard Lester

Country

UK

Cast

Christopher Reeve, Richard Pryor, Robert Vaughn, Annette O'Toole, Annie Ross, Pamela Stephenson, Jackie Cooper, Margot Kidder, Marc McClure, Gavan O'Herlihy

Storyline

Superman (Christopher Reeve) takes on a megalomaniacal businessman (Robert Vaughn) who is using a dopey hacker (Richard Pryor) to help him take on the world.

Opinion

Whatever this thing I just watched is, I'm sure its main purpose is to make me feel bad for saying a lot of terrible, atrocious things about "Superman". It has to be some sort of revenge on me. It has to. But let's get into the review, shall we?

"Superman III" is a silly, shallow, completely ridiculous film that not only insults the two previous entries but the viewer as well.

The film is bad on so many levels - it's bad on all the levels to be honest -, I don't know where to start. I don't know what Richard Lester was thinking, but if he wanted to make fun of Superman, like a parody would do, he succeeded. 

I should probably talk about the plot now, but it's going to be very hard since there is no plot. Things happen, that's all. Superman gets to be a supporting character in his own movie. How does that even happen? Instead of being the focused of the film, he has some subplots, like an awful one involving Lana Lang, played by a young Annette O'Toole which, by the way, was way better in "Smallville" than she is in this one, and another involving Superman getting wasted in public, losing his temper, and settling whatever he had to settle in a "Fight Club"-esque manner. Oh, did I mention that the villain makes synthetic kryptonite that eventually splits Clark Kent in two? One good, one evil, and that's the reason Superman gets drunk. 

The main character of the film is the villain, some megalomaniacal businessman that substitutes Gene Hackman's brilliant Lex Luthor, and/or Terence Stamp's spectacular General Zod. I let you choose. The worst thing is that even being the main character, the villain is forgettable. 

This could easily fall in the so-bad-it's-good category, because despite being completely stupid, nonsense, - and did I already say ridiculous? -, it is indeed a great fun to watch. It is so bad it made me laugh. Anyway, kudos to Lester for killing Superman without kryptonite. 

Superman II (1980)

Genre

Action | Sci-Fi

Director

Richard Donner | Richard Lester

Country

USA | UK

Cast

Christopher Reeve, Gene Hackman, Ned Beatty, Jackie Cooper, Sarah Douglas, Margot Kidder, Jack O'Halloran, Valerie Perrine, Susannah York, E.G. Marshall, Marc McClure, Terence Stamp

Storyline

After escaping from the Phantom Zone, General Zod (Terence Stamp), Ursa (Sarah Douglas), and Non (Jack O'Halloran) descent upon Earth to conquer it. It's up to Superman (Christopher Reeve) to save the world.

Opinion

If you recall last week I said a lot of bad things about "Superman" - boring, dumb plot, terribly aged, a waste of a great cast. Luckily "Superman II" is a huge improvement on its predecessor. Yeah, I know, it basically happens with every sequel.

Perhaps the greatest thing about this film is that it continues where the first film ended, but it also provides a brief summary of what happened before so you don't actually have to watch the first movie.

Other than that, the film features a strong, interesting plot that revolves around Zod trying to rule Earth, Lex Luthor escaping from prison and joining the supervillains to take revenge on Superman.

But the most interesting part is the moral dilemma that Superman has to face as Lois Lane finds out Clark Kent and him are the same person. For love, he gives up his powers without hesitation, but unfortunately his powers are needed by the whole world, so isn't it selfish of him to deprive humanity of his protection only to live a normal live with the woman he loves? And is it worth it? For this very reason, the romantic subplot is quite interesting as well.

By any means I'm saying the film is perfect though. Of course it has plot holes - how does Superman even falls for that Lois Lane is a mystery, and returning to the suit was a little bit too easy - but none as big as turning back time.

The special effects are still not that good, but they are a great improvement on the first film, and the action sequences are great to be honest.

Like I said a week ago, Christopher Reeve does a great job both as Clark Kent and Superman, and will remain forever the embodiment of the Man of Steel, but the stand out is Terence Stamp. He is simply terrific as General Zod.

Superman (1978)

Genre

Action | Sci-Fi

Director

Richard Donner

Country

USA

Cast

Christopher Reeve, Margot Kidder, Gene Hackman, Marlon Brando, Ned Beatty, Jackie Cooper, Glenn Ford, Trevor Howard, Jack O'Halloran, Valerie Perrine, Maria Schell, Terence Stamp, Phyllis Thaxter, Susannah York, Jeff East, Marc McClure, Sarah Douglas, Harry Andrews

Storyline

The infant Kal-El, of the planet Krypton, makes his journey to Earth in a ship constructed by his father, Jor-El (Marlon Brando), just as the planet explodes. As he grows to manhood, Kal-El (Christopher Reeve) learns he possesses super-powers, and becomes the Earth's greatest superhero.

Opinion

Although I've been addicted to "Smallville" for about 10 years, I've never been a Superman fan. Singer's "Superman Returns" wasn't that bad, and the new Snyder's films are okay. Still, not enough to make me love the Kryptonian. I thought maybe the original movie would have changed my mind. Turns out I'm probably the only one on the "Superman is a terrible movie" island and I honestly don't get why people love this film so much.

I mean, "Superman" is a very boring, poor film, aged in the worst way, with a screenplay that seems written by a 5-year-old kid.

I haven't read the comic books, so I don't know how faithful the film is, but I can point out the dumbness that laying in the plot. I used to think Kal-El was a smart guy. Apparently he is so smart that tells to a reporter all of his secrets, especially his weaknesses, so said reporter can publish every single word he said for his enemies to read. Deserving a price for smartest guy in the film is also Lex Luthor. Just like his enemy, he is so smart that brings Superman at his own secret place and tells him his plans. As if being that smart wasn't enough, Lex isn't even some insane criminal, but just a crook who wants to take over some real estate. In the process of stopping this badass, Lois Lane dies, so Superman travels back in time to save her. But why didn't he time travel to prevent the nuclear bomb to go off?

I really can't believe Mario Puzo, the guy who wrote a masterpiece such as "The Godfather" took part in this. How that even happened?

Anyway, what makes me cringe the most are the special effects. I'm not comparing them with modern films but with films of the same era, like "Star Wars" that came out one year earlier. And I fail to see how this movie managed to win the Oscar for best special effects. I really fail to. Also the sets, especially the alien ones, are goddamn awful.

However, the film ain't a hundred percent rotten. I really liked Clark Kent as he is the best, funniest part of the entire film, John Williams's score is beautiful, and Christopher Reeve is actually able to give a believable performance as Superman, and despite the film he makes you care for him.

When Push Comes To Shove: Warners Moves WONDER WOMAN And JUNGLE BOOK Launches

Some pulling up going on too. WONDER WOMAN is being pulled up to a slated release date 3 weeks earlier to June 2, 2017. Showing us some confidence? I hope so. I really enjoyed Gal Gadot's performance in the role in BATMAN v SUPERMAN - one of the few aspects of that movie that I didn't have any issues.

Meanwhile, Andy Serkis' JUNGLE BOOK: ORIGINS has been pushed out a full year from October 6, 2017 to October 19, 2018. I also view this as a positive with not only giving Serkis more time to deliver on his performance capture promises but also allowing audiences some breathing room from Jon Favreau's THE JUNGLE BOOK offering (which looks amazing) opening next week on April 15. It will feature the voices of Benedict Cumberbatch, Christian Bale and Cate Blanchett among others.

Said Serkis: "I’ve got to say that personally I’m absolutely thrilled that Warner Brothers have changed the delivery date of our movie. The ambition for this project is huge. What we are attempting is an unprecedented level of psychological and emotional nuance in morphing the phenomenal performances of our cast into the facial expressions of our animals."

Further to Warner Bros announcement of these changes, they added dates for a couple of untitled DC Comics launches: October 5, 2018 and November 1, 2019.
 

Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016)

Genre

Action | Sci-Fi

Director

Zack Snyder

Country

USA

Cast

Ben Affleck, Henry Cavill, Amy Adams, Jesse Eisenberg, Diane Lane, Laurence Fishburne, Jeremy Irons, Holly Hunter, Gal Gadot, Robin Atkin Downes, Tao Okamoto, Ray Fisher, Jason Momoa, Ezra Miller, Michael Shannon, Harry Lennix, Christina Wren, Jeffrey Dean Morgan, Lauren Cohan

Storyline

Fearing the actions of Superman (Henry Cavill) are left unchecked, Batman (Ben Affleck) takes on the man of steel, while the world wrestles with what kind of a hero it really needs. With Batman and Superman fighting each other, a new threat, Doomsday (Robin Atkin Downes), is created by Lex Luthor (Jesse Eisenberg). It's up to Superman and Batman to set aside their differences along with Wonder Woman (Gal Gadot) to stop Lex Luthor and Doomsday from destroying Metropolis.

Opinion

My excitement was so high I went to the cinema on Wednesday night, even though that meant staying awake until almost one in the morning to see the whole thing. Big challenge for me considering the poor outcome of "Man of Steel", but, and I can't believe I'm actually saying it, Zack Snyder did a good job for once, and I haven't miss a single frame despite being tired as hell. Without further ado, here's my thoughts on one of the most anticipated films of 2016.

A great piece of entertainment, "Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice" is a solid foundation for the DC Cinematic Universe.

The opening sequence was not what I expected but it shows Snyder's visual creativity and wowed me for the first time that night: while the opening credits rolls in, in a dream-like sequence, is told the murder of Bruce Wayne's parents, without mince words since we all know the story, later to move the action in Metropolis, while it is being destroyed by Zod, this time shown from Batman's point of view.

I won't spoil anything, but the film goes on showing a series of actions that will bring the two superheroes, Batman and Superman, to the fateful clash, that eventually turns out to be nothing more than the outcome of a series of misunderstandings.

This first part is beautifully done, it is so well made that the idea of Zack Snyder making it won't even cross your mind for a second. Simply spectacular.

In the second part, the good old Zack just couldn't resist to the temptation, and indeed loaded it with a lot of action. While this was a major issue with "Man of Steel", in "Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice" the action is appropriately dosed and has really improved since 2013. The fight between Batman and Superman is quite amazing.


Despite one terrible scene - you'll know what I'm talking about when you'll see the film -, the CGI is actually good. Doomsday was frightening, threatening, all I wanted to see in such a character.

Unlike in the previous film, Snyder did not use action and special effects to compensate the lack of a good story. Actually, overall, the story is well written, it has the right amount of twists and a good amount of humour enough to be compelling and very entertaining. To be honest, though, there are some plot holes, and the story could have been developed a little better in the second part of the film.

The film also features quite beautiful cinematography, colours and atmosphere as well as a thrilling score from Hans Zimmer and  Junkie XL.

Something I was worried about was Ben Affleck playing Batman and Jesse Eisenberg playing Lex Luthor. While Christian Bale will always be my favourite Batman, Affleck did a wonderful job, he was intense, and played beautifully both the aged Bruce Wayne and Batman, and he can finally shake off "Daredevil". Jesse Eisenberg's casting was questionable, and I was worried he was going to kill Lex Luthor. Well, I've never been so happy to be wrong. He is quite a villain, deceiving, and convincing, a true devil. He still played Jesse Eisenberg, but really had something new this time. Gal Gadot is the other member of the cast standing out. Eff the haters, because she owned the role of Wonder Woman in every possible way, and she also nailed it as Diana. And now the other side of the coin: Henry Cavill. If he didn't convince you in "Man of Steel", he won't convince you neither here. As if looking like a piece of wood was not enough, he has also lost charm.

Overall, "Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice" is a great improvement on "Man of Steel", but it is not as good as Christopher Nolan's "The Dark Knight". Not even remotely.

Man of Steel (2013)

Genre

Action | Sci-Fi

Director

Zack Snyder

Country

USA

Cast

Henry Cavill, Amy Adams, Michael Shannon, Kevin Costner, Diane Lane, Laurence Fishburne, Antje Traue, Christopher Meloni, Ayelet Zurer, Russell Crowe, Harry Lennix, Christina Wren, Richard Schiff, Michael Kelly

Storyline

A young boy learns that he has extraordinary powers and is not of this Earth. As a young man (Henry Cavill), he journeys to discover where he came from and what he was sent here to do. But the hero in him must emerge if he is to save the world from annihilation and become the symbol of hope for all mankind.

Opinion

Because of all the excitement for "Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice", I thought "Man of Steel" was supposed to be a big deal. So I watched it with high expectations, and I was rewarded with a big let down.

"Man of Steel" is loaded with action and special effects, but never quite takes off mainly because of the writing.

While I would have expected something like this from Zack Snyder, David Goyer ("Batman Begins", "The Dark Knight") and Christopher Nolan really disappointed me, and they made a film that portrays the famous Kryptonian with very little befitting the character - Superman never kills, no matter what.

The film can be easily divided into two parts. The first one introduces Clark Kent, with many significant flashbacks about his childhood, and his two fatherly figures, Jonathan Kent and Jor-El. It also shows what happened on Krypton, and why Kal-El's father had to do what he did. This is what made me think it was all going to work out. This part was awesome, but then shit happened. I mean, part two happened, the whole fighting thing with Zod. What could possibly go wrong with that? Everything. This part is loaded with special effects - 80-90% of the time - and extremely long action sequences that made me yawn God only knows how many times, and made me spend more time checking Twitter than actually focusing on the boring action.

The modern context of the film is to be appreciated though, and Clark's multiple father-and-son tales are beautifully done, but the Lois Lane/Superman romance is shallow.

I've already mentioned special effects and action a few times, and I think they deserve their own paragraph. They tried to compensate the lack of a solid story with unnecessary special effects that will be soon outdated, and action scenes there are just smashing scenes for the most. There is so much smashing going on, the Hulk would have gotten sick of it.

But let's move to the acting. After watching "Smallville" for 10 years, it's quite hard for me to get used to someone playing Clark Kent/Superman other than Tom Welling. But I wish that was the only problem. Since we are talking movies, the comparison between Brandon Routh and Henry Cavill is quite obvious - I'm leaving Christopher Reeve out of this because I'm yet to see his Superman. Anyway, I was saying, while Routh had grace and some acting skills, Henry Cavill has a great screen presence but he's just like a piece of wood. The rest of the cast, oh man. Michael Shannon was great as General Zod, and Kevin Costner did good in the little screen time he had, but Russell Crowe and Amy Adams are completely wasted here.

All of this being said, am I going to see "Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice" next week? Of course I will, I love superheroes flicks, and I won't miss the chance to complain about it.

MUST WATCH: New BATMAN v SUPERMAN Trailer

**Update: Apparently that wasn't the Suicide Squad trailer - DC is holding it back for some reason - fine see if I post it when it comes out - whenever. I could care less about it. Big day though for DC and Warner Bros' other tent pole at Comic-Con as they release their BATMAN v SUPERMAN: DAWN OF JUSTICE trailer. Now THAT looks like a movie!

BvS looks amazing. The trailer knocked it out of the park and while I have issues with Batman's "attire" the whole thing resonates with raw emotion and energy. I won't spoil it for you but have a look.


BATMAN v SUPERMAN opens on March 25, 2016 while SUICIDE SQUAD is slated for August 5, 2016 - that is if they decide to show to the public instead of just comic-con attendees squeezed into a box.

AQUAMAN May Just Be The Savior Of The DC Cinematic Universe

Batman? Nolan's not directing. Superman? I like Cavill in the role but I'm not completely sold on Snyder's directing him. DC universe? I still haven't seen how they're bringing it all together and I'm worried.

I'll tell you one movie I'm NOT worried about - AQUAMAN. I think DC has swung for the fences and landed a perfect team and the cornerstone is James freakin' Wan. Warner Bros just confirmed that Wan is directing and supervising the script (being written by 300's Kurt Johnstad - another strong move) and I couldn't be more thrilled.

So we have Wan who is arguably the hottest director in Hollywood right now (Furious 7 will soon be 3rd all time behind Cameron's 1-2 punch of AVATAR and TITANIC) and he's prolific - something Cameron does not do (NO, I'm not saying he's better than Cameron. C'mon).

Add in the writing of the militaristic Johnstad (300, 300: RISE OF AN EMPIRE, ACT OF VALOR) and you've got the solid backbone of a major hit already.

But now, add in the SOLID casting of Jason Momoa as AQUAMAN himself and the picture is complete. So while I'm standoffish regarding the DC cinematic universe, I'm all in for this movie. I think it will cornerstone the expansion of DC's plans much more so many think and may surprise even the top brass at Warners.

AQUAMAN is slated for a July 27, 2018 release.