[themoviebloggers]

GHOSTBUSTERS Reboot Cast Confirmed, Internet Stays Crazy

Earlier this week the cast of Paul Feig’s (Bridesmaids, The Heat) upcoming Ghostbusters reboot was confirmed.Kristen Wiig, Melissa Carthy, Kate McKinnon and Leslie Jones will be doing thebusting of the ghosts. We also learned that it has a confirmed release date ofJuly 22nd, 2016.

by Jordan Appugliesi

Upon the release of this news, the Internet reacted the way one would assume. The general response was positive: a reboot like this is why reboots exist and can be a good thing; taking the form and idea of what came before and putting a beneficial, diverse twist on it. Also: the cast is AWESOME and this could be a lot of fun. The other side of the Internet decided to respond as it/they usually tend to: with a lot of crazy. Many exclaimed that this was “ruining their childhood” and that it is going to suck (without seeing a single piece of footage from the actual movie) and so on and so forth. This casting news also came the same day as the trailer for the Fantastic Four reboot dropped, which features Michael B. Jordan as the Human Torch, a color-blind casting choice that was welcomed by most rational individuals, but of course, had its fair share of contrarians.

There are a few problems with all of this. This is Paul Feig’s iteration of Ghostbusters and it by no means ruins your purposed sanctity of the original movie (which, by the way, is nothing amazing – sorry). Secondly, the reaction to the casting news for this Ghostbusters reboot deterred from how awesome this cast is. Kristen Wiig and Melissa McCarthy seemed like obvious inclusions when this project was originally announced, but it’s the other two that is really exciting. For those unaware, Kate McKinnon and Leslie Jones are current cast-members of Saturday Night Live. McKinnon was introduced as the heir to Kristen Wiig and, in just a few years, has become one of the most lauded members of the current cast. Jones joined the show this year and has instantly become a fan favourite. Both are exceptional comedians and this cast as a whole is intriguing and promising. Unfortunately, we’ve yet to arrive at a point where this kind of news isn’t as divisive.

So, while that dark portion of the web stays insane, the rest of us look forward to the Ghostbusters reboot.

[themoviebloggers]

FANT4STIC FOUR Finally Gets A Trailer, And Its… Meh.

Just six months until release and we finally have our first look at that movie people were mostly talking about because we hadn’t got our first look at it yet. The long-awaited teaser trailer for Chronicle director Josh Trank’s Fantastic Four is here, and I’m struggling to care about it. Hit the jump to check it out.

by Josh Lewis

Practically on its hands and knees, begging for us to take it seriously the teaser opens with deeeeeep, gloooooooomy piano music and voice-over warning of us of all the seriousness this movie is going to have. It’s really boring, generic tentpole stuff for the most part complete with serious, melancholic glances, vast cityscapes and locations to explore that are later blown up or welcomed by giant laser portals, which for some reason are becoming increasingly popular(?).

Eagerly ditching the fun, family-centered spirit of the original comic (which long-time fans have quickly expressed agitation about) and instead replacing it with tones and themes far more suited to the sci-fi/horror genre is really the only thing keeping me on board with it. The superhero film that is incredibly popular as of late has truly proven itself to be far more than a one-genre pony. See: the politically-infused spy thriller Captain America 2, the gritty, realistic Dark Knight, or the whimsical space adventure Guardians Of The Galaxy, and I –for one – am very intrigued about a scientists-turned-superheros narrative done through the creepy, Cronenberg-ian lens Trank and Kinberg are clearly going for.

Will it make for a great Fantastic Four film? Probably not. We’ll have to see. Will it make for a great genre film? Maybe. We’ll have to see.

That’s the most this trailer makes me feel. I mean, props to Trank and company for giving us a trailer that doesn’t spoil any of the plot elements and relies solely on its tone and deeply-seeded themes, but the rest of this trailer doesn’t convince me that they intend to follow through on either of those. It looks fine in terms of cinematography and I like the cast, but there’s no real personality/sense of who or why I should care separating this from the other generic end-of-the-world stuff we get every year. 

But maybe that’s just too much to expect out of a teaser trailer. What do you guys think? Am I crazy? Does this look like the film of 2015?

[themoviebloggers]

Movie Review - X-MEN: DAYS OF FUTURE PAST

Looks like Bryan Singer finally (kinda, sorta?) figured out how to make one of these.

by Siddhant Adlakha

Bryan Singer's X-Men: Days of Future Past exceeded my expectations, though I wouldn't necessarily call that high praise since I still find it hard to sit through all of X2. Still, the scenes involving characters sitting down and explaining the plot are far and few apart for once, and there are even moments that rank amongst the series' finest. I am however, hesitant to jump right in to any kind of comparative praise. After all, it's been 7 films and 14 years, and I can't help but wonder: is 'good enough' good enough anymore?

Singer was always setting out to make two films with this one, the sequel to Matthew Vaughn's First Class, undoubtedly the series' best till date, and the sequel to Singer's own X-Films from back in the day. In either case, it feels like a sequel in both style and spirit, but only one of those is a good thing.

The post-apocalyptic scenes involving the original cast, and a few newcomers rendered unnecessary, are kept to a minimum, and thank god for that. They feel far too much like the director's dirty laundry, and he ends up turning his black leather bleakness up to an astounding 11, while still somehow managing to make them cartoonish in the worst way possible. Over the top death scenes of characters we've just met that feel like something out of Itchy & Scratchy, veteran thespians forced to stare just off camera as they explain everything that's happened and everything that's going to happen, and.... Kitty Pride has.... the ability to.... send people back in time? Okay, that's the least of my issues with the film, and it gets a good chunk of the unintentional silliness out of the way at the very beginning.

And that's when things start to get a little more enjoyable.

It's quite a head-scratcher that after two solo films and and a trilogy that may as well have been centered around him, Wolverine finally gets to be portrayed at his optimum in a sprawling ensemble piece. His dry wit keeps the dreariness of the Skynet future at bay just long enough to hold the film's opening together, and it continues to act as an interesting narrative push when he comes up against Beast, Xavier and Magneto in 1973.

Speaking of which, the film comes alive in its past timeline simply by not being the future one, and the colours and the characters all pop as if Singer learned a thing or two from Vaughn. Finally, FINALLY, after all these years, he understands that the longevity of the X-Men has been dependent on them being FUN. They're a family, and they fight, but there's an inherent frivolity to them that was missing in his early works. It's quite sad to think about what could've been, had the series started out this way, but the film we're getting now (for better or for worse) is in fact, a fun X-Men movie.

That said, there's certainly no dearth of engaging character moments. Even though Xavier and Magneto still find themselves having the exact same conversations five films later, the predicaments they find themselves in are different enough that one might not even notice.

The plot is rather Mystique heavy, and it's one of the film's biggest strengths, even though much of the film's development, both plot and character-wise, is dependent on Charles and Eric. She's rather integral to it all, the ripple effect of her actions have the ability to make or break, and she kicks a whole bunch of ass while getting hints of her own arc and ethos, but her story is far too dependent on the other characters. It's as if somebody in the writers' room had the idea to make a Mystique-centric movie that really, really worked, but somewhere along the way, the team started to chicken out on that decision. And I really do wish this was more of a Mystique movie, because Jennifer Lawrence shines as a Raven caught half way between her character in First Class and the version of her we see in the Trilogy, and it's nice to see this character (almost) get her due.

And while we're on the subject of characters dealt a shitty hand, my oh my, Evan Peters as Quicksilver. I, and everybody else who doubted the decision to include him have no choice but to eat our words with a side of humble pie. While he ends up being a C-list character in this already crowded movie, and absolutely nothing like the Quicksilver of the comics, he steals every single scene that he's in. In fact, if I had to pinpoint the moment where I'd say the audience was enjoying the film the most, it'd have to be the few times he was on screen, and the reason for that is simple. He's scenes are the most fun, most entertaining, and most joyous. Hell, even Magneto, Xavier and Wolverine end up mere spectators to his antics, and I honestly can't wait to see more of him in the next one.

As for the plot, while it's set into motion by some silly and expository mumbo jumbo on the future side of things, the stuff going on in the past is just clear enough. Wolverine must bring Magneto and Xavier together to stop the ticking time-bomb that is Mystique, in order to avoid total annihilation.

James McAvoy's Charles Xavier finds himself in a very different position than when we last saw him. One of Hank McCoy's serums helps him walk and eases the pain, but it suppresses his powers, and he's a man at the peak of his addiction and at his life's rock bottom. His turn towards the light comes about midway through the film in a scene involving a bit of time-travel-y goodness. It takes some of the more pleasant elements from the original trilogy, and allows their essence to flow across the screen, while simultaneously creating the same serenity that Charles did for Eric in First Class. Remember that one? It's kinda hard to forget. It's a wonderful callback in so many ways, and it's an instance really does justify the film's existence as a way to tie the two series together, but it may actually be the only one.

What follows isn't necessarily disjointed, but the dots all feel rather pre-connected. The film is visually splendid, in fact one can see where a lot of their money was spent, but one of the most important characters in the series ends up being almost brushed aside despite sharing most of the screentime. Michael Fassbender's Magneto is most certainly a wild card, but his motives and his thought process are never made clear, even though certain scenes kind of depend on it. He's responsible for most of the film's BIG moments, but they feel like moments that are only unfolding because they were on some sort of check-list (The Q&A with the producer afterwards actually confirmed this about the film's single biggest set-piece) and that sort of approach ends up taking a hell of a lot of weight away from the guy who's essentially THE most interesting mutant.

Still, while Magneto feels like somewhat of a pawn in the hands of the filmmakers, it isn't necessarily enough to bring the entire thing down. While having shot the film in digital and 3D proves to be a useless endeavor, and the film looks distinctly un-cinematic at times, there's a constant energy to it that keeps it moving even amidst its less enjoyable moments. There's a real attempt made to mirror the events of the two timelines, making it some kind of meditation on consequence, and while it doesn't entirely work owing to how plain uninteresting the future timeline is, the action is engaging at the very least (Hallelujah! That's always been my main issue with Singer) and the story is always traveling in a definite forward direction, and at a rapid pace.

It all comes together rather neatly in the end, giving Singer the opportunity to simultaneously start a-fresh (strangely enough, undoing a lot of what came before?) and to give his old pals a warm and happy send-off. What that hopefully means is that the series is no longer tied to its original continuity (more importantly, its original TONE), allowing Singer and the producers to finally let go of a darling that they really should've killed a long time ago.

The post-credit scene is a treat for anyone who knows what's to come (hint: it's in the title of the next film), and what I'm really hoping for after seeing this one is that Singer, if he's still on board, takes the lessons learned here and applies them unabashedly, now that he's finally gotten the last of his 'MAKE EVERYTHING DARK AND NOT FUN' out of his system. Hopefully.

Days of Future Past is an enjoyable film. It's disjointed, and held back by a lot of the series' prior baggage, but for a decent chunk of its runtime, it takes what makes the X-Men the X-MEN, and brings them to life in a way that I'm happy I got to see. So, is 'good enough' good enough? For the time being, I suppose I have no choice but to say so. Here's to hoping for a brighter future, though.

[themoviebloggers]

Disney Hires GODZILLA Director For STAR WARS Spin-Off

Finally, some ACTUAL Star Wars news, and it's pretty damn exciting.

by Siddhant Adlakha

While J.J. Abrams is busy playing coy in his mystery box, it appears one of Disney's non-Episode VII adventures has found itself a talking point, namely Gareth Edwards. The Monsters director caused quite a stir with his Godzilla remake (you can find my thoughts here) and it would appear the mouse-eared empire has jumped at the first opportunity to hire him.

It's unclear as to whether or not he'll be back for the Godzilla sequel, though many of us would like him to be (he's attached to the next two, but who knows), and it's even less clear as to which off the potential spin-offs he'll be granted the reigns to. Either way, this is big news for both parties. Edwards, who's career is growing exponentially, and Disney, who have bagged themselves two directors who have had the 'new Spielberg' monicker thrown at them in recent years.

So, will it be Boba Fett? Yoda? Darth Vader? Something else entirely? We'll keep you posted as and when we know more. The film is expected to hit theatres December 16th, 2016.

[Source: THR]

[themoviebloggers]

Batman Vs Superman Has A Title, Its Writer Is A Piece Of Shit

I'm lazy, so I'm just going to smash these two stories together. Now you only have to 'hit the jump' once to get all the latest scoops. Hit the jump, baby. Hit the jump.

by Siddhant Adlakha

As per WB's press release, the film is going to be called Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice. It's a silly title, and there's not much more to be said about it. What I would like to talk about, however, is David Goyer, and some of the things he recently said.

On a podcast with Craig Mazin, good old Goyer, the whose fingerprints are all over Batman, Superman, and now Wonder Woman, had a few things to say about Martian Manhunter, and more troublingly, about She-Hulk:

Craig Mazin: The real name for She-Hulk was Slut-Hulk. That was the whole point. Let’s just make this green chick with enormous boobs. And she’s Hulk strong but not Hulk massive, right? … She’s real lean, stringy…

David S. Goyer: She’s still pretty chunky. She was like Chyna from the WWE.

Mazin: The whole point of She-Hulk was just to appeal sexistly to ten-year-old boys. Worked on me.

Goyer: I have a theory about She-Hulk. Which was created by a man, right? And at the time in particular I think 95% of comic book readers were men and certainly almost all of the comic book writers were men. So the Hulk was this classic male power fantasy. It’s like, most of the people reading comic books were these people like me who were just these little kids getting the shit kicked out of them every day… And so then they created She-Huk, right? Who was still smart… I think She-Hulk is the chick that you could fuck if you were Hulk, you know what I’m saying? … She-Hulk was the extension of the male power fantasy. So it’s like if I’m going to be this geek who becomes the Hulk then let’s create a giant green porn star that only the Hulk could fuck.

Craig Mazin wrote both sequels to The Hangover, so one can't really expect much better of him. David Goyer on the other hand, has been in the comicbook movie game for nearly 20 years now. He co-wrote The Dark Knight Trilogy, he solo-wrote Man of Steel, and his Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice script (wow, they're really calling it that, huh?) is the jumping off point for Chris Terrio's rewrites, not to mention the jumping off point for the entire future of the DC Cinematic Universe. Oh, and he's an executive producer on the film too.

What was it that Uncle Ben once said? Something about power and responsibility that eventually became the modern mantra for superheroes? Well whatever it was, David Goyer is doing the opposite. You can find the rest of his comments about Martian Manhunter here, and while they're severely misinformed, they're rather harmless in retrospect. The excerpt I posted above, however, is a different story.

Ignoring the fact that Jennifer Walters a.k.a. She-Hulk was conceived as Bruce Banner's COUSIN (not his power-fantasy fuck-buddy), while Goyer may have some sort of larger point to make about the depiction of women in comics, it's buried far, far beneath the things he actually said.

Still, words are just words, yes? And all he's doing is critiquing ink on paper, correct? Only that's not all it is.

For one thing, She-Hulk is an important part of Marvel's female roster, so her casual dismissal is somewhat troubling. A lawyer by profession, Jennifer Walters has been, for the longest time, a figure of both sexual and social empowerment. She's intelligent, successful, and above all else, the thing that stands out about her as a superhero is her conscious decision to remain in She-Hulk form. If that doesn't do a world of good for the issues of body-image that run rampant in comicbooks, then I don't know what does.

Like any good superhero, She-Hulk stands for something. She was initially created as 'female Hulk', but she carved her own individual path as the years went by, and if anything, she's a power fantasy for *girls* who read comics, and already have very little by way of characters to latch on to. I wasn't going to write about this at all, actually, but it was this comment over at the Badassdigest community that prompted me to do so.

Superheroes are important. Stories are important. Fiction is important to people for innumerable reasons, and the superhero has always been a way to reconcile the best and worst parts of ourselves, and turn it into something meaningful and positive. What then, do I hope to achieve by pointing out Goyer's comments? Do I simply want to be 'outraged' that this is the man now in charge of three of our most important and iconic heroes? Perhaps. But I'm not so much upset as I am defeated right now.

What I want more than anything though, is for us to be better. We can be better, and characters like Batman, Superman, Wonder Woman and She-Hulk show us that we can be better. So once we're done with all the yelling, and demanding these guys' heads on a platter, as I'm sure will happen, let's use whatever feelings stuff like this leaves us with and channel it into something more positive.

Me? I'm going to use this opportunity to delve into more She-Hulk. I just ordered Volumes 1 & 2 of her recent Complete Collections, and I'll probably write a piece or two once I'm done reading them.

Write. Create. Support your favourite titles. Use this as an impetus to talk about the positive impact these characters can have on people, and share your favourite and most meaningful stories with someone else. Who knows, you might just put a smile on someone's face. After all, isn't that what your favourite superhero would want?

Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice opens May 6th, 2016. Let's hope for something hopeful.

[themoviebloggers]

New Trailer For GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY

You're welcome.

(function(d, s, id) { var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0]; if (d.getElementById(id)) return; js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id; js.src = "//connect.facebook.net/en_US/all.js#xfbml=1"; fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs); }(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk'));

Post by Guardians of the Galaxy.

by Siddhant Adlakha

I'm still not sure what to make of this movie, all I know is it looks awesome.

[themoviebloggers]

Alfonso Cuaron To Direct 'Fantastic Beasts And Where To Find Them'?

The Harry Potter spin-off may be interesting after all.

by Siddhant Adlakha

My news coverage tends to be infused with a level of indignant snark, perhaps at the very idea that we're even talking about movies that are two or three years away while ignoring stuff that's in theatres right now, and I'm fully aware that I'm part of the problem. My initial story about Fantastic Beasts and Where To Find Them, for instance. What can I say, it's fun to use the internet to condescend towards no one in particular. The upside however, is that since it's all in good fun, I'm not afraid to eat my words. In fact, I'm more than happy to do so on occasions such as this, when the news in question may result in a good movie.

Alfonso Cuaron directed Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, the film that dared to take departures from both Chris Columbus' overly child-friendly installments, and from the source material in general, matching the tone of the stories to the sort of angsty, hormonal struggle teenage wizards might go through, especially when they're, you know.... The chosen one. While Cuaron only directed the one, it was in fact, THE one, and we wouldn't have had the series we do today were it not for him never having read the book.

If not paying attention to the book is a pre-requisite, then he and Rowling's novella are practically made for each other, or so thinks madamme Finke, who it'd be foolish not to believe. Back then, he was just the guy who directed Y Tu Mamá También, but since then, he's done a couple of films you might've heard of, namely Children of Men and Gravity. If the notion of the filmmaker behind those two being handed the reigns to Rowling's next big thing doesn't excite you, or at least make you remotely intrigued, well, you probably shouldn't be watching movies anyway.

The first film in the 'Fantastic Beasts Trilogy' hit theatres November 18th, 2016. We'll keep you updated on the eventual casting and on whenever Cuaron wipes his nose. Probably more interesting than any current Star Wars news anyway.

[themoviebloggers]

New TRANS4MERS Trailer Is A Transformers Trailer

Yes, we're calling it Trans4mers now, in case you didn't get the memo.

by Siddhant Adlakha

"How many more of my kind must be sacrificed?" asks Optimus Prime in this new Age of Extinction trailer. Fitting, since we've been wondering the same thing about the Transformers movies since 2007.

Despite its promises, the new trailer isn't very different from the old trailer, just as the new movie doesn't seem very different from the last three. At this point it's become somewhat of a joke, seeing what bits of his last film Michael Bay will deride to somehow convince us the next one will be any good.

The Autobots are supposed to have undergone some kind of design overhaul to make them seem, what's the word.... not ugly? But they look like they jumped right out of films 2 and 3 and into whatever this is supposed to be. The plot is being kept somewhat under wraps (a particularly interesting rumor has the Chinese building knock-off Transformers) but the end-result seems to be another bad-robots-trying-to-destroy-Earth type deal, only this time, the good guys are teaming up with the MOTHERFUCKING DINOBOTS.

That's an exciting concept, and that final image of Optimus riding Grimlock while wielding a broadsword is one of those things you hope is really, really good in the actual movie. It certainly has all the makings of a 'good' Michael Bay Transformers film, whatever that might look like in theory, but the fact that it's number FOUR in the series doesn't exactly inspire confidence.

Shia LaBeouf's perpetually confused Sam Witwicky has been replaced by Marky Mark's sincerity, and I'm kind of intrigued by it. Seeing him exclaim that he thinks he might've found a Transformer, like a child on Christmas morning, and then having him thrust into the middle of the action seems a far more interesting human story than anything the series has had to offer thus far, but what's going to make or break this one is the robots. We're four films in, and it's high time they learned how to make one of these.

People go to Transformers movies for the action, myself included, and the few moments in Part 3 where the action was both coherent and engaging were pretty damn good, even though the other 86% of the movie.... wasn't.

My fingers are firmly crossed for this being a good time at the movies, but in the event that it isn't, its failure would mean Bay is free from the series for good, and able to make the kind of movies he's good at making, i.e. not Transformers movies. Either way, we'll know for sure on June 27th.

[themoviebloggers]

Full Trailer For Christopher Nolan's INTERSTELLAR

Do yourself a favour and watch this one in IMAX alongside Godzilla.

by Siddhant Adlakha

The teaser released last December showed mostly stock footage (some fabricated specifically for the trailer) and focused on human innovation these last 50 years, the fulcrum being man's first steps into outer space. There was a sense of wide-eyed wonder to it, an almost boastful nostalgia, proud of its heritage in the long line of voyages that have, unfortunately, become far and few apart.

This next trailer, one that carries over that same feeling of bewilderment at a shuttle taking flight, reveals much more about the film's Earth-bound plot. Humanity's food supply has run thin, and while the world's focus is on the ground, trying to figure out a short-term solution to its farming problems, Matthew McConaughey's Cooper (an engineer) looks up at a drone and calculates how much solar energy it could provide. He's still reaching for the stars in an age where staying grounded is the only acceptable status quo.

The human story gets its due, Cooper has to make the difficult decision to leave his kids behind as he embarks on a journey into the far reaches of space. And as if that wasn't an intriguing enough stylistic departure for Chris Nolan (one still in keeping with many of the themes and character dynamics he employs), the trailer offers us a few glimpses at the stuff that's untethered. And my, oh my.

Familiar imagery from the most famous of sci-fi, think the likes of Alien and 2001: A Space Odyssey, show up dirtier than their original cinematic incarnations. Cryo-sleep pods. Rotating landing docks. It's as if the seeds for what would eventually become the Nostromo and Discovery One are being planted here, only their pristine appearances are now suitably grimy, much in keeping with the story of the film. It's as if these are the last remaining space crafts in existence, and are thus, our last hope for survival.

And as if that wasn't enough, the sequence of a ship traveling in an apparent circle as space itself bends and curves around it, is both unsettling and adventurous, and like nothing ever seen before on film. In that final moment, the trailer withholds the answers to the film's most burning questions, as the ship disappears into the unknown.

Interstellar hits theatres (and 70mm IMAX) on November 7th.

[themoviebloggers]

Movie Review - GODZILLA

Mis-marketed for a cause, this is the Godzilla movie you've been waiting for.

by Siddhant Adlakha

If you haven't seen the movie yet, stop what you're doing, find the biggest 3D screen in your vicinity, and watch the hell out of it. Long story short, this is summer done right.

To talk about Godzilla (2014) would be to talk about Gojira (1954) and about Godzilla movies in general, because Gareth Edwards and company have crafted a jaw-dropping kaiju spectacle that's both completely serious, and completely self-aware. Not only that, but as far as 'remakes' go, this one shoots way up to the top of the list in terms of transposing material from its original thematic context in a manner that both pays tribute, and acts as a pitch-perfect modern update despite being a complete inversion.

Where the '54 original positioned Godzilla as an end-result of nuclear fallout, the 2014 pseudo-remake allows him(?) to be a force of nature. What sets him apart however, from both the Japanese original as well as Hollywood's last attempt at co-opting the franchise, is that here he's akin to the more human-friendly Godzilla of Toho's later years. No, Godzilla is not the villain of the movie. He's not even an anti-hero. He's a straight-up good guy, battling not one, but two massive bug-like kaiju that feed off - wait for it - drumroll please - nuclear radiation.

The film isn't just thematically sound, it's thematically ballsy. While the human story does take center stage more often than not, it's used to prop up the film's structure as 100% buildup. And boy oh boy is it worth the wait.

It's a summer movie that, thankfully, sheds any sort of 9/11 imagery (I counted at least 4 last year) and instead takes its cues from Fukushima, Katrina and East Asian Tsunamis, in keeping with its nature Vs nuclear theme. We're harnessing what we believe is the power of the future, but we're doing so at the edge of a knife, and perhaps a trip back in time to when things were simpler might do us some good.

Perhaps, in an age of convoluted, cynical blockbusters, a good, old fashioned monster beat-em-up is exactly what we need as movie-goers. And perhaps we need to put our egos aside for a minute and just watch on in awe, as we allow gods to do battle on our behalf.

(It's rather fitting too, that letting the monsters fight isn't just the alternative to dropping a bomb on them, but is put into action at the behest of the son of a Hiroshima victim.)

I haven't seen too many films that balance their two worlds as well as this, i.e. the world of the characters, and our world as an audience. The story stands on its own, a functional father-son tale set against the backdrop of global calamity, during which people around the world come together. But at the same time, it delivers AS a Godzilla movie, the thing you're paying money to see, and it knows exactly how to tease, and to deliver. Reveals met with applause. Action met with cheers. Moments of tension and their subsequent release through either fear or fun met with every intended, immersed and incredible response

I don't think a movie has ever made me lean forward in my seat with anticipation at the sight of something lighting up slowly (you'll know it when you see it) only to have me lose control and yell at the top of my voice when [the thing happened], but it wasn't even remotely out of the ordinary. Everyone else in the theatre was screaming and clapping too.

I'm uncertain as to whether or not I'll watch it again, part of the magic of this first time watch was the buildup and the opening night audience, not to mention discovering how it differed from previous incarnations. Hell at one point, it even uses a tiny vessel similar to the ones destroyed in Gojira (and by the actual atom bombs) to get a nuke AWAY from a populated area. That sort of panache, coupled with its major, MAJOR action moments, is more than enough to make it a highlight of this summer, and plenty of summers prior.

I thought it peaked at the solar beam. It was just getting started....

[themoviebloggers]

Movie Review - CHEF

Have you ever been to an upscale restaurant and ordered something run-of-the-mill, only to be greeted by the sweet sensation of a simple formula now perfected? Chef is the movie version of that experience. All the bits and pieces are familiar, but the ingredients are cooked to perfection.

by Siddhant Adlakha

A working dad shows up late to pick up his young son from the home of his well to do ex-wife. It's an image so clear that you could name a handful of movies that employ it right off the top of your head, only here, it isn't used as window dressing. Jon Favreau's Carl Casper puts his culinary passion above all else, including his ten year old son Percy. It's a premise that's been done to death, but its predictability is used to the film's advantage, for Favreau and company have no qualms about the kind of soul-food they're making.

The film is a delicious blend (sorry, the food puns are unavoidable when you're in such a good mood) of stylized visual composition and hyper-naturalistic performances, in which director Favreau and his cohorts, the likes of John Leguizamo, Bobby Cannavale, Sofia Vergara, Oliver Platt, Scarlett Johannson, Dustin Hoffman, Amy Sedaris, Robert Downey Jr. and the young EmJay Anthony, have oodles of fun on screen, no matter how small their actual part. In fact, the biggest names on that list have no more than 15 minutes of combined screentime, but no matter the occasion, the enjoyment is infectious.

A road-trip movie, a kitchen cavort and feel-good family film all rolled in to one, Chef's key strength is writer-director-lead Jon Favreau, who bears his artistic soul for two hours, with a fair amount of self-deprecation to boot. It's fitting that Favreau, after coming off studio-mandated disasters such as Iron Man 2 and Cowboys & Aliens, would make a movie where his character gets fired for refusing to cook the owner's menu, and in which he has a stand-off with a stringent food critic for so easily dismissing what he puts his heart and soul into, but these aren't so much victory moments as they are a trip down a rabbit hole. Casper lashing out at the critic goes viral, nearly destroying his career, and while Casper himself might not, Favreau actually treats the concept of a harsh critic with a certain amount of respect, even eventually implying that a co-existence between art and criticism is somewhat necessary.

The film that ensues is merely the pieces of the puzzle shifting into place. Things fall apart rather early on, and the remaining 2/3rds of the film are a careful re-assembly (something something.... kitchen pun?) of things we've seen countless times before, only this time the struggle is infused with an unrelentingly joyous atmosphere. Casper swallows his pride and opens a food truck, going solo and independent after his restaurant gigs, much like Favreau with this film. Along the way, he stops to have a few conversations about why he loves what he does. "I get to touch people's lives with what I do, and I love it, and I want to share this with you" Casper professes to his son, as the line between Favreau and his character starts to blur. And that's part of the beauty of it.

The film also makes devastatingly good use of the 'main character's fuck-up goes viral' trope that seems to have been used as a gag on countless occasions, as it allows social media to be a full fledged character, responsible for both Casper's downfall as well as his comeback, not to mention allowing his tech-savvy son to get in on the food truck action as well as tutor his not-so-savvy dad.

"I'm a meme now. Do you know what a meme is? I'm a meme. I'm a fucking meme."

The film has no dearth of broad, melodramatic moments, but they're balanced by Favreau's keen eye for subtlety when it's called for. Young EmJay Anthony is a perfect fit for the director's approach, at times going big with lines like "You're so mean to me!" before running off awkwardly, but also able to carry the weight of an entire scene that hinges on a closeup of him simply looking at his divorced parents while he dances. He and Favreau share most of the film's screentime, and the chemistry they share is molten hot.

Eventually, the film begins to head towards its only possible conclusion, wrapping up neatly (perhaps too neatly, for some) and ending on something of a fairytale note, but whether or not that's necessarily earned doesn't really seem relevant anymore. After the credits rolled, I found myself leaving behind several people who, without knowing each other or planning it prior, were dancing their way out of the theatre. And had I not been as self-conscious and exhausted from a full day on set, I'd have probably joined it. And you can't really argue with something like that.

[themoviebloggers]

Movie Review - THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN 2

Ahoy, true believers! I'm going to try and keep this brief since we're well over a week into the conversation and because I don't have much time right now. To be honest though, there's not much I can say that hasn't already been said, but I'll put my best foot forward in trying to unravel this terrible, amazing, complicated film.

by Siddhant Adlakha

Well. Perhaps 'complicated' is overselling it, it's not so much the film that's complicated, but the varied responses to it. It isn't divisive in a traditional sense, it's individually dilemmatic. Far too many chefs have entered the kitchen, and while some of them have managed to throw a few useful ingredients into the broth, a thick, viscous mixture consisting of multiple layers that cannot and should not mix, how the final product tastes will all depends on what kind of ladle you use. Some of it is downright awful, part Man of Steel part Batman & Robin (while trying to achieve what both those extremely different films set out to), and yet, it's also the single best visual translation of Spider-Man in any non comic medium, which is kind of unfortunate, all things considered.

On the Spidey side of things, the film is a visual feast. His traditional red & blue comes to life like never before, the colours and practical stunt work popping on 35mm as he swings and swoops and stumbles and fumbles. On the Peter Parker side of things however, the film is absolutely inept.

The previous film managed to, at the very least, give us a glance at the ethos of Peter Parker. Who he was, what made him tick, what made him different. But here, there is no Peter Parker to be found. Andrew Garfield is so, so perfectly cast as Spider-Man that they decided to let him keep the costume on even when he wasn't wearing it. Spider-Man is the hero. The costume. The brightly coloured mask. The humor to hide the pain. Who then, is Peter Parker? In this case, he's someone who causes drama in his own life. He's someone who hurts the people closest to him. He's someone who's 'scientific' in that he watches YouTube videos. He's someone who breaks up with Gwen Stacy because it's too dangerous for her to be around Spider-Man, but spends the entire movie going back and forth and back again without reason or consequence. He does however, swoop in on the day of his graduation and kiss Gwen in front of a cheering crowd. Much like, I don't know, a superhero might? Only the film is insistent on pretending there's a distinction between Peter and Spidey where no such distinction exists.

More so than its inability to commit to its own main character, it takes the 'power fantasy' elements that were beneath the first film's surface and makes them the entire overarching theme of the film (if one can call it a theme, it feels more like an accident), and Spider-Man is never held accountable for his actions by the film's internal morality, if it indeed has one. He has great power, but he's fuck-all in the responsibility department. You'd think that after his parents, Uncle Ben and Captain Stacy he'd have learned something, but the end of the last film seemed intent on doing the reverse. Here, the film undoes its predecessor's undoing, and then.... re-does it? Whatever decisions Gwen makes regarding her relationship with Peter are rendered moot because, well, because apparently Peter is irresistible to women. Now, I'm no purist, but such a drastic 180 from half a century's worth of source material surely has a point to it, does it not? It doesn't, actually, because as I mentioned before, Peter is never held accountable for his actions. By the people. By the story. By himself. He is however, the person who gets to decide whether or not Harry Osborn lives or dies, simply by making a decision, and he doesn't even make the most heroic decision possible. He makes the most neutral one. Rather than using his gifts as a hero and as a scientist to figure out a way to save his friend (they didn't seem like friends, they just talked about being friends), he decides to sit it out entirely. Oh, and if you're reading this without having seen the movie, don't worry, you're not missing any important information with regards Harry Osborn, other than the fact that, like Spider-power-adaptability, Green-Goblinism is hereditary. Or something. It's not important.

Speaking of which, Dane DeHaan turns in a maniacal, operatic performance as Harry Osborn, but it felt like his scenes were in the wrong movie. You know which movie he should have been in? Well, actually, he should've been in this one, but the half of the movie that was trying to be over-the-top campy. Instead, he was shoved into its 'dark' and 'gritty' corners, and was replaced by Electro, a villain so boring, useless and perfunctory that he has no bearing on the plot until the big team up in the third act, and even then he merely functions as a temporary blockade. If you cut him out of the movie, it remains largely unchanged, which is why I'm not even going to mention him again.

In fact, you could shift any of the major pieces around and still end up at the exact same third act one way or another, because that's how this film was made. Those were the bullet points (i.e. the SELLING points) that writers Orci & Kurtzman took from the executives, who are so intent on creating a larger universe with their limited property that they forgot to give their impending franchise the legs to stand on.

The film does, however, have three or four of the best individual Spider-Man scenes ever put together on film. The moments between Peter and Aunt May are pitch perfect, Spider-Man rescues a little kid from some bullies and then walks him home, and later on, that kid tries to take on the Rhino while dressed as Spider-Man just as Spidey shows up to save the day. Also, there's the [REDACTED] scene that a particular character is known for, the selling point of most of this film for people familiar with the comics, and they absolutely nail the scene itself in all its gory detail, and the impact (pun intended) is gut-wrenching, but it.... doesn't really fit the rest of the movie. It doesn't happen because of Peter's lack of responsibility, it doesn't have any real thematic or narrative bearing, and its foreshadowing during Peter & Gwen's graduation is pure garbage. It just sort of.... happens.

Stone and Garfield carry over their incredible chemistry from the first film (and from real life) but even they can't rescue some of the scenes written for them. Their initial break-up, the first of several I believe, is on par with Anakin's sand monologue in Attack of the Clones, and even two young actors as fine as themselves clearly struggle with the material.

In the end, when Peter finally has the opportunity to reflect, and there's some sort of potential for learning responsibility, even though it'd be pointless at this stage of the film since his actions or inactions have no bearing on who dies and he's basically infallible, the film decides to skip over several months at a stretch. Four, in fact. Granted, the closing scene on the other side of that bridge is spectacular, but the jump itself is a horrible, horrible decision. It glosses over the most important elements and decisions of Peter Parker as a character, perhaps the ONLY important decisions in fact.

Oh yeah, and there's an entire subplot (main plot? I'm not even sure) about Oscorp and Peter's father and a magic subway car that's really just better left forgotten, and happens to be just another spinning plate that the franchise is obviously having a terribly difficult time balancing. I'm not entirely certain why I should care about an opening 10 minute flashback revolving around Peter's parents fighting someone on a plane, nor what Peter finding out any information about his father (like, at all) is supposed to do for the character or story, but there's clearly a lot of this movie that was left on the cutting room floor, and it's just a disheartening mess at the end of the day.

Marc Webb and the cast wanted to tell a serious superhero story, the producers wanted to build a lucrative franchise (planting the seeds for ALL of the Sinister Six at Oscorp?) and the writers were busy trying to cater to both parties whilst being as moronic as they've always been, and the whole movie just crumbles in on itself. Granted, it makes a strong recovery towards the end, presenting some truly memorable and powerful *individual* scenes, but I'd be lying if I said it was worth the other 75%, during which I was slouching down in my seat, looking over at my friend in sheer horror as we considered getting up and walking out on numerous occasions.

I don't care how good your best scene is, if a Spider-Man movie makes you want to get up and leave, you dropped the ball. And I wouldn't be surprised if they drop it again in a couple of years.

[themoviebloggers]

Marvel's AGENT CARTER Series Is A-Go!

Oh yeah, and Agents of S.H.I.T. got renewed as well. Hit the jump to see me ignore it entirely as I fawn over the ladies of the Marvel Universe instead.

by Siddhant Adlakha

Hayley Attwell's Peggy Carter first showed up in Captain America: The First Avenger, where she formed one equal half of the Marvel Cinematic Universe's most interesting and convincing romance, while also establishing herself as a force to be reckoned with. She kicked some more ass in Marvel's Agent Carter one-shot, a short that explored her attempts at establishing herself in the male-driven world of espionage prior to the formation of SHIELD, and now, she's finally getting to headline her own TV show.

The series will be set in the mid 1940s, a world we're likely to revisit in next summer's Avengers: Age of Ultron with Peggy making another appearance, and with this and the inclusion of Jessica Jones in Marvel's Netflix solo roster, the ladies of Earth 616 are beginning to make it to screens of various sizes. Fingers crossed for that Ms. Marvel movie. I'm reading Brian Reed's run on Carol Danvers right now and it'd make a fantastic jumping off point, but even if it doesn't happen (it will), we've got not one, but TWO upcoming Marvel series headlined by female characters, and they're both pretty damn exciting.

Also, while I wasn't necessarily convinced before, Captain America: The Winter Solder really made me want a solo Black Widow movie, and her part in Age of Ultron is probably going to make me want it more. There's no official word on when exactly Agent Carter will debut on ABC, but as long as it isn't the same creative team as that other show, it's probably going to be worth the wait.

[Source: Marvel]

[themoviebloggers]

Here They Are - The Cast of STAR WARS EPISODE VII

It's finally, finally official.

by Siddhant Adlakha

The next Star Wars film is about to go into production, and for better or for worse, I can't help but be excited. This morning, way across the pond where the other six films did most of their work, J.J. Abrams brought the cast together for the film's first table read, and the official Star Wars website decided now was the best time to give us our first look at the people we'll be seeing on screen.

[I was getting nervous they might ACTUALLY wait until that 'May The Fourth' nonsense]

Some familiar faces, some expected new ones, some not so expected, but it all feels rather surreal at this point. We've known about Episode VII since late 2012, but now? Now it's finally real. Here's who we're going to be seeing kickstart the new generation of Star Wars:

John Boyega, Daisy Ridley, Adam Driver, Oscar Isaac, Andy Serkis, Domhnall Gleeson, and Max von Sydow.

AND, returning to a galaxy far, far away, we'll have Harrison Ford, Carrie Fisher, Mark Hamill, Anthony Daniels, Peter Mayhew, and Kenny Baker. Back on the big screen. In a Star Wars movie....

You know, I thought I was going to be cynical when this day finally came, but I'm actually really looking forward to it now. Putting aside whatever doubts I might have - we're getting more Star Wars. With the cast of the original Star Wars. What a time to be alive.

[themoviebloggers]

New GODZILLA Trailer Will Send You Into Full Fanboy-Mode

Just when you thought you couldn't possibly be any more excited for Godzilla...

by Josh Lewis

"Let them fight"

HOOOOOOOOOLY FUUUUUUUUUCK. Up until now I'd been trying as best as I could to hold in my excitement for this movie. Sure, I'd been convulsing and foaming from the mouth from time-to-time but I'd been able to keep it to myself, you know? This trailer has sent me over the edge. I'm officially in full fanboy-mode so everything following this is basically just nonsense, feel free to read it if you want.

THERE'S A FLYING KAIJU FIGHTING GODZILLA. 

At this point, I'm done watching anything to do with Godzilla. Not because I'm sick of it but because if I have to remind myself one more time that my eyeballs are still a few weeks away from this majestic beast taking on other, possibly just as majestic beasts then I might just explode.

I fell in love with directer Gareth Edwards' debut film Monsters and while watching that movie I thought to myself: "you know, this guy could probably make an incredible Godzilla movie" and now look where we are. 

Between hiding this bit of insane action and convincing most people that Cranston is the lead, the marketing for this film has been insanely good. It's been teasing and diverting us, but not to the point of misrepresentation (at least I hope). I think other companies could learn from this *cough* SONY!

One thing that fascinates me about this though, there is still a lot of secrecy as to what's going on with these monsters and why. Is it possible that they created one to fight other ones? Could this be the movie Pacific Rim should've been? [sorry, I know a lot of you like that movie but it still leaves a bad taste in my mouth] I HONESTLY HAVE NO CLUE AND THIS IS EXCITING. Just think about that, though: we may be living in a world where Godzilla saves more lives than Superman. Godzilla might be the hero we need AND deserve right now.

... Or he could be a ruthless dick that kills everyone and EITHER WAY IT'LL BE FUCKING AWESOME.

Ok sorry, I'm done. Honestly, I'm not even sure what else I can say anyway. This movie looks incredible, and I couldn't be more excited for it. Can we all please just metaphorically hold hands and chant until this movie comes out? That would make me happy.

[themoviebloggers]

WB Taps 'Legend of the Guardians' Director For JUSTICE LEAGUE Movie

The man behind the 2010 animated fantasy seems to be the number one choice for DC's foray into Marvel territory. Hit the jump for more.

by Siddhant Adlakha

A rare, quaint afternoon with nothing for fanboys to argue about was rudely interrupted this past Sunday, when the good folks at the Wall Street Journal reported that WB's long-awaited Justice League movie is not only in the works (following their yet untitled 'Batman Vs Superman' project), but will be helmed by Legend of the Guardians: The Owls of Ga'Hoole director Zack Snyder.

The announcement comes during peak media blackout, where the lack of information on both Batman Vs Superman and Star Wars Episode VII has caused some people to resort to drastic measures, such as speculating on travel itineraries to decipher casting news that is completely unknowable and unguessable at this point. Let's hope the info drought doesn't last.

The decision likely stems from Warner Brothers' prior history with Snyder (they were the producers behind Ga'Hoole) and it puts the studio in an exciting position, since both they and Zack Snyder are known for their amazing trailers. Expertly edited, visually stunning, and always employing great music, the trailers these folks make have been some of the most memorable in recent years. The question is, can they adapt their talents when it comes to the trailers for the Justice League movie?

Some feel Snyder is the wrong man for the job, claiming his trailers lack depth, and often have too much destruction in them, whereas others are often blown away by the trailers for his films. In recent years, he's come under fire for changing too much from the source material and making things unecessarily complicated for no reason (the book was just called Guardians of Ga'Hoole) but one might also argue that the mythos he brought to it himself by adding a colon and subtitle works far better in movie form.

The trailers for Justice League are expected to hit sometime prior to 2017, and in the meantime, I'm sure we're all looking forward to the trailers for Batman Vs Superman within the next year or so. It's unknown at this stage whether or not Gylfie (the female owl who plays a supporting part in Soren and Metal Beak's tale) will finally get a solo film, but one can certainly hope.

[themoviebloggers]

BREAKING: You'll Never Guess Who Has A Cameo In The Latest Marvel Movie!

TMB has the latest scoop on who'll show up in this summer's Guardians of the Galaxy, and the news is taking the internet by storm. Hit the jump, true believers!

by Siddhant Adlakha

It was a quiet Sunday afternoon. Marvel movie fans were lazing around with nothing to fawn over. But then, out of nowhere, trusted source Variety broke the news that would break the internet in two and make the fanboys go wild: Stan Lee will have a cameo in the next Marvel Studios movie!

The news came straight from Stan 'The Man' Lee himself at C2E2 this weekend. When asked about potentially filming a cameo for the movie, Stan 'Greatest of All Time' Lee said "I did, already," and followed it up with "I can’t tell you what it is, but I can tell you I do not understand what it was or why I did it," when asked about his involvement with Marvel comics over the last 50 years.

I'm sure this news is very exciting to all of us fandomboys, and if you aren't literally shitting yourself over this, you're not a real geek nerd, and I roll my eyes at you like Hit-Girl did in Kick-Ass 2 when those idiotic fifteen year old girls didn't know who Stan Lee was. I mean, he's STAN LEE. He created comicbooks, and was single handedly responsible for the widespread popularity of the Guardians of the Galaxy in the first place.

Stan 'God of all things Marvel' Lee drew every Marvel character back in the day, and has written every single issue of Captain America since 1937, so the fact that he's showing up in James 'James Gunn Is Not Stan Lee' Gunn's Guardians of the Galaxy is sure to boost box office numbers, and elicit an earth-shattering applause from midnight audiences. Don't forget to be that guy who yells "That's Stan Lee!" at the screen when he shows up! It wouldn't be a Marvel movie if you didn't. And if you've ever spoken the words 'Jack Kirby' in your life, you may as well just kill yourself.

What do you think about this surprise turn of events? Let us know, and we'll keep you posted about any future cameos Stan 'Cameo' Lee makes in Marvel films as soon as the news gets to us. This is been a TMB super scoop, true comic nerd believers. Domo arigato.