Tag: action

Film Critic, Movie Blog, Movie Reviews

Dune (2021)

apenlady

DUNE (2021)

Director: Denis Villeneuve  Runtime: 2 hr 35 min  Rated: PG-13

Studio: Legendary Pictures  Based on: Frank Herbert’s novel ‘Dune’

Screenwriter: Eric Roth, Jon Spaihts, Denis Villeneuve

Cast: Timohée Chalamet, Rebecca Ferguson, Zendaya, Oscar Isaac, Jason Momoa, Stellan Skarsgård, Stephen McKinley Henderson, Josh Brolin, Javier Bardem, Dave Bautista, Charlotte Rampling, Sharon Duncan-Brewster

Dune is a science fiction saga layered with all the typical trappings of humanity. Rife with greed and civil unrest as a set of noble houses control planets for resources, wealth, and power. Often to the detriment of the locals. 

Not too far into the film, and I’m having a flashback to 2015’s Jupiter Ascending, which was marginally more exciting than this film. 

In Dune, the house of Atreides is given stewardship of planet Arrakis by the overlord of all the houses-the Emperor. House Atreides, people of a water planet, go to Arrakis, a desert world, to mine spice. It’s the only thing of value to the houses because though spice is a drug; they also use it to navigate space. Okay. Spice is only on Arrakis, with two other things: the locals, known as the Freemen, and massive sandworms. 

The Freemen walk in a certain way to not cause unnatural vibrations in the sand that would otherwise attract the worms. They also wear special garb to help them endure the intense heat of the surface. Freemen characters are Chani (Zendaya), Stilgar (Bardem), and Dr. Kynes (Duncan-Brewster). Dr. Kynes has the most screen time out of these three, and the trailers for this movie imply the other two have more significant roles than they do. So if you see Dune just because they are in it, you’ll have to wait for most of the film and will be vastly disappointed. 

Javier Bardem’s Stilgar in ‘Dune’ Image: Legendary Pictures via IGN.com

The previous stewards of Arrakis, House Harkonnen, mined the spice for 80 years and left abruptly. Houses Harkonnen and Atreides are sworn enemies but obey the Emperor’s decree of change. Still with me?

Paul Atreides (Chalamet) is the son of Duke Leto Atreides (Isaac), next in line to rule his homeworld. Paul follows his father and mother, Lady Jessica (Ferguson), to Arrakis to learn how to lead more. Dune is billed as a sci-fi hero’s journey of a young boy born for a destiny he can’t grasp. A journey to provide safety for his people and family, all while not giving into fear. 

Frank Herbert originally published Dune in 1965. 

‘Dune’ Spice harvester Image: Legendary Pictures via WSJ.com

To get to my following observation, let me highlight some key phrases and notions about Dune. 1. An Emperor (really) 2. Mine spice (Kessel) 3. Planet of sand (Tatooine) 4. Massive worms (Sarlacc pit, or Jabba) 5. Walking a certain way (Sand people) 6. Wear special garb (Sand people) 7. Hero’s journey (Luke) 8. A Young boy(Luke/Anakin) 9. Destiny (Luke/Anakin) 10. Not giving in to fear (Jedi) 11. High council (Jedi)12. Superpowers (the Force) 13. Imperium (Empire). I could go on. Before seeing this version of Dune, I knew nothing about it. I had never read the books or seen the previous movies, so I walked into the theater with no pre-knowledge or conceptions. However, after only a few minutes into the film, I was beyond irritated. 

This irritation was because I couldn’t stop thinking about how much George Lucas poached from Frank Herbert. Not drew on as inspiration, full-on stole. George Lucas released the first of his Star Wars films, A New Hope, twelve years after Dune was published. Yes, the troupes of a young hero’s journey, saving one’s family, and the notion of destiny are all well used throughout cinema and literary works; but this is something else. 

Sandworm of Arrakis in ‘Dune’ Image: Legendary Pictures via Looper.com

My urge to slap George Lucas aside, Villeneuve’s Dune isn’t worth the hype. It’s dull, cold, and wastes its runtime with lackluster performances. This film should have had gravitas and more substance, considering the vast source material available. I saw the trailer like millions of others, but I was unimpressed. The movie, like the trailer, left me with no investment in the plot or the characters. Dune’s filmmaker expects the audience to care and follow along with this story, though there’s no satisfaction at the end. 

Why is there no satisfaction or excitement to find out what happens next? Imagine the following: you wake to strangers in your home, there’s shooting, fire, and death. Therefore you flee for your life through dangerous parts of town to seek shelter and help from people you barely know. All while not disturbing the gigantic sandworms and daydreaming about a girl. These people agree to help you- end film. Without actual spoilers, I just summed up Dune. 

Zendaya in ‘Dune.’ Image: Legendary Pictures via nerdist.com

Villeneuve cuts Dune off after two-and-a-half hours with no actual climax/resolution. Walking through worm-infested dunes isn’t a proper climax. It’s a bloody boring letdown. As an avid reader and fan of films, I know that movies rarely do their sourcebooks justice. Even though I haven’t read Dune, I don’t believe the first novel ended the way the film did. Please correct me if I’m wrong because Dune is one of the top 100 books of all time. 

How does such a popular novel make it to the silver screen with lackluster cast performance, pace, and lack of details? The most energy any character provides is Jason Momoa’s Duncan Idaho, discounting Brolin and Bautista’s roles as gruff, angry soldiers. That’s not a stretch for them, so I hardly call it acting. 

Stellan Skarsgård as Baron Harkonnen in ‘Dune.’ Image: Legendary Pictures via latimes.com

Stellan Skarsgård’s depiction of Baron Vladimir Harkonnen was said to be terrifying. I’m a big fan of Mr. Skarsgård’s work, and terrifying isn’t the word I would use to describe him in this film. Authoritative, vengeful, physically imposing (he’s a tall man in real life) who flies, which I find to be a weird ability, but not terrifying. Again I haven’t read the books; maybe he’s amazingly terrific as his literary counterpart description. 

The Lady Jessica is credited as Atreides but is referred to as the Dukes’ concubine in the film. If she’s his concubine, she’s not his wife. Either way, she is the mother of the Dukes’ son, Paul. The Lady Jessica is part of the Bene Gesserit, a political shadow group of sorceress with a breeding program. Again, I have that Star Wars connection in my mind. Breeding, cloning. Female sorceress’s, the Nightsisters of Dathomir. By and large, Ferguson’s emotional range is that of a brick wall. 

Chalamet, Ferguson, and Isaac in ‘Dune’ Image: Legendary Pictures via Screenrant.com

Ferguson is a brick wall, and Timothée Chalamet is a wet mop. Why is there hype around this kid? Harry Potter had more emotional responses about his dead parents, whom he’d never met than Paul does about any of the stuff happening around him. And Paul is a lot older than an eleven-year-old. For that matter, Harry’s dead parents in memory form or in moving magical photos conveyed more emotion for their son than Lady Jessica. 

It’s not fair that all I can think about is Star Wars when watching this; Frank Herbert really should have sued George Lucas at some point. Star Wars has plenty of other things that separate it from Dune. Still, so many of the broad strokes are not original, leaving me with a bitter taste in my mouth about the franchise. Herbert crafted a sci-fi series in novel form, and had George Lucas never come along with Star Wars, who knows how popular the Dune series cinematically could have been long term. All it needed was a studio, cast, and director, along with an excellent screenplay to bring it all to life- a few decades too late. Instead, now, Dune is left seeming like recycled content. 

Jason Momoa as Duncan Idaho in ‘Dune.’ Image: Legendary Pictures via Vanityfair.com

The script and direction should be solid when watching a big-budget film with a solid cast based on a classic novel. The passage of too much time and George Lucas robbed Dune of its full potential. Try as Denis Villeneuve did to make a better version of the 1984 attempt of Dune; it still falls flat. The devil is in the details, and there were not enough of them for Dune to resonate as the larger-than-life story it’s branded to be. 

Hopefully, the next attempt at Dune on the big screen will better incorporate details about the Houses in general, the interpersonal connections, and the mystical components that were played up but meant nothing. The story isn’t compelling enough without energetic performances and more complete pictures of characters and story arcs. 

When plot mechanics are the backbone of a film with little emotional resonance (story), it shouldn’t be on anyone’s watchlist. That’s not a film worth anyone’s time.

-A Pen Lady

Film Critic, Movie Blog, Movie Reviews

Eternals (2021)

apenlady

Eternals (2021)

Director: Chloé Zhao   Runtime: 2 hr 36 mins  Rated: PG-13 

Studio: Marvel Studios  Screenwriter: Chloé Zhao, Patrick Burleigh, Ryan Firpo

Cast: Richard Madden, Gemma Chan, Angelina Jolie, Salma Hayek, Lauren Ridloff, Barry Keoghan, Lia McHugh, Brian Tyree Henry, Kumail Nanjiani, Ma Dong-seok, Kit Harington, Bill Skarsgård 

Eternals is everything a decade’s worth of MCU films couldn’t do; it tells a complete, complex, and compelling story, with a strong plot, from beginning to end. A story where you didn’t know how it or the characters would end up. When you spend a decade establishing characters, building up an ensemble to fight together, you expect them to win. You expect them to make it to the end of their respective standalone films, so there’s little mystery there. How you get from Iron Man to Endgame is largely spectacle. Flash over substance. 

Eternals is more substance over flash, and many movie-goers hate that. Over the years, the MCU model conditioned people to expect less story from Marvel films, which are padded with costumes, CGI, and action. Don’t despair. Eternals have plenty of CGI and action woven more intrinsically within this detailed, rich story. 

Perhaps this is part of what many disliked. Details. Being required to listen and pay attention; when it’s not a spectacle, that’s what films need. Perhaps it’s the openly gay couple with a kid? Get over yourselves. Maybe it’s the sex scene? Hm, that one is fair. Up to this point, you could take young kids to see their favorite superhero in what has been a G/PG rated aspect of this topic in the MCU thus far. Well, kids grow up. Comic characters are not just for kids, nor have they ever been. Eternals isn’t dark and deranged like Zack Snyder’s comic book character depictions. Eternals fall in the middle. I’ll grant you this tiny spoiler if you’re on the fence about this film based on this point. It’s tastefully done. Sure it’s clear at one point two of the characters are lying down and don’t have clothes on anymore, but it’s from the collarbones up. Take from that what you will. 

Image: Marvel Studios, composite by Kirsten Acuna/Insider.com

Exploring this further, Eternals has a well-rounded, diverse cast. There are black people; one of whom is deaf, white people, an Indian character, Asian characters, a Spanish character, and a kid. This large cast ticks off a bunch of boxes with ease and not for the sake of ticking off boxes. I appreciate a well-rounded, talented cast that lets the film be about the story-not character-specific. In prior MCU films, one or two characters always managed to show up even when it wasn’t their standalone film like the film wouldn’t work without their inclusion. While Eternals have costumes, you should consider them more as uniforms, extensions of their powers, and ship. In this manner, this ensemble is without the brightly colored spandex costumes and accompanying ego trips. It’s all the better for it. 

Fans, however, may not feel better about the film’s opening sequence. They’ll need to read the screen. This isn’t a bad thing! It certainly sets the tone for the movie and the upfront departure from every other MCU project to date. It provides needed backstory in a format that consumes less screen time and budget. This format will not resonate with every viewer, but it’s an essential blip in the overall runtime of the film. It’s hardly the first film to use this tactic. So, read it without complaint. It’s also an important reason to remember to show up and find a seat before the film starts! 

Celestial image from the MCU Image: Marvel via Screenrant.com

Eternals has gotten mixed reviews, and I’m going to point out why you should ignore the naysayers. 1. Marvel didn’t put nearly the marketing effort into hyping this movie as others. It’s like they didn’t know how because 2. They are obscure characters with no prior buildup 3. The teaser trailer did nothing for this movie. Please ignore it. 4. It’s not all Hulk-like smashing, gun-heavy violent 5. The box office sucked. On that last point, when American films come out usually, other countries see them first. China is an excellent example of this, and they opted not toallow Eternals into their theaters. When that happens, the studio will see fewer zeros from ticket sales. That’s just a fact. Couple that ban with still touchy post-Covid theater options, and it’s clear those previous metrics for evaluating a hit or flop need reassessment ASAP. With all that against it, tossing that all aside and Eternals should be considered a box office hit. 

Chloé Zhao did a bloody marvelous job bringing together a large ensemble that portrayed characters worth being invested in. A cast who have great chemistry and energy that are believable and meaningful. Full of details that make the plot move along at an incredible pace, with seamless cinematography. Zhao tells a consistent story whose themes are just right and impactful. The audience can understand their story, who they are, why they are on Earth, their purpose, and how it all fits together in the MCU, which is a fair point after Thanos. 

Kumail Nanjiani is Kingo in ‘Eternals’ Image: Marvel Studios via SYFYWire.com

Moving forward, I sincerely hope that the house of mouse doesn’t “Disney-fi” future work with the Eternals within the MCU because this fresh infusion of characters is a palate cleanser. The right amount of serious and grownup to intermix with the sassy, zany and quirky characters left doing projects with the MCU. 

Eternals is worth a spot on your watchlist and your time. Make sure to stick around for the two end credit scenes; one’s at the very end. Cheers!

-A Pen Lady

Film Critic, Movie Blog, Movie Reviews

Star Trek (2009)

apenlady

Director: J.J. Abrams    Runtime: 2 hrs. 7 mins.    Rated: PG-13

Studio: Paramount Pictures    Screenwriter: Roberto Orci, Alex Kurtzman

Based on: TV series Star Trek created by Gene Roddenberry

Cast: Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto, Simon Pegg, Lenard Nimoy, Karl Urban, Zoe Saldana, John Cho, Anton Yelchin, Eric Bana, Bruce Greenwood

It’s always a pleasure when something classic is reimagined and doesn’t stink. It’s even more enjoyable when there’s a substantial time gap between the two. Today I’m talking about Star Trek. Yes, a few T.V. shows bear that name, but this film is rebooting the original T.V. series in a fashion. 

Paramount Pictures Trailer for ‘Star Trek’ via Classic Trailers on YouTube.

J.J. Abrams directed a star-studded cast that perfectly depicted and paid homage to the original characters and the actors that played them. If you’re familiar with the original T.V. show or films, you can appreciate it more than if you have not. Creator Gene Rodenberry crafted a reality that explores space, sure, but set the bar for how humanity should be. Peaceful, collaborative, intelligent, inclusive, and open-minded. He was decades ahead of his time. His amazingly radical notions don’t have quite the impact today as they did when Star Trek first aired, but that’s a good thing. It represents progress. 

“Space, the final frontier.” I think of these iconic words as I look out an airplane window at 40,000 feet writing this. The multiple shades of blue, nothing visible beneath me, sparse speckling of clouds smeared onto the sky like an artist at work. It’s nothing compared to seeing the entire planet from above and afar. To try and imagine that or other worlds is beyond the scope of my appreciation. So when J.J. Abrams and the production team gave birth to this remake in such a vivid, plausible, and fun manner, it just had to be good. Right?

Yelchin, Pine, Pegg, Urban, Cho, and Saldana in Paramount Pictures ‘Star Trek’ Photo via Slashfilm.com

Captain James T. Kirk (Pine), Spock (Quinto), Lt. Uhura (Saldana), Soo-Lu (Cho), Ensign Chekov (Yelchin), Doctor McCoy (Urban), and Scotty (Pegg) are all superb casting choices! Everyone has this well-blended chemistry that makes you fall for them as their respective characters. Though Zachary Quinto’s resemblance to the original Spock, Lenard Nimoy, is uncanny. It’s one thing for an actor to look like someone else, but accurately depicting them is vital, and Quinto makes an excellent Spock. R.I.P. Mr. Nimoy.

This film introduces the Star Trek universe and the cast’s journey together. However, how the story originates is brilliant. Using one of the original Trek members as the catalyst to the plot allows the story to honor the original and carve out its own path for newer generations. It’s a genuinely clever way to reset many things about the original without destroying its memory. 

Leonard Nimoy and Zachary Quinto as Star Trek’s Spock. Credit: People.com

The freshly minted crew of the U.S.S. Enterprise, the flagship of Star Fleet, work together to tackle the immense challenge of stopping a rogue Romulan captain named Nero (Bana) who is out to destroy the Federation, one planet at a time. Why? And how do you stop someone that can destroy planets? The answer to that and the reason for the plot working so well was the addition of “Spock Prime” (Nimoy) as he’s credited. The concept of the plot doesn’t work without his inclusion. 

It’s not just Mr. Nimoy but the entire cast who brings depth, energy, and believability to their roles. After all, that is what anyone wants from an actor, an outstanding performance. Star Trek gets that from everyone attached to the film; to me, that is a sign of great hiring. It’s also a sign of a great script. A project can have the best actors around, which can flop from a terrible script or a bad director. 

The Romulan ship, the Narada in ‘Star Trek.’ Image: Paramount Pictures

Another attribute that makes this iteration of Star Trek so appealing to watch is the production that created believable costumes for the various aliens, the sets and props, and the technology used to complete all the CGI. Every time Star Trek is taken on anew, it automatically benefits from the newest filmmaking tools of the time. This franchise has come a long way in visual appeal since 1966. It’s come a long way in general and paved the way for many first on T.V. 

This Star Trek does a spectacular job of character development in weaving the storylines together and representing how different species manage meeting new people in life and on the job. 

Bridge of the U.S.S. Enterprise in Paramount Pictures ‘Star Trek’

Fantastic acting, set design, cinematography, directing, story, and humor make this film worth the effort into creating it. All these attributes created a movie worth seeing. J.J. Abrams boldly chose to go where many have gone before and comes out of warp speed with a refreshing winner of a reboot of a beloved sci-fi franchise. This Star Trek is worthy of a place on your watchlist!

-A Pen Lady

Uncategorized

Guardians of the Galaxy Vol.2

apenlady

Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2

Directed by: James Gunn Rated: PG-13 Runtime: 2 hrs 18 mins

Studio: Marvel Studios Screenwriter: James Gunn

Cast: Chris Pratt, Zoe Saldana, Dave Bautista, Bradley Cooper, Vin Diesel, Michael Rooker, Karen Gillan, Pom Klementieff, Kurt Russell

‘Guardians of the Galaxy Vol.2’ Teaser Trailer from Marvel Studios

So here we find our Guardians of the Galaxy, again, as the MCU’s tenth film. The Guardians are hired by a race called the Sovereign to save their planet’s power supply from becoming a dimensional-jumping onto-slug’s dinner feast. That plays out how it does, with the Sovereign chasing them across space for offending them. Remember, Rocket (Cooper) is a part of this group.

Along the way, they encounter a pair (Russell and Lementieff) who claim to know Quill’s (Pratt) father. Vol. 1 focused on Quill’s mom’s issues, so it follows that James Gunn would make Vol. 2 about his father’s issues. So, Peter, Drax (Bautista), and Gatorade (Saldana) go with the pair. Rocket and Groot (Diesel) have another task, including dealing with the incredible Karen Gillan’s Nebula.

‘Guardians of the Galaxy Vol.2’ Pom Klementieiff, Dave Bautista, Chris Pratt, Kurt Russell, Zoe Saldana Credit: Marvel Studios via IMDb.com

In Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2, the characters explore places and ideas that change how they view family and the universe. It’s touching moments like when Rocket gets a therapy lesson from Yondu of all people, with the humor and action that ground the story and moves it along with ease. The soundtrack helps too! Gunn’s starship of misfit toys and the well-selected tracks mesh so well. It’s another dose of quirk, the opposite of the Avengers ensemble, and it’s incredible how it all comes together. Plenty of people have posed the question ‘team Iron Man or team Cap’ over the years. What they should have been asking is, are you team Avengers or team GotG? Really, who would you want to save the universe?

As a sequel, the surprises of the characters’ personality traits and Gunn’s outlandish style is gone for the audience in Vol.2. Thankfully, it’s not gone-gone. Gunn’s focus is always the characters so the story feels like it’s organically in response to them.

Michael Rooker and Bradley Cooper in ‘Guardians of the Galaxy Vol.2’ Credit: Marvel Studios via Forbes.com

Guardians of the Galaxy Vol.2 is a fun, energetic, semi-dirty follow-up to Vol. 1. While not all the jokes hit their mark, plenty still do. The comedic style is still there, just like the tone and spunk of the first one. The story is solid, considering it focuses on Quill’s daddy issues. Full of sass and wit, it also has substance and continued character development, which is essential when characters will be seen again and again.

Personally, I think that Yondu and Baby Groot steal the film overall. Share your thoughts on your favorite Guardian character in the comments!

If you enjoyed Vol.1, you’d love Guardians of the Galaxy Vol.2 just as much. So it should be on your watchlist!

—a pen lady

Film Critic, Movie Blog, Movie Reviews

Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 1

apenlady

Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 1

Directed by: James Gunn   Rated: PG-13   Runtime: 2 hr 5 min  

Screenwriter: James Gunn, Nicole Pearlman   Studio: Marvel Studios

Based on: Various Marvel comic book characters

Cast: Chris Pratt, Zoe Saldana, Bradley Cooper, Vin Diesel, Dave Bautista, Michael Rooker, Karen Gillan, Lee Pace

If the Avengers were a motley crew when forming, what does that make the Guardians of the Galaxy? Who are, at best, a collection of misfit toys. Ones without the benefits of standalone films preceding their silver screen MCU team-up. A group of characters virtually unknown before this film. 

None of the “Guardian” characters in the MCU’s version are original members in the comics. Not one. Guardians of the Galaxy (the comic) first appeared in 1969. Throughout the decades, they went largely under the radar of popularity. In 2008 Marvel relaunched, reshaped? reformed? the Guardians into the content director James Gunn found inspiration in. Fine. Great. Whatever. When this first came out, I had only seen one of James Gunn’s films. I could live the rest of my life without seeing anymore. So when I heard he was directing this movie, I was skeptical, at best. Marvel did what? I went and saw it without managing to see a trailer for it beforehand. So, yes, I went because it was Marvel. Surely they wouldn’t screw the pooch at this juncture in the MCU? 

Bradley Cooper, Chris Pratt, Vin Diesel, Dave Bautista, Zoe Saldana in ‘Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 1 Credit: Marvel Studios via The Hollywood Reporter

No. They. Did. Not. In fact, this film grossed over $600 million more than it cost to make. Bravo! Okay, the pooch is fine. And James Gunn raised the bar for himself in terms of his filmmaking skills. How did he manage this? He dove into the treasure trove of characters associated with the Guardians, the relaunched version, and molded that into characters and a story that would seamlessly attach itself to the MCU’s ultimate storyline goals. 

In logical viewing order, this film is number nine. First, Captain Marvel introduced the audience, Colson and Nick Fury, to the reality of life outside of Earth. Still, the movie’s “public” wasn’t aware of it. That came later with Thor and certainly with Avengers. With Guardians of the Galaxy, the audience is introduced to space travel beyond the Bifrost. To new worlds and characters, and still connects it to Earth, the Battle of New York, Thanos, and beyond. 

In James Gunn’s version, the “Guardians” are Peter Quill a.k.a. Starlord (Pratt), Gamora (Saldana), the adopted daughter of Thanos, Drax the Destroyer (Bautista), Groot (Diesel), a nine-foot walking tree species, and Rocket the Raccoon (Cooper). 

Karen Gillan in ‘Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 1’ Credit: Marvel Studios via Syfywire.com

Adventure and comedy ensue when Quill can’t make money off a job he stole from his boss, Yondu (Rooker). Followed by a public altercation with bounty hunters (Rocket and Groot) that Yondu sets on him. The extra stiff wrinkle is that a mass murderer, Ronan (Pace), wants the item in question as well. He orders Gamora to retrieve the item for him. That doesn’t go as anticipated, and she is arrested with the others. Along the way, they meet Drax and agree to work together temporarily to stop Ronan from his genocidal goals. That’s the summary of this film, and yet, Guardians of the Galaxy is so much more than that. I really don’t want to give anything away. This version of the characters is excellent! They are everything all the other MCU characters to date are not. Guardians bring to the table a much-needed dose of humor and lightheartedness. All while facing some serious obstacles and foes. A more serious character might rebuke their cavalier attitudes and personas. What Gamora simply refers to as “idiots.” The Guardians rally, like the Avengers, and work together to tackle the tasks before them. 

Lee Pace, Djimon Hounsou in ‘Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 1’ Credit: Marvel Studios via CinemaBlend.com

The film’s pace always moves along, like an Olympic ice skater who displays a flawless performance. This is accomplished by the excellent cast chemistry and the fantastic performances of their respective characters, also with well-placed quips, jabs, and jokes throughout the film. Another contributor to the pace is the music. Between the jokes and the musical styles of the 1970s that just fit with this eclectic bunch, it really helps it move along. Additionally, it sets the tone of the film early on. Something that is always smart to do. 

Frankly, this film’s story could have been poorly received if the audience wasn’t “feeling” this movie’s overall tone and cadence. Primarily when it’s held up against the early MCU films. It just doesn’t take itself seriously like the others. And yet, it’s just what the doctor ordered. 

Guardians of the Galaxy is that underdog story that seemingly comes from know where and wins the hearts and minds of the audience. It adds to the MCU and still tells a grand standalone story that is deep, meaningful, watchable, enjoyable, and gifts the audience with characters it can’t help but love. A movie that can pull off all that is worth a place on your watchlist. Grab some snacks and settle in! 

—a pen lady

Film Critic, Movie Blog, Movie Reviews

The Tomorrow War (2021)

apenlady

The Tomorrow War (2021)  

Directed by: Chris McKay   Rated: PG-13   Runtime: 2 hrs 20 mins

Studio: Skydance, Paramount Pictures, Amazon   Screenwriter: Zach Dean

Cast: Chris Pratt, Yvonne Strahovski, J.K. Simmons

The Tomorrow War is a story about humanity dealing with an extinction-level event. The best way to avert it is by the world coming together. Okay. The threat is aliens. Tired and well used, but, still, okay. Then…

Solider’s from 2051 show up via a portal of some kind in 2021. Explaining and warning that “We are you, 30 years in the future.”… “In eleven months, all human beings in the future will be wiped from the face of the Earth.” Unless, of course, the humans of 2021 help. 

Director Chris McKay said in a Collider interview that he didn’t think about the time travel mechanics, as it didn’t matter to solving the issue of the story. That’s the gist of what he said anyway, and he couldn’t have been stupider for ignoring it. Just because the director doesn’t want to think about it doesn’t mean the audience won’t. Magically, all of the issues of time travel and creating paradoxes just vanish in his mind. Well, not in mine and not in others. Especially when the device which allows thousands or millions of people to travel through time and space is held together by the equivalent of tape and chicken wire. WTF? Do not beam me up, Scotty! 

The main problem is that writer Zach Dean created and left the line stating “…all human beings…” all humans will be dead in eleven months. Well, if all of humanity is dead, how are there still people around 30 years later to come to 2021 and warn humanity? Words are important. A viewer shouldn’t need to pause their film (in this case) to try and figure out what they’ve seen before that can logically explain this. 

Screenshot of device that allows time travel in ‘The Tomorrow War’ Credit: Paramount Pictures and Amazon

What should have been said is ‘almost all of humanity will be wiped from the face of the Earth.’ Maybe even giving an estimate of who’s left in eleven months. Then the audience can follow along with ease and still grasp the dire predicament. 


The entire world gets on board. Yeah! Like Independence Day. 

But the lack of logic and common sense is so prevalent it’s incredible this film got made. So, first, some military personnel are sent to the future, then everyday people are conscripted. They are given no training or actual gear. You have a motor mouth that can’t load a weapon and points it at himself. Other characters take spare ammo off the dead, which is a brilliant move, while others seem to never run out of ammo. Future humanity “needs” help yet firebombs its recruits just to kill the enemy. Past humans are no more than to-go fodder. It reeks of desperation and poor storytelling. 

‘The Tomorrow War’ alien Credit: Paramount Pictures and Amazon via Variety.com

Make no mistake, this shitty script is full of holes that leave it dull and irritatingly illogical to follow along with. Like a high school student with the answers to when, why, where, and how a plot point no one in the thirty years after him was able to figure out. Since when do we default to a teenager for “expert” information? That a plane, an American one at that, could just fly deep into Russian airspace undetected? Give me a break. That specific scientific components with alien DNA will *magically* be unlocked in less than a day? Should I continue? Sadly, I could.

Sadly, all of that isn’t a summary of the entire film. This movie clocks in at 2 hours and 20 minutes and feels double that. Just when you think the film is going to end, it keeps going. There were so many areas where the pace needed to pick up or be left out altogether. It’s not that The Tomorrow War doesn’t know what it wants to be or where it wants to go. It doesn’t have that problem. Its most significant issue is that it tries to be like every other sci-fi creation before it, all while being fresh. It’s not rotten, but it does stink. 

Jasmine Mathews, Chris Pratt in ‘The Tomorrow War’ Credit: Amazon and Paramount Pictures via SyfyWire.com

Perspective is critical in this film in that everything is from Dan Forester’s (Pratt) perception. How he processes the events unfolding around him, his take on solving it, everything. The filmmaker’s choice allows Pratt’s character to have a fuller story arc, which is well developed. Pratt actually does a great job of depicting a loving father, former soldier, teacher, and unwitting participant. However, the focal point being on him is at the expense of the other characters.

There are some impressive action sequences with the fighters and aliens in various places. The CGI isn’t terrible. The aliens at least look like something I haven’t seen before. Those are the best things I can say about this movie. 

The Tomorrow War was a waste of my time and brain cells. There are so many other films in the sci-fi realm worth seeing over this. Any of the movies this one rips as “inspiration,” such as Pacific Rim, Jumper, Alien, Independence Day, A Quiet Place, or War of the Worlds. The Tomorrow War is an illogical, tedious waste of effort that has no place on a watchlist. 


—a pen lady

Film Critic, Movie Blog, Movie Reviews

Thor: The Dark World (2013)

apenlady

Thor: The Dark World (2013)

Directed by: Alan Taylor   Runtime: 1 hr 52 mins   Rated: PG-13

Screenwriter: Stephen McFeely, Christopher Yost, Christopher Markus

Studio: Marvel Studios

Cast: Chris Hemsworth, Tom Hiddleston, Natalie Portman, Idris Elba, Anthony Hopkins, Rene Russo, Christopher Eccleston, Jamie Alexander, Kat Dennings, Zachary Levi, Stellan Skarsgård, Ray Stevenson, Tadanobu Asano

Thor: The Dark World dives deeper into Asgard’s history and shows off more of what a stunning place it is. Full of detail and scope. 

The plot introduces The Dark Elves, led by Malekith (Eccleston). An ancient race of beings that ruled and thrived before Asgard came to lead the nine realms. Thought to be long gone, they reemerge as a vehicle for the aether’s introduction into the MCU. The substance is the Dark Elves’ most prized possession, one they will destroy worlds to reclaim. Alongside that, they want revenge for practically being exterminated eons prior. As reasons for retribution go, that’s a fair one. 

Malekith and the Dark Elves’ story is believable, but the premise is cut off at the legs by Marvel’s MCU goals. It could have been so much grander instead of petty. Christopher Eccleston’s performance as Malekith was as outstanding as the script allowed for. The fault isn’t with Eccleston’s depiction. He’s a talented actor who could have taken the character in any direction if he had been allowed. 

In Thor: The Dark World, anger, fear, guilt, pride, and sorrow are all passengers on the emotional roller coaster ride various characters must manage. All while the nine realms line up in a ‘convergence’ creating dangerous pockets of time and space. Wreaking havoc upon all. 

Idris Elba, Christopher Eccleston in ‘Thor: The Dark World’ Credit: Marvel Studios via ScreenCrush.com

To help stop the Dark Elves, Thor (Hemsworth) requires Loki’s (Hiddleston) help. Even after Thor arrested him for the attack on New York. Hiddleston’s performance is strong, comical at times, and a nice distraction from all the otherwise serious themes running their course. 

While Heimdall (Elba) doesn’t have a more important place in this film, the character’s contributions are still significant. He mentions how he can see things few others do, and it gives a sense of how powerful he is as gatekeeper. If a viewer hadn’t figured that already. His conversations with Thor are not a subject with a leader; you can tell there’s a kinship there. A real friendship. 

While her role in the Thor films is the smallest, she makes an impressive impact with her screen time—Thor’s mom. Frigga (Russo), Queen of Asgard. Russo is adept at handling herself in action films, and Thor: The Dark World is no exception. Frigga’s use with a blade makes me wonder if she taught Loki more than just magic…

Stellan Skarsgård, Johnathan Howard, Kat Dennings in ‘Thor: The Dark World’ Credit: Marvel Studios via NerdReactor.com

Some well-placed lines and scenes with Darcy (Dennings) are like low-hanging fruit in the way she always says what she’s thinking. Or what everyone else is but won’t actually utter out loud. I like the character as a natural break between tension and humor. Mixing Darcy with Dr. Erik Selvig (Skarsgård) is vital to the plot, their tone vs. the rest of the movie is like peanut butter and jelly. 

The pace of the overall movie and the scene transitions are all fine. There is character development here, but the purpose of this film really wasn’t about Thor and company. Marvel needed to use certain aspects to further propel the gigantic story arc that is the first few phases of the MCU.

Costume design for the characters, again, perfectly accentuates each one distinctly and fittingly. To Frigga and Jane’s (Portman) Asgardian attire, to Loki’s classic black and green leather ensemble, Darcy’s hats, or Dr. Selvig’s lack of pants. Um…

Rene Russo, Jamie Alexander, Natalie Portman in ‘Thor: The Dark World’
Credit: Marvel Studios via ScreenCrush.com

The story itself isn’t terrible. It’s like any sequel that needs to slow down to build up more material to work with later. Once you understand it’s not meant to be a fast-paced, sci-fi action film, you’re less likely to be disappointed. It certainly pumps the breaks after Avengers, but it is watchable. 

Thor: The Dark World gets knocked around because of how its tone stacks up against the other ‘Thor’ and MCU films. Take it with a grain of salt. This film is eighth in viewing order and is absolutely worth a place on your watchlist if you’re just in it for Thor’s story or the MCU as a whole. 


Be advised there are two end scene credits for this movie. Enjoy!

—a pen lady

7-9-21

Film Critic, Movie Blog, Movie Reviews

Avengers (2012)

apenlady

Avengers (2012)

Directed by: Joss Whedon   Runtime: 2 hrs. 25 mins.   Rated: PG-13

Studio: Marvel Studios   Screenwriter: Zak Penn, Joss Whedon

Cast: Robert Downey Jr., Chris Evans, Chris Hemsworth, Scarlett Johansson, Jermey Renner, Mark Ruffalo, Tom Hiddleston, Samuel L. Jackson, Cobie Smulders, Gwyneth Paltrow, Stellan Skarsgård, Clark Gregg

Avengers is the culmination of years of planning and strategic story-telling. Number seven in proper viewing order. It brings together Iron Man (Downey), Captain America (Evans), Thor (Hemsworth), Black Widow (Johansson), Hawkeye (Renner), and Hulk (Ruffalo). Together they work to stop Loki (Hiddleston) and his aspirations of ruling Midgard (Earth). 

Yep, that Loki. And he’s not alone. He’s got an army. Loki’s introduction beyond Asgard was visually impressive! The audience gets to see more character development with him and everyone. 

Trailer for ‘The Avengers’ Credit: Marvel Studios via YouTube.com

The Hulk was recast. The previous one played by Edward Norton came across exceptionally well as a geeky scientist. Other than that, Marvel swapping him out with Mark Ruffalo isn’t a big deal. Still, Marvel uses the Avengers to create a backstory and rationale for Hulk’s quick and seamless participation. 

Hawkeye gets more screen time here than he did in Thor, where the character appeared, briefly. His storyline within the movie mixes with Black Widows. They’ve worked together for years, and the audience gets to see this bond, which feels authentic. Their respective roles always matter more within the ensemble, what they add to the group and why they stick around. They’re the only two without something “extra,” so they are the closest to everyday people. That makes them more relatable. 

In the beginning, they’re a motley crew, but they rally. NYC gets trashed in the process, but it’s not their faults Loki came. 

The Avengers in ‘The Avengers’ Credit: Marvel Studios via Cinemablend.com

The story itself isn’t complicated, nor should it be with a movie like this. It’s designed to be engaging and fun. There’s no prerequisite to see this film if you don’t care about the standalone films before it. No need to have read comics, ever. With these stories, the Marvel Cinematic Universe’s (MCU) ambition is to build upon the one before it. It’s easier to watch an ensemble do something, like saving the world when the audience is invested in the characters. Marvel building up the characters beforehand was an excellent strategy to get the audience invested. 

Books have been made into films for decades. Stories as rich, diverse, complex, and satisfying as Lord of the Ring are masterfully adapted to the screen, but the material only goes so far. Avengers is dozens of stories and connections, their potential- limitless. Why? Because comic books engage multiple-age groups over a wide range of lifestyles and cultures. Comic adaptations, done right, don’t have to end. 

Chitauri in ‘Avengers’ Credit: Marvel Studios via Screenrant.com

The characters are engaging and watchable. The performances by all are convincing, for what the roles asked of them. No one from this franchise will win an Oscar for their acting; the script never allow for that level of depth and range. However, awards should be given for excellent editing, sound editing, CGI, and stunt work. The actors may be the “face” of the film, but the lion’s share of what makes it what it is comes from the handwork and efforts of all the behind-the-scenes magic. 

Avengers is a fun, loud, colorful, action-packed film that’s worth a place on your watchlist. 

—a pen lady

Film Critic, Movie Blog, Movie Reviews

Thor (2011)

apenlady

Thor (2011)

Directed by: Kenneth Branagh   Rated: PG-13   Runtime: 1 hr. 55 mins. 

Studio: Marvel Studios’   Screenwriter: Ashley Miller, Zack Stentz, Don Payne

Cast: Chris Hemsworth, Tom Hiddleston, Natalie Portman, Jamie Alexander, Idris Elba, Anthony Hopkins, Rene Russo, Stellan Skarsgård, Clark Gregg, Kat Dennings, Ray Stevenson, Tadanobu Asano, Jeremy Renner

Thor is the sixth MCU film in thematic viewing order. The concept of Thor and company is based on an actual myth and once followed belief system. For the most part, Disney hasn’t mutilated Thor to suit its own needs yet. Given that it’s the first, this cleverly created script works to introduce that the myth is, well, real. 

Its fantasy come to life, aided by fantastic-looking costumes and sets working in tandem with the magic of CGI. The grandeur and scale of Asgard are beautiful. I wish it was explored more. 

‘Thor’ Official Trailer via Marvel Studios, YouTube

The stunt work is incredible. Whether Thor (Hemsworth) is beating up SHIELD agents, or Sif (Alexander) is taking on a magically powered sentry. To group fights with giant ice beings, nothing is questionable and disrupts the viewing experience. 

Thor is not perfect; none of the Norse mythological characters are. Okay, Disney/Marvel did change that in this first film, but that’s not a bad thing. For those who think Odin (Hopkins) can only act as Odin and Thor, a selfish, mindless meat sack should go brush up on Norse mythology. This adaptation is diet-Norse, a lower rating of their usual temperaments. Doing this fits in better with Marvel’s overall plans and makes for more compelling characters long run. 

After disobeying his king’s/fathers commands to not do something that would cause war, Thor is cast out from his home on Asgard. He is hurtled to Earth as punishment until he can grow up. Why is it that being sent to Earth by aliens is a punishment?

Tom Hiddleston and Chris Hemsworth in ‘Thor’ CREDIT: ZADE ROSENTHAL/MARVEL/PARAMOUNT/KOBAL/SHUTTERSTOCK via People.com

The message from father to son of ‘there are consequences for actions—even for ‘gods,’ is essential to represent. One, because power should not be left unchecked. Second, superhero’s seemingly walk about doing what they please, often forgetting or believing they are above ramifications. The point helps shape Thor into who he’ll become, even if it’s not what Odin had in mind. 

Even though Thor has his own standalone film to better serve Marvel’s goals of an ensemble team-up, it works. His characters’ world has depth and history, and his own movie was absolutely required. 

The overall pace of the film and scene beats flow with no sagging or hiccups. The cast is a massive part of that. Everyone is phenomenal and perfectly cast. Yes, some don’t get their full due in this film, but it’s a large cast. Certain characters will be fleshed out more later (Renner), and others are just there as supporting members (Dallas, Asano, Stevenson). 

Ray Stevenson, Jamie Alexander, Josh Dallas, Tadanobu Asano in ‘Thor’ Image: Marvel Studios via Mashable.com

Chris Hemsworth makes a visually appealing Thor, but more than that, he delivers his character with the right balance of emotion, force, and charm. He’s not too brutish, cheesy, or mildly simplistic like some animated versions of the character. 

Tom Hiddleston’s Loki is the opposite of Thor. He’s smaller in stature, lean, and lacks any physical prowess. Loki makes up for that with wit, smarts, charm, and a silver tongue. Unlike Thor, Loki was taught magic by his mother, Frigga (Russo), and uses it often. Tom was an unlikely choice for the god of mischief but made the role his own and embraced it. 

Sir Anthony Hopkins has done many roles in his distinguished career, but his casting as Odin is perfection. It’s not a large role, but once you see him as the all-father, it’s difficult to imagine anyone else. The same is true of Idris Elba as Heimdall, the gatekeeper of Asgard. His natural tenor and presence would make most think twice before wanting to deal with him, but in Thor, his golden armored costume only amplifies that. Honestly, it takes an exceptional person to pull off that much gold and fight in it, all while wielding a gigantic sword. 

Stellan Skarsgård, Kat Dennings, Natalie Portman in ‘Thor’ Credit: Marvel Studios via Cinemablend.com

The comradely and established bonds of the characters shine through in such a robust and believable manner with little to no character development. That’s difficult to create and perform, and Thor executes it well. 

Thor is the general publics’ first inclination that they are not alone in the universe. Decades after Captain Marvel came to Earth, briefly and went unnoticed by the public, this is Marvel’s foot in the door to execute its master plans. 

Is Thor a compelling story as other superhero troupes? No. And yet, it’s absolutely worth watching. A good, fun story with a solid cast. For those that don’t like this kind of film, fine. For everyone else, this is worth a place on your watchlist. 

—a pen lady

Film Critic, Movie Blog, Movie Reviews

Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves (1991)

apenlady

Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves (1991)

Directed by: Kevin Reynolds   Rated: PG-13   Runtime: 2 hrs. 35 mins

Studio: Warner Bros.   Screenwriter: Pen Densham, John Watson

Cast: Kevin Costner, Morgan Freeman, Alan Rickman, Christian Slater, Mary Elizabeth 

Mastrantonio, Nick Brimble, Michael McShane

Does every generation deserve a version of Robin Hood? Considering how many have turned out, no. So what’s the allure? Robin Hood is from an English folk story. It’s been retold or made more than the legend of King Arthur or Beowulf. This allure is probably rooted in the fact that Robin Hood sticks up for the little guy, the downtrodden, against an oppressive ruling body. That theme exists in every society today. 

For those unfamiliar with the character, he’s against the local sheriff of Nottingham overtaxing, imprisoning, and killing the people and destroying their homes. Robin steals back the money and returns it to the people. He tries to also protect the kingdom until King Richard can return home. Why? He feels honor-bound to do so, not because someone tasked him with the job. Some people don’t like bullies… I can appreciate that. 

‘Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves’ Official Trailer via Movieclips Classic Trailers via YouTube

While Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves Robin of Locksley (Costner) does end up leading a group of outlaws, he’s little like the original material. Costner’s Robin is not light-hearted, and that departure is at the expense of having him been a crusader. Battling for years can change anyone, but it removes a critical component of the legends persona in this version. To say nothing of Costner’s “English” accent or the rest of the cast. 

The film begins with a dark, violent dungeon scene where body parts are chopped off. Historically this is what happened in certain places of the world as punishment. So it has little to do with an American director being overly violent. 

This introduction sequence is where Robin meets Azeem (Freeman). His character is not from the original tale but is a welcome addition that is utilized well. Morgan Freeman’s natural presence and tenor made him a perfect casting choice for this character. Azeem also balances out Costner’s lackluster performance to Alan Rickman’s sheriff’s outlandish demeanor and quips. No one on this project cared much for historical tone or accuracy to help drive the story. 

Kevin Costner in ‘Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves’ Image: Warner Bros. via The Guardian

While historically, loves was not a factor in match-making, the tale of Robin Hood is centered around his deep love for the Maid Marion (Mastrantonio). In this film, love has nothing to do with it. Costner and Mastrantonio come across more like squabbling siblings who were ordered to get in the mood. There is no buildup of chemistry; they just sort of jump to that at some point to move the film along. This makes the immensely popular Brian Adams song “Everything I Do (I Do It For You)” seem wrong. As for the rest of the music in this film, it’s strong and has a memorable intro score. 

Robin’s band of merry men are mainly nameless, except for a guy named Bull, who references his penis size. Little John (Brimble), whose role is diminished due to Azeem’s addition, Will Scarlet (Slater), and a drunk Friar Tuck (McShane). 

Christian Slater, Morgan Freeman, Nick Brimble in ‘Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves’ Imgae Credit: Warner Bros.

Thinking back thirty years from when I first saw this as a nine-year-old kid, specific memories come to mind. The witch of Nottingham was a creepy-crone (that’s still true), wanting to rewatch this movie just to see Will Scarlet and my moms’ comment about Kevin Costner’s “nice butt.” We all have bizarre things that stick in our minds…

In terms of viewability, there are far worse Robin Hood tales to watch. As a child of the 80s, my first introduction to the character was via Disney’s 1973 animated film, Robin Hood. A fun retelling of Robin and company in animal form. The next was the 1938 film The Adventures of Robin Hood, starring Errol Flynn. It’s the version everything else has failed to emulate for over eight decades. 

This was the early 90s, so the best action sequences still came from explosions and stunt work. The utilization of nature and the trees of the forest help to move the story forward is creative, compelling, and believable. The bow shooting, swordplay, and other action scenes are a nice change of pace from what’s usually showing in theaters. Or streaming nowadays. 

Alan Rickman and Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio in ‘Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves’ Credit: Warner Bros. via Deenofgeek.com

Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves misses the mark of Robin Hood, the legend. While Alan Rickman was a phenomenal actor, someone should have given him some scope of his character; rather than free rein. Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio had nothing to truly work with, except to avoid being raped…while a creepy witch watches. That entire scene is weird, uncomfortable, and anti-climatic. Kevin Costner was too stoic for the role. 

Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves is watchable. It’s not bad enough to avoid it altogether. A touch of nostalgia made me again. But, any film I can go longer than a few years, or decades, without watching shouldn’t be on anyone’s watchlist. 

—a pen lady