Reviews by PvtCaboose91

All reviews - Movies (1660) - TV Shows (38) - DVDs (2)

Disposable and generic but enjoyable

Posted : 6 months, 3 weeks ago on 25 July 2025 02:57 (A review of Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer)

For a sequel to a wholly unremarkable superhero film, 2007's Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer is not awful. Like its predecessor, it's a harmlessly diverting superhero tale that pales in comparison to the best Marvel films, but is neither disastrous nor offensive; instead, it merely suffers from a lack of narrative ambition. With the obligatory origin nonsense out of the way, Rise of the Silver Surfer is zippier and more fun, indulging in more colourful action sequences and reducing the downtime between the set pieces. In other words, it amounts to a flashy 90-minute special effects reel aimed at preteen boys who enjoy superhero antics and mindless spectacle. However, this follow-up feels even more disposable and shallow as a result. It never reaches the heights of the best superhero movies, but at least it fills a niche for viewers who dislike darker, more serious genre outings.

After a mysterious cosmic object enters the Earth's atmosphere and causes unusual occurrences, U.S. Army General Hager (Andre Braugher) approaches Reed Richards (Ioan Gruffudd) to ask for help tracking its movements. With days left before Reed marries Sue Storm (Jessica Alba), he begins constructing a tracking system for the government while the media goes into a frenzy over the impending wedding. However, the wedding is interrupted by the arrival of the Silver Surfer (Doug Jones), a metallic humanoid on a flying surfboard who wreaks mass destruction. With the world in jeopardy, the Fantastic Four - Reed/Mr. Fantastic, Sue/Invisible Woman, Ben Grimm/The Thing (Michael Chiklis), and Johnny Storm/Human Torch (Chris Evans) - work to try and stop the Silver Surfer, reluctantly accepting the assistance of Dr. Victor Von Doom (Julian McMahon). However, Doom has an ulterior motive, and the Silver Surfer answers to a more powerful entity that survives by feeding on life-bearing planets.

Rise of the Silver Surfer brings back several creatives who were involved in the first flick, from director Tim Story and co-writer Mark Frost to composer John Ottman and editor William Hoy. Also contributing to the screenplay this time is Don Payne, a long-time writer for The Simpsons who was fresh from penning the 2006 superhero rom-com My Super Ex-Girlfriend. This Fantastic Four sequel is more amusing than its predecessor, and the dialogue is less wooden, though the laughs are not exactly memorable or clever. However, despite its technical razzle-dazzle, the film sorely lacks substance. Since Rise of the Silver Surfer runs under 90 minutes, there is not enough time for sufficient dramatic development or meaty character arcs. There is an attempt at something deep with Reed and Sue wanting a normal married life without the superhero business, but it feels obligatory and rushed instead of substantive and thoughtful. Consequently, it is difficult to care about the characters, even when one of them nearly dies during the climax. Sam Raimi's Spider-Man films demonstrated how to effectively add poignancy and humanity to a superhero story, but the Fantastic Four pictures fall short.

With a higher budget, Rise of the Silver Surfer's visuals are more impressive and slick than the first flick, but some of the CGI - especially for Reed's rubbery body - looks dated and phoney. Story is more at ease with the material here, and he achieves a more agreeable pace, but the execution is still completely generic and lacking a stylish filmmaking touch. Nevertheless, the action scenes are sufficiently enjoyable, from a destructive set piece in London to a climactic throwdown in Shanghai, with Story expanding the story's scope beyond the United States. To ensure the film is appropriate for younger viewers, Story tones down the violence compared to the 2005 movie, as Rise of the Silver Surfer is PG instead of PG-13. Consequently, even though Galactus threatens to destroy the Earth, the movie is not nail-biting or intense, as it feels more like a two-part episode of a lightweight cartoon TV show than a theatrical action-adventure.

In the years since Rise of the Silver Surfer's release, online commentators continue to criticise the movie's use of Galactus, and for good reason. A quintessential Marvel villain, Galactus appears briefly in the film, and the depiction fails to properly serve the character. The lack of screen time and any character development is baffling, and the design does not even slightly reflect the comics - instead of a powerful humanoid entity, the movie depicts Galactus as a cloud. Similarly, the Silver Surfer does not receive the development or nuance he deserves, and Doom remains startlingly one-dimensional, though Julian McMahon continues to have a lot of fun in the role. Fox intended to pursue a Silver Surfer spinoff movie as early as 1998, and in 2007, the studio hired filmmaker and comic book writer J. Michael Straczynski to write the picture. The spinoff was intended to explore the Surfer's origins and further develop Galactus, delving into darker territory. Rise of the Silver Surfer even ends with a brief tease to set up the planned spinoff. Frankly, it is a shame the Silver Surfer movie never came to pass.

The visualisation of the Silver Surfer often looks impressively convincing despite the limitations of special effects in 2007. Doug Jones, best known for playing non-human creatures in Guillermo del Toro films, portrays the metallic character in a special grey-silver suit enhanced by digital effects. The instantly recognisable Laurence Fishburne provides the voice, which gives the Surfer a regal quality. Also joining the cast is the late Andre Braugher, whose character serves as a stand-in for Nick Fury. The filmmakers wanted to include Fury but did not have the rights, as Marvel was preparing to introduce Samuel L. Jackson's portrayal in 2008's Iron Man. Out of the titular team, Chris Evans remains the most energetic as the brash, womanising Johnny Storm, while Michael Chiklis again makes a great impression despite wearing an elaborate suit to play The Thing. Continuing the longstanding Marvel tradition, Stan Lee also pops in for another cameo.

Considering the popularity of Marvel's First Family, these big-screen iterations should be much better. With millions of dollars at their disposal, it is a shame this creative team were unable to create something on the same level as Spider-Man or X-Men. Unpretentious and unserious, Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer is akin to a B-grade, straight-to-video action adventure from the '80s or '90s but with a bigger budget and state-of-the-art production values. It might work for some viewers, but your mileage will vary. Although Fox planned to pursue a third instalment (the cast signed a three-picture deal), the underwhelming box office haul put a stop to any immediate plans, and Marvel locking in Evans as Captain America put the final nail in the coffin of a prospective Fantastic Four 3, for better or worse. In hindsight, the notion of another inoffensive, forgettable Fantastic Four outing with this cast and from the same creative team seems more enticing than Josh Trank's irredeemable 2015 reboot, Fant4stic.

5.8/10

0 comments, Reply to this entry

Pedestrian and by-the-numbers but not awful

Posted : 6 months, 3 weeks ago on 24 July 2025 06:26 (A review of Fantastic Four)

2005's Fantastic Four emerged before the Marvel Cinematic Universe era, when studios licensed several iconic comic book characters in the hope of creating lucrative blockbuster franchises. After the success of Spider-Man and X-Men, Marvel's First Family was an obvious candidate for a big-budget adaptation. With a script credited to Mark Frost (Twin Peaks) and Michael France (2003's Hulk), Fantastic Four retains the light-hearted, adventurous tone of the comic books, but the feature is startlingly pedestrian and by-the-numbers, making it one of the lesser Marvel adaptations to date. With an enormous pool of potential directors, it is baffling that 20th Century Fox handed the filmmaking reins to Tim Story, who was fresh from helming 2004's critically reviled action comedy Taxi. Although not awful, Fantastic Four is incredibly mediocre, as it lacks wit, heart, a sense of humanity, and passion. It delivers the bare minimum for the genre, but there is nothing to elevate it above the ordinary.

While studying cosmic clouds in space, Dr. Reed Richards (Ioan Gruffudd), Sue Storm (Jessica Alba), Johnny Storm (Chris Evans), and Ben Grimm (Michael Chiklis) are struck by a cloud and soon develop superpowers after arriving back on Earth. Reed discovers that he can stretch his body like rubber, Sue can turn invisible and create force fields, Johnny can transform into a human fireball, and Ben transforms into a superhuman rock monster. The media dub them "The Fantastic Four," with superhero names also emerging: Reed is Mister Fantastic, Sue is Invisible Woman, Johnny is Human Torch, and Ben is The Thing. Meanwhile, Dr. Victor Von Doom (Julian McMahon) blames Reed for the failure of the mission, for which he faces backlash from his stockholders. As the Fantastic Four work together to study their abilities and hopefully find a cure, Doom begins to mutate into organic metal and plans to use his powers to exact revenge.

Fantastic Four is not the first live-action movie featuring the Marvel superhero team created by Stan Lee and Jack Kirby, as Roger Corman produced a cheap, famously unreleased feature film version in the early 1990s that was shelved after completion. In the ensuing years, Fox pursued a big-budget adaptation, though it took ten years for Fantastic Four to enter multiplexes after a decade of development hell. Unsurprisingly, Frost and France's script adheres to the familiar origin story template, depicting the titular team receiving their powers and learning to deal with the abrupt change. The film will likely disappoint viewers hoping for endless action and spectacle, as the set pieces are few and far between; however, this is not necessarily a bad thing. However, the villainous aspect of the story is distinctly lacking. Despite the presence of the terrific Julian McMahon, Doom's portrayal fails to do justice to the iconic comic book villain, as the script reduces the nuanced character to a simplistic, generic, one-dimensional bad guy. The script does not give Doom a compelling motive or even a proper plan - he merely wants to destroy the Fantastic Four because he is envious of the publicity they are receiving. Even a trite world domination plot would be more interesting than this.

Furthermore, with the movie trying to give the spotlight to everyone in the titular team, there is no singular protagonist in Fantastic Four, which makes it challenging to become genuinely invested in the story. The most promising subplot involves Ben's fiancée, Debbie (Laurie Holden), who cannot accept his physical condition. Ben's story comes teasingly close to being poignant, especially when Debbie silently leaves her ring on the road to silently call off their engagement, but this narrative thread ultimately feels too insignificant and perfunctory, never delivering any genuine emotion. Similarly, Ben's newfound relationship with a blind artist named Alicia (Kerry Washington) feels tragically undercooked. It feels like the film was pared down to the bare essentials during editing, which is indeed the case, as Fox later restored 20 minutes of unseen footage for an obligatory extended cut on home video, which contains more character-building moments.

Despite a generous $100 million budget, Fantastic Four is workmanlike from a technical perspective, with passable but not spectacular special effects, unremarkable cinematography, and a forgettable original score that fails to introduce a recognisable theme. After going through several directors (including Chris Columbus, Peter Segal, Raja Gosnell, and Peyton Reed) and a long development period, Fox hired Tim Story and rushed the movie to meet its summer 2005 release date, allowing barely six months for post-production. The problem is that Story is not a visionary director in the same league as Christopher Nolan or Sam Raimi, and he is in over his head with Fantastic Four. There is nothing unique, exciting or stylish about Story's handling of the picture, as he does the bare minimum in translating script to screen. The narrative is not constantly engaging, and the pacing is hit-and-miss, though there are a few highlights. One enjoyable sequence is a goofy montage of the titular team adjusting to their powers while Johnny plays a prank on Ben, set to the tune of Gabin's " Bang Bang to the Rock 'n Roll."

2005 was a different time for big-screen special effects, as CGI merely supplemented, rather than replaced, practical effects and sets. Fantastic Four was the last time that filmmakers used practical effects to bring The Thing to life, and the suit is enormously believable and impressive. The production also constructed a 200-foot set for the Brooklyn Bridge action sequence, rather than relying solely on digital effects. Unfortunately, the CGI throughout Fantastic Four is a mixed bag, with moments of slipshod compositing that looked below-par in 2005 and look even worse after two decades. Not everything looks awful, as the flame effects for the Human Torch are impressive, but the rubbery Mr. Fantastic appears overly cartoonish. Meanwhile, the action scenes are sufficiently entertaining, from the much-publicised bridge sequence to a climactic showdown with Doctor Doom, but none of the set pieces are necessarily riveting or exhilarating.

In terms of casting, Fantastic Four is a mixed bag. The late Julian McMahon sinks his teeth into Doom and brings a sinister edge to the role, though Doom's relationship with Sue is wholly uninteresting and unconvincing. Indeed, Jessica Alba is pleasant eye candy, and the film even contains a gratuitous underwear scene for the actress, but she fails to bring any dimensionality or passion to Sue Storm. Likewise, Welsh actor Ioan Gruffudd tries his best but does not make a significant impression as Reed Richards, although his American accent is convincing. Faring better is Chris Evans, the future Captain America, who makes the biggest impression as the smarmy Johnny Storm, consistently engaging in pranks and stirring up his friends in increasingly amusing ways. Evans generates the movie's only moments of genuine humour, and his charisma and gusto make him a perfect Johnny Storm, making it unsurprising that Evans later reprised his role in 2024's Deadpool & Wolverine. Rounding out the team is Michael Chiklis, who delivers a terrific performance underneath the elaborate suit, espousing a gravelly voice and making the character feel real. Meanwhile, the late Stan Lee is also on hand here, making a cameo appearance as a postal worker.

Twenty years after its release, Fantastic Four remains a curious footnote in superhero cinema, overshadowed by the unreleased 1994 film and its associated complications, as well as the disastrous 2015 reboot, which was plagued by reshoots, studio interference, a disgraced director, and its eventual critical mauling. With an inadequate director and a mediocre script, 2005's Fantastic Four never reaches its full potential, although it is superior to a number of recent Marvel Cinematic Universe productions, as the franchise has lost its lustre. This adaptation is harmlessly diverting and watchable, striking the middle ground between the brilliance of Sam Raimi's Spider-Man and the direness of Catwoman.

5.9/10

0 comments, Reply to this entry

Entertaining and full of comedic highlights

Posted : 7 months ago on 14 July 2025 01:18 (A review of The Heartbreak Kid)

When online commentators proclaim that filmmakers no longer make comedies like they used to, they are referring to movies like 2007's The Heartbreak Kid. A remake of the 1972 black comedy of the same name, The Heartbreak Kid reunites directors Peter and Bobby Farrelly with There's Something About Mary star Ben Stiller for another round of bawdy, crude, R-rated comedy that spotlights their leading man finding himself in awkward and humiliating situations. The humour is not for everybody, as reflected in the picture's scathing critical reception, but viewers who enjoy the likes of There's Something About Mary and Me, Myself & Irene should have a fun time with this one, as it's full of comedic highlights.

A sports shop owner in San Francisco, Eddie Cantrow (Ben Stiller) is hopelessly single. His father, Doc (Jerry Stiller), constantly tries to console his son about his failed relationships, while his best friend, Mac (Rob Corddry), struggles with an imperfect marriage. After a chance meeting with the gorgeous Lila (Malin Åkerman), the pair have a whirlwind romance, impulsively getting married to avoid a job relocation despite only dating for six weeks. Heading to Cabos, Mexico, for their honeymoon, the cracks begin to show in their relationship almost immediately, as several things about Lila irritate Eddie, and her behaviour only worsens during the trip. Eddie quickly regrets his decision to marry Lila, and finds comfort with the sweet Miranda (Michelle Monaghan), who's on vacation with her family. As Eddie spends more time with Miranda and her family, he seriously considers divorcing his new wife.

I avoided The Heartbreak Kid for years because critics made it out to be an irredeemable trainwreck, but the critics got this one wrong. Contrary to the harsh reviews, the movie is frequently hilarious, delivering a stream of memorably laugh-out-loud scenes and moments. There are more big belly laughs than I was anticipating, from the ludicrous sex scenes to the foul-mouthed dialogue, and one memorable moment involving a donkey. The Farrelly brothers dabbled in PG-13 comedies for a few years in the early 2000s (Stuck on You, Shallow Hal), but The Heartbreak Kid sees the directors embracing their R-rated sensibilities, going bonkers and raunching it up with hysterical comedic set pieces.

Some viewers might balk at the way the Farrelly brothers reinterpret the original film, but it undeniably works if you appreciate this type of R-rated humour. The Heartbreak Kid retains the structure of the 1972 picture, but the directors (who co-wrote the screenplay with Scot Armstrong, Leslie Dixon, and Kevin Barnett) colour the flick with their trademark brand of juvenile comedy. The movie is undeniably too long at a beefy two hours, and it starts to lose its way throughout the protracted third act that lacks the comedic spark of what came before it, but there is otherwise very little to complain about. Eddie's morals are certainly debatable, as the character is a cowardly liar, but the movie is not necessarily on his side. The script makes him pay for his actions in Mexico, and even though the conclusion is slightly predictable, he does not receive a perfect, fairytale ending.

Another commendable aspect of The Heartbreak Kid is the way it patiently develops Eddie and Lila in the first act, allowing the romantic relationship to feel genuine and earned. You want to see the pair get together, but it gradually begins to fall apart as Eddie realises he made a terrible mistake. Stiller plays the prototypical straight man, which is typical for the actors in such productions (Meet the Parents, Along Came Polly), and he consistently reacts to the insanity around him. Malin Åkerman's unhinged performance is a highlight, with the actress fearlessly going for broke here. A colourful supporting cast surrounds Stiller, with several recognisable comedic actors turning in memorable performances. Stiller's real-life father, the late Jerry Stiller, scores several laughs, while the likes of Danny McBride (Pineapple Express), Rob Corddry (Hot Tub Time Machine), and comedian Carlos Mencia are also on hand here. Meanwhile, Michelle Monaghan (who was fresh from Mission: Impossible III) is a delight as Eddie's new love interest, making it easy to understand why the newly married man quickly changes his mind.

In 2025, there is something innately comforting about movies like The Heartbreak Kid. It was shot on celluloid by ace cinematographer Matthew F. Leonetti (Poltergeist, Commando), it's boldly R-rated, the film is unafraid of offending anyone, and it's charming in its simplicity, with no dreary character or genre deconstructions. Without emerging as an awards contender, The Heartbreak Kid is a perfectly entertaining way to spend a couple of hours, and there is ample replay value.

7.2/10

0 comments, Reply to this entry

Falls short of being truly satisfying

Posted : 7 months, 1 week ago on 8 July 2025 02:43 (A review of Superman Returns)

The motion picture that marks Superman's return to the big screen after nearly twenty years, Superman Returns tones down the cheesiness and buffoonery of previous films to restore a sense of humanity and sincerity to the franchise. With director Bryan Singer (X-Men, X2) at the helm, Superman Returns is a homage sequel to Richard Donner's Superman and Richard Lester's Superman II. Indeed, rather than returning to the comics to produce a fresh new cinematic take on the enduring DC Comics character and further explore the mythos, Singer mounts an enormously expensive tribute to 1978's Superman. The resulting movie boasts visual highlights and spectacle, thanks to the benefit of state-of-the-art special effects, but Singer falls short of delivering a truly satisfying Superman blockbuster. Although Superman Returns is better than Superman III and Superman IV: The Quest for Peace, that is a low bar to clear.

After spending five years searching for the remnants of his home planet of Krypton, Superman (Brandon Routh) returns to Earth and soon resumes his job as a journalist for the Daily Planet using his alter ego, Clark Kent. However, during his time away from Earth, Lois Lane (Kate Bosworth) gave birth to a child named Jason (Tristan Lake Leabu) and got engaged to Richard White (James Marsden), the nephew of Daily Planet editor Perry White (Frank Langella). In addition, Lois's anger about Superman leaving the planet led her to write an acclaimed article positing that the world no longer needs the Man of Steel. As Superman tries to reconcile with Lois, sociopathic scientist Lex Luthor (Kevin Spacey) develops a new plan to create a new continent in the open ocean using shards from Superman's Fortress of Solitude. The scheme will change the world's physical makeup, killing billions of innocent people as a result.

In the nineteen years between Superman IV: The Quest for Peace and Superman Returns, several writers and filmmakers attempted to bring the Man of Steel back to the big screen. After Cannon Films cancelled their planned Superman V, Warner Bros. purchased the film rights and pursued several proposed projects, including the much-publicised Superman Lives, which was going to be directed by Tim Burton in the late 1990s from a script by Kevin Smith, with Nicolas Cage onboard to play the hero. Wolfgang Peterson also tried to mount a Batman vs. Superman film in the early 2000s, but it never materialised. Superman Returns originated as Superman: Flyby, a radically different take on Superman and the character's mythos, written by J.J. Abrams. However, after two directors (Brett Ratner and McG) quit Flyby, Bryan Singer signed on for the project and scrapped the existing script, developing an entirely new story with X2 writers Michael Dougherty and Dan Harris. Even though Superman Returns is essentially a sequel to Superman and Superman II, the movie curiously takes place in a contemporary setting with cell phones and a date-stamped 2006 newspaper. The loose continuity evokes the James Bond franchise.

Singer, who banned comic books from the set of X-Men, chose Donner's Superman film as his point of reference for Superman Returns, even commencing the picture with a title sequence in the same style as Superman, accompanied by John Williams's iconic, uplifting theme music. But Singer's worship of Donner's Superman extends to the story, with Luthor's plan to make a new continent feeling too reminiscent of his scheme in the original film, and it takes too long to develop; consequently, Returns fails to offer anything new, innovative, or thrilling. Additionally, there is too much dead narrative weight here, as Superman Returns clocks in at a gargantuan 154 minutes. The first act, in particular, is full of superfluous moments, including a strange scene in which Lex Luthor secures the fortune of a wealthy widow, as well as scenes of Clark spending a considerable amount of time with Jimmy Olsen. Singer even recognises the editing shortcomings, as Superman flying into action to save a damaged airliner should be the first time we see Clark/Superman. There are many other redundant scenes throughout the film that do not meaningfully contribute to the story or characters, and Superman spying on Lois, Richard, and Jason in their home is undeniably creepy. The notion of Superman having a child with Lois is the most promising subplot here, but it ultimately leads nowhere.

Superman Returns marks the first time filmmakers could utilise contemporary digital effects to bring the Man of Steel to life, and the movie does not disappoint in this respect. Armed with a gargantuan budget of over $200 million, making it one of the most expensive films in history at the time, Singer executes the set pieces with sensational flair and astonishing visual effects that mostly hold up nearly twenty years later. Without the janky blue-screen compositing of the old Superman films, the illusion of Superman flying through the air looks more believable than ever, and the action sequences are significantly larger in scope. Singer hits the ground running with an outstanding, crowd-pleasing set piece that showcases Superman making his memorable return by saving a Boeing 777 from crash-landing, while the Man of Steel thwarting a robbery is also a highly compelling highlight.

The only sequence that does not stand up to scrutiny is a flashback to young Clark leaping through a field in Smallville, as the digitally enhanced jumping looks strange. It's an unnecessary scene, making it all the stranger that Singer chose to include it in the final cut while removing an expensive "Return to Krypton" prologue that cost $10 million. Furthermore, since the villains here are all mortal, Superman Returns lacks a showstopping climactic fight to truly show off the Man of Steel's abilities; instead, the movie peters out with a resounding whimper, making the third act feel remarkably anticlimactic. Thus, despite a few action highlights, the picture lacks excitement.

Instead of shooting on 35mm film, like the previous Superman flicks, cinematographer Newton Thomas Sigel (X-Men, X2) captured the action using Panavision's Genesis digital cameras, making Superman Returns one of the earliest digitally shot feature films. Thankfully, the production design carries more vibrancy and life than the previous Superman films, with sets that do not look like obvious, lifeless soundstages. The visual design of Superman Returns is hard to fault, with the city of Metropolis gaining a stronger sense of identity beyond an obvious New York City stand-in, while the Fortress of Solitude looks striking thanks to modern filmmaking techniques. Composer John Ottman also incorporates recognisable motifs from Williams's Superman score into his compositions, and the tribute is genuinely effective, as the soundtrack is a tremendous asset. Additionally, to maintain a welcome sense of continuity with the Christopher Reeve Superman movies, Superman Returns features the return of Marlon Brando as Jor-El through unused footage and a computer-generated recreation of the legendary performer. Brando's voice during the opening sequence adds undeniable gravitas.

Continuing the tradition of casting unknown actors in the titular role, Brandon Routh is a terrific Clark Kent/Superman, continuing the character's legacy with reverence and confidence. Routh looks the part, bearing a striking resemblance to the late Christopher Reeve, and he nails the all-important double act: he is believable as the clumsy, awkward Clark and the heroic, boyishly charming Superman. Other casting is equally spot-on, including the terrific Frank Langella as Perry White, and Sam Huntington, who's spot-on as the dorky, eager-to-please Jimmy Olsen. Meanwhile, Kevin Spacey presents a different take on Lex Luthor compared to Gene Hackman. Spacey's performance is understated yet menacing, creating a credible portrayal of a madman. However, there is no way to defend Kate Bosworth, who is an atrocious Lois Lane. Bosworth, who was only 22 years old during filming, is not believable as a seasoned, Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist, and conversations about past events are bizarre - was she a teenager when she fell pregnant and Superman departed Earth? Crucially, she lacks the spunk and charm of Margot Kidder, and with Lois playing an unusually large role in the movie's proceedings, the actress's shortcomings become a significant problem. Consequently, Bosworth earned a Razzie nomination for Worst Supporting Actress.

Superman Returns flirts with greatness, but its dreary deconstruction of Superman and overlong narrative prevent the movie from reaching its full potential. A drastic re-edit would ameliorate some of the problems and make for a smoother viewing experience, but it would be difficult to overlook the lack of a satisfying climax. Nevertheless, Superman Returns is worth watching for fans of the character and the franchise, as some of the set pieces still have merit, and there are fun references and callbacks to the previous films, including a spiel about flying still being the safest way to travel. Despite Warner Bros. spending heavily on the worldwide marketing campaign, Superman Returns proved to be a box-office disappointment for the studio, ultimately leading to the cancellation of the planned sequel. Instead, the studio forged ahead with a complete reboot, 2013's Man of Steel, with director Zack Snyder taking the helm.

5.7/10

0 comments, Reply to this entry

Cheap and lethargic despite good intentions

Posted : 7 months, 1 week ago on 7 July 2025 01:07 (A review of Superman IV: The Quest for Peace)

The once-brilliant Superman film series sputters out with a whimper with 1987's Superman IV: The Quest for Peace, a lethargic, bargain-basement superhero action adventure that the movie's cast and crew now regard as a regrettable mistake. Although this fourthquel retains many of the original cast members, including the return of Gene Hackman as Lex Luthor, and features a story co-written by Christopher Reeve, the result feels like a poor imitation of a Superman movie rather than a rousing, inspiring and dramatically satisfying entry to the franchise. Most of the issues stem from Superman IV being a Cannon Group production, as Menahem Golan and Yoram Globus acquired the rights to the franchise from Alexander and Ilya Salkind following the commercial failures of 1984's Supergirl and 1985's Santa Claus: The Movie. Superman IV has grand ambitions, as Reeve and screenwriters Mark Rosenthal and Lawrence Konner try to tell a relevant story about the nuclear arms race while advocating for peace, but this sequel looks too tacky, is not exciting enough, and does not make much sense, making it understandable why the film was a financial disappointment that killed this iteration of the franchise.

After learning of escalating tensions between the United States and the Soviet Union that could lead to a devastating nuclear war, Superman/Clark Kent (Christopher Reeve) decides he can no longer abstain from meddling in the affairs of Earth. Superman addresses the United Nations to announce that it is his moral responsibility to rid the world of nuclear weapons to prevent Earth's potential destruction. Meanwhile, Lex Luthor (Gene Hackman) escapes from prison with the help of his nephew, Lenny (Jon Cryer), and the pair use a stolen strand of Superman's hair to create a superhuman entity known as Nuclear Man (played by Mark Pillow, but with Hackman providing the voice). Superman's alter ego, Clark Kent, also contends with a change in leadership at the Daily Planet, as tabloid tycoon David Warfield (Sam Wanamaker) takes over and installs his daughter, Lacy (Mariel Hemingway), as the paper's editor, replacing Perry White (Jackie Cooper). Lacy immediately takes a shine to Clark, much to the annoyance of Lois Lane (Margot Kidder).

The internet is full of stories and information regarding the problematic production of Superman IV, as The Cannon Group slashed the budget from $36 million down to a paltry $17 million due to severe financial difficulties. According to co-writer Mark Rosenthal, The Cannon Group were pinching pennies at every step, with filming occurring in cheaper locations, and the producers even cut 45 minutes from the movie after a negative test screening. Cannon was in dire financial straits at the time, as they were producing too many movies simultaneously, and none of their recent productions had been big hits. Consequently, they could not afford to bankroll a major blockbuster like Superman, and the project received no special consideration. Even though Warner Bros. Pictures threw Cannon a $75 million financial lifeline to save the company from bankruptcy, Golan and Globus split the money among dozens of projects.

Instead of bringing back the special effects crews who worked on the previous Superman films, the penny-pinching producers hired cheaper Israeli crews, and the downgrade is wholly evident. Even though Superman II and Superman III have their share of shoddy compositing and cheesy special effects, Superman IV is even worse, as almost every SFX shot looks laughably unfinished. The human performers appear too bright compared to the backdrops, and the matte lines and edges of the blue and green screens are frequently visible. Additionally, large portions of Superman IV take place on bargain-basement sets that would not pass muster on a sitcom, such as the bunker from which Luthor launches the nuclear missile. Furthermore, instead of shooting in front of the very recognisable headquarters of the United Nations in New York for a crucial scene, Cannon opted to use an industrial park in England's Milton Keynes with limited extras and no set decoration apart from some pigeons.

With neither Richard Donner nor Richard Lester returning for this instalment, Cannon chose to hire Sidney J. Furie to oversee the fourthquel, even though Reeve wanted Ron Howard. Furie is not a bad director, as he helmed several impressive titles during his career, including The Ipcress File, The Boys in Company C, and the horror film The Entity. However, with such limited resources, Superman IV is a startling bore, featuring sluggish action scenes that fail to generate even a modicum of excitement. Instead of enjoying the fights, you will be tempted to stare at your watch and simply wait for the scenes to end. Furthermore, Nuclear Man looks like a regular human in a cheesy suit rather than a superpowered threat. Nevertheless, the film does have its worthwhile moments from time to time, such as a double date scene when Clark is on a date with Lacy, accompanied by Lois and Superman. It is humorous to see the consistent switch between Clark and Superman, necessitating an arsenal of excuses to explain why they continue to disappear. Additionally, it is fun to see Superman and Lois flying over Metropolis together once again, but the janky compositing ruins the sequence. The scene also ends with Superman using the 'amnesia kiss' once again to make Lois forget that Clark is Superman, despite fans frequently criticising its initial use at the end of Superman II.

One of Superman IV's limited assets is the soundtrack. Thankfully, this sequel makes heavy use of John Williams's recognisable Superman music, and the resulting soundtrack is a significant improvement over Superman III. Alexander Courage receives a credit for "adapting" Williams's compositions, filling the movie with familiar motifs, from the iconic theme to the gentle music when Superman takes flight with Lois. Williams actually wrote a few new compositions for Superman IV but left the conducting to Courage. Parts of the soundtrack are cheesy, but the music is mostly solid. Additionally, a few special effects shots look reasonable, such as the space shuttle in the opening sequence, while the wire work for the flying scenes is also sufficiently convincing. At least Superman IV is not a complete bust from a technical perspective.

Reeve was hesitant about returning to his iconic role, but The Cannon Group tempted him back to the franchise by offering him an enormous payday ($6 million) and promising to finance his pet project, 1987's Street Smart. Despite the subpar production quality, Reeve gives it his all throughout Superman IV, treating the material with utmost earnestness, and he still looks fantastic in the red and blue suit with his muscular physique. The double act of the bumbling Clark and the confident Superman is as believable as ever, making it all the more depressing that this film features Reeve's final performance as the iconic superhero. Meanwhile, it's a thrill to see Gene Hackman and Margot Kidder return one final time, and the film gives Lois more to do after her reduced role in Superman III. Like Reeve, his co-stars approach the film with sincerity despite the depressing circumstances of the production. In terms of the newcomers, Jon Cryer (fresh from his role in 1986's Pretty in Pink) plays Luthor's nephew with some outrageous fashion choices. Decades later, Cryer went on to play Lex Luthor in the CW's Arrowverse.

Superman IV: The Quest for Peace is a well-intentioned movie, as there is a timely message at the story's core, the returning cast members are excellent, Furie dials back the humour, and the decision to involve John Williams in the score is auspicious. It's not a detestable film by any stretch; instead, it's just disappointing and underwhelming. This reviewer typically enjoys B-grade titles produced by The Cannon Group, as goofy action films like Missing in Action, the Death Wish sequels, Cobra and The Delta Force are fun despite obvious budgetary shortcomings and cheesy scripts. Regrettably, Superman IV lacks the usual Cannon charm, as it does not deliver enough excitement to be considered a guilty pleasure. Superhero films require spectacle to compensate for any script or storytelling shortcomings, but there is no spectacle to behold here. It is heartbreaking to watch Reeve waste his time and talents on such subpar Superman sequels, as the actor deserved to lead a memorable and high-quality franchise. To repeat the sentiment I already expressed in my review of Superman III, fans can stick with Superman and Superman II: The Richard Donner Cut and ignore everything else.

4.1/10

0 comments, Reply to this entry

A promising new chapter with thrills and spectacle

Posted : 7 months, 1 week ago on 6 July 2025 03:33 (A review of Jurassic World: Rebirth)

Jurassic World: Rebirth shifts away from the controversial excess and creative choices of the Jurassic World trilogy, opting for a simpler standalone story that merely exists within the same cinematic universe as its predecessors. Returning the series to its roots, Rebirth feels like a sequel to the original Jurassic Park trilogy rather than a follow-up to the Jurassic World films, as it features an ensemble of characters trying to survive and escape an isolated island surrounded by dinosaurs. This reverence for the Jurassic Park films is unsurprising, as Rebirth was written by David Koepp, who returns to the series after scripting Jurassic Park and The Lost World: Jurassic Park and consulting on the revised story for Jurassic Park III. At the helm of Rebirth is Gareth Edwards (The Creator, 2014's Godzilla), who executes the script with confidence, creating an entertaining and suspenseful dinosaur blockbuster with plenty of memorable set pieces. There are clichés, and Koepp's screenplay does not stray too far from the established formula, but Jurassic World: Rebirth is a promising new chapter, delivering the type of thrills and spectacle that viewers have come to expect from this franchise.

The Earth's climate is inhospitable to sustain dinosaur life, forcing the surviving species to live in remote areas near the equator, which are no-travel zones. Palaeontologist Dr. Henry Loomis (Jonathan Bailey) believes that three large dinosaur species could hold the key to developing a cure for heart disease, prompting pharmaceutical executive Martin Krebs (Rupert Friend) to charter a mission to collect biomaterial samples on the island of Ile Saint-Hubert in the Atlantic Ocean. To join the expedition, Martin recruits ex-military operative Zora (Scarlett Johansson), who brings along her long-time friend Duncan (Mahershala Ali) and a few other mercenaries. While tracking a Mosasaurus aboard Duncan's boat, they receive a distress call from Reuben Delgado (Manuel Garcia-Rulfo), a shipwrecked father who was on a sailing trip with daughters Teresa (Luna Blaise) and Isabella (Audrina Miranda), and Teresa's boyfriend Xavier (David Iacono). The mission resumes after rescuing the family, but aquatic dinosaurs soon attack the boat, stranding them on Ile Saint-Hubert. With a rescue helicopter on the way, the team works to extract their samples without becoming dino food.

Koepp and producer Steven Spielberg worked together to develop story ideas, and the notion of a medical science exploration is more satisfying than the locust storyline from Jurassic World: Dominion. (There is also a touch of Deep Blue Sea to this premise.) Koepp structures Rebirth in a similar fashion to the first three Jurassic Park movies, with an opening act dedicated to build-up and character development before the humans navigate a succession of dangerous situations in a dinosaur-filled environment. Thankfully, Rebirth functions as a standalone story rather than a set-up for further sequels, making it a rarity in modern blockbuster filmmaking. However, the movie is not immune to silliness, as there are conveniently placed vehicles that still work at an abandoned InGen facility, while an opening scene involving a Snickers wrapper is one of the goofiest moments in the franchise. Plus, it almost goes without saying, but the dinosaurs always hesitate while pursuing the important characters, and none of the deaths are particularly surprising or shocking because the animals only devour the obvious dino fodder.

Like the original Jurassic Park, Koepp's script mixes horror and humour, as moments of levity enhance the sense of humanity and ease the tension. The pacing is not always ideal (Edwards is not exactly renowned for making fast-paced movies), but there is enough momentum to prevent the film from devolving into tedium. Character types are fairly broad across the ensemble, with Martin feeling the most trite, especially since Rupert Friend plays him like an antagonistic, callous corporate stooge. However, the character work is still mostly effective, with the family adding some sympathetic characters to the mix, while the likes of Zora, Henry and Duncan are easy to latch onto. Zora and Duncan receive tragic backstories through brisk shorthand, and the performances from Scarlett Johansson (a long-time Jurassic Park fan) and Mahershala Ali are energetic and spirited. Jonathan Bailey (of Bridgerton fame) also makes a positive impression as a palaeontologist who studied under Alan Grant, giving the movie its only direct connection to the franchise's legacy characters.

Viewers who were unimpressed by the over-the-top set pieces of the Jurassic World flicks will find more to like about Rebirth, which feels more grounded while still delivering thrills aplenty. The set pieces underscore that the prehistoric animals are dangerous, as Edwards aims more for terror and suspense. Edwards even pays loving homage to Spielberg, as the filmmaker fills the waterborne scenes in the first act with Jaws references (the score even references John Williams's iconic Jaws soundtrack), while a sequence in the climax harkens back to Jurassic Park's iconic "raptors in the kitchen" scene. Meanwhile, one of the Rebirth's best sequences involves a group of characters trying to avoid waking a sleeping Tyrannosaurus rex while escaping on an inflatable raft, a scene from Michael Crichton's original novel that finally makes it to the screen. (It was originally in the script for Jurassic Park, and the scene was storyboarded, but it was too expensive and complex for 1993.) It is always a thrill to see a T. rex on-screen, and Edwards ensures the animal's appearance is memorable. Although T. rexes and velociraptors are a franchise mainstay, Rebirth drastically limits their appearance to concentrate on other dinosaurs.

Edwards adds a visceral punch to the attack scenes, but the director does not push the limits of the PG-13 rating, ensuring Rebirth is appropriate for younger viewers, much like Spielberg accomplished for the original Jurassic Park. Edwards also finds time for wondrous moments to underscore the beauty of the animals, namely a sequence involving a Titanosaurus herd. Another addition is an adorable little Aquilops affectionately named Dolores by Isabella, who chooses to adopt it. Several other dinosaurs appear throughout Rebirth, including the monstrous Mosasaurus and the return of the Spinosaurus. Those anticipating the Spinosaurus to resemble its counterpart from Jurassic Park III will be disappointed, as Rebirth features a redesigned Spinosaurus that reflects new research suggesting the creature was semiaquatic. One of the key new monsters here is the Distortus rex, a deformed hybrid that resembles the rancors from Star Wars.

Despite the accelerated production schedule, ILM again brings their A-game to Jurassic World: Rebirth, creating astonishingly realistic digital dinosaurs. Edwards continues to demonstrate his talent for seamlessly integrating digital effects with practical sets and locations, as the animals often appear in real environments, including the gorgeous natural scenery of Thailand. Edwards is a big fan of the original Jurassic Park, and he clearly strives to emulate the look of Spielberg's original movie by shooting on 35mm film and avoiding CGI overload. John Mathieson's cinematography is striking, with shadows and smoke adding tension and atmosphere. Admittedly, not all of the blue-screen work aboard the boat is entirely convincing, but the sequence is exciting and thrilling nevertheless. Unfortunately, even though animatronics are a staple of the franchise, Edwards chose to stick with digital animals to maintain a consistent look for the dinosaurs. Additionally, although composer Alexandre Desplat's score is competent, it does fall short of giving the sequel its own distinct aural identity. Compared to Williams's nuanced, memorable scores for Jurassic Park and especially The Lost World: Jurassic Park (the best soundtrack in the franchise), Desplat's work is slightly underwhelming.

It is tempting to be cynical towards Jurassic World: Rebirth, particularly since not many major blockbuster franchises can even reach a seventh instalment, and critics are pulling out the all-too-predictable "the series should go extinct" catch-cry. However, outside of the Jurassic series, dinosaurs mostly appear in D-grade, low-budget, direct-to-streaming tripe, making it all the more fun to continue seeing these prehistoric animals on the big screen with the benefit of a generous budget. Children and young adults are still besotted with dinosaurs, and these movies are important to them, warts and all. Indeed, even the worst Jurassic films still have redeeming qualities. As long as Universal and Amblin continue to produce these movies, this reviewer will continue to show up.

7.3/10

0 comments, Reply to this entry

A rousing, old-fashioned crowd-pleaser

Posted : 7 months, 1 week ago on 6 July 2025 05:27 (A review of F1: The Movie)

F1 is an unapologetically old-fashioned, thrilling, and crowd-pleasing summer blockbuster that confidently proves Hollywood is still capable of producing satisfying original movies amid all the reboots, sequels, remakes, and superhero flicks. With its clean storytelling, robust character work, outstanding practical effects, and dangerous stunts, it is unsurprising that F1 is from the same creative team behind 2022's Top Gun: Maverick, including director Joseph Kosinski, screenwriter Ehren Kruger, and veteran superproducer Jerry Bruckheimer. The movie's appeal is not solely restricted to those who watch and enjoy Formula One, as Kosinski pays sufficient attention to the characters at the centre of the story, supplementing the spectacle with humour, heart, and humanity. Although Kruger's script contains a few familiar components, this hardly matters because Kosinski capably translates the material into an enormously compelling and entertaining watch. With top-flight filmmaking that fires on all cylinders, F1 is precisely the type of summer movie that movie-goers crave but rarely receive.

A former Formula One prodigy, Sonny Hayes (Brad Pitt) is an aging racing driver who maintains a nomadic life, constantly moving around in search of new challenges and never staying in one place for too long. After winning the 24 Hours of Daytona, Sonny is approached by his former teammate, Rubén Cervantes (Javier Bardem), with a too-good-to-be-true offer: a seat in Formula One as part of the Expensify APXGP team. Although hesitant, Sonny agrees and travels to the United Kingdom, where he meets the other members of the team, including fellow driver Joshua Pearce (Damson Idris) and technical director Kate McKenna (Kerry Condon). Sonny's arrival upsets Joshua, who immediately seeks to outshine his teammate on the track and at press conferences to impress the investors and ensure his career has a future. It's a tense proposition for the two racers, but a lot is riding on their cooperation on the track. Indeed, the season is make-or-break for Rubén because the investors plan to sell the team, and Sonny and Joshua are his last hope.

Although Sonny and Joshua appear like stock-standard character types, their relationship is anything but ordinary, and their hard-won bond is one of the most joyous aspects of the narrative. Neither man is perfect, but the movie does not feel the need to cut one down to build up the other; instead, they both have things to learn. Sonny is a seasoned professional, but he needs to adapt to the F1 vehicle and learn how to work effectively as part of a team, including following orders and giving up his position in a race. Joshua, meanwhile, is a cocky newcomer, and he perceives Sonny as an old fossil who does not belong on the track. F1 contains traces of Top Gun: Maverick in this respect, as Sonny arrives on the track as the veteran "old guy" who needs to earn the trust and respect of the dubious team. Subtle aspects give the character genuine dimensionality, such as Sonny's addiction to throwing cards or his pre-race routine of placing a card in his pocket. Sonny also races not for the money or the trinkets, as he constantly moves around as a gun-for-hire, living out of his van. A bit of romance emerges between Sonny and Kate, but the subplot thankfully does not detract from the narrative's focus.

Brad Pitt turned 60 during the production of F1, but he doesn't look it, as the actor sports an incredible physique. Pitt oozes cool and machismo, and it's refreshing to see a male character who is not subject to humiliation or deconstruction. Damson Idris is another standout, as the charismatic young actor brings immense believability and dramatic gravitas to the role of Joshua Pearce. It's a star-making turn for the performer. A superb supporting cast surrounds the two men, with not a single dud performance in the ensemble. The two standouts are the Oscar-winning Javier Bardem and the Oscar-nominated Kerry Condon, while contributions from the lesser-known performers are uniformly excellent across the board. F1 also features real-life Formula One personalities, including seven-time World Drivers' Champion Sir Lewis Hamilton, who also served as one of the film's producers.

Several racing sequences occur during F1's beefy runtime, and these set pieces do not disappoint. Real-life Formula One races are repetitive at first glance, as the cars zoom around the same track dozens of times. However, Kosinski and Kruger miraculously make the racing sequences highly involving and exciting, incorporating the necessity for strategy amid the high-speed racing. As Sonny and Joshua learn to work together, they collaborate strategically to the benefit of the team, including giving up positions and, in some cases, deliberately damaging their racecars. Naturally, Sonny gets away with a lot, and it is hard to imagine a real-life racer doing all of these things without receiving a ban, but F1 is a movie, after all. The characters are also fallible, as they make mistakes while zooming around at high speeds. Although one crucial accident scene is admittedly predictable, it is nevertheless effective and hard-hitting and will likely leave you on the edge of your seat, desperate to see if everyone will survive. On that note, the movie's conclusion is equally nail-biting and edge-of-your-seat, as it's easy to root for Sonny and Joshua to succeed during the final race.

On a technical level, F1 is virtually flawless. Kosinski wisely retained Top Gun: Maverick's cinematographer, Claudio Miranda, and composer, Hans Zimmer, who also scored Ron Howard's 2013 Formula One film Rush. Although countless movies feature races and car chases, the racing sequences in F1 are genuinely one-of-a-kind, as Kosinski approaches the set pieces in the same way he approached the jet action in Top Gun: Maverick: it's all real. Without a hint of CGI or digital manipulation, the racing scenes are the result of real drivers putting their lives on the line at high speeds while tiny, custom-built Apple cameras capture the action. Astonishingly, Pitt and Idris reportedly did their own driving, reaching speeds of nearly 300km/h, which enhances the movie's sense of authenticity. With a reported 5,000 hours of footage to sift through, Oscar-winning editor Stephen Mirrione (The Revenant) had his work cut out for him, but he somehow managed to turn the dailies into fluid, coherent, and enormously engaging action sequences. F1 looks and sounds sensational, with slick visuals and a nuanced, rousing sound design, while Zimmer's score is unsurprisingly exceptional.

Despite clocking in at a mammoth 156 minutes, F1 does not feel overlong - the time flies by as there is always something to keep your interest, from the action set pieces to the sharp character interactions. The narrative is not exactly surprising, but it is engaging. Furthermore, F1 is not generic, committee-designed slop that bows to studio demands in a foolish attempt to expand its appeal; instead, Kosinski and co. stick to their guns, designing an outstanding summer movie with old-fashioned machismo, an uncompromised vision, and some of the best action set pieces of the year. And ironically, due to this approach, it will appeal to a wide audience, as it's challenging to imagine anybody leaving the cinema feeling unsatisfied by this rousing crowd-pleaser.

9.2/10

3 comments, Reply to this entry

A poor sequel lacking lustre, scope and gravitas

Posted : 7 months, 2 weeks ago on 29 June 2025 06:47 (A review of Superman III)

1983's Superman III is the first entry in this series without any input from Superman director Richard Donner or screenwriter Tom Mankiewicz, whose conceptual ideas elevated the flawed but still serviceable Superman II, which was heavily rewritten and reshot after producers Alexander and Ilya Salkind fired Donner. Thus, the Salkinds handed the keys for Superman III over to Superman II's substitute director, Richard Lester, and the screenwriting pair of David and Leslie Newman. Although the Newmans retain a credit on the original Superman, Donner detested their comedic scripts for the first two pictures to such an extent that he hired Mankiewicz to rewrite them. Donner and Mankiewicz had plans for further Superman films and intended to use Brainiac as a villain, but Lester and the Newmans foolishly disregard the years of comic book villains and stories for their Superman III, instead creating a low-grade Richard Pryor comedy vehicle that lacks the lustre, sincerity, scope and gravitas of 1978's Superman. The law of diminishing returns is in full effect here.

After Metropolis's unemployment agency stops his benefits, Gus Gorman (Richard Pryor) sets his sights on becoming a computer programmer and gets a job at Webscoe Industries. Shocked by his low salary, Gus concocts a scheme to embezzle thousands of dollars from the company, which brings him to the attention of Webscoe's CEO, Ross Webster (Robert Vaughn). Although Gus broke the law, Webster sees him as an asset and blackmails the computer programmer into helping him with a scheme to dominate the world financially. Meanwhile, Clark Kent/Superman (Christopher Reeve) returns to Smallville for his high school reunion, where he reconnects with his childhood friend, Lana Lang (Annette O'Toole). Lana is now a divorcee who's raising a son, Ricky (Paul Kaethler), and they soon start spending time together. When Superman interferes with Webster's plans, the millionaire orders Gus to find a way to eliminate the Kryptonian hero. Although Gus's attempt to make synthetic Kryptonite fails to kill Superman, it corrupts him and turns him into a selfish menace, gravely affecting his public image.

Superman III does not feel like an organic continuation of Superman because Lester turns the threequel into a farce. The director fills the threequel with comedic tomfoolery, from slapstick nonsense (the green and red men in the traffic lights fighting each other) to Pryor's overacting and improvising. The comical tone is a radical departure from the original Superman, for which Donner and Mankiewicz believed earnestness was crucial. Superman III is powerfully stupid at times, with Gus managing to bypass all computer security by typing simple requests. The writers also seem to believe that even basic model computers in the 1980s could do virtually anything, including reprogramming satellites to control the weather. Additionally, even if viewers can accept Superman III as a non-serious comedy, it is not overly funny. The script lacks wit and belly laughs, while Lester seemingly relies on Richard Pryor to try to create the comedy by mugging the camera. Pryor, who was only cast after he told Johnny Carson that he would like to feature in a Superman movie, is a gifted comedian with several notable comedies to his name (Stir Crazy, See No Evil, Hear No Evil), but he cannot bring the flick to life despite his best efforts.

The concept of an evil Superman is easily the most promising aspect of Superman III, but the film does not fully capitalise on it. Indeed, we only get to see evil Superman 'fixing' the leaning Tower of Pisa, complete with awful compositing, in front of a street vendor who sells souvenir towers, and he also blows out the Olympic Flame. Lester plays both scenes for laughs. More sinister is a scene in which Superman causes an oil spill, but that is about as interesting as it gets. A dark Superman would do more than commit acts of petty vandalism, and it would be more effective to see him tearing people apart or stealing gold from secure vaults. Admittedly, however, Reeve is genuinely frightening when Superman lashes out in anger during a drunken outburst, and the fight between Clark Kent and the corrupted Superman in the junkyard is easily the best set piece in the picture. One cannot help but wonder what Superman III would be like if the story were more focused on Superman turning evil. Unfortunately, with the film resolving the corrupted Superman arc after a mere 20 minutes, it amounts to a minor distraction.

The special effects throughout Superman III range from serviceable to laughably goofy. Most of the flying scenes look convincing, with excellent wirework and respectable green-screening for the era, but a sequence involving Superman freezing a lake and picking up the enormous icicle looks howlingly awful, even for the 1980s. Another mistake was bringing back Superman II composer Ken Thorne, as the resulting soundtrack lacks the magnificence, nuance and gravitas of John Williams's triumphant compositions on the original Superman. Thorne's rendition of Williams's iconic Superman theme sounds like a lifeless imitation, and the rest of the score resembles something from a generic comedy rather than a superhero film. On a more positive note, The Beatles' cover version of "Roll Over Beethoven" plays during Clark's high school reunion, a fitting track that also serves as a tribute to Lester's directorial work on A Hard Day's Night and Help! with the British rock band. Thankfully, too, Lester's direction is more dynamic here, with the film feeling less slapdash than the hastily-reshot Superman II, but the quality of Superman III does vary from scene to scene.

Christopher Reeve remains note-perfect as Clark Kent and Superman, with the two identities remaining wholly distinct thanks to his nuanced performance. The dull material, thankfully, does not diminish Reeve's boyish charm, and the sequence of Clark fighting evil Superman is among Reeve's finest work in the series. Additionally, Reeve and the lovely Annette O'Toole make an endearing pair, and O'Toole eventually returned to the Superman universe by playing Martha Kent in TV's Smallville. Meanwhile, Margot Kidder openly criticised the Salkinds for their treatment of Richard Donner, and her reduced role here as Lois Lane seems like retaliation, as she only appears in two scenes. Although the Salkinds deny bad blood and claim that the Lois and Clark love story was overdone after the first two films, it is clear that the producers deliberately did her dirty here. Furthermore, Robert Vaughn is clearly a substitute for Gene Hackman's Lex Luthor, as their respective characters are somewhat similar. Hackman refused to return to the Superman II set after Donner's firing, making it unsurprising that he does not appear in Superman III, though the Salkinds insist that his absence was only due to Hackman's commitment to other projects.

Superman III contains kernels of good ideas, as it explores advancements in technology and the battle between good and evil, while the Lana Lang love story holds promise. Additionally, the film comes to life at times, particularly during the junkyard fight and a sequence where Superman rescues workers and extinguishes a fire at a chemical plant. However, Lester squanders the picture's potential by focusing too much on ineffective comedy. Simply put, Superman III does not feel like a true Superman movie, as the producers were more interested in capitalising on Richard Pryor's fame by creating a comedy rather than exploring more of Superman's mythos. Unfortunately, placing Pryor in the film did not boost its box office, as this threequel grossed less than half of its predecessor's worldwide haul, earning $80 million against its $39 million budget. Although the Salkinds wanted to pursue another picture, they eventually sold the rights to The Cannon Group, who produced a fourth instalment that is even worse. Even die-hard Superman fans should just watch Superman and Superman II: The Richard Donner Cut, and consider the series over.

4.2/10

0 comments, Reply to this entry

Exhausting cinematic brain rot

Posted : 7 months, 3 weeks ago on 27 June 2025 01:51 (A review of A Minecraft Movie)

A Minecraft Movie is cinematic brain rot for the lowest common denominator, a bone-headed collection of witless set pieces and broad attempts at comedy that further proves we are moving towards the future that Mike Judge predicted in Idiocracy. Although there is an audience for this filmic tripe, namely pre-teen boys, there was also an audience in Idiocracy for the fictitious movie Ass, which was a static 90-minute shot of a flatulent rear end. Go figure. There is not a single creative thought behind A Minecraft Movie, with its paper-thin plot, passionless storytelling, and unfunny jokes. It only exists to capitalise on the popularity of the videogame of the same name, and Warner Bros. rushed this slop into production out of necessity rather than creative passion. The movie's overwhelming financial success is a reflection of the glum state of modern filmmaking, wherein memeable cult movies like this generate insane profits while better quality features struggle to recoup their budgets.

Steve (Jack Black) maintains a lifelong obsession with mining, and he breaks into a local mine where he discovers an Orb and a Crystal. Combining the two creates a portal to the Overworld, where easily manipulated cubes comprise the landscape, buildings, and wildlife, and where Steve constructs a paradise for himself. However, a creature named Malgosha (Rachel House) imprisons Steve because she despises creativity, and she seeks to obtain the Orb, which would allow her to rule the Overworld. Luckily, Steve manages to send his dog back into the real world with the Orb and Crystal. Years later, the Orb and Crystal enter the collection of Garrett (Jason Momoa), who owns a video game store in Chuglass, Idaho. Meanwhile, after the death of their mother (oh, that old chestnut), Henry (Sebastian Hansen) and his big sister, Natalie (Emma Myers), move to Chuglass. During a visit to Garrett's store, Henry combines the Orb and Crystal, which leads them to Steve's mine. They are followed by Natalie and her, um, real estate agent, Dawn (Danielle Brooks), and all four are sucked into a portal to the Overworld. They soon meet Steve, and they try to defend themselves from Malgosha's Piglin army as they work to find a way home.

The creators behind A Minecraft Movie (including a staggering five credited screenwriters) are in tune with contemporary internet culture, designing the movie for a generation with short attention spans accustomed to YouTube skits and short-form TikTok content. The characters frequently speak in idiotic catchphrases that 10-year-old boys will now start using in school ("Release!", "Ninja roll!"), while recognisable meme sounds ("Let me tell you something!") and songs ("Lil Boo Thang") also make an appearance. There is no downtime between the consistent attempts at humour, and the result is the cinematic equivalent of being stuck on a plane with a screaming baby. It is not unreasonable to expect more from director Jared Hess, who demonstrated his talent for witty comedy in his 2004 film debut, Napoleon Dynamite. A Minecraft Movie is the polar opposite of Napoleon Dynamite, replacing clever comedy with broad silliness as the actors perpetually mug the camera for laughs.

It is difficult to care about anything that occurs throughout A Minecraft Movie, as it never feels like the characters are in any danger, and there are no meaty, emotionally cathartic character arcs. In fact, the movie does not even know who the main character is. Ostensibly, the protagonist is Steve, who is also the main character in the games. However, Steve does not grow or change throughout the movie, despite the movie opening with voiceover narration from Jack Black that reveals his character's background. Meanwhile, Garrett sometimes seems like the main character, but the story is not told from his point of view. A third potential protagonist emerges in Henry, but his presence has minimal bearing on the story, and you could be forgiven for forgetting he even exists. There's also a Token Black Woman(TM) who has no compelling reason to be in this story. It appears that several writers submitted various versions of the script with different main characters, only for the final draft to haphazardly combine them without proper consideration for the basic tenets of storytelling. The sole focus was on broadening audience appeal - Steve for older viewers, the cool-looking Garrett for teens and young adults, Henry to attract younger children, and Dawn for the diversity points - rather than creating a proper story.

Before the SAG-AFTRA strike in 2023, Matt Berry was set to play Steve, but he had to vacate the role due to his shifting schedule. Although Jack Black is no slouch, he cannot elevate the extraordinarily pedestrian screenplay, despite his best efforts. Additionally, moviegoers are growing tired of Black's shtick, as the actor appears to lack range and nuance. One cannot help but imagine how much better the movie would be with Berry leading the ensemble cast. Berry still has a voice-only role as a villager, but unfortunately, he does not make much of an impression. Jason Momoa fares better than Black, bringing wonderful energy to this beefy, jock-like retro game enthusiast. The movie's only laughs (there are not many) are thanks to Momoa, although Dawn's random alpaca also generates a couple of giggles. Elsewhere in the cast, Sebastian Hansen and Danielle Brooks are incredibly nondescript as Henry and Dawn, with their presence only taking away narrative focus. Emma Myers at least brings genuine charm to the role of Natalie, and she does her best with the slipshod screenplay. The voice acting cast is not much better, as Rachel House sounds completely uninterested in the role of the villainous Malgosha, reciting lines as if she were standing in a recording booth reading directly from a script.

Since Warner Bros. spent a considerable amount of money bringing A Minecraft Movie to the big screen, it is a competent and slick blockbuster with colourful production design and top-notch digital effects that bring this videogame world to vivid life. The movie also attempts to convey a message about the importance of creativity, but the message is somewhat muddled, and The LEGO Movie already explored the same themes over a decade ago in a far more effective and poignant manner. A Minecraft Movie is mindless, hackneyed slop, and it is impossible to recommend that anybody waste their time on it. It's not even ironically enjoyable - it's just soulless, corporatised filmmaking. For many adolescent boys, A Minecraft Movie likely represents a culturally significant moment due to its rampant popularity, and the internet memes and unruly cinema behaviour it generated. But children deserve better.

3.7/10

0 comments, Reply to this entry

An outstanding remake with heart and humour

Posted : 7 months, 3 weeks ago on 26 June 2025 12:35 (A review of How to Train Your Dragon)

With Disney producing a seemingly endless string of below-par live-action remakes of beloved animated classics, it is a joy to behold 2025's How to Train Your Dragon, which puts the House of Mouse to shame by showing that such projects can be genuinely excellent in the right hands. DreamWorks Animation's first live-action remake, How to Train Your Dragon has an ace up its sleeve in writer-director Dean DeBlois, who co-wrote and co-directed the 2010 picture before masterminding the second and third animated flicks. Although the feature is loosely based on Cressida Cowell's 2003 novel of the same name, DeBlois does not return to the source to create a more accurate adaptation; instead, the filmmaker uses the original picture as a template. This remake does not significantly deviate from the 2010 movie, but the magic lies in the execution: instead of a lazy copy-and-paste, 2025's How to Train Your Dragon is an exhilarating and poignant ride, with DeBlois recognising the importance of characters and story over mindless spectacle. It's a respectful update that neither mocks the source material nor subverts expectations, resulting in a highly entertaining, crowd-pleasing blockbuster for everyone.

The Viking village of Berk is under constant threat of dragons, as dozens of flying creatures frequently stage night-time attacks to steal the villagers' precious livestock. 16-year-old Hiccup (Mason Thames) aspires to fight dragons alongside his warrior father, Stoick the Vast (Gerard Butler), and he makes mechanical weapons to compensate for his slim build. After incapacitating a Night Fury dragon with a bolas launcher during one raid, Hiccup sets out to find the creature to prove to the village that he is a capable dragon fighter, but he cannot bring himself to finish the job. Instead, upon finding that the dragon cannot fly properly after losing half of its tail fin, Hiccup befriends the sleek black beast, naming him "Toothless" and equipping him with a prosthetic fin. Hiccup learns to fly on the dragon's back and tries to keep the situation a secret from his fellow villagers. Meanwhile, Stoick enrols Hiccup in a dragon-slaying class alongside other local teenagers, including Astrid (Nico Parker), Fishlegs (Julian Dennison), Snotlout (Gabriel Howell), and twins Ruffnut (Bronwyn James) and Tuffnut (Harry Trevaldwyn). Under the tutelage of local blacksmith Gobber the Belch (Nick Frost), the teenagers begin learning about how to fight dragons, and Hiccup starts applying what he learns from Toothless to give him an edge in class, which draws Astrid's ire.

Like the 2010 flick, How to Train Your Dragon carries a playful but sincere tone, with a touch of humour that does not feel forced or farcical. Although the movie slavishly adheres to the plot structure of its predecessor, and some scenes are virtually identical (DeBlois recreates Hiccup's first encounter with Toothless shot by shot), the enhanced character beats and added spontaneity of live-action performers give the movie a fresh identity and personality. This iteration runs a beefy two hours compared to its predecessor's lean 90-minute duration, but it does not feel long in the tooth, as DeBlois consistently keeps the narrative moving at an involving pace. There is a big beating heart at the centre of How to Train Your Dragon, as the relationships Hiccup develops between Toothless and his father contribute to the movie's overwhelming emotional core. The story's message also remains effective, as the script explores themes relating to self-discovery and forging one's own path while underscoring that everyone has a place in the world, regardless of perceived shortcomings. After all, Hiccup could not become a burly Viking warrior, but his ingenious inventions and his ability to befriend Toothless saves Berk.

Although How to Train Your Dragon was understandably pricey with a $150 million budget, the movie thankfully does not carry the bland, plastic look of several high-profile blockbusters that reportedly cost twice as much. With cinematographer Bill Pope (The Matrix, Alita: Battle Angel) designing the feature for IMAX screens, it boasts immense visual majesty, from the sweeping camera movements during the flying sequences to the meticulous lighting that allows Berk to feel like an authentic Viking village. The elaborate production design vividly recreates iconic locations from the animated film, including the recognisable dragon-fighting arena, while the natural beauty of the Irish filming locations adds further visual appeal. How to Train Your Dragon looks especially stunning in IMAX, with the expanded aspect ratio creating a greater sense of immersion, and the movie is fun to watch in 3D. Enthusiasm for 3D understandably waned after rampant overexposure, but for those with an appetite for the additional dimension, the format works well here.

DeBlois considered creating realistic dragons that radically differ from their animated counterparts (a la 2019's The Lion King), but the filmmaker smartly opted to retain a slightly cartoonish look. Therefore, Toothless still looks like Toothless, and the dragon has genuine personality with its wide, expressive eyes and cat-like behaviour. The various digital dragons are not photorealistic, but they are convincing enough, and it is easy to accept the on-screen illusion because they look and act like living, breathing creatures. Additionally, the quality of the CGI is consistent throughout the picture, with no special effects shots looking rushed or slipshod. Another asset is the exceptional soundtrack, which perfectly complements the breathtaking imagery. How to Train Your Dragon wisely retains composer John Powell, who preserves his familiar soundtrack motifs from the animated feature while updating the score to make the movie feel even more epic. The exquisite music carries astonishing flavour and emotion, amplifying the impact of standout scenes. Most notable is the sequence involving Hiccup taking Toothless on a test flight, which gave this reviewer chills. The smaller dramatic moments are equally effective, as Powell's orchestral brilliance augments the drama without overwhelming the terrific performances.

Understandably, DeBlois could not bring back the likes of Jay Baruchel, America Ferrera or Christopher Mintz-Plasse to reprise their roles in live-action, as DeBlois required a younger cast to portray teenagers convincingly. However, the new cast is outstanding from top to bottom, with Mason Thames embodying the character of Hiccup without trying to mimic Baruchel, and the lovely Nico Parker (Thandiwe Newton's daughter) making for a spirited and likeable Astrid. Another standout is Kiwi actor Julian Dennison (Hunt for the Wilderpeople) as Fishlegs, while Gabriel Howell scores several laughs as Hiccup's rival, Snotlout. Additionally, Nick Frost is superb as Gobber the Belch, capably handling the story's humorous elements and dramatic scenes. However, bringing back Gerard Butler to play Stoick the Vast in live-action is a creative masterstroke. His thick Scottish brogue and robust frame give him an immense on-screen presence, and the actor treats the material with utmost sincerity. Indeed, How to Train Your Dragon might be a movie for children, but Butler does not hold back on the dramatic gravitas; he gives it his all, adding an incredible amount of passion and emotion to crucial scenes.

The sole shortcoming of 2025's How to Train Your Dragon is that it came out after the original animated movie. This live-action remake is virtually note-perfect, and most of its magic derives from the way it lovingly and sincerely executes recognisable shots and scenes in live-action rather than making unnecessary or bone-headed changes. However, it lacks the novelty factor of the 2010 feature, which seemingly emerged from nowhere to achieve immense critical success and win the hearts of film-goers. Nevertheless, it is easy to accept and enjoy both versions. Emotionally resonant, thematically rich, technically proficient and highly enjoyable, 2025's How to Train Your Dragon is a grandiose blockbuster that exceeds expectations, making for a joyous return to Berk. Kids who are unfamiliar with the original movie will have a great time, while adults who grew up watching the animated features will find this update equally enjoyable.

8.2/10

0 comments, Reply to this entry

« Prev 1 2 34 5 6 7 » 17 » 170 Next »