Review - Doctor Strange: Multiverse of Madness

Dr Strange 2 follows the titular wizard as he tries to protect a dimension hopping teenager from a powerful villain.

CONVOLUDED
A lot of people conflate the MCU as being one long story, which I disagree with; it’s a series of smaller franchises that share a universe and occasionally cameo.
Dr Strange 2 however feels a lot harder for new people; it references multiple movies and shows while trying to be a direct sequel to its previous movie. Being more selective with what to bring up and what to omit would have been a huge help, but that’s only half the problems I have with the movie.
Dr Strange’s arc feels somewhat confused about what’s it’s trying to be; is he a man trying to get over his ex, or a hero struggling with the fact that his alternate selves all seem to lose their way in one way or another. Picking and focusing on one arc would have really helped the flow of the movie; it’s a little over 2 hours but feels much longer.
It would also help to tie his story much closer to the villain as well as the new hero, America Chavez; it would make it feel like a much more like a solid movie than a bunch of sup-plots happening at once.

VILLAIN
The villain is much better handled; equal parts tragic and downright terrifying.
Especially terrifying!
The director, Sam Raimi is best known for his horror movies and this puts him right into his element, more so than his Spider-Man trilogy.
Unlike Strange, the villain is much more consistant in their goals and arc.

ACTION
The action is comparatively tamer than the previous movie, with more grounded set pieces which feel more typical super-hero.
The only real stand out is a battle where both sides use the soundtrack against each other, and that is not an exaggeration or a euphemism. Wish there were more moments like that.
Its does deliver on the visuals however; it shows what creative steps can be taken with CGI, with a lot of striking visuals that really stand out, debatably more so than the first movie and with a much more horror feel to them.

CONCLUSION
It’s a messy movie in dire need of a second draft, but it’s distinctive visuals and compelling villain make it a very enjoyable movie.

I’m interested to see how this feels to an audience new to the MCU; a movie should be accessible, no matter if it’s the second instalment or the twentieth, and I’m not sure if this one is.
It’s not a good entry point to the MCU, but it’s certainly not one you’ll forget, for better or worse.

Review - Doctor Strange

Doctor Strange follows Stephen Strange; an egotistical surgeon who loses the use of his hands and finds a new purpose as a sorcerer who protects the world.

PROTAGONIST
As to be expected with a Marvel Studios movie, the best part is the lead.
Benedict Cumberbatch brings a snarky arrogance to the role but also balances it with the tragedy of a man who loses everything. His performance swings from a cocky swagger to a desperate and angry man, with a heavy emphasis on drama that makes this feel like a more mature action movie.
His basic story is not exactly new for a superhero, but the presentation is more of a spiritual discovery than of a hero fighting crime, making for a much more mature character-focused experience.

VILLAIN
A lot of criticism is placed on the villain, played by Mads Mikkelsen, but I feel like this is unfair; rather than approaching the character as a typical supervillain, he’s just a high functioning henchman for the larger threat, Dormomu.
The villain isn’t going to win any awards, but they function perfectly well as a central threat to move the plot along.

ACTION
The action is a definite highlight; combining martial arts with creative CG effects.
It has some interesting setups too; Dr Strange fights someone in spirit form while his body is undergoing surgery, one takes place on a building that’s in the process of folding over, and my personal favourite is a fight in a destroyed street that is fixing itself in reverse.
It’s a really unique action style, even outside of superhero movies; like if Inception was more creative in its setups.

CONCLUSION
It’s not the best of the Marvel movies in terms of quality, but it excels so hard with its characterisation and visuals that it’s one of my favourites.

Think Harry Potter meets Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon, while tripping on acid.
It’s a well led movie that combines creative action with a really strong lead, and it’s a solid recommendation from me.

I'M DONE - Fantastic Beasts embargo

I consider myself a patient man.
I believe in giving every movie a chance to impress me; even if I go in expecting to dislike it, oftentimes low expectations can lead to my enjoying the final product.
Even in some of the worst movies I’ve ever seen, I’ll try to highlight the positives.
I won’t review bomb something for the sake of my emotions,
and I promise to always judge each movie on its own merits.

But I have limits.

The Fantastic Beasts movies had a lot of promise; they were penned by JK Rowling, the author of the original Harry Potter novels that this series spins off from, and directed by David Yates, who brought the last four Harry Potter movies to the big screen.
It was set to be a darker look at this world through the eyes of adults while exploring the past of one of its main characters and his relationship with the villainous Grindlewald.

Instead, the final result is ugly to look at and infuriating to follow the plot.
Characters do stupid things and events happen purely because the story wants them to.
Events are disconnected from the plot and sometimes entirely pointless.
Despite having one writer, each movie will directly retcon things that happened in the previous movie.
Actions will be undone, dead characters resurrected and relationships shifted for the sake of whatever new story they want to tell.

It’s hard to escape the comparisons to the Star Wars Prequel trilogy; the returning pedigree of the previous movies set to take us back into the world we loved as kids but lost itself in bad storytelling, poor characterisation and needless pandering to fans of the original.
And yet those movies didn’t irritate me as much as Fantastic Beasts; they were bad, sure, but I liked my fair share of moments from them.
At least this series doesn’t have the racist aliens of the Phantom Menace, but they still have two movies left, so they could still introduce a Beast that looks like a golliwog or something.

But I won’t be there to see it.
I’m out.

I have only placed an embargo on two other series; the Disney live action movies and the Micheal Bay Transformers franchise.
On both occasions, I stayed with them for three movies but realised that I couldn’t enjoy them.
There is an anime community thing called the three-episode rule; you give a show three episodes to suck you in since the first two rarely set everything up properly. After three, you’ll know if this show is for you,
and that’s what I’m applying to these movies.

To be clear, this has nothing to do with anything behind the scenes; neither my disagreement with the politics of the writer nor my feelings towards the firing of Johnny Depp.
My opinions on these matters have no place in anything on this site, and quite frankly they are no business of anyone but myself.
My only concern is the product and said product sucks.

I am open to lifting it, however.
Transformers turned itself around with the highly entertaining Bumblebee movie, and it’s possible Fantastic Beasts will do the same.
But I have lost confidence,
and it will take a lot to win me back.
Critical praise or endorsement from critics I respect; I promise to remain hopeful, even if my expectations are low.

This is to both warn you away from these movies
and to close my own personal book on this franchise.
After I have said my peace, I don’t plan on watching or even thinking about the Fantastic Beasts movies, current or future.

Plans change of course,
but for now,

I’m done.

Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindlewald

Crimes of Grindlewald is about…nothing.
This plot is nothing.
It’s certainly not about Grindlewald or any crimes he may commit.

So in theory the plot is about the character of Creedance Barebone from the previous movie, who survived exploding at the end of the last one, because shut up, and is hunted by multiple people who are after his power.
The villains, led by the villain Grindlewald, want to harness his power for evil, and the heroes want to stop him, while a third party of Yusef Kama, played by William Nadylam, wants revenge for something he belives Creedance’s father did to his mother.
The plot revolves around this, with Creedence’s revelations and Kama’s search for revenge being based on this idea that Creedance is this person.
And it’s ultimately a lie.
This is an over two hour movie that effectively wasted both the time of the characters, and audience,
and this might be salvageable if this was a one off movie about misplaced revenge,
but it’s not.
It’s the second part of what is planned to by a pentalogy and it has no baring on the ongoing narrative.
By the end, nobody directly involved in this plot cares about any revelations, and having seen the sequel, it’s brought up all of once, only to sweep it under the rug.
Seriously, they retcon a connection so Kama cares about someone who died, only so they can take his memory away.
It is amazing how inept this was.

Not only that, but they ruined aspects from the previous movie.
If you read my review of Fantastic Beasts And Where To Find Them, I talked about how I liked the romance between the characters Kowalski and Queenie.
The movie begins undoing the dramatic ending where Kowalski’s memory is wiped and separating the lovers, and has Queenie mind control him into marrying her.
They call it “enchanting”, but it’s not. It’s mind control and it’s character assassination of Queenie.
If the genders were reversed here, I guarantee people would be complaining about it (though it would make for a much better show. Seriously, watch Jessica Jones, thank me later).
It’s not even for a satisfactory reason; she isn’t portrayed as a villain or anything, but more a confused person struggling with her feelings, so it feels even more wrong because at least going full psychopath would be committing to the horrible act. I wouldn’t like it, but it would feel like a direction the writer wanted to take.
And I pray to every God that they didn’t have sex while he was like this, because I don’t even want to contemplate the grossness of witch rape on top of everything else.

The movie tries to distract the audience with characters from the Harry Potter movies and books, but there’s no insight and they don’t contribute more than cameos.

CONCLUSION

The plot is fluff that amounts to nothing, the way they have Queenie act like a villain for stupid reasons and a distinct lack of anything interesting makes this a terrible movie in my eyes that I have zero inclination to revisit.

It’s an unpleasant experience and one of the few movies that I honestly can’t think of anything I like about it.
Don’t let those two stars fool you; I wish I could justify scoring it less, but that would be unfair in my eyes.
Even if you liked this first, this is just trash.

Fantastic Beasts And Where To Find Them

Fantastic Beasts follows Newt Scamander, a Wizard who studies magical animals, as he tracks down several monsters that have escaped into New York, while also being drawn into a conspiracy that threatens the world.

The first theatrical spin off of the Harry Potter franchise, Fantastic Beasts tries to take the franchise in a more adult direction, which I applaud.
The fan base for this series has grown up and with it a more mature change of direction is a good direction to take it (though debatable this franchise hasn’t really been a kids story since around the fourth movie, but I digress).

The issue is with the execution; the story has a metric ton of plot holes that really start to add up.
Characters do stupid things or know things because the plot needs them too, and the ending pulls a Deus Ex Machina out of it’s all to solve all the movies problems.
It’s really distracting when you keep asking, “wait, why is this person doing something stupid?”

The biggest sticking point was an execution scene; Newt discovers the villains identity and he tries to have him killed via a strange execution method where the prisoner is sat on a chair over what looks like Mercury that…I think it burns them. Drowns them? It’s really not clear, but that’s the least of the problems.
Why is the villain using this method? Can he do this? There’s no trial? We saw in the Harry Potter movies that they have a judicial system to imprison people, but execution can be assigned by whoever?
And why kill them? It makes him look really suspicious. A better method would be to use mind control (which this series has established does exist), have them attack someone in public and gun them down in self-defence? Or have them go free and draw attention away from you.
It raises so many questions that could be easily avoided, but they were really set on filming this scene so just worked it in.
A recurring issue when we get to the sequels, but let’s stay focused on this movie.

It’s a very ugly looking movie too.
There’s little life to any of the images, it’s all shades of grey and brown. And scenes in the dark become really difficult to see what’s happening.
There’s a scene where they enter the American Ministry of Magic and this whimsical music plays, but it looks washed out and unimpressive, so the music feels like it’s trying to hard to impress me.

I did enjoy the characters however; Newt himself, played by Eddie Redmayne, is well cast and delivers the idea of a social awkward man who communicates well with animals but struggles with people. Redmayne has great subtle acting to accentuate this; the way he avoids making eye contact, his speech feels nervous without mumbling so we can still understand him.
The ultimate test is that the main danger is a human, the one animal he can’t talk to well, so it’s great to see him overcome his shyness to help someone else.

Another aspect I enjoyed was the romance between the characters Kowalski and Queenie. They are both very likeable characters that have a real friendly energy to them, and they make for an extremely cute couple.
Sure hope the sequel doesn’t do anything to mess this up! (it does)

CONCLUSION

This is a flawed but not unsalvagable movie; I can generally accept issues like plot holes and unappealing visuals if the characters are right, but this really tested my limits.

I didn’t enjoy it, but it’s not without it’s merits, and I can see someone else getting into this movie even if I didn’t. However I can’t recommend it.
The original Harry Potter movies were mature enough and all really good movies (well, except maybe 4, but I enjoyed that more than this movie at least), so I would say they are more worth your time.

The Lost City

The Lost City follows a romance novel writer who is forced by an eccentric billionaire to help him find an ancient treasure, while a foolish model does his best to save her.

The movie has a very tropic thunder vibe, with Sandra Bullock and Channing Tatum having great comedic energy.
Tatum’s charmingly idiotic Alan brings a very likeable version of the classic dumb model arc-type, that actually has some depth which goes beyond being a walking punchline, while Bullock’s straight man to both him and the villain helps sell the comedy.
The pair work well together and the witty writing help elevates what could have been a tired premise.

Daniel Radcliff is a brilliant villain too; this is another trope we’ve seen in other movies, but Radcliff brings a certain energy that it’s hard to say I’ve seen performed the same way. His increasing frustration leading to the climax makes him both threatening and funny.

CONCLUSION

It’s not a very deep movie or too original, but the performances and writing make for a funny and entertaining movie.

Hardly the next comedy classic, but a very enjoyable trip to the cinema.
It’s a solid recommendation, and if that doesn’t sell you on the movie,
it has Channing Tatum’s butt in.
And while I’m not into guys, I gotta conceded,
it’s a nice butt.

Operation Mincemeat

Operation Mincemeat follows British spies in world war 2 that try to trick the German military in advance of a major battle.

I’m not really a fan of war movies, WW2 in particular; after a while they kind of blend together for me.
Though I am partial to the ones that feel different; Hacksaw Ridge for example was a refreshing subversion of the classic formula, and I feel the same about this movie.
Not only is a different sort of war movie, it’s a different sort of spy movie; it’s not about gunfights or gadgets (aside from a cute moment) but a more realistic look into espionage that pays homage to the real life spies that fought in the shadows to protect their homeland.

Sadly this movie falls apart in the character aspect.
The romance between Colin Firths Ewan and Kelly McDonald’s Jean felt underdeveloped and really dragged the movie down.
The idea of two character working on a cover story for a fictional soldier and his lover living vicariously through their fantastical characters has merit, but it never felt like a romance.
I honestly didn’t know that’s what they were going for until they just came out and said it.

But more annoyingly was the character of Charles, played by Matthew Macfadyen.
He comes across as a petty and jealous creep, who leers at Jean throughout the entire movie.
I would be fine if they wanted a love triangle, but it’s not even that. He’s not even an angle in this non-existant romance.
Nothing against Macfadyen’s portrayal; he’s clearly doing as directed and doing it well, but I question why he was written this way or what the movie was trying to bring across.

The movie really shines in the actual deception part of the movie; the plot is based placing fake documents on a dead body and making sure it makes its way into German hands, and that they believe it.
A lot of effort goes into showing the detail; manufacturing a cover story, getting the right dead body, having Charles wear the uniform of the soldier throughout the movie so the wear and tare looks realistic.
And when something goes wrong, there’s real tension; I was honestly on the edge of my seat time times when something threatened to unravel the whole plan.

It’s also a surprisingly funny movie; a lot of black humour works its way into the plot and it got a lot of laughs out of the audience I was with.

CONCLUSION

While the romance and characters felt lacking, the focus on espionage and the sense of humour helps elevate this movie.

My parents really enjoyed it so that may give you an idea if it’s right for you, and the parts that I strong are still enough for me to recommend this movie.
But maybe wait until it’s available for streaming; it is worth it for the unique take on the spy genre, so long as you can wait through the sucky parts.

Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore

Fantastic Beasts: the secrets of Dumbledore follows the wizard Dumbledore’s efforts to stop his former lover Grindlewald from taking over the wizarding world.

I wasn’t a fan of the previous movies in this series, and sadly the same is true with this third entry.
It’s better than the previous movie, the Crimes of Grindlewald, but suffers the same issues that prevented me from enjoying that movie.

The main issue is the abundance of plot holes and irritating habit of wasting time; the first two thirds of this movie are spent pretty much wasting time. Nothing is accomplished, which the characters openly admit to, but that doesn’t make it better just because it was the intention. This is a two and half hour movie with barely enough actual plot to fill a feature length running time.

If there is an issue that frustrated me more than the superfluace, it’s the painfully inept world building.
The plot revolves around an election, but for what the movie doesn’t make clear. It’s for a Confederation of wizards, but we don’t know much about what this confederation does.
Do they superseed the leader so individual countries, because we do see that each nation has its own minister of magic. It appears to be a democratic election, but the voting is thrown out in favour of using a magical animal. Have the people already voted? If so, why aren’t they more angry? A character is arrested by German police at one point and sent to a jail where they await to die by a giant scorpion. He’s a foreign national and a civil servant; these people don’t see how this could cause issues diplomatically?
Things just happen because the plot needs them to, without any satisfactory explanation or resolution.
Two characters who joined the villain at the end of the last movie switch sides with very little convincing; one was preparing to kill Dumbledore, blaming him for being abandoned as a child, but all it takes is Dumbledore telling him its not his fault and he just takes him at his word. Again, because the plot needs him too.
And that’s not even getting into the retcons imposed; Grindlewald in the last movie escaped custody and went on to murder several wizard policemen, and his crimes are thrown out due to “lack of evidence”. It’s all just swept away because they changed their minds about what they wanted the plot to be. If there was a trial and we see how members of the jury or even the judge sympathise with his cause then that would be an explanation because it shows how much power he has politically, but the whole criminal thing is thrown away with a shrug.

The only part I enjoyed was the character of Albus Dumbledore; Jude Law brings a fatherly energy to the role that helps sell him as a younger version of the same character seen in the Harry Potter movies. His ability to dodge questions and manipulate people while also placing a genuine level of trust in them makes for a different kind of mentor; not necessarily darker but complicated, as he keeps people at arms length.
His conflict comes from the fact that he and Grindlewald were once lovers turned enemies, and Law does well to portray a man clearly at odds with what his heart wants and what he knows is right.
The opening scene does well to portray this with little more than innuendo and physical acting, and led me to believe that the movie would be better. However it ultimately ended but being downhill from there.

Grindlewald was a missed opportunity; Mads Mikkelsen again does his best with what he has, with subtle facial expressions that say louder than worlds how he feels, but I feel that the script gives him no meat to work with.
The characters of Newt Scamander and Jacob Kowalski too feel wasted; Eddie Redmayne and Dan Fogler bring the same likeable energy to their roles as in the previous movies, but like the second instalment this movie doesn’t give them much to work with.
Newt in particular feels like a character written for the first movie that plays to his strengths as a social awkward animal lover, but was forced into this new plot without a plan of what to do with him.

CONCLUSION

While better than the previous movie, the third Fantastic beasts movie is a giant disappointment.
Good characters aren’t utilised well, half the plot amounted to nothing and the plot holes really pile up that it drowns out the only part I liked, which was the character of Dumbledore.

This movie felt like a waste of my time, and I fear it may be a waste of yours.
And after three chances all disappointed me, I am officially done with this franchise.
I don’t care to see the remaining movies in this story.
I’m out.
Do yourself a favour and just watch the Harry Potter movies instead.

The Bad Guys

The Bad guys follows a gang of criminal animals who try to improve their image while planning their next big heist.

Animation has really come a long way lately; between Mitchells vs the Machines and Turning Red, more and more animated movies are bringing the energy of 2D animation to movies that have traditionally felt very stiff.
The animation here is top notch; every movement feels exaggerated perfectly and is full of energy, but not to the point where it becomes distracting; it knows when to slow down and take its time to let the emotion of the scene sink in.

This carries over to the action scenes, that are expertly choreographed and full of life.
Every movement and camera view helps deliver a rush of adrenaline, even more so than most live action movies.

Its characters too are well defined and likeable, helped by some great casting.
Usually the celebrity stunt casting of animated movies can work against the movie, since you just hear the celebrity and not the character, but here it feels like everyone disappears into their role, including Richard Ayoade, who has a very particular voice and delivery had me convinced of his character by the end.

It’s not exactly a deep story, and most of the twists I saw coming a mile away, but that’s part of the curse of having seen so many movies; I can see kids getting a real kick out of the twists and turns of this plot.
But while it’s not another movie like Pixar, that combines deep themes with child friendly animation, this makes up for it with overwhelming style.
The editing and pacing are really slick and easily comparable to the heist movies it’s emulating.

CONCLUSION

Its a pretty standard kids movie plot, but a great looking one.
The animation, editing and action are high grade, with a great cast to bring it together.

I’ve heard the phrase, “if Disney is classical music, then Dreamworks is jazz”, and this is the embodiment of that.
It’s not gonna deconstruct anything or examine to complexities of puberty, but it is going to keep you entertained for the entire run time,
and if the previews for the new Puss in Boots are any indication, this is a brilliant direction for this studio to be heading in artistically, with well styled and energetic animation that can give it identity to distinguish from Disney and Pixar.
I loved this and hope to see more in the future.

The Northman

The Northman follows a Viking, Amleth, on a path to avenge his father.
If you’re able to guess the entire plot from that description then you’ve seen the Lion King too.

It’s hardly an original plot, but what it lacks in a new story, the Northman delivers in atmosphere.
It’s a visual masterpiece, that’s impossible to look away from.
The cinematography is gorgeous; from one-shot fight scenes to the disturbing close-ups, it captures the emotions of every scene and completely drew me in.
Not just visual either. The sound design is downright perfect, from the violent hacking of blades to the howling winds; a movie has never sounded this cold.

Action scenes felt pretty sparse and lacking in my opinion, but that’s clearly not what this was going for.
This is an artistic action movie; it’s about emotion and cinematography rather than an updated Conan the Barbarian.
I’m not marking it down for that, but it is something to bear in mind; if you expect an action-filled adventure, you’ll be disappointed.
That said the final battle is pretty epic, but again it’s down to the cinematography.
Just letting you know what you’re in for.

It’s pretty trippy too; somewhere between Midsommar and Dr Strange, with visual allusions to the Norse Mythology that inspired it.
It’s not fantasy; there’s a fight scene with an undead skeleton that’s all a dream, and illusions of Valkyries and Odin, it’s a great way of including this classic imagery while keeping it grounded in the real world.
It helps build this world and sucks you further into the story.

CONCLUSION

It’s every tale of revenge in olden times you’ve seen, but thanks to it’s visual and sound design it definatly stands above the rest.

It’s not the blood soaked epic I thought I wanted,
but the artistic journey into the world of Vikings I didn’t know I actually did.
While it lacked the story or character to push it over the edge, it’s an extremely immersive work of art that I highly recommend to those who wish to journey to the frozen North.

Sonic the Hedgehog 2

Sonic the Hedgehog 2 follows the titular character, as he races to stop the evil Dr Robotnik and his partner Knuckles from acquiring a powerful emerald.
So yeah, pretty much adapting the plot of Sonic 3.

Remember when we were all grossed out by the original design for this character?
Hard to believe we were expecting the movie to bomb so hard originally after seeing this new movie.

The plot is pretty much ripped from the game and there’s no end to the references in this one to its source material; from the character Tails being voiced by an actor from the games to the GUN organisation being introduced. I mean when there’s a reference to the obscure spin-off game, Dr Robotnik’s Mean Bean Machine, you know the people involved did their research.
And yet it manages to have its own lore and history that it merges with the established canon of the games, so it didn’t disregard the changes made for the sake of accommodating the old stuff.

But films can not live off references alone; how does it stack up as its own movie?

PROTAGONISTS
The Characters are very likeable and developed; I was pretty lukewarm on this version of Sonic from the first movie, but by the end of this movie he feels both developed as his own character and true to the original. They really upped their game in the sequel, which is really refreshing in a kid’s movie based on a video game.
Tails is a game character introduced here as Sonic’s best friend and sidekick; he retains the little brother energy from the games while leaning heavily on his technological skills that the later games put emphasis on. I was worried at first that they were heading to a “liar revealed” or at least becoming disillusioned with his hero worship of Sonic, but instead, they use their connection to help Sonic grow by feeling responsible for his safety and Tails find his courage through their interactions; they compliment each other really well.
I was kind of put off by the cuts back to the James Marston character and his side plot, but they ultimately tie it together in the end and again build on the connections made in the first movie rather than throwing them out in favour of more game stuff.

VILLAINS
The villains are a lot of fun; Jim Carrey does pretty much what you’d expect fo him, mugging constantly, shouting like a lunatic, which again is very game accurate to the cartoonish Robotnik while also feeling like a legitimate threat. He never felt too silly that I didn’t believe why the other characters were scared of him.
Knuckles is a mixture of different from the game version while also feeling very true; he’s traditionally meatheaded and lets his fists do the talking for him, while also being tricked by Robotnik on multiple occasions. That’s true here but they gave him a warrior culture schtik that builds on the new movie cannon, while making his stupidity similar to the MCU version of Drax the destroyer; he’s introduced to the concept of a handshake as “gripping someone else’s hand very tightly”, making it a running joke that he breaks peoples hands when they try to shake his. You kind of know the direction their taking with him, especially if you’ve played the games, but he makes for an intimidating counter to Sonic while acting as the straight man to Robotnik; gotta love how the literal cartoon is the serious one in this pairing, like a reverse Roger Rabbit.

ACTION
The action gets pretty intense at times, ranging from chase scenes to fights. It’s well shot and fast-paced in a very enjoyable way.
Again it’s the kid’s movie that’s doing this well, while the superhero movie for “Adults” that I just reviewed, Morbius, felt lacking in the action department.

COMEDY
Comedy wise, this will either make or break this movie; for every groaner, there’s one that works. Your enjoyment of this movie is going to weigh very heavily on your tolerance for kid movie humour, personally, I loved it; it’s one of those rare movies that had me smiling pretty much the whole way through.

OVERALL

Sonic the Hedgehog 2 is a huge improvement on the first movie; its characters are likeable and entertaining, its jokes are more hits than misses and its action is well shot and choreographed.

If you’re not a fan of Jim Carrey’s overacting or kids’ movie humour then you can bump this down to a 3 star, but for me, I found this very enjoyable.
Who’d have thought that the movie to feel like it got a video game adaptation right would be from the Sonic the Hedgehog franchise? Other studios should be taking notes <Glares intently at the Halo series and Mario movie>.

Monsters University

Rating-9/10

The good
-The humour
-The animation
-The story
-The designs

Monsters U follows Michael "Mike" Wazowski (Billy Crystal), a small monster who is desperate to stand out as a scarer of children, and James "Jimmy" Suliven (John Goodman), an arrogant slacker with a chip on his shoulder. The pair move from rivals to friends over the course of their first couple of semesters in a university for monsters where they learn to harness children's screams as a power source.

The humour is spot on, with nearly every joke getting a reaction. The animation too is spot on.
 
SPOILERS

The animation in the human world is so drastically different from the colourful monster world, that it actually makes it fairy scary, creating a fantastic contrast to the rest of the film and reinforcing the characters fear of the human world.

END OF SPOILERS

The story feels fairly typical of a university film; with a the jerky frat brothers, nerdy outcast frat which the main characters align with and the stern Dean with a grudge against the main characters, but is ultimately saved by the climax.

SPOILERS

The plot ultimately doesn't go the way you expect, with both Mike and Sully dropping out and having to work their way up to where they want to be in life. I honestly expected it to be more cliche, but I was thankfully surprised.

END OF SPOILERS

The film included a lot of fantastic designs, in particular Dean Hardscrabble (Helen Mirren), who was a cross between a dragon, a millipede and a feminist lawyer. Other great characters included a hippy who is nothing but two arms with a face, and the librarian monster.

Monsters University is a fantastic film, feeling both funny and inventive if you can ignore some of the more glaring cliches.
A definite must see.

AS A PREQUEL

The film never feels like it's treading old ground, with the focus of the film shifting from the power of laughter over fear, to the psychology and analysis of fears power. 
The human world is represented as the scary environment that the characters believed initially before the events of Monsters INC.
The callbacks to the original film are sparse enough that they don't feel like their more than nods and are shown in a way that makes old characters funny rather than distracting. Even the retuning characters like Mike, Sully and Randell are portrayed in a way that they feel like different characters, so it never feels old and allows the film to be its own thing.

2 Guns

Rating-9/10

The good
-The humour
-The action
-The storytelling
-THe style

2 Guns focuses on criminals Robert "Bobby" Trench (Denzel Washington) and Michael "Stig" Stigman (Mark Wahlberg) as they find themselves involved in a despite over a large sum of money following a bank robbery.

If I had to describe the film in one word, it's balanced. The humour, story and action never feel too over the top without getting boring and flow very organically into the story. The main characters have great chemistry and conversations, with brilliant writing and clever humour (on a side, I wouldn't mind a sequel with these characters).
The action felt well shot and knew when to pull shots back or when to go into the more chaotic close camera shots, featuring a lot of style and really helps the film stand out from a lot of other action films.
Story wise, I won't dare spoil anything; twists come one after the other, but never so fast that the plot becomes convoluted or confused.
The real strength of the film is its writing, in both the humour and the twists and turns of the story. It never feels tired or boring without feeling lost, with some genuinely funny moments, helped by fantastic acting from everybody involved.

Its difficult to analyse the story since it never stays the same, but all round the experience was fun, funny, action packed and interesting.
2 Guns is a fantastic film that I can't recommend enough.

Grown Ups 2

Rating-5/10

The Good
-The jokes that work

The Bad
-The Jokes that miss
-Immature humour
-The storytelling

Grown ups 2 follows childhood friends Lenny (Adam Sandler), Eric (Kevin James), Kurt (Chris Rock) and Markus (David Spade) in a day in their lives as middle aged parents.

As a comedy the humour is very hit and miss. Some of the side characters are a little off, but mostly I found them enjoyable, especially Taylor Lautner as a highly strung frat boy and Shaquille O'Neal as a crazy police officer (on a side note, any film that can make me enjoy Shaq is doing something right). The CG effects in some scenes can also be a little distracting.
The main characters seem to interact very naturally, bordering on stand up.

The storytelling is fairly off; plot lines seem to come up during the film, then are resolved very poorly during the climax, often in very convenient ways.

Ultimately Grown Ups 2 is pretty fun. If you can bare with it and ignore some of the bigger flaws you might have a good time, however I can't recommend it unless you are able to really turn your brain off and enjoy some of the sillier moments.
If you aren't a fan of the first film, or Happy Madison in general, I recommend missing this one.

AS A SEQUEL

The fact that it was a sequel doesn't really hold any baring on the film. 

The Wolverine

Rating-9/10

The good
-The characters
-The action
-The villains

The bad
-Questionable camera
-Unfocused plot

Scene during the credits

The film follows Wolverine aka Logan, (played by Hugh Jackman) after he is dragged into events surrounding the daughter of an old acquaintance, Mariko (Tao Okomoto) in Japan.

Wolverine is the same terrific performance by Jackman, selling the character from the classic Marvel comics. The other actors adapt well to their roles, though the real stand out was the villain, Viper (played by Svetlana Khodchenkova); the type of villain that is always several steps ahead, with a very unique and interesting ability. (My only regret is that she didn’t receive enough screen time).
A lot of the film focuses on the relationship between Logan and Mariko, which feels very genuine, thanks to some brilliant acting by both Jackman and Okomoto.
Thankfully the film avoids the cliche fish out of water scenarios, except for when it highlights the differences between Logan and Mariko, or a few times when it's for the sake of humour, though these are thankfully sparse and fairly original.

The action included a lot of variety, with close quarters fistfights, to martial arts sword fighting and a spectacular fight on the roof of a bullet train. Only one scene suffered from a claustrophobic and unstable camera, which the film thankfully outgrew by the end.

SPOILER TALK

The plot had a clearly defined three act structure, though the middle act seems to go nowhere in the grand scheme of the film. However the third act really impressed me with a fantastic twist of the main villain; the kind of twist where you don’t see it coming, but you can see the clues looking back in hindsight.

END OF SPOILERS

Minor gripes concerning the camera in a few scenes and a story that could have benefited from a little more focus do little to sway my opinion of this film. It’s fantastic and I highly recommend it.

AS A FRANCISE

Wolverine is set after the events of X-men The last stand, with a lot of focus being on Logan’s guilt over Jean’s death. However this doesn’t really distract from the film, allowing the story to do its own thing, making it feel very easy to adjust to even if you don’t know the story so far. At the same time it fits very well into the X-men film storyline, so fans of the series also benefit in that regard.

Mariko’s reaction to Logan’s claws seems very refreshing, especially when compared to former love interests Jean or Silver fox interactions to him, or even in his relationship with Rouge. She seems to calm him down and balances him out in a way that feels very natural when I think about his character in the previous titles in the series.

I can’t comment on the films faithfulness to the source comics, however from my experience the X-men film series is very good at paying tribute to the original stories that inspired them while still doing their own thing. I’ll allow Wolverine fans to make their own assessment in that regard.

Pacific Rim

Rating-9/10

The Good
-Original universe and story.
-Efficient and impressive action.
-Well developed characters

The Bad
-Questionable camera angels during fights.

The films focus is on a future threatened by colossal demons known as Kaiju from a portal beneath the ocean. In response humanity deployed giant mechs called Jaegers, controlled by two pilots sharing a mind link.

The real strength of the film lies in its large scale fights between the different Kaiju and Jaegers, making use of the camera to give a real feeling of size and weight. However this can also work against the film; often shots are too close to tell what’s going on. However the film knows when to pull back and allow the audience to appreciate the designs.
The action felt very efficient; the focus was on the major hits and showing the advanced attacks of the mechs and beasts. Every movement had a point and a purpose.

Story wise the film is very character based. Even the more cliché characters have their own sympathetic storylines, and are given a lot of depth to them. The actors do little to stand out from their roles, but seem very genuine; there were a lot of moments were I was really sold on these characters.
There was also a lot of tension; there were few moments were I wasn’t convinced that a character was going to die or was in trouble.

It’s a very entertaining film, with a ton of originality and style, doing it’s best to establish it’s own world and rules, in an industry were such values hold little weight. Even if you can’t enjoy an action film like this, you can at least appreciate the effort put in by everybody involved.
Pacific Rim is a must for fans of action films, in particular fans of Toho monster flics and mecha anime, but the story is accessible enough for any action fan to enjoy.

Despicable me 2

Rating - 10/10

THE GOOD
-The Animation
-The designs
-The humour
-The voice acting

Despicable me 2 features former super villain turned stay at home father Gru (Steve Carell), as he is recruited to stop another Super Villain from taking over the world by an agency of super spies.

Easily the best part of this film is the animation; it's so exaggerated and slick, as if the characters are made out of rubber. That is until it becomes time for the slap stick, which has such perfect timing and has such an impact that every hit is just as funny as the last.
This is helped by the exaggerated design of the characters; every one of them has it's own personality from its design alone. Even Gru has an air of Muggsy from the Looney Tunes about him.
The designs are complimented by a tremendous voice cast. Everyone was on top form and really brought their roles to life, complimenting the animation and designs perfectly.
On top of the character designs, the sets were given the same amount of exaggerated and creative design as the characters, especially the design of the mall set.

The comedy is spot on; there wasn't a moment where I wasn't laughing at the jokes.
The story itself does have a few neat twists. You could pretty much guess the love interest sub plot from the first trailer, but at least it refrains from the whole "feeling betrayed, but you know that the'll get back together anyway" schtick  and I even thought that they were going that way at one point, but I was pleasantly surprised.

I have no doubts in saying that this film is perfect!
There was no point where I found that I wasn't enjoying myself, or any point where I wasn't entertained.

Man of steel

Rating - 8/10

The good
-Acting
-Action
-Characters
-Universe

The bad
-Cinematography.

Man of Steel is a re-imagining  of the Superman comics, staring Henry Cavill as Clark Kent, aka Superman, as he fights against the antagonistic General Zod (Michael Shannon) while finding his place amongst the people of Earth.

The pacing of the story is very fast, scenes come and go very quickly, but at the same time the individual scenes do take their time and tell what they want to tell, so it never feels rushed. It's a very different feel to storytelling, and one that I feel the film nailed perfectly. I never felt like I was being rushed along or lost, but at the same time it moved efficiently, telling the story very well and never feeling like it dragged.

All of the actors were on their A game, delivering fantastic performance after fantastic performance. Cavill sucked me in instantly as Superman, carrying himself very well as the Man of Steel himself. He had this very sincere and yet imposing presence, like he could wipe everybody out in the room if he chose, but you still felt safe around him, like you could sleep well knowing that he was looking out for you. Ideology wise the philosophy of the character felt extremely well balanced; the idea of the Alien Superman and the human Clark Kent felt very at peace. I was afraid that they would take the extreme of Superman being the Kryptonian before he was the Earthling, but they evened it out and created a great moral contrast. There was a sense that he could side with the villains at any time, but not to the point where you didn't believe that he would stay true to his believes.
The character of Louis Lane (Amy Adams) was also very well done. She struck me as a very no nonsense reporter, who would never stop until she got the story that she wanted. She was very involved in the story and helped out the hero in a way that never felt like she was dead weight who was just there to be the damsel. When she needed saving it was because she was in over her head, never like she was just put in danger for the sake of being in danger.
Zod was a fantastic villain, created as a very believable villain; you could understand his point of view but still disagree with him. His philosophy is well established and the actor did a brilliant job of portraying this incarnation of the character. I never got the impression that he was doing what he did to just take over the world, but rather that he felt like he was supposed to do what he does for the good of his people. This creates a contrast with Superman; one is the guardian of Earth, the other the guardian of Krypton.
The rest of the cast was fantastic; there wasn't a second where I saw actors in a role, I saw them as their characters.

The fight scenes were amazing, in particular the super powered fights. Characters moved at blinding speeds, smashing their opponent through building after building. It felt very reminiscent of an Anime in it's over the top style, really embracing its comic book roots. This extends to the flying scenes; giving the sensation of flying through the sky at a break neck speed.  Other scenes suffered from unstable cinematography, looking very close and nonsensical, making it hard to tell what was going on.

However the cinematography was just hopeless. The camera had a real problem holding still and shot far to close to see what was going on. It felt like camera man was a drunk unicyclist with personal space issues.
That being said the rest of the film was good enough that I was able to enjoy myself despite this huge problem with the film, which is probably my only criticism.

The planet of Krypton at the beginning of the film felt very fleshed out despite a limited screen time, with a very distinct and original feel; clearly a lot of effort went into this world which helped to establish the philophy and history of this world, which helped flesh out the main character in ways that wouldn't be possible if the focus remained on his human origins.

AS A FRANCHISE

A lot of talk has gone into the re-telling of the established Superman origin story and how boring it is. Personally through I felt like here it was handled well. The film clearly had its own take on the character and established itself as its own version of the character. It was a make or break situation, which the film really made its own.

SPOILER TALK

Killing is one thing that a super hero doesn't do, especially Superman. But the way that it was handled in this film was just so good. He was clearly forced into the situation to kill Zod and struggled with the decision. And even when he did kill, he was clearly in a state of torment, in a way that a lot of films, especially super hero films, never seem to do. But here it worked.

AS A FRANCHISE

A lot of talk has gone into the  

After Earth

Rating - 7/10

The good:
-The setting.
-The art style.
-Genuinely suspenseful.
-Cinematography.

The bad:
-Majority of the acting.
-Poor or odd directorial choices.

After Earth follows Kitai Raige (Jaden Smith) and his father Cypher (Will Smith) after they crash land on a now inhospitable Earth, in a mission to send off a distress signal.

Story wise the focus is on Kitai, as his father is incapacitated in the crash and now assists him via radio. Both actors do a great job in their respective roles; Will Smith is great as the uptight military father, which is vastly different from his usual persona, but at the same time works in a good way. The character is supposed to be a man who can suppress his fear and as a result his emotions. There are breaks of emotion where needed for the character, like when he is relived to see his son alive for example. Jaden flip flopped at times between great and insufferable in his acting, but to his credit I get the sense that this was down to direction, like he's constrained by it. And like I said, he does have some genuinely good moments.
The rest of the cast however was awful. There was a real feeling that everyone was trying their hardest not to act! It worked for Cypher because his character was an uptight, emotionally repressed soldier, and Kitai seemed to be emulating him. But for everyone else it just came across as awkward and stilted. Thankfully the focus of the majority of the film was on the father and son, and the film benefited greatly when they became the only two prominent characters. If they built up this new culture as one that repressed their fears and emotions, that could work, but they never do so it just comes across as bad acting. The only other actor who impressed me was Zoe Isabella Kravitz as Cyphers late daughter, who appeared in flashbacks and visions.

The coolest thing about this film was the world; showing little details about how everything worked and the technology used. The philosophy behind the warrior culture of the Rangers, the films version of a colonial military was interesting and I would actually like to have learnt more about it.
The main enemy of the film was the planet itself, which proved to be a harsh and unforgiving setting for the rookie protagonist, as he struggled against the elements themselves. There is another villain; a beast called an Ursa, which tracks it's prey by smelling their fear. The reason that Cypher is seen as a hero in this universe is because he can suppress his fear and fight these monsters invisibly, which is how Kitai ultimately over comes his enemy. The monster itself was kept hidden until the very end, following the rule of Jaws by keeping your monster hidden and making the hunt more tense and suspenseful.

The Direction here is very polarised in my opinion. Cinematography wise I couldn't tell is it was being pretentious or brilliant (probably both). It made a lot of shots that another director would probably have avoided or wouldn't have even thought of. It felt like the director was trying a little too hard to impress, but at the same time I guess it's better than not trying at all. Some of the shot were just fantastic, like it was taken straight out of an artists sketch book. I'd actually like to get my hands on some of the concept art for this.
On the other hand some of the choices just came across as weird  For one there's a focus on the book Mobey Dick, which you would think come across in the hunt for the Ursa. However neither Cypher nor Kitai seemed to be obsessed with find ing the beast so any similarities you could draw fall flat. Another scene that went no where was where a now paraplegic soldier forces himself to stand in order to salute Cypher for saving him. Just just came out of left field and just feels so cliche in it's execution. Later Cypher does the same to his son at the end, which could have worked, but I was reminded of the earlier scene and it totally sucked me out of the moment. If this early scene was removed then it might have worked, but otherwise it's just distracting.

In conclusion, I enjoyed After Earth following a rocky beginning. I found myself getting lost in the world and the set pieces, that the often broken acting became a very minor footnote in my experience. M Night Shyamalan has been on a bit of a downward slope with his recent directorial ventures, but this movie reminded me that he can make enjoyable movies.
I understand that the film has critically panned by critics, but I honestly enjoyed it.

On a cliff note regarding claims of Scientology propaganda.
I don't see it nor do I care.