|
Post by Weirdraptor mini™ on Jan 5, 2022 21:06:26 GMT -5
Fair enough. Honesty, the WTF-ery is why I love it. I understand. After all, the WTF-ery is part of why I love Riverdale. I guess what separates WTF-ery that I like as opposed to WTF-ery that I don't like is that I need to at least be able to understand something about what's going on...and I can't say I really did when watching Dune (1984). Fair enough entirely. David Lynch can be quite unwelcoming to someone that's not used to him. Even his staunchest fans realize that.
|
|
|
Post by Chalice_Of_Evil on Jan 5, 2022 22:03:53 GMT -5
I understand. After all, the WTF-ery is part of why I love Riverdale. I guess what separates WTF-ery that I like as opposed to WTF-ery that I don't like is that I need to at least be able to understand something about what's going on...and I can't say I really did when watching Dune (1984). Fair enough entirely. David Lynch can be quite unwelcoming to someone that's not used to him. Even his staunchest fans realize that. Yeah, I think because I'm not overly familiar with his work and have only watched two movies of his - this and Mullholland Drive (which I had the same reaction to as I did this movie, and I know that one is quite well-liked), plus I've never seen Twin Peaks - I'm not the right type of person for his work, as it just leaves me feeling confused/gives me a headache. And I was willing to give his Dune a fair chance too (as you well know, just because some seems to be mostly hated doesn't necessarily mean I'm going to hate it just like something that's almost universally adored doesn't mean I'm going to be one of those who adore it), but I guess I just have a limit as to how much WTF-ery I can handle...and this exceeded my limit. Oh well. Maybe one day I'll watch the 2021 version and see if that makes any more sense than this one did.
|
|
|
Post by Chalice_Of_Evil on Jan 6, 2022 17:44:13 GMT -5
The Avengers (2012). It’s Iron Man’s world and the rest of the Avengers just live in it, apparently. As one of the seemingly few who's not a fan of the Iron Man character or his films, and after seeing the trailers, I had my reservations about this film. Was it going to be Iron Man 3, guest-starring the rest? Well, yes and no. It's clear who Joss Whedon's favourites are, as they get the most character development. Those who come out on top: Tony Stark (of course), Black Widow and (surprisingly) Bruce Banner/Hulk. If you're a fan of these characters/the actors who portray them, then you should be satisfied with their amount of screen time. Fans of Stark, who don't mind his attitude and want nothing more than his mumbled speedy snarky lines/blowing stuff up will be the most pleased. Annoyingly, even his love interest gets to be the only one to appear in this film (too bad for Peggy Carter & Jane Foster, both of whom I greatly prefer as characters. Though at least we get to see a picture of them and it's mentioned that Jane's safe. I wish Thor had been allowed to reunite with her before he left again). RDJ does his thing, and he's naturally fine doing it, but I'm probably in the minority who prefers him as Sherlock in his Sherlock Holmes films. Captain America thankfully gets to retain his likability, calls Tony out on his BS (there’s more than one scene of two verbally sparring) and has his moments of leadership. I was annoyed, however, that his practical costume from CA: TFA was replaced with one that looked like the comical outfit he wore when promoting war bonds during the ‘Star Spangled Man’ song/dance number in his solo film. It’s pretty clear Whedon views him as a ‘dork’ of sorts, so he’s reduced to the butt of jokes and not getting to be ‘cool’ like Stark. Even with Whedon’s clear bias against him, Steve continues to be the most likeable/noble hero. Scarlett Johansson gets to kick sufficient arse as Natasha Romanoff/Black Widow and does a good job of subverting the obvious (something Whedon is a fan of...along with scenes where everyone yells over the top of each other). There are a few moments where it appears she’s beaten/showing signs of weakness, but then she turns things on their head and she proves herself to be no damsel and more than capable/not to be underestimated. The one somewhat ‘regressive’ role Whedon sticks her in is 'beauty taming the beast' in regards to her character and the Hulk. Speaking of the 'other guy'(as Bruce calls him), this Hulk looks better than the two previous movie versions thanks to motion-capture allowing Mark Ruffalo to actually portray the not-so-jolly green giant and even his face bears resemblance to Ruffalo. Bruce gets to be all brooding and restrained for the bulk of the movie, but when he eventually Hulks out, he does plenty smash-o-crash. Unfortunately, Hulk is also played for some rather immature laughs at times, like when he punches Thor after they've just teamed up to take down a baddie (why? Because it's “FUNNY”!) or he cuts Loki off mid-speechifying by tossing him around like a ragdoll, thus kinda undoing all the effort Tom Hiddleston put into making Loki menacing (there's one exchange he has with Natasha where he comes across truly evil). It’s clear Whedon’s not a fan of ‘god-like’ characters and hopes to sway others to be like-minded. Nick Fury gets to be sneaky/manipulative, jumps on the 'Let's blame Thor' train and shoots stuff, as does his offside, Agent Hill (Cobie Smulders), when she's not providing exposition or miraculously escaping death. Hawkeye fans might be a tad miffed that he spends the majority of the film zombiefied by Loki, but is eventually freed of the mind-control and his backstory with Natasha is briefly touched upon. Even Agent Coulson gets a fair amount of development. Disappointingly, Thor gets the short end of the stick...or hammer. I'd thoroughly enjoyed his solo movie and Chris Hemsworth in the role, so I was hoping he'd get the respect/focus he deserved as part of this ensemble cast...but it seemed Tony Stark's one-liners and the Hulk beating Asgardian arse for laughs was Whedon’s priority, sadly. Poor Thor never seems to be allowed to have a true victory in the film, which is a real disappointment since his character had undergone a true hero's journey in his own film and deserved to be taken seriously, rather than disrespected/treated as the butt of jokes. Sure, he and ‘Mew Mew’ get to kick a fair amount of butt, but not nearly enough as they should’ve. He doesn't even get to be the one who takes down Loki (his brother...who’s adopted) in the end and save everyone, as that victory’s given Iron Man and Hulk, of course (and Thor had been about to save Stark’s arse at the end too until Hulk swooped in and stole his thunder). Such a shame that Thor gets screwed over, but I appreciated his little moments of humour (all the more effective because they aren’t OTT or at the expense of others) and that he brought some actual seriousness to proceedings/his complicated sibling relationship with Loki wasn’t entirely ignored. Despite my few quibbles, the film surprisingly comes together pretty well. Whedon proves he can direct action with the best of them and it’s blissfully free of overuse of shaky-cam. It's quite the feat, bringing all these characters from different films together and actually making it work, but he pulls it off. Not a dollar of the movie's considerable budget has been wasted. It's all up there on the screen, the humour works (some of the time), all the actors do well in their roles, but I personally would’ve liked to have spent more time with Cap & Thor and exploring their reluctant partnership (how about a buddy film?). I'm more invested in their own solo films than seeing them sharing time with characters who I’m not a fan of, but not opposed to seeing the Avengers reassemble.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2022 18:07:48 GMT -5
I understand. After all, the WTF-ery is part of why I love Riverdale. I guess what separates WTF-ery that I like as opposed to WTF-ery that I don't like is that I need to at least be able to understand something about what's going on...and I can't say I really did when watching Dune (1984). Fair enough entirely. David Lynch can be quite unwelcoming to someone that's not used to him. Even his staunchest fans realize that. Are you a Twin Peaks fan?
|
|
|
Post by President Ackbar mini™ on Jan 6, 2022 18:10:48 GMT -5
Fair enough entirely. David Lynch can be quite unwelcoming to someone that's not used to him. Even his staunchest fans realize that. Are you a Twin Peaks fan?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2022 18:47:21 GMT -5
Are you a Twin Peaks fan?
|
|
|
Post by Weirdraptor mini™ on Jan 6, 2022 19:32:49 GMT -5
Fair enough entirely. David Lynch can be quite unwelcoming to someone that's not used to him. Even his staunchest fans realize that. Are you a Twin Peaks fan? If we're talking about Season One, yeah.
|
|
|
Post by Weirdraptor mini™ on Jan 6, 2022 19:33:44 GMT -5
Fair enough entirely. David Lynch can be quite unwelcoming to someone that's not used to him. Even his staunchest fans realize that. Yeah, I think because I'm not overly familiar with his work and have only watched two movies of his - this and Mullholland Drive (which I had the same reaction to as I did this movie, and I know that one is quite well-liked), plus I've never seen Twin Peaks - I'm not the right type of person for his work, as it just leaves me feeling confused/gives me a headache. And I was willing to give his Dune a fair chance too (as you well know, just because some seems to be mostly hated doesn't necessarily mean I'm going to hate it just like something that's almost universally adored doesn't mean I'm going to be one of those who adore it), but I guess I just have a limit as to how much WTF-ery I can handle...and this exceeded my limit. Oh well. Maybe one day I'll watch the 2021 version and see if that makes any more sense than this one did. The 2021 version does make more sense. It's not as fun by my estimation, but it does make more sense.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2022 20:21:01 GMT -5
Are you a Twin Peaks fan? If we're talking about Season One, yeah. I think it’s still great until after the killer gets revealed. Then season two is just unbearably atrocious. The black lodge scenes in the season two finale are so cool though, despite being the end of a string of bad episodes. And season three is… you know what, let’s just pretend that one doesn’t exist.
|
|
|
Post by Weirdraptor mini™ on Jan 6, 2022 20:25:42 GMT -5
If we're talking about Season One, yeah. I think it’s still great until after the killer gets revealed. Then season two is just unbearably atrocious. The black lodge scenes in the season two finale are so cool though, despite being the end of a string of bad episodes. And season three is… you know what, let’s just pretend that one doesn’t exist. Twin Peaks has a lot of valleys despite its name, sadly.
|
|
|
Post by Chalice_Of_Evil on Jan 25, 2022 3:39:25 GMT -5
The Three Musketeers (1993). I must admit I haven’t read the original story of The Three Musketeers...and maybe that's why I'm able to enjoy the film so much? I’d only seen maybe one or two older film versions before this^ one, but the ’93 movie is one I remember the most fondly...although I hadn’t watched it in a VERY LONG time (probably not since the days of VHS videos I'd hire from the local video store). That wasn't by choice, of course. It’s just that they *never* put it on TV here anymore (though they seem to put on other versions all the time, which is very frustrating for me) and I think it stopped being available on DVD here too. However, I recently came across a secondhand version of the DVD and immediately grabbed it (a total bargain at just $1.60). Yes, the quality isn't the best and it's one of those DVDs where you have to flip the disc over partway through the movie to watch the second half...but I don't care - I finally got to watch it again! {Spoiler}One thing I always remembered about the movie was that I enjoyed all four actors in the roles of the Musketeers, Athos, Porthos, Aramis & D'Artagnan (btw, that's the order I always think of their names in. It's weird to me whenever their names are said in a different order - I find it just sounds weird/'wrong'). Kiefer Sutherland’s Athos may have seemed grumpy most of the time (except when he “takes his drinking very seriously” as one of the other Musketeers informs D’Artagnan), but I still liked him. I think this may have been one of the first roles I remember seeing Kiefer Sutherland play, and whenever I saw him in anything else, I always thought, “Hey, it’s Athos!”. I really liked how he played Athos’ devotion to the King. I totally believed he was putting the King’s safety first before anything else, and I always remember his, “Save the King!” line as they’re all fighting in a battle towards the end. He may have seemed like the typical character who starts out as having become disillusioned with what he once believed in, only to get back in the game/back into the groove of things at the end, but I really enjoyed his character and was so happy to see him eventually brought out of his ‘funk’. I thought he did a good job with the story he tells D'Artagnan about 'love'. You can feel the weight of it thanks to Sutherland's performance and it plays into his history with Rebecca De Mornay’s Milady D’Winter...who I’ll get to in a bit. I might be in the minority, but I actually liked Charlie Sheen’s Aramis. Yes, he's a bit of a manwhore (not too different to Sheen in reality), but I also bought that he “takes death very seriously” as D’Artagnan's again informed by one of the Musketeers (one thing I always noted when watching this movie was the mention of Athos and Aramis taking different things “very seriously”. It would've been funny if Athos or Aramis had informed D'Artagnan, "Porthos takes his wenching very seriously."). Sheen was quite ‘deadpan’ when he got the occasional humourous line, I enjoyed his dynamic with Porthos especially and I remember that I was as relieved as Athos & Porthos were (yes, I was actually worried for him at the time - hey, I was young) when it was revealed the bullet Aramis had been shot with in fact hit the cross he was wearing. His “There *is* a God.” was the perfect line for the reveal of how he'd survived (I also liked earlier during one of the fights with the Cardinal's guards when he shot a guy, then made the sign of the cross with his gun. He had a few humourous takes on the religious stuff he said/did). Oliver Platt was just plain FUN as Porthos, I thought. He got most of the best lines (like when he associated Rochefort with ‘a smelly kind of cheese’) and moments in the movie, including the bit where he basically did the Indiana Jones trick of the opponent who does lots of fancy moves, followed by the hero doing something quite basic to take out his opponent (though in this instance they added Porthos imitating his opponent’s fancy moves before he took him out easily). I call it the 'I don't have time for this' move. I loved the whole bit with the Musketeers 'intending to resist' the guards, then having a discussion. But the funniest moment, for me, still remains the part where D’Artagnan tries to join the group as they’re having a discussion and Porthos casually shoves him away. Platt was just so good with his comic timing, I thought, but he was also believable in the more ‘serious’ moments too (like when he thought Aramis had been killed). He served as the 'comic relief'...but that wasn't *all* he was/he was more than that. Plus, he happened to have one of the more ‘darker’ scenes when he faced that disfigured goon and impaled him on a bunch of spikes. This movie had some quite disturbing stuff for a Disney movie, I always thought. It's not afraid to show blood or have the musketeers kill. Chris O’Donnell as D’Artagnan. Yes, he was a bit of a dork...but a likeable enough one. He's overconfident, but he also receives lessons in humility and proves himself worthy of becoming a musketeer. He gets schooled in the art of seducing women thanks to Aramis and Porthos (they have different methods of seduction, and when D'Artagnan fails to be as poetic as Aramis, he resorts to Porthos' more direct manner). It was nice to see Athos kind of warm up to him (as did the others) and showed just how much he'd come to care about Athos when he hated leaving his side when he was in a pinch (his "I'll never forget you."). Another thing that probably helped me not dislike him *too* much was the fact that there someone else who was so much worse who had it out for him. In comparison, D’Artagnan wasn’t so bad. It wasn’t until a LONG time after seeing this movie that I discovered that who played the supremely annoying cowardly character of Girard was noneother than the eighth Doctor from Doctor Who, Paul McGann. He certainly portrayed the part of someone you wanted to punch extremely well (that high-pitched girlish voice of his was like nails on a chalkboard). His reaction at the end of the movie when all the Musketeers chased him was quite satisfying (I liked all the musketeers having D'Artagnan's back). Tim Curry was just deliciously evil as Cardinal Richlieu. He was the other character who got all the best lines in the movie - and with that voice of his, they were just so much fun (I always remember his shouted line of wanting the Musketeers dead or alive, then adding, “I prefer... dead.”). Though it wasn’t just his lines, but the looks he’d give too. He certainly perfected the ‘evil grin’, and the scene where he plays the King like a fiddle (taking his suspicions and turning them around to seem 'farfetched') reminded me of Palpatine doing the same to Anakin. Also evil was Michael Wincott as Rochefort. I felt he played the more ‘serious’ villain of the two well, and I found him to be a suitable opponent for D’Artagnan to face. His trick with the candles was pretty neat, I thought at the time, and I enjoyed getting some of the history between him and the Musketeers. What I *really* liked was Constance helping D’Aartgnan out there at the end by tossing him the sword that was out of his reach so that he could finish Rochefort off and he got a memorable death/last line as he died. Speaking of...this movie had no shortage of fine-looking ladies, starting with Julie Delpy as Constance. Gabrielle Anwar as Queen Anne (I always remember her from this role and her one in the Michael J. Fox movie The Concierge - which my mum used to watch all the time). She didn't have much to do besides give Constance advice regarding D'Artagnan and rebuking the Cardinal's creepy advances, but I liked her and how much she stood by the King...despite him being kind of a ponce. And best of all, Rebecca De Mornay as Milady D’Winter. I thought De Mornay was just so entrancing in the role. I could never tell whether she was fully ‘bad’ or not (plus, no one could rock a hood & cloak quite like her). She had a great exchange (which I remember was included in the trailer for the movie) when the Cardinal says, "A snap of my fingers, and you could be back on the block where I found you." when he wanted to get frisky with her, and her response was to pull out a dagger she aimed at a very sensitive place whilst replying, "And with a flick of my wrist I could change your religion." - that basically told you what kind of woman she was/that she wasn't to be messed with. I liked her interaction with pretty much all the characters (including D'Artagnan who, amusingly, she probably wouldn't have picked up from the side of the road if he weren't 'handsome' like she commented. He did well to concentrate on his mission when presented with someone as alluring as Rebcca De Mornay...and even got into an altercation wit her), but especially Athos. Both actors sold this deep relationship their characters’ had once and what must've happened which separated them. I was relieved that we got to hear what her name was from Athos (Sabine, I think he said), as I would've been very annoyed if they'd kept it a secret, and that he rushed over to her before she was decapitated. I was also glad that they got to say their final words to each other, reached a sort of ‘understanding’, and that she took her fate into her own hands (after telling Athos the important information he wished to know in regards to the Cardinal's plot against the King, which she'd refused to earlier when he admitted he couldn't have her life spared) by jumping off the cliff. I think the only actor I wasn’t fussed on in the movie was the one playing King Louis...but then, the character always comes across as rather annoying/insufferable in *any* version I've watched. I did think it was good how he showed strength, standing up to the Cardinal (with Anne watching on proudly) after the Musketeers had been disbanded in the most unceremonious of ways. It showed the King was at least someone decent, since he wanted to explain things to them first. Though he was also naïve regarding what the Cardinal was really up to. However, there was a nice payoff near the end with him getting a ‘hero moment’ with him being the one to punch the Cardinal’s lights out (which the Queen seemed to be turned on by). All in all, this is just a plain old ‘fun’ movie, I find. It's a rollicking good adventure, with fun performances and excellent action, but without having an overreliance on CGI. Plus, it doesn't get bogged down with all the stuff that tends to ruin such films these days and doesn't take itself too seriously, but wasn't a complete farce either. It knew when to let the 'serious' moments play out and when to include a joke - with one not coming at the expense of any other (something else that, sadly I've noticed today's action films have less of a handle on, as they seem to be afraid of letting 'serious' moments play *without* a joke interrupting them). I’ll always remember the song which accompanied the film (which we get orchestral hints of at some points in the movie). I'm SO glad that I finally got to watch this film again after so long.
|
|
|
Post by Chalice_Of_Evil on Jan 29, 2022 21:35:16 GMT -5
Captain America: The Winter Soldier (2014). A more accurate title would’ve been ‘The CapNatFury & Winter Soldier Movie’. CA: TFA is my favourite MCU movie, followed by the first Thor. Both ‘origin’ films had a unique feel about them that set them apart from the yawn-inducing Iron Man movies (at least for me). I enjoyed CA: TFA being set in the past and felt its ending was purely to get Cap where he needed to be for The Avengers, coming at the expense of the rest of the film, which wasn't given its own proper ending. Maybe it's because I enjoyed the first film SO much that this sequel didn't feel like it quite lived up to it in my mind. That's not to say it’s bad in any way (it's still better than the IM films), but while the first kept me enthralled throughout, I felt there was some slow stretches this time around. Like Chris Hemsworth is as Thor, Chris Evans continues to be easily likeable as Steve Rogers/Cap (unlike certain other jerky snark-spouting Avengers). He was very noble in the first film, living up to his 'Boy Scout' rep, and still manages to keep the character's best qualities here. Little references to how old he is/what time period he grew up in were highly welcome and provided some nice subtle humour (see? We don't require "witty" one-liners all the time. One doesn't have to be Tony Snark to ‘bring the funny’). Cap also shows how skilled he is at not only Frisbee-ing his shield everywhere, but also hand-to-hand combat, as we see him take down almost a whole ship's crew (then later an elevator full of bad guys single-handedly). I personally found his costume change in The Avengers to be a step down from his CA: TFA outfit, so it was a welcome surprise to see him back in his original costume near the end of this film (as the one he sports for the majority of it is rather boring in its simple blue/silver colour scheme). Hayley Atwell as Peggy Carter in the first film was easily one of the best Marvel "love interests", and we get footage of her from the past, but then there’s a very moving scene with her and Steve in the present. The effects used to 'age up' Atwell are truly some of the most convincing ever done in movies (thankfully, no bad 'old age' make-up). Evans and Atwell are a perfect match, and it's a shame their characters can never regain the romance between them that was unfairly cut short in the first film. Cap also has a nice rapport with Natasha/Black Widow, anything more than friendship between them is only used as a 'cover', and they make a good team. ScarJo is decent here, though I liked her better in The Avengers. Also, she should've kept her hairdo from that film (which was quite flattering/suited her), as her hair in this film is SO straight/boring/lifeless and not-as-flattering. Most importantly, though, is that she gets to kick arse whilst also having character growth/development. Anthony Mackie's a welcome addition as Sam Wilson/Falcon. His introduction scene and subsequent scenes with Steve make it believable that they grow a fast friendship/loyalty to one another. Revenge's Emily VanCamp does the most with what she's given as Agent 13/Kate (we later learn her real name). She makes her character mysterious, kick-arse and shows chemistry with Evans in a small amount of screen time. I’d like to see more of her. Meanwhile, someone with no shortage of screentime in this film is Samuel L. Jackson’s Nick Fury. At one point it feels like HE'S the main action star of this film, especially in a chase scene involving him and his talking SUV. And in any scene that doesn't feature Nick Fury? They sure talk about him a hell of a lot. Like with Thor in Thor 2, sometimes it doesn't feel like Cap is the focus of his own movie here. And, really, was anyone actually fooled into thinking Fury carked it for reals? The most interesting thing with him is we finally get to see under his eyepatch. At least Cobie Smulders gets to be awesome as Maria Hill. More of HER, please! Robert Redford as Pierce was a rather dull villain, I thought. His long talky scene with Cap bored me (and I usually don't mind talky scenes). Which is the same with a lot of similar moments in this film, while I wasn't bored for a *second* during CA: TFA. Sebastian Stan's more effective as an antagonist for Cap. While the first Thor had Loki, a more personal villain for the hero to fight, the sequel didn't. It's the reverse here, with this sequel featuring the Winter Soldier aka Bucky, Steve's close buddy who it seemed he previously lost. It makes you invested in them when they're fighting each other. Stan does a lot with a little, and although most probably predicted the Winter Soldier’s identity reveal, it's still very emotional seeing Steve's reactions to him (the post-credits scene promises more of Bucky to come). There are some ridiculous moments in this film (like how Fury, Nat and Cap all get shot and manage to just walk it off or they survive explosions/falls that should’ve easily killed them or the mind of Red Skull's offsider, Zola, inside decades-old supercomputers to name just a few examples), but these Marvel films gave up any sense of 'realism' long ago, so it's a moot point. Speaking of realism, it appears magic's being introduced into the MCU with the mid-credits scene featuring a pair of super-powered twins set up to be antagonists for the next Avengers movie. Elizabeth Olsen's Wanda Maximoff/Scarlet Witch particularly grabbed my attention and promises to be quite formidable (while her brother just runs into walls). The film's action is a bit too darkly-lit/shaky at times and features lots of explosions/gunplay (though the most stand-out moments are the hand-to-hand fights). While others seem to consider this one of the 'best' MCU films, I vastly preferred the first...though this one ain't too shabby.
|
|
|
Post by Chalice_Of_Evil on Jan 31, 2022 17:04:11 GMT -5
Avengers: Age of Ultron (2015). Asks the important question: If an elevator can lift Mjölnir, does that make it ‘worthy’ to rule Asgard? While I liked the first Avengers film, I didn’t think it was the 'BEST. MARVEL. MOVIE. EVER.’ as some did. No MCU film is without its flaws (some more prominent than others), but what matters is whether the movie overcomes these and the good outweighs the not-so-good/bad. I felt this sequel more or less succeeded in that respect. It starts impressively, with the team working as a well-oiled machine (which blows the first film's opening scene out of the water), and we're reintroduced to Aaron Taylor-Johnson and Elizabeth Olsen (first seen during CA: TWS’s mid-credits) as Pietro & Wanda Maximoff aka Quicksilver/Scarlet Witch. Maria Hill sums their powers up as "He's fast and she's weird.", but more specifically, Wanda can harness magic/engage in hypnosis and telekinesis. Taylor-Johnson fashions a more well-rounded Quicksilver than the X-Men version, with depth and humour, whose fitting first and last line in the film is "You didn't see that coming?" (taking on a whole new meaning). I was immediately intrigued by the character of Wanda. I thought Elizabeth Olsen made quite the impact with her performance. We’d already seen what she could do to toy blocks, but here her powers are fully unleashed. Olsen conveys SO much with simply a look or creepy smile (speaking of, they really should’ve gone to this movie’s title straight off of said creepy smile, as it was unnerving/had a sense of foreboding, which would’ve been a very strong moment to go off of...but, no, as always, it’s ALL ABOUT TONY and that’s who leads into the movie’s title). I enjoyed the character journey Wanda went through, starting off being filled with so much hate (considering it's mainly directed at Tony, I can relate). Yes, she and Pietro were on the 'wrong side' to begin with, but they were manipulated/working from the information they had. As soon as Ultron's true intentions became clear to them, they chose the 'right side'. They mightn’t have had THAT much screentime in this movie, but I thought both actors managed to build a believable sibling relationship between their characters. I also liked their dynamic (separately and together) with Hawkeye and the pep-talk he gave Wanda (which resulted in one of the movie’s most memorable moments/displays of power). I’d figured which sibling wasn't going to survive based on the footage in the trailers we got of Wanda screaming on her knees, but the moment still had impact in the film itself (and I was relieved with which Maximoff survived). My biggest gripe with The Avengers was Thor getting short shrift and everything being ALL ABOUT TONY. Both problems are still present, but more characters also means things are spread out more. Whedon makes things up to Jeremy Renner/Hawkeye for his mostly zombiefied role last time around. After a shaky start (where he’s wounded and seems like he’ll be out of commission), it’s not long before Clint's back in action, given decent character development, and introducing his family (which some may’ve complained about, but like with the earlier party scene featuring the Avengers just hanging out/chillin' and trying to lift Mew Mew, I thought it was important to have breaks from all the action/explosions). He even manages to outwit Wanda (that’s before he turns her from an enemy into an ally). Cap's shield-fu is on full display (though, annoyingly, so is his being the butt of a running joke throughout the movie), but overall he's at least treated as the leader he deserves to be, he's the most 'human' character and Cap/Thor is the best team-up of the film (MUCH better than secret info-keeping science bros, Tony & Bruce). If you didn't get enough of her in CA: TWS, ScarJo's Natasha/Black Widow (blessedly sporting her Avengers hairdo once again and now outfitted in TRON-esque light-up duds) has her backstory further explored here, plus she and Ruffalo's Banner have a thing going on (which may upset some people, including 'Clintasha' shippers, but I felt the groundwork was clearly laid out for this pairing in the first film. And those who’re all “Ew, romance!" need to GROW UP). Hulk's still played mainly for laughs, and his battle with Tony in 'Hulkbuster' armour seemed like a side trip that we didn't require/brought things to a halt, though at least Hulk received a decent pounding. Just a shame Tony was the one delivering it instead of Thor, who totally owes Hulk for sucker-punching him in The Avengers. Speaking of, poor Thor disappears for periods of time and clearly Whedon still has his own personal issues with Thor/God/godlike characters (which he gets a couple digs at). Nevertheless, Hemsworth works his charm and provides some of the film's best humour (especially when he’s stalling and runs out of things to say). Also humorous? Our resident big bad ‘murder-bot’, Ultron, who’s menacingly voiced by James Spader, though not without his morbidly amusing side (which some people may hate, but I thought it made him more entertaining/avoided him becoming Malekith levels of dull/boring). If anything, it’s his waxing philosophical that’s his most annoying trait. After doing voicework for several movies now, Paul Bettany finally appears onscreen as Vision (looking like Robbie Williams towards the end of his 'Rock DJ' music video), who's introduced rather late in the game but still makes an impact. There are cameos by certain characters from the different movies, including Hayley Atwell's Peggy Carter (who’s awesome, no matter how brief her screentime...though Thor would argue "Jane's better.", which I at least agreed with when he and Tony were comparing how accomplished/successful their girlfriends are). I feel the film moves at a good/steady pace, with various action sequences (which are top notch) spread evenly throughout whilst also taking moments to slow down and be more character-focused (except for Thor, of course!), and the direction ensures things are seldom boring. The end credits, with what appear to be marble sculptures of the Avengers, are pretty awesome too. Some will nitpick this movie, but I think it's a worthy sequel and pretty great.
|
|
|
Post by Chalice_Of_Evil on Feb 7, 2022 2:35:33 GMT -5
Ant-Man (2015). Don't tread on an ant; he's done nothing to you. There might come a day when he's treading on you! From the opening scene, which we get before the 'Marvel Studios' logo appears, you know things will be a bit different with this movie compared to the previous ones. It was a nice surprise to see Hayley Atwell (once again rocking the convincing old age makeup) as an older Peggy Carter, who appears alongside a more youthful-looking Michael Douglas as Hank Pym (which remains the BEST de-aging I’ve seen in a film) and John Slattery's Howard Stark. After this set-up, we're introduced to Paul Rudd's Scott Lang in a scene you think you've watched many times before (the hero getting beaten up in jail, only to fight back and win), but it’s something else. I appreciated this shake-up to the formula we've become accustomed to over time. And that's this film's main takeaway: it mixes things up, which is sometimes a positive/sometimes a negative. The beginning, for example, feels slower-paced with its setting up of the characters and rather ‘low-key’ in comparison to other Marvel films. Paul Rudd has an easy likeability about him, which is important since Scott’s a burglar...but he’s also a mostly-good person. Seeing our hero working at Baskin-Robbins may come as a surprise to some, but he’s just an ordinary guy trying to do right by his daughter (the heart of the film). Unlike certain other jerky superheroes, while Scott gets some funny lines (Rudd's extra-dry delivery helps), thankfully it’s not of the rapid-fire mumbling snark variety and he also knows what he’s good at, without being full of himself. Playing well off Rudd is Evangeline Lilly, sporting toned arms and a questionable bob haircut as Hank's daughter, Hope van Dyne. While she starts off seeming like the typical ‘tough chick’ who argues with her father, teaches Scott to fight and doesn’t seem to like either of them very much, we learn why that is (Hank fed her a lie about the death of her mother and also refuses to let her wear the Ant-Man suit despite her proving time and again how qualified she is to be a hero while Scott struggles to be). So, she has good reasons for acting the way she does and is far from ‘one-note’. Eventually Scott earns her respect; her dad tells her the truth and that’s when they become a team. Lilly displays her range, showing she's not only capable of throwing a punch and delivering verbal barbs, but also displaying humanity when it counts whilst never losing her edge. Her final line in the mid-credits scene, “About damn time.”, is not only in regards to Hank finally allowing her to don a superhero suit (that of The Wasp, as her mother was before her) and join Scott, but also about it being well-past time we had a female superhero working alongside the male lead as an equal partner. I really liked her dynamics with Scott and Hank. Speaking of, Douglas lends some real weight/gravitas to the film, playing the old Ant-Man who needs someone to take over from him. He gives a layered performance and the way Hank tests Scott makes for the film's first memorable 'shrinking' sequence. Regarding the shrinking effects on display, these aren't the old-style Honey, I Shrunk the Kids type of thing, but much more refined. The concept of Ant-Man allows for something completely different to what we're used to when it comes to MCU action sequences. Scott's first shrinking was quite effective, conveying just how dangerous everyday normal things can be when you're the size of an ant. The upside is that he gains strength and ants become his allies. He even develops a friendship with one particular winged Carpenter ant he names Ant-thony (if you didn't see the outcome of this friendship coming from a mile away...clearly you’ve never seen Honey, I Shrunk the Kids). We soon learn of various types of ants, all of which have different sets of skills that come in handy, and it's nice to see Scott's bonding with his various insectoid allies. At the other end of the spectrum is nasty badguy, Darren Cross, whose experiments reduce test subjects to bloody piles of goo (WHY’D they have to do that to the CUTEST LAMB EVER?! At least Hope was upset by it). It's weird that he’s so focused on this shrinking tech when he has a gun that TURNS PEOPLE TO GOO (which can be flushed down the toilet) that's a more powerful weapon. His is the latest in a long line of MCU bad guys, and as unhinged but otherwise relatively 'normal' human villains go, Corey Stoll does a decent enough job (though he missed an opportunity to use " Dead-ant, dead-ant/Dead-ant, dead-ant dead-ant dead-ant dead-ant..." when threatening Ant-Man). Scott also battles a less-likeable-than-he-was-in-CA: TWS Sam Wilson/Falcon at one point. Scott's heist buddies, referred to as "wombats" by Hank, are mostly played for laughs (with varying degrees of success), but are alright/not entirely useless. Michael Peña’s Luis walks a fine line between being entertaining and annoying, especially with his storytelling about tips he's given. Judy Greer has the rather thankless role of Scott's ex-wife, Maggie, while her new husband, Paxton (Bobby Cannavale), seems kind of a jerk for most of the movie, but eventually shows he's a decent guy. There are some really great moments (unfortunately, the trailers spoiled the Thomas the Tank Engine scene) throughout, plenty of heart, a likeable hero and new/fresh type of superhero power that we haven’t seen before which isn’t just about causing explosions. There’s real imagination/creativity to it. Best of all is the catchy/memorable ‘Ant-Man Theme’ (it’s nice to have a clearly identifiable superhero theme after so long). While I was a bit underwhelmed by this film after my first viewing, and really wanted to know what Edgar Wright (who dropped out due to 'creative differences') would’ve done with the concept, I’ve appreciated this movie more with repeated viewings. It mightn't be one of the 'big' MCU films...but you know what they say about good things coming in small packages.
|
|
|
Post by President Ackbar mini™ on Feb 8, 2022 12:13:52 GMT -5
DON'T LOOK UP got a Best Picture nomination, which I correctly predicted.
|
|
|
Post by Weirdraptor mini™ on Feb 12, 2022 21:30:59 GMT -5
DON'T LOOK UP got a Best Picture nomination, which I correctly predicted. Good or bad thing?
|
|
|
Post by President Ackbar mini™ on Feb 12, 2022 22:15:03 GMT -5
DON'T LOOK UP got a Best Picture nomination, which I correctly predicted. Good or bad thing? Oh, I loved it, but many online folks did not, lol
|
|
|
Post by Chalice_Of_Evil on Mar 1, 2022 2:12:57 GMT -5
Captain America: Civil War (2016). Maybe they should’ve tried hugging it out instead? CA: TFA remains my favourite MCU film, I didn't like CA: TWS as much as everyone else seemed to and the IM films are among my least favourite (which I know is an ‘unpopular’ opinion). Therefore it's disappointing that Cap's third film is divided up between Steve and Tony. Contrary to popular belief, not everyone’s a fan of Tony/not EVERYTHING has to be about him. RDJ fits the role, but I find Tony extremely unlikeable, which is why Chris Evans' Steve/Cap was such a breath of fresh air. Not only did his origin film give us a different setting/feel, it also gave us a likable hero. It's why I'm firmly on Team Cap throughout this movie. Thankfully, Steve remains likable (despite an obvious bias going on/the film’s attempt to paint him in a less-than-positive light at times). We begin with Steve, Sam, Wanda and Natasha as a team...and THAT'S the film I would've rather watched. They work well together, and I especially liked Steve's dynamic with Wanda. He obviously understands her/what she's been through and therefore sympathetic. Elizabeth Olsen isn't given nearly enough screentime, but does exceptionally with what she has, clearly conveying Wanda's guilt over events in AoU and that occur at the start of this film (those who blame her conveniently forget that she was SAVING people and if she hadn’t done what she did, there would’ve been just as many, if not MORE, casualties). I hated seeing her straightjacketed/collared like an animal at the end of the film. Steve's loyalty to Bucky is also admirable, as he understands his friend’s actions are not of his own free will (something those who condemn Bucky seem unable to comprehend). I completely understood Steve’s position in not wanting to allow his friend to be killed for actions he had no control over, nor wanting his other friends/allies to be controlled by the government/having their rights taken away. Speaking of, even when others join Cap's side later on, they're the ones I would've preferred the film focus on rather than screentime being divided between them and Team Jerk. The only one on his side I care about is Natasha and, thankfully, she eventually sees things Steve's way. Theirs is another of the better/more worthwhile relationships in the movie. Speaking of relationships, this so-called 'friendship' between Steve and the not-exactly-blameless Tony (trouble stems from his camp not listening to Steve's reasons for defending his friends and their rights) that the latter tries to guilt the former with towards the end is a total 'WTF?' moment. After two Avengers movies, I never saw anything between them other than begrudging tolerance of each other at best, but we're supposed to believe there's some great betrayal? Maybe there should've been more evidence of friendship/closeness between them before causing a rift, as the only TRUE friendships on display here are those between Steve/Bucky and Steve/Sam/Natasha/Wanda. Debuting in this film are Black Panther and Tom Holland's new iteration of Spider-Man. I've seen these two described as the 'stand-outs' of the film, and while both have their moments, I'd hardly deem them the 'best' parts. Black Panther spends the majority of his time opposing Team Cap, not exactly making the best first impression, but eventually sees what Tony failed to, which was that Bucky was under MIND CONTROL, and he puts the blame on who actually deserves it, thus showing a maturity which Tony lacks (on top of being a hypocrite who accuses Steve of being blinded by his friendship with Bucky...but then towards the end is equally blinded by his own feelings/rage upon learning a secret). Chadwick Boseman has a regal quality about him and develops a good chemistry with Scarlett Johansson's Natasha. After the action of the film's opening, things feel a bit slow at times as it progresses, with a couple of sporadic action scenes injected to keep events lively. While some of the quieter character moments are appreciated, things do come to a somewhat screeching halt when Tony pays a visit to Peter Parker and his "unusually attractive aunt" (Tony's words...although, given Marisa Tomei's playing the role, it's understandable). Holland's web-slinger is far more juvenile than we've seen before (more like ‘Spider-Kid’ than ‘Spider-Man’), and since he’s tied to Tony, I couldn’t care less (good job bringing a kid into battle, Tony!). His shtick seems to be over-enthusiasm, which some might find ‘fun’/’funny’, but I personally thought got tiresome rather quickly. Better humour is provided by Paul Rudd's Scott Lang/Ant-Man (whose 'fanboying' over Cap is more tolerable than Spider-Man's hero-worship of Tony) and Paul Bettany's Vision (his relationship with Wanda isn’t given nearly enough screentime, but they make the most of it. I also appreciated the Wanda/Hawkeye interaction/callbacks). While no one could hold a candle to Hayley Atwell's Peggy Carter, Emily VanCamp does what she can with what little she's given as Sharon Carter (whose relationship with Steve is rather short-changed and therefore unfair to criticise here). One of the funniest moments in the film is Bucky/Sam's reaction to Steve/Sharon sharing an intimate moment. She's definitely a Carter, though, given how kick-arse she is. Credit where it's due, the film does an admirable job of juggling such a large cast of characters and the fight between both sides towards the end is one of the movie's best scenes. Thanks to Daniel Brühl's villainous Zemo (who has no special powers, but deals the Avengers more damage than Loki and Ultron combined, thus making him better than other snooze-worthy human villains who've come before), what the film's climax comes down to is Iron Man vs. Cap/Bucky (their tag-team kicking of his shiny metal arse is a thing of beauty). Not everything is resolved nice and neatly. Which side of things you fall, coupled with who your favourites are and whether they get what you'd deem as 'enough' screentime in your eyes, will most likely determine your enjoyment of this film. For me, the good and bad aspects were about even, though I'm sure many will disagree.
|
|
|
Post by Chalice_Of_Evil on Mar 27, 2022 19:23:28 GMT -5
Doctor Strange (2016). Sherlock Holmes and Irene Adler are FINALLY reunited (sort of)... Benedict Cumberbatch (best known as Sherlock Holmes in the TV series Sherlock) and Rachel McAdams (Irene Adler in the Guy Ritchie Sherlock Holmes movies) play exes, Dr. Stephen Strange and Dr. Christine Palmer, who work at the same hospital. He's a successful neurosurgeon; she's a trauma doctor specializing in thoracic surgery. Cumberbatch isn't straying too far from his Sherlock role here, as his Strange is just as stubborn, arrogant and cocky as Holmes...though thankfully doesn't indulge in quite so much speed-talking. Like with his Sherlock, Cumberbatch's Stephen is not someone you are immediately meant to like. He does have a fondness/vast knowledge of music (too bad The Doors' 'People Are Strange' wasn't included), and he can toss out a quip or two, but on the whole he's kind of a jerk. However, what separates him from certain other jerky MCU characters is that his cockiness makes sense given how skilled a surgeon he is, and his stubbornness almost ruins his relationship with Christine, but he goes on a character's journey that teaches him humility, patience and to think of others instead of himself. We already know Cumberbatch can play an egotistical jerk to perfection, but throughout the course of the movie his Stephen actually manages to become more likable (moreso than his Sherlock Holmes) and he learns about self-sacrifice (his solution for defeating the film's 'big bad', Dormammu, is quite ingenious/hilarious). Christine is far more likable a character right from the start, as she only wants what's best for Stephen, but after he's in a car accident that robs him of the loss of his hands (the movie's end credits include a driving safety message), she can only take so much of his crap attitude/treatment of her before she's had enough. We haven't seen her like in a female lead throughout the MCU before. She's supportive, but not a pushover, she's firm/tells it like it is, but wouldn't (nor shouldn't) ever be classed as "whiny/bitchy". McAdams balances the right amount of strength and warmth that the character requires to ensure the audience is on her side during her 'fight' with Strange post-accident. McAdams also has good comic timing, and her reactions to Stephen later in the film are great. She and Cumberbatch have a nice chemistry, their characters have a very 'grounded/believable' relationship (which contrasts nicely with the later craziness), though they aren't playing out some 'typical MCU love story', it's quite different to what's come before. Aiding Strange in becoming a sorcerer and losing that arrogance is Tilda Swinton as the Ancient One. Her performance seems so effortless, playing this ancient being. She gives off this serene vibe, always so calm and at times frustratingly so (for Stephen especially), but there's more to her than is first presented. She and Cumberbatch play well off each other, sharing some memorable scenes. Also helping out is Chiwetel Ejiofor's Mordo and Benedict Wong...as Wong. Mordo is a curious character, as he seems on the side of good, but oddly enough his most intriguing/important scene comes post-credits, suggesting he's not what we once thought. There seems to be a running theme of the characters not being quite as they first appear, as Wong seems like the humourless sort who protects the books/spells and doesn't get Stephen's jokes/pop culture references (speaking of, I personally felt that Strange's pop culture references were a bit 'forced' and the film rather overdid them/could've done with far fewer of them), but by film's end is seeing the humour in things and proves Stephen's closest ally against the Ancient One's former pupil turned adversary, Kaecilius. Mads Mikkelsen, who was so great as Hannibal Lecter and Le Chiffre, doesn't have a whole lot to work with here. He gets maybe one or two amusing lines, but like the majority of MCU villains, doesn't leave much of a lasting impression (at least he uses henchwomen for a change). The unique trap that Strange captures Kaecilius in at one point is far more memorable than the character himself...though at least his fights with the good guys are very memorable. However, it's the effects on display (which the 3D definitely enhances here, rather than being just a money-grab) that are the real stand-outs of the film. Yes, there's been comparisons to Inception, but that was hardly the first movie to feature moving cityscapes ( Dark City, anyone?). The mind-bending effects and sheer trippiness of the film is what stands out most, as is Strange's Cloak of Levitation aka THE BEST CLOAK EVER since the Invisibility Cloak from the Harry Potter movies. This one's even better, as it keeps him from harm, helps him find the most appropriate weapons for fighting, wipes away tears from his face and, best of all, kicks the arses of bad guys all by itself. Like with Ant-Man, this film may feel so 'different' to what's come before that those who have grown comfortable with the MCU movies to date might feel this one's a little *too* different, but I liked the fact that there are still new ways of telling these movies and giving us something we haven't seen before in the MCU. There are two credits sequences, the post-credits one as mentioned earlier (it's worth waiting for, plus you get to hear 'The Master of the Mystic End Credits' tune, which is pretty neat, although the film's score overall does have some sense of familiarity about it), and one mid-credits (my favourite of the two) featuring an amusing cameo from Thor. It's great to see Stephen interacting with another Avenger already (and even better that it's one of the one's I actually like). It's the more entertaining of the two credits sequences, and promises some interesting stuff to come whilst raising questions about the next Thor film and what's happened since the last one. He may have started as a jerk, but by the movie's end I'm fully on board with seeing Doctor Strange in further films.
|
|
|
Post by Chalice_Of_Evil on Apr 8, 2022 19:21:37 GMT -5
Captain Marvel (2019). Captain Marvel has nothing to prove to you... After a nice acknowledgement of the late Stan Lee (and all his cameos throughout the Marvel films) in the MARVEL opening logo and a special tribute to him, the film begins with us introduced to Brie Larson's Carol Danvers (currently going by the name Vers), who has a blue nosebleed, has clearly been in a fight and/or accident, and as a result is suffering fragmented memories of her previous life. First thing you'll have to adapt to with this film is its non-linear storytelling. We shift between past and present, which gives you an idea of just how confused Carol must be feeling. She's a Kree, which are 'noble warrior heroes' who fight against green aliens called Skulls. She's part of a team led by Yon-Rogg (Jude Law). They have an interesting relationship, trading jabs at one another, but clearly respecting each other too. Also of note in the film are the relationships between Larson's Carol and the other characters. When something happens that leads to Carol crash-landing into a Blockbuster video store on Earth, it's not long before she encounters a younger version of Nick Fury (a de-aged Samuel L. Jackson, who's actually likeable here thankfully, as I'd been getting tired of him appearing in everything and pretty much playing himself every time). Their relationship is pretty much the 'heart' of the movie. Fury starts off wary of her, but eventually comes to respect/admire her and a trust forms between them. One reason why Fury's so likeable in this film is his dynamic with Carol, but another reason is his love for the scene-stealing not-cat named Goose, who got the biggest laughs, though isn't the only source of humour in the movie. It also comes from the 90's being...the 90's (slow typing and loading on computers, movie/TV show/music references, etc) and Carol herself. Despite what certain others have said, Carol is NOT 'unlikeable'. Claims of her trying to make snarky comments like Tony Stark and coming off as a worse person than him couldn't be further from the truth. I personally have had enough of Mr. Snark and his mumbled speed-talking. Carol has a wry sense of humour and comes off as a pretty cool person you'd actually want to hang with (five minutes spent with Tony and I'm fairly sure most people, even his 'fans', would be punching him like Carol punches a Skrull disguised as an old lady in this film). Speaking of Skrulls, Ben Mendelsohn's Skrull character, Talos, starts off as your typical villain. He looks alien, but acts quite 'human' with his line deliveries/references/etc. However, he actually proves to be not quite what he seems and it allows for interesting character development. Another important relationship Carol has is with her former fellow fighter pilot, Maria Rambeau, and her daughter. Their friendship proves crucial to the story. The movie really hits its stride once all these^ characters come together. Carol surrounds herself with a good group of characters who prove useful, but who don't take away from her. The story of Carol Danvers is about what makes her who she is. Those against her try to make her a 'better'/'the best' version of herself, but we're shown that what makes her special isn't her powers, but rather her humanity and who she is as a person. Having said that, when she finally lets loose with her powers in all their glowing, gravity-defying-hair glory...it's quite something to behold (and set perfectly to classic 90's music). Some will claim she's 'overpowered', but she's no more 'overpowered' than Superman or various other male superheroes. And that's^ the crux of the issue here for some people...that she's doing what male superheroes can do. For certain types of people there seems to be five stages when it comes to seeing a female-led movie: 1) Anger ("How DARE a female be the lead! Women should only be side characters/love interests/villains!"), 2) Denial ("This movie isn't successful! It's a flop!"...despite all evidence to the contrary), 3) Attempting to 'rationalize' the film's success ("This movie's only successful because..." insert lame excuse here such as people only liking it because of some 'agenda', people being 'paid' to say good things, etc), 4) Whininess ("WHY do they keep doing this?! Making more female-led movies...don't they know these genres like sci-fi, superheroes, etc are meant to be MALE-oriented?") and 5) Seeking out new targets, starting all over again/lather, rinse, repeat (sadly, there's no 'Acceptance' stage for these people). Seeing the negativity regarding this film only proves one thing: there's a LOT of insecure people out there. This is a 'different' sort of Marvel film...but in no way 'bad'. It's about time they shook things up a bit and gave us something new, as it prevents things from getting 'stale' (the only expected thing here is two credits scenes, one in the middle and one at the end...both of which are worth sticking around for). And if Captain Marvel is to eventually take over from Tony Stark as head of the Avengers...I, for one, welcome our new alien DNA-infused leader.
|
|
|
Post by Chalice_Of_Evil on Apr 17, 2022 0:21:59 GMT -5
Avengers: Infinity War (2018). Give this man a shave! I took a break from seeing MCU movies at the theatre, since 2017's offerings didn't appeal to me, but having enjoyed some of the previous solo movies/half-enjoying the previous two Avengers movies, I checked out A:IW for the characters I cared about, knowing full-well time would also be spent on those I didn't care about. We begin with Thor, Loki and the film's big bad, Thanos. It feels like Thor got more screentime here than he did in the two previous Avengers movies. Most surprisingly, his main interaction's with Rocket from the GotG movies, who he calls "Rabbit". Like in A:AoU, Thor is absent for long periods of time/shows up towards the end, seemingly with a means to defeating the villain...that doesn't quite work out this time. I enjoyed his first movie, but am disappointed with what they've reduced him/his movies to since. Tony is...Tony. If you're a fan, chances are you're never going to dislike him (no matter what he says/does), whereas I'm someone who's never been a fan of RDJ's mumbled-speed-talking a-hole of a character, so I just tune out when he's eating up screentime/cracking "jokes". RDJ's/Paltrow's scene just made me wish the screentime was spent on something/anything else. His relationship with Tom Holland's Spider-Kid may tug at some people's heartstrings (especially near the end, where Holland/Peter ripped-off the Tenth Doctor's exit from Doctor Who), but I personally find his whole shtick tiresome. Mark Ruffalo does some questionable acting early on when he's describing the severity of the situation to everyone else, Bruce is also made to look the fool on more than one occasion, and the Hulk doesn't show his green face again after losing a fight to Thanos in the opening scene . There's an all-too-brief acknowledgment of his past 'relationship' he developed with ScarJo's Natasha/Black Widow (who sports a new short blonde 'do and is sadly underutilised) that I personally appreciated. Disappointingly, a bearded Steve Rogers/Cap has suffered a similar fate to Thor (for me). His screentime's been reduced significantly (despite his third solo film having already been hijacked by Tony & co...which should've meant he was owed more screentime, not LESS) and what I enjoyed about him/his first solo film has been stripped away. He's much less fun to watch now...though I still choose his side over Tony's. Steve/Cap has some brief exchanges...and that's about it. I was super-disappointed that the 'brother-like' relationship he'd developed with Wanda was dropped here (as was her one with Hawkeye, who's entirely absent). That other Steve, Doctor Strange, has become Tony's new verbal sparring partner, as they immediately clash thanks to Tony's inability to go without snarking at/insulting others for even a minute (how I wish Strange's Cloak of Levitation would've slapped the snot out of Tony instead of just giving him a light slapping when he was disrespecting an ancient artifact). Thankfully, the cloak remains awesome. Not-so-awesome? The GotG. I'm not a fan of them/their movies (John C. Reilly's character summed them up best in their first film: "What a bunch of a-holes."), and their brand of 'humour' doesn't work for me. The only one I half-like (Karen Gillan's Nebula) is sadly wasted here. She's tortured, then awesome, then gives Star-Lord some upsetting information which causes him to muck up everybody's ONE REAL CHANCE at defeating Thanos. Not fun when someone lets their PERSONAL FEELINGS get the better of them IS IT, TONY? While others don't appreciate the characters of Wanda/Scarlet Witch and Vision, or the actors' performances, I thought Elizabeth Olsen/Paul Bettany made the most of their screentime. I've always liked them/their characters' relationship. The actors make the most of what they're given and I enjoyed what little time we got with them (especially when Wanda started kicking major butt. And despite her feelings for Vision, she makes the ultimate sacrifice/does what needs to be done). As I expected, they're given short-shrift/tossed aside near the end without anyone mourning/caring about them. Chadwick Boseman's T'Challa/Black Panther hasn't much to do. Danai Gurira's Okoye makes more of an impression (particularly in the scene where she/Natasha help Wanda. Too bad there wasn't more of this trio). There are other characters who're given moments here and there (and even some cameos), but a large percentage of the film is taken up by Thanos. Josh Brolin's certainly given more material to work with than the last few Marvel villains prior to this film, but I personally would've rather spent more time with the good guys, as I don't feel for Thanos no matter HOW much the movie wants me to. Why should I care if he looks sad/cries, when he'll kill half the universe's population without a second thought? Some of the action is hard to follow, the film cuts back and forth between many different characters/plots (thus making things feel 'scattered'/all-over-the-place) and the cliff-hanger ending elicited a "WTF?" reaction from the audience I saw it with (while my main reaction was finding Bruce looking sad in the 'Hulkbuster' armour unintentionally comical). This film was never going to please everyone, and while there are those who're unfairly critical towards it, there's also those who overpraise it too. I might sound like I didn't enjoy the film, but that's not entirely true. Parts of it worked. Other parts? Not so much. The problem with trying to cram so much together is that everyone 'loses' in some way (except Tony, of course!). Also, I think the film overdid the 'deaths' throughout, which just felt like they were there for 'shock value'. There's such a large number of 'casualties' that you just know most, if not all, are going to be undone in the following film. The end credits haven't anything interesting/special to look at, which is disappointing. The after-credits scene doesn't offer much except the promise of hopefully something better yet to come with Captain Marvel.
|
|
|
Post by Chalice_Of_Evil on May 5, 2022 6:02:34 GMT -5
Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness (2022). **spoilers below** You break the rules and become the hero. I do it and I become the enemy. That doesn't seem fair. Doctor Strange in the MoM was the MCU movie I was looking forward to the most post-Endgame. I’d originally thought it'd be a team-up movie between Doctor Strange and Wanda/Scarlet Witch, then as more and more leaks for the film surfaced, I thought maybe she’d turn ‘bad’ partway through only to be turned back to the side of 'good' by the end. Suffice to say things didn't go quite the way I was hoping. This movie's opening scene gives us a taste of the mind-boggling effects the film has to offer as we meet a Doctor Strange from another universe who's attempting to save a teen named America Chavez from the evil pursuing her that's wishing to steal her power/ability to traverse the multiverse. 'Our' Stephen Strange then awakes as if from a dream, before attending the wedding of Christine Palmer (it’s probably for the best she married someone else, given how Stephen treated her previously). Some may deem this segment of the movie ‘slow’, but it’s necessary, as the payoff for their characters’ relationship comes towards the end of the film. Those with short attention spans needn’t worry, though, as it’s not long before a giant one-eyed octopus attacks the city. Strange is aided by Wong in this fight, the climax of which is literally eye-popping. After this, Strange seeks out Wanda Maximoff's help (oh, sure, when you WANT something you bother to check in with her, Strange, but you couldn’t have helped her out when SHE needed it? Speaking of...where was Hawkeye? Some friend! EVERYONE abandoned her). Having not seen WandaVision, I sadly missed out on the most important part of Wanda’s story (ie. how she got from Endgame to here). As someone who’s been a fan of Wanda throughout the films, standing up for her when others condemned her, it's a slap in the face. WHY should I have to get Disney+ to see a crucial part of her character’s journey? At least release the show on DVD/Blu-ray, jerks! I've gotten the gist of what happened, and it sounds to me like while some simply wish to 100% blame her for everything/see her ‘punished’, they fail to take into account the manipulations that occurred and Wanda being corrupted by the Darkhold. I guess since she’s not a GUY who’s ‘charming’/quippy, all’s not forgiven? This movie's biggest disappointment is Wanda being reduced to just someone who wants her nonexistent kids (in her universe, anyway. They exist in every other one) back by any means necessary. It’s a disservice to the character/the actress who portrays her, as like a certain other female character from a popular TV series, the writing's portraying her as an example of 'woman can't control her emotions/goes mad with power and has to be put down like a rabid dog' (at least BELLS didn’t turn Wanda nuts). We get a brief scene between her and Strange where they’re civil, but it’s soon revealed she’s already descended into ‘madness’, so she becomes 'the enemy' surprisingly early on (thus my hopes of ever seeing them comparing fancy magic-casting hand gestures were immediately dashed). Also surprising is that some apparently found this movie ‘confusing’. It’s actually pretty simple: stop Wanda from killing America thereby gaining her power to get her kids from another universe. The problem is it’s *not* particularly complex, and that’s why I was ticked off with what the movie did to Wanda. She’s given a moment here or there to display some signs of humanity, but it’s clear the Wanda who previously sacrificed a LOT to save the world is basically gone now. This movie’s oversimplified characterisation robs her of the complexities of her character. Things appear very 'black/white', with her as the 'villain' when previously she's proven herself a hero (albeit with flaws). Elizabeth Olsen, who seems to never get the credit she deserves for the nuance/subtleties she's brought to her character, does the best with what she's given, making her 'Scarlet Witch' persona seem truly unhinged with her line deliveries/convincingly conveying barely-contained rage bubbling underneath the surface ready to let loose any moment (and I was glad she called out Strange for his hypocrisy). Those in denial about her being one of THE MOST powerful characters in the MCU should pay attention as she takes on many opponents in this movie...and pretty much kicks ALL their butts (she and Carol/Captain Marvel totally could've defeated Thanos together). Strange even states outright how powerful she is. If this is indeed her last movie...then shame on you, MCU! Wanda/Elizabeth Olsen deserved SO much better. Benedict Cumberbatch and Benedict Wong have an easy chemistry as Strange and Wong and it's a shame they're separated for the middle chunk of the movie. I was surprised to see Rachel McAdams feature as much as she did in the movie, as it seemed she'd vanished after the wedding. Thankfully, we meet one of her alternate selves who's involved in the film's second half. Xochitl Gomez does a decent job with the debut of her character, America, developing a fun dynamic with Strange. It's unfortunate that her finally tapping into the full potential of her power seems to come at the expense of us losing Wanda, though. There are some character 'variants' which I'm sure will please a lot of fans (I personally was very happy to see a certain shield-wielding someone). One of these is apparently lots of people's 'fancast', so if he doesn't end up playing the actual 'proper' version...it'll be rather disappointing. Also disappointing? How briefly these characters appeared in the movie (though it gave us some of the film's more shocking moments, as they're creatively disposed of). A lot of elements in the movie work, like Sam Raimi's direction. He's clearly skilled at handling the 'horror'/gruesome aspects, bringing his own distinct style to the movie (complete with interesting camera angles). Danny Elfman provides some memorable score at certain points, the movie looks great (downright trippy at times) and the actors do their best...but the writing could've been better.
|
|
|
Post by Chalice_Of_Evil on Jun 7, 2022 21:02:26 GMT -5
I'd heard of this adaptation, but nothing could've prepared me for just how WTF-worthy it actually was. Every scene resulted in me having dozens of questions, and at the top of the list is 'What's the deal with the big space sperm with arms?'. Fair enough. Honesty, the WTF-ery is why I love it. Well, I just watched the 2021 version of Dune and my opinion of it throughout was pretty much... It was only marginally less confusing than the 1984 version and I kept wondering whilst watching, "Where's the space sperm with arms?". I doubt I would've even stayed awake if Rebecca Ferguson wasn't in it (really, she was only reason I even bothered to check this out).
|
|
|
Post by Weirdraptor mini™ on Jun 7, 2022 21:15:57 GMT -5
Fair enough. Honesty, the WTF-ery is why I love it. Well, I just watched the 2021 version of Dune and my opinion of it throughout was pretty much... It was only marginally less confusing than the 1984 version and I kept wondering whilst watching, "Where's the space sperm with arms?". I doubt I would've even stayed awake if Rebecca Ferguson wasn't in it (really, she was only reason I even bothered to check this out). Sorry you didn't like it. I guess you and Dune are just destined to not get along. It can be rather unwelcoming to a lot of readers/viewers.
|
|
|
Post by Chalice_Of_Evil on Jun 12, 2022 16:57:32 GMT -5
Red Eye (2005). Do you wanna know how Lisa Reisert got this scar? Save for the beginning and ending, the majority of this film takes place aboard a plane (obviously). Thanks to Wes Craven's directing and the film's two main stars, the film is never boring, remains tense throughout and keeps the momentum going. Rachel McAdams proves that she can carry a film, establishing quickly her character of Lisa Reisert as a likable/capable/resourceful hotel manager who knows how to think quickly and deal with problem customers "with special needs" efficiently. It's a credit to McAdams that she makes Lisa so likable in such a short time, because we have to like her to feel for her during the predicament she finds herself in. She soon meets a man by the eyebrow-raising name of Jackson Rippner (he of the pale blue eyes, Cillian Murphy). Murphy, who played an excellent villain in Batman Begins, but was only given a limited amount of screentime, is given much more here, relishing every minute. He starts off as a helpful, "charming" person who comes to Lisa's aid at the airport, but it's not long before she's crossed paths with him again on the plane and he makes his true intentions/motives known. He's a terrorist operative working for a group who wants one of Lisa's hotel guests, United States Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security, Charles O'Keefe, dead. Lisa's the only one who can get him moved into the right room to be assassinated, and if she doesn't do it, Jackson will have her father, Joe (Brian Cox), offed. The plot isn't exactly one we haven't seen before (a parent in danger, the protagonist has to do what the antagonist says, or her father gets it, etc), but the way in which the story's told is what keeps the viewer glued to the screen. Lisa isn't the typical damsel in distress. She's smart/knows how to think on her feet and makes several clever/sneaky attempts to alert people to her predicament, but unfortunately for her, Jackson's no fool either, and just when you think Lisa might succeed, he foils her plans. The easy-going chemistry that's set up early on between the two actors, which then leads to extreme tension later on, is what holds the film together. If it weren't for McAdams and Murphy, I doubt the film would've been as effective as it was/could've easily fallen apart. It's the little touches that make the film above average. Things you wouldn't have first thought were that important prove crucial later on, such as when Lisa comes up with a new inventive way of using a pen, for example. Her quick-thinking is what helps her last as long as she does (and keeps the audience from rolling their eyes, as she's not to typical sort who makes stupid mistakes. She's constantly figuring out ways to get out of her situation). What I really appreciated was how much of a match she is for Jackson. He obviously regards himself as 'superior', talking down to her and saying condescendingly, "Lisa, whatever female-driven, emotion-based dilemma you may be dealing with right now, you have my sympathy. But for the sake of time and sanity, let's break this down into a little male-driven fact-based logic. One simple phone call saves your dad's life.", but she's no pushover, giving as good as she gets. One little detail I appreciated was how Jackson Rippner seemed to 'devolve' into his infamous serial killer whose name his sounds like. Bit by bit, Rippner takes on the vague appearance of what one might imagine when thinking of Jack the Ripper: he acquires a silk scarf (which he tucks into the top of his shirt like a cravat, so as not to attract so much attention...what with the slight throat issue he's got going on. And, no, it can't be simply fixed with some Soothers), a decidedly raspy voice (as a result of said throat problem - and yes, they do explain how it is he still manages to talk after Lisa introduces him to his new best friend who goes by the name Pen), a limp, and lastly...the trademark knife. I thought it was nifty how he slowly took on these aspects of his namesake. Once off the plane, the film does appear to 'degenerate' into somewhat of a 'slasher' film (well, there's chasing and a knife involved, but a surprising lack of blood. If you wondering how there's no blood at one point towards the end of the film, there's a vague explanation. I just chose to go with it). Apart from one instance of the classic/obligatory 'run/trip over/fall' that plagues all slasher movie victims, it seems, Lisa manages to hold her own against Jackson once they reach her house (where he proves to be no match for all manner of flying objects being hurled his way. Yes, 'sometimes bad things happen to good people'...but sometimes they fight back! Where's your male-driven fact-based logic NOW, Jack?). Although Brian Cox isn't given much to do, he makes the most of his screentime and we care about Lisa's father/his relationship with his daughter. He also proves helpful near the end. Other side characters that populate the plane have their own little moments here and there. I also appreciated that time was devoted to us learning what led to Lisa's notable scar, which we're introduced to early on and Jackson makes an assumption about. McAdams gives a good speech about it, playing a part in Lisa's turning the tables on her tormentor. The film has its moments of humour (thanks to Glee's Jayma Mays as Lisa's co-worker, Cynthia. The film's ending satisfyingly pays off the problems her character was having at the start regarding troublesome customers. Even Lisa has her limits, patience-wise), but mostly succeeds at what it's supposed to be: a thriller. It isn't a long movie, the film's premise isn't dragged out, and that's why it works so well/benefits from a short runtime. This is a sorely underrated/underappreciated film.
|
|
|
Post by Chalice_Of_Evil on Jun 26, 2022 20:59:10 GMT -5
The Village (2004). When you’re desperate for medical supplies and your village is in the middle of a forest far away from civilization...send the blind girl for help. I was SO glad that I took a chance, and saw this film at the theatre. Not only was I pleasantly surprised by how much I enjoyed it, but it also introduced me to Bryce Dallas Howard - for which I'm forever grateful. She left a lasting impression with her role in this movie, playing Ivy Walker - a blind girl who "sees" (but just not as we see), Bryce is quite a wonder to behold. People will complain how, for a supposedly "blind" person, she manages to get around pretty easily/know where she's going and seems fairly familiar with her surroundings. If you actually pay attention, you will hear that she was not born blind. She obviously got to know the place where she grew up and familiarized herself with her surroundings/how to get places before she lost her sight. Even after that, she still "sees" people's "colours". So there's actually an explanation for the way she gets around, you just have to listen. At its heart, this movie is a tale of romance (in its purest form). What holds the movie together is the love story between Bryce's Ivy Walker and Lucius Hunt (portrayed perfectly by Joaquin Phoenix. No wonder he's a perfect fit - as the role was apparently written for him). It's also no wonder that Shyamalan cast Bryce without an audition from her and after only having seen her on stage. She's quite the find. Her chemistry with Phoenix is a large part of what makes the film work. There's a purity and innocence to their love for each other. Their interaction/dialogue really gets to the heart of what love is/should be about. I especially liked her trust in him and his faithfulness and loyalty to her. The rest of the cast also does well. William Hurt is excellent as Ivy's father, Sigourney Weaver is quite good as Lucius's mother, and Brendan Gleeson is great as always (though a little underused). Meanwhile, Adrien Brody has a tough role, playing Noah Percy (who is literally "the village idiot"). He'll probably get on some people's nerves, while some might just find him unintentionally amusing. I thought he played the role well, and I even felt a twinge of sympathy for him. Judy Greer is also good as Ivy's sister, Kitty (and she shares one especially amusing scene with Lucius. Both she and Phoenix are excellent in the scene where she makes her feelings known to him). Apart from the wonderful relationships of lovers, father and daughter and mother and son, there's also the love/relationship between two sisters on display. The film itself looks great. Very moody and atmospheric, nicely gloomy and cast-over. The night scenes are brilliantly done, taking full advantage of shadows and the only light source being candles. I just cannot say enough about how good this film looks. It creates the sort of place one would almost want to step into, walk around in and be a part of. It has a mystical sort of quality to it, yet everything is grounded in a 'reality' of sorts. Speaking of, the elements to this film that may feel 'supernatural' in nature are actually handled really well. There is an explanation for everything that happens in the film, but like with all good movies, you can't expect answers straight away. You have to pay attention and be willing to go along for the ride all the way. Obviously, after Shyamalan's other movies, people are expecting a 'twist'. Thing is, if you go into this movie for the sole purpose of looking for what the twist might be, then chances are you may figure it out. I myself went into the film not actively seeking out the twist, and was able to sit back and just enjoy the movie for the story it had to tell. The 'twist ending' is not the main thing you should be worrying about here. It's the story that matters...and it was a story that I thoroughly enjoyed. Some may possibly feel that the film just sort of ends abruptly, but I think that if you've been paying close enough attention to the journey that the character of Ivy Walker goes through, you'll realise that the somewhat open-ended final scene can only have one natural resolution. It's really left up to you to decide, but I know that I was happy with how I thought the film ended. It's one of those cases where you either 'get' the film or you don't. And I absolutely 'got' it. It addresses issues about today's society and makes you really think about what the world has come to. What are people, as a whole, like nowadays? Not exactly the best examples of human nature are on display in today's day and age. People, in general, are deeply flawed, and The Village ponders what could be done about that to escape the unpleasantness. I very much appreciated this film and, after having recently re-watched it yet again on DVD, I love it just as much as I did the first time I saw it at the theatre (maybe even a little more). Out of all of Shyamalan's films that he's done, this one is easily my favourite. It's a truly under-appreciated gem of a film.
|
|
|
Post by President Ackbar mini™ on Jul 4, 2022 17:46:47 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Chalice_Of_Evil on Jul 20, 2022 4:19:15 GMT -5
Alice in Wonderland (2010). Curiouser and curiouser... Having never read the book/s, and only having vague memories of the old Disney cartoon version of Alice in Wonderland, all I knew going into this film was the gist of the story. However different things may be this time around, though, it remains an interesting tale. Alice isn't as young as the first time she visited Wonderland (she's 19 now) and has forgotten her previous journey, but it seems she goes about doing things exactly the same way as she did her first time around (like drinking/eating stuff that says 'Drink Me'/'Eat Me'. Considering just how ominous that sounds, WHY would you do that??). Her various "wardrobe malfunctions"/costume changes, as a result of her shrinking/growing, are fun to watch. Aussie actress Mia Wasikowska, despite what some might say, is actually well-cast in the role of the now older Alice. I can see why Tim Burton picked this relative newcomer over more well-known actresses. Despite all the amazing visuals/weird and wonderful characters in Wonderland (AKA 'Underland'), Mia is what carries this film. And a grand job she does of it too. She doesn't come off as annoying or stupid, but a character who's trying to figure out who she is and not wanting to let others decide for her. She certainly holds her own with the rest of the cast and proves to in fact be "the right Alice". She's most definitely NOT lost her "muchness". Johnny Depp’s actually quite restrained as the Mad Hatter...in a manner of speaking. He never goes so over-the-top that you can't connect with the character. He does, in fact, give the Hatter much more depth than you might expect from such a loon. His interaction/friendship with Alice helps ground the film (they're very loyal to each other). While he does have his wacky moments (and, on occasion, switches to a Scottish accent, sounding/looking quite sinister), he also has some quieter moments where you really get to see into the heart of his character. Speaking of hearts... Helena Bonham Carter is a riot as the Red Queen/Queen of Hearts. She's completely off her rocker, as you'd expect, what with that bulbous head of hers. Watching her face turn red (as she gets mad at everyone/everything), resting her feet on pigs and playing croquet with flamingos is all quite amusing (HBC's delivery of certain lines also makes them much funnier than they might've been originally). Her taking a liking to "Um from Umbridge" (as she comes to know grown-up Alice, who's keeping her identity a secret) allowed for some great interaction between the two. Then, of course, the Queen lets loose, screaming "OFF WITH HER HEAD!!!" once she finds out what is what. The always creepy Crispin Glover, as Stayne/the Knave of Hearts, is one twisted individual (he likes "largeness"?). Of course, by the end of the film, we discover he mightn't be as devoted to his Queen as he appears. Then there's the White Queen, played to perfection by Anne Hathaway. She totally embodies the role of this graceful, peace-loving, slightly peculiar and extremely pale Queen who seemingly glides everywhere and is so majestic in all of her movements (it's particularly amusing when she's doing this to keep up appearances, but immediately drops the act when she's out of view of her courtiers). Combined with her airy voice, this is a very different performance from Miss Hathaway to what we're used to. She's a bit odd, but that's what makes her so wonderful (that and the faces she makes when something grosses her out...which is especially funny when she's creating potions involving ingredients such as urine, fingers and her own spittle among other things). As for the voice cast, I particularly enjoyed Stephen Fry as the grinning/cheeky Cheshire Cat (his line deliveries are delicious and his obsession with the Hatter's hat amused me), Michael Sheen (who's been a werewolf, a vampire and is now a fluffy bunny) as the White Rabbit and Timothy Spall as the bloodhound, Bayard. The Blue Caterpillar is about what you'd expect from Alan Rickman providing the voice. As for the March Hare, I couldn't understand much of what Paul Whitehouse was saying, but if nothing else, he at least came off as being truly mad (even moreso than the Hatter). The one character I COULDN'T STAND was the Dormouse. How I HATED her! With her constant declarations of "She's the wrong Alice!", outing Alice to the Red Queen and just general attitude towards Alice, she quickly got on my nerves. She apparently loved stabbing eyeballs with her pin-sized sword and one of her victims was the poor misunderstood Bandersnatch (I was SO glad when Alice just TOOK the eyeball off that annoying Dormouse when she dared her to and shooed her away at one point. I just wish the rodent had met a grisly demise). By the way, I really liked the Bandersnatch and how it and Alice made things 'even' between them, becoming a team/friends by the end. Danny Elfman's score adds some moodiness, which is fitting considering Wonderland's 'otherworldliness' (I also really liked the Avril Lavigne song that plays when the end credits start). As far as story goes, this was an interesting interpretation (since it's basically a sequel to the original Alice tale). I never found things got "boring" at any stage, nor did I think it ran too long. I feel it ended at just the right moment and with a nice conclusion for the character of Alice 'finding herself'. This was the first movie that I saw in 3D...and what a great experience that was! Things literally flew out at you/felt like you could reach out and touch them as though they were there in the cinema *with* you. It was truly splendid. Even without the 3D, it's still visually stunning (as is the beginning of the end credits). Tim Burton's version of the story is one that I personally enjoy very much. Like Alice, I'd go down the rabbit hole and experience it all over again.
|
|
|
Post by jayman on Jul 26, 2022 0:26:02 GMT -5
Mission impossible!
|
|
|
Post by Weirdraptor mini™ on Jul 28, 2022 23:15:08 GMT -5
But what about Objective Improbable?
|
|