On the End of the MCU

So, I saw Endgame the other day. My review pretty much matches that of John C. Wright. The strength was the acting. There was one massive plothole that comes with time travel, but it's the plothole I have with Terminator 2, and who doesn't like that movie?

All in all, that was a very nice little wrap up to the Marvel Cinematic Universe.

What's that you say? There are still Marvel movies to come? Including another Spider-Man film?

No. This wrapped things up nicely. We can all go home now. If they insist on making more films, I've got no problem getting them used, if I even feel the need to see them.

Take a look for a moment around "phase 4" of the MCU. See if you notice anything.

• Spider Man: Far From Home
• Black Widow
• Black Panther 2
• Doctor Strange 2
• Eternals
• Shang-Chi
• Guardians 3

And before you ask, no, it's not about Captain Marvel. Even the directors of Endgame hated her so much, they had Thanos punch her right out of the movie. I'm told she was on screen for 15 minutes. I think most of that time she was not speaking, or she was so covered in CGI, she looked like Tinkerbell. There is no way you can jam her into more than two of these seven films, and that's assuming anyone allows her in.

Despite all of Kevin Feige's woke spinning, every time he spins politics, he never delivers it, which is a point in his favor. So I'm not going to guess which films he wants to jam in "body positive" or L.G.B.T.Q.Q.I.A.A.P.M.O.U.S.E. "role models" in.  (If you see a "hero" called "America" expect heads to roll after the movie bombs like Hiroshima.)

I'm only concerned with those bullet points.

If you don't see it, don't worry, I have you covered.

Spider Man: Far From Home. If you remember, Homecoming was so full of woke secondary casting it was painful. Really painful. They were so unnecessary to the plot that we really only needed three actors -- Michael Keaton, Roberty Downey Jr, and Tom Holland. Almost everyone else could be replaced by a cardboard cutout. In the case of "Zendaya," I'm relatively certain she is a cardboard cutout.  I suspect Far From Home will only need Tom Holland, Sam Jackson, Jake what's-his-name, and CGI monsters. Which means that I can wait for it to be remaindered in Edward R. Hamilton, or used on Amazon.

Black Widow -- if you've seen Endgame, you know why this is a problem. If you haven't seen it yet (oh come on, even I've seen it by now) let's say that one of their selling points is WE HAVE A FEMALE DIRECTOR.  Um, that's nice. What's this FEMALE DIRECTOR done? Um ... well, that sucks. Pity that when they finally get around to making the Black Widow movie fans wanted since Avengers (if not Iron Man 2) is made by someone with fewer credentials than the creature who made the Wrinkle in Time movie.

Black Panther 2 -- I hold out no hope for this one. I suspect that one day people will realize that BP was a disjointed, tone-deaf mess that couldn't figure out what it wanted to be when it grew up. Did it want to be Game of Thrones in Africa (As in the first 30 minutes)? Did it want to be James Bond (as it was in that bit in Korea)? Did it want to focus on Wakanda versus black urban America? They should have stuck with one tone and ran with it. (And for a movie with the two "Tolkien White guys," did anyone else realize that while everyone was having a civil war, Martin Freeman was saving the world?)  And while everyone else squee-ed over battle rhinos ... yikes, that CGI was bad.

Doctor Strange 2 -- Cumberbatch might make this worth renting or buying used. The CGI might tempt me to watch it on a big screen, but they're going to have to have a trailer that blows my socks off and turns my hair white to tempt me that much. And I don't think they have the chops do to that.

Guardians 3 -- James Gunn, the director, thinks pedo jokes are funny. They're not. Check please.

• Eternals
• Shang-Chi

At which point, I get to break out a GIF.

Don't worry, you're not the only one. I had to look them up, too.

Brian Niemeier is a fan of saying "Don't give money to people who hate you." I concur. I had no problem going to Endgame because the House of Mouse is going to burn itself down, courtesy of Dickhead in Chief, Bob Iger, who is so beset by scandals and criminal investigations, and downright mishandling of properties that I actually think that Endgame's success will only fuel their certitude of their own invulnerability, and thus fuel their own demise.

They killed Star Wars with The Last Jedi. And yet they're going to burn nearly... what? Half a billion dollars per movie over the next few years? (I'm guesstimating based on previous, conflicting numbers). While they got burned with Solo -- an okay film caught in the backlash from The Last Jedi -- Disney didn't learn their lesson. They're going to spend about three billion dollars on six Star Wars films over the next few years, hoping to make at least six billion dollars. However, the people behind these films (at last report) are Rian Johnson of Last Jedi and the people who dropped the ball on Game of Thrones. Say goodbye to three billion dollars, Disney.

They want to try an Avatar franchise, which will take forever to make and mountains of cash to finish. But they have so doubled down on it, they've put in an Avatar section to their theme park .... no, seriously, Disney, Avatar came out a decade ago. The prime audience for Disneyland wasn't even born at the time, and are currently spoiled with better graphics in casual video games, which are largely better written (unless they're Assassin's Creed).

Next up, the Aliens franchise!  (Guys, just stick with Aliens. The series is dead already)

The Disney model used to be reinvest profits into the company, expand, and make more money. They're still doing that, but they're doing it in such a way that is just going to screw them over. Investing in Star Wars land (yes, I know) after The Last Jedi? Investing in Avatar at the parks before there's really a market for it?

Next up: the "MCU" will get the same treatment. But the MCU is over, fellas. They got a decent sendoff. It was a miracle that it got this far anyway -- normally, conflicting personalities would destroy a franchise like this in three movies, if not sooner. It was probably a minor miracle. Robert Downey Jr. is a good guy who stood up for Mel Gibson. Most of the main actors had never been big names before they were cast. Sure, there were some attempts. Before the MCU started, I think the biggest names they had were Scarlett Johanssen and Sam Jackson.

Endgame wrapped up the MCU.

• Everyone got a happily ever after. 
• All of the main characters without a sequel series are done with the franchise. 
• All of the good secondary characters are going to yet ANOTHER streaming service... and we saw how well that worked with NetFlix (Three good seasons of television out of eleven). 

So, the movies are done. But Marvel will pour in the money. Disney bought Marvel Comics, and allowed the comics to go to woke crap while the movies made money. Now that Disney is going to streaming, expect the films to go to woke crap while they focus on streaming -- and like with Star Trek Discovery, Disney won't care if it's all crap, since the membership fees will be money up front.

There is a Graham Greene story called A Hint of an Explanation, where a man tells the story of how his atheist next door neighbor wanted to run tests on a consecrated host. The narrator, who had been an altar boy, palmed the host, and nearly handed over the host for desecration, when the neighbor pushed just a little too hard, was a little too eager, and let slip his darker nature. The point of the story is that evil overreaches and screws itself over.

Now that Disney is secure in the sensation that it can do no wrong, and they have money to burn, get ready to spend the next ten years watching the money go up in flames.

Disney is overreaching.

If you want a superhero that will never go woke, I suggest

My Saint Tommy NYPD series.

Or

Silver Empire's Heroes United

If you have the time, stop in to my Dragon Awards discussion and tell me some of your favorites.

Why no one cares about the #Oscars, 2019

I know I've already discussed how no one gives two damns for the nimrods in Hollywood and their pretensions and their BS.

But it's Tuesday, the blog is late, the Oscars are trending, and I can do this quickly without tuning my brain on.

Let's look at the latest crop of these Oscar nominations that have been forced down our throats this time.

I'll make a few guesses here and there about what's going to win, but those guesses will be made largely on content, virtue signalling, and victim points -- since CONTENT seems to be the last thing Hollyweirdoes want to even consider, unless the content is about a black hispanic homosexual being brutalized by rich white oppressors, or screaming "REPUBLICANS ARE EVIL" over and over again, but enough about the film Vice.

And no, I don't think that was cynical enough for today's insanity.

I don't think anyone cares about documentaries ... (RGB? Zion? I can't even find an IMDB page on some of these).  Foreign language films ... Poland did something about the Cold War, which probably slipped in because no one in Hollywood was looking.

For the log of God Almighty --- FIFTEEN musical score nominations? Fifteen... talk about overkill. I know they expanded nominee rosters to allow for their pretensions and for popular films, but this is insane.  Besides, they all enjoy masturbating to Lin Manuel Miranda, so we know that Mary Poppins Returns is a shoe - in. It satisfies their politics (after all, LMM might as well have started "Orange Man Bad") and has the illusion of being popular (the nicest review I heard called the film "unnecessary"). Then again, as I look closer, the only thing on this list that doesn't check all of the usual boxes is Infinity War.... unless someone really wants Thanos to be the Green Peace mascot.

Original songs ... fifteen. Again. Ugh. This is .... an amazingly terrible collection.

Short films....  who cares? Visual effects....  who cares?

Ah! Best actor! .... Let's see, Christian Bale has signaled his virtue by calling Dick Cheney "Satan." Rami Malek played gay (if he is for real, don't tell me, I don't want to know.) Bradley Cooper... may have had to act. Viggo Mortensen ... I don't want to look at what he did. I"m guessing Bale is the winner.

Best Supporting Actor. If anyone cared about acting ability, I'd even give Mahershala Ali a nod -- I've seen him, he can act. But if I recall correctly, he didn't virtue signal hard enough in Green Book, and no one will ever give anything to Sam Elliott if it can be avoided. So I'm assuming Sam Rockwell for Vice, because George W. Bush is stupid and evil, etc etc, blah blah blah.

Actress in a Leading Role..... I'm assuming it's going to either Lady Gaga for being a freak or to Melissa McCarthy because her Ghostbusters film "fought the patriarchy," thus making it "her turn," or something.

Actress, Supporting role. The Favourite, a film about women being bitchy to each other, is up twice. I'm assuming they get canceled out. I'd say Amy Adams in Vice, but that requires that people like Amy Adams. I do, but Hollywood doesn't seem to.

Animated Feature Film .... I look here and I don't care. I'm sure everyone I know wants it to be Spider-Verse. 

Cinematography .... does anyone care? Costume design, oy.

Directing ... Cold War is up for it (I found it on IMDB... Romeo and Juliet, Cold War style? Didn't more interesting things happen then?). BlackKKKlansman has the virtue signal points, but I'm not sure Spike Lee has enough by himself. Roma ("A year in the life of a middle-class family's maid in Mexico City in the early 1970s.") The Favourite and Vice. This one is more of a crap shoot -- virtue signalling on virtue signalling violence. Though Roma may win out because "working class Mexican" seems to have more victim points than anyone else right now.

Documentary ... eh. Media has decided for the last two years to do very little BUT jerk off to Ruth Bader Ginsberg. So that's my bet there.

Best picture ... already? Oy. Let's see ... Black Panther has been thrown on probably because it made a ton of money and they may not be seen as out of touch. If it wins, it'll be so they can say "we gave Marvel an award. We never have to do it ever again" and move on. Frankly, it's one of the lesser marvel films. It really is.  If BlacKKKlansman wins, they can say they gave Spike Lee something. Bohemian Rhapsody might win ... because gay, but "gay" may not have the right victim status anymore and lacks the points.  The Favourite .... "rich white girls are bitches" movie.... who cares? Green Book seems to be about people who work for a living with people who can act-- I'm almost certain it's not going to win, though it may be the only thing here that might deserve it. Vice, A Star is Born, and Roma might win for the reasons mentioned above in other categories.

Wow, such pretentious bullshit. I'm 100% certain that nothing here was nominated based on the strength of their acting, writing or directing, and based entirely on political math.  Yet again, I'm going to stay far, far away from the Oscars. Screw these guys.

Here, have some books that have no pretension whatsoever

Hell Spawn  Death Cult

The Trailer for #JohnWick3 is here

Yeah, this is going to be fun.

If you're interested in some high tension action to tide you over until John Wick releases, here you go.

Hell Spawn  Death Cult

Spider-Man: Far from Home trailer

Just when I was wondering what I would post about today, they came out with a new Marvel Trailer.

This is literally the first trailer, and surprisingly, it looks good. Someone should tell it to the people who made the first Captain Marvel trailer. Me? Cynical? Naw.

Anyway, this looks like fun. More importantly, it looks like Sony is treating Peter Parker's friends as disposable as they should be. Tranquilizing Ned is a good start. Though I still refuse to credit ... that as MJ. Though at least someone taught Miss Resting Bitch Face how to smile. Though I'd still like to hit her with a 2x4. As I understand it, tormenting someone you have a crush on is something that happens in grammar school, not high school.

Let's break this down a bit.

Opening: Aunt May seems to have gotten used to her nephew being a superhero. She's gotten even more used to Tony Stark's Happy Hogan. I guess it's good to be a producer.

:30 -- Peter Parker's European vacation. I'm not sure how you work that into bringing along a collection of high schoolers on a vacation that's worth tens of thousands of dollars.... unless of course it's a Tony Stark endowment. Given what happens next, it wouldn't surprise me.

1:12 -- Sam muthaf***ing Jackson as Nick muthaf***ing Fury. Yee haw. Given everything that has happened to Tony Stark, it's good to retire him from this franchise. Also, Peter Parker needs adult supervision, and Tony doesn't really qualify.

1:24 -- And Fury is already stealing this movie. Please, let Ned swallow his tongue. He's annoying as hell.

1:29 -- whoever is doing the music for this trailer is turning the classic 60s Spider Man theme into something that almost sounds epic. Who knew? Props to this fellow.

1:36 -- Spider Man becomes London Has Fallen. I approve.

1:38 -- the bad guys for this film are "elementals." Sorry, all I can think is "So, someone re-purposed Sandman and Hydroman?"

1:53 -- The Spiderman Noir suit? Interesting choice. Though considering how dark the back story on that costume design is, I'm not expecting they'll call it that.

2:03 -- Mysterio? Why's he in this film? As a ... hero? Considering the background on Mysterio, I'm going to wonder if he's the bad guy, and all of the other villains are simply one mass illusion on his part. It would explain why a character whose biggest abilities were splashy special effects is fighting elemental Kaiju.

2:25 -- oh, look, they've decided to make the character called Flash Thompson a fan of Spider Man and a dick to Peter Parker. Now if they just made him a six-foot blond athlete dickhead instead of a preppy Indian midget, they might come close to recognizable to readers of the comic books.

Until the reviews for Far From Home comes out, (proving it's safe to watch) here, have some action packed novels that aren't made for the PC crowd.

Hell Spawn  Death Cult

#Avengers4 trailer: #AvengersEndgame

10 years, over 20 movies (IIRC), and it all comes down to this.

This is gonna hurt.

Death Cult is coming. The official release is next week, so you might want to pre-order it now.

The #CaptainMarvel trailer

Oh look, the trailer is out for the upcoming Marvel film....

For the record, Miss Marvel, which was Carol Danvers' first of many identities, was a six-foot blonde who got her powers through less than conventional means... even for the Marvel universe. On the right, you get to see Miss Marvel in her original, and best, outfit. She's muscular and feminine at the same time. So, not bad.

Now, Captain Mar-vell was an alien who turned on his people to save humans from his own people, eventually dying to save humanity.

Marvel comics would eventually give Danvers a promotion in the air force and they would relabel her Captain Marvel, which is something that a lot of old school fans are less than happy with. Then they redesigned her suit so that it was ugly, then retooled her look to cut her hair to a crew cut. Then, eventually, removed her boobs entirely to give her pecs like Captain America.

Don't believe me? Look at this picture.

Captain Marvel is the one in the middle. The one on the right is supposed to be She-Hulk. Yes, these characters are all supposed to be women. Ugly, isn't it? There's a reason I super sized the top pic.

Now, knowing a little bit of the backstory so you can understand my trepidation going into this, let us begin.

7 seconds: Ooooooo. It is that ancient temple to the vid gods known as Blockbuster. Surely we are in ancient times....

Yes, I know it's a good way to establish setting, but this is a trailer. They're already lingering on it too long. It's 7 of the first 13 seconds. That's at least three minutes too long.

20 second makr: "War is the universal language?"  No no no, Nick Fury, that's "War. War never changes."

22 seconds: And good God I hate that outfit. It's so flipping ugly.

22 - 52 seconds: Nothing but Sam Jackson narration and special effects. This is a Nick Fury origin movie! This'll be great.

(Also, Fury knew about aliens in the 1990s? Really? Then why blame Thor for the Tesseract powered weapons in The Avengers? Why hasn't everyone been trying to develop new super weapons since this film?)

52 seconds in, SHE SPEAKS. And she sounds so .... what's the word? Pathetic? Wimpy? I'm not finding the right word. After

1:00: She has flashes of memory ... oh FFS, another hero with amnesia problems? Are we kidding? And the whole film will be told in retrospect? Oh, screw you people. I'm already having problems getting psyched for this film, and you want to BEGIN by taking the tension out of it by showing us she survived in advance?

1:06: Female fighter pilots ... in the 90s. Am I the only one with bad memories about that?

1:14: Are they going to subject her to her entire life story? Because if so, I'm bugging out of this film already.

1:15: FINALLY we get space stuff. Took them frigging long enough. Except the more I look at this image, the more I think everything is CGI in this shot, including her and her suit.

1:20: Oh, look, she has resting bitch face and apparently no charisma. I am not enthused for this film. Do something, trailer! DO SOMETHING!

1:22: ..... Should I know this actor that you're spending a close up shot on him? This is a trailer. Every second counts. Give me SOMETHING to latch onto aside from Sam Jackson trying to look like he did in Pulp Fiction.

1:30. We have Skrulls! Evil, shape-shifting SOBs. So we have a villain! This trailers has something for me to care about?

1:27-1:31:  "What makes a hero?" followed by our lead punching a little old woman in the face. Without any context at all for people who don't already know that the Skrulls are shape shifters. Way to sell this film to the general public.

1:33: Oh, look, it's Agent Coulson back when he was cool.

1:40: Oh good sweet Lord, not that costume. That costume is ugly.

1:45: "I'm not what you think I am."  Oh, lady, you don't wanna know what I think you are.

Is it me? Am I the only one who is less than thrilled about this movie? Don't get me wrong, this looks like a great film for the backstory on Fury and Coulson, but this isn't supposed to be a SHIELD origin story is it?

Is it that the trailer is poorly edited? Long lingering shots, excessive focus on everyone but our main character? I remember the trailers being more interesting than this. Then again, I'm coming into it with some preconceived notions. But this just looks like a mess.

Anyway, here, have a heroine who's feminine and badass, a hero he's manly and lethal, and hordes of the damned trying to kill them both.

Love at First Bite

Review: Death Wish

This is going to be strange. Why? Because I generally don't get requests to do reviews.

However, JD Cowan asked me to review this one when this was in theaters...

My fiancee made me sit all the way through Tomb Raider ... you may have read that review.


Equally odd ... because I have never really been a fan of the Death Wish series. I don't really have anything against it, I just hadn't seen many of them no TV, nor did I ever go out of my way to watch them.

But when the Death Wish remake came out, I went out of my way to watch the original with Charles Bronson.... it was okay. It seemed a little ... dated? It was very slow. Though it was an interesting look at a really young Jeff Goldblum.

Fast forward to the modern remake.

Dr. Paul Kersey (Willis) is a surgeon with a loving wife and daughter. He lives in Chicago's Lake Shore Drive in 2016, during the spike of 90-kills a week, and 40 on a weekend. When he is called away to surgery, his wife and daughter are attacked in their own home. His wife is murdered, and his daughter left in a coma. Inspired by his Texas father-in-law, Kersey steals a gun from a gangbanger in his own ER, and starts to practice. It's clear at this point in the film (about 40 minutes in) that he's going to use it for some less-than-legal purposes, he still takes his time, builds up his skills ... mostly by watching YouTube videos. And after interrupting a car jacking and saving a boy from the corner street dealer (the Ice Cream Man... yes, really) he starts hunting the men who attacked his home. And we're off to the races from there.

I like this film. I really do. Like the original, this one took its time. I think Bruce Willis waits a whole 45 minutes before killing anyone -- which is a long time in a Willis action role. There is so much time spent building up the characters and establishing a rapport with them, it was strange -- I actually gave a damn about what happened with these people.**

Unlike the original, this one doesn't spend long elliptical moments spent on nothing, but it also doesn't rush. Also unlike the original, this one had a plot.

Yes, I said it. Charles Bronson's Death Wish was an anatomy of a man as he goes from a nonentity to being a vigilante with a taste for hunting the wild criminal through the streets of 70s New York. Bruce Willis is a father who has learned the art of self defense, and goes hunting the people who murdered his family -- killing a few other criminals along the way. And yes, he does seem to have a taste for it.

Somewhere around killing "the Ice Cream Man," this Death Wish almost feels like The Fugitive for the dark side.

And frankly, while this one moves faster, it may have a lower kill count (I think Willis killed only 8, while Bronson killed at least that many) and I think it did their social commentary better. Yes, really. It felt really weird laughing in the middle of this film at "a vigilante in the age of social media," with the talking heads of the radio arguing about the morality of the situation, and coming up with ... a shrug.

You know how odd this film is? I even liked the directing. And I generally don't care about camera angles and panning shots. But this one used a lot of nice camera techniques that surprised me -- hell, I'm surprised I even noticed them.  Now,I don't know Eli Roth from a hole in the ground (I think he does horror films?) but I can't complain about his directing technique. I'm certain he's spent some time looking at Hitchcock films -- it's definitely clearer in the first hour than in the later segments, but Roth still has them sprinkled throughout. Though Roth does like a good Chekov's gun ... several of them.

And it's so nice to see a film where gun owners aren't branded as nut cases, just enthusiastic.

Let's go over the acting a bit.

Bruce Willis ... was allowed to act. He isn't doing John McClain here, nor is he doing his more recent routine of devolving into self-parody. There are some moments where I felt like he should have put more effort into the emotional bits, but that slack is picked up by some of the other actors.

Vincent D'Nofrio ... it a great character actor. As usual. And it was amusing to see him as Bruce Willis' brother, as they have similar hairlines.

Dean Norris, as the investigative cop ... I don't know, there's something about having Chuck Norris' brother in a Death Wish film that strikes me as funny. Also, the interactions between him and our main character felt a lot more real here than it did in the original.

Granted, really, the only thing I think needed work in this movie may have been the development of the bad guys ... but I don't think that interfered with the plot at all.

Overall, really good. Give it 7/ 10. Good movie. Recommended.

Honor at Stake  Demons are Forever

Live and Let Bite

**Sigh. Yeah, I feel I gotta look at the original. Look, it's a really good snapshot of the mood of the era: screw "the man," who needs the cops?, and still thinking that Kitty Genovese was really left to die without anyone calling the cops (it's a myth, from what I can tell). The ending was more about how the cops "just want this all to go away," and rather than addressing the crime, or the situation. Here, it's more about making certain all of the right people are in the ground, and that the vigilante killing stops. But wow, do I not care about anybody in that movie. Everyone feels lifeless while we have long shots of very little -- I would call them ponderous, but it doesn't really ponder anything. It tries to be deep and go into vigilantism, but honestly? It didn't work. 

Review: Tomb Raider

Bland rocks vs artistic temple
Sums up the different in a nutshell.

This will actually be a dual review. In large part because the film is trash. Garbage. I have never in my entire life walked out of a movie before. The only reason I didn't walk out of this one and into Death Wish down the hall is that my fiancee wanted to see the end of the movie.

Let's get this straight: Tomb Raider (2013) was a magnificent game with a beautifully crafted story, well-developed and rendered setting, and had depth of plot and character that I will set as a standard against other movies. Not other games. Films.

Yes, it is that good. If you don't believe me, play the game. If you don't feel the same way after you leap from the top of a burning temple, into a helicopter, seconds before the temple explodes .... then you're just lying.

Now, I know what you're going to say. "But, Declan! A film can't jam 10 hours of gameplay into a two-hour movie."


Excuse me, but Tony Stark had a character arc and growth in Spiderman Homecoming, and he was barely on screen for 5-10 minutes. Don't tell me that two hours of screen time isn't enough for a character arc of your protagonist.

Which brings me to the film, Tomb Raider, starring Alicia Vikander.

In the video game, we start on the mysterious island of Yamatai, home of the Sun Queen, Himiko, a legendary empress of a long-deceased nation in the Pacific that makes the Bermuda Triangle look like a theme park. Why? Because Lara is a newly-graduated archaeology student, and she's assembled a team to go in search of the island. That's it. That's the motivation.

Get used to this view of Lara.
She spends a lot of the film like this.

In the film, we spend at least half of the movie just getting to the island, with no fewer than two gratuitous chase scenes ... a lot of talking at one another... and instead of Lara doing all of the research herself, showing off that she's a bright woman with a future ahead of her .... she's merely following in the footsteps of her father. She's not doing any of the heavy intellectual lifting, and it's fairly boring to watch her plod along.

Because that's what we expect from a Tomb Raider movie -- Lara Croft, running through paperwork, audio tapes, camcorder footage, and dusty offices in her family's mansion... which, come to think of it, was DLC, not the main campaign. Why have her running through tombs, or pretending like she actually knows her ass from a whole in the ground.

Good God, man, Angelina Jolie did a better job.

Oh, and of course, Lara's an MMA fighter, because of course she is. Let's check box all of the "Strong Female Character" tropes needed in the movie .... but yet, somehow, the film infantilizes Lara by making her unable to take charge of her own damn life (oh, she's the heir to a billion-dollar Croft empire, but she works as a courier because she won't touch a dime of Daddy's money because "I can't believe he's dead." Sigh).

Also, she gets her ass kicked in the fight. Because that's how a badass rolls.

Ow, I hurt my eyes with that roll.

Oh, and the flashbacks. So many flashbacks. You know what? I don't care how she grew up. There was exactly one flashback that added anything.... and you have to believe that, just because Lara had some training with a bow and arrow when she was 12, she can hit what she aims for over 20 years later.

And then, an hour in, we finally get to the freaking island of Yamatai, the thing they focus on in every muthaf**king trailer.

In the game, they very subtly hint that Yamatai is haunted by supernatural dealings. The boat Lara's team arrives on is taken out by a horrible storm that tears the ship in half. It is a gloriously rendered sequence, taught with tension. And this is the first few minutes of the game, where you don't know any of the characters, and you barely even know Lara -- technically we don't even know Lara, especially in this version / reboot of the franchise. It is tense, gripping, and makes your pulse race just watching it. It's pure Indiana Jones.

In Tomb Raider, 2018, the ship is a rust bucket that's sunk because Lara browbeats some poor drunken schmuck into trying to find their fathers, because both of their parents were lost trying to find Yamatai. (Coincidence!!!!!)

I will give the film props for at least trying to get the same cinematic feel as the game. Except that, even though we're an hour in, I don't feel any connection to the two characters who are supposed to be at risk in this situation.

A lot of this film from here is paint-by numbers.

Tomb Raider (2013) has Lara crashed on Yamatai, and immediately kidnapped by insane cultists. We eventually learn they believe that Himiko lives, and that the Sun Queen will never let them go unless they find a sacrifice that will make her happy.

Tomb Raider (2018) has Lara land on Yamatai ... and she encounters an evvviiilll organization who is evil for the sake of being evil, led by a sad man who is running an archaeological dig at gunpoint by his shadowy bosses. They want to find Himiko because of her "powers," that she could kill by touch.

Tomb Raider (2013): Lara escapes and begins a desperate journey of survival, collecting weapons, learning to kill, in order to saves her friends. She goes from apologizing to a deer she kills for food, to killing a cultist, to eventually becoming a badass with an array of weapons and eventually goes on to cut through over 400 gun toting lunatics..

Tomb Raider (2018): Lara escapes, gets dropped off of a cliff, wounded, and kills a man three times her size with her bare hands without so much as a whimper on her part (despite having been run through the abdomen with a bit of tree branch). There are a collection of slaves on the island that we don't know and have no connection to, and I don't think even the protagonist cares.

She then trips over her father, who is alive, has been on the island for years trying to prevent our villains from making progress. And "It's a good thing I told you to burn my notes, otherwise they could use them" ... I think I liked it better when Sean Connery said it in Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, as "Why did you think I sent you my diary? So it wouldn't fall into their hands! I should have sent it to the Marx Brothers." Our hero's father is kidnapped by the bad guys, and they threaten to kill him unless our hero does their bidding; at which point, she navigates through a series of booby traps, where the floor falls out from underneath their feet and "In the Latin alphabet, Jehovah begins with an I."

Did I mention paint by numbers?

... Lara kills a few people with a bow and arrow, because guns are bad? I guess?

It is also LAUGHABLE to see Alicia Vikander threaten a helicopter with a bow and arrow.

SPOILERS (game and film)

Tomb Raider (2013): The ghost of Himiko is real. Not only is she a witch who can control the weather, but she is an evil monstrosity that leaps from body to body. She's been trapped in a corpse for centuries, and the cult that runs the island wants to give Himiko one of Lara's friends as a fresh body.

Tomb Raider (2018): Himiko was just so misunderstood. She was a Typhoid Mary whose touch was death, and she sealed her corpse away behind all of these booby traps because she cared just so much....  yet couldn't be bothered to arrange for her body to be burned? What? Even Europe figured out that the Black Death could be destroyed by fire.

Tomb Raider (2013): The final battle is Lara cutting a swath through monsters and beasts and cultists using an array of guns, grenades, fire bombs, as well as a bow and arrow. She has learned to survive in a brutal environment.

Tomb Raider (2018): Lara takes on a guy about a foot taller and a hundred pounds heavier in hand-to-hand combat, using skills she had at the opening of the film. No evolution happens. I would say this film was made by Anita Sarkeesian, but our heroine is attractive.

Tomb Raider (2013): Lara has learned that the supernatural is real. Her father wasn't crazy when he talked about legends being real. Because legends are real and they just tried to murder her.

It's time for her to go out and fight legends, and prove her father's legacy, as well as start her own.

Tomb Raider (2018): Lara knows that her father is dead, and he was totally insane for believing in the supernatural. But there's this evil organization out there that she is going to personally hunt down and destroy, setting up a sequel that will not happen, because no one signed the actress to a three-movie deal, and she's already moved on.

I can only imagine how the script writing worked for this film.

HEY! I KNOW!  Let's take this AWESOME, truly cinematic game about Lara Croft's survival on a mysterious island, haunted by the ghost of a witch, and witness Lara's growth from a timid, scared college girl into a woman hardened by circumstances as she uses multiple guns and weapons to cut through legions of insane cultists. ..... 

And then make a movie about Strong Female Character wood carving #3, that spends most of her time getting to a bland island, overrun with cardboard cutouts, so they can get their hands on a glorified biological weapon, and then take EVERY SINGLE PLOT POINT from Indiana Jones at the Last Crusade.

Gee, I wonder why "video game movies make no money."

They made a thrilling, gripping game with character depth into a bland, boring, aggravating exercise in naval gazing. They made Lara a "strong female character who needs no one," losing all of her evolution in the game, giving her almost no character development in the film. Her only super power is "solves puzzles and wins fights for no reason."

I'm not even saying "They didn't mimic the game perfectly." I'm saying that there was NO CHARACTER EVOLUTION OR DEVELOPMENT AT ALL.  But then again, it would help if she had a character to start with.

And you know what? The marketing people knew this movie was going to suck. They knew it. Because none of the trailers, none of the behind the scenes interviews, none of them focused on the entire first half of the movie. They all focused on the Yamatai sequences, and the handful of images and set pieces that mimicked the best parts of the game.

I actually liked Vikander. I don't like how she was written, but she definitely put an effort into being Lara Croft. She put more effort into being Lara than the writers put into the script.

Oh, and the visual design people. You know they played the game. The makeup, the wardrobe. Any side-by-side comparison shows you that the visual design people did their damnedest to make Alicia Vikander look like Lara Croft. You want effort, it's here.

There were obviously a lot of people who worked their hearts out trying to make this film look awesome.

But the writing team?

And yes, it was a team. Three people developed the script. Two people worked on the story. Two people worked on the scrip. Only one person worked on both. Oh, and that one person who worked on both? She wrote the screenplay for Marvel's upcoming Captain Marvel film, a D&D movie, and Sony's Silver & Black film for Silver Sable and Black Cat. Because Womyn.

Oh, yeah, and this woman, Geneva Robertson-Dworet? This was her first writing credit, and yet she's already part of another major franchise. Who is this woman, and who did she have to blackmail to be put on this film?

And the director is ... Norwegian. That's it. That's his claim to fame.

I hated this movie. At this point, you can make a better investment paying $10 for a used copy of the video game for Playstation or Xbox.

Film rating: 2/10

Honor at Stake & Demons are Forever

The Dragons are coming.

If you don't have your ballot filled out already (either IRL or in your head,) here's my list. It includes the lists of other people, so there are options.

Just remember to vote.

Review: Black Panther

I finally saw Black Panther on DVD.

Premise: T'Challa is now the king after his father was murdered in Civil War (cue flashbacks ... really, we need flashbacks that go on more than a few flashes?). Wakandan war criminal Ulysses Klaue, arms dealer, pops up on the radar. You may remember Ulysses Klaue from Age of Ultron, played by Andy Serkis, who is no longer trapped in a motion capture suit.

What they don't know is there is another force working with Klaue that can lead to T'Challa, and Wakanda's, downfall...

What did I think?

.... Eh. It was Okay. A little slow, though.

Okay, it's a lot slow.

How slow?

When we get to our first major action sequence, a ritual duel to affirm retaining the crown ... because in a highly advanced civilization like Wakanda is supposed to be, right of ascension by combat is the way to go... Which just makes it look like Wakanda has great tech, and the culture never caught up. Uh huh....

Anyway.... While we have a brief skirmish at the opening, and the ritual challenge right after, neither of these really feel like a Marvel film. T'Challa's sister Shuri is playing Q, and she's cute, but that's about it. There's a lot of discussion about whether or not Wakanda should show off their tech to the rest of the world,. Blah blah.

And our first real bit of Marvel action takes place nearly 50 minutes into the film. They go into a cool bar in South Korea, I was half expecting the film to become like unto a James Bond like spy thriller when they walked into a casino that I'm almost certain hosted Daniel Craig at one point.

But that's interrupted by a chase, and then a Marvel finally movie breaks out.

And then there's the real hero of the film: Bilbo Baggins -- I mean Martin Freeman. As the only one with no genetic modifications (yes, apparently Black Panther is the result of a home-grown, do-it-yourself Super Soldier serum) and no high tech gadgets, Freeman's character Everett Ross (who debuted in Civil War) seems to be the only one in the entire film who has saved anybody.

Yeah... remember when people complained about Man of Steel when Superman couldn't be bothered to save anyone as Smallville or Metropolis was blown apart? Yeah. Ross saves one of T'Challa's spies, getting shot for his trouble. T'Challa saved no one. Even in the opening, he was interrupting an operation just to send an invite.

Now, I saw a lot of people hyping that Black Panther had the most developed MCU villain to date. Honestly, he was about as developed as Aldrich Killian of Iron Man 3, and he was motivated by the same thing -- revenge. For this film, Erik "Killmonger" Stevens, grew up in Oakland, and one evening, he came home to find his father dead on the floor. Killmonger is left alone, abandoned, and grows up to enter Wakanda, having never seen it.

Killmonger's ultimate goal boils down to a race war that he expects to ... you guessed it ... take over the world

Killmonger. Because we need shirtless scenes for the girls.

.... I'm sorry, if one drops a ton of guns into Oakland, are the local gunmen going to try to take over the world? Or hold up banks? I suspect that Killmonger did not think this plan through. Not to mention that his only plan for taking over the world under a racial banner seemed to boil down to "Give out weapons like party favors, and we'll win."

This is not the intricate planning that made Killmonger the threat that he is in the movie...

Then again, the plan that even makes him a threat relies on a lot of things happening that were contrived.

Honestly, there was just so much stupid going on in this film. There is an act 2 "twist" that is quite contrived. There are a lot of stupid motivations going on throughout the film, and I'm not sure I'm all that happy with them. For the second half of this movie to happen, we need several forced internal conflicts to happen, as well as contrived plot points and character decisions.

The film is about 20 minutes too long, packed with atmospherics, and how many times can we linger on someone being buried in a ceremony? How many different ways can we have flashbacks to the opening sequence? How many different points of view shots can we have in the same sequence and setting?

I think too much time was spent building up T'Challa's sister, and his mother, and his bodyguard, and his tech, and not enough time building up T'Challa. Most of what we saw of T'Challa in this film can be summed up by seeing The Lion King. I'm sorry, T'Challa in the comics is supposed to be insanely smart, with multiple PhDs, and even discovering a different realm of physics. Here, I don't even get a sense that he's that great a leader. The actor has the gravitas, I'll give him that. And I think he had more character in Civil War than he did in his own film.

Again, this is my first viewing. But I'm looking at the CGI war rhinos and went "Wait, you guys needed more time to for resolution on those rhinos, didn't you?"

This is his look a lot in this film

Maybe this will improve as I rewatch this. But the first half of the film is around Ulysses Klaue as the villain, and frankly, I think this would have made for an interesting duel. Heck, you have T'Challa out in the pursuit of a criminal who outran his father, murdered people in his kingdom. T'Challa can team up with Ross of the CIA, and hunt down Ulysses Klaue and stop whatever he has in mind. Killmonger could have lurked in the shadows and come out at the end, perhaps even revealing himself as he murders Klaue....

No. This film looked like Ulysses Klaue became completely unhinged after having his arm cut off by a ten-foot tall Raymond Reddington. Either that or Andy Serkis was drunk and / or stoned off of his ass while on set. Between Klaue and Serkis, I can't tell which one was shoe-horned in. Honestly? It felt like either they changed their mind mid-movie, or he was a throw away.

It was an okay film. I enjoyed it more than Ant-Man. Maybe more than the first Thor film.

Right now, being generous, 7/10. My perspective may improve with further viewings.

The Dragons are coming.

If you don't have your ballot filled out already (either IRL or in your head,) here's my list. It includes the lists of other people, so there are options.

Just remember to vote.

Ironing out A Wrinkle in Time

The novel A Wrinkle in Time is a classic of children's literature. Perhaps the proper new term is "Young Adult," but, as with Narnia, they are books probably too good for children. In my estimation, while they are not Narnia or Middle Earth, author Madeleine L'Engle is right underneath, if not side-by-side with, CS Lewis and JRR Tolkien.

It is the story of Meg Murray and her little brother Charles Wallace, and the search for their father, a scientist who vanished. Joining them is the popular kid in school, Calvin O'Keefe as well as Weird Sisters (TM, Will Shakespeare) Mrs Whatsit, Mrs Who, and Mrs Which. These three are older women -- one as very old, one as plump, and one as a ball of shimmering light / traditional Margaret Hamilton.

To find their father, Meg and Charles must travel to an alien world via folding space and time (hence a "Wrinkle"), fight an IT that makes Stephen King's alien clown look like .... a clown... and his henchman, a man with glowing red eyes who looks like Satan's understudy.  There's good versus evil, saving those you love, sometimes through the power of love, and while there are Christian themes, if they didn't bother you in Narnia and Tolkien, they won't bother you here -- assuming you even notice as you're reading.

Now, I read this book over twenty years ago, and I should probably reread it. I've given you much of what I recall off the top of my head. The concept of folding space and time stuck with me, especially as I tripped over several other SFF worlds that also used it. Little brother Charles is the one who I remember most fondly, since I identified with him the most. I recall him being nearly deus ex machina -level smart, and perfectly charming. Meg happened to have the same name as my sister.

All in all, a wonderful, enjoyable novel.

Then Disney came along.

Okay, to be honest, this is probably less the fault of Disney than Oprah and Director Ava DuVernay, but one thing at a time.

Now, I'm not a stickler for films adhering perfectly to novels. Some things you can do in books you can't do in films. Simple as that. But at the very least, I would like the filmmakers to at least have made a production that tells me that they at least READ the original novel, and understood what was enjoyable about it. At a bare MINIMUM, I would like it if I could look at the characters and say "Yes, I can tell just by looking at X that s/he is Y from the novel."

You've seen the description above of the Weird SistersTM.

So of course, they cast the old / fat women as Oprah, Reese Eithersppon, and Mrs. Who is now play by (checks IMDB page) what looks like a relatively slender Indian girl named Mindy Kaling....

Are we serious?

No, really, take a look at these images.

This is Reese Witherspoon as Mrs Whatsit ... because she looks old, and covered in layers of clothing.

Yup, she looks old, don't she?

And it gets even worse as time goes on. This is a still of her from the trailer.

..... Are we kidding? Is she playing Mrs. Whatsit, the old woman? Or Poison Ivy cosplaying as an elf?

Then there's "Mrs Which," who is either Margaret Hamilton, or a shiny ball of light.

Oprah as "Mrs Which"

No, seriously, what the Hell? Why are they dressed for the Halloween Day parade down in Greenwich Village? In fact, I'm relatively certain there are better dressed, perhaps even more tasteful, people down in the Village. Granted, they would be X-rated versions of the costumes, but you'd at least be able to figure out the costumes.

Of course, making things even dumber is what has been done to Mrs. Who. She in particular, tended to talk in quotes -- great philosophers, Shakespeare, Dante, Cervantes, Goethe, even the Bible. How? She now quotes the great philosopher ... Jay-Z.

And oh, by the way, remember when I mentioned the henchman that looked like Satan's understudy? If I look at the cast list correctly (assuming that "The Man with Red Eyes" has been shortened to simply "Red"), our dastardly villain is played by ... Michael Pena. That's right. The comic relief sidekick from Ant-Man. Because sure, he was intimidating.

And looking at the trailers (I will not even link to that drivel) is so bright and shiny and bouncy I want to vomit. Sure, Wrinkle never really goes as grimdark as some YA, but it's nowhere near the bright shiny happy people crap we've seen in the trailers.

Oh, and another problem with the trailers .... no Charles. At all. He's only, oh, THE SECOND CENTRAL CHARACTER. But details! Details! This is f**king Hollywood.

Three of the producers worked on the new Pete's Dragon ... because that worked out so well, no one saw it.  For another, it's her first gig. The director, Ava DuVernay's major successes include Selma, some hip-hop shorts, and a Jay-Z project.... At least we know what happened to Mrs. Who.

I have to ask, considering how old, and how well loved A Wrinkle in Time is ... who did these people have to sleep with in order for all of these relative amateurs to be allowed within spitting distance of a project like this?

The only real answer I can come up with is with Ava DuVernay, and that is ... she was probably the flavor of the month at the time. Given how long it takes to make a movie, she was probably first offered the film fresh off of Selma (2014). She was confirmed to direct in 2016, so 2015 was probably the negotiating period.

And looking through Ava DuVernay's directorial experience, I'm certain there was a fair amount of politics in this decision. Everything she's done is either a documentary, or tied in with racial identity politics, or both.

Now, one thing that people familiar with the book and the ads for the new film will note one thing that I've left out. The new film makes the Wallace family black instead of Caucasian. Frankly, that looks like the least of the film's sins. Hell, their Meg at least has glasses, something I thought Hollywood didn't allow on women unless they were also wearing lab coats at the time.

No, the race swapping is less offensive to me as it is confusing... especially when they've made everyone in the family black, except for the missing father, played bizarrely enough by Chris Pine. Because, you know, Chris Pine as a scientist is just so convincing.

Not to mention that if this were any other director, I would probably just say someone in casting saw Chris Pine and said "Sure, why not?" Given the politics of the director, it wouldn't surprise me if she wanted to slip in an absentee white dude as the father because having an absentee black father would be too on the nose for what I'm sure DuVernay considers "her" audience.

Actually, the more I look at the project, and I hear what they've done to certain aspects and characters, the more offended I am by DuVernay's racism. Yes, racism. Her casting choices are obviously directed towards making the roles racially diverse. Under any other director, I would think that it was their shot at making it more identifiable to a wider range of people. But with DuVernay's directing history, I'm certain she wants "her" audience to be one specific group.

Also, having Mrs. Who speak in quotes of Jay-Z just feels like talking down to said audience. I'm sorry, but if DuVernay's casting is obviously trying to get a good percentage of Afromericans to the theaters for this schlock, then why is she dumbing down the material? Is it because she thinks that blacks are too stupid to understand Shakespeare or the Bible? It's right up there with the Black Panther trailers featuring majority hip hop, yet none of it appearing in the principle soundtrack.

In short, it's pandering. Bad director. No cookie.

Sigh.

Of course, it gets even better. You'll notice I've given no credit to the writers. Because in film, writers are nothing and nobody. The screenplays they write are usually mere suggestions to whatever megalomaniac is put behind the camera. The writers of the screenplay are responsible for, on the one hand Bridge to Terabithia (ugh) and on the other ... Frozen and Zootopia. Yay. So you can imagine what the starting screenplay looked like.

So, like with The Chronicles of Narnia, Disney has taken yet another beloved childhood novel, and proceeded to wreck it. I won't even see it in theaters. You know it's bad when even the cinematography is making me wary of the project. The casting of the Weird SistersTM is atrocious, character dialogue (if not the casting) is geared towards pandering towards (or just looking down on) a specific section of the general public, and the vibe of every trailer is perfectly tone deaf or atonal to the original novel.

Pardon me while I go out and watch Death Wish or Red Sparrow.

New Trailer: ANT-MAN AND THE WASP

For those of you who don't recall, there are three -- count 'em, three-- Marvel films coming out this year.

February is Black Panther.

May is Avengers: Infinity War

And then there's this.

I guess the first thing to note here is the Wasp, played by Evangeline Lily. I can only suppose someone saw her choreography from The Hobbit films and said, "Yeah. We can make her a superhero." And with all the little jabs at Scott Lang ... this is Scott Lang. I think his entire character is "eternal punching bag." It seems to be less a matter of being beaten up on by the female lead, and more of being beaten up on by the world in general. Not to mention the aspect of "Yes, I gave my daughter on-board offensive weaponry, not the ex-con" fits perfectly well with Michael Douglas' Hank Pym.

While it's nice to see Laurence Fishburne join the Marvel Universe ... he's going to play Goliath? From what I recall of the character, isn't he getting a little too old for action lead? He's in great shape, but they're very clearly letting him go gray here.

I notice this entire film takes place post-Civil War, but makes no mention of the Infinity War. If this means that Scott Lang won't be in Avengers 3, I'm good with that. Though I suspect that we'll be seeing both of them in Avengers 4, when we have been threatened with a new Avengers team.  (I'm expecting it to consist of Black Panther, Doctor Strange, these two, and maybe Carol Danvers. Just a guess.)

If Ant-Man is a heist film, this one looks like a fugitive film. It already looks better than Ant-Man, which was on the low end of the MCU films.

Review: Justice League

This was a very nice two-hour television pilot with a lot of special effects, and a plot barely strong enough to hold the film together. If it were compared to Marvel films, I would say it was on part with Thor, the first one. This review will discuss a plot point in the review, though, I don't think I can spoil anything. In case you haven't guessed already, Superman will be coming back from the dead, and the villain will not destroy Earth--he can't, this is only the start of the franchise.

Premise: an alien threat called Steppenwolf has come to Earth after an attempt to conquer the planet in the days that time forgot. When he was driven off the planet the first time, he left three MacGuffin devices called Mother Boxes that he can use to reshape any planet to his wishes. If he gets his hands on the Mother Boxes, it's game over. Batfleck (sorry, Batman, played by Ben Affleck) and Wonder Woman have to assemble the World's Mightiest Heroes (Trademark, Marvel) to find the Mother Boxes, and stop Steppenwolf.

Yes, Steppenwolf is Sauron, and the mother boxes are the Infinity Stones / One Ring / Genesis device.

For the record, that's the plot. The entire plot. Steppenwolf is a killing machine out to rule everything, and he's going to get the Mother boxes. That's his motivation, character, and arc. I literally can't even pad his appearance anymore. Unlike other people, I didn't mind his CGI form ... though I did object to the lip sync. Did anyone else think the mouth didn't match the dialogue?

But Steppenwolf is such a small part of this movie, he's barely worth talking about.

This film is ... okay, with a lot of great scenes. And the scenes are what keep this film from being a total failure.

Ezra Miller as The Flash is remarkably charming as "awkward nerd." And it's clear that he, like everyone else, is as the start of his hero career. And, no, we HAVEN'T seen all of the various and sundry good bits in the trailers.

... But you can find them on YouTube.

Jason Momoa's Aquaman had several fun parts, and they definitely don't want to go anywhere near the blond in the orange scales as seen in Superfriends. I think someone concluded that they had a show stopper here, and they let him try to stop the show. The best bit is him waxing on about how yeah, they're going to die, but it's a good cause to go out for as long as they stop Steppenwolf, etc etc, and it goes on for nearly two minutes ... before he realizes he's sitting on the lasso of truth.

Batfleck works a lot more than I thought he would. And he is definitely the "I'm getting too old for this" Batman as he gets beaten up, a lot. But you can believe he's Batman. You might even believe him as Bruce Wayne. There's exactly one line of dialogue I would have had rewritten, but otherwise, he was spot on.

Wonder Woman... Gal Gadot still surprises as Wonder Woman. She just works. I don't know why, she does. And she has good chemistry with Batfleck -- not sexual chemistry, though Alfred does make fun of Batman for being interested in her, despite no visible interest when the two are on screen together.

And I will compliment Ray Fisher's Cyborg / Victor Stone as being a great performance, acting through heavy CGI on his face.

So that's that positives in this one: the team is the strength here. The characters interacting is the main joy in this film. As for the overall film eh. There is no tension here. It's a world-ending threat, yet the biggest sense of danger in the movie was from ... Superman. Yes, went they bring Superman back from the dead, he wakes up cranky, and you genuinely believe that he's going to rip Batman's head off. But outside of that...wait, is Superman smiling? He's not allowed to smile! This is a Zack Snyder movie! I might actually believe this guy is Superman. But, again, downside: Henry Cavill's resurrection as Superman was so strange, and added so little, all I could think is "If this is the payoff, why did they kill him in the first place?"

And there is so much that's just off here. For example, Victor Stone becomes Cyborg after being in an accident that kills his mother, and his father uses the Mother Box to bring him back from the dead with machine parts. There's a lot of dramatic potential here. Victor feels like a freak and an outcast. He resents his father for keeping him alive like, this, and he hears an alien voice in his head from the mother box computer code. He's even cranky to Wonder Woman. Then, Cyborg's father is kidnapped by our villain. His father is saved, and Victor is on the team .... and he disappears from the rest of the film. Poof, he's gone. I've seen damsels in distress who have had more screen time. So much dramatic tension is drained from the film, and the character.

There's a lot of that going around. There's a scene with Wonder Woman and Batman after one battle that's just the two of them. There were several ways the scene could have gone, from "I'm too old for this" to "This is why we need the superpowered everybody: I'm breakable" to just following through on the romantic tension between the two of them that was clearly supposed to be in the movie.

I know that Justice League had reshoots, possibly even the final edits, done by Joss Whedon. He even has a writing credit here. Whedon started his career as a script doctor. The writer credited for Speed has said that Whedon rewrote most of the dialogue. So you'd think that if there were problems here, Whedon would fix it. No matter his personal issues, he doesn't suck at his job. But it's clear that there were instructions for the film to be exactly 120 minutes, and there are a lot of scenes where you can see the danging threads from where there were obvious cuts. If there's an extended edition, I'll try it.

Over all, the execution was serviceable. But it's Justice League. It should have been more than that. Technically, we didn't need dramatic, we needed grand and big, and we didn't get that. Don't get me wrong, it generally works. The main characters were likable. But there are things like plot, and tension. Hint: we shouldn't have more tension from a hero than the world-ending villain.

And why is the only person in the entire film to say "League" is Lex Luthor in the after-credits scene?

Taken together, I think this is a case where the sum is not greater than the finished product. The individual scenes and moments and little touches in this one are better than the film as a whole. And while I hate using this phrase... ahem... IF THEY'RE SMART...  this is a way for them to skip all of the origin stories in the individual movies, which is a good move, but there should have been more in this film.

I don't think you need to see this one on the big screen in order to appreciate it. Save your money, watch it on DVD. It's cheaper than evening tickets for two to the theater.

Review of Thor: Ragnarok

If you know Norse mythology, you know that Ragnarok is basically the doom of Asgard. It is the end of all things. Can Thor, god of thunder, stop the cataclysm from happening?
Going by the first minutes of the film, yes. Yes he can.

When last we saw our intrepid Avenger, Thor had flown off in search of the Infinity Gems (the shiny MacGuffin devices from half the franchise). Finding none, he is now in search of the cause of his dreams: dreams of Ragnarok. It leads him to Surtur ... some sort of magma ...Satan ... thing. Surtur monologes a bit about how he will destroy of of Asgard, bwahahahaha ... and Thor interrupts him for some comic moments, and we're off.

However, the end of all things isn't quite averted. Hela, goddess of death, has been trapped for half a million years, and she's out, and she's ready to rule everything.

So, nicely epic. But can they pull it off?

Largely, yes.

Hela is released, and due to a problem with the Rainbow Bridge, Thor and Loki don't get a full confrontation with Hela, but are thrown down onto an alien planet. Thor is captured via cheap technology tricks, and is made to fight in a gladiatorial arena owned by Jeff Goldblum.  Yes, Jeff has tired of playing with dinosaurs, and wants to play with comic book characters instead. It's all very strange.

The whole film is strange from start to finish. There is a definite departure in tone from the other Thor films, giving it more of a Guardians feel to it. Thor, the deadly serious, makes for a surprisingly good slapstick artist. I was surprised too. I think I laughed at this one more than I did at Guardians.

All in all, this was straight up fun. There are shoot outs that make me think of Flash Gordon (the one with Topol, Queen, and Max von Sydow) to such a point that I thought excerpts of the soundtrack would start playing at any moment. At one point, "Pure Imagination" does start playing. Yes, really. There's comedy. There's some well-done plotting. Nothing is really forced (okay, one scene is, to be seen below). I'd even say the Pulp crowd would be entertained, given that we have a space ship firing a machine gun at Fenris while a horde of zombie soldiers are being mowed down by a lightning-wielding demigod, who shot his way out of an intergalactic gladiatorial ring with a laser rifle.

Now, you know that there are several elements they must address in the film. such as the post-credit scene in Doctor Strange. You know from the end of The Dark World that Loki is on the throne of Asgard, pretending to be Odin. You know that he was looking for the Infinity gems. You know that someone might want to mention that Jane Foster (Natalie Portman) isn't in this movie -- and frankly, I have no idea how they could have fit her in as well. All of these plot points are actually addressed and resolved within-- at a guess-- about fifteen minutes in.

I have two major problems with the movie, and a minor one, below. One, we have a moment that is a variation on the "you have hidden depths" meme that we've seen before -- though I don't have a problem with how they did it, I have a problem with where they put it. It's rather awkwardly jammed in. I blame whoever edited the film together. It's fairly jarring.  You'll see where they put it. I liked the scene itself (it could have been a minute longer), and it had some witty lines, but it's sort of shoehorned in, like the editor went trigger happy somewhere along the line. I know there are several shots and lines of dialogue cut from the trailer to the film; I know that it happens, but given some parts of the ending, I think someone went overboard.

My second major problem: character deaths. Of the five character deaths in this film, only one is lingered on for any length of time. The other four were murdered off-handedly, making me wonder why some of these people were even brought in.

The acting is surprisingly well done. Hemsworth is a great straight man, and pulls off the big epic moments, as well as the slapstick. Don't worry ladies, you'll get shirtless Thor -- though he seems to have bulked down, and has gone more for martial art muscle than gym muscle.

Cumberbatch as Strange is even better, and funnier here than he was in his own movie. It was fun, and they got rid of him in a matter of three minutes, a good thing, since he might have stolen this film if he was more than a cameo.

Tom Hiddleston as Loki ... is Tom Hiddleston as Loki. Has anyone ever had any problem with his Loki? Loki's still insane, but dang, he's got style. And he knows how to make an entrance.

Hela ... she's a serviceable villain. She's fun, and she leaves more of an impression than the dark elves from The Dark World. She even comes with her own army of zombie Rivendell elves. Yes, I know they're supposed to be old Asgard warriors. And she comes with Fenris as her pet.

Valkyrie -- Sigh. You know, I didn't mind Idris Elba as Heimdall, because he brings gravitas and .. he ACTS LIKE HEIMDALL. I didn't mind a random Asian dude thrown in as one of the Warriors Three, since they're largely background characters. But when you replace Valkrie, a six-foot blonde who should be built like Red Sonja, with a 5'4" Tessa Thompson, I have multiple levels of why this is a problem. It will help if you have no actual attachment to the comic book character in the first place. Trust me on this

Karl Urban as the Executioner ... while I like Urban, pretending that this character is anything like the comic book version is idiotic. I presume that this is the last Thor film, for multiple reasons, but most of all because they felt the need to jam in certain characters without bothering to make them anything like their comic book counterparts. Damn it, Idris Elba at least acts like Heimdall.

Again, a fun film. Possibly the best Thor film. Definitely the funniest Marvel film. Though I'm surprised at their restraint: I had expected at least new one Infinity Gem, and didn't get one. If I recall correctly, there are still two missing.

But we'll see.

Right now, I don't have an analysis for what this means for the rest of the Marvel universe. I have some guesses, but it's pure speculation.

Ragnarok is definitely recommended on the big screen.