Throwback Thursday Review: 'Iron Man 3'

First of all, I apologize for the delayed review but I've been busy at work on the latest podcast for my Youtube channel in which me and some friends discuss our favorite and least moments in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, and work and school of course as finals are fast approaching. Another reason for the delay is that it took me a few days to finish my review of The Huntsman: Winter's War and I prefer to work on one review at a time so my thoughts don't become muddled. But any who, this week my Throwback Thursday is over Iron Man 3 completing my reviews of the Iron Man trilogy. Although I may revisit some of them later for my newer "Triple-R" format of review where I basically re-review a film with updated thoughts an opinions. Next week I will continue my series of Marvel reviews with a Throwback Thursday Review of Captain America: The First Avenger and a Recollection Reflection Review of Captain America: The Winter Soldier. The latter of which will probably be posted before the former since Triple-R's don't have a specified date. Also, if you want to marathon some Marvel films to catch up before Captain America: Civil War but don't have 24 hours to spare, you can check our Road to Civil War podcast I mentioned earlier at this link: https://youtu.be/bj_BnjCCO_g. 

'Iron Man 3' Review

Nominated For: Best Visual Effects.

Iron Man 3 is one of the most divisive Marvel films to date. This is in large part to being Marvel's first film post-The Avengers. The Avengers really raised the bar for everything to come from the studio now that the shared universe had taken shape. It was going to be nearly impossible for Iron Man 3 to meet these heightened expectations as it's difficult to tell a solo story right after a huge crossover event. In order for me to dissect my feelings about the film, I feel some spoilers are necessary so be forewarned, there will be spoilers in this review. Iron Man 3 is directed by Shane Black, who had previously worked with Downey in Kiss Kiss, Bang Bang and takes the reigns from Jon Favreau. This gave Iron Man 3 a vastly different feel to it's predecessors, Iron Man and Iron Man 2, as there wasn't any ACDC to be found, which I view as a creative decision symbolizing Tony Stark's character arc across the Marvel Cinematic Universe as he becomes more responsible (something that was further explored upon in Avengers: Age Of Ultron and looks to be a prominent part of Captain America: Civil War). Black and his creative team set out to bring Stark's story full circle putting him back in a metaphorical cave with a box of scraps and giving him some personal issues to overcome along the way. When it comes down to it, Iron Man 3 is a character driven story focused on Tony Stark. And that's the thing that I appreciate most about Iron Man 3 that I'll dive into more when discussing Downey's performance. Those expecting lots of action scenes with Stark sporting his armor were disappointed as there's only three major action sequences. While the action is relatively scarce in comparison to the entirety of the film, all the action is wildly entertaining. This includes the destruction of Tony's Malibu house, an incredible heroic sequence in which Tony must save about 15 people falling out of a plane, and the final fight between Extremis soldiers and Tony's vast Iron Legion. There's some fun scenes where Tony must use his wit and resources to fight Extremis soldiers and infiltrate the Mandarin's domain that were cool as well. The visual effects are wonderful as is to be expected from the studio at this point and it wouldn't be an Iron Man movie without some snarky sarcasm and quick one-liners, to which this film has many that still have me dying of laughter. I also really love the original score composed by Brian Tyler that I personally prefer to the inclusion of ACDC that's been a staple of the character in the previous films. When it comes down to performances, everyone across the board nails it for the most part. Robert Downey Jr. is definitively both Tony Stark and Iron Man at this point and never ceases to impress me. Downey gets to explore Stark's post-Avengers psyche where we learn he's now suffering from anxiety attacks and the Battle of New York left him with PTSD. Some complain about this but I think it was a logical step to make the character more compelling. I also like how it's left him in a place that's picked up well in Avengers: Age Of Ultron where he wants to "build a suit of armor around the world" and should be taken even further in Captain America: Civil War. Stark's new armor, the Mark 42, was visually an awesome experience. I enjoyed seeing the components individually latch onto Stark and culminate into a grand suit of armor, although it was too mustard for my taste. Gwyneth Paltrow is back as Pepper Potts and finds herself to be a deceptive damsel in distress at moments. Her chemistry with Downey is par to none and is a relief to see her kick some butt this time around. One thing that bothers me about her character is that there was a fake-out where she's presumed dead and survives due to the extremis in her blood stream. I think her death would have had greater ramifications as opposed to her survival since it doesn't seem keeping her alive has done the Marvel Cinematic Universe any favors. Don Cheadle returns as James Rhodes and this time around has been rebranded from the aggressive War Machine to Iron Patriot, a cool looking red, white, and blue suit of armor that isn't used much in the film. Cheadle's terrific in the role as we know from Iron Man 2 and has a fun buddy cop dynamic with Downey that keeps the lightheartedness alive in spite of the huge stakes present. Ty Simpkins is known by many as the "kid from Jurassic World" and is far less annoying in this film as an odd pairing to Downey that surprisingly works. Sir Ben Kingsley plays a more modern incarnation of the Mandarin or so Marvel wanted audiences to believe. With a huge twist no-one saw coming it was reveled that this supposed terrorist leader Mandarin was actually just a amateur British actor with a drug addiction. Fans were outraged by this twist and I was bothered by it upon first viewing but must admit it was a hilarious twist nonetheless. My frustrations with this have been significantly eased with the revelation that a real Mandarin does in fact exist as revealed in the Marvel's One-Shot All Hail The King. Yes, Guy Pearce is ANOTHER poorly executed Marvel villain as the suave Aldrich Killian, but I'd say he ranks among the upper half of the spectrum in comparison to others. Iron Man 3 is a nice resolution of the Iron Man Trilogy that goes full circle and functions as a great continuation to The Avengers and a decent launching pad for Phase 2 of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. When it comes down to it, I personally enjoy Iron Man 3 despite the twists that drove fans bonanza. And while I'll admit it was a huge disappointment the first time I watched it in theaters, I've come to like it more and more with each successive viewing and can recommend it for those that temper expectations. 

Film Assessment: A-

'The Huntsman: Winter's War' Review

The Huntsman: Winter's War is the prequel/sequel to Snow White and the Huntsman that nobody really asked for. For those of you that have read my Throwback Thursday Review of Snow White and the Huntsman, you know that I was very dissatisfied with it overall and sadly have to say that is indeed again the case. However with that all being said, I liked this slightly more than Snow White and the Huntsman. When it comes down to it, it's quite easy to see that the root of many of the storytelling issues present here derive from Kristen Stewart's unwillingness to return for another installment. The screen writers and creative team had to side step her character and distance her as much as possible from the events unfolding onscreen. This wasn't too bothersome as I'm not a big fan of Kristen Stewart in general but in order to keep her out of the film, the creative team had to go back and construct an abstract backstory for Huntsman in an attempt to shift the focus to his character. Unfortunately, this doesn't quite work as well as the creative team would have liked as I found myself much more interested in exploring some of the new characters. The production had been troubled from the start as Universal had difficulty finding a director to helm the project. The studio settled on the second unit director from Snow White and the Huntsman, Cedric Nicolas-Troyan, who had never directed a feature film before. I think Nicolas-Troyan has some serious issues with placing proper focus within a scene. Fantastical creatures would fly by and divert attention various times throughout the film. Occasionally during scenes of intense dialogue all emphasis would be placed on random fairy creatures, which was quite bothersome and unnecessary. In fact, I'd daresay it was a waste of the visual effects budget that would have been better spent on action sequences, not that the action looked bad. Actually, the action looked great! The fight choreography was entertaining and intense and you could actually see what was happening as none of the action happened too quickly, although there were a few slo-mo shots that I saw as unnecessary. The cinematographer captured some beautiful imagery throughout and gave the various sequences enough time to breathe and the audience to gaze upon. This helped the film feel much lighter and more colorful than Snow White and the Huntsman, that was certainly an improvement over it's bleak predecessor. The film has many attempts at humor, but falls flat on it's face with every joke. But the film's biggest problem was that it didn't provide a reason for me to be invested in any of the characters so I lost interest easily and almost fell asleep three or four times. And this is coming from someone who stays fairly attentive and almost never sleeps during a movie (especially in theaters). Every new character was a bore, the dwarves in particular. I won't even bother listing out the actors as they put forth little to no effort and the only interesting dwarves are taken out. The rest of the cast's performances range from not even trying to decent. Chris Hemsworth is back as the Huntsman, Eric, and this time around he's much more comfortable in the role as a more seasoned actor. Hemsworth fills the role with as much charisma as he possibly can making for a great lead. He once again has a wonky Scottish accent but he at least sticks with it throughout as in Snow White and the Huntsman he occasionally slipped out of it. Jessica Chastain is decent as the Huntsman's love interest, Sara,  but along those lines she and Chris Hemsworth had some very awkward romantic scenes that were a little too long. It wasn't the chemistry that made it weird but rather the awkward long silence of the two gazing at each other that could have easily been cut out. Chastain also had an Irish accent that was just atrocious. Emily Blunt is one of my favorite modern actresses but even I have to admit that her performance as Freya the Ice Queen was just awful. This role was far beneath her and I don't understand why she would take it but unfortunately she tends to end up in projects that bomb at the box office. Almost every line of dialogue was delivered with practically no emotion, but there were glimmers of potential sprinkled throughout as Blunt was terrific in the more emotionally heated scenes. Another returning actress is Charlize Theron and she was terrific in her six to seven minutes of screen time as she just epitomized villainy. However, almost all of her scenes were in the trailers so there wasn't any shock value to anything that happened involving her character. Sadly, the film was a disappointment as I hoped for significant improvements from Snow White and the Huntsman but only got slight improvements. In summation, the film is a snooze-fest that's probably just a waste of your time.

Film Assessment: D-

Throwback Thursday Review: 'Snow White and the Huntsman'

This week I'm reviewing Snow White and the Huntsman to prepare for the release of it's prequel/sequel? The Huntsman: Winter's War this weekend that I should have a review for by next Tuesday. Next week, I'll resume more of my Marvel reviews, completing my thoughts on the Iron Man Trilogy with a Throwback Thursday Review of Iron Man 3, and the following week will do a Triple-R Review over Captain America: The Winter Soldier and then later in the week a Throwback Thursday Review of Captain America: The First Avenger and my full-in depth non spoiler review of Captain America: Civil War. 

'Snow White and the Huntsman' Review

Nominated For: Best Visual Effects and Best Costume Design.

I apologize for posting this a day late, but I'll outright say that this film is extremely difficult to sit through. I distinctly remember being fairly excited to see the film in theaters because Chris Hemsworth would be playing the Huntsman, and having recently seen The Avengers I was excited to see what he could do here. I also remember that this is one of the first films that I actually disliked seeing in theaters as I was starting to get a taste for critiquing films and having more of an opinion of movies aside from the "It was ok/good" or "I enjoyed it", and really prior to seeing this generally had positive opinions about most films. The one positive thing I can say about Snow White and the Huntsman is that it shaped my ability to critique film and allowed me to begin to form more of a stance on my opinion of all kinds of art. Prepare for an onslaught of negativity. First and foremost, the narrative is extremely flawed. There are abundant plot holes and lack of development in the plot or characters that amount to an incoherent mess. For example, many of the Evil Queen's action's didn't make logical sense despite the fact the screenwriters making her motivation clear. Like why does she bathe in milk exactly? And every character is static, showing no signs of progress or development for themselves. Really if I were to describe the film in one word, I'd be conflicted between "strange" and "boring". The strange elements are derived from many of the creative elements. The creative team must have an odd obsession with milky gooey substances because there's abundant liquid imagery placed throughout the film that was just gross. While some critics praised the visuals, I found them to look atrocious and thought they all looked jagged and unfinished. On the subject of visuals, the film's cinematography is abysmal. There seems to be almost no color palette onscreen till an hour into the film that makes the film all the more hopeless. There are a few impressive shots but the editing quickly takes away from any awe an audience member could possibly have in reaction. The editing in the entire film is off the wall as there are quite a few scenes featuring the Evil Queen with no dialogue that came out of nowhere and add absolutely no significance to the narrative or the film as a whole. The film tries many times to emulate the epic feel of The Lord of the Rings but falls flat on it's face as the action sequences suffered the brunt of the lousy editing as it has an unhealthy mixture of slow-motion and sped up footage. What I mean by this is that some portions of action occur too quickly for anyone to possibly comprehend what just happened and the slo motion is unnecessary as it's merely a slower take of a character's reaction to something that drags the pace of the action through the mud. If it weren't for the pitiful editing, the action scenes had potential to look awesome. In regards to story beats, the film tries to drag out of it's dreariness through attempts at humor and romance but none of it works. Now for the inevitable, the performances. Yikes. Kristen Stewart is awful in the role of Snow White delivering all her lines with almost no emotion or any indication she cares by lack of any facial expressions aside from a blank stare and a few very awkward faces. Chris Hemsworth is easily the best performance on display here with the only actor oozing any charisma whatsoever, and it's probably the reason he is the lead in the new spinoff/prequel/sequel? However, he has an inconsistent Scottish accent that he attempts to use that was a little bothersome. Sam Claflin is fairly decent as Prince William and fills the role well but the character he portrays wasn't given enough depth for me to care about. There's an assortment of dwarves of course, and they're utilized as an attempt to elicit humor but it never really clicked with me. Each of the actors are fairly mediocre and seem to be taking this as a paycheck gig so I won't bother listing out the actor's names. Without a doubt one of the worst performances in the film comes from Sam Spruell, who plays the Evil Queen's brother, and he embodies the personality of the over the top cheesy lame villainous stooge. The most praised performance seems to have been Charlize Theron as Raveena, the Evil Queen, but I stand to disagree. In every scene she's either screaming at everyone, spreading a malevolent gaze, or in some strange liquid. She's good in this capacity, but none of it is impressive in the slightest as the character is evil, purely to be evil. Everything aforementioned amounts to a bleak, dreary take on the classic Snow White tale that's just a snooze-fest.

Film Assessment: F

'The Jungle Book' (2016) Review

Nominated For: Best Visual Effects.
Won: Best Visual Effects.

The Jungle Book is the latest adaptation of Rudyard Kipling's book, and I'll outright say that it's the best adaptation to date. Some of you are probably thinking that I'm insane declaring this to be superior to the 1967 animated The Jungle Book, but hear me out. This is the latest of Disney's push to make live-action adaptation of some of their classic films, but I don't think this film classifies as live-action since the entire film was shot on a sound stage in Los Angeles. 

The only real, tangible aspects to the film are Neel Sethi as Mowgli and small portions of the set for Sethi to interact with. Aside from that, the remainder is entirely CGI. Yes, EVERYTHING. The jungle environments, the sky, the water, and the animals. All animated.  And it's breathtaking, especially in 3-D. Now while we have seen this previously in films like Avatar or Life of Pi, this film progresses the technology going one step forward and not only making these environments and creatures seem lifelike, but also making the delivery of dialogue from the animals actually look believable as well. It's clear that the crew spent plenty of time researching the animals integral to the narrative. The animators include subtle movements for the animals that make them seem all the more real such as Shere Khan's stealthy stroll, Baloo's slow bear trod, and Bagheeera's ears flicking every now and then.

The crew even took it a step forward by ensuring to find animals quite similar to those found in the story that would actually be found in that part of the Indian Jungle. For example, instead of making King Louie an orangutan, they decided to make him a Gigantopithecus. This serviced the film in two ways by providing an over looming ape that monkeys would obviously be subservient to and also finding a creature close enough to an orangutan that actually could be found in India, although Gigantopithecus are extinct. Now many of you are probably thinking I was merely wowed by the animation, but there is so much more to this film. 

First and foremost, Jon Favreau went above and beyond as director. Since Neel Sethi was acting opposite virtually nothing, he made sure to create a comfortable atmosphere for the child star by utilizing animal puppets and even acting in place of the animals himself in some cases, to be taken out in postproduction of course. Favreau did a phenomenal job stitching together all of the terrific work from each respective department to create a truly terrific movie. 

Secondly, the screenwriter, Justin Marks, ensures that he adds much more depth and sophistication to the tale (or at least the animated version, I can't speak for the actual book since I haven't read it). We're all quite familiar with the basic story itself and so I won't really delve into that, especially since I included that in my Throwback Thursday Review of the animated incarnation. In comparison to Disney's other live-action fairytales and how close they stuck to their respective animated sources of inspiration, I'd say it falls somewhere between Cinderella, which was largely a clear cut live-action version of the animated film with relatively few changes, and Maleficent, which almost completely ignored the continuity of Sleeping Beauty. So for those expecting something along the lines of a clear-cut shot for shot remake of the animated version, you may be disheartened. Favreau does however take into account the love general audiences have for the animated classic and includes plenty of visual imagery homaging the animation. 

One new aspect I really liked was that the jungle is treated as a society of it's own (More along the lines of what can be found in The Lion King rather than Zootopia though). The various characters are also fleshed out much more than the animated version, placing emphasis on their relationships with Mowgli, whether they be friendly or antagonistic. Also, the film captures a whirlwind of emotions with something for everyone. The film captures the lighthearted fun of the original, snippets of action and adventure in some intense moments, thanks to Shere Khan, that may scare some young children, and provided scenes with a gripping emotional core. 

In regards to performances, The Jungle Book assembled quite an impressive cast. The one element that was going to make or break this film was the actor portraying Mowgli and Neel Sethi delivered. Sethi managed to act opposite the CGI creatures quite convincingly and also gave a great performance as well. Sethi embraced the innocence of Mowgli and really brought out the most of his childlike persona and sold it. I loved that his character was written so that he asked questions any child would ponder but while refraining from making it obnoxious. 

Bill Murray comes into the role of Baloo injecting tons of fun into the film with his sarcastic one liners that definitely earned some laughs and he doesn't stray from the zany personality either. I also really bought into the brotherhood between Mowgli and Baloo thanks to both performances and the chemistry between the two actors (even though it's only Murray's voice). Sir Ben Kingsley manages to expertly balance Bagheera's overprotective demeanor with a mixture of responsibility and pride in Mowgli brilliantly conveyed through merely his voice. 

Lupita Nyong'o is the emotional core as Raksha and serves the story as best she can in her limited screen time. Opposite her, Giancarlo Esposito makes for a believable leader and father figure albeit his limited screen time. Christopher Walken balances charisma with a looming menace as King Louie, who's much more of a mob boss this time around as opposed to the zany king. Scarlett Johannson captivates the audiences as Kaa, utilizing the snake hisses to the fullest even though she's in the film for about five minutes. Regardless, a terrific choice for Kaa. 

Last, but certainly not least, Idris Elba makes a masterful villain of Shere Khan, projecting his malevolent gravitas so far that you can feel the terror when his name is mentioned. Shere Khan is introduced much earlier in this version, which I prefer because it adds gravity to the situation, giving audiences a taste of what Shere Khan is capable of. 

Lastly, I'll discuss the use of music in the film. The score takes the classic songs everyone knows and loves and expands upon them by converting them into full orchestral epics. The score is embedded to match the scenes with each perspective character, such as "Trust In Me" being paired with Kaa. Don't worry though as the film doesn't cower away from any singing like Disney's previous live-action fairytales. In fact, the renditions of "I Wanna Be Like You" and "Bare Necessities" were a ridiculously fun time. If you stick through the credits you will be rewarded with a nifty credits sequence utilizing these songs, no post credits scene though. Looking forward, I really hope The Jungle Book is remembered during awards season, and it's no wonder the sequel was greenlit before the film opened.

In summary, The Jungle Book seems to be the best incarnation of the source material possible with fun for everyone providing content all ages can enjoy and I only wonder how the upcoming Warner Bros version directed by mo-cap exert Andy Serkis will fare. Now, can we get a version of The Lion King using this technology?

Film Assessment: A+

Throwback Thursday Review: 'The Jungle Book' (1967)

This week, my Throwback Thursday Review will be of the classic Disney animated The Jungle Book to coincide with the live-action adaptation, although the term live-action is questionable considering it's 99% CGI, or computer generated imaging. Anyways, next week's Throwback Thursday will be for Snow White and the Huntsman to coincide with the prequel The Huntsman: Winter's War. Following that, I will resume more Marvel reviews in the build-up to Captain America: Civil War.

'The Jungle Book' (1967) Review

Nominated For: Best Original Song "The Bare Necessities"(written by Terry Gilkyson). 

The 1967 Walt Disney animated version of Rudyard Kipling's book, The Jungle Book, was the last Walt Disney animation project that was overseen by the man himself. It's is widely regarded as a classic and I can't disagree with that statement having been in love with the film since first viewing it as a child. However, once you take a step back and look, the film feels a bit devoid of plot, although that is often the case for animated films (Can't wait to go into this with a Throwback Thursday Review of Frozen later this year). The difference with The Jungle Book being that there actually is a plot and a nice message, it's just very simple, straightforward, and loads of fun. The Jungle Book follows a young boy, Mowgli, who was found abandoned as a child by a panther, Bagheera, and taken to a pack of wolves to be cared for and raised among animals. Mowgli grows up among the pack but it is soon decided that he must be returned to mankind before the villainous Shere Khan discovers him and disposes of the boy. Bagheera takes it upon himself to escort Mowgli to the nearest village inhabited by man and along the way Mowgli encounters a wide variety of animal personalities that are either trying to exploit him for nefarious purposes or teach him valuable life lessons. Mowgli upon meeting each of these animals tries to fit in for the most part by taking up their philosophies or paling around with them till he's saved by Bagheera and that's really where The Jungle Book s central theme comes in, you shouldn't conform to society but be yourself. While it may not be quite as clear as in The LEGO Movie it's definitely one of the messages that's being conveyed to audiences and a great message for children to learn early on. The Jungle Book features a few songs many of you may be familiar with already but nonetheless "Bare Necessities" and "I Wanna Be Like You" are two songs that are very fun, catchy, and just plain entertaining when combined with the events unfolding onscreen.  The film's animation also really holds up despite being almost 50 years old as characters move smoothly onscreen and the environments are exceptionally drawn. The film is bolstered by it's voice cast who all excellently portray the personalities they are being tasked with just their voices. Bruce Reitherman as Mowgli really embraces the brotherhood between Mowgli and Baloo making it all the more believable when he feels betrayed by Baloo's change of conscience when he tells Mowgli he should go to the village. Aside from that, he was obviously a child at the time and so of course he's believable in the role but nails the personality you'd expect from a child raised in these conditions. Phil Harris is remarkable voicing Baloo getting to tap into a fun, zany bear that loves to eat, dance, and relax. Sebastian Cabot voices Bagheera and from his voice alone you can feel the weight on his shoulders and burden of responsibility as he gives off the personality of an uptight, efficient workaholic that wants to ensure Mowgli's safety. Louis Prima gets to let loose as the jazzy orangutan, King Louie, who secretly wants to harness the power of fire to be more like man. Sterling Holloway captivates the audience as the slippery serpent, Kaa, who wants to hypnotize Mowgli and eat him as a  nice meal. Last but certainly not least, George Sanders makes for a truly terrifying tiger in Shere Khan, who I'm sure was the inspiration for The Lion King's Scar. Shere Khan's presence is felt throughout the entire film as animals cower in mention of his name and when he stealthily creeps on screen it's a satisfying reveal. Shere Khan also evokes himself as both an intellectual and physical force to reckon with that plays mind games with his prey and the ferocity to pounce any instant. In summation, The Jungle Book is certainly one of Disney's greatest animated works and without a doubt remembered as a classic thanks to the a few fun songs, some memorable characters, and and a nice message regarding conformity, friendship, and family. While I'd love to give The Jungle Book a perfect score, the very beginning of the film drags a bit, the villain doesn't enter the fray till an hour in, there only two noteworthy songs with the rest of the music turning out to be rather bland, and the plot is very simple but none of these things take away from the overall fun viewing experience. I'd highly recommend it for Disney fanatics even if you've seen it before, especially given that Disney's having another go at the material this weekend that looks quite promising and it will be fun to spot any references or homages to the '67 animated version. 

Film Assessment: B

'Hardcore Henry' Review

Hardcore Henry is an interesting action film in regards to the entire film being shot from a first person perspective. Yes, the ENTIRE film is shot in this first person point of view perspective. Now, many will take a glance at this and say that it looks like a first person shooter video game and honestly that's a very accurate summation of Hardcore Henry  There are many elements in the film that make it feel even more like a video game that I'll discuss while avoiding spoilers because if you're going to see this film I recommend going in knowing the bare minimum of the film's plot and a consensus of what the film will feel like. There are many times while watching the film where I felt like I was watching a skilled gamer playing a first person shooter and this was due to many reasons. First and foremost, obviously the combination of the first person perspective and intense action provides a video game-like atmosphere. The first person point of view definitely enhances the experience as it immerses the viewer in this environment. I will admit that it takes about 30 minutes into the film to get used to this type of camerawork, but once you adjust you will be sucked into the film and feel as though you actually are Henry. I deem that it's only appropriate to commend many of the creative talents responsible for the first person immersion including director, Ilya Naishuller, the cinematographers and the stunt crew. The combination of these creative forces resulted in an awesome filmgoing experience and allowed for some incredible action sequences. One action sequence that stood out to me was the climactic fight towards the end on a rooftop, that was literally pumped with adrenaline (You'll understand once you see the film). Aside from this sequence, a lot of the action did blend together and none of it was particularly noteworthy because it all seemed similar. Don't be startled though, as all of these action sequences are definitely awe-inspiring, but the fact that it's so jumbled together makes it easy to take the experience for granted. The fact that the film is essentially one action sequence after another with little room for exposition doesn't help. However, all of the action features extremely well choreographed stuntwork and for the most part, some great visuals. Although towards the end, you could tell the creative team was running out of money in the visual effects budget as some of the explosions looked very fake. Secondly, the film goes out of it's way to ensure that the lead character, Henry, is given a waypoint directing him to the next action scene. Any of my readers that are gamers as well are very familiar with the concept of a waypoint, which is a form of exposition that directs the character to the next mission or next objective, and Hardcore Henry has LOTS of waypoints sprinkled throughout the film used as convenient plot devices. As for some of my other nitpicks with the film, I found that the film is very fast paced, rolling from one action scene to another, and while I'd much prefer a fast pace to a slow burn, this does make some portions of the film seem a little confusing and incoherent. This left little room for exposition and when exposition is given, it seems very rushed and doesn't quite explain what is going on. Now I understand that this could have been an intentional concept from the filmmakers to further put the audience in Henry's shoes and I'm all for that but it only goes to make the film feel that much more like a video game. Another tiny thing that bothered me was that the camera was extremely shaky for the first portion of the film. Shaky cam can be extremely bothersome and annoy me to no end in some cases when it's used poorly, but when used correctly enhances the thrill of the action. Hardcore Henry lands in the middle of that spectrum as there are times that it definitely made the experience more authentic, but almost every time Henry ran the camera would shake around quite a bit. I'm sure this had more to do with the camera rather than the stunt team that portrayed Henry but I know that when I run my head doesn't bobble around nearly as much as what I witnessed. I'd highly recommend staying away from Hardcore Henry for anyone that is prone to motion sickness as I'm not a victim and even I found myself feeling a little nauseated at times. My final nitpick is that the film lacks any development whatsoever for almost every character with the exception of a select few. After the entire one hour thirty minute runtime, I still feel as though I learned absolutely nothing about Henry's character, aside from the fact he's some kind of cyborg and can kick a lot of butt. Other than those two things, there's a lot of flashbacks that cut in throughout the film as Henry regains his memory, but none of them are really explained too well or go into much depth at all, leaving behind a mysterious past for Henry to explore in potential future installments. I wouldn't have an issue with this if there are indeed sequels planned because future installments would be welcomed and a great opportunity to flesh out Henry's backstory. In regards to performances, there are a few key characters but outside of these four roles everyone else is something for Henry to brutally murder. Henry is not portrayed by an actor though, but actually by multiple stuntmen running around pakouring with a Go-Pro attached to them. Henry also has no lines of dialogue, as the character is mute and doesn't utter any dialogue for the entire running time. Seems convenient for the stunt team, right? Well, I was ok with this as it reminded me of most first person shooters, where the lead character typically is a silent roguish hero. The glue that holds every piece of this film together is surprisingly the supporting wide variety of caricatures played by Sharlto Copley. Yes, I said it, caricatures. Multiple roles. But seeing his characters pop up make the film all the more fun and certainly enhanced the experience. The double edged sword to this was that as soon as Copley was absent from the screen, the film lost a little of it's charm. It manages to make up for this with the brilliant soundtrack that amasses a number of thrilling hits. Haley Bennett makes for a generic damsel in distress as Henry's wife, Estelle, who is constantly in danger and Danila Kozlovsky certainly does chew the scenery as the most cartoonish villain I've seen since ...well Lex Luthor in Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice so I guess it wasn't too long ago. Kozlovsky's super powered diabolical threat certainly looms over Henry for the entirety of the film but Akan is played to be quite the cookie-cutter generic villain with unclear motivation (Although eventually this is filled in). In summation, I can say that Hardcore Henry certainly is no performance piece but practically an hour and a half of nonstop graphic violence. Speaking of which, this film is a very hard "R" with lots of graphic violence, language, and some brief nudity so I can't advise that any parent bring a child to see Hardcore Henry, as I'd consider it to being a harder "R" rating than even Deadpool. I can however recommend it to action movie fans, those interested in the first person perspective aspect of the film, and gamers. This film is certainly tailored to that specific demographic and I think they will get the most enjoyment out of Hardcore Henry.  If the very idea of the film at least intrigues you, I'd advise you at least give the film a chance as I can attest for the film being one hour and thirty minutes of an entertaining first person thrill ride. 

Film Assessment: B

Throwback Thursday Review: 'Iron Man 2'

This week I will be starting my Throwback Thursday Reviews correlated with the upcoming Captain America: Civil War by reviewing the remaining Iron Man and Captain America films I have yet to review. I figured I'd tackle one of the more controversial Marvel films, Iron Man 2, and next week I will review the classic animated The Jungle Book before the live action incarnation drops.

'Iron Man 2' Review

Nominated For: Best Visual Effects.

Iron Man 2 can be generally conceded as one of the missteps for the Marvel Cinematic Universe but nonetheless is quite entertaining. Iron Man 2 picks up right where the first one left off where Tony Stark announces to the world that he is indeed Iron Man but from a different perspective introducing Ivan Vanko, the villain of the piece. It then jumps forward a few months to Tony kicking off the Stark Expo, a Stark Industries equivalent of the New York World Fair, and we soon learn that the arc reactor keeping the shrapnel out of his chest also happens to be slowly killing him. This allows for a very interesting subplot for the film that isn't really given the depth that the severity of the situation deserved and unfortunately is shoved aside for a lot of set up for Marvel's Cinematic Universe. The biggest fault of the film is the fact that it prioritizes setting up ties and connections to the Marvel Cinematic Universe rather than focus on Tony Stark and further exploring his character. While it handles the setup exceptionally well, the film suffers from the overbearing attention to the setup and overabundance of subplots. Now, that's not to say that the film doesn't have great components, which it does, but the bad does unfortunately outweigh the good for the most part. I've drawn attention to really what the film's crux weakness is several times in the preceding sentences and aside from these issues, the remaining elements work quite well. Jon Favreau carries over his directing style from the predecessor and does the best job he can to pull this film together and make it the best it can be. Unfortunately, I believe that the studio restricted Favreau's creative freedoms so that the film would fall in line with Marvel's dreams for a Cinematic Universe. Aside from this, the technical elements are exceptional. The visual effects are very well realized and make the idea of a high tech suit seem somewhat real and look authentic. The action interspersed throughout the film is all entertaining and awesome to watch. One of the key action sequences that stood out to me was the Monaco Grand Prix fight that showcased the Mark V suitcase Iron Man suit, that was very cool to see onscreen albeit the brief screen time. Other key action scenes include the skirmish between Rhodey and Tony in their respective suits, and the third act big battle where we see Iron Man fight side by side with War Machine. Aside from action, the film relies on the very talented cast assembled and the cast delivers their A-game, for the most part. There's no denying it, Robert Downey Jr. is Iron Man. Downey brings fun, quirky charisma to the role that it's very difficult not to enjoy every moment Tony Stark is onscreen, regardless of whether he's wearing the Iron Man suit or not. Don Cheadle fills in the role of Rhodey for Terrence Howard and personally I preferred Cheadle in the role. Cheadle has some great chemistry with Downey giving a great buddy cop vibe from the two. While speaking of Don Cheadle, I feel I should discuss how they progress his character to become War Machine and I think that's one element that was handled quite well. I love the look of the War Machine suit and it's functionality in combat along with the narrative reasoning for Rhodey to don the suit. Gwyneth Paltrow returns to the role of Pepper Potts and has more of a spunky personality this time around. Her scenes with Downey are enjoyable due to the verbal tennis that they play with one another and the two definitely work well together onscreen. Scarlett Johansson is introduced as Natasha Romanov or, the name that many of you are more familiar with, Black Widow. Johansson plays the role with an air of mystery and kicks tons of butt in her action sequence to make her an interesting member of the cast, and I'd equate it to the size of Gal Gadot's role as Wonder Woman in Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice. Other small supporting performances in the film include Samuel L. Jackson as Nick Fury and Clark Gregg as Agent Coulson and both S.H.I.E.L.D. members are certainly quite welcome. In regards to antagonists, Stark finds himself opposed by two villains, Sam Rockwell as a discount Tony Stark, Justin Hammer, and Mickey Rourke as a homicidal Russian, Ivan Vanko. Rockwell is amusing onscreen but feels like he's aiming to replicate Downey's performance as Stark but not as cool. If that's truly what Sam Rockwell was aiming to do, then he does it exceptionally well. Mickey Rourke is a serviceable villain but is quite odd at times and seems to be lacking proper motivation to make Ivan Vanko a truly compelling character. All in all, Iron Man 2 isn't the sequel that Iron Man deserved. The film certainly has it's flaws, but still amounts to be a pleasant viewing experience that establishes a solid foundation for The Avengers.

Film Assessment: B-

Throwback Thursday Review: 'The Bourne Supremacy'

This week I continue my Bourne Throwback Thursday Reviews in the lead up to the fifth installment, that was recently revealed to be titled Jason Bourne. I'm reviewing each Bourne flick bimonthly, so the next two reviews will come in May and July. Next week's Throwback Thursday Review will be Iron Man 2 as I'm aiming to review the Iron Man and Captain America films before Captain America: Civil War.

'The Bourne Supremacy' Review

The Bourne Supremacy is the second installment in the Bourne franchise and once again showcases high octane spy action and well coordinated, intense stunt work. This time around, there's a fresh perspective on the character from director Paul Greengrass. Greeengrass gets the ball rolling with a faster paced film, yet at the same time ensures that some scenes are slowed down to provide a proper sense of levity. The camerawork does a great job of making the action seem more intense and intimate for the audience. There's a little shaky-cam but it has a reserved use so it's not too bad. The screenplay is also well crafted by writer Tony Gilroy who provides a great base of support for the performances, plot, and the film in general. Speaking of performances, Matt Damon's back and certainly proves that he can lead a film, and beyond that proves he's more than capable of carrying an action franchise. Damon gets to dive into exploring more of the character's past and even gets to showcase some emotional acting range in a few key scenes that impressed me, at the same time manages to play the hard-edged, supreme spy Jason Bourne. Damon nails it and really seems to have a great understanding of this character. Franka Potente, the love interest from the original, returns but briefly. However her character's explored a bit more and her chemistry with Damon improved since the first film. Joan Allen delivers in the supporting capacity as CIA head, Pamela Landry, and is terrific onscreen. One thing I really enjoyed was her verbal sparring with Bourne that happened a few times. One of my issues though was with the film's weak villain that doesn't really have a purpose. Karl Urban is a Russian spy, Kirill, whose primary purpose in the plot is to frame Jason Bourne for some criminal activities but beyond that doesn't really have much to offer to the plot. It also seems lacking that he's doing this because he was told to rather than personal vendetta or something more interesting. I can confidently say that The Bourne Supremacy improves upon most of the aspects I saw as weaknesses in it's predecessor and ups the strengths making for another entertaining and thrilling spy flick.

Film Assessment: B