'Guardians of the Galaxy: volume 2' picks up pretty much where the first one left off. That is why Groot is still a baby and then, before the opening credits, the movie jumps forward 34 years from its 1980 flashback. So, it's 2014 again and the Guardians are the organized team that they became at the end of the first film. Fighting baddies, doing jobs for money. This is established (along with the great old-school soundtrack that the first movie had) in a very funny opening battle/title sequence.
Rocket's affinity for thievery gets the team in hot water and then the story takes the Guardians all over the galaxy, Empire Strikes Back-style. Peter Quill (Star-Lord) meets his father and goes off to his home planet with Drax and Gamora while blue, fin-headed Yondu joins the rest of the team to find him. Peter's father, as you may have seen in the trailers, is played by Kurt Russell, the human form of a living planet called Ego. Peter learns where he came from and struggles to understand why his father left him. As the one who actually raised Peter, you may remember from the first film, Yondu has a larger and much more emotional role in this story than I expected he would. The whole movie is about people who you are related to vs. people who were actually there for you. "Family" is an important theme to this story, although Vin Diesel doesn't actually say the word "family" over and over again like he does in 'Fast and the Furious' because he is playing Groot.
This is a very funny movie. The Guardians quip at each other during the action scenes. I agree with criticisms that there is a little too much of this, but only a little. Most of the jokes either land or help you to get to know the characters and their flippant attitudes a little better. Another movie that had a rapid fire succession of jokes was 'The Simpsons Movie', but 'GOTG volume 2' made me laugh much more. There are more funny references to things that Peter Quill grew up with in the 80's that nobody out in space understands and this creates a funny friction between him and Gamora, who knows nothing of David Hasselhoff and Pac-Man.
My only complaint about this movie is a storyline between Nebula and Gamora. For most of the movie, Nebula is just kind of there and then, the emotion of her feud with Gamora comes out. It's an interesting dynamic, but it should have been at least alluded to earlier. Other than this minor gripe, this film does a great job of juggling all of the characters. There is a slight 'drag' in certain places, as they had to give all the main characters/actors adequate screen time. But everyone has something interesting to do and some way to grow as a character. New friendships are formed, relationships move forward, either as friends or enemies. Drax is far more interesting than I expected him to be, a prejudice I had against Dave Bautista as an actor because he started his career as a wrestler. When I think "wrestler in a space movie" I think 'Suburban Commando', but he was awesome and hilarious in this.
Even the cameos are well handled, not bogging the movie down. They serve their purpose, either providing a laugh or an insight into one of the main characters, and then they move on. The Stan Lee cameo is one of my favorites of his. Another small role in this film is an obvious set-up to a spin-off movie that Marvel hasn't greenlit yet. But the set-up for said film is saved for one of five post-credits scenes that this movie has, so sit tight when the credits roll. I saw this movie at a screening where people walked out as the credits were rolling. My wife looked at me and muttered "amateurs". This is a Marvel movie, people!
A fun space adventure that will make you laugh out loud. No, it's not as good as the first one, but not by much. 3.5 Infinity Stones out of 5.
Check out Turtle Rocket Books for science fiction books from the mind of a mildly-autistic man-child.
Tuesday, May 9, 2017
Sunday, April 23, 2017
'Fate of the Furious' REVIEW
I always say that, anything that a movie explains in the first twenty minutes or so, people will buy into, because that is when your brain is trying to figure out what you are watching. So, with sci-fi movies, they explain the fantasy elements right away, so you believe that this guy was bitten by a radioactive spider or is from Krypton or whatever. And with space movies, there is still the element of "this is another planet, so this is different from what I'm used to". So, even if they take a little longer than twenty minutes to explain The Force, you buy into it because they established that you were in a galaxy far, far away...right away.
'Fate of the Furious', the 8th installment in the series, takes place on Earth, with cars, weapons and countries that we are all familiar with. This makes the fantasy elements, the laws of physics that they ignore, both with the car chase scenes and with how strong Dwayne Johnson's character is, far less believable than Yoda fighting Count Dooku. The saving grace, however, is how this movie knows what it is and does not try to be anything other than silly. So, if you shut off your brain and laugh at how over-the-top it is, you will have a great time.
The main characters are very likable, despite being played by actors who would be terrible in anything except this series or a music video. Again, the producers know what kind of movie this is and have given us two good actors to raise the credibility of the cast as a whole. Charlize Theron is great as the villain in this and even makes human Groot Vin Diesel look like a better actor than he is in other scenes. Kurt Russell is also great, playing a government agent. My low opinion of Tyrese Gibson as an actor has improved, but I give credit to the writers and director of this movie for making him the butt of the jokes all the time. It made me feel that I am not the only one who finds him irritating.
A lot of characters are the butts of jokes, as this movie was clearly made for a bunch of guys who like cars to sit around and bust each others chops while watching it. Dwayne Johnson has some funny one liners (including one about a toothbrush) and there is a scene at the end with Jason Statham that was legitimately hilarious. I'm not going to spoil it, but he's protecting something and it's funny. I dare you not to laugh. Or go "awwwwww!"
There is a decent story holding this all together, about Vin Diesel's character being blackmailed into going back to his old criminal life from the first movie. There are a few surprises and the characters explain what you need to know from previous films in order to go along. If you forgot that Paul Walker's character's name was Brian, you might be confused when he is referenced. (The actor passed away shortly before the 7th film was released, but the character just went home to his family.) But everything else leads up to a plot twist that I honestly did not see coming. I gave them credit for surprising me, allowing me to enjoy the ridiculously fun climax with cars running away from a submarine (on ice) that was shown in the trailers.
All-in-all, if you shut off your brain and can enjoy the over-the-top madness, Fate of the Furious is a good time at the movies. I give it 3 nuclear subs out of 5.
Check out Turtle Rocket Books for science fiction books from the mind of a mildly-autistic man-child.
'Fate of the Furious', the 8th installment in the series, takes place on Earth, with cars, weapons and countries that we are all familiar with. This makes the fantasy elements, the laws of physics that they ignore, both with the car chase scenes and with how strong Dwayne Johnson's character is, far less believable than Yoda fighting Count Dooku. The saving grace, however, is how this movie knows what it is and does not try to be anything other than silly. So, if you shut off your brain and laugh at how over-the-top it is, you will have a great time.
The main characters are very likable, despite being played by actors who would be terrible in anything except this series or a music video. Again, the producers know what kind of movie this is and have given us two good actors to raise the credibility of the cast as a whole. Charlize Theron is great as the villain in this and even makes human Groot Vin Diesel look like a better actor than he is in other scenes. Kurt Russell is also great, playing a government agent. My low opinion of Tyrese Gibson as an actor has improved, but I give credit to the writers and director of this movie for making him the butt of the jokes all the time. It made me feel that I am not the only one who finds him irritating.
A lot of characters are the butts of jokes, as this movie was clearly made for a bunch of guys who like cars to sit around and bust each others chops while watching it. Dwayne Johnson has some funny one liners (including one about a toothbrush) and there is a scene at the end with Jason Statham that was legitimately hilarious. I'm not going to spoil it, but he's protecting something and it's funny. I dare you not to laugh. Or go "awwwwww!"
There is a decent story holding this all together, about Vin Diesel's character being blackmailed into going back to his old criminal life from the first movie. There are a few surprises and the characters explain what you need to know from previous films in order to go along. If you forgot that Paul Walker's character's name was Brian, you might be confused when he is referenced. (The actor passed away shortly before the 7th film was released, but the character just went home to his family.) But everything else leads up to a plot twist that I honestly did not see coming. I gave them credit for surprising me, allowing me to enjoy the ridiculously fun climax with cars running away from a submarine (on ice) that was shown in the trailers.
All-in-all, if you shut off your brain and can enjoy the over-the-top madness, Fate of the Furious is a good time at the movies. I give it 3 nuclear subs out of 5.
Check out Turtle Rocket Books for science fiction books from the mind of a mildly-autistic man-child.
Thursday, April 20, 2017
What Suicide Squad could have learned from Guardians of the Galaxy
Suicide Squad was a mess of a movie. But there was enough cool stuff in it that, as I often do with movies I am disappointed by, I started rewriting it in my head. I usually don't bother rewriting the flick in my head unless I like something about it and want to salvage the rest. I thought Margot Robbie was great as Harley Quinn and Jared Leto was good as The Joker, his performance diminished by the poor writing. Viola Davis made an amazing Amanda Waller, a character I loved from the Justice League cartoon, but didn't save the weaker elements of the film. Anyway, as I was mentally rewriting Suicide Squad, I realized that this movie could have benefited from being more like Guardians of the Galaxy.
Not that Suicide Squad should not have had the darker tone. Of course it should have. The people in Suicide Squad (or any Batman-related property) certainly should have had a tone that was darker than GOTG. Darker humor would have worked to lighten up the movie where it needed to. But the thing that Suicide Squad did poorly that GOTG did much better was apparent to me from the very beginning. It had to do with the way that they introduced the characters.
GOTG and Suicide Squad are both about groups of people, a "squad" and "guardians" respectively. But GOTG started out by introducing us to a main character (Peter Quill/Star Lord) and then, as we follow him on his journey, we meet the rest of the group (Rocket, Groot, Drax, Gamora etc.). So, even though the movie is about a group of people, it still technically has ONE main character, which prevents the movie, the first act where you introduce everybody, from being confusing.
Confused is precisely what I was in the first act of Suicide Squad, which consisted of numerous flashbacks being hurled at the audience, introducing all the characters, most of which I forgot who they were, because they don't give you much of a reason to care. Besides Harley and the Joker, I only remember Killer Croc because of Batman's 1992 animated series. Oh, and Deadshot. Would I have remembered Deadshot if Will Smith didn't play him? Probably not. Should DJ Jazzy Jeff have played Scarecrow? YES!!!
But that was my biggest problem with Squad. Movies should have ONE main character, even when said film is about a group. I said to a friend after seeing the film that Mad Love, the Batman cartoon episode where they get into Harley Quinn's origin story, would have made a better basis for the movie. People like seeing female main characters, so here you have a criminal psychologist who gets her first high-profile gig working at Arkham Asylum. She's lonely and falls in love with the bad boy. And in helping the Joker escape, she lets out the other members of the Suicide Squad, who we meet slowly through the first act of the film through therapy sessions that they have with Dr. Quinzell. Then, you have your Batman cameo and Amanda Waller (DC's female Nick Fury) intro as they show up to handle the madness. See how that would have been better because you're following Harley around, getting to know her, getting inside her head and THEN she meets other people?
Personally, I would have ditched the other members of the Squad and made it a Harley Quinn movie, where Harley and Joker escape and go on a Mickey and Mallory/Bonnie and Clyde style road trip crime spree. But even if the other guys are there, focus on one journey and how that journey affects other characters.
There are a lot of things that I think mainstream sci-fi movies could learn from GOTG, but I will save that for when I review the second film, which is coming out in 2 weeks. Are you looking forward to GOTG2? What's your favorite comic book movie of all time?
Meanwhile, check out Turtle Rocket Books for science fiction books from the mind of a mildly autistic man-child.
Not that Suicide Squad should not have had the darker tone. Of course it should have. The people in Suicide Squad (or any Batman-related property) certainly should have had a tone that was darker than GOTG. Darker humor would have worked to lighten up the movie where it needed to. But the thing that Suicide Squad did poorly that GOTG did much better was apparent to me from the very beginning. It had to do with the way that they introduced the characters.
GOTG and Suicide Squad are both about groups of people, a "squad" and "guardians" respectively. But GOTG started out by introducing us to a main character (Peter Quill/Star Lord) and then, as we follow him on his journey, we meet the rest of the group (Rocket, Groot, Drax, Gamora etc.). So, even though the movie is about a group of people, it still technically has ONE main character, which prevents the movie, the first act where you introduce everybody, from being confusing.
Confused is precisely what I was in the first act of Suicide Squad, which consisted of numerous flashbacks being hurled at the audience, introducing all the characters, most of which I forgot who they were, because they don't give you much of a reason to care. Besides Harley and the Joker, I only remember Killer Croc because of Batman's 1992 animated series. Oh, and Deadshot. Would I have remembered Deadshot if Will Smith didn't play him? Probably not. Should DJ Jazzy Jeff have played Scarecrow? YES!!!
But that was my biggest problem with Squad. Movies should have ONE main character, even when said film is about a group. I said to a friend after seeing the film that Mad Love, the Batman cartoon episode where they get into Harley Quinn's origin story, would have made a better basis for the movie. People like seeing female main characters, so here you have a criminal psychologist who gets her first high-profile gig working at Arkham Asylum. She's lonely and falls in love with the bad boy. And in helping the Joker escape, she lets out the other members of the Suicide Squad, who we meet slowly through the first act of the film through therapy sessions that they have with Dr. Quinzell. Then, you have your Batman cameo and Amanda Waller (DC's female Nick Fury) intro as they show up to handle the madness. See how that would have been better because you're following Harley around, getting to know her, getting inside her head and THEN she meets other people?
Personally, I would have ditched the other members of the Squad and made it a Harley Quinn movie, where Harley and Joker escape and go on a Mickey and Mallory/Bonnie and Clyde style road trip crime spree. But even if the other guys are there, focus on one journey and how that journey affects other characters.
There are a lot of things that I think mainstream sci-fi movies could learn from GOTG, but I will save that for when I review the second film, which is coming out in 2 weeks. Are you looking forward to GOTG2? What's your favorite comic book movie of all time?
Meanwhile, check out Turtle Rocket Books for science fiction books from the mind of a mildly autistic man-child.
Sunday, March 26, 2017
'Power Rangers' REVIEW
I enjoyed Dean Isrealite's last movie, the time-travelling teenager movie 'Project Almanac'. I liked the characters, thought the dialogue was well-written, but the ending ruined it for me. It was like they either ran out of time or money and the movie just fell off at the end. I went from being pleasantly surprised that Michael Bay had something to do with this to being confused, not that Michael Bay made a disappointing movie, but as to what happened at the end.
Well, running out of budget was no problem for Dean Isrealite's latest movie 'Power Rangers', which contains the most obvious product placement for Krispy Kreme Donuts that you have seen since Chris Rock suggested their donuts have crack in them. Literally, the crystal that Rita Repulsa is looking for during the whole movie is buried under the Krispy Kreme ("Krakky Kreme?") in Angel Grove. And the kids hang out there (it IS a small town), practicing some of their kung fu moves by trying to snatch donuts away from each other on the end of forks. A "wax on, wax off" for the new generation.
This new version of 'Power Rangers' (based, of course, on the campy 90's kids show) contains the same kind of well-developed teen characters that 'Project Almanac' had, almost as though Dean wanted to finish his movie. "Dinosaur robots??? Cool??? Why not?" Fans of 80's movies will make comparisons between this movie and 'Breakfast Club', especially since all of these soon-to-be superheroes meet during Saturday detention. And the plot revolves around their characters having to bond and work together as a team. They don't "morph" into their iconic, multi-colored suits if they don't. But instead of writing a letter to the teacher (or to Zordon) about being "the geek, the brain, the spaz etc." they fight monsters and save the town.
Fans of the original show might not like the fact that these heroes do not show up in their iconic armor suits until the end of the movie, but that is what I liked about it. As I mentioned in my last blog post, I don't have a nostalgic pull towards these characters because I did not grow up with the show, so I was "just" looking for a good movie...and I got one. I liked the fact that this movie is a teen drama with sci-fi elements sprinkled in and then all the "wham bam" stuff shows up at the end when the putty hits the fan.
I liked the fact that Billy the Blue Ranger was autistic, for personal reasons. I liked being represented and seeing how nice Jason the Red Ranger would be to me if we ever met. I liked that these characters all felt like real, mischievous kids that I grew up with in the 90's, when I was in high school and too old to be watching the original show. These are truly "teenagers with attitudes", not the goody-two shoes kids that you may remember from the show. You will be able to relate to at least one of these characters. The movie still has positive messages about the importance of trying to understand one another...but without being preachy like the show tended to be.
The sci-fi elements (power coins, Zordon, Alpha 5) are introduced little by little and do get a little over-the-top. But, it doesn't take you out of the movie because you are already invested in these characters and want to see them succeed. Also, since the original show was a little over the top, the filmmakers were trying not to alienate long-time fans. They just gave the characters more backstory and grounded it in a more serious world, before they donned colorful costumes and started driving around in robot dinosaurs...and it works. It all gels together. All of the young actors who play the Rangers are great and Elizabeth Banks is great as (yes, over-the-top) villain Rita Repulsa. Same with Bryan Cranston as Zordon and Bill Hader doing the voice of Alpha 5.
Not sure if long-time fans will disagree, but I liked it. This was the serious, but still-quippy take that I would have loved to see in a TMNT movie. Now, THAT was something I grew up with.
RATING: 3.5 Zords out of 5
Like sci-fi? Want to read a book with another autistic superhero? click here
Well, running out of budget was no problem for Dean Isrealite's latest movie 'Power Rangers', which contains the most obvious product placement for Krispy Kreme Donuts that you have seen since Chris Rock suggested their donuts have crack in them. Literally, the crystal that Rita Repulsa is looking for during the whole movie is buried under the Krispy Kreme ("Krakky Kreme?") in Angel Grove. And the kids hang out there (it IS a small town), practicing some of their kung fu moves by trying to snatch donuts away from each other on the end of forks. A "wax on, wax off" for the new generation.
This new version of 'Power Rangers' (based, of course, on the campy 90's kids show) contains the same kind of well-developed teen characters that 'Project Almanac' had, almost as though Dean wanted to finish his movie. "Dinosaur robots??? Cool??? Why not?" Fans of 80's movies will make comparisons between this movie and 'Breakfast Club', especially since all of these soon-to-be superheroes meet during Saturday detention. And the plot revolves around their characters having to bond and work together as a team. They don't "morph" into their iconic, multi-colored suits if they don't. But instead of writing a letter to the teacher (or to Zordon) about being "the geek, the brain, the spaz etc." they fight monsters and save the town.
Fans of the original show might not like the fact that these heroes do not show up in their iconic armor suits until the end of the movie, but that is what I liked about it. As I mentioned in my last blog post, I don't have a nostalgic pull towards these characters because I did not grow up with the show, so I was "just" looking for a good movie...and I got one. I liked the fact that this movie is a teen drama with sci-fi elements sprinkled in and then all the "wham bam" stuff shows up at the end when the putty hits the fan.
I liked the fact that Billy the Blue Ranger was autistic, for personal reasons. I liked being represented and seeing how nice Jason the Red Ranger would be to me if we ever met. I liked that these characters all felt like real, mischievous kids that I grew up with in the 90's, when I was in high school and too old to be watching the original show. These are truly "teenagers with attitudes", not the goody-two shoes kids that you may remember from the show. You will be able to relate to at least one of these characters. The movie still has positive messages about the importance of trying to understand one another...but without being preachy like the show tended to be.
The sci-fi elements (power coins, Zordon, Alpha 5) are introduced little by little and do get a little over-the-top. But, it doesn't take you out of the movie because you are already invested in these characters and want to see them succeed. Also, since the original show was a little over the top, the filmmakers were trying not to alienate long-time fans. They just gave the characters more backstory and grounded it in a more serious world, before they donned colorful costumes and started driving around in robot dinosaurs...and it works. It all gels together. All of the young actors who play the Rangers are great and Elizabeth Banks is great as (yes, over-the-top) villain Rita Repulsa. Same with Bryan Cranston as Zordon and Bill Hader doing the voice of Alpha 5.
Not sure if long-time fans will disagree, but I liked it. This was the serious, but still-quippy take that I would have loved to see in a TMNT movie. Now, THAT was something I grew up with.
RATING: 3.5 Zords out of 5
Like sci-fi? Want to read a book with another autistic superhero? click here
Friday, March 24, 2017
Go Go No Nostalgia!!!
I remember when the original 'Mighty Morphin Power Rangers' show came out and, at the time, I was too old for it. It was on 'Fox Kids' right after 'Batman: the animated series', which I love (and still do, owning all the DVDs as a grown man) and the TV in my room didn't have a remote control...and I was too lazy to get up. So, I watched with judgmental curiosity the adventures of these small town kids who fought monsters every time one or more would be sent to their quaint little burgh.
I guess I was at that age where I thought my fandom was too cool to watch something aimed at too young an age group. I scoffed at the opening sequence, where Zordon labeled the Power Rangers as "teenagers with attitudes". Clearly, if you watched the show, these kids were straight-A students who helped old people, younger kids and did volunteer work. I went to school with teenagers and the ones who did that stuff didn't have "attitudes". None of the Power Rangers were sneaking alcohol or girls into their rooms (or lives). Obviously, this was done to keep positive messages in the show for the younger fan base. So, what kept me watching (privately) this "kiddie" show that I had pronounced "stupid" in front of my peers?
I had read in a pre-Internet 1990s movie fanzine that MMPR used to be a Japanese show where the American actors were edited into pre-existing footage. Being a fan of 'Godzilla' at the time and realizing that this same thing was done to the American Raymond Burr version of the original 'Godzilla' in a racist, post-WWII USA (so that the main characters would not be "those people"), part of my brain viewed it as a kiddie version of the kaiju flicks that I loved. It was still in the "so bad it's good" MST3K territory and I never bought any merchandise from the show, but I did enjoy watching robot dinosaurs knock down small buildings...in that "revert back to a five-year-old" kind of way.
All the while, the teenager part of my brain was wondering why this Rita Repulsa lady wold be spending all her time and energy trying to conquer Angel Grove, a small town no one's ever heard of and that only had tall buildings when the movie came out and the budget went up. Was there oil underneath this town? Did Rita work for the Carlyle Group? Is that why she was waging war on a small place and killing innocents during monster/robot battles? And where did the Zords come from? Why would Zordon bury WMDs underneath this small town? All these questions were shoved aside as I laughed and quipped at this colorful show, like I would see Tom Servo and Crow do all those years later. Also, I thought Kimberly was hot, one of the perks of every show casting 20-somethings to play teenagers on TV.
Then, I saw the trailer for the 2017 version many years later. Well, they fixed the teenagers with attitude thing, one kid is on parole, the other has to take a drug test. And the special effects are way better. And they fixed the racial connotations to the colors of their uniforms. The blue ranger is black, the black ranger is Asian. I think the yellow ranger is Hispanic. The pink ranger is still a girl, but one kid is autistic like me, so that's diverse too. I like being represented.
Anyway, I'm going to check out the new movie, shutting off my brain and enjoying the giant robot dinosaurs. I won't have the nostalgic baggage that I had when Michael Bay ruined Ninja Turtles, because I didn’t grow up loving the franchise. But I do like superhero movies and I plan to go into this one like it's something new. Obviously, Hollywood would have never made this film if it was an original idea, because they don't do that with sci-fi...so, thank you, cheesy show, for the closest thing I'll have to watching something truly original at the movies this year.
Like sci-fi? http://www.turtlerocketbooks.com
I guess I was at that age where I thought my fandom was too cool to watch something aimed at too young an age group. I scoffed at the opening sequence, where Zordon labeled the Power Rangers as "teenagers with attitudes". Clearly, if you watched the show, these kids were straight-A students who helped old people, younger kids and did volunteer work. I went to school with teenagers and the ones who did that stuff didn't have "attitudes". None of the Power Rangers were sneaking alcohol or girls into their rooms (or lives). Obviously, this was done to keep positive messages in the show for the younger fan base. So, what kept me watching (privately) this "kiddie" show that I had pronounced "stupid" in front of my peers?
I had read in a pre-Internet 1990s movie fanzine that MMPR used to be a Japanese show where the American actors were edited into pre-existing footage. Being a fan of 'Godzilla' at the time and realizing that this same thing was done to the American Raymond Burr version of the original 'Godzilla' in a racist, post-WWII USA (so that the main characters would not be "those people"), part of my brain viewed it as a kiddie version of the kaiju flicks that I loved. It was still in the "so bad it's good" MST3K territory and I never bought any merchandise from the show, but I did enjoy watching robot dinosaurs knock down small buildings...in that "revert back to a five-year-old" kind of way.
All the while, the teenager part of my brain was wondering why this Rita Repulsa lady wold be spending all her time and energy trying to conquer Angel Grove, a small town no one's ever heard of and that only had tall buildings when the movie came out and the budget went up. Was there oil underneath this town? Did Rita work for the Carlyle Group? Is that why she was waging war on a small place and killing innocents during monster/robot battles? And where did the Zords come from? Why would Zordon bury WMDs underneath this small town? All these questions were shoved aside as I laughed and quipped at this colorful show, like I would see Tom Servo and Crow do all those years later. Also, I thought Kimberly was hot, one of the perks of every show casting 20-somethings to play teenagers on TV.
Then, I saw the trailer for the 2017 version many years later. Well, they fixed the teenagers with attitude thing, one kid is on parole, the other has to take a drug test. And the special effects are way better. And they fixed the racial connotations to the colors of their uniforms. The blue ranger is black, the black ranger is Asian. I think the yellow ranger is Hispanic. The pink ranger is still a girl, but one kid is autistic like me, so that's diverse too. I like being represented.
Anyway, I'm going to check out the new movie, shutting off my brain and enjoying the giant robot dinosaurs. I won't have the nostalgic baggage that I had when Michael Bay ruined Ninja Turtles, because I didn’t grow up loving the franchise. But I do like superhero movies and I plan to go into this one like it's something new. Obviously, Hollywood would have never made this film if it was an original idea, because they don't do that with sci-fi...so, thank you, cheesy show, for the closest thing I'll have to watching something truly original at the movies this year.
Like sci-fi? http://www.turtlerocketbooks.com
Tuesday, January 6, 2015
'Transformers: Age of Extinction' REVIEW
I have always said that action scenes are only as good as the rest of the movie. As well-filmed and clever as they may be, you only care about them if the rest of the movie is good and you care about the characters and why they are fighting/escaping/chasing etc. I would not care about the toys in 'Toy Story 3' escaping from Sunnyside Daycare if I didn't like the characters. That being said, Transformers 2 and 3 are examples of how cool-looking action scenes can be crazy boring if the movie is stupid and the hero is whiny and his mother tries to be funny by eating hash brownies and talking about sex.
Now we have 'Transformers: Age of Extinction' (TF4), a semi-reboot where Sam Witwicky, played by Shia LeBeouf has been replaced with Mark Wahlberg's character. Marky Mark is an inventor who is a bit over-protective of his 17-year-old daughter who is secretly dating a 20-year-old race car driver. The events of TF3 are referenced breifly as a reason why the government is hunting down Autobots, as the battle at the end of the last movie destroyed Chicago (5 years ago in movie time). Marky Mark finds a rusty old truck that is really Autobot leader Optimus Prime in hiding. The government, led by a very entertaining Kelsey Grammar as a villianous CIA agent, finds Prime on the farm. So, Mark, his daughter and the boyfriend that Marky Mark doesn't like are on the run from Evil Fraiser with the few remaining Autobots hiding on the planet. His new Funky Bunch.
Meanwhile, Stanley Tucci plays a much richer inventor who has his own tech company. His company has been reverse engineering the remains of the Decepticons that were destroyed at the end of TF3, creating robots that he believes will protect mankind. Iconic TF villian Megatron has been influencing the construction of these new robots, tricking this businessman into rebuilding his Decepticon army. Megatron is reborn in a new body and renamed Galvatron. Yes, just like in the 1986 cartoon film. Only cooler, because these new Decpticons transform by breaking up into a million pieces and coming back together.
Yes, the special effects are great and being a Michael Bay movie, the cool ideas do make way for some really loooooong, loud action scenes where a bunch of stuff gets destroyed, but it is far more entertaining this time around simply because both the characters and the cool ideas are better developed. Yes, this still a pointless 'rock 'em, sock 'em' action movie with a paper-thin plot, but by the time this movie deteriorates into the loud action scenes, you ar least care enough about whose fighting to be invested in who is in danger. And that makes this movie better than TF 2 and 3. The first one is still the best. That might be because I related more to a young boy who wants a car and Megan Fox than a father protecting his daughter. There are a few characters here who flirt with each other without their relationship being developed (which is annoying), but I liked most of the characters. And the humor is better/darker too. Nothing as ridiculous as the Twins or Sam's parents in this film.
I remember thinking, when TF2 came out, that the seven pieces of construction equipment that came together to form one enormous robot (like that TF toy I wanted as a kid...I think it was called a Constructicon)...would have been a cool way to end a better film. Well,at the end of this movie, we get the Dinobots, the origins of which are explained believably well (for a TF film). They are very cool and the rest of the movie is good enough so that they are enjoyable instead of causing you to look at your watch and groan the way I did with the Constructicons in part 2.
Silly, but non-confusing plot. Likeable human characters with some decent acting and tender moments. Better humor. Cool parts with robot dinosaurs. Ridiculous ending where Optimus Prime just flies off the planet when doing so earlier would have solved a bunch of problems. 2.5 Dinobots out of 5.
Now we have 'Transformers: Age of Extinction' (TF4), a semi-reboot where Sam Witwicky, played by Shia LeBeouf has been replaced with Mark Wahlberg's character. Marky Mark is an inventor who is a bit over-protective of his 17-year-old daughter who is secretly dating a 20-year-old race car driver. The events of TF3 are referenced breifly as a reason why the government is hunting down Autobots, as the battle at the end of the last movie destroyed Chicago (5 years ago in movie time). Marky Mark finds a rusty old truck that is really Autobot leader Optimus Prime in hiding. The government, led by a very entertaining Kelsey Grammar as a villianous CIA agent, finds Prime on the farm. So, Mark, his daughter and the boyfriend that Marky Mark doesn't like are on the run from Evil Fraiser with the few remaining Autobots hiding on the planet. His new Funky Bunch.
Meanwhile, Stanley Tucci plays a much richer inventor who has his own tech company. His company has been reverse engineering the remains of the Decepticons that were destroyed at the end of TF3, creating robots that he believes will protect mankind. Iconic TF villian Megatron has been influencing the construction of these new robots, tricking this businessman into rebuilding his Decepticon army. Megatron is reborn in a new body and renamed Galvatron. Yes, just like in the 1986 cartoon film. Only cooler, because these new Decpticons transform by breaking up into a million pieces and coming back together.
Yes, the special effects are great and being a Michael Bay movie, the cool ideas do make way for some really loooooong, loud action scenes where a bunch of stuff gets destroyed, but it is far more entertaining this time around simply because both the characters and the cool ideas are better developed. Yes, this still a pointless 'rock 'em, sock 'em' action movie with a paper-thin plot, but by the time this movie deteriorates into the loud action scenes, you ar least care enough about whose fighting to be invested in who is in danger. And that makes this movie better than TF 2 and 3. The first one is still the best. That might be because I related more to a young boy who wants a car and Megan Fox than a father protecting his daughter. There are a few characters here who flirt with each other without their relationship being developed (which is annoying), but I liked most of the characters. And the humor is better/darker too. Nothing as ridiculous as the Twins or Sam's parents in this film.
I remember thinking, when TF2 came out, that the seven pieces of construction equipment that came together to form one enormous robot (like that TF toy I wanted as a kid...I think it was called a Constructicon)...would have been a cool way to end a better film. Well,at the end of this movie, we get the Dinobots, the origins of which are explained believably well (for a TF film). They are very cool and the rest of the movie is good enough so that they are enjoyable instead of causing you to look at your watch and groan the way I did with the Constructicons in part 2.
Silly, but non-confusing plot. Likeable human characters with some decent acting and tender moments. Better humor. Cool parts with robot dinosaurs. Ridiculous ending where Optimus Prime just flies off the planet when doing so earlier would have solved a bunch of problems. 2.5 Dinobots out of 5.
'Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles' REVIEW
It's been thirty years since two freelance artists who were living in Dover, NH at the time (Eastman and Laird) collected their last few thousand bucks to self-publish a comic book that satirized what was popular in comic books at the time (the ninjas in Daredevil, the teenage mutants of X-Men...um, turtles are slow and you wouldn't expect them to be ninjas). The more popular it got, the more it became its own "thing". A series of toys spawned a very popular TV series (which is backwards and part of the problem, but typical of the 80's) that was quite campy and had completely different side characters from the comics. A 1990 movie successfully combined what was cool about the comics and the cartoon, but kept the "brothers who bicker but still love each other" and "step-parent raising four boys" aspect that was always the "heart" of the better TMNT stories in any medium. Since then, TMNT versions have ranged from a nice combination of the cartoon and comics to even more campy and "let's sell toys to younger kids because our original fans are growing out of this crap" kind of thing...like the "Coming Out of Our Shells" music stage tour that I will try to forget about again and hope it goes away.
Now, we have a live-action Michael Bay-produced TMNT movie. The man who ruined Transformers is tackling something I had MORE of an emotional attachment to as a kid. (Saw it a week ago, haven't killed myself.) First, the good. No one changed their origin story to aliens instead of mutants, a concern started two years ago when Michael Bay "misspoke" (or changed his mind later when turtles fans got mad and lit the Internet on fire). Second, complaints about the look of the computer generated turtles are overblown. They were trying to make them look like real turtles, but still make them able to emote like the characters we grew up with...and turtles have beaks. So, they look different, but it grows on you as you are watching the film and realize (third) they they got the four turtles' personalities exactly right. The big brother. The hothead. The nerd. The funny one. (Michelangelo is as funny as he should be) The characters are well-done visually, a nice mix of familair and more realistic. Fourth, this movie has great action scenes and is better than Transformers 2 amd 3, which is not saying much, but this film helped me realize what a difference it makes when watching big, dumb, pointless action scenes where you care a little about the characters...as opposed to when you don't. You care a little more about what's blowing up and who is catching who instead of being bored. Megan Fox was better than I expected as the turtles' human friend/reporter April, who wants to be a serious journalist instead of interviewing fitness gurus. They gave the character more to do and more of a connection to the turtles' origin, which was from the (great) current IDW comic book series. Will Arnett is funny as her quippy cameraman Vernon Fenwick.
Now, the bad. The main villian is not Shredder (the iconic villian from every other version)...but a scientist/new character named Eric Sachs (played by a great actor named William Fichtner) who had a hand in creating the chemicals that mutated the turtles (and their rat/father figure Splinter). People unfamiliar who are dragged to this movie with their kids won't know the difference, but (spoiler alert) his "end" at the end of the film is so anti-climatic where he gets knocked out and he's gone for the rest of the movie that you will just be there with your mouth hanging open, going "whaaaat?". The same is true of fan-favorite/Shredder's daughter Karai, who has one scene and very little point in this pointless movie. The turtles fight Shredder at the end like they do in every version, but because he had been reduced to secondary villian and (more offensively), they cut out his backstory/connection to the turtles' rat/father figure/teacher Splinter, you care about him as a villian even less. And then, the real villian gets knocked out and you're like...eh. There are alot of plot holes in this movie, a weak story and bad dialogue that detracted from the decent parts and none of the above-mentioned "heart" that characterized better TMNT stories. The TMNT taught me that it was okay to cry when I was 11, as both Raphael and Mikey do it in the 1990 version. All this movie will teach kids to do is that its okay to pointlessly wreck trucks if you're big enough and have a shell.
Got the turtles' personalities right. Side human characters were funny. Villians, some of the dialogue and plot ruined the rest of it.
2 shells out of 5.
Better (current) versions of TMNT that show what these characters can be.
The new TMNT cartoon on Nick.
The new IDW comic book series. I think you can still download volume 8: Northhampton for free on the Google Play Store. Lots of emotionin that story.
Now, we have a live-action Michael Bay-produced TMNT movie. The man who ruined Transformers is tackling something I had MORE of an emotional attachment to as a kid. (Saw it a week ago, haven't killed myself.) First, the good. No one changed their origin story to aliens instead of mutants, a concern started two years ago when Michael Bay "misspoke" (or changed his mind later when turtles fans got mad and lit the Internet on fire). Second, complaints about the look of the computer generated turtles are overblown. They were trying to make them look like real turtles, but still make them able to emote like the characters we grew up with...and turtles have beaks. So, they look different, but it grows on you as you are watching the film and realize (third) they they got the four turtles' personalities exactly right. The big brother. The hothead. The nerd. The funny one. (Michelangelo is as funny as he should be) The characters are well-done visually, a nice mix of familair and more realistic. Fourth, this movie has great action scenes and is better than Transformers 2 amd 3, which is not saying much, but this film helped me realize what a difference it makes when watching big, dumb, pointless action scenes where you care a little about the characters...as opposed to when you don't. You care a little more about what's blowing up and who is catching who instead of being bored. Megan Fox was better than I expected as the turtles' human friend/reporter April, who wants to be a serious journalist instead of interviewing fitness gurus. They gave the character more to do and more of a connection to the turtles' origin, which was from the (great) current IDW comic book series. Will Arnett is funny as her quippy cameraman Vernon Fenwick.
Now, the bad. The main villian is not Shredder (the iconic villian from every other version)...but a scientist/new character named Eric Sachs (played by a great actor named William Fichtner) who had a hand in creating the chemicals that mutated the turtles (and their rat/father figure Splinter). People unfamiliar who are dragged to this movie with their kids won't know the difference, but (spoiler alert) his "end" at the end of the film is so anti-climatic where he gets knocked out and he's gone for the rest of the movie that you will just be there with your mouth hanging open, going "whaaaat?". The same is true of fan-favorite/Shredder's daughter Karai, who has one scene and very little point in this pointless movie. The turtles fight Shredder at the end like they do in every version, but because he had been reduced to secondary villian and (more offensively), they cut out his backstory/connection to the turtles' rat/father figure/teacher Splinter, you care about him as a villian even less. And then, the real villian gets knocked out and you're like...eh. There are alot of plot holes in this movie, a weak story and bad dialogue that detracted from the decent parts and none of the above-mentioned "heart" that characterized better TMNT stories. The TMNT taught me that it was okay to cry when I was 11, as both Raphael and Mikey do it in the 1990 version. All this movie will teach kids to do is that its okay to pointlessly wreck trucks if you're big enough and have a shell.
Got the turtles' personalities right. Side human characters were funny. Villians, some of the dialogue and plot ruined the rest of it.
2 shells out of 5.
Better (current) versions of TMNT that show what these characters can be.
The new TMNT cartoon on Nick.
The new IDW comic book series. I think you can still download volume 8: Northhampton for free on the Google Play Store. Lots of emotionin that story.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)