I’m going to start out by saying that I won’t be approaching this film with objective analysis or much of any kind of objectivity. All film is subjective, and different people respond differently to what they see and experience. The Marvel Cinematic Universe films are very near and dear to the hearts of many people. For those who are fans of comic books and fantasy, experiencing something like Avengers: Endgame was a monumental and emotional thrill ride. I can’t speak for everyone’s experience. All I can talk about is how I responded to this film; how this film made me feel.
Growing up, I was an avid comic book reader and fan. I loved Batman, Superman, Spider-Man, the Justice League, etc. I was fairly engrossed in the comic book mythos of both Marvel and DC. My love of superheroes was enhanced by the emerging comic book movie renaissance. Movies like Iron-Man, The Dark Knight, and The Avengers signaled the start of a revolutionary period in Hollywood. Since then, superhero movies have become box office behemoths, and the Marvel Cinematic Universe has become one of the most profitable brands in the world. The same passions of the highest level that I felt for superheroes at that stage in my life are no longer shared by my current self in that degree, but I always appreciate the memories of following my favorite superheroes and aspiring to adopt their strong moral compasses.
Avengers: Endgame is a perfect encapsulation of why I, among many others, loved to see the fluttering capes and bold colors of superheroes. It is a beautiful sendoff to a ten-year, 22 movie saga. While not perfect, Endgame shines as a culmination, nay a celebration of the MCU and all its blockbuster superhero glory. It balances a heavy plot and numerous characters in order to deliver an experience that is wholly satisfying. If you are a major fan of this movie series looking to get the ultimate Marvel movie, this will likely not disappoint. The film manages to stay afloat despite a more somber tone less typical of the MCU standard. I personally found the tone to be refreshing, as an over-reliance on humor was becoming a trend in the other films and was popping up at inopportune times within the movies, something that Avengers: Infinity War suffered with significantly.
The action was another strong point in the film, though used sparsely until the end. The film starts off slow, but the approach felt very methodical, like every scene and every character interaction building up to the climax was important. However, considering the sheer number of characters in the MCU, not everyone gets to shine as much as you would want, and there were certain characters that I would have liked to have seen more from either in terms of character development or screen time. Still, the most important characters get their time to shine.
This may be one of the few films where the plot was actually one of the biggest strengths rather than just the action, comedy, or characters. There are many twists and turns, exciting moments, and mountains of fanservice. The result of this is an ending that is emotionally resonating and deeply fulfilling. The best comparison that comes to mind is Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King. Though not at the same level of literary depth and cinematic achievement, Endgame certainly had a few corollaries with Return of the King in how it managed to wrap up an epic saga of films with the proper care and dedication, even setting aside a respectable amount of time for an epilogue. In some ways, Endgame feels like a direct sequel to the first Avengers movie, really honing in on the fact that everything comes full circle from that fateful meeting of these heroes.
In summation, though not every part of the journey in these 22 films was perfect, Avengers: Endgame is a more than fitting conclusion to a great universe of heroes. It calls back to the classic moments in which we first saw these beloved characters, provides an exciting time at the movies for those who are looking for the ultimate spectacle and brings passion and pure delight to those who have been on this journey every step of the way. Considering the scope and scale of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, and the unbelievable task that Joe and Anthony Russo had in sticking the landing, I think they nailed it. Avengers: Endgame is an event in cinematic spectacle the likes of which we rarely ever see and is worth checking out even for the most casual of audiences. And yes, watching it gave me the same feelings of pure joy and passions from my cherished memories of years past.
Jordan Peele’s directorial debut, Get Out, took the world by storm. It was lauded by audiences and critics alike for its social relevance, unique ideas, and thrilling twists. It even garnered Peele a Best Director nomination and Best Original Screenplay win at the Academy Awards. Naturally, his sophomore effort has caused collective anticipation from enthusiastic audiences. Us focuses on a family that is attacked by seemingly alternate malevolent versions of themselves. Lupita Nyong’o plays the lead role of Adelaide Wilson, a mother of two children, who is disturbed by the return of the doppelgangers since she once encountered her evil counterpart as a young girl. As the fight for survival between the original family and the counterparts continues, Adelaide must face the dark secrets of her past and uncover the truth behind why the doppelgangers are attacking.
Us is an extremely well-directed, exciting, and suspenseful film that unfortunately has a confusing resolution that doesn’t give the satisfying final “oomph” moment that the rest of the film was building up to. I won’t be going into spoilers in this review until the very end. First, the good things in the movie start with the absolutely breathtaking performance of Lupita Nyong’o. She conveys vulnerability and then strength as Adelaide Wilson, and manages to elicit a steady dose of fear as her malicious doppelganger. There is already early Oscar buzz for her, and after seeing her incredibly compelling performance I am not one to argue. Winston Duke plays the part of the comical and blundering father of the family, with Shahadi Wright Joseph and Evan Alex as the two children. The interplay between the family, especially thanks to Winston Duke’s comedy, helps to build empathy for them and allows us to root for them when things go sideways. After an initial slow build that creates intrigue, the second act of the film is easily its best, as the family is confronted by their doppelgangers and have to frantically grapple with their counterparts. This is where the scares and horror stylings are their best. Peele litters this film with references to Jaws, A Nightmare on Elm Street, and The Shining. The directing is expertly executed, as Peele can go from expansive shots of devastation to small and claustrophobic moments dripping with suspense. There is a particularly important reason for cutaways in the film that leads up to the big revelation at the end. The music is also well done, with the sharp staccato notes of the violin as the film’s main theme creating terror with its shrill sound. There are quite a few twists and turns that are sure to surprise audiences. Some of them are welcome, however as I said, some of the twists at the end are a little head scratching. Specifically, the reason behind how the doppelgangers came to be and are doing what they are doing is disappointing and unfulfilled. It seems there was a lot more that could have been filled in and the end product creates a major suspension of disbelief that hampers the quality of the film slightly.
The build-up to the end is incredible, everything from the comedy to the drama, suspense, and horror, however, considering that the film is predicated upon the fact that the secrets of these doppelgangers would be a groundbreaking revelation that puts the story into perspective, there just isn’t enough to leave the kind of impact that I expected. The ending of the film isn’t bad or terrible per se, but the meaning of the narrative could have certainly felt much more powerful had the end not been so filled with needless exposition and inconsistencies that were created despite all of the exposition. For example, there is a scene between Lupita Nyong’o’s character and her doppelganger where the doppelganger is explaining certain things that she shouldn’t have been able to explain given the fact that she was a doppelganger. It seems that in order to sell the twist in the film, certain glaring inconsistencies were left open, especially when exposition is being given by characters that can’t be giving that exposition since they were never in the position that they are describing, as confusing as that all sounds. In the end, I enjoyed the film, but Peele is asking me to ignore too many inconstancies and plot points that don’t make sense in order to feel the weight of the narrative. Us delivers a powerful message that is unfortunately kept short of tying up a brilliant first two acts due to several irregularities with the film’s final act. It ends up being too contrived and focused on selling a big twist rather than finding a natural resolution to such an interesting premise.
Warning: The rest of this review contains spoilers so read no further unless you’ve already seen the movie or just don’t care.
So, going into spoilers, it’s revealed in the end that Adelaide’s encounter with her doppelganger back when she was a child turned out quite differently than we were led to believe. It turns out that on that night, the doppelganger attacked her original, crushing her throat and dragging her back to the underground facility where the doppelganger trapped the original. Thus, the doppelganger Adelaide, known as Red, actually switched lives with Adelaide and lived her life on the surface world while the real original Adelaide was forced to live her entire life underground with the rest of the Tethered. This suggests that nurture reigns over nature, as with enough connection to society and family, the Tethered Red was able to develop into a fully functioning person with a family whereas the imprisoned Adelaide became a menacing psychopath. While this is certainly a good reveal, it doesn’t make sense why the real Adelaide who we thought was the doppelganger the whole time should be explaining what the Tethered are to Red, since Red already knew what was down there as she had grown up in it until she switched lives with the real Adelaide. It seems that the closer someone is to their tethered counterpart, the more likely they are of encountering each other, or at least that’s the case with Adelaide. So why didn’t any of the other Tethered wander up to the surface? How was Red able to go up there in the first place? And if Red was able to go up and escape, then why wasn’t Adelaide also able to go up the escalator and find the surface. Another confusing element is how the Tethered seem to mirror the movements of their surface world counterparts, so how come Red wasn’t controlled by Adelaide’s movements. The implication perhaps is that when Red went to the surface world the power struggle shifted in her favor, but that still doesn’t explain how Adelaide was able to just escape after all that time. Once the switch is revealed, it strengthens the beginning of the film since it makes sense that Red would be scared of going back to the place where she left Adelaide, but then why would she go at all and risk the chance of her counterpart resurfacing for revenge? There is also no explanation for how Adelaide was able to organize and communicate with millions of grunting vapid Tethered and convince them to organize the “Hands Across America” movement. The facility seemed to be one of many, so how was she able to get across to the millions of Tethered how to escape their facilities and link up? It’s also not explained why the Tethered exist in the first place. It’s simply stated that “The government started cloning people to try and control us but couldn’t replicate the spirit so they just let millions of zombies wander underneath the surface of America”. What exactly were they trying to control in people? Why couldn’t they replicate the spirit through education and nurture? There are so many leaps in logic and suspensions of disbelief that it is simply too much, in my opinion, to truly drive the film home. The answer to all of these questions seems to be, unfortunately, “because, it just works so that we can have a movie”, which doesn’t quite cut it for me. What I believe Peele is trying to do is force us to reflect on the nature of our situation, and the status and comforts that we have as a result of other people suffering and doing the difficult work that keeps our luxuries belonging to us. The Tethered making a statement is reminiscent of protests from unions and blue-collar workers. The underground facilities and scissors are potential mirroring’s to sweatshop labor and the mistreatment of sweatshop workers, especially children. It reminds the viewer that the clothes on their backs and the ground that they walk on have been shaped by people, some of whom do not have the prosperous lives that we have. Unfortunately, in regards to the film, there is too much left in the air, and too little explained for the dramatic effect of the ending to be truly resonant
Really? Is that it? Surely there must be more right? These were the questions manifesting in my head after another stellar season of The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel, a show that provides far too much joy and entertainment in such small doses. The first season of this show was as close to a masterpiece as masterpieces go. We were introduced to the character of Mrs. Miriam “Midge” Maisel, a 1950’s Jewish woman in her 20’s with two supportive parents, a happy marriage and two children. Unfortunately, her world gets flipped upside down when her husband Joel admits to having an affair and leaves her. Fueled by the problems of her personal life, Midge discovers an outlet through stand-up comedy and meets the irreverent but hilarious Susie Myerson, a tomboyish club manager who decides to become Midge’s manager. What was magical about the first season of the show was how relatable of a character Midge was. Like any millennial today, she’s a true multitasker, trying to balance her family life, kids, a job, and of course, her passion for comedy. Her pursuit of her comedy career, however, is where we see the difficulty she has to go through in being not only a woman in a male-dominated society but also a woman in a male-dominated industry. Seeing how she overcame these challenges and struggles was a highlight of the show. Unfortunately for her, the challenges she faces especially in regards to her gender are only amplified in Season 2 alongside all of the family drama that is constantly surrounding her.
Season 2 picks up right where the first season left off and carries the same amount of charm and wit and style. One important thing to note is how lived in the world feels. 1950’s New York has never been replicated so well on television. From the fast-moving upper West Side to the lower streets of Greenwich Village, every setting is filled with activity. It’s truly effective in reminding the viewer of the living history of New York City. On top of the rich atmosphere, the characters themselves are perfectly embedded into this breathing world. Mrs. Maisel walks with the typical gate of women of that time period, and Joel Maisel quips in the fast-talking style typical of the 1950s. There isn’t a modern idiom or suggestion in sight. In fact, the entire show comes off more like an old movie or a stage play from the 50’s itself. In short, there could not be a more perfect period piece for this era.
Combined with the perfect setting is some absolutely brilliant directing. This season also decided to become slightly more experimental with long takes, sweeping shots, extreme long shots where characters are spouting dialogue moving in and out of a house, and many more interesting and unique ways to convey the experience. The music is excellent as always, the soundtrack brings in many more key pieces appropriate to the time period. The score itself adds to the levity or intensity of each scene. I noticed a few musical references calling back to earlier tracks from the first season during scenes that were also harkening back to moments from the first season. The show also switches things up by changing locations and having part of the season take place in Paris as well as at a family getaway in the Catskills. The Catskills was actually a prominent vacation spot for Jewish Americans at the time and so, of course, that also had to be captured as a living and breathing locale by the show. It’s another example of how excellently this series integrates its fictional characters with real-life locations as well as some real-life characters as well (i.e. Lenny Bruce).
Speaking of characters, now we get to the real heart of the show. Rachel Brosnahan delivers another phenomenal performance as Mrs. Maisel, and Alex Bornstein continues being awesome as Susie. Their chemistry together also continues in stride however this time around with a little more conflict. One character that stole the show in the first season and comes back again for a full course is Abe Weissman, Midge’s fastidious father. Some of the best humor from the first season resulted from Tony Shalhoub’s portrayal of Abe, and the same case applies for season 2. Joel continues to be a character of contention, garnering sympathy at times while also coming off as a bit of a loser. It’s clear that since the first season he has realized his mistake and is now afraid to let go of his love for Midge. Some new characters also grace the screen, Zachary Levi of Chuck fame is particularly noteworthy as a character with a major role.
Despite the constant barrage of humor, there is an equally impressive display of drama. In fact, another feature of the show’s brilliance is how it manages to blend drama and comedy so deftly. There will be moments where you will cry, and moments where you will laugh. There will be moments where you immediately go from laughing to crying, from crying to laughing, and doing both at the same time. At times, it can start to feel like everything is too episodic in nature and that there is a stagnating of the narrative, however, the very moment that you might feel that is when the narrative hits the hardest. There is very little fault to be found in The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel’s second season. If there were anything to nitpick about, it would be that the season concludes with another cliffhanger of an ending in a similar way to the first season. Still, the ending is understandable as a means to build anticipation for the already confirmed third season.
There are a million more things to say about The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel but all of these things can’t convey what can be conveyed by simply watching the show. If you haven’t seen it yet and have Amazon Prime, watch it. It’s a magnificent period piece, a witty comedy, a socially aware drama, and a wonderful work of television.
I’m just gonna jump right out and say it- Queen is my favorite band of all time. I have yet to encounter a musical group with more perfect vocal harmony, energy, and versatility. No one song sounded the same with Queen, and each piece felt like an evolution of the band’s ideas. The centerpiece of all of this was Freddie Mercury, the iconic frontman with a voice so powerful it could shatter a glass building. Naturally, when I heard that a biopic was being developed based on the band and with a strong focus on Mercury himself, I was beyond excited. What I didn’t anticipate was 2018 being a somewhat slow and disappointing year for movies, at least in my opinion. Luckily, sitting down to watch Bohemian Rhapsody was the cinematic highlight of the year, as not only does the film do justice to the legacy of Freddie Mercury, but it also brings the brilliance of Queen back into the forefront and into the public conversation. It is without a doubt one of my favorite musical biopics of all time, and may even be my favorite if not for the genius of the 1985 Mozart biopic Amadeus.
Directed by Bryan Singer, the film began with some production troubles. Actor and comedian Sacha Baron Cohen was originally slated to play Mercury however differences arose between what the surviving members of Queen wanted and what Cohen wanted and as a result, Cohen left the project. I’m not sure how Cohen would have done in the role, however actor Rami Malek does such a phenomenal job as Freddie Mercury that he may as well be a lock for the Best Actor award at the Oscars. Malek simply becomes Mercury in every way, from speech to facial expressions to mannerisms. Malek’s performance is not only the best performance by an actor this year but one of the best in the last decade. The film leads up to the 1985 Live Aid performance, and when comparing actual footage of the performance to the scenes in the film, it’s clear how dedicated the filmmakers were in nailing every aspect of Freddie and the band’s movements, and how well Malek mimics Freddie’s style. Surrounding Malek, however, is a strong supporting cast consisting of the other three members of Queen: guitarist Brian May played by Gwilym Lee, drummer Roger Taylor played by Ben Hardy, and bassist John Deacon played by Joe Mazzello. Mix in a few other good performances by Tom Hollander as the band’s lawyer and Lucy Boynton as Mary Austin, Freddie’s longtime friend, and former wife, and you end up with a not so star-studded cast giving absolutely star-worthy performances. Credit also has to be given for the make-up and costume departments for replicating Freddie’s iconic outfits and recreating the looks of all of the band members. Each actor in the movie looks like a mirror image of their real-life counterparts (Gwilym Lee is nearly indistinguishable from a young Brian May). The core band members themselves have infectious chemistry. There are great moments not only where the band interacts with Freddie, but also where the other band members are interacting with each other.
Where Bohemian Rhapsody truly shines is in its focus on the most important aspect of Queen and Freddie Mercury, the music. Throughout the film are several scenes showing how some of Queen’s most famous songs came about and who was responsible for composing them. Whether it’s Brian May’s foot stomps for “We Will Rock You”, or John Deacon’s bassline for “Another One Bites the Dust” or the musical ponderings by Freddie that led to the song that inspired the title of the film, there was a lot of insight into the musical process of the band, how they kept innovating, how they worked as a unit, what inspired their music, and of course, how they went about creating the music. Most musical biopics play slight snippets of music but focus more on the personal lives of the musicians whereas, in Bohemian Rhapsody, entire songs of Queen are performed and to great effect. If there were ever a film about a band where the songs should feature heavily, Queen would be the band.
Films based on true stories often exaggerate and embellish for dramatic effect, and that is still the case with Queen. Without going into what inaccuracies exist within the film, I will say that with whatever liberties were taken, the end result of added drama pays off with the exception of a few key events in the second act. Most of the drama surrounds Freddie’s personal life, and though many have criticized the way Freddie’s life was tackled, I think there was just enough of it that was explored without derailing the film and taking away the importance of the band. There were even some additions like Freddie’s family that helped to tie the film together including a powerful yet subtle moral lesson from Freddie’s father. The exploration of Freddie’s background also helped to give perspective on the struggles and poor influences that Freddie had while also not interfering with the mystique of Mercury. In fact, the entire journey of Freddie’s character in the film only enhances the larger than life persona of Freddie Mercury.
By the end of this movie, there is a clear message to the audience about the powerful nature of Queen’s music, and the kinship of the four members of Queen that kept them together. This is all related through a beautiful climax that solidifies the legend of Queen and the legendary status of its members. Technically, Bohemian Rhapsody can be thought of as a two-hour advertisement for the band itself, but the subject matter of the film is more than worthy of a little more recognition. Based on the box office results of the film, it’s clear that there are more than a few people who have some love for Queen and their cornucopia of iconic and brilliant songs. So all in all, despite some muddled plot and lack of focus in certain parts of the film, Bohemian Rhapsody succeeds in paying homage to the legacy of Queen thanks in part to the brilliance of Rami Malek as Freddie Mercury, a talented supporting cast, and a dedication to concentrating on the music itself rather than other elements of a more tantalizing and provocative nature that is often explored in other biopics for shock value or intrigue.
The Academy Awards, also known as the Oscars, are an annual set of televised awards given out by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. Each year, the esteemed voters of the Academy gather together a host of important Hollywood contributors in an event dedicated to recognizing the best in cinematic achievement. These awards include “Best Actor in a Major Motion Picture”, “Best Actress in a Major Motion Picture”, “Best Director”, “Best Cinematography”, Best Original and Adapted Screenplay, and of course, the coveted “Best Picture” award. To win an Academy Award is considered a prestigious honor that few in the film industry will ever have the opportunity to receive…or so it was thought. This week, the Academy announced that they would be adding “a brand new category for outstanding achievement in popular film” which has been dubbed the “Popular Film Category”. The official details as to the criteria for this category have yet to be announced. What is certain, however, is that this is a completely moronic idea that is insulting towards the majority of films.
I first saw this news on an Instagram post. My initial reaction was that this must be a meme poking fun at the Oscars, but then I noticed that the post was published by none other than Rotten Tomatoes. This prompted me to check the official statement by the Academy to confirm that this was a legitimate motion by them. Upon learning this, I went nearly blind with fury. The idea of a popular film category is terrible for a few reasons, but before I dig into that, I need to give a little context about the current state of the Academy Awards.
In 1992, the Disney animated film, Beauty and the Beast became the first ever animated feature to be nominated for Best Picture. The significance of its nomination was rooted in the fact that animated films had long been considered unsophisticated entertainment for kids. By earning the nomination, Beauty and the Beast showed the world that an animated movie could have the grace and subtlety in its storytelling to be recognized alongside other live-action drama films. Furthermore, it opened the door for other animated features in the future to be recognized. However, in 2001, the Academy decided to create a category for Best Animated Feature. From that point on, any critically acclaimed animated films would go into that category. Now, it is true that UP (2009) and Toy Story 3 (2010) received Best Picture nominations after the new animated category, but I’ll discuss that more in a moment.
The real historic and groundbreaking moment in the film industry took place in 2004 when The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (2003) was nominated for and won 11 Academy Awards including Best Picture. It was the first time that a fantasy film had ever won Best Picture and the first time that a true genre film outside of drama and musical had won. This move showed that no matter what kind of film was made, as long as it was dedicated to the craft of filmmaking, it could be recognized for being the best among all films. Then, the moment that changed the film industry forever, making it what it is today; The Dark Knight (2008), Christopher Nolan’s critical and commercial hit masterpiece, was snubbed at the 2009 Academy Awards by not being nominated for Best Picture. As a response to the massive backlash for this decision, the Academy decided to expand its Best Picture category from five films to ten. This allowed for more films to be recognized in the category and is the major reason as to why Toy Story and Up were nominated as animated films. There is still debate as to whether this was a good decision since it gives more films the opportunity to be recognized but may also lead to the Academy recognizing more of the conventional drama films that fit their criteria even though they don’t deserve the nomination. Regardless, The Dark Knight’s impact paved the way for a growing superhero genre that has, for the most part, avoided any prestige from the Academy.
Still, the push for recognition from genre films increased in 2016 and 2017, with some success. Logan (2017), the emotional homage to Western films featuring a grizzled Wolverine, was nominated for Best Adapted Screenplay at the 2018 Oscars. Get Out (2017), a popular horror/thriller was nominated for Best Picture. Both of these films took strides towards bringing in more recognition for their respective genres. It seemed like the film industry was making progress and moving towards opening its tight circle of smaller and more obscure films…. until this latest announcement.
Now, all the work that has been going towards genre recognition will be eradicated. The Popular Film Category will essentially take whatever is a big hit, regardless of quality or cinematic achievement, and give out empty, meaningless awards to these films. Rather than having the quality of comic book films increase to where they can be recognized as Best Picture candidates, they will just be assigned to the Popular Film Category. If this Popular Film Category were around in 2004, The Lord of the Rings would not have won Best Picture, let alone been nominated. It would have simply been a “popular film”, and all of its cinematic splendor would go unrecognized in the real category. It’s almost like an award for participation. These films wouldn’t be awarded for being good, but instead, for being “popular”. What’s next? A category for Best Film Featuring Product Placement? Best Vegetable in a Movie? In fact, why have a single category at all, just break up the genres now. Best Biopic, Best Comedy, Best Supernatural Thriller. Each of these ideas is equally as ridiculous as the popular film category. Instead of adding legitimate categories that many people have been asking for such as Best Stunt Coordination or Best Voice Acting Performance, we get this. The only explanation for this, outside of sheer stupidity, is that this is an attempt to increase viewership for the awards show by having more popular films feature.
Hopefully, the amount of backlash this receives will change the Academy’s mind, and from the looks of it, there does seem to be a lot of backlash. Just check the comments in the Rotten Tomatoes post or read an article about it. Industry disapproval has spread with actor Rob Lowe and director Adam McKay (The Big Short) being some of the many vocal opponents. This may sound one-dimensional, but as it stands, this move by the Academy feels like a last ditch effort from a bunch of tight-lipped arthouse film snobs to boost viewership while keeping only a neatly-defined criterion of film designated for any true recognition.
The sound of waves crash against a small fishing boat floating on the waters of the ocean. The character of Quint, played by Robert Shaw, bites down on a biscuit. He is seated next to a giant fishing reel. The splashes of the ocean and the creaking of the boat are interrupted by slow, low notes from a string section of an orchestra. The reel begins slowly ticking, coming into focus and catching the attention of Quint. Martin Brody, played by Roy Scheider, sits at the edge of the boat, trying to tie a bowline knot. Quint slowly grabs the rod as the camera focuses on the large reel. Suddenly, Brody shouts “Hey, I’ve got it!” as he finishes the knot. This break in tension segues into a frenzy as the line begins rapidly pulling forward, propelling the film towards its next thrilling sequence. This brilliant moment is one of many that exemplify the brilliance of Steven Spielberg’s 1975 classic, Jaws. I’d never seen the movie until now, but a classic is a classic for a reason. Jaws is a tightly-wound masterpiece. Its narrative and characters feel as if they leaped off the page of an intricately-woven literary novel. If that isn’t enough, its cinematography, music, acting, and production cement the film as one of the greatest examples of cinema in history. It is also, in my opinion, one of the best-directed films ever made. Though this is only Spielberg’s second directing gig, he manages to rival Hitchcock in his ability to build suspense and keep the audience’s attention on what he wants. Jaws is also commonly accepted as one of the most influential films in history. The anticipation, release, and success of the film made it essentially the first major summer blockbuster. The sheer amount of accomplishments that this film was able to garner is astounding when considering its troubled production, filming drama, and costly budget for the time. Spielberg insisted on filming at sea, and the entire second half of the film was shot completely on a small boat. The amalgamation of production and budget restrictions that hindered Spielberg’s vision for the film ended up benefitting the film, as Spielberg was forced to think out of the box and employ new and revolutionary tactics in filmmaking and direction.
Jaws, as most people know, is the story of a giant killer shark that terrorizes a small beach town and is pursued by the chief of police, Martin Brody. Brody is an honest man with a wife and two kids. The brilliance of Roy Scheider’s performance as Brody is that despite having the outward appearance of a stern and hardened man, his demeanor is actually soft and reflective. It really feels like he’s just an ordinary guy trying to do his best to protect the people of the town. When casting for the film, Spielberg didn’t want to have big name actors appear in the movie since he wanted the events of the film to “believe this was happening to people like you and me”. In fact, Charlton Heston was originally interested in the role but Spielberg felt his grand image would detract from the ordinary every-day setting and the terror and connection that the audience would feel for Brody. As much of a thriller as Jaws is, the first half of the film is actually dedicated to building the character of Brody, and in analyzing the fear and paranoia of the townspeople in response to the shark attacks. A difference in ideologies takes place early in the film between Brody and Mayor Larry Vaughn, one of the many colorful characters in the movie. The mayor has his eyes set on continuing the beach tourism that drives the town’s economy while Brody is more concerned with the safety of its citizens. Brody’s anxiety is depicted through close up shots of Roy Scheider’s concerned expressions. In a particularly memorable scene, Brody sits on the beach, and as other people cross the screen, the camera cuts in closer to Brody’s face. Even during the shark attack sequences, the camera focuses on the movements and reactions of the people as a brilliant depiction of fear and panic. It’s as if the conflict doesn’t come from the shark itself, but rather the people’s fear of it, and how it causes them to act.
But to cite the fear of the shark as the main conflict in the film would do an extreme disservice to the shark itself. Even without actually being on screen, the shark’s presence is always felt. Originally, Spielberg had designed several mechanical sharks, but they all constantly malfunctioned. To film around this issue, Spielberg showed only portions of the shark at a time. In some scenes, its tail or fin could be seen, and in others, it would be shown as a prop shark head. Aside from the practical effects, the shark’s terror came from its unseen presence more so than what was actually seen. Spielberg would have a large barrel, or a log slowly move towards the characters to represent the shark’s movement. The greatest fear comes from the imagination of the audience, and so by hiding the shark, it’s appearance could be hyped by the audience as more terrifying than what could be shown in a practical prop. Of course, none of the terror would be possible without John William’s excellent score. The simplicity of two alternating notes in a minor 2nd interval proves to be so impactful in its ability to indicate the presence of lurking dread. The increasing speed and volume of the notes as they crescendo into a symphony of cacophonous sound only further builds the suspense. Aside from the ominous main theme, Williams’s score is quite upbeat, with a sense of adventure created by animated and energetic violins.
As the film progresses, more and more interesting characters get featured, such as oceanographer Matt Hooper, played by Richard Dreyfuss. Hooper adds some levity to the film with his slightly more buoyant personality. He provides just the right amount of quirk and humor to not distract from the film’s serious tone. Robert Shaw’s Quint, the shark hunter, is another character that is rich with personality. His pursuit of the shark comes off as very Melvillian, often harkening to the literary obsessiveness of Captain Ahab in Moby Dick. The second half of the film relies on the strength of the character interactions between Brody, Hooper, and Quint. Jaws can actually be considered two movies with two separate environments. The first hour introduces the shark and focuses on the town, whereas the second hour is a shark hunt on a fishing boat that takes place entirely out in the ocean. This is where the acting really shines. The scientifically inclined Hooper comes into conflict with the hardened Quint while Brody acts as a straight man to both. Eventually, they feel and function like a unit and bond as they try and hunt down the shark. Scenes between the three involving Quint and Hooper comparing injuries, followed by the three characters singing chanteys are some examples of the excellent character moments in the film. The action and adventure also heighten in the second half as more of the shark is seen and as the fishing boat becomes more and more damaged after each run-in with the creature (even some live footage of actual sharks was integrated into the filming). These scenes, with the combination of brilliant acting, character development, music, and directing are some of the greatest examples of movie magic that you will be hard-pressed to find replicated in most movies today.
When I finished watching Jaws, I had this great feeling, as if I had just come back from a big adventure. There are not one, but several scenes that can be considered some of the best scenes in film history. The camera and the music felt like characters just as much as the actors did. The selective views of the shark along with the initial point-of-view shots from the shark’s perspective cement it as one of the most iconic creatures in horror. There’s no point in reiterating how impactful this film was to Hollywood, but what I can say is that it more than earns its status. It’s a carefully constructed and thoughtful yet wild adventure that builds to an epic encounter between a terrifying force of nature. It’s an inward look at human psychology and response to fear. It balances its narrative in just the right ways and rewards and punishes characters in a way that consistently aligns with their actions and choices. At the end of the day, Jaws is one of the greatest movies ever made.
So, if you’ve read one of my earlier blogs on Star Wars, you’ll know how I feel about the new Star Wars movies. I haven’t experienced what I would call a real Star Wars movie since Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith. I mean, obviously the prequels were terrible for the most part. Revenge of the Sith had its fair share of awful moments too, but it made it up for it with some awesome moments (Anakin vs. Obi-Wan). However, I would still prefer some creativity and new direction rather than the corporatization of the new movies including the carbon copy of A New Hope that is Star Wars Episode VII: The Force Awakens, and the blandness that was Rogue One: A Star Wars Story. I didn’t have very high expectations going into Solo: A Star Wars Story, especially when I heard about all of the behind-the-scenes mess that was going on. Directors Phil Lord and Christopher Miller, who previously worked on films like 21 Jump Street and The Lego Movie, were both fired and replaced with veteran director Ron Howard. Both Lord and Miller, were great directors in my opinion, whereas I have not been a big fan of Ron Howard. I loved one of his films called Rush, but his other projects including Angels and Demons, The Da Vinci Code, Inferno, and Cowboys and Aliens were all atrocious and even worse…boring. To me, Ron Howard is a director with a lot more stinkers than good films, and most of his films are very, very (I’ll say it again) boring, I’m talking full on snooze fest (I’ve tried to watch The Da Vinci Code 3 times and fell asleep each time). Boring, is unfortunately what I got with Solo: A Star Wars Story. As I said, I wasn’t very excited for this film, and wasn’t impressed by any of the trailers. In fact, no one wanted to see this movie. I remember that when it was announced, the internet was full of discussions on how unnecessary a film this was. The early buzz around the film’s reception also wasn’t too good, so I really didn’t expect much going in, but, it is a Star Wars movie. Though I was skeptical about Rogue One after The Force Awakens (Episode VII), I entertained the possibility that it would be good, that it would be the film that would do something different. Unfortunately, I was let down, and I went into The Last Jedi the same way, not excited by the trailers but hopeful that it would bring about the change in Star Wars that I wanted to see. Right before the opening of Solo, I still kept a lingering notion that this would be the one that I would truly enjoy, that wouldn’t feel contrived or like a forced Star Wars nostalgia-fest. But alas, I was wrong again.
Solo: A Star Wars Story is a film that explores the story of legendary Star Wars character Han Solo. To the film’s credit, it starts off well enough. We are introduced to Han in a great action scene, and the opening moments begin to establish some dramatic conflict and stakes within the story. The first third of the movie shows promise, with a handful of neat action set pieces and some new insights into the Star Wars world that hadn’t been seen before on film. However, once all of the pieces are on the board, the film doesn’t know where to go. Yes, it is a smaller story and so there doesn’t have to be a larger overarching epic storyline with a compelling villain, but even smaller scale stories have to be told the right way and have to be paced correctly. The pacing in this movie is off-putting, since there is a considerable amount of time dedicated to one particular event in the second act, and that’s where the film’s dullness begins to show through. Though the actors are charismatic enough, the writing and interactions don’t give them the proper development to shine. Alden Ehrenreich actually does a good job as Han Solo, and the film’s inadequacies don’t in any way fall on his shoulders. Woody Harrelson is Woody Harrelson, Donald Glover as Lando Calrissian is charming as expected, and Emilia Clarke is acceptable. No particular cast member steals the show, aside from Paul Bettany who displays a real tenacity for playing a more villainous role in the few scenes that he is in. The droid L3 is initially shown to be fierce and fiery, but most of, if not nearly all of her lines were pushing a “free the droids” agenda which was unnecessary and felt very forced. It’s definitely an area that Star Wars could explore, but it would need a much heavier spotlight instead of being used for a couple jokes and then getting tossed aside. Furthermore, since L3’s dialogue primarily consisted of these lines, her character essentially became a conduit for the agenda, leading many viewers to call her the “SJW bot”. There is certainly nothing wrong with identifying agendas in film, because what is art if not agenda-setting, but the way it was done was actually insulting since the character of L3 was less of a character and more of a talking punchline for an agenda, effectively displaying tokenism. Only Woody Harrelson and Alden Ehrenreich had truly memorable chemistry. Han and Chewbacca’s interactions were fine, but they could have been a lot better. In fact, the buddy comedy movie that was pitched by Lord and Miller seems like it could have been a better prospect in terms of creativity and interaction between Han and Chewbacca. Alden and Emilia also had acceptable chemistry but there wasn’t any really great connection between the cast members. The film’s few attempts at humor severely miss the mark. I laughed maybe once the entire movie, and the theatre audience I was with was silent throughout the movie. Again, I keep thinking what the proven comedic geniuses of Lord and Miller would have done with the movie (then again it may not have worked either but you never know, I think they at least would have done something bold). The cinematography was another disappointing aspect of the film. There were a lot of muted colors and dull backgrounds. The beginning of the movie has a few scenes that are filmed through a blue filter, and the result is a very hazy quality to many of the shots. The music is completely unmemorable aside from the nods to John William’s original score. The third act may seem like it has good twists, but really the twists are redundant and can be summed up as “this person double-crossed this person and this person double-crossed this person and this person double-crossed this person”. The film just kind of ends without any true character growth for Han. The Han Solo we see in A New Hope is narcissistic, distrusting, snarky, and has shades of a very negative attitude. The Han Solo in this movie is consistently a little too happy-go-lucky and it doesn’t seem like he learned too much or developed his personality to align with the Han we see in the original trilogy. All of these lackluster elements point to what the film really is, painfully generic. The character interactions are generic, the plot is generic, the dialogue is generic and downright terrible at times. It’s a safe, marketable film that is hollow. There are so many elements of fan service that I’m almost convinced that fanservice is all the movie has to truly offer. There are constant in-your-face references to older movies that come off as “See! Look at this! This was in the original movies!”. It seems that Disney opted to tell a story that nobody asked for because they thought the same nostalgia goggled fans would keep coming back to said same story and characters every time. Part of this falls upon members of the Star Wars community that continuously demanded something like this. Members of fan bases like Star Wars and Call of Duty are divided to where half the fans want to see something new, and the other fans are completely averse to change and just want the same thing over and over again to keep their nostalgia hunger fulfilled. These change-resistant fans make a massive fuss over any innovations made by studios to the point where these studios are afraid to alter anything that fans would deem sacred. The onus nevertheless falls upon Disney and LucasFilm for ignoring the warning signs and pushing forward with unoriginal and uninspired content.
To sum up, I honestly must ask was this necessary? Solo: A Star Wars Story doesn’t even depict a young Han Solo, but rather a Han Solo as he is set to appear in A New Hope. It features the same Imperial environment that we have seen for the past 40 years in Star Wars, and provides a subpar story and direction that will numb the senses. It’s all downhill from the first act, and it didn’t seem like the studio knew where they wanted to take this story. It’s also a sign of franchise fatigue for me, since it is incontestably clear at this point that these movies are not going in any new and creative directions, and are instead opting for the same tired, corporatized, rinse and repeat, cost-effective, risk-averse methods that have become the model for so many franchises. I’d say that this is more of a video game problem with companies like Activision and EA, but it seems that the LucasFilm under Disney is falling prey to the same issues. When I first heard they were making Star Wars spinoff movies, I was excited at the prospect for new stories that we’ve never seen before, but this is all the same. We’ve seen Han Solo and Chewbacca before; we’ve seen the Millennium Falcon far too many times in the new movies to the point where it might be called the flagship for nostalgia. I keep thinking about all the amazing things in the Star Wars universe that aren’t being told. Instead of pursuing stories that many fans want, like Mandalorians, The Old Republic, Obi-Wan Kenobi (Yes we’ve seen it before but Ewan McGregor deserves a second shot at playing the character without the weight of the prequels), Disney is confining itself to the nostalgia prison of the Empire saga. Look, I do love Star Wars, and I did see flashes of what I loved from the franchise, but it cannot go on like this. I think that Star Wars needs to go back to the pre-Empire era. That includes the new trilogy, which I think needs to DIE. The new trilogy in my opinion has been nothing but an unoriginal massive cash grab by Disney to tell the same stories disguised as different ones. It’s all the same, the First Order is the same as the Empire, etc. The episodic trilogy should finish up and end, but the Star Wars stories movies can be good if done right. The early results are already coming in that Solo will not do as well as expected at the box office. If Star Wars doesn’t innovate and do something truly groundbreaking next, it will grow stale with everyone. I know a Boba Fett film has already been greenlit, which I think will be more of the same, and there has been little more than rumors of anything else. I know this may be contentious, but Star Wars needs to explore more of the world introduced in the prequels. The only successful moment of fan service in this film, the only moment that had the rather unreactive audience collectively gasp in my theatre, was a nod to the prequels. I myself, got chills hearing the Duel of Fates music slowly stir in the background. I’ll finish this off by saying Solo was an exercise in corporate blandness, and I could not be less excited for a Star Wars movie then I was for this, but I may prove myself wrong when Episode 9 arrives. Please skip this and contribute to the box office of the excellent and hilarious Deadpool 2.
When the first Deadpool came out in February of 2016, it came out of nowhere and took the world by storm. Boasting a $132 million opening weekend, Deadpool officially became the highest grossing R-rated film globally of all time. It was also a massive hit with the critics and fans, with heaps of praise piled upon Ryan Reynold’s portrayal of the titular character, and the scripts boldness in pushing the envelope with its humor and content. I had been a fan of Deadpool long before news of his feature debut. I loved his meta humor and morbid yet funny defilements in the comics, and I, like many others, was extremely disappointed in how Deadpool was depicted in X-Men Origins: Wolverine. By 2014, I had long given up on the idea of a Deadpool movie, and I didn’t even think it would be possible to replicate such a character on the silver screen. Luckily, after some leaked test footage, Deadpool was greenlit and the best marketing campaign of any film in history convinced me that it would be awesome, and it was. The original Deadpool is one of my favorite comic book movies of all time, so naturally, I’ve been anticipating the sequel along with the rest of the millions of people that saw and loved the first movie.
I can say without a doubt that Deadpool 2 is the most entertaining film that I have seen in theaters all year. This movie had me hooked from beginning to end with its lightning fast jokes, dizzying action, and surprisingly dark and emotional moments. While the first Deadpool did feature lots of violence and humor inappropriate for many, it was a surprisingly light-hearted film. The sequel has some heavier themes, dealing with abuse, death, and family. In every way, it feels much bigger in scale than the first, with a plethora of new characters and additions to the Deadpool universe. Ryan Reynolds once again steals the show, effectively cementing himself as an actor that will have a hard time being separated from the character he plays. Alongside Deadpool are some fan favorite returning characters including Colossus, Dopindar, and Blind Al. Even T.J Miller, who despite having faced some recent controversy, was funny (he did have most of the same jokes as he did in the first movie, but just like Drax doing the same thing over again in Infinity War, it was still funny to me somehow). Some notable new additions include Domino, played by Zazie Beats, and Cable, played by Josh Brolin. There was a lot of anticipation for Cable since he and Deadpool had a very established relationship in the comics. Unfortunately, the relationship between Cable and Deadpool isn’t explored as much in this movie, and Cable isn’t in the movie enough to make a massive Thanos-level impact or to stand out particularly amongst the other side characters. The point is, this is still entirely Deadpool and Ryan Reynold’s show. To that end, the movie is filled with more pop culture references, meta humor, and celebrity cameos than ever before. Everything feels consistent with Deadpool’s character, he feels more alive and relevant than ever before. As I said, Director David Leitch, who was one half of the directing pair responsible for John Wick, did a fantastic job with the action scenes in the movie. The action is bigger and better than the original. This combination of humor and thrills creates a complete package of an excellent action comedy that deserves to be seen.
Though not without some weird moments and the occasionally overdone joke, I couldn’t find much wrong with Deadpool 2. It was exactly the movie that I was hoping for, and I left with a smile on my face. This film is even more unafraid to take the humor and violence of the Deadpool character to greater lengths. Though I would say the story is slightly convoluted compared to the simplistic and easily understood love story/revenge plot of the first film, the charisma of the characters and the combination of humor and action will most definitely keep viewers engaged throughout. Along with one of the best end credit scenes in any movie, Deadpool 2 is a major success. It’s a dark and twisted, yet hilarious and thrilling romp that continues the tradition of an unkillable anti-hero in a red suit continuously satirizing the comic book and comic book movie genres as well as society in general. Whereas the Deadpool of the comics pokes fun mostly at the Marvel comic book universe, this version of Deadpool is able to draw upon and target the collection of comic book movies and the cinematic universes of DC and Marvel that have amassed over the past 10 years or so.
So getting into spoiler territory, the first big surprise of the film comes before the opening credits with the death of Vanessa, Deadpool’s wife/girlfriend/it’s never revealed or not if they married. The opening credits capitalize on the moment with title cards like “Did They Really Just Kill Her?”, “Presented by What the Fuck?”, and “In Association With I Don’t Understand?”. The opening credits are all set to an original song by Céline Dion just for this movie called “Ashes” and all done in a James Bond style of opening sequence. Regardless, this opening surprise death forces Deadpool into a depressed state of longing for his own death. It’s surprisingly fatalistic coming from such a boisterous character, and the emotional tones conveyed during the dream sequences with Deadpool seeing visions of Vanessa are surprisingly heartfelt and bereft of jokes that would undercut said emotional tones. The changes that they made to Cable’s backstory were also appropriate for the film, as his motivation for going back in time and killing the mutant that would kill Cable’s family gives him a solid motivation. The mutant kid, Russel AKA Firefist, played by Julian Dennison, is a serviceable character, though I didn’t think there was anything extraordinary involved in either his portrayal or his character arc. Julian Dennison does give a good performance, and there was always the possibility of the movie going down the common path of the child actor/character being annoying. Luckily this wasn’t the case, although Firefist as a character could have been more compelling. The surprise villain of Juggernaut was a fun reveal also, and the moment he rips Deadpool in half is one that can’t be missed, however, he was primarily used for a third act CGI fight with Colossus. There wasn’t really a single villain to follow, which wasn’t as effective as the first film in terms of antagonistic quality. I for one was a big fan of Ed Skrien as Ajax in the first movie.
The other big twist is that the X-Force team that was teased in the trailers was just a big lead up to a joke where all of them except Domino end up dead. For fans looking forward to seeing characters like Terry Cruises’ Bedlam or Bill Skarsgard’s Zeitgeist, it may be disappointing since Bedlam is hit by a bus and Zeitgeist lands into a wood chipper when the H.A.L.O jump sends the team all over the place due to high winds. Even Rob Delaney’s Peter, who was hilariously advertised in the trailers as an average joe looking to excite his life, gets dissolved by acid vomit. Though I was looking forward to seeing members of this team, I was pleasantly surprised and just as thrilled to see the end result of the team being the spontaneous deaths of each member.
There are several fourth-wall breaking moments that stand out, like the movie opening with a wind-up doll of a dead Wolverine from the events of the movie Logan. There is the scene where Deadpool autographs a Wolverine cereal box with Ryan Reynold’s signature. Some external non-comic book references that had me laughing were “Jared Kushner” and “Mission accomplished? Well, in a George W. kind of way”. The end credit scene is particularly funny, as Deadpool borrows Cable’s time traveling device to kill the Deadpool from X-Men Origins: Wolverine and to kill Ryan Reynolds as he is reading the script for the 2011 Green Lantern.
Avengers: Infinity War, directed by Joe and Anthony Russo, is the latest installment in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Before I go into the review, I’d like to give a little background.
In the comic book industry, there is something called a “comic book crossover event”. This began in 1984 with Marvel Comics’ Secret Wars which featured an assortment of characters from the Marvel Universe coming together for 12 issues. After this, DC responded with its own major crossover, Crisis on Infinite Earths, which also spanned several issues and significantly affected the continuity of the DC Universe. Since the 1980’s, there have been countless event comics from “Infinite Crisis” to “Civil War” to “Infinity War”. And although 2012’s The Avengers was a significant landmark in the comic book to film medium, Avengers: Infinity War is the first time that a major comic book crossover event is being adapted for the big screen. Now I’m much more of a DC fan when it comes to the comics (I can tell you about literally every major story event in the DC Universe going all the way back to its inception in 1939), but I did manage to read the 1991 Infinity Gauntlet story by Jim Starlin which is what this movie is based off of. For me, the opportunity to experience a massive event like Infinity War on the big screen is something I never could have imagined as a child. That being said, I went into this film with tempered expectations. There has been an unreal amount of hype leading up to the release of the movie, and the fact remained that there was a lot that was being promised or at least expected.
Well, I can certainly say that Avengers: Infinity War delivered on its expectations. The Russo Brothers were able to give the fans what they had promised, a big event where the entire Marvel Cinematic Universe fights off an overwhelming threat. If you are expecting an entertaining action film with some big moments, this is the movie for you. It is quintessential blockbuster popcorn fanfare with a little something more for those who are big fans or want to dig deeper into the story’s implications. It’s also a film that takes itself more seriously but still has a nice blend of humor. At times, the humor can be weird and overstay its welcome, but it largely didn’t detract from the drama.
The important thing to know is that this is not a story where the Avengers are the main characters. Thanos is actually the main character of this tale, and he means business. It seems like the Russo Brothers really took a delicate approach to how they wanted to represent Thanos. He is a nuanced and emotional character, with a lot of screen time, and a unique motivation. It’s admirable that this character with no prior development that has been hyped for 13 films was developed so well. His relationships with other characters within the MCU also felt well-established. Josh Brolin did an excellent job with the motion work and managed to capture the myriad of emotions Thanos exhibits. a villain for the film, Thanos fits the part and does it strides. He truly feels like the big threat to the Avengers that the studio was hyping up, and it represents the comic book storyline well since it seemed nearly impossible for the Avengers to even stand a chance against him. The fact that his actions in the movie act out a crusade rather than a conquest, and the fact that you really understand where he is coming from, makes Thanos a good villain. He is not the emotional roller coaster that is Killmonger or the malice that is The Joker, but he serves his purpose within the story.
The action is also excellent. There are a lot of great fight scenes and epic struggles with some great “wow” moments. One thing I didn’t expect was the number of twists, thrills, and shocks in the movie. It’s all a lot to take in, and the end result is a heavier, more genuine film than most of the recent quirky comedy style MCU films like Spider-Man: Homecoming and Thor: Ragnorak. Speaking of Thor, he can be considered almost a secondary main character within the narrative. He gets the second most development and screen time after Thanos. The approach to Thor does take a step back from the tone of Ragnorak and opts for a more grounded view of his character. He still makes a few jokes here in there in the typical Thor way, however, there is a bigger focus on how much he has lost. It’s reminded how much of a tragic character he really is and also how powerful he really is. Due to the serious approach, there are moments in the film that come across as very dark, and even haunting at times. There is this sense of finality like everything has been culminating towards the confrontation with Thanos. 18 years of build-up has all lead to this.
Considering the fact that there has been so much development and new additions to the Avengers ensemble after 18 movies, there are a lot of characters to balance. For the most part, the characters work off of each other very well, especially many of the new combinations of characters who had previously never interacted with each other. The styles and aesthetics of the other films in the franchise were also well-incorporated within the movie. When the Guardians of the Galaxy showed up, classic rock began playing and bright streaks of colors filled the screen. When Wakanda was featured, the drums started kicking in and the Black Panther theme came on. As good of a job as the film does in balancing the characters, some of the characters are underdeveloped or underused, and some are even inconsistent with how they were in previous films. I can’t really get into who these characters were until my spoiler review which I’ll post later. The main drawback to the overall experience is that there’s so much going on that at times it can feel very disconnected and the stories start feeling separate. A group of characters will be off doing one thing while another group of characters will be doing something somewhere else. There are multiple storylines going on at the same time and featuring different characters, and the story jumps around from place to place and at different times which can be quite discombobulating. We may spend a lot of time in one particular point with one group of characters before jumping back to a different group of characters at a different point. In some of these jumps, I would completely forget the previous arc and would have to reorient myself towards the current point. It’s understandably hard to juggle all of these characters, and the Russo Brothers did a good job, however, the jumping around from vignette to vignette made the experience less absorbing and harder to get engrossed in.
Overall, Avengers: Infinity War is a solid addition to the Marvel Cinematic Universe. It delivers on its promises, offers exciting and novel action sequences, and presents an awe-inspiring and multifaceted villain the likes of which the comic book movie genre hasn’t seen before. As a major DC fan, I can’t help but feel a little jealousy that the DC universe hasn’t been able to replicate this level of universe-building and massive scale. Infinity War felt exactly like the event comics I loved reading with the way everything came together and how many characters appeared on-screen. It’s a wonderfully constructed adaptation of the Marvel Universe depicted in the comic books and is put together fairly well especially considering the sheer magnitude of the film in terms of characters, themes, and the overall universe.
Yet, I can’t help but feel there is something more that could have been. I enjoyed the film, but I can’t put it up there with some of the most epic sagas of all time like Star Wars, Halo, or Lord of the Rings. What I think is missing is consistency of tone in regards to this film and the rest of the universe. This is an issue more with the direction the entire MCU has taken. The fact that so much had to be done in this film to establish a new tone, new villain, new characters, and create an epic spectacle indicates that the previous films before it weren’t successful in establishing the right tone and emotional stakes. The Marvel formula has always been fun, comedic, and low stakes for the most part. Infinity War is epic, but there’s a disconnect. The overly comedic tone of the franchise so far has hurt the movie. The emotions not running as high for these characters in their respective films is what might have caused the emotional disconnect in this film. This would have been truly legendary if the previous films were different and had established this more serious tone. The films could have been darker and had more stakes to begin with, set up Thanos and the Black Order much earlier, and hyped up more of the Infinity War itself. If Marvel had done all of these things much earlier and set up elements of Infinity War in other films, it would have been unbelievable to witness. However, I think the Russo Brothers still did an excellent job, and quite possibly the best they could have done given the situation they were in.
For those of you haven’t seen Westworld, there are two things that you should know. The first thing is that the first half of this review is spoiler-free, and the second thing is that I would definitely recommend checking out the show. What Westworld does best is comprehensive storytelling. The first season runs at a perfect length and executes its story beats with precision. Unlike other science fiction shows like Lost where the end of each season leaves you with more questions instead of answers, Westworld concludes with just the right amount of new questions. The few unanswered plot threads don’t detract from the overall experience.
The only downside to Westworld’s brilliant first season is how they plan on upping the ante for the second season. The first season, in being so comprehensive, felt like a ten-hour movie with a solid introduction, middle and conclusion. The way the show ended, it didn’t seem to need a sequel. Regardless, without going too much into where the series is headed, I’d like to discuss the show as it stands.
Based off of a 1973 film written and directed by Michael Crichton (Author of Jurassic Park), Westworld aired on HBO in the fall of 2016. I hate to have to give away the premise because I watched the show without knowing a single thing about it, but the story features a Western-style theme park where rich patrons called “guests” can interact with life-like androids called “hosts”. As I said, I didn’t know anything about the show, so when I realized the characters we were following around were androids, it blew my mind. Essentially, the guests come to Westworld to engage in whatever fantasies they like with the hosts, mainly sex and murder. The android hosts repeat each day with specific routines that can be influenced or changed by interacting with the guests. Anytime a host is killed, they are patched back up and rebooted to continue the next day as if nothing had ever happened. It’s a torturous cycle, and it is brought up several times that if the hosts were ever to remember these experiences it would surely wrack their “brains”. The guests go about committing what would be deemed violent atrocities in the real world, however the fact that the hosts aren’t real makes the guests justify their actions.
This concept of fantasy vs reality is paralleled much in today’s world to video games. Violent video games in modern society have often been stigmatized and believed to be a causation of real-world violence. The counterargument is that a game is a game, and the players are able to understand the distinction between fantasy and reality. When someone presses a button to kill someone else in a video game, it is not the same as physically pulling the trigger or making the fatal blow. Even in games like Grand Theft Auto where you can kill or harm anyone you like, the act of playing the game is far from actually going out and committing the crimes themselves. The argument that games train shooters is also preposterous. Shooting virtual guns from a PS4 or Xbox controller doesn’t prepare someone for actually holding and discharging a firearm. That being said, perhaps there is a line where fantasy and reality get too intertwined, and where the actions in the fantasy world reflect one’s character in reality. I believe that Westworld shows what happens when that line is crossed. The world itself, unlike a video game, is not virtual. The actions that are carried out by the guests are being done with their own two hands. The concept that Westworld explores here is becoming increasingly relevant, as virtual reality in games becomes more and more immersive. What’s to say that as VR gets more and more realistic, our actions in the game world become indistinguishable from what reality looks like? Are we still morally righteous individuals if we enter a virtual game world and slaughter people?
One of the creators of the show, Jonathon Nolan, was heavily inspired by video games such as Red Dead Redemption, The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim, and my personal favorite game of all time, BioShock. In fact, the elements of choice vs obedience and revolutionary new systems in exotic locations are clearly influenced by BioShock. Despite the facts surrounding Westworld’s immersive experience, many would still not consider Westworld to be crossing the line. A lot of you may think, if the hosts aren’t real, what does it matter? That is where Westworld’s true philosophical themes lie. Are the hosts real? Do they think? Feel? Experience pain? And if what the hosts experience is a series of programmed responses to external stimuli with some improvisational response built off of previously programmed responses, what makes them any different from us? I believe that this leads us to the fundamental question that Westworld explores: What is reality? Is our existence a result of calculated physiological structuring from a natural or divine source? Our brain consists of neurons firing, telling us what to do in which situation. What’s to say that what we experience isn’t the same as what the hosts in Westworld experience?
The show begins with Bernard Lowe, played by Jeffrey Wright, asking the host Dolores, played by Evan Rachel Wood, a question: “Have you ever questioned the nature of your reality?”. Dolores and the other hosts always say no, but the fact that hosts have to be programmed not to question their existence says something. The showrunners like to engage in misdirection, such as having the host Teddy, played by James Marsden, shown on camera when the off-screen monologue begins talking about the “newcomers”. It’s only later when Teddy’s bullets don’t harm the mysterious Man in Black, that we realize what Westworld is and who the “newcomers” really are. However, as much as the show loves to misdirect, it loves leaving clues even more. Lingering camera angles on the expressionless host’s faces seem to hint that the hosts have a greater awareness than the guests may think. Another way of being self-referential is in the music. Composed by Raman Djawadi of Game of Thrones fame, the music in Westworld combines traditional Western-themed tracks with anachronistic rock anthems like “Paint it Black” or “Black Hole Sun”. The player piano is constantly used as a source of diegetic music, and as a symbolic prop. The mechanical player piano reinforces the programmed vs improvisational themes in the narrative. Now, the two big twists in the show are the dual timelines and the fact that Bernard Lowe is actually a host recreation of one of the hosts’ original creators, Arnold. While the twists became apparent to me at a certain point in the show, the overall execution of these moments was so elegantly crafted that the obviousness didn’t detract from the experience. Especially if you look back, the clues were right in your face the whole time. Arnold and Bernard clearly dress differently, and the park is less ironed out and detailed in the older timeline.
The show is not without its faults, specifically in regards to suspension of disbelief. How do the guns work? How come they can hurt hosts but can’t hurt guests? Where do the guests go at night? How do the guests tell each other apart from the hosts? When Ben Barnes’s character stabs a host with a fork, what was to stop him from doing that to a guest? It doesn’t seem like they all know who they are before and are told to watch out for each other. Lots of things realistically about the park don’t make sense but the story is so interesting you aren’t super concerned about it. The dialogue is well written, and tends to tease and reference the idea of loops with lines like “There’s a path for everyone”, “Are you saying I’m repetitive”, and “Are you real? If you can’t tell, does it matter?”. Rewatching the show has been wonderful since I can now see the hints and references to future events, as well as see the story from a new perspective. I now know which timeline we are watching, and can observe the differences between the two timelines and how the park evolved.
Westworld poses a brilliant philosophical question; when do the lines between reality and fantasy blur? Arnold wanted to create consciousness and replicate the human mind while the other creator, Robert Ford, played by Anthony Hopkins, believed the hosts were something purer than humans. Ford wanted to subject the hosts to the experiences of the park because he believed they had the capacity to take it because they were not, in fact, imperfect humans but instead perfect androids. Yet, in the end, Ford realizes his mistake and agrees with Arnold that the hosts were conscious. Eventually, he sets the hosts free of their programming that allows them to harm the hosts. It’s a perfect ending to a mostly perfectly crafted season of television. Yet, the series provides just enough opportunity for speculation and philosophical ponderings Ford definitely anticipated his death by Dolores, so was it his own code telling her to kill him or did he convince her as a sentient being without having to program her code? What separates humans and robots in free will? As Ford said, even we may not have free will as we still follow a serious of loops in our lives. One thing is certain, machine learning exists. Repetitions can slightly alter each time and become something new. As we gear up for Season 2, I think it’s crucial to assess the show’s first season as its own entity. As it stands, the first season of Westworld is pretty damn good, and once Game of Thrones finally ends, it should prove as a serviceable replacement for what to look forward to from HBO.